Dissidents Need a Common Minimum Programme
STATECRAFT BY HAPPYMON JACOB
The question that many, including in J&K, are asking today is whether the dissident leadership in the state knows what it wants. One is not sure if they have indeed arrived at a consensual blueprint, behind closed doors, as to what their endgame is going to be. It doesn’t look they have a blueprint, going by the statements of various leaders, trajectory of the movement, shifting stances of the various dissident formations and the incongruence between the mood of the public and the deeds of the leaders. The leaders of the ongoing dissident struggle in Kashmir have come from a wide range of political formations, shades of opinion and political persuasions and have therefore shown no great deal of unity of purpose in the ongoing struggle. Added to this is the simmering dissent within the dissident camp that has now become fairly clear. First of all, Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s claim to ‘sole leadership’ has not gone down very well with the other leaders and they have expressed that in many words. Secondly, Geelani and his disciples are ostensibly spearheading the ongoing struggle for azadi. Moreover, his camp seems to be making both the grand strategy and tactics of the ongoing struggle. What this means is that even if others do not know what their endgame is, Geelani does.
More importantly, Geelani’s recent statements about other Kashmiri dissident leaders and questioning their credentials have not gone down well with the rest of them. What this dissent in the dissident camp will do, slowly but steadily, is to weaken the momentum of the ongoing agitations. One of the reasons why the other leaders do not seem to be contesting Geelani’s modus operandi is because it will not be tolerated by the common Kashmiris who are participating in the protests: they would like to see their leaders united and they see Geelani as the grand old patriarch who can provide the necessary symbolism to the ongoing agitations. Anyone who shows dissent in the dissident camp today would most definitely have his political career cut short.
So while this apparent ‘unity’ will sustain, under the circumstances, the ongoing agitations in the days to come without any serious ruptures, what this will deprive the ‘movement’ is a unity of purpose. First of all, they need to have a commonly worked out scheme on how to talk with New Delhi and secondly, what to demand from New Delhi. At present there does not seem to be any serious formal or backchannel efforts to engage New Delhi. If the dissidents believe that they can sustain the momentum of the agitations for as long as they wish, they are mistaken: popular movements invariably have their lifespan. It is advantage dissident camp at this point of time, but then the ball is in their court too: they need to make their demands loud and clear. One of the reasons for this lack of common demand is that different leaders in the dissident camp believe in different things. While Geelani may be having a field day with his leadership, ideas, and ideology, ruling the roost today, there are other equally competing ideologies within Kashmir’s dissident camp. Consider for example: one of the slogans that one gets to hear rather frequently during the ongoing agitations is: Ham Pakistani Hain, Pakistan Hamara Hai (We belong to Pakistan, and Pakistan belongs to us). Apart from Geelani, not many would agree with this slogan but even then they don’t seem to be in a position to speak up against that.
If the aim of the agitations so far was to create conditions to force New Delhi to listen to the Kashmiris regarding innovative and out-of-the-box solutions to resolve the issue, they have undoubtedly achieved that and now the time has come for them to reach a consensual and workable solution. Can the dissident camp continue the present momentum and have a unity of purpose at the same time? They can, provided they decide upon a ‘common minimum programme’ while the agitations are in their prime. This requires a willingness on the part of the dissident leadership to do some collective and realistic strategising. As this writer has pointed out in earlier columns in GK, there are indeed many common themes in the opinions of the Kashmiri dissident leadership regarding what the future of Kashmir should be. While it is true that the wide range of dissident opinions ranging from merger with Pakistan to greater autonomy, the middle-of-the-road solution between the two extremes seems to be the restoration of the provisions of an undiluted Article 370.
The significance of ‘Achievable Nationhood’
One of the key documents that need to be carefully examined by the dissident camp today is the much acclaimed Achievable Nationhood produced by People’s Conference led by Sajad Lone. Lone’s document not only makes a realistic assessment of the situation in J&K but also proposes innovative methods to address the feelings and needs of the people of J&K. While some of his solutions might be beyond the brief of Article 370, one must understand that, this is a document that is open to be put to discussion, deliberations and, perhaps, amends to suit the needs of the various constituencies in the state. The importance of this document lies in its inherent flexibility to address the aspirations of various actors and so the dissident leadership needs to give serious consideration to this document in order to lay out a common minimum programme which is perhaps a must at this point of time.
An afterthought
Even as the anti-India protests are gaining in strength in Kashmir, India’s National Security Advisor M K Narayanan was sent by New Delhi’s political leadership to assess the security situation in Srinagar and report back. Those accompanied included the Defence Secretary, Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Director of Intelligence Bureau and a Joint Secretary at the Prime Minister’s Office. There were no politicians in this high level delegation and, for that matter, no senior political leader from New Delhi has visited the valley ever since the protests began there. This shows that New Delhi still prefers to look at it as a law and order and security problem and not a political problem. More importantly, why do New Delhi’s politicians shy away from engaging the people and dialoging with them when it matters the most? Politics, our politicians need to understand, is not a bed of roses.
(Source: Greater Kashmir, September 3, 2008: URL: http://greaterkashmir.com/full_story.asp?Date=3_9_2008&ItemID=3&cat=11)
