news details |
|
|
| Jammu being taught things Jammu famous for | | Reorganization Imminent | | Neha
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, July 14: Interlocutor Dileep Padgaonkar yesterday asserted that "a need to maintain integrity of the State and power sharing between regions and sub regions and maintaining tolerant and pluralistic culture of the State were the other major points, which have emerged during the broad dialogue.'' He also stated "though aspirations of different regions and different sets of people differed, there was a consensus among majority of people against trifurcation or bifurcation of the State."
His statement that those who took part in the roundtable conference in Jammu rejected outright the idea of the state's trifurcation could be construed as an over-statement. It can also be described as a politically motivated statement. After all, right from day one these interlocutors have been speaking against those demanding trifurcation. They have never ever criticized those demanding autonomy or self-rule, or even independence. On the contrary, they have consistently aired views which appeared quite appreciated of those demanding autonomy/self-rule.
It was expected that the delegates to the roundtable would not support the trifurcation demand. The composition and complexion of the conference was such. It was a congregation of the selected few and those considered convenient. Those who represented Kashmir were the ones who, like the Kashmiri leadership, not only wanted New Delhi to allow the state to secede from India but also wanted New Delhi to allow Kashmir to rule and exploit Jammu and Ladakh and, hence, their opposition.
And, those who represented Jammu in the conference were so meek, so week and so confused that they had no point to make, except beating about the bush. Most of those who represented Jammu were those who had never played any role whatever in the Jammu's public life. Besides, most of them were non-political entities and chicken-hearted. They simply talked culture, art and other things, though important components of society.
The interlocutors had deliberately excluded from the conference political persons committed to the Jammu cause. Take, for example, the exclusion of the JKNPP, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Jammu State Morcha (JSM) leadership. Their exclusion was significant in the sense that had they been part of the conference, the interlocutors would not have made the statement they made. That the interlocutors not only excluded the leadership of these three outfits from the conference and that they did not inform the public that those from Leh had demanded union territory status for Ladakh should leave nobody in any doubt that whatever the interlocutors did and said was aimed at hoodwinking and misleading the people of Jammu province and please Kashmir.
It needs to be underlined that it was only on July 10 that the BSP and the JSM had submitted memoranda to the interlocutors demanding the state's trifurcation. Earlier, the JKNPP had demanded the reorganization of the state as well as separate assembly and separate chief minister for Jammu. These three organizations, besides several other individuals, who had met these interlocutors in the past, had made it quite clear that reorganization of the state was only panacea available for the ills afflicting them and that the existing politico-constitutional set-up had rendered the people of Jammu province irrelevant.
As for the views of the interlocutors on "maintaining tolerant and pluralistic culture" of the State, less said the better. It was nothing but an attempt on their part to teach the people of Jammu province things for which they are famous - peaceful co-existence, secularism, tolerance, compassion, accommodation, nationalism and spirit of sacrifice. It would have been better had they taught these things to those in Kashmir who stand for a primitive, intolerant and exclusivist ideology, who do not believe in the concept of "the other" and who are up in arms against India. Had the interlocutors took the pain to read what Early Times reported under the caption "Futile Exercise - I & II" on Tuesday and Wednesday, they would not have said what they said.
But it would be too much to expect from these biased interlocutors that they would talk sense. They have an agenda; they have fixed views; they have pre-conceived notions; and they have been working as per a grand strategy worked out to appease and please one religious sect and one particular region jeopardizing the interests and aspirations of all others and Jammu and Ladakh. (To be continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
