EDITORIAL
ELUSIVE
AGENDA
As days roll by, hectic
activity grips both New Delhi and Islamabad. A set of
arrangements contemplated since the announcement of the
impending visit of General Musharraf may have to be
altered at New Delhi. The General who had managed not to
salute the Indian Prime Minister at the time of
latter’s Lahore visit, has managed the escape the
second time. By embalming himself as the President,
protocol comes to his rescue. Did he make himself
President only to avoid the protocol requirement of
saluting the Prime Minister of India? Pakistanis may call
it a brilliant move on the part of the Chief Executive.
Having overcome this
difficulty, is the onward path as smooth as it could be?
There are doubts. Reports from Pakistan say that during
President Musharraf’s 8 June conference with the
Corps Commanders, two seniors Generals had expressed
reservation on the agenda that was in making. A section
of top bureaucracy is also reported to have voiced its
dissent. Pakistani foreign minister Abdul Sattar, who was
in the US when the Chief Executive crowned himself as
President said that he had no prior information of the
development. President Musharraf is to consult the
radical Islamic leadership, Kashmiri leadership and some
political activists on matters related to his impending
visit to New Delhi. As far as PML is concerned, Mian
Nawaz Sharif remains banished to Saudi Arabia and under
the release deal, he is not permitted to pass any comment
on internal political situation in Pakistan. His
party’s unity eroded soon after his dismissal from
office and the separatist group was soon roped in by the
regime. It has no strength to question the President on
any matter that is of crucial importance, like Kashmir.
As far as PPP is concerned, its chief has already been
living in exile and only recently she has been convicted
in some cases by the court of law. Thus this political
party also remains sidelined for a pretty time. But its
leader, Benazir Bhutto has already announced her
party’s response to the visit of the General. She
said that as long as the military rulers do not announce
a definite day for restoration of democracy in Pakistan,
her party would not endorse the decisions taken at New
Delhi meet or agreements made between the two leaders.
The same will be the reaction of PM L (N) group.
Therefore the question arises what will be the agenda for
talks between the two leaders? If President Musharraf
comes with one-point agenda of obtaining Kashmir on a
platter, he would better forget about it. But of course,
the military commander may like to discuss
Siachin-oriented security matters. Both countries want
de-militarisation of this most difficult and the coldest
outpost atop the Himalayas between the subcontinental
states. In the past also, some serious thinking had taken
place between the local commanders in Siachin to
demilitarise the zone because of its forbidding costs to
both. But then there is the element of China in it.
Pakistan has ceded 5000 square kilometres of Aksaichin
region to China. But since China is eyeing further
territorial expansion westward of Tibet, she is in no
mood to pat Islamabad for a final solution of Siachin
posts. Is President Musharraf in a position to dissuade
the Chinese authorities from interfering in the internal
matters of a sensitive state of Jammu and Kashmir? In the
words of former Prime Minister Mr. I.K. Gujral, if the
two leaders meet and agree on fixing the date for the
next meeting, that would be an achievement."
FIGHTING POLLUTION
The other day, State
Pollution Control Board (JKSPCB) celebrated World
Environmental Day in Jammu. Minister for Environment and
Forests was the chief guest. As is the custom, those at
the helm of affairs seized the opportunity of producing a
long list of the achievements of the Board. Generally
these ‘ achievement’ are paper-borne; the
reality on ground is radically different. Prevention of
pollution has to be defined in its dimensions and is not
to be portrayed as forest-related. There are not many
industries in Kashmir region. As such, pollution in terms
of factory refuse and human dispersal is almost
negligible. But notwithstanding that, the matter of
healthcare for industrial labour remains an unresolved
problem. Take the case of Wuyan Cement Factory or the
numerous carpets and namda manufacturing centres in
Kashmir. Induction of child labour in these industries is
tantamount to pollution if we stick to the norms of the
WHO or ILO. What are the measures taken by the Government
to provide healthcare to this segment of labour? It has
to be reminded that child labour is a violation of human
rights and the protocol of ILO takes serious view of the
phenomenon. There are many industries in Jammu region
particularly in Bari Brahmana sector. Pollution control
of these industries is only minimal. It matters little if
these are situated outside the main town of Jammu. The
town is expanding and there is brisk population move.
