India’s song and dance against terrorism

Should Pakistani actors in Bollywood be held responsible for the jihadists attack India on India? As relations between the South Asian neighbors continue to sour, this appears to be the new and foolish consensus in India’s entertainment industry.

Earlier this week, Karan Johar, a prominent Indian film director, pledged in a video message to “not engage with talent from the neighboring country.” Only last month, Mr. Johar had struck exactly the opposite note. “Will banning Pakistani talent stop terrorism?” he asked anchor BarkhaDutt on television.

A theater-owners’ association has already pledged not to screen movies featuring Pakistanis in parts of India. Zee, a top television company, has dropped popular Pakistani soap operas from its lineup. Across the country, organizers have canceled screenings of Pakistani movies and performances by Pakistani singers. An association of producers has banned Pakistani actors and technicians from working in India.

In retaliation, Pakistani theater owners suspended the nearly decadeold practice of screening Indian movies. On Wednesday, Islamabad imposed an official ban on Indian programming on both radio and television.

Mr. Johar’s public reversal— prompted by threats from a thuggish regional party in Mumbai to forcibly block an upcoming movie of his featuring Fawad Khan, a dashing Pakistani actor—accurately reflects a large swathe of public sentiment.

But while the assertiveness of Narendra Modi’s government against terrorist outfits and their backers is entirely welcome, Bollywood’s childish response is not.

In India’s long war against radical Islam—the interpretation of the faith that seeks to order all aspects of state and society by Shariah law—Mr. Khan and his compatriots in Bollywood are allies, not adversaries. Offering a platform to talented Pakistanis in the arts allows India to play a role in thwarting its neighbor’s descent into radicalism. By contrast, shunning the likes of Mr. Khan suggests an inability to grasp the distinction between regular Pakistanis— many of whom bear India no ill will.

It’s easy to see why a ban appeals to some people. It suggests solidarity with soldiers at a time of heightened tensions on the border. It’s a poke in the eye of the People’s Republic of Bollywood, whose irritating peaceniks appear to believe that no problem is too large to be solved by a candlelight vigil.

In some Indians’ eyes, a ban also places Pakistan beyond the pale of civilized nations. If India refused to play cricket with apartheid-era South Africa—effectively punishing sportsmen for the sins of their government— then why not apply the same principle to Pakistani actors and musicians?

To complicate matters, Mr. Khan and his best-known compatriots employed in Bollywood have so far refused to condemn the attack on Indian soldiers. Instead, they have taken a stand against terrorism “anywhere in the world” or spoken in gauzy terms about “a more peaceful world” or “spreading peace and love.” Their critics point out that the same people, including Mr. Khan, had no trouble speaking out against the November 2015 Paris attacks.

However, it’s one thing to understand the fount of public anger in India, and quite another to surrender to it without examination.

In purely artistic terms, Pakistani actors and musicians enrich Bollywood by infusing it with greater competition. But even if you buy the (perfectly reasonable) argument that art cannot always be separated from geopolitics, turning a cold shoulder to talented Pakistanis makes little sense.

For starters, as Mr. Johar correctly pointed out before backtracking, there is no evidence to suggest that the jihadist groups that threaten India will be affected in the slightest by a snub from Bollywood. On the contrary, as Islamabad’s prompt ban on Indian programming shows, Pakistani hawks will use India’s actions as an excuse to pursue their own longstanding agenda of cutting off their citizens from Indian influence.

Moreover, if India’s biggest longterm worry about Pakistan is its descent toward radicalism, then going after entertainers is an odd way to address it. Hardline Islamists in Pakistan, like Islamists everywhere, abhor popular cinema and music. They have the most to gain if Pakistan shuts itself off from Bollywood, the most visible cultural product of a society they regard as godless.

During the Cold War, the U.S. distinguished between the Soviet government and Russian writers, dancers and musicians. It recognized that when faced with an authoritarian foe, one of a free society’s greatest strengths is showcasing its freedom. India ought to come to the same conclusion. Instead of banishing Mr. Khan and his compatriots it ought to welcome them with open arms.