news details |
|
|
| Article 370, Candid Reflections & Unsettling Suggestions | | Jammu & Kashmir in the words of Padgaonkar | | Rustam
JAMMU, Dec 31: "Yes, I can say something about Article 370. Union Home Minister P Chidambaram had said that Jammu and Kashmir is a unique state. On the one hand, it is an integral part of India and, on the other hand, it enjoys a special status within the Indian Union. It is under Article 370 that it enjoys a special status. Besides, Jammu and Kashmir has its own constitution which declares Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India. So, Jammu and Kashmir has two identities. The people of the state have two identities. One is that they are Indian nationals. The other is that they are state subjects. There is no region in the country which houses people having two identities. It is very important to understand this double identity of the people of the state. We have also to see how this double identity could be preserved and promoted. It is very important. We have dealt with this aspect in our report".
One would agree with most of the Padgaonkar's formulations on Jammu and Kashmir, as well as his views on Pakistan, on Kashmiri separatists, on displaced Kashmiri Hindus, on the attitude of Jammu and Ladakh towards the Central laws, on the Kashmir's demography, on the plight of Jammu and Ladakh, on the attitude of New Delhi towards Jammu and Ladakh and on the attitude of the India media towards Kashmir. He is absolutely right when he says that the Wahabis and Salafis have given a radical orientation to Islam in Kashmir, thus creating an environment in the Valley where liberals could not live. Indeed, it was the rise of radical Islam that led to the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus, thousands of Sikhs and a few Muslims from the Valley. There is no doubt whatever that a particular section of Kashmiri Muslim society has become intolerant and exclusivist over the period.
Padgaonkar is also right when he holds Pakistan responsible for their failure to engage with the Kashmiri separatists and opines that the Kashmiri separatists are mortally afraid of Pakistan and that they just cannot afford to ignore Islamabad, which has established their stranglehold over them. He is also to the point when he says that the Kashmiri Society is highly heterogeneous and that while the Kashmiris dislike the central laws, the people of Jammu and Ladakh accept the same most cheerfully.
Equally appreciable are his suggestions on the miserable plight of the displaced Kashmiri Hindus and the people of Jammu and Ladakh who, according to him, never received their due share in the political and economic processes in the state. No less significant is his negative observation that New Delhi and the Indian media have always ignored Jammu and Ladakh and looked things the way the Kashmiri leadership wanted and wants. It would also be a crime against man and god if his observation on the empowerment of people inhabiting different regions is overlooked. Indeed, his' are candid reflections on Jammu and Kashmir.
However, to say all this is not to suggest that there is nothing controversial in what he has said about the state. There is much that creates serious doubts in the minds of the people about his real intentions. Take, for example, his formulations on Article 370, on double identity of the people of the state, on the need to preserve and promote this double identity, on the special status of the state and on the Instrument of Accession. His formulations clearly suggest that he wants the retention of Article 370; that he doesn't consider the people of the state an integral part of India to the same extent as other Indian nations, that he supports the concept of double nationality, that he emphasizes the fact that the Instrument of Accession had restricted the jurisdiction of New Delhi over the state to just defence, foreign affairs and communication, that New Delhi over the period diluted the state's special status by bringing it under the jurisdiction of several central laws and institutions, that the state enjoys a special status that needs to protected, and that we have depended largely upon Balraj Puri while dealing with the issue of regional empowerment. (Balraj Puri wants autonomy for the state and within that autonomous state some semblance of autonomy for Jammu and Ladakh, which is utterly unacceptable.)
Besides, the various reports clearly suggest that the interlocutors have suggested withdrawal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, demilitarization of certain areas, rehabilitation of militants, general amnesty and many such things. The fact that Padgaoknar did not reveal as to what exactly the report contains as far as the solution part is concerned does suggest that he has put forth suggestions, which, if accepted, would hasten the process of disintegration or unsettle the settled in Jammu and Kashmir. One must keep one's fingers crossed. The interlocutors are not really dependable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
