news details |
|
|
| Nothing positive to emerge out of the interlocutors’ initiative | | |
MINCING NO WORDS
NEHA
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Feb 20: If someone in Jammu or Ladakh or in any other part of the country, excluding Kashmir, is expecting that the Delhi-appointed interlocutors would recommend a national, rational and secular solution to the issues facing the state, then he/she is living in fool’s paradise. These interlocutors have on occasions more than one clearly indicated that they are concerned more with those handful of Kashmiri separatists who have wrecked havoc in the state and promoted the Pakistani cause in the state and that they are least bothered about the bulk of population in the state that has nothing to do with communal and separatist politics.
A reference here to just one interview given by Radha Kumar in November last to one Chhenai based paper would be enough to determine the approach of the interlocutors towards Jammu and Kashmir. In an interview to the correspondent of the said paper, she had, among other things, said: “Our aim is to work out a dialogue structure — through the widest possible consultations with all shades of political opinion — which will be uninterrupted and uninterruptible no matter who tries to break it…The two factions of the Hurriyat Conference, led by Syed Ali Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, are the key stakeholders…We plan to work out the framework on which the government and the stakeholders in Jammu and Kashmir can rely upon and which would ultimately lead to a political solution to the problem…it was not at all easy to approach people in the Valley who were suffering under spells of curfew and grappling hard to put together basic necessities for leading normal lives under such circumstances. Their confidence and trust in instruments of governance had been completely shaken. Kashmir is teetering on edge, the situation needs to be handled with great care…Ground situation has to change for the people in Kashmir to move towards a political solution…They (Kashmiri Muslims) want a comprehensive and lasting political settlement and the sooner it comes about is better; they stress the need for good governance; and the way to resolve the problem is to recognise the honour and dignity of all concerned actors...The biggest challenge facing the interlocutors is to demonstrate their credibility insofar as arriving at a political settlement of the Kashmir problem is concerned…Terrible individual sufferings are there and the challenge is to respect the suffering while we have to ensure that key political issues are addressed…The gains made during 2003-06 in terms of peace, and confidence building measures had, by and large, gone in 2010…The challenge is also to regain that level and start building upon it. It is not impossible but it surely is a daunting task…”
The implications of what she said were many. One, the solution has to be such as was acceptable to Geelani and Mirwaiz. Geelani wants Pakistan and Mirwaiz wants independence but is also prepared to accept the Musharraf’s four-point Kashmir formula – demilitarization, porous Line of Control, joint-mechanism and self-governance – as a first step. Two, the Kashmiri Muslims want a “comprehensive and lasting solution.” What the Kashmiri Muslim leadership wants is not a secret. It wants to sever all ties with India and long for a dispensation in the state that would be of Kashmir, by Kashmir and for Kashmir. Three, ground needs to be prepared for the implementation of the Musharraf’s formula. The suggestion “the gains made during 2003-06 in terms of peace, and confidence building measures had, by and large, gone in 2010…The challenge is also to regain that level and start building upon it” does not suggest any other meaning.
This is the approach of the interlocutors. It appears their single-point agenda is to appease the Kashmiri extremists and help out Pakistan so that it establishes its control over the state waters. Pakistan’s very survival depends upon the state waters. All in all the interlocutors are likely to jeopardize the national interests in the state. Where is the ultra nationalist BJP? What is it that the Congress is doing to defeat those working for the segregation of the state from India or facilitating another partition on communal line? Again, it appears that it would ultimately be the people of Jammu who would have to respond to the emerging situation in the manner they responded in 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
