news details |
|
|
| Interlocutors diagnose ailment, prescribe wrong medicine | | State Of Contradictions | |
NEHA
JAMMU, May 29: New Delhi-appointed interlocutors these days are under severe attack. The reasons are obvious. One of the reasons is that they have made suggestions which are neither acceptable to the Kashmiri leadership nor to the people of Jammu and Ladakh, notwithstanding the fact that they did succeed to an extent in diagnosing what ails the state's three distinct regions.
Take, for example, what they said while referring to the causes responsible for the so-called alienation of Kashmiri Muslims and causes of discontent in Jammu and Ladakh. It would be only desirable to quote verbatim the relevant portions from their report to put things in perspective. Regarding the causes of "alienation" in Kashmir, they have, among other things, said: "The sense of victimhood is articulated in the most intense emotional terms in the Kashmir Valley. The reasons are all too compelling. Here, for over six decades, people have experienced what, in their eyes, constitutes a systematic denial of their democratic rights. They have been witness to rigged elections, the dismissal of elected governments and installation of pliant ones, the arrests of their popular leaders, the choking of dissenting voices through harsh laws, the detention of political prisoners without the due process of law; the failure to bring to book those guilty of violating human rights; and, not least, violence perpetrated by militants and by the security forces. That these alleged violations of human rights - including the deaths of 104 youth in the summer of 2010 - did not adequately figure either in the Indian media or in Parliament is seen, rightly, as India's lack of concern for the sufferings of the Kashmiri people. Add to this the widespread allegations of mis-governance, pervasive corruption among the political and bureaucratic elites, lack of quality education and public health services; poor physical infrastructure and woefully inadequate job opportunities, especially for skilled and educated youth. All these factors, taken together with what is seen as a mushroom growth of religious extremism of all hues, have brutalized Kashmiri society to such an extent that today it fears for the very survival of its religious and cultural identity. This accounts for political demands ranging from 'Azadi' and the establishment of an Islamic State to autonomy, self-rule, achievable nationhood and such other alternatives. At the heart of all these dirges, however, is the sentiment that the woes of Kashmir are due to the emasculation of the substance of its distinctive status enshrined in Article 370 of the Constitution of India".
Referring to the causes of discontent and unrest in Jammu, they have said: "The concerns, interests, grievances and aspirations of Jammu and Ladakh are of another order. People in these regions strongly believe that the Valley politicians have given them a raw deal largely due to an iniquitous delimitation of constituencies. Indeed, there is a strong sentiment in both regions that the Centre has neglected their grievances because of their robust pro-India inclinations. It has taken the people of Jammu and Ladakh for granted and, to make matters worse, consistently chosen to 'pamper' the political and bureaucratic elites of the Valley. Such 'pampering', they allege, accounts for the sentiments of rage and frustration, particularly among the youth of the two regions. The youth have expressed their sentiments in a peaceful manner so far. But it is only a matter of time before the protests take an ugly turn - as they have in the Valley - unless the grievances are addressed on an urgent and sustained basis. The anti-Valley feelings have widened the regional divide in the State, particularly between Kashmir and Jammu. On certain issues - such as the establishment of facilities for the Amarnath pilgrims - polarization has taken place along communal lines. Some sections of Jammu opinion therefore clamour for a separate State".
And, as for Ladakh, they have said: "The demand for Union Territory (UT) status is near unanimous in Leh, cutting across not only party but also community lines (including the small Muslim community, for whom however UT was the least bad of options). There is also a demand for Ladakh to be made a province, on the grounds of its considerable territorial size. Indeed, territorial size is a hot issue in Leh. The immediate grievance is financial, that the principle of State budgetary allocations on population basis is by its nature biased in a region which is territorially large but sparsely populated. The development of infrastructure suffers severely as a result, and there is little doubt that for infrastructure development allocations need to be made on territorial requirements rather than on the basis of the population".
All this shows that the fundamental causes responsible for "alienation" in Kashmir are the presence of India in the Valley and the "erosion" of Article 370 under which the state was granted a very special status in the Union way back in October 1949. Article 370 envisaged a system under which New Delhi was to exercise powers in Jammu & Kashmir only in matters relating to defence, foreign affairs and communication. In other words, it provided for limited accession. The situation changed over the period, as the leadership in New Delhi and the state agreed to bring the state at par with other states of the Union as far as possible and they did succeed to a large extent. It is this integration that has "alienated" a section of Kashmiri society, section which has been at the helm of affairs since October 1947.
As far as Jammu and Ladakh are concerned, the causes of discontent, according to the interlocutors themselves, in these two regions are many. In Jammu and Ladakh, people want close relations with New Delhi. They have unflinching faith in the Indian political system, whatever it is. They also want a system that could empower them to compensate for the losses they have suffered so far at the hands of the Kashmiri leadership and make them master in their own respective houses.
The interlocutors should have straightaway recommended reorganization of the state taking into consideration these contradictions, but they have insisted on the unity and integrity of the state. Of course, they have suggested the formation of regional councils but the problem is that these councils cannot harmonize inter-regional relations, as they, if established, will have to work under the overall control of the Kashmiri-dominated state government. Even otherwise, the problem of the people of Jammu and Ladakh is political which can only be surmounted if they are granted the power to legislate. Will the interlocutors revise their report taking into consideration the fact that the people of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh cannot co-exist, as their political aspirations are contradictory and mutually exclusive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