Foolproof pollution control over these industries has to
be ensured. The breweries well inside the municipal
limits of Jammu emit endless smoke from their tall
chimneys. There layers of soot spread over houses and
open space in the vicinity of these breweries. But so far
the Pollution Control Board has not taken any notice of
this pollution-creating source. In many states in
Northern India, the manufacture and use of polythene bags
has been prohibited. It is one of the worst pollutants.
Some time back, there was astir that polythene bags were
banned in Jammu also. But the manufacturers contrived to
scuttle that order and now heaps of polythene bags block
the lanes and drains creating water logging and
unhygienic conditions. The city of Jammu is strewn with
polythene bags.
During the past decade of
turmoil, there has been wanton destruction of forest
wealth on an incredibly large scale. Trees have been
felled and jungles have been turned into barren lands.
Villagers have been encroaching upon forestland raising
shabby and unhygienic structures. The rural Kashmir has
lost its pristine purity. Nullahs are used for dumping
the trash and garbage. Playgrounds and pathways are all
littered with cow dung left to dry up and to be used as
fuel. There should have been mass education and awareness
among the villagers and the environmental agencies should
have included this in their programme. We have never seen
the officials setting up camps for mass education
anywhere in the Valley or in Jammu region. We must know
that a majority of our village people is illiterate. They
need to be educated through workshops and interaction. It
boots little to set up a function at a posh hotel in the
town and gather a group of slogan raisers and deliver
speeches eulogising each other for the work done and
pollution controlled. One fails to understand how far
will this farcical activity carry us?
|
Lopsided
approach to Naga peace
By
Vaniram
There is
no surprises with the new ceasefire deal
the Vajpayee Government has signed with
the Naga ultra leader T Muivah in
Bangkok. Both the broad contours of the
deal, namely extension of the ceasefire
to the entire North East, and the
disquiet the agreement would generate are
known for a while, particularly after the
Muivah faction of the underground
National Socialist Council of Nagaland
(NSCN) had threatened to walk out of the
ongoing peace process.
To use the
expression, capitulation to the
insurgents, as some quarters have termed
the agreement may be patently unfair to
the players from the Government side, who
were dealing with the issue under four
successive Governments - Narasimha Rao,
Deve Gowda, Gujral and Vajpayee.
Certianly,
not unfair will be conclusion that New
Delhi has surrendered itself to short
term objectives even while professing to
work for the long-term interests of the
neglected North Eastern region, where the
progress is counted in terms of outlays
and not on the basis of physical
achievments.
The
Vajpayee Government could have gone in
for a hard bargain with Thuingaleng
Muivah, who needs New Delhi's help to
wriggle out of the Thai legal tangle.
Though he has been breezing in and out of
Bangkok where his family and relations
live, he landed in the Thai police net
late last year while returning from
Karachi on a forged passport.
Subsequently, he compounded his miseries
first by jumping bail and then by trying
to flee the country.
To what
extent India's RAW was responsible for
his trouble is a moot point? For his
part, Muivah blames the RAW though. If
one goes by the 'relief' on the face of
North Block seniors when the news of
Muivah arrest in Thailand appeared on the
tickets last year, his allegation may not
be wide off the mark. That is beside the
point.
Union Home
Secretary Kamal Pande has said that the
North Eastern States had been taken into
confidence while inking the deal with
Muivah. The strong reaction from Assam
Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi and Manipur
leaders belies this claim.
AGP
leader, Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, as Chief
Minister, also was known to be opposed to
extending the Naga cease-fire to other
areas. He mellowed towards the end of his
term after the AGP tied up with the BJP.
Why Mahanta gave in to Delhi plans when
it is clear that the proposal virtually
gave the Naga ultras a free run in the
hill districts of Karbi Anglong and North
Cachar hills of his State remains an
enigmatic mystery, as enigmatic as his
smile.
