When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

India

India-Pakistan, A Cricket Metaphor For Nationalism

An Indian boy playing cricket.
An Indian boy playing cricket.
Shah Alam Khan

NEW DELHI — Farooque was a Kashmiri. He hated India. His cousin was killed by security forces at a demonstration in Srinagar. This was 1990. We were classmates, and I always took him head on for his anti-India rhetoric. Back then, no one minded his bombast, nor our arguments — and life went on. Then came March 1992 and the cricket World Cup. The determined Imran Khan and Pakistan came from behind and won the title. I skipped college the day Pakistan won because I did not have the courage to face Farooque, who was of course ecstatic beyond words and was looking to rub my face in it. I was madly in love with cricket and my national team, which had let me down. But I also knew that defeat was part of the game, and part of life.

But 1992 also came with hate. The 400-year-old Babri Masjid was pulled down within four hours by kar sevaks. That become a defining moment in India's secular history and Farooque taunted me on being the citizen of a country which could not protect the mosque from a group of rabid communalists. I was hurt, but also convinced that it was the handiwork of a lunatic fringe that would never have a place within the pluralistic and secular India I was so proud of.

I was madly in love with cricket and my national team, which had let me down.

Again, life went on and we graduated from college. India too graduated from an innocent past and the mid-1990s saw the swift embracing of neoliberal policies. People changed and jumped classes overnight. Farooque left the country and we lost contact.

And then 2002 happened. Yes, it happened not as a year but as a moment of perfidy for the thousands of Muslims who lived in different parts of Gujarat, imagining it to be their home. I emailed a Muslim and a Hindu friend from Ahmedabad asking about their well-being. Both were copied on the same mail. The Muslim guy replied in short — "Alive" — while my Hindu friend wrote, "Ashamed to be alive."

I was thankful that I had lost touch with Farooque. The brevity of the message from my Hindu friend gave me hope. They will never be able to hijack this country, I thought, but a tiny doubt had crept up in me, which was bound to grow further when Mohammad Akhlaq was lynched in 2015, followed by similar acts against Junaid Khan, Majloom Ansari, Pehlu Khan and others.

The Champions Trophy this year saw India defeating Pakistan in its very first match, but we lost the finals to a resurgent Pakistani side. To my horror, I didn't feel as bad as I had when we had failed to reach the finals of the 1992 World Cup, which was won by Pakistan. I couldn't explain what deferred me from being sad. Sadness, like happiness, should have a reason and I was scared to face this reason. It was like a disfigured person looking in the mirror for the very first time. Was I turning into an anti-national, like Farooque? Why would I not mind India losing to its arch rival?

Then, that evening my phone rang with urgency. It was Farooque — after 25 years he had traced my number through a common friend. We talked for half an hour, discussing our lives and careers.

"Aur miyan, abhi bhi nationalist hee ho? (So, are you still a nationalist?)" he asked me in his usual provocative tone. I was ashamed — not because he had the audacity to pose the question, but because I quickly changed the topic to something altogether irrelevant. Irrelevance, after all, is the best disguise for survival.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Geopolitics

It's A Golden Era For Russia-Turkey Relations — Just Look At The Numbers

On the diplomatic and political level, no world leader speaks more regularly with Vladimir Putin than his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. But the growing closeness of Russia and Turkey can also be measured in the economic data. And the 2022 numbers are stunning.

Photo of Erdogan and Putin walking out of a door

Erdogan and Putin last summer in Sochi, Russia

Vyacheslav Prokofyev/TASS via ZUMA
Aytug Özçolak

-Analysis-

ISTANBUL — As Russia has become increasingly isolated since the invasion of Ukraine, the virtual pariah state has drawn notably closer to one of its remaining partners: Turkey.

Ankara has committed billions of dollars to buy the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system, and contracted to Russia to build Turkey's first nuclear power plant. The countries’ foreign policies are also becoming increasingly aligned.

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

But the depth of this relationship goes much further. Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan speaks to Russian President Vladimir Putin more than any other leader: 16 times in 2022, and 11 times in 2021. Erdoğan has visited Russia 14 times since 2016, compared to his 10 visits to the U.S. in the same time period (half of which were in 2016 and 2017).

But no less important is the way the two countries are increasingly tied together by commerce.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

The latest