news details |
|
|
| Ladakhis up in arms against Kashmir, demand separation | | Struggle for UT | | II Stark Reality II
Rustam
JAMMU, Sept 8: Between August 26 and September 8, Leh witnessed three events all suggesting that the people of Leh district in Ladakh region have made up their mind to get their region separated from Kashmir and link their fate directly with New Delhi. On August 26, Ladakhi leaders belong to all organizations, including political, religious and social, paid floral tributes to thee martyrs of Ladakh and resolved to revive the agitation for UT status. That day 23 years ago, the police had shot dead three young Ladakhis as they were part of the agitation for UT status. The Ladakhi leaders, including from the Congress, the BJP, the LBA leaders and Muslim organizations, declared that they would soon convene an all-party meeting to chalk out a strategy which could help them achieve their stated goal. People of Ladakh have been seeking separation from Kashmir since 1947, when the state acceded to India.
On September 7, the youth wing of the BJP organized an impressive demonstration in Leh to attract the attention of the authorities towards the age-old demand of the Ladakhis. All those who took part in the demonstration spoke in one voice that that they will take rest only after they achieved their goal.
And on September 8, the Leh-based BJP leadership organized a rally to achieve the same objective. Addressing the rally, the BJP leaders said that they passed a resolution on UT demand and urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to look into their demand and take steps which could help them achieve their objective. They informed that they sent a letter-cum-memorandum to the Prime Minister urging him to concede the demand of the Ladakhis.
The communication to the Prime Minister, among other things, said: “The demand for separation of Ladakh from Jammu and Kashmir State is the oldest demand for creation of a new state as the leaders of Young Men's Buddhist Association of Ladakh had approached Government of India in 1947 for Ladakh being separated from Jammu and Kashmir and governing it directly from Delhi…People of Ladakh have, since, been consistently requesting for fulfilling their genuine demand which is based on historical and strategic reasons and above all being in the national interest…Ladakh meets the criteria and norms required for creating a separate political entity as required under rules and conventions followed in creation of new states”.
Their communication further said: “There is worst form of discrimination against Ladakh at the hands of successive Governments in the State as the Ladakhis have been denied their due share in every field and treated as second class citizens with the Governments having failed to implement the recommendations made by several commissions set up to remove regional disparities, which, if implemented, would have given some sense of belonging to the people of Ladakh. The height of the things is that even the Government at the centre has been using Ladakh and its people to suit their convenience with the people of Ladakh having willingly allowed themselves to be used as sacrificial lambs in the wider national interests”. Their communication also expressed concern over the Chinese intrusions in Ladakh.
The developments which have unfolded in Leh during the past few days clearly suggest that there exists an extreme form of bitterness between Leh and Srinagar and that the people of Ladakh want a separate dispensation that is independent of Kashmir and within India and Indian Constitution. To be more precise, they want New Delhi to administer their affairs by involving them in matters of governance. It is the Kashmiri leadership that is responsible for forcing down the throat of the Ladakhis the demand for UT. Had the Kashmiri leadership treated the people of all the three regions equally and not evolved and implementing Kashmir-centric policies and abandoned its communal and divisive ideology, things in Ladakh, or for that matter in the areas beyond the Kashmir Valley would have been totally different and there would not have been demand for the state’s reorganization. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
