Pakistan and India Should Learn from the Middle East: Enmity is Not Always Good

Pakistan and India should take lessons from the situation in the Middle East. Constant enmity does not lead to good outcomes. When enmity becomes boundless, neither dignity nor humanity remains safe.

For the past 26 years, I have been continuously observing global affairs, events, and situations. One thing I have learned is that there is no alternative to tolerance, patience, understanding, forgiveness, and mutual respect.

Pakistan and India are like two limbs of the same body. When one limb does not function properly, the whole body suffers from discomfort and pain.

The tension between Pakistan and India has its roots. While India bears responsibility, Pakistan cannot be absolved either. The hostility and distance between the two nations might not have been so severe if global powers hadn’t used them for their interests.

I am familiar with senior officers in the Indian military who genuinely wish to move forward with Pakistan as a brotherly nation. Similarly, there are many sincere and well-intentioned leaders in Pakistan who want to live with India as a neighbor in harmony.

Both neighbors should now learn from the situation in the Middle East. There is no room for misunderstandings anymore. Mistrust will only widen the gaps, and accusations need to end.

Take Syria, for example, where the Assad family ruled for 54 years through force, exiling and massacring those who did not align with their family, sect, or political ideology. Their oppressive rule wrote such dark chapters of cruelty that even historians might struggle to record those horrors.

If Pakistan or India adopts a stubborn and oppressive stance similar to the Assad family in Syria, the outcomes will mirror what the world has witnessed in Syria today. It is hard to definitively declare who emerged victorious and who was defeated in such scenarios, but one thing is clear—humanity always loses.

The former ruling family of Syria, which denied basic rights to its people, is now witnessing those very people entering cities like Aleppo, Damascus, and Hama as victors, while Bashar al-Assad and his supporters have either fled or are in hiding.

Both Pakistan and India need to reflect on what happens when a group, nation, or class is deprived of basic rights. What is the potential fallout of such actions?

Both nations must critically evaluate their points of contention. These two countries are like two arms of the same body—why then do they engage in actions that harm the whole body?

There should be no disagreement on this because it is a real issue that cannot be ignored. This is not just a matter for Kashmiris but applies to any situation worldwide where such circumstances exist, and the solution is the same as outlined by the international community. If Pakistan or its political and religious parties demand that India grant Kashmiris their right to self-determination, India might be willing to listen to those voices from Pakistan. However, if Pakistan makes demands for the freedom of Sikhs or for the people of Nagaland, Assam, and other states, I consider such demands unjust. If Pakistan or Pakistanis make demands outside of Kashmir, I do not consider them valid, and I believe such demands should be rejected.

Is it a good tradition to politicize the temporary negative situations caused by economic rises and falls in domestic conditions by making them an issue between nations? This should not happen. If that were the standard, then would it not be true that political activism in Pakistan, like that of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has been blocked in the name of justice? Has not brutality been inflicted on them? Have their basic rights not been taken away? Are they not being humiliated by false cases and being thrown behind bars? If there has been a temporary economic or political setback in India, it does not mean that new narratives should be invented to destabilize India and use those conditions as a basis for demands of freedom.

Let’s assume that if this is the standard, then India would also have the right to say that PTI has been deprived of all its basic rights. The most popular political leader in Pakistan, who represents 70% of the population, has been imprisoned to hide his corruption, collusion, and to prevent his crimes from coming to light. Against state oppression, injustice, and violence, Imran Khan is demanding real freedom for Pakistanis and freedom for PTI workers. If Pakistan then says that India is interfering in Pakistan's internal affairs, India is also justified in saying that Pakistan should refrain from supporting groups and individuals advocating for the creation of Khalistan, Nagaland, Assam, and other states. India's stance on this issue is completely justified.

As for Kashmir, this issue is already present at the United Nations platform, and it should be resolved there. According to my sources, India is reluctant to implement the demand for Kashmiris' right to self-determination, not just because of Kashmir, but also because of demands from Pakistanis to give independence to other states.

I urge the governments and people of both Pakistan and India to resolve the Kashmir issue bilaterally. If this doesn’t happen, I fear the region may witness the same devastating scenes and stories currently unfolding in the Middle East.

India must also consider alternative scenarios. In Syria, the Assad family ruled with brutality for 54 years, suppressing human rights. Today, the reaction is such that the Assad family has been wiped out, and Syrians, driven by anger and revenge, have reclaimed the country. If Pakistan and India make similar mistakes, the outcomes may mirror what we see in Syria today.

India should keep the door to dialogue on the Kashmir issue open at all times, ensuring Kashmiris feel that their sentiments are respected. This approach will weaken the influence of countries like China in the matter.

