news details |
|
|
| Who the interlocutors in J&K must meet to know the truth | | | Rustam
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Oct 22: It is good that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Home Minister P Chidambaram and interlocutors like Dileep Padgaonkar have announced that the panel of interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir would hold the "largest possible consultations with all sections of opinion in Jammu and Kashmir" to reach a conclusion. However, it is the statements issued subsequently by Chidambaram and Padgaonkar that have created a serious doubt in the minds of the people about their intentions. The statement of Chidambaram that there are "no red lines for interlocutors" and the assertion of Padgaonkar that their "mandate…is to seek as large area of agreement as you can to get to arrive at a comprehensive, political settlement of the Kashmir dispute" do convey a message that the interlocutors have the mandate to reopen the settled issue of Jammu and Kashmir. This is utterly unacceptable.
It is a mater of grave concern that the interlocutors like Dileep Padgaonkar, embol-dened by the Home Minister P Chidambaram, have asserted that their "agenda is for political settlement of Kashmir." What do they mean by "political settlement"? The issue of Jammu and Kashmir was settled way back in 1947, when the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir using his powers invested in him by the Indian Independence Act of 1947 acceded to India - a decision no one can reopen under any of the Articles of the Indian Constitution or under any section of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution of 1957. Article 1 of the Indian Constitution and section 3 of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution are unambiguous and clearly state that Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of India. Hence, where is the question of resettling the settled issue?
And, who has given them the mandate to reopen the settled issue. The people of Jammu and Ladakh, the displaced Kashmiri Hindus, the Sikhs and other religious and ethnic minorities, who constitute nearly 78 per cent of the state's population and inhabit more than 93 per cent of the state's land area have not given New Delhi any mandate to throw in their lot with the Kashmiri-speaking Sunni leadership that represents only a microscopic minority in the state and that represents a highly regressive and exclusivist ideology. India is a secular state. How could it reopen the settled issue at the behest of the blackmailing, rabble-rousing and communal Kashmiri leadership? It cannot and it must not. To reopen the settled issue would mean negation of the very idea of secular India; negation of the Indian Constitution; negation of secularism and democratic ethos; negation of the supreme sacrifices of our Army and paramilitary forces; in effect, negation of everything the Indian nation stands for.
If the Union Home Minister and the team of interlocutors mean political empowerment of the people of Kashmir, then it can be said that they are groping in the dark and that they know nothing about Kashmir. The people of Kashmir through their leaders already enjoy absolute political power. They enjoy unbridled political power not only in the Kashmir Valley, but also in the state's two other provinces - Jammu and Ladakh. All the Chief Ministers of the state have been from Kashmir and all of them belonged to that sect that is basically involved in the anti-India activities. Ghulam Nabi Azad also did not belong to Jammu in the real sense of the term. His forefathers belong to Kashmir. Besides, they enjoy all the residuary powers no other state of the Union enjoys. No Central law is automatically applicable to the state. What more than that, they have a separate constitution and a separate flag.
What more they want? The Home Minister and the interlocutors must remember that the Kashmiri leaders, without any exception, want separation from India because they believe in the two-nation theory; because their whole approach to the Kashmir issue is communal. Secession from India is their watchword and battle cry. It should be noted. "Go India Go Back" is the cornerstone of their whole formulation.
The Home Minister and the interlocutors need to ponder over these STARK REALITIES. Their approach needs to be holistic and nation-centric, as opposed to Kashmir and Kashmiri-speaking Sunni leadership-centric. They would do well to take into consideration the following important points before reaching any conclusion:-
1. Accession of Jammu and Kashmir is final, legal, non-negotiable and irrevocable. It was not signed under any agreement whatsoever. The accession offer was voluntary.
2. The instrument of Accession signed by the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir and other princely states was identical. The accession was unconditional.
3. Article 370 of the Indian Constitution is a temporary provision.
4. The problem confronting the Indian nation in Kashmir is communal and not political.
5. Kashmir is over-empowered, over-fed, over-developed and over-pampered and appeased. The people of Kashmir are the most prosperous and richest in the whole of the country.
6. Kashmir has been ruling over the state and exploiting the people of Jammu and Ladakh and religious and ethnic minorities in the state since October 1947.
7. The grant of special status to Kashmir under Article 370 has failed to produce the desired results. It has, instead of bringing the Kashmiri people into the national mainstream, only driven them away from it and helped promote the politics of separatism and communalism.
8. The 1975 Indira Gandhi-Sheikh Abdullah accord stands implemented in letter and spirit.
9. The prevailing unrest in Kashmir is because of the dirty machinations of Pakistan, which wants to grab Jammu and Kashmir under one pretext or the other and establish its control over the state waters in order to meet the irrigational needs of the Pakistani Punjab.
10. The people of Jammu and Ladakh are the most neglected segment of the society in the state. They are no more than slaves. Kashmir has converted Jammu and Ladakh into its colonies. They deserve a dispensation that is within India and under the Indian Constitution, as they do not want to maintain any kind of relationship with the separatist and communal Kashmiri leadership. They need a system independent of Kashmir.
11. Jammu houses more than one million refugees and all of them deserve a special attention and preferential treatment so that they are empowered; so that they lead a dignified life as the Indian nationals. These refugees are leading a miserable life. They are all victims of fanaticism and two-nation theory.
12. Jammu houses nearly four lakh displaced Kashmiri Hindus whose rational and national hopes, aspirations and demands need to be addressed. One of their demands is separate homeland in the Kashmir Valley and it needs to be accepted forthwith. They cannot live with the fanatics in Kashmir because they represent the Indian ethos and fanatics primitive, medievalist and intolerant ideology.
13. The Sikhs in Kashmir are at the receiving end. They need to be protected against exclusion by the majority community in Kashmir. They need to be given a foolproof security cover. Their culture and religion should also be protected at any cost. There are elements in Kashmir who are working day and night to ensure their migration from the Valley. They have asked them to exercise a choice between supporting the anti-India movement and quitting Kashmir or facing persecution.
14. There exists no such agreement as the Delhi Agreement. Statement made by a particular leader in any forum cannot be taken as a sacrosanct agreement.
15. Sheikh Abdullah appointed a three-member Cabinet-sub-committee after coming back to power in 1975. The Cabinet-sub-committee gave its reports. What happened to them? What did Sheikh Abdullah do with these reports?
16. The future of India depends on what it does in Kashmir. Full Integration of the state into India would put the rebels in Kashmir and elsewhere in the country on the mat, promote secularism and democracy and ensure unity and integrity of the country. Independence to the state or semi-independence to the state at the behest of the vocal, all powerful and well-entrenched Kashmiri leadership would promote fissiparous tendencies across the country and lead to the balkanization of India. It is a fight between those who stand for what Osama Bin Laden stands for and those who stand for peaceful co-existence of communities, modernization and progressive outlook and rule of law.
These are some of the points which the Home Minister and interlocutors, or for that matter all the powers-that-be in New Delhi, should take into consideration. It is hoped that they would do so and refuse to walk into the dangerous trap of the Kashmiri leadership. The nation is looking forward to a report that is anti-terrorism, anti-separatism and anti-communalism and pro-Indian nation and pro-nationalist people, who have been suffering at the hands of the fanatics in Kashmir. (Concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
