Since the dawn of modern time, sports has diligently been weaved into the diplomatic affairs of a state, seen as a medium for bridging gaps between a chasm of differences. Not only does it do the aforementioned, but the message of goodwill that sporting events propagate, has helped to bolster communal relations between states in a way that surpasses all differences of culture, ethnicity and religion. Sports can bring hostile nations together and help to temporarily stave off the plethora of discrepancies that might else wise spark out in battlefields.
For this very reason, Sport diplomacy is among one of the very efficient diplomatic practices- something that has been exercised for decades. However, quite logically, for any sort of diplomacy on this matter to excel, willingness and receptive attitude needs to be shown from both sides. Naturally, all efforts cannot be made by just one side alone while the other poses as a stubborn goat. Both sides need to meet each other half way.
Now let's put things into context. It was only the other day that the Chief Minister of the Himachal Pradesh, an Indian state, threw his arms up in the air and declared he would not provide adequate protection to the Pakistani cricket team during the scheduled world cup match with India on the 19th of March (the venue for this match has been relocated to Kolkata). It's prudent to mention here that the venue (Dharamshala) was decided approximately a year ago. This recent blunder on India's part only serves to bolster Pakistan's claim regarding the unstable security situation in India when it comes to the safety of the cricket team. It should also be noted that the Indian Provincial government is playing politics based on its image as a country rather than the game itself.
In the recent past, incidents ranging from hostile statements of government officials to the skirmishes at the border have shown that nothing seems to be going particularly dainty between Pakistan and India. It is even in this hostile environment that the Pakistan Cricket Board's chief, Shehryar Khan, went to India to discuss the cricket series between the two countries. This was something that India has promised to play with Pakistan, in lieu of the support that was given by Pakistan on the issue of the "Big Three".
The workers of Shiv Sena, an Indian extremist political party, attacked BCCI head quarters to protest against the arrival of Khan. The aftermath of this resulted in the meeting with the BCCI's chief being cancelled. There is no pretending that the message behind these actions was ambivalent, it was a clear and hostile sentiment towards Pakistan. To begin with, the threats to Aleem Dar, one of the best umpires in the world, resulting in his exclusion from the umpiring panel of the recent series between India and South Africa was the first instance of this adverse behaviour. This was then followed by the incident where the face of Sudheendra Kulkarni, Khurshid Kasuri's book launch organiser, was censored by the far-right Indian protestors. Then, came the cancellation of a musical concert of Ghulam Ali. These are just a few recent examples from an exhaustive list of incidents of India's antagonism towards Pakistanis.
Since there is no point in talking about past experiences of animosity, let's talk about the ICC T20 World Cup 2016. In order to safeguard itself, it is important that Pakistan takes a clear stance while presenting its case in front of the ICC; that under Modi's regime, the Indian extremists have nothing to fear and can go up-to any extent to cause harm to the Pakistanis. This may seem like paranoia but a hint can be taken from the very fact that India was the first country to object to the Cricket World Cup 2011being played in Pakistan.
It doesn't take a Sherlock to piece together the above events and arrive at the conclusion that India does not have the slightest wish to share the pitch with us. How else should the Indian government get across the message that they are not interested in cricket matches with Pakistan?
While I clearly denounce a hostile attitude towards our neighbour, yet, I cannot help but draw an extent to the cordiality that we should assume: communal relations are only to be practiced to the point that our self-respect and dignity are not compromised. Playing with India is perfectly acceptable as long as they are receptive to the idea of communality. However, if the other side continues to display such a repelling behaviour then Pakistan too should be relieved of any obligation to practice cordiality.
(The writer is a freelance columnist)
Comments
Comments are closed.