Reading the editorial in yesterday's edition of The Times of India, I came across an interesting article that talked about the effects of a prolonged war with no end in sight on the minds and health of the soldiers of the US Army. The random train of thought on a Monday morning then led me to think what started the war (s) and how it was positioned as a war for truth, for the prevalence of democracy and righteousness. And how after almost a decade, it is nothing more than a string of locally won 'street fights' and a chain of lost battles! The very WAR is no where in discussion because it wasn't from the very start.
So what is it that started the war really? Was it just the greed of the US Capitalists as was positioned in the media across the world? Maybe. But I am certain that a lot more is being forcibly brushed under the carpet, unknowingly in full view of the world. The war (like most other wars) was started to give credence to the 'idea of war' and 'the notion of martyrdom', of a nation and its people.
How different is this war from the one waged by the "non state elements" against India? To be precise, how different is the idea of one from the other. One talks about giving the right to the Afghani people to decide and live in peace and yet after almost a decade, those very people are the ones who have suffered the most in the mindless bargain. The war on India has been positioned as all about giving the people of Kashmir their identity. And it is ironical that this battle at some level is being waged by a country that bears the albatross of a completely tattered social fabric around its neck!! Shouldn't the responsibility of that country be towards its citizens, those who toil on its very land?
This is what convinces me that it was never about the war itself but about the fanciful idea, an idea permeated with self created notions of power, responsibility and fame. Yet an idea riddled with the pain of continued failure and an indefinite loss of life. This is what convinces me that it was nothing but the notion of martyrdom that has become the governing rule of many modern day societies. The fancied idea of dying for a supreme cause.
And in this, how different is the institution of Army of any country? Taking India for example, the Army invites young fit people to join the honor of dying for their country! Really!! Any person with some decent sense of basic marketing principles will scoff at this approach which starts with the highest fear that any human faces, that of death. How is that you expect to find the best people when you are promising them death? Is it to say that a soldier who goes into the battle field but comes out alive is any less than the one who has perished to the enemy's bullet? Is it to say that the bravery of the one who has lived is not as much as the one who has laid his life? Shouldn't joining the army be all about serving the nation and not necessarily have to die for it? Shouldn't the premise of any recruiter be to promise the pride of service? How is the idea of a martyr greater than that of a loyal servant? But then maybe it is.
This is where the notion of martyrdom comes in. It is this notion of martyrdom that is causing an irreversible increase in the number of people taking to the gun. Maybe those on the right side of the fence need to reverse their tactics and hiring policies since the belief system of those on the other side seems far more superior and convincing than ours. The very notion of being a martyr for no body's cause (this is not really a battle for themselves, or for their people) is so heightened in each of them that this has come to form the very idea of a country's existence. Historians have argued over the years that Pakistan (politicians alone) will never want to find a solution to Kashmir because this very problem forms the basis of their existence. I will refrain from taking such an extreme view point but most certainly, am convinced that the one meeting ground for our neighbor and Uncle Sam is the urge to play policeman in absolutely unrelated circumstances from their daily life and to push millions from their country every year into a dark alley of war, nah martyrdom!
So finally, does every country need a martyr? Maybe. Afterall, isn't one man's martyr another man's terrorist? It is a questioning reality, repackaged as a believable truth!
No comments:
Post a Comment