How can India play cricket with Pakistan while its people are being killed?
Barely an hour before Prime Minister Narendra Modi's swearing-in ceremony on May 26, 2014, Afghanistan's then president Hamid Karzai told me in an exclusive interview that Pakistan's Lashkar-e-Taiba was responsible for the attack on the Indian consulate at Herat.
Karzai was in New Delhi to attend the event as were Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif and other SAARC leaders. Karzai did not mince his words. His intelligence team had details of the involvement of elements from the Pakistan state in the terror attack. The aim was to send a signal to the prime minister-elect. Whether it is Manmohan Singh or Narendra Modi at 7 Race Course Road, Pakistan-sponsored terror to destabilise India will continue.
The terror timeline:
May 13, 2015: Four Indians and one American were among 14 people killed in what was described as a Pakistan-sponsored Taliban terror attack at a guest House in Kabul. Afghan intelligence agencies concluded that the Indian ambassador to Afghanistan was the target.
July 27, 2015: Pakistani terrorists dressed in combat fatigues attacked the Dinanagar police station in Gurdaspur. Seven people, including the superintendent of police, were killed in the terror strike. The terrorists had earlier planted five bombs on the Amritsar-Pathankot railway line. The aim was massive destruction.
August 5, 2015: Two Pakistani terrorists attacked a BSF convoy in Udhampur. Two BSF personnel were killed in the terror attack and eight were injured. One Pakistani terrorist was caught alive.
August 27, 2015: Another Pakistani terrorist was caught alive after a fierce encounter in Baramulla, J&K.
There are several other instances of Pakistan-sponsored terror in India, including stepped-up attempts at infiltration and ceasefire violations, resulting in the loss of innocent Indian lives at the hands of Pakistani security forces.
Amidst the terror strikes, there are repeated calls to resume cricketing ties with a state sponsor. There are those who argue that sports should be kept insulated from politics and even diplomacy.
Sports have always been a part of diplomacy world over. The United States did not participate in the 1980 Moscow Olympics to protest the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the US was not the only country to do so. More than 60 countries opted out of the event. In fact, given his huge popularity, the US even sent boxer Muhammad Ali to Tanzania, Nigeria and Senegal to persuade them to boycott the Olympics.
In 1984, the entire Soviet Bloc kept off the Los Angeles Olympics to pay the US back in the same coin. Once again, sports were a part of the diplomatic signal countries were giving out. Were there protests from sporting bodies and athletes at that time? Yes. Several US athletes told then US president Jimmy Carter that all their effort and training would go down the drain. He told them he understood their pain but spoke of larger national interest.
Is it more important for the BCCI, our cricketers, sponsors etc to make money than seek justice for those killed in Pakistan-sponsored terror? Can the BCCI answer these simple questions -
- Has Pakistan taken any action to bring to justice the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai terror?
- Has Pakistan taken any steps to check terror aimed at India?
- Has Pakistan army stopped aiding, abetting, training and sponsoring terrorists being sent to India?
- Has Pakistan stopped printing fake Indian currency aimed at destabilising the Indian economy?
- Has Pakistan stopped harming India's interests in Afghanistan?
If not, then why are we so desperate to play cricket with Pakistan? There may be international obligations for a global series, but why resume bilateral cricket? Is it not the responsibility of every Indian to send out the message - we will not tolerate state sponsors of terror or play cricket till credible action is taken to stop those who aim to kill fellow Indian citizens.
Sports as a key part of international diplomacy is not restricted to the Moscow or Los Angeles games. The entire cricket-playing world boycotted South Africa for practising apartheid.
In 1970, South Africa was barred from the International Cricket Council (ICC).
In 1971, Australia cancelled the cricketing tour of South Africa. Before that, in 1968, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) called for a boycott of all South African sports bodies till they abolished apartheid. Earlier, in 1964, South Africa was barred from Tokyo Olympics.
On August 19, IPL commissioner Rajiv Shukla tweeted: "Cricket is a gentleman's game and the spirit of the game expects same generosity and tolerance from those who love the game."
In the context of the Shiv Sena barging into the BCCI office in Mumbai, I agree with him. But is Mr Shukla a terror less evil than apartheid? If the entire cricketing world could boycott South Africa for the practice, why can't India stop playing cricket with Pakistan till the time the Pakistan state, its army and ISI stop sponsoring terror in India.
Pakistan has to realise it cannot send one team with guns and the other with cricket bats. And that message has to go in one voice from an entire nation. Or Pakistan will continue to play and bleed us, through a thousand cuts and we will have only ourselves to blame.