news details |
|
|
| Popular uprising in J&K:A clash of identities | | Unless long-term causes of regional tensions are attended to, they may explode again in more dangerous ways | | Balraj Puri
Jammu and Kashmir is passing through an unprecedented popular upsurge, for the first time simultaneously in its two main regions, though in divergent directions. Apparently, the cause of this upsurge is sharp differences over government land to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB). It did provide a flash point to the simmering volcano that already existed.
In Kashmir militants and separatists were providing an outlet to the sense of alienation. Suddenly both declined, partly due to political upheaval in Pakistan and partly due to the developments within the state. The new civilian government in Pakistan ignored the separatist leaders and instead gave recognition to mainstream leaders like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti. These leaders had already encroached upon the space that separatists had occupied by protesting against human rights violations and supporting dialogue with Pakistan and separatists for the final solution to the Kashmir problem.
The land transfer order of May 26, 2008 provided the separatists an opportunity to stage a comeback by raising exaggerated fears. Their task was facilitated by the Chief Executive Officer of the Shrine Board who said that the land had been purchased by the Board permanently. The Peoples’ Democratic Party was a party to the decision for land transfer. But fearing isolation from the popular mood, it joined in the demand for cancelling the land transfer order. The National Conference too jumped onto the popular wave. This provided a rare opportunity for the extremist and moderate factions of the Hurriyat, led by Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq respectively, and also for the separatist and mainstream parties, to unite.
On July 1 the land transfer order was revoked. It immediately provoked a reaction in Jammu. Though a religious demand for restoration of land was the rallying point of the protest, it got popular support on account of widespread feeling that Jammu had been discriminated against by successive governments The protest movement has continued for two months. The ire of the Jammu movement this time was not directed so much against Pakistan or separatist leaders but against leaders of the mainstream parties.
Sporadic attacks by anti-social elements on traffic to and from Kashmir, provoked a revival of popular protest in Kashmir. On August 11, fruit exporters gave a call for a march to Muzaffarabad across the LoC. The march was joined by both factions of the Hurriyat, some mainstream parties and a mass of people. The firing killed seven people including a Hurriyat leader Sheikh Abdul Aziz. His funeral next day was joined by a larger number. The leaders of the movement said that the blockade or the Shrine Board land was no more the main issue and demanded right of self-determination and the final solution of the Kashmir problem.
Thus it is a clash between the identities of the two regions, which sometimes takes the form of a communal clash. As Kashmiris feel a threat to their identity, they seek an outlet in militancy and secession. In Jammu it seeks an outlet in ultra-nationalist and integrationist slogans. This forms a vicious circle where reaction in one region provokes a contrary reaction in the other. Unless long-term causes of regional tensions are attended to, they may explode again in more dangerous ways.
Some exercises to ensure internal harmony in the state have been made in the past. Pandit Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah declared at a joint press conference on July 24, 1952 that the constitution of the state would provide for regional autonomy. Though the Bharatiya Jana Sangh initially opposed the Delhi Agreement, after a prolonged correspondence with Pandit Nehru, the founder president of the Sangh, Dr Shyama Prasad Mukerjee, offered to support it provided “the principle of autonomy will apply to province of Jammu and to Ladakh and Kashmir Valley” .
A 45-page draft document on provisions of regional autonomy was sent to Durga Dass Verma, the underground leader of the Praja Parishad, the Jan Sangh’s regional affiliate, who approved it. The State People’s Convention, convened by Sheikh Abdullah in 1968, accepted a draft prepared by this writer on the internal constitutional set-up of the state. It envisaged autonomy for the regions and further devolution of power to districts, blocks and panchayats. The same proposal was elaborated in the report of the Regional Autonomy Committee, appointed by the then Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, which was also headed by this writer.
The report suggested a division of subjects between the State and the regions. The latter would have legislative, political and administrative powers on subjects delegated to them. The lower tiers would be empowered more or less on the pattern of panchayati raj in the rest of India. The report also dealt with cultural safeguards for all ethnic communities. For financial allocation to various levels an objective and equitable formula was suggested.
This blue print could be the basis for a wider debate to arrive at a consensus. The present overcentralised system would continue to generate suspicion in one region against the other and is not conductive to solve even short term problems. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
