The Hindu : Seizing the moment in J&K

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Oct 25, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Perspective

Seizing the moment in J&K

By Malini Parthasarathy

The protracted and dreary negotiations that are now ensuing over the formation of a Government in Jammu and Kashmir between the Congress and the PDP, haggling for hours on end over who will be Chief Minister and how the ministerial spoils are to be shared, have robbed a watershed election of much of its excitement and sense of hope. This was a critical election, seen worldwide as a harbinger of better times for the Kashmiris, for India's own stakes and the encouraging signs that emerged — including a high voter turnout and a rejection of the National Conference, the selection of new players such as the PDP and the Congress — suggested a new opportunity to apply a healing hand to the agony of the Kashmiris. Small wonder that the exhilaration and hope is fast turning into disgust and disillusionment. There cannot be a truer illustration of the bitter suggestion often made by cynics that if India's democracy never fails her, India's politicians invariably do, so used as they are to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It is therefore crucial that the meeting today of the PDP president, Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, with the Congress President, Sonia Gandhi, bring an end to this dispiriting stalemate, allowing what was in essence a potential new dawn in Kashmir to break through the clouds.

Both the Congress and the PDP have taken enough of the State's time and of the nation's to have done their political bargaining, and by all accounts there are enough proposals on the table enabling some give and take on both sides that can bring forth a compromise and allow for a coalition Government to take power in Srinagar. The Congress as the larger national party and with its own historic sense of national responsibility has no choice but to accept the reality that for the new government to represent a meaningful political option in the Kashmir Valley, it would have to let the PDP occupy the larger space in the governing coalition. The very issues on which the Congress eyes the PDP warily are, in fact, the PDP's points of strength. The fact that the PDP has strong links with the separatists, especially militants such as in the Hizbul Mujahadeen, would render it easier for it as a governing authority to reach out to these separatists. Second, the Congress has not yet convincingly demonstrated to the Kashmiris that it is willing to conceptualise a different paradigm of power-sharing in its approach to their problem. Given all this, it is probably easier to have the PDP lead or at least take the frontal role in the administration, where it will have the space, with the backing of the Congress, to offer radical initiatives.

It is vital to recognise that the new Government in Srinagar does not possess the full mandate of the entire Valley, given the low voter turnout in the recent elections. As a governing authority, it will have to sustain its own moral authority and political credibility by reaching out to a wider and more representative set of interlocutors who can set in motion the steps required to bring a lasting peace to the troubled State. Although the Hurriyat leadership stayed away from the election, the ground reality is that they remain popular and are still seen by the Kashmiris, especially in the Valley, as the most trustworthy intermediaries in the search for a solution. Another important element to recognise in the changed situation is that the Hurriyat's own attitude and approach has changed over the last few months since the assassination of Abdul Gani Lone, and undeniably that change is in India's favour. In this sense, the Hurriyat's obvious willingness to be intermediaries between the new State Government and the militant groups is something that can be usefully utilised.

It is now the time to adopt a two-pronged approach to the Kashmir crisis. Too often have the issues been mixed up and to India's disadvantage. The Hurriyat and the militant groups have skilfully played upon India's strategic confusion, insisting that tripartite talks are the immediate requirement, glossing over the fact that there are two distinct strands — one, the alienation of the Kashmiris and their sense of suffering over the bloodshed that has taken so many of their lives, and the other longer-term issue, the settlement of the status of J&K.

The Government in New Delhi and the new administration in Srinagar must dexterously steer their way out by separating the two strands. The new Government must plunge immediately into confidence-building measures, including exploring the degree of autonomy and power-sharing that is required to address the sense of injustice and loss on the part of the Kashmiris. A unilateral effort on the part of the new Government to implement a series of confidence-building measures will yield the space to embark on the more difficult part of the exercise — addressing the issue of the final status of Kashmir.

An interesting and unpublicised aspect of the unfolding situation in Kashmir is that the approach of the Hurriyat appears to have become relatively open-ended despite the formulaic posturing of their leaders. It may be recalled that the Hurriyat leaders, the late Abdul Gani Lone and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, had gone to Dubai last spring for a meeting with the leader of Pakistan's Kashmir Committee, Sardar Qayyum Khan, in which the Hurriyat leaders had suggested that the Kashmiri leaders in "Azad Kashmir" (POK) likewise bring pressure on Islamabad to allow for a settlement of the problem. Lone paid for that singular effort to break new ground, with his life. Yet it is clear that the Hurriyat has not abandoned this track — the idea that the Kashmiri leaders on both sides of the border work towards a settlement, not necessarily reflecting a territorial readjustment on either side.

It is also learnt that on his recent visit to the U.S., Mirwaiz Umar Farooq was told by American officials that independence was not a political option that would be encouraged, a point that the Hurriyat has now factored into its strategic calculations. More significant, in a meeting with Pakistan's President, Pervez Musharraf, Mirwaiz Farooq extracted from the Pakistani leader an assurance that if the Kashmiris were able to reach a settlement to their satisfaction, Pakistan would not stand in their way. These indications would suggest that if a new track is explored, of allowing Kashmiri leaders to unofficially meet with their counterparts on the other side, there might be fresh pressure on the leadership in Islamabad not to sabotage efforts being made by India to address the alienation of the Kashmiri people.

Thus the task of addressing the awesome challenge in Kashmir cannot be simplistically reduced to the issue of forming a Government that will be given the sole responsibility for addressing all the aspects of this situation. The Congress and the PDP will have to acknowledge that it is their immediate responsibility to begin an effort at confidence-building among the people of the State. The new administration would have to implement a series of measures that are designed to win back the trust and faith of the alienated Kashmiris in the Indian democratic system. Once such an atmosphere is created, it will be much easier, with the cooperation of the Hurriyat and other such separatist groups, to bring about a cessation of hostilities with the militant groups. If such a two-pronged strategy is adopted, it would render it far easier for India to begin a dialogue with Pakistan on the final status of Kashmir, given that its moral authority and political credibility would have been greatly strengthened in the process.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

ASEAN and lost opportunities

Toll of opportunism

Seizing the moment in J&K

Cow and culture

Women and food insecurity

What about politicians?