A muscular approach, coupled
with development, cannot resolve the main political problem
The upheaval in Kashmir
after security forces killed the young Hizbul Mujahideen commander
Burhan Wani is yet another grim reminder
of the failure of successive governments in New Delhi to address the
volatile situation in the Valley in right earnest.Ever since militancy
reared its head in J&K in 1989, their response to curb it has been
on predictable lines: deploy the armed might of the Indian state to
eliminate it root and branch and focus on development and good
governance to win the hearts and minds of Kashmiris.Peace and normalcy
would follow suit.
That hasn't happened. The nature of militancy
itself has changed. The militants who attack security forces are
increasingly local youth who are well-educated and who belong to
well-to-do families. How many of them have crossed the border to receive
training and procure arms is still a matter of conjecture. But growing
evidence suggests that these are home-grown elements who no longer rely
entirely on Pakistani largesse to wage their violent struggle against
the Indian state.
Militancy has also acquired pernicious
religious overtones. Until recently the secessionist forces sought to
downplay the Islamic component of their `freedom movement'. No longer.
The new breed of militants makes no bones of its adherence to a
radicalised brand of Islam. The `movement' cannot be isolated from the
turmoil in the Islamic world at large.
Another worrisome
development is the popular support for militancy .There was a time when
New Delhi could justifiably argue that the population of the Valley was
by and large indifferent, if not hostile, to the militants on account of
their depredations intimidation, wanton killings, maltreatment of
women etc. Today the huge crowds that turn up for the funerals of slain
militants, the attacks on the security forces by ordinary civilians
(including, most tellingly ,
by women), the strict observance of hartals and shut-downs decreed by
separatist leaders and so forth tell another, altogether alarming story .
The result is there for all to see. No one can doubt the unyielding
commitment of the security forces to maintain law and order in the face
of extremely heavy odds.The casualties they have suffered in the
exercise of their duties command respect and admiration. Yet the fact is
that often their ham-handed riposte when they face angry mobs have
generated more indignation and more retaliatory acts. Both sides are
thus trapped in an infernal cycle of violence and counter-violence.
There is more. A sense of victimhood has existed in Kashmir since the
dismissal and incarceration of Sheikh Abdullah in 1953. The sacking of
subsequent chief ministers, the erosion of J&K's special status,
rigged elections, lack of economic and social development, ineffective
gover
nance, alleged abuses of human rights and corruption heightened that
sense.Now the sense of victimhood is being expressed more vociferously .
And it is couched increasingly in communal terms.
Thus the
separatists projected the state government's moves to establish separate
housing facilities for retired sainiks from the state and for Kashmiri
Pandits who were hounded out for their homes and to lengthen the
duration of the Amarnath yatra as a sinister Indian design to change the
demographic composition of the state. New Delhi's
response to this evolving situation has been, to put it mildly , tepid.
The Centre does not seem to have learnt lessons from the past,
especially from upheavals that followed the stonepelting agitation in
the summer of 2010 and the hanging of Afzal Guru in February 2013. Now,
as then, it has chosen to believe that cracking down on militants and
their sympathisers and pouring in more funds for development would be
sufficient to beat back secessionist forces.
This is tantamount
to myopia. Not to read the writing on the wall that the main problem
is a political one would plunge India's only Muslim-majority state
into more turmoil. The only way to address the problem is to engage with
all stakeholders, including the separatists, to determine how the
diverse, even divergent, political aspirations of people in J&K can
be met without compromising India's security interests.
New Delhi
must also swiftly find
ways and means to engage the powers that be in Pakistan to reach a
negotiated settlement of the Kashmir issue. In the worst case scenario,
the resumed dialogue might yield nothing more than hot air. This would
serve to expose its fundamental intent, that relentless hostility to
India can alone ensure the raison d'être of Pakistan.
The best
though admittedly farfetched scenario would be that Pakistan's de
facto rulers have realised that continuing hostility towards India only
complicates their problems with Afghanistan and their efforts to stem
the upsurge of terror violence in their own country . They just might
opt as Pervez Musharraf did to move towards a pragmatic settlement
of Kashmir.
Either way , India has little to lose but much to
gain to resume the `composite dialogue' with Pakistan. At the very
least, this would go some way to cool tempers in the Valley . That, in
turn, would give the PDP-BJP coalition government in J&K breathing
space to recover its reflexes that the latest upheaval appears to have
numbed.
By Dileep Padgaonkar
Courtesy: Times of India
No comments:
Post a Comment