news details |
|
|
| Term Kashmiriyat was not in vogue before 1975 | | Ill-informed anchors | | Neha
Jammu, Dec 3: What is Kashmiriyat? What does it stand for? When was the term Kashmiriyat coined? Who coined it and for what? The Left-oriented and essentially pro-Congress and ragtag UPA news channel, NDTV India, on November 1 organised debate on Article 370 under its programme "Badi Khabar" between 6 and 7 p.m. The anchor was sophisticated Nidhi Kulpati.
One of the five participants, Om Thanvi, like the anchor, was absolutely ignorant about Article 370. They were neither here nor there. Two of them - Union Minister Harish Rawat of the Congress of communalists and separatist MP Mehboob Beg of the pro-autonomy National Conference - exhibited their hatred for the Indian laws and used the opportunity to distort facts, murder history, preach falsehood and speak half truths to mislead the nation. Both behaved in a most irresponsible manner and proved that they represented that view that had culminated in the communal partition of India in August 1947. The remaining two panelists - Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi of the BJP and RSS-watcher and expert Baldev Sharma - were the only ones who sought to put things in perspective.
But what they said about Article 370 is not the issue under scrutiny. The issue under reference is Kashmiriyat. Nidhi Kulpati repeatedly used this term and asked Harish Rawat if the Congress felt outraged and deeply concerned over the use of this term by BJP Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi in his speech delivered at the historic and path-breaking Lalkar Rally in Jammu on December 1. She sought to create an impression that it was the Congress that had been using this term and describe its historical significance.
Interestingly, he endorsed the ill-informed formulation of Nidhi Kulpati and said that the "Kashmiriyat is a reality and the Indian Constitution protects and promotes it". "The Congress understands India and its uniqueness, but the BJP doesn't," he also said, thus exposing his hypocritical approach.
Even what Harish Rawat, who seldom talks sense and quite often jumps on to the bandwagon of ultra-communalists, told Nidhi Kulpati in response to her innocent query is not a point of discussion. As said, the issue in hand is Kashmiriyat. Put in any amount of effort to find if the term Kashmiriyat found place in any history book or chronicle or in any literary work produced before 1975 or any article that appeared in any newspaper before 1975 and you will come out of the exercise minus everything. The reason is that this term did not exist it all. It was in 1975 that this term was coined by a Jammu-based controversial and "secular" politician-cum-columnist. That was the year the votary of plebiscite, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, was brought back to power by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi after bringing down her own party's government to pander to the protagonists Switzerland-type independent Kashmir.
The people of Jammu province and Ladakh region, besides the minority communities in Kashmir, especially the miniscule minority of Kashmiri Hindus, felt aghast over this dumb-founding and dangerous development for obvious reasons, the most notable being the well-known communal, anti-Jammu and anti-minority and pro-semi-independence credentials of Sheikh Abdullah. The one who coined the term Kashmiriyat, who had earlier flirted with Sheikh Abdullah and his Valley-based NC, joined the NC to fulfill his ambition of entering the Lok Sabha on the NC ticket. He got it but suffered a massive defeat at the hands of the patriotic people of Jammu. In between and even thereafter he continued to use the term Kashmiriyat in his essays in his desperate attempt to mislead the nation by saying that it stood for liberal, secular and democratic values; it was all-embracing; and it made no distinction between man and man on the ground of caste, creed and religion. His whole objective was to keep Sheikh Abdullah and his son Farooq Abdullah, presently NC president and Union Minister, in good humour by projecting them as ardent champions of Kashmiriyat and he was rewarded for that also.
Kashmiriyat cannot be termed as liberal and all-embracing. It is regressive. It stands for exclusiveness and exclusion of all against the members of one religious sect, which has been in power since October 1947. It is they who control and run all the Kashmir-based "mainstream" political, militant and separatist organisations. These include the NC, Congress, People's Democratic Party (PDP), CPI, CPI-M, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), All-Party Hurriyat Conference - Mirwaiz (APHC-M), APHC (Geelani), Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), Jammu & Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party (JKDFP), People's League (PL), People's Conference (PC), Dukhtran-e-Millat (DeM), Hizbul Mujahideen (HM), to mention only a few.
The people of Jammu and Ladakh, Shiite Muslims, Gujjar and Bakerwal Muslims, Pathowari-speaking Muslims and non-Muslims, displaced Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and so on are not part of the so-called Kashmiriyat. Infact, they are its victims. They abhor Kashmiriyat and believe that "it has been posing a grave threat to their distinct identity and personality". They say that "it was because of this Kashmiriyat that over three lakh Kashmiri Hindus, hundreds of the Sikh families and the handful of Kashmir-based Christians had to quit Kashmir in early 1990 to become refugees in their own country". They say that "it is because of Kashmiriyat that the refugees from West Pakistan, women, SCs, STs, OBCs and similar other social groups have suffered, and continue to suffer, immense socio-economic and political losses". And they say that "it is because of the recognition and promotion of Kashmiriyat that the nation has been facing serious challenges in the Kashmir Valley".
Will ill-informed anchors like Nidhi Kulpati examine the background in which the term Kashmiriyat was coined and inform the nation as to what it stands for and means to Jammu and Ladakh and several religious and ethnic minorities in the state? They would also do well to ensure the participation in such debates of those who are the victims of the pernicious Article 370 and Kashmiriyat. For, they are only bringing bad name to them by selecting as panelists those who have been misinterpreting Article 370 to create a wall of hatred between Kashmiri Muslims and the rest of the country and misleading the nation by seeking to create an impression that Kashmiriyat is something very unique and special. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
