news details |
|
|
| Peace first, KPs' re-entry into Valley later | | SUNDAY SPECIAL | |
B L KAK
NEW DELHI, SEPT. 23: "No, not in the near future", is the Union Home Ministry's standpoint on the renewed talk in favour of the return of the uprooted Kashmiri Pandits (KPs) to the Valley of Kashmir. Even as the Home Ministry is supporting the Jammu and Kashmir admininistration's scheme of things in relation to the resetlement of Kashmiri Pandit migrants in the Valley, the possibility of the scheme fructifying during the remaining part of the current year is ruled out.
In fact, New Delhi wants the issue to be taken up for further discussions at various levels before formulating mechanism or methodology vis-a-vis the KPs' return to the Valley. In other words, New Delhi is against what has been termed as "hasty steps" in support of "early" re-settlement of the members of the displaced Hindu community in the land of their forefathers.
According to authoritative sources, at a time when a section of the ruling coalition in Jammu and Kashmir has been found making more-than-necessary noises in favour of uprooted Kashmiri Pandits' return to the Valley, the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, and Home Minister, Shivraj Patil, are understood to have separately counselled the present Chief Minister of the troubled State, Ghulam Nabi Azad, to keep in mind certain "crucial" aspects of the prevailing situation while allowing his administration to tackle the sensitive issue.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD), too, does not appear willing to support advocates of "early" return of KPs to the Valley at this stage. If there was any doubt about it, it was set at rest by the MoD itself by making public its finding in relation to the situation in Kashmir. The MoD's annual report has let it be known that the ground situation in Jammu and Kashmir has not been "significantly altered" and the level of violence in the State continues to be "a matter of utmost concern".
This, if any, suggests the Union Government's unwillingness to support or encourage any steps, which may trigger further trouble in the troubled State. A section of the Muslim population in the Valley is for the KPs' return to their homeland. At the same time, there are many others among the Islamist rebels who do not want this to take place. Whatever the reservations or fears of the Hindu critics of Muslim separatist leaders on the future of the displaced Pandits, there is no doubt that without the support and cooperation of the local Muslim population in the Valley of Kashmir little will be achieved on the issue of KPs' return to Kashmir.
The beginning of the dialogue process between Kashmiri Pandit leaders and Hurriyat Conference was, obviously, the product of backdor chanel diplomacy by a set of Kashmiris. What is highly important in the given situation is to determine whether the Hurriyat Conference, which is a house divided, can ensure safety and security of the Kashmiri Hindus after their return to the Valley.
The KP-specific strategy is a positive development amid the noises from a section of the populace. This section derives pleasure and hidden benefits, too, by pursuing negative poli ies and philosophy. Will this section finally allow open-minded leaders of the Hurriyat Conference to translate into action the reported strategy to make possible the KPs' return to the Valley?
This question just cannot be brushed aside, if one took into account the unabated oppositon by a section of Islamist rebels to the very idea and thought of creating conditons conducive to the KPs' return to their homeland. True, the ones among the Hurriyat leaders who want to pursue the Kashmiri Pandit leadership to offer their helping hand in making possible the return of KPs to the Valley, have to be appreciated. But these Hurriyat leaders will have to appreciate the fear, the premonition the displaced comunity of Kashmiri Hindus is assailed by.
Some senior leaders of pro-India organizations in J&K have, from time to time in recent years, made a pointed reference to strategic requirements while supporting the idea of KPs' return to the Valley. But the question which needs to be prioritized for any meaningful dialogue on the displaced KPs' future, is: Is the security aspect more important than the strategic requirements?
=================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
