news details |
|
|
| What did Omar mean by "we"? | | AFSPA Row | | Neha
JAMMU, Nov 20: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah yesterday again suggested that he was committed to getting AFSPA revoked from certain areas in the state and added that "there is ample scope to go ahead with the move while addressing the concerns of the Army". Actually, he responded to a volley of questions on his stand on AFSPA after his return from New Delhi, where he met four ministers, including Prime Minister, the Army chief and the AICC president and UPA chairperson in order to solicit their support. "I believe there is ample scope for us to go ahead with what we have decided to do, while at the same time addressing concerns that the Army has flagged off", Omar on Saturday told reporters outside the office of Regional Transport Officer (RTO) at Narwal, Jammu.
What exactly he meant when he said "we have decided to do" as far as revocation of the AFSPA is concerned? What did he mean by "we"? Did he mean the government that he leads? Or, did he mean the Council of Ministers that he heads? Or, did he mean his Cabinet colleagues? Or, did he mean the NC and the Congress? Or, did he mean the Chief Minister and the Union Home Minister? Or, did he mean the Chief Minister and Kashmiri separatists of all varieties? Or, did he mean the Chief Minister himself? The answer seems to be the Chief Minister himself. Another answer could be the Chief Minister and Kashmiri separatists, who had been demanding revocation of AFSPA, Disturbed Areas Act (DAA) and Public Safety Act (PSA) since years for reasons not really difficult to fathom.
Had the Chief Minister discussed the matter in the Cabinet and brought all the Cabinet ministers on board before announcing his decision to revoke AFSPA from certain selected areas on October 21, the state would not have witnessed the spat between him and the JKPCC Congress president, between the latter and the Chief Minister's uncle and between the Chief Minister and a couple of Jammu-based Cabinet ministers belonging to the Congress party. Had he taken on board the JKPCC leadership into confidence before going public, his uncle would not have lost the two crucial party positions -- positions of general secretary and chief spokesperson of the NC. These positions were snatched by the NC president and the Chief Minister's father just to save the situation for his son who had created the whole mess by mishandling the sensitive issue.
Similarly, had he taken the JKPCC leadership into confidence, the Union Home Minister and the Congress national spokespersons, including Abishek Manu Singhvi and Manish Tiwari, would not have sided with the JKPCC president and advised the Chief Minister to discuss the whole issue with the local Congress leadership. The fact of the matter is that the Chief Minister considered him the boss, took everyone for a ride, went public and landed himself in a very serious trouble - trouble that culminated in his virtual isolation. His' was a decision taken unilaterally and his methodology dictatorial. Has the Chief Minister learned from the mistakes he committed in the recent past as far as the AFSPA issue is concerned? Perhaps, yes. His statement that "I do not want to get into the debate through the media on AFSPA" and that "I have already told media on the two occasions when I was coming out from the meeting with Union Home Minister and Union Finance Minister" does suggest so. It needs to be underlined that it was the Chief Minister and none else who created a fierce controversy by getting into debate through the media; it was he who declared that he would not listen to "no" from the Army; and it was he who dismissed everyone and insisted on revocation of AFSPA overlooking the dangerous ramifications of his unwarranted move.
The defence-related or security-related issues are not discussed in public. Similarly, the Chief Minister, or for that matter any other constitutional authority, just cannot demonize the Army and seek to create an impression that the Army is the problem or the AFSPA is the problem. Unfortunately, the Chief Minister did both the things. But it is India where even the constitutional authorities are permitted to subvert the constitution with impunity. Can, for example, anyone do such things in Pakistan? No. Pakistan neutralizes fissiparous tendencies in no time. It doesn't mind even aerial bombardment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
