news details |
|
|
| Panun hits nail on the head, took on Chidambaram | | STARK REALITY | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT,
JAMMU, Sept 24: The much-hyped all-party parliamentary delegation's visit to J&K is over, but it continues to evoke negative response from the people of Jammu province. The reason: The Union Home Minister, under the baneful influence of certain elements, did not meet with those who wanted to meet him to highlight their woes and problems, register their protest against the activities of and demands put forth by the Kashmiri leaders and denounce the New Delhi's Kashmir policy or he and the members of his team meat with only a few "selected" groups. This is what some authentic sources reveal. These sources also reveal that certain elements in the political establishment did not want the Union Home Minister to meet Panun Kashmir (PK) leaders, including Ajay Chrungoo and Agnishekhar. Perhaps, the sources hinted at the failed, isolated and irresponsible Chief Minister.
It is now clear that both the PK leaders had repeatedly approached the concerned authorities for seeking an appointment with the visiting team. They wanted to meet the Home Minister and members of his team to explain the nature of the Kashmir problem and the official attitude towards it and put forth their demands. All their efforts failed. Ultimately, however, some good sense prevailed and both of them were officially invited at about 8.30 pm. The meeting took place at about 10.30. Theirs' was the last meeting. It was a four-member delegation. Chrungoo and Agnishekher worked in unison although they represent different factions of PK. There was no confusion. When asked by the Home Minister as to who would speak and if they belonged to the one PK. Both Chrungoo and Agnishekar instantly said: "Yes, they are one." This was a significant development. Even more significant perhaps was the gesture of Agnishekhar. He told the Home Minister that "DR Ajay will speak." This is the way things should be done, particularly when it's a question of life and death; when it's an issue of national importance.
What did they demand? They demanded separate homeland in the Valley for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus. Their demand was coupled with a condition. The condition was that the homeland must be invested with the status of Union Territory so that there is free flow of the Indian Constitution there. What they told the visiting team in this regard read like this: "It is high time to recognize that in Kashmir Valley there are two sets of opinion -- one that of the separatists and the other that of patriots. The Hindus of Kashmir constituted the patriotic section of Indians, along with others living there whose voice has been strangulated. That all Kashmiri Hindus want to live in a dispensation of a Union Territory to the North and East of Jhelum River where there is unfettered flow of the Indian Constitution. It is time that the Government of India initiate a dialogue at the highest level with PK on the demand of creation of a Union Territory in Kashmir Valley for the resettlement of one million exiled Kashmiris there." Besides, they told the Home Minister and others that creation of such a Union Territory in Kashmir will "pave the way for reversal of genocide of Kashmiri Hindus and defeating communalism and separatism." Not just this, they took the visiting team to task and expressed their "outrage and dismay" over the way a section of the all-party delegation "bent on its knees to please those separatist elements that have been responsible for genocide and religious cleansing of the Hindus in Kashmir." One cannot but agree with them.
And, what did the PK leaders tell the Home Minister and his team members about the nature of Kashmir problem and the official attitude towards it? They candidly told the visiting team that "all the variants of separatism in Kashmir Valley are a negation of Indian secularism, the Charter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are destructive of the fundamental rights of all citizens"; that the "separatist movement in Kashmir Valley is basically regressive and it is high time that the same was deprived of any liberal (read official) legitimacy"; that "Muslim separatism and communalism have been left uncontested ideologically as well as politically by the Indian State"; that the "entire population has been allowed to be fed on historical distortions which tantamounted to handing over Kashmiri Muslim population, particularly the youth to Taliban like indoctrination"; and that "Kashmir was never a Muslim preserve and always remained an important component of the continuity of the Indian civilization."
Equally significant was the reflection of the PK leaders on the concepts of greater autonomy, self-rule, independence of merger with Pakistan. They told the Home Minister, who were listening to them very patiently, that all these concepts "are ideologically same and complementary to each other." "Unless this is understood and the complementary relationship between these strands of separatism decisively destroyed, the space for democracy, equality and nation-building shall never be created in Kashmir; alienation in Kashmir is because of communalism ruling the roost over the minds of Kashmiri Muslims", Ajay and Agnishekhar, in fact, told the Home Minister and the Indian law-makers. What they told was what needed to be told. You can promote secularism through the path of communalism. You always pandered to the Kashmiri communalists and the result is there before our eyes.
Even far more significant was their attack on the Union Home Minister. They didn't name him, but their attack was directed against him. The case in point was the Union Home Minister's statement made on the eve of the all-party visit to Kashmir that "we made certain promises in the past that needed to be fulfilled." They candidly told the Home Minister that "no promises were ever made with the Muslims of Kashmir by the Indian State"; that "Pt Nehru did commit himself to elicit the opinion of the people of Jammu and Kashmir on accession subject to the basis condition that the invading forces of Pakistan were withdrawn from Kashmir" (read occupied areas, including the so-called Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan region); that "that condition was never fulfilled by Pakistan"; that "at the time of accession of the State neither Nehru nor any other Indian leader gave any assurance to the NC leaders with regard to future constitutional structure of the state"; and that the "truth is that…no NC leader asked for any assurances seeking a special autonomous constitutional status at the time of accession." The PK leaders were factually correct. They did put things in perspective.
It would be appropriate to say that the PK leaders hit the nail on the head. They exposed the flaws in the New Delhi's Kashmir policy and held it responsible for all the Indian woes in Kashmir; for the promotion of communalism and separatism in the Valley; and for the persecution and exodus of the minorities from Kashmir. They only wanted the Home Minister and his team members to contest what the Kashmiri leaders had been saying and counter what they had been doing since decades to establish a Muslim Republic within the secular Republic of India. Their major refrain was: "Assert, do not succumb."
Will the Home Minister pay heed to what the PK leaders and other Jammu-based leaders, including those representing other refugees and advocates, said on September 21? Reports emanating from New Delhi suggest that New Delhi is not prepared to change its Kashmir policy. It is a bad omen. It appears the people of Jammu province have to wage a war similar to the one they waged in 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
