news details |
|
|
| Leh Congress rejects Saghir report, jumps on to UT bandwagon | | |
RUSTAM
JAMMU, JAN 19: On August 1, 2009, young Congress leader and former MLA from Akhnoor Sham Lal Sharma virtually revolted against the Congress high command and extended his unqualified support to the Shri Amarnath Yatra Sangharsh Samiti (SAYSS), which was spearheading the land-restoration movement in Jammu. He was the first congress leader in the state to make common cause with the SAYSS. Extending his support, he declared that “he was a Jammuite first” and that “he cannot keep himself aloof at a time when the people of Jammu province are fighting for a just and nationalist cause”.
The plunge that Sham Lal Sharma took had its very positive impact on almost all the Jammu-based Congress leaders. The impact was to the extent that all the Congress leaders, particularly those with mass experience, plus a few JKPCC office-bearers, including one vice-president, hailing from Jammu province, extended support to the Amarnath land cause. Commenting on this development, one local English daily wrote: Jammu Congress leaders “joined the gang too”. In other words, the decision of Sham Lal Sharma opened the floodgate and motivated all the genuine Jammu-based Congress leaders to take on the Congress national spokespersons for their controversial and anti-movement statements, including the statement that those involved in the Jammu movement were no different from those belonging to the Hurriyat Conference. The Jammu-based local Congress leaders had then said many a time that these spokespersons were not aware of the ground realities and that their statements were damaging the Congress in Jammu. The Jammu province is the core constituency of the Congress.
This change of heart on the part of the Jammu-based Congress leaders, which also demonstrated their eagerness to retain control over their respective constituencies (and which was natural), had its positive impact on the Congress high command as well as the Congress-led UPA Government. They were mortally afraid of the fact that their negative attitude to the ongoing agitation in Jammu would render them irrelevant. The result of this change of heart on the part of the Jammu-based Congress leaders was that the Union Government dismissed all the sinister arguments advanced by those who were violently opposing the demand in Jammu for the restoration of that particular piece of land at Baltal which the then government had taken back under pressure from Kashmiri separatists and communal elements. One of their arguments was that the land diversion to the Shrine Board was a “conspiracy” hatched by the Congress Governments in the state and at the Centre to “change the demography of Kashmir”, “pollute its environment” and “destroy its fragile ecology”.
What the Jammu-based Congress leaders did between August 1 and August 31 was a sort of revolt that paid off, although it could not retain its tally of 15 seats in Jammu province in 2009, despite the best efforts made by Ghulam Nabi Azadi. It could win only 13 seats. Had the Congress-led collation government ignored the opposition to its decision to divert the Baltal land to the Shrine Board on the ground that the matter was pending before the Jammu and Kashmir High Court -- a very valid reason -- the Congress would have won the Assembly elections in the Jammu province hands down and formed on its own the next government in the state. But it has at this point in time become a story of the past and, hence, there is no use raking up that issue now.
Significantly, the history is again repeating itself as far as the developments with the state Congress party are concerned. The Congress is once again facing a revolt. The banner of revolt this time has been raised by none other than a serving minister in the National Conference-Congress coalition government in the state. He is a senior Congress leader and Cabinet Minister holding the portfolio of Tourism. He is Nawang Rigzin Jora from Ladakh.
The Tourism Minister has, like the people of Jammu, Kashmiri Hindus and Bakerwal and Gujjar Muslims, rejected the report of Justice Saghir Ahmed on the Centre-State Relations and jumped on to the bandwagon of those demanding Union Territory (UT) status for Ladakh. The method he adopted to join hands with those in Ladakh opposing the said report and demanding UT status was noble. He joined hands with the protagonists of UT status and opposing the Saghir Ahmed’s report when he was in Bhopal on an official visit and when the Ladakhi Congress leaders, mostly women, were adopting a three-point resolution on January 17 at Grand Dragon in Leh to that effect. In fact, Jora addressed the party convention telephonically and expressed solidarity with the UT cause.
The resolution condemned the Justice Saghir Ahmed’s report, reiterated the demand for UT status for Ladakh and declared that the Ladakhi Congress leaders, like other Ladakhis, Buddhists and Muslims included, will fight “relentlessly” for achieving the UT status for their region.
This is a very significant development in the contemporary history of the Congress party in Jammu and Kashmir and it is no different in its implications from the one the state Congress had to face and deal with last year. The only difference is that earlier it was Jammu-based Congress leaders and now it is the turn of the Ladakhi Congress leaders. But what is significant is that the reasons are identical – the Amarnath land agitation was national in spirit and the nature of opposition in Ladakh to Justice Saghir Ahmed’s report too is identical.
Yet, at the same time, one can see a glaring contradiction in the attitude of the Ladakhi Congress leaders and the Jammu-based Congress leaders to the Justice Saghir Ahmed’s report. The contradiction is glaring because while the Ladakhi Congress leaders have taken a clear-cut stand ignoring the stand taken by the JKPCC president on the said report, none of the Jammu-based Congress leaders, including any minister, has spoken so far against or in favour of the Justice Saghir Ahmed report.
As for the Congress leaders from Kashmir, they had, baring one JKPCC office-bearer, remained mum in 2009 and they are doing the same this year as well. They had not said anything in favour of or against what had been happening in Kashmir or in Jammu.
The stony silence or indifferent attitude of the Kashmir-based Congress leaders is not that significant because they live and operate in a peculiar political atmosphere as it prevails in Kashmir. What is significant, rather puzzling, is the indifferent attitude of the Jammu-based Congress leaders, barring the former Jammu Bar Association and Additional Advocate General (AAG) B S Slathia. They must take a clear-cut stand. Rather they must follow in the footsteps of Nawang Rigzin Jora. This is in their personal interest, in the interest of the Congress party and in the interest of the Indian nation as a whole. As a matter of fact, they have no other choice but to join hands with the angry people of Jammu province and they can do so only if they muster could courage to take on the National Conference leadership, which is insisting on implementation of the pro-autonomy and anti-Jammu Justice Saghir Ahmed report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
