news details |
|
|
| Interlocutor Radha sets the record straight | | Jammu-Kashmir-Ladakh | | Neha
JAMMU, Apr 16: There was no doubt whatever from day one that the group of interlocutors, which was appointed by the Government of India on October 12, 2010 to prepare a roadmap for the resolution of Jammu and Kashmir issue, would take into consideration the viewpoints of Kashmiri leaders, including the known separatists and extremists, and come out with a report that would be essentially Kashmir-centric. The interlocutors submitted their report to the Union Home Minister on October 12, 2011. It was on April 12 that a national daily carried a story on the recommendations based on the interlocutors' report. The said story cleared all the cobwebs of confusion and established that the critics of the interlocutors were right when they suggested and opined that the latter's approach would be Kashmir-centric and not holistic.
The report, which appeared in the said national daily of repute, established that the interlocutors had, like the Kashmiri leaders, including the known separatists, not considered Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India. Remember, one of the key suggestions of these interlocutors is that the dual character of the State has to be maintained at whatever cost. The very fact that they have vouched for the State's dual character and asked the Union Government to substitute the word "Temporary" from the heading of Article 370 with "Special" is a proof that they have dismissed Jammu and Ladakh as irrelevant. Jammu and Ladakh, besides the internally-displaced Kashmiri Hindus, who represent the majority view, had all along demanded abrogation of Article 370 and the State's full integration into India. In other words, they had all through opposed the dual status the State had been enjoying under the divisive, communal and anti-democratic Article 370. Their opinion remains the same even today.
That the so-called interlocutors took into consideration the viewpoints of the Kashmiri leaders and virtually ignored the other view while giving a concrete and final shape to the report became more than evident yesterday, when interlocutor Radha Kumar answered certain questions put to her by the correspondent of a local English language daily. A story to this effect appeared today. The story said the interlocutors "had not rejected any proposal given by political parties" (read Kashmir-based parties, both "mainstream" and separatist)" and that instead they "have discussed them in detail".
Radha, according to the story, told the correspondent that "there was no question of rejecting any such proposal as that was not our mandate"; that "we discussed in detail" Greater Autonomy concept of the National Conference, Self-Rule doctrine of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Achievable Nationhood formulation of the People's Conference and "tried to find common as well as divergent points"; and that "our job was not to reject any such report but to recommend how we could constitute a base for a consensus on the basis of common points and how differences could be bridged on divergent points". "After all this exercise forms the core section on political aspect of addressing the problem. Obviously these proposals (read proposals like the pre-1953 politico-constitutional position or semi-independence) were important for laying a foundation for our discussion," she also told the correspondent.
She, in addition, told: "They also studied in detail the five-point formula given by Syed Ali Shah Geelani and four points given by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. We have tried to see how these could be taken on so that the things are implemented. Our job was not to reject any report but to recommend how we could constitute a base for a consensus on the basis of common points and how differences could be bridged on divergent points".
What does all this show? It shows that the report contains everything that suits the secessionists and communalists and enables Kashmir to not only assume independence in course of time but also to further tighten its hold over Jammu and Ladakh and all others who have been striving very hard to link their fate with India since 1947 itself. It is strange that no Jammu-based political party has come out with a definite response to the stories on the recommendations based on the report of the interlocutors. It appears the Jammu-based parties have not tried to study the implications of the proposed recommendations. It's very sad and disturbing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
