![]() Saturday, Sep 21, 2002 |
| Opinion | |||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
Leader Page Articles
By Rajindar Sachar
THE POLLING figures after the first round of the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly election show that massive abstention, for fear of the gun or in pursuance of the boycott call issued by the All-Party Hurriyat Conference, has not happened. But it would be equally wrong for the Central Government to make the arrogant assumption that alienation in Kashmir has evaporated and that the bureaucratic functioning of old can be continued as before. As it is, the situation during the pre-election period was not handled properly by the Centre, whether knowingly or unknowingly. Otherwise, this election could have been the prelude to a final settlement. But the opportunity was certainly wasted by New Delhi, assisted by the Hurriyat Conference and some other groups. And, any worthwhile discussion between India and Pakistan is now not even a distant possibility. Whatever little chance there may have been for Indo-Pakistan talks was buried by the slanging match before the whole world at the United Nations. Prior to fixing the election dates, the Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, and his deputy, L. K. Advani, had announced their willingness to hold talks with all groups but finally the elections were announced without this happening. This naturally compelled the Hurriyat Conference and others to refuse to participate in the elections. Even at that stage, Shabir Shah and others were practical enough to announce their willingness to participate in the polls provided Mr. Vajpayee or Mr. Advani agreed to commence talks. But they refused and a poll boycott ensued. Whether these groups would have participated in the elections after the talks may be questioned but now the Centre has provided them an alibi. One reason given by the Government for holding early elections is said to have been the intelligence assessment that Pakistan's capacity for cross-border terrorism would be lessened because of the elections in that country. This assessment defies logic. Elections in Pakistan would rather be a compulsion for Islamabad to intensify its activities. Elections in Jammu and Kashmir after the Pakistani elections would have placed less pressure on the Musharraf regime to play to the gallery. I wonder whether the Centre's snub of the groups in the Kashmir Valley is not part of a drama based on the undisclosed acceptance by the Government of India of the United States-sponsored Kashmir Study Group's suggestion for trifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir and for making the Valley a kind of sovereign unit. I believe the RSS has evolved an election strategy in collusion with the BJP where it will openly whip up anti-Muslim hysteria keeping in view the coming elections in Gujarat and, if successful, early general elections. Separation of the Kashmir Valley also suits the U.S. and its multinational corporations. Even Pervez Musharraf may go along because he could boast that though the Line of Control (LoC) is being agreed to as the international border, he has succeeded in separating the Valley from India and will also have a hand in the pie by being joint guarantor for its defence. But public opinion in India will never accept this because it will strike at the root of our secularism. My suspicions are aroused when Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary-General, has for the first time gratuitously said that the situation between two nuclear capable countries in South Asia remains perilous and "if a fresh crisis erupts, the international community might have a role to play". Surprising is this approach considering that Dixon, even in his controversial report (1950) to the U.N., had this to say: "It is perhaps best that the initiative should now pass back to the parties. I am not myself prepared to recommend any further course of action on the part of the Security Council for the purpose of assisting the parties to settle between them how the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to be disposed of." The mildly satisfactory polling should not deceive the Government of India into assuming that people's resentment has vanished it has not even lessened. Voters have expressed their deep disgust with the present set-up in Kashmir and it is a voice against the violation of human rights. Even though the people had voted ignoring terrorists bullets, they went to the accompaniment of slogans for `Azadi' and to show anger at Farooq Abdullah. It is necessary that the Centre should draw the correct lessons and not delude itself into assuming that it has solved the Kashmir problem. Though the BJP has said that it will after the elections talk to the elected representatives, it should not refuse also to talk to those groups that had not participated. That would be a costly mistake. The only practicable solution is for the LoC to be made the international border and to concede pre-1953 status to Jammu and Kashmir, with regional autonomy to the three regions Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir. This would mean that apart from foreign affairs, defence, communications and currency, other subjects would be left with the State Government. This will be a proper recognition of the reality of the situation and will also give the people a sense of participation in the mainstream. There is a panicky over-reaction against agreeing to a pre-1953 status. The rights of individuals and the privileges of the minorities, especially Kashmiri Pandits, in the matter of religion and language will be constitutionally guaranteed. The Supreme Court will continue to have appellate jurisdiction and act as a sentinel to safeguard fundamental rights. Any funds given by the Centre will necessarily be under the scrutiny of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India. For those in Jammu and Kashmir wanting to enter Central Services, the jurisdiction of the Union Public Service Commission has to be maintained. In an extreme case, the defence power of the Centre can be invoked to ensure that the State Government carries out its constitutional obligations towards the minorities. Thus, a flow of freedom will be felt by the youth and an overwhelming number of people of Jammu and Kashmir if they are given this internal autonomy. They will have the satisfaction of knowing that their struggle has not been in vain and that the imbalance that had crept into Centre-State relations has been corrected. It is axiomatic that while no Union Government can agree to an independent Kashmir, no group in the Valley can possible agree to anything less than a pre-1953 status, if a permanent, peaceful solution is to be found. Immediately after elections, the Government of India should initiate talks not only with the elected representatives but also other groups. I hope that by then the Hurriyat Conference, Mr. Shabir Shah and others would have realised that their keeping out has only weakened them. This will inevitably put pressure on Gen. Musharraf who, freed from the election battle, may take a realistic view of the matter and accept the inevitability of the solution suggested above, and act similarly for the part of Kashmir now with Pakistan. This will usher in India-Pakistan amity and allow the subcontinent to play its rightful role in the comity of nations.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|