As the attention of the Indian cricket fans moves away from Mohali to Mumbai, the India-Pakistan game earlier this week entered the Hall of Fame of Indo-Pak cricket diplomacy encounters. The unique reverence for the game in the sub-continent has been often used as diplomatic ice-breaker in the past. The special place accorded to cricket in India-Pakistan relations is evident from a concomitant lack of ‘nationalist’ fervor in the upcoming India-Sri Lanka World Cup Final in Mumbai on April 2. P.M. Singh has not invited his Sri Lankan counterpart or President Mahinda Rajapaksa to watch the game at Wankhede Stadium. (However, President Rajapaksa is expected to watch the game in Mumbai and he will be joined by Indian President Pratibha Patil). The game at Mohali was another occasion to witness the craze for cricket, its value in the conduct of national diplomacy and much beyond.
The CrazeIt’s difficult to capture in words the popular craze for cricket in India and Pakistan. Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani had declared half-day holiday in the country to allow the fans to fully enjoy the ‘grand encounter’. While the Indians were not so lucky, everyone found a way out to witness the high-voltage drama. Following requests by students several professors postponed examines scheduled for March 30, television screens were put in shopping malls and devout women putt off religious rituals till later time. From religious offerings in temples to private prayer routines, the fans would do all to ensure the team’s success. For over two months advertising campaigns and shopping deals have focussed on the cricket fever in the country. The Indian and Pakistani Diaspora across the globe were glued to the game irrespective to time zone variations. The India Community Center in Silicon Valley, California had arranged for viewing the game on big screens at the Center from 2 a.m. Pacific Time. Anyone following Hussain Haqqani, Pakistan’s Ambassador to U.S., on twitter would have received his invitation welcoming all Pakistanis and cricket lovers to the embassy auditorium at 4 a.m. Eastern Time to view the game. Parts of Belgrave Road in Leicester had to be closed as about 2,000 cricket fans rushed out to celebrate India’s victory in the semi-final.
Cashing on the common craze for cricket, India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh invited his Pakistani counterpart and President Zardari for the game to Mohali. The invitation was accepted by P.M. Gilani. For those who consider P.M. Singh to be a good economist and lacking in political and leadership qualities, this gesture of statesmanship may come as a rebuttal. According to the main opposition party, Bharatiya Janta Party the move was an attempt to divert attention of the domestic public from the barrage of scam accusations confronting the prime minister. However, the BJP needs to realize that peace overtures towards Pakistan is not a very positive strategy for winning popular support in India. There could be other reasons for P.M. Singh’s diplomatic gesture.
Summit meeting between India and Pakistan tend to generate a lot of excitement and expectation. The pretext of the game allowed reducing the hype and inducing a sense of informality to the bilateral interactions. C. Uday Bhaskar is right in suggesting that cricket could be both the sub-text and an astute cover to introduce that much needed political fillip into the moribund India- Pakistan talks. B. Raman explains the Indian approach to combine ‘strategic re-engagement’ with ‘tactical dialogue’ between the two countries. The Mohali initiative was part of the re-engagement process, where the two leaders engaged in “wide-ranging conversation” as distinct from “talks” and avoided the overtly hyped joint statements and press conferences.
It is possible that P.M. Singh sought to avert the re-run of events in 2005 when Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf expressed to the media in Islamabad his desire to travel to India to watch one of the India-Pakistan cricket matches that spring. According to Sanjay Baru, Former Media Advisor to P.M. Singh, New Delhi was stumped into silence for several days. The instinctual response of many was to view this as a typical Musharraf googly. While the Foreign Ministry was still working on an appropriate diplomatic response (since ghost of failed Agra Summit was looming) P.M. Singh “chose to bat for himself.” At the end of his long speech in Parliament, replying to the debate on the motion of thanks on the President’s address to parliament, Dr Singh made public his decision to invite President Musharraf to watch the game. Perhaps P.M. Singh wanted to take the initiative before formal diplomatic niceties complicated the decision.
It’s too early to evaluate the success or failure of this diplomatic gesture. One tangible outcome is the possibility of resumption of sporting ties between the two countries. There are indications of resuming bilateral cricket series between the Indian and Pakistani teams. On the political front, the meeting between Home/Interior Secretaries was held on March 28-29 and the Home/Interiors are expected to meet in July. This political dialogue was set in motion by the Thimpu talks held in February 2011 and can’t be directly attributed to P.M. Singh’s cricket diplomacy. However, P.M. Singh’s gesture has contributed to improving the atmospherics even if it has not directly impacted the contours of political re-engagement.
Reactions in Pakistan after the Mohali game reflected that cricket was much more than a game or an instrument of diplomacy. In 1996 Pakistan was defeated by India in the World Cup Quarterfinal. Shashi Tharoor’s article summarises the reaction in Pakistan then: “The national reaction was calamitous. A Pakistani college student emptied his Kalashnikov into his TV set and himself; another fan succumbed to a heart attack. The players’ aircraft had to be diverted to Karachi to shield the players from the fury of the crowd that assembled to greet them at their scheduled destination, Lahore. The losing captain, Wasim Akram, received death threats, with some reading dark motives into his failure to play in the crucial encounter (had he played and been too unfit to make an impact, he would have been pilloried as well). A judge admitted a legal suit against the team, hinting darkly at corruption. A senior Islamic cleric, Maulana Naqshabandi, declared that Pakistan’s defeat was its penalty for having elected a woman, Benazir Bhutto, to rule; such “obscene” imitations of Indian culture were bound, he argued, to bring about such tragic results. It took weeks for the sense of betrayal and grief to die down.”
The reactions over the defeat in Mohali were markedly different. One Pakistan daily carried an article titled ‘Nation should welcome cricket team home’. The case for a warm welcome was strongly made in The Tribune, “They are our heroes. Our heroes who won many but lost one or two. They are our heroes, regardless of whether they come bearing the golden trophy or not. We should welcome them as heroes, and nothing less.” Reactions shared by the Pakistani fans on the team’s Facebook page and via twitter were equally emotive and supportive. “Men in green, you have given us a lot of joy over the past few weeks and every reason to be proud of you” – Nighat Dad via Twitter. “So proud of Afridi, Lala you were brilliant. No need to apologise. Extremely proud of the team, we made it to the semifinals. Well played” – Sana Saleem via Facebook. The game of cricket continues to serve as a medium to express the nationalist sentiment and mood of the national psyche is reflected in the support for respective teams.