India must remain engaged with Kashmiri organizations demanding self-determination so that they do not fall prey to misunderstandings or transform into groups like "Hay’at Tahrir al-Hind."

I fear that if the Indian government continues suppressing the human rights of Kashmiris like Hafez al-Assad, Islamist youth may form a movement akin to "Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham." At that point, neither Pakistan, India, nor global powers will be able to control them.

The facts I am presenting stem from what I observe in the region. Ignoring these realities is akin to throwing oneself into a deep pit.

At the time of the subcontinent's partition, Kashmiris were to decide their future under the agreed-upon formula. However, they now find themselves trapped between Pakistan and India, unsure of whom to align with. Today, Kashmiris want independence, but who will respect this desire?

The Muslim world's sympathy for Kashmiris is natural and rooted in Islam, while the world's diplomatic relations with India are based on its identity as a secular state. This perception influences global perspectives and actions.

Why Should Pakistan and India Learn from the Middle East?

Prophetic traditions (Ahadith) predict significant end-time battles involving Muslim groups, with two key regions mentioned: the Middle East and India. Sunni Muslims claim these groups include those who eventually conquer territories like Syria. According to these traditions, India is next.

The last Messenger of Allah, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), while giving the glad tidings of Paradise, made a prophecy that goes as follows:

’’عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ مَوْلَی رَسُولِ اﷲِ صلی الله عليه وآله وسلم عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلی الله عليه وآله وسلم قَالَ: عِصَابَتَانِ مِنْ أُمَّتِي أَحْرَزَهُمَا اﷲُ مِنْ النَّارِ: عِصَابَةٌ تَغْزُو الْهِنْدَ وَعِصَابَةٌ تَکُونُ مَعَ عِيسَی ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَام‘‘.

Hazrat Thawban (RA), who was a servant of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

"Two groups of my Ummah will be saved by Allah from the punishment of Hellfire: one group will fight in jihad in India, and the other will be with Jesus (peace be upon him)."

References:

• Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, 5:278, Hadith No. 22449
• Sunan An-Nasa'i, 3:28, Hadith No. 4384
• Al-Bayhaqi, As-Sunan Al-Kubra, 9:176, Hadith No. 18381
• At-Tabarani, Al-Mu'jam Al-Awsat, 7:2423, Hadith No. 6741 (Dar Al-Haramayn, Cairo)

Rebels in the Middle East believe the Prophet’s prophecies have been fulfilled, claiming victory. Their strength is growing rapidly, and their next target, based on these traditions, is India. If the world’s military strategies, budgets, and covert efforts have failed to stop the Syrian fighters, how will India counter the believers in the "Ghazwa-e-Hind" prophecy? This also raises concerns that similar changes could occur in Pakistan, as happened in Syria after 54 years of Assad's dictatorship.

Verified Observations:

1. Pakistan once pledged moral and diplomatic support to Kashmiri Muslims, but this is no longer the case. Pakistan has learned from its past mistakes and lacks the resolve to repeat them. Moreover, Kashmiri separatists have grown disillusioned with Pakistan and now have stronger connections with the Afghan Taliban.
2. Credible reports indicate that Kashmiri Muslims have gained support from Indian Muslims and other anti-India groups. Bangladeshi Muslim youth are also in contact with them. Sunni Muslims from the subcontinent are known to have fought alongside Syrian rebels. When the Syrian Muslims establish their governance, their next destination will likely be India, fulfilling what they see as the second prophecy of the Prophet.

The world, particularly Pakistan and India, must heed these lessons and avoid repeating the mistakes that have led to destruction and chaos elsewhere.

Just as followers of other religions believe that their religious beliefs and teachings are dearer to them than life itself, Muslims claim the same. These Muslims consider jihad in India as a part of their faith and the greatest means of attaining paradise. India must understand and evaluate the situation carefully, opting for reconciliation rather than confrontation. This is crucial because numerous conflicts have already erupted worldwide, and many more are expected to arise. If India engages in confrontation, how can other powers—already preoccupied with their own security threats—come to India's aid?

Both Pakistan and India can only overcome these dangers together. India should work with Pakistan to find a mutually acceptable solution for Kashmiris and both nations. If this cannot be achieved, then just as rebels in Syria overcame all forces and reclaimed control after 54 years, similar movements could unite with the marginalized communities of South Asia, particularly Kashmiri Muslims, to seize power.

If nothing is done today, there will be nothing left but regret, as a poet once said: "What is the point of regret when the sparrows have already eaten the harvest?"