If playing cricket with Pakistan brought prospects of improved relations, then the cricket series would be worth its while. That, alas, is far from being the case.
If playing cricket with Pakistan brought prospects of improved relations, then the cricket series would be worth its while. That, alas, is far from being the case.
Monday’s decision by the Indian cricket board to resume matches with Pakistan after a gap of five years in December and January is palpably political, whatever the waffle about the final picture resting on security clearances from the Union home ministry.
The two sides playing five matches in a space of 15 days, with less than a week’s break for the Indian team after the series with England, would ordinarily be unthinkable. Cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar is therefore right to express misgivings on grounds of cricket. Mr Gavaskar makes the further point about feeling uncomfortable with the BCCI’s decision as he is a Mumbaikar and Islamabad has done precious little to bring the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai outrage to book. His understanding is far from misplaced. In this context, being a Mumbaikar and being an Indian are the same thing. Indians, in general, are likely to share the former captain’s apprehensions. Indeed, anyone who is civilised and is a humanist will also see the point being made.
Even so, if playing cricket with Pakistan brought prospects of improved relations, to the extent of Islamabad cracking down on terrorist groups targeting India (and others, as the terrorism matrix springs from the same worldview and political endorsement flowing from that country’s security establishment), then the cricket series would be worth its while. That, alas, is far from being the case.
Cricketing ties between India and Pakistan have almost always — since the 1965 war — flowed from political considerations, with this country suspending and resuming play depending on diplomatic requirements. India-Pakistan cricket has thus amounted to little more than diplomatic fodder. The argument has always been made that cricket gives a shot in the arm to the considerable peace constituency on both sides of the border. That is undoubtedly true. But this factor seems not to lead anywhere. The matches played, official Pakistan resumes its hostile intent beneath formally constructive words.
It was still possible to give cricket lovers and peace-seekers a level playing field if India placed a price on cricketing relations, for instance by making this contingent on Pakistan too doing certain things. At the present juncture, this could have been visa diplomacy. India should challenge Pakistan to allow easy visas for Indian business and industry, as well as writers and journalists. Recently the Indian home secretary was in Pakistan ready to sign an agreement on visas after President Asif Ali Zardari, during his April visit to India, had hinted this could be accomplished rightaway. But he returned empty-handed. Give peace an opening, but it can’t be a one-way street. That would not lead to a widening of the road, if the past is any guide.