Also
understandable is the opposition of
Manipur leaders of all hues, who had a
bitter experience in dealing with Delhi
in the past few months. The anger on
diplay inthe streets of Imphal is as much
against the local political leaders as
against Delhi. The Nagas constitute a
sizeable section of the State's
population. In fact, they are in a
majority in two of the hill districts
close to the State Capital, Imphal. Given
the unsteady times Manipur is passing
through and the nexus various Manipuri
ultra groups have forged with Naga
insurgents, their fear of an escalation
of insurgent activities is real, not
imaginary.
The
worries of Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura
fall under a different category but need
to be addressed to take them on board.
Let us not forget that Naga ultras pass
through these two States while on their
way from their hideouts in Myanmar and
Bangladesh. Any discussion on the
Northeast must reckon with an important
factor. It is the presence of same tribes
on either side of the border. On the
Myanmar side, the writ of Yangoon doesn't
run in the border region.
Unification
of all Naga inhabited areas is a dream of
late Phizo, who first hoisted the flag of
rebellion after the British left India.
Nagaland assembly adopted a resolution
twice, in the sixties and again in the
eighties advocating Greater Nagaland. The
caveat in the resolution was that there
should be no opposition to the merger of
Naga inhabited areas from other States.
Even now, the Chief Minister S C Jamir is
sticking by the resolution. That his
sympathies lay with the Khaplang faction
of the underground is a matter of public
knowledge on the Naga scene.
The latest
ceasefire agreement is seen by the
Nagaland neighbours against this
historical perspective. But New Delhi is
taking shelter under the wording of the
agreement with Muivah. Former Home
Secretary, K Padmanabhaiah, who
negotiated the deal asserts, "The
ceasefire stipulation -- there are no
territorial limits -- will not, in any
way, affect the territorial integrity of
any of the North Eastern States".
Crtitics dub the effort as a clever ploy
of words, which will not fool anyone.
Naga
insurgency dates back to 1947. Xavier
Pfokrehe Mao, a professor at the
Northeast Hill University, Shillong,
traces the first political expression of
the collective will of the Nagas to 1918,
the year the Naga club was formed in
Kohima to represent local interests to
the British. Since then Issac Chisi Swau,
Thuingaleng Muivah, and S S Khaplang
among other top leaders repudiated the
accord. They floated the NSCN, the
National Socialist Council of Nagaland.
The council has since split into Muivah
and Khaplang factions - NSCN (I/M) and
NSCN (K).
Both
factions have entered into a ceasefire
agreement with the Government -- Muivah
four years ago, Khalplang from this
April. Muivah did not like the New Delhi
deal with his rival, whom he dubs as
Jamir's lackey. He upped his ante and his
fulminations culminated in the Bangkok
agreement.
From the
text of the agreement released by Union
Home Secretary, it is not clear whether
the ultras have given a commitment in
writing not to raise their demand for
"Greater Nagaland" at any time.
He merely reiterates what Prime Minister
Vajpayee told the Chief Ministers from
the North East that extension of
ceasefire to other Naga inhabited areas
in their State would in no way affect
them politically.
One thing
is certain. Given the poor law and order
situation and thinly spread network of
police force, the Naga insurgents will
have no problem to spread out. It will be
well neigh impossible for the Goverment
to check the 'migration'. Neither Home
Secretry, who met the media in New Delhi,
nor K Padmanabhaiah, who talked to
reporters in Bangkok in the company of
Th. Muivah, has explained how the
'no-territorial limit' aspect of the
cease-fire would be monitored.
The new
ground rules on cease-fire have very
little new to offer, contrary to what the
Home Ministry claims. The ultras have
never admitted that they are indulging a
extortions under the garb of 'levying
taxes'. Now also they have stuck to the
same refrain. The only concession they
are willing to offer is "in the
interest of promoting peace process, the
NSCN representatives will prevent such
activities."
Like wise,
the underground has always claimed that
its ranks are swelling by volunteers, not
by forced recruits as contended by the
Government. So much so, the agreement
that "if there are any reports opf
forced recruitment, they should be
discussed in the Ceasefire monitoring
Group" is no big deal.
So goes
the agreement on a big 'no' for
'offensive operations' and 'road
blockades' et al. Because the very
concept of ceasefire demands an end to
such activities. Clause C of the
agreement provides for housing the NSCN
(I/M) cadres at select places --
designated camps as these are termed.
Yes, this proposition has an element of
freshness in the approach.
