news details |
|
|
| CM virtually defending unruly elements, demoralising armed forces | | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Apr 26: India is a sovereign country. It has its own people, definite territory with well-defined borders, constitutionally elected government and army. It has its political instruments in every state. It has elected assemblies and elected governments and constitutional heads, called Governors, who represent New Delhi in the states and ensure that the state governments are discharging their constitutional obligations towards the country. As for the elected governments in the states of the Union, it is their constitutional duty to neutralise the anti-state forces whosoever they are and protect and promote further the country’s sovereign interests in their respective states. It is also their duty to uphold the constitution of the country and defend all the Indian laws and institutions, including the institution of army.
Unfortunately, chief minister Omar Abdullah, whose party has only 28 MLAs in the 87-member legislative assembly and who is enjoying power because the Congress support, has failed to come up to the expectations of the people who are fed with the ongoing violent activities in the state in general and Kashmir valley in particular. On the contrary, his policies are directly and indirectly emboldening unruly elements and anti-India forces and demoralising the army and paramilitary forces who have been tackling Pakistan-sponsored insurgency and separatist movement and defending the frontiers against heavy odds.
During the past two weeks, Chief Minister has made several controversial statements which have only served the cause of the unruly elements in Kashmir and demoralised the army and paramilitary forces. Take, for example, his response to the army chief’s statement that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) was needed in the state to deal with the armed militants and separatists in the state. Instead of appreciating the statement of the army chief that was based on the ground situation in the state, the chief minister in no time made his displeasure public. He made the statement that he would meet the army chief to discuss this issue with him.
All the Kashmir-based leaders, “mainstream” and separatist, including the Kashmir-based media and a couple of Jammu-based English language dailies, had condemned the statement of the army chief. The statement made by the chief minister and the statements made by other Kashmiri leaders made it extremely difficulty to distinguish between those responsible for the unity and integrity of India and those working for the country’s disintegration. It was not expected of the chief minister that he would make a loose statement and identify himself with those who want India to disintegrate.
Similarly, the chief minister’s 20th April Kalamchakla, Langate (Kupwara district), statement that the “Kashmiri blood is not cheap”, that “human rights violators won’t be tolerated” and that the “blood of innocent people…is no so cheap that those responsible for its shedding will be allowed to go scot-free” was undesirable by any yardstick. He was hinting at whom. Obviously, he was only hinting at those who have been conducting anti-insurgency operations, making supreme sacrifices for the national cause and enabling the politicians and common people to lead a secure life and have a sound sleep in the night. He should have expressed solidarity with the armed forces and counted how many body bags Kashmir has sent to different parts of India. He should have also appreciated the fact that the people of Jammu and Ladakh have never alleged that their human rights have been ever violated by the army and paramilitary forces and that it is only the Kashmir valley, which has become a trouble-spot, where those involved in anti-India operations and communal activities have been consistently raking up the issue of “human rights”.
Unfortunately, the chief minister didn’t do that. Instead, he shared the views of those who condemn the Indian armed forces day in and day out under the garb of the so-called human rights. That’s the reason his statement has been roundly condemned in Jammu and elsewhere in the country. The chief minister is part of the Indian political establishment and it is his constitutional duty to identify himself with the national sentiment and requirement. He cannot go beyond the confines of the Indian Constitution. The sooner he recognizes his responsibilities and duties the better. If he feels that the politics of one-upmanship would help him consolidate and expand his constituency, then he perhaps is living in a world of the past. Politics of one-upmanship or politics of reaction would not lead him and his party anywhere. It will only further add to the miseries of the already suffering people and render the NC irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
