news details |
|
|
| Frivolity implicit in the interlocutors' suggestion | | Future Of J&K | | Rustam
JAMMU, Sep 6 : A serious debate is going on over the otherwise settled political and constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir, notwithstanding the fact that Jammu and Ladakh are not pleased with the existing politico-constitutional status. What has give the debate an alarming twist and baffled the people of Jammu and Ladakh is the frivolity implicit in the clearly Kashmir-centric and divisive suggestion reportedly made by the interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir to end the alienation in Kashmir. The interlocutors include perverted Dileep Padgaonkar and Radha Kumar.
Apart from economic and administrative measures, the interlocutors have reportedly told The Hindustan Times that the future status of Jammu and Kashmir could be based on the "1952 Delhi Agreement". The otherwise non-existent Delhi Agreement, according to the ruling National Conference, envisaged excessive autonomy for the state.
Mercifully, the interlocutors or for that matter the trouble shooters in India, have erred in the fashion the successive governments at the Centre have been viewing the separatist tendencies in Kashmir in isolation from the geo-political crisis afflicting Jammu and Ladakh.
It is pertinent to mention hat both Jammu and Ladakh have been working since decades to link their destiny with India by severing their political ties with the egoistic and "dubious" Kashmiri leadership. Both have been freely recognizing that whatever progress they seek must be within the Union and under the Indian Constitution, whatever it is. In fact, the slogan of a separate state or reorganization of the state on regional basis has already gained momentum with the resolve on the part of the people of Jammu to launch a "war" to "stand up" and "resist the onslaught on their rights and opportunities so that their progeny does not suffer and starve as we did all these years of independence". The people of Ladakh, on the other extreme, have warned New Delhi that they would "now settle for nothing less than Union Territory status, failing which the portents for the security of the nation will not be encouraging".
It has to be underlined that the non-existent Delhi Agreement is sought to be brought into operation for the first time in a real sense although as early as in 1952-53 an attempt had been made by the then Wazir Azam and NC leader Sheikh Abdullah to redefine the Centre-state relations but the move could not fructified due to the Praja Parishad movement in Jammu in which 14 persons lost their precious lives and thousands suffered torture in the various jails.
The interlocutors have reportedly sought to justify excessive autonomy on the basis that it is prerequisite for the preservation and promotion of Kashmiriyat (read Sunniat), but what they have not justified is its wholesale implementation in the whole of the state and this has obviously sparked off some loud protests.
Dismissing the reported proposals as ludicrous and highly reprehensible, the critics of the interlocutors have said there is no point in including the people of Jammu and Ladakh in the scheme as prepared by the interlocutors. They have raised a question as to why Kashmir and Jammu-Ladakh are treated alike and why should they be equated unless their idea is to "stomach insults" and "humiliations" at the hands of the Kashmiri leaders. Further, the interlocutors are silent on how exactly are the "genuine aspirations" of the people of Jammu and Ladakh and displaced Kashmiri Hindus to be appreciated and realized and what really is the status and role of Jammu and Ladakh in the interlocutors' scheme of things.
The shrewd and canny politicians that the Kashmiris are, they would like to further tighten their grip and, therefore, would convey the message that there was no question of New Delhi trying to interfere with the administration of the state on behalf of Jammu and Ladakh. When once the Centre-state relations are redefined and enforces, it is asserted, and very rightly, that Jammu and Ladakh would come under the direct control of Srinagar.
The interlocutors perhaps feel that the matter of conferring excessive autonomy is a matter of commitment held out by the Indian Parliament and not intended to enslave Jammu and Ladakh. Yet the fact remains that there are several ambiguities and well-founded fears which need to be removed and clarified beyond doubt so that the popularly-held belief that such excessive autonomy might render Jammu and Ladakh quite irrelevant for all practical purposes might be removed.
There are no two opinions on the need to tackle the situation in Kashmir. Whatever the compulsions of New Delhi, in the present surcharged scenario, especially as the opinion is sharply divided on the particular course of action, it is simply prudent to search other and acceptable alternative whereby the purpose could be served.
Sectarianism does become an impediment in democratic processes if the policies of politico-economic development of a particular region are dictated by purely partisan considerations. The question of balanced growth and equal participation at all levels right now is sweeping the political frontiers of different regions. It is, therefore, desirable and imperative to make certain that favours which stimulate egoistic parochialism are eschewed and avoided. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
