news details |
|
|
| Clarify the doubts | | | Kewal Krishan Pangotra | 11/30/2009 12:52:45 AM |
| Kewal Krishan Pangotra
People’s Democratic Party (PDP) on N0v.15, 2009 convened a seminar in Jammu. ‘Is Self Rule a way forward to the resolution of Kashmir problem’ was the subject matter. A Number of intellectuals were invited mainly to hear the party stalwarts. The party designators and workers from Jammu had the responsibility to invite the listeners. It was a clever strategy to make the event a grand success in Jammu province. But the main drawback seemed to be loose impression of party designators regarding self rule upon the politically awaked peoples of the province. If the seminar was really organized to prove the acceptability of self rule; was it not beforehand necessary to despatch the draft for study and thereafter organise the open debate to let the masses comprehend the objectives as well as pros and cons of self rule in the social, economic and political interests of different ethnic and religious groups of J&K.
Broadly, self rule couldn’t catch the interest of the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir. That is why Mujaffar Husain Baig, the architect of self rule, was obliged to tell that the killers of Pandits in Kashmir and of Muslims in Jammu are roaming freely in the streets of Srinagar. The question is whether self rule may be a document, if applied, can assure social, economic and political security to non-Musilam minority subjects of the state. For the present there is no assurance. There are some doubts regarding self rule in the state particularly in Jammu province. Without the clearance of these doubts no concrete consensus can occur in Jammu for self rule. Socially the party has to satisfy the non-muslims without worrying about the time it takes. In any part of a secular country like India, a fare policy having nothing to do with region, language and caste should become a bugbear. In J&K if self rule gets recognition of capability to bestow social and political justice to the people of three regions of the state then why to object for any kind of ‘Rule’. It is considerable that why discrimination spouts for Jammu and Pandits feel insecure in valley? The self rule would continue to be tested on the similar basis. There are numerous instances of discrimination often quoted.
Mujaffar Beg has mentioned some plans while addressing the seminar. Why to question on development? Who can go against the loss occurred as a result of Indus Water Treaty criticised by Beg? Nobody can go against the idea of diverting J&K state as a centre of trade and commerce. There is one more idea from Beg to covert state as an economic union. Well, but it is most important to pave the way for changing the state entirely into a composite centre of communal harmony wherein the hatred towards minorities should find no place. It is being felt in spirit. The reason is long standing mindset against Jammu and Ladakh which has damaged the social agreement among majority and minority communities. Only to invite intellectuals from Jammu can’t be a testimony of acceptability for self rule.
In fact Jammu sometimes favours article 370 but disagreement and dissent arises when examples and acts of discrimination to Jammu and Laddakh catches the head and heart of people in view of application of the article and a separate constitution of state. In the seminar it was also mentioned that permanent establishment of article 370 is a must for the state but in self rule there is no answer to ‘stronghold of Kashmir centred rulers’ on Jammu and Laddakh due to article 370 and separate constitution of J&K. Whether self rule contains any solution for resolving so called ‘strong hold’ issue propagated in Jammu. If yes, then Jammu can embrace self rule. In Jammu and Laddakh there is a probability of compromise on self rule if social and political balance is guaranteed in all the three reigns of state. Mostly the laity favours the idea of maintaining LoC as permanent border which in their view can solve the problem of Pak sponsored terrorism. The laity wants peace and social agreement. It is possible only when leaders and rulers pledge for ending the religious based hatred. It is of no use making the plans only for gaining power. In a sense both National Conference and PDP are tussling for political supremacy over each other by propagating unachievable self rule and autonomy. Whatever, it is important to note that to what extent self rule absorb the problem of minorities from valley, Laddakh and Jammu?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
