Political chaos in J&K

Political chaos in J&K

By HAPPYMON JACOB

During the course of the last three weeks, many significant developments have taken place in Jammu and Kashmir and many of these will have long-lasting implications for the ongoing peace efforts in and on Kashmir. The Congress government in the state has resigned leading to the possibility of President’s rule in the state for the fourth time in the state’s history, seven people have so far died in the protests that rocked the valley in the past few weeks, the ruling coalition in the state - Congress and the People’s Democratic Party - has parted ways and the state continues to be in turmoil.

However, the most unwelcome result of all the political developments in the state is indeed the unprecedented communal polarisation that the state is witnessing today: there are threats of an economic blockade of Kashmir by some Hindu fundamentalist parties in Jammu and this has prompted many Kashmiris to ask Pakistan for help with essential commodities. There are also reports of communal clashes from many parts of the state.

It all started when the state government decided to allot 200 Kanals of forest land to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB), which led to the 10-day agitation in the Kashmir Valley spearheaded by the secessionist leaders such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Yaseen Malik. Under pressure from widespread protests, the state government revoked the land grant order, which gave rise to protests in Jammu.

Kashmir, by all accounts, was limping back to normalcy in the last couple of years. Why then has this otherwise relatively minor act of land transfer and the controversy surrounding it, which, of course, could have been pre-empted by some deft handling by the government, taken the state by storm? What explains this sudden change of public mood on the streets of Srinagar? Why is peace in Kashmir so fragile?

A post-facto analysis of the situation in Kashmir proves one thing beyond any doubts: peace in Kashmir is too fragile to be taken for granted. Normalcy in Kashmir, to a great extent, did manage to veil the discontent, uneasiness and disapproval of the people at a lot of things that were happening in and on Kashmir. It is this pent-up anger and uneasiness that was vented out on the streets of Srinagar during the past few weeks.

T here are a number of underlying causes behind what is happening now and they call for some serious introspection on the part of the state and central governments.

Many analysts around the country tend to believe that the anger on the streets of Kashmir is essentially communal in nature and the Kashmiri dissidents who led these protests and a large number of common Kashmiris who participated in them are indulging in anti-Hindu politics.

The truth is far from that. While the immediate cause of these protests may be linked to the land transfer itself, there are other not-so-apparent and more substantive causes behind this. The recent spell of protests is the result of a series of fundamentally flawed policies in and on Jammu and Kashmir by the governments in Srinagar and New Delhi.

First of all, despite all their promises to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, what have the governments in Srinagar and New Delhi done to resolve the Kashmir issue to the satisfaction of the people of the state? Almost nothing. The Prime Minister’s round table conferences and the reports that were produced subsequently by various working groups have been neatly archived and forgotten about, as usual. The reports and the contents were indeed very encouraging and one had hoped that the governments would act on them helping, thereby, improve the situation in the state.

The change of guard in Srinagar in November 2005, when the People’s Democratic Party’s (PDP) Mufti Mohammad Sayyed was replaced by Congress party’s Ghulam Nabi Azad as the state’s Chief Minister, in retrospect, was a serious mistake committed by the Congress party: it suddenly brought to a grinding halt all the good work that the Mufti government was doing in the state even to the extent of being accused of as pro-militants by some. More importantly, the incoming political leadership lacked the political will and vision to implement the suggestions from the various working group reports. Even as PDP’s ‘healing touch’ was dismissed as mere rhetoric, it did have a great deal of symbolic effect. Therefore, one might say that the Mufti government would have organised the round tables better and diligently worked towards implementing the suggestions from the working groups.

Secondly, it is now apparent that the government was sleeping through the various phases of peace in Kashmir ignoring the daily demands and pleas from dissidents, activists, mainstream politicians and analysts to engage the state and the problems therein more proactively.

Not only that there was unprecedented willingness from the part of the dissidents and various sections of Kashmiris in looking for a solution to the state’s problems but more importantly many of these suggestions to conflict resolution were concrete and should have been taken into serious consideration. The governments’ dismissive attitude towards such gestures and proposals has brought about the prevailing situation of political disconnect between the people and the state in Jammu and Kashmir.

Giving the current spate of protests in Kashmir a religious colour is being simplistic and counter-productive. It is time we learnt to read the signs of political frustration of the people and act on them before it is too late. That said, it is necessary also to point out that the argument that the transfer of land to SASB is part of a well-thought out Indian conspiracy to settle non-local Hindus in the valley in order to turn Muslims to a minority in the state is far from the reality. It is also interesting to note the Pakistani reaction to the political developments in Kashmir.

Despite repeated pleas from the Kashmiri separatist leadership to get involved in the ongoing political turmoil in the state, Pakistani government is maintaining a studied silence on the issue and is seemingly unwilling to make loud statements about it.

Source: Sakaal Times, July 10, 2008.