news details |
|
|
| Congress response to Kashmiri leadership's divisive demands | | Queering the Indian pitch in the Valley | | Neha
Jammu, Mar 22: It is an established fact that political power has been in the hands of Kashmiri leadership since 1947 and Article 370 has further empowered it to exercise unbridled and absolute legislative and executive powers. It is also a fact that Jammu and Kashmir is the only state in the country that enjoys residuary powers. It is also too well-known that Kashmir has been getting preferential treatment from New Delhi and dominates all or nearly the institutions in the state. And still the nation is facing many challenges in the Kashmir valley. It is not only the separatists and fanatics like Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Yasin Malik and Shabir Ahmad Shah who have been putting forth divisive demands. The so-called mainstream parties like the National Conference (NC) and the Congress are recommending unsettling solutions to the so-called Kashmir problem. Some Kashmiri leaders, for instance, are demanding greater autonomy or semi-independence or restoration of pre-1953 politico-constitutional status or a step short of complete independence saying such a political concession alone could end alienation in the Valley and forge a lasting peace there as well as South Asia. In other words, they say that if the Government of India sincerely wishes to resolve the issue, it has no other option but to withdraw all the central laws and institutions from the state which were extended to it after August 1953. The ruling National Conference is the votary of greater autonomy and its insistence is on a dispensation that is outside the political and constitutional organization of India. It is also for the withdrawal of the Army and revocation of the AFSPA. It also says that the state only acceded to India and not merged with it and by repeating the words Atoot Ang (integral part) you cannot change the political status of Kashmir. It says so on the floor of the Assembly and outside at all available forums. Sadly, some responsible persons in Delhi endorse these unsettling formulations.
Some Kashmiri leaders say the grant of self-rule alone has the potential of conciliating the alienated Kashmiris, restoring peace in the region and harmonizing India-Pakistan relations. By self-rule they mean not just restoration of pre-1953 political status, but also mean withdrawal of the army, revocation of the AFSPA, economic freedom, porous borders, dual currency, a particular type of banking system, irrelevant Line of Control/ceasefire line and adoption of supra-state measures. And by supra-state measures they mean India-Pakistan joint control over Jammu and Kashmir. To be more precise, by supra-state measures they mean a regime that empowers Pakistan to share equal sovereignty with India in Jammu and Kashmir. They also say demilitarization is imperative to provide what they call "breathing space" to the people of Kashmir. And again, there are influential elements in Delhi and media houses who endorse the self-rule doctrine. They in a way endorse the politics of competitive communalism and competitive secessionism being brazenly indulged in the Valley by those whom we describe as mainstream and secular. These elements not only endorse the greater autonomy concept and self-rule doctrine, notwithstanding the fact that the people of Jammu province and Ladakh region, besides the internally displaced Kashmiri Hindus and religious, are vehemently opposed to them, they also cross more lines to further muddy the Indian waters in Kashmir. For example, the Congress says, "we are prepared to redraw the political map of India if that could lead to the resolution of the Kashmir problem". For example, they say, "Our Government has decided to reward the moderate militants". For example, the Congress says, "There is the need to evolve a consensus on the issues of self-rule and autonomy within the vast flexibilities provided by the Constitution". For example, the Congress says, "There should be joint control of India and Pakistan over the state's waters, power projects, agriculture, sericulture, tourism, forestry and environment". For example, the Congress endorses the Hurriyat's suggestion for trilateral dialogue between India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir to resolve the so-called Kashmir issue and talk about New Delhi-Srinagar axis, New Delhi-Islamabad axis and Srinagar-Islamabad axis. For example, they say, "Kashmir has a unique history and unique geography. Kashmir problem is unique that requires a unique solution. The solutions which are applicable to other states of the Union cannot be replicated in Kashmir". For example, the Congress says, "Don't' read too much into the unanimous Parliamentary resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir and the Pakistani anti-India role in the state". And some of those who are close to the Congress say, "we will ask the Government of India to amend the Indian Constitution to accommodate the Kashmiris' azadi demand".
But these are only a few instances which only serve to demonstrate the Congress' compromising attitude towards Kashmir, which acceded to India, like other 560-odd princely states, as per the constitutional law on the subject and suggest that its concept of India and on India is highly flawed. It's no wonder then that the so-called mainstream Kashmiri leadership has been exploiting this flawed approach towards the Valley and systematically widening the gulf between Srinagar and New Delhi day by day.
It is time to acknowledge that a regressive and hate-India ideology has poisoned the minds of sections of society in Kashmir, including Kashmiri youth and act accordingly. It would be wrong to term the problem in Kashmir as Kashmir problem. The problem is neither political nor economic. It is basically a problem of uncontested communalism of the Kashmiri leadership. So far, New Delhi has tried to address it by incremental surrenders or by creating a process of circumventing it. The policy of incremental surrenders has only created more problems for the nation in Kashmir. New Delhi must behave like self-respecting states, including the US, Russia, China, Israel and even Sri Lanka, behave to protect and advance further their geo-political and economic interests. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
