news details |
|
|
| Is the attitude of IFO changing? | | Brussels Meet | | RUSTAM
JAMMU, June 29: Is the attitude of Indian Foreign Office (IFO) towards those who advocate greater autonomy (read quasi-independence), self-rule (read India-Pakistan joint control over Jammu & Kashmir) and those who stand for the mind-boggling 1975 accord between an individual Sheikh Abdullah and the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi undergoing a change? Has the IFO finally decided not to allow any Indian to go abroad to take part in seminars on Jammu & Kashmir?
Although it is very difficult to answer these straight questions, yet one can take risk and say yes. One can afford to take risk in the light of the very positive decision of the IFO not to allow the protagonists of greater autonomy, self-rule and 1975 accord to visit Brussels, Belgium, and take part in a conference where Jammu & Kashmir will also be discussed. Brussels is one place in the world where anti-India elements have organized many anti-India seminars on Kashmir and the process continues unabated.
A Kashmiri commentator has described the otherwise very wise decision on the part of the IFO as a "surprising move" (read an unwarranted move). One can understand his disgust and lament. Who were the three Jammu & Kashmir politicians whose visit to Brussels was scuttled by the IFO? They were National Conference MP Mehboob Beg, PDP MLA Nizamudin Bhat and Congress MLC Ravinder Sharma. Beg is an ardent believer in the concept of greater autonomy and former Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf's four-point break-India Kashmir formula.
Bhat is a staunch supporter of self-rule doctrine and Musharraf's formula. Sharma is a person who seldom speaks. He is a politician whose party says day in and day out that the solution to the Kashmir issue lies in the 1975 accord. In other words, all the three invitees, whose visit to Belgium has not been cleared by the IFO, are the ones whose political formations do not consider Jammu & Kashmir as an integral part of India to the same extent as other states of the Union.
The only difference between the three formations is that while the parties of Beg and Bhat do not believe that the accession of the state to India was final and irrevocable and that things have not been done as per the law on the subject, the party of Sharma says that Kashmir is a special case and it has to be dealt with separately; it has to be accorded a special treatment.
What would have Beg, Bhat and Sharma spoken in the Brussels conference, had the IFO cleared their visit? Obviously, they would have advocated the views they had been advocating till the other day; they would not have defended the Indian case in Kashmir. Sharma's intervention might have been somewhat different.
But still the fact remains that the Congress spokesperson has never ever countered the votaries of greater autonomy and self-rule. Sharma, according to one report, is feeling highly disturbed. He has reportedly said that "he belongs to a mainstream party" and "stopping him from visiting Brussels was surprising". He also reportedly said that he had taken up the matter with his party and that the "conference was not Kashmir-specific".
All in all, it can be said that IFO has done a commendable job by preventing the protagonists of greater autonomy and self-rule from attending the Brussels conference. One can only hope that the IFO will take similar decisions in future as well and clear the papers of only those whose credential are out-and-out pro-India.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