Another
stipulation is photo identity cards to
the NSCN cadres who are required to move
frequently. At least sixty identity cards
will be issued to begin with. They will
be a privileged lot . Under the
cease-fire ground rules, the I-card
holder can have an armed cadre
accompanying them for security at all
times. How effective this provision and
the new cease-fire will be is a moot
point.
Syndicate Features
|
 |
Assam
can ill-afford a fresh bout of violence
By
Sachet Barua
The
violence in Manipur is threatening to
spread to Assam. Student bodies in the
State are warming up for a movement
against the Naga ceasefire area extension
Perhaps
there should have been deeper
consultation with the Chief Ministers in
the region before the Centre agreed to
the NSCN (I-M)’s demand to extend
the ceasefire beyound Nagaland. The
NSCN(I-M) was threatening to call off the
ceasefire and was reportedly
unappreciative of the Centre’s
desire, though lukewarm, to consult the
newly-elected Government in Assam.
The kind
of political communication and
interaction that should have preceded the
final ceasefire never took place. Mr.
Advani’s handling of the States and
the periphery has been marked by the same
insensitivity that characterised the
Congress regimes.
Assam
Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi is
apprehensive that in view of a new tide
of violence in the succession of attacks
launched by the United Liberation Front
of Asom (ULFA) and the National
Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB) in
areas that had, for some time now, been
more less quiescent; or of the sweeping
changes in counter-terrorism strategy
that Gogoi has sopken of in his first
weeks in office; or, indeed, of the
administrative and economic vision that
is currently being articulated, and that
needs to be assessed in great detail,
lest it result in continued failures that
the State can ill afford.
Gogoi has
taken charge on a pitch that had
unfortunately been queered by the
mismanagement of the election process by
the Centre. Over the past year, dramatic
changes had taken place in the context of
terrorism in the State, and though 2000
had been a year of rising violence, it
had also proven to be a year of shrinking
militant influence. Indeed, the
ULFA’s capacity to strike –
along with that of the other major and
active militant group, the NDFB’s
– had been virtually contained
within a relatively limited area along
the Bhutanese border, and many of the
hotbeds of terrorist violence in the
mid-1990s had been entirely rid of
militant activity and terrorist incidents
by the end of the decade.
Unfortunately,
it is the administrative incompetence of
the Centre – and in the present
instance, on the part of a constitutional
authority – that has, time and
again, wasted away critical opportunities
for peace. These opportunities are
created out of the blood and sacrifice of
hundreds of security personnel, but are
destroyed by the crude and inaccurate
picture Delhi has of events and ground
realities on the country’s
periphery.
The SFs
and the Assma establishment were well
aware of the situation in the State, and
the potential for electoral violence long
before the polls, as they were of the
crucial importance of peace during the
polls, not just in a limited sense of
holding free, fair and nonviolent
election, but n the larger context of
political stability and the opportunity
for resolution of the conflict in the
State. Their apprehensions had been
communuted to the Centre and the Election
Commission, but their advice was ignored,
and the ULFA succeeded in executing a
number of demoralising strikes in the
run-up to the polls. Had the elections
been staggered, and far greater Force
been allocated much earlier, the mandate
for peace could have been consolidated,
and the legitimacy of the new regime
would not have been tarnished by
unverified allegation of collusion with
militant elements, Such allegations have,
of course, been given the clear lie by
the Gogoi government’s sustained
counter-insurgency thrust in the past
weeks, but the damage had already been
done.
The
post-election period has seen a flood of
extortion notices issued by the ULFA
right across Assam, and fear is, once
again, endemic. This has certainly made
the new Government’s task the more
daunting, but the emerging direction of
response appears positive. For one thing,
counter-insurgency operations have been
strapped up, and have already notched up
a number of significant successes. Gogoi
has also displayed an understanding of
the nuanced character of responses that
are required in multi-force operation,
and has emphasised the pivotal role that
the State’s police and intelligence
will have to play if the scourge of
terrorism is to be defeated.
This is a
time at which the State’s efforts
will need the greatest of support,
irrespective of narrow party affiliations
and interests. In this, the Centre would
do well to remember that peace in Assam
is the key to peace in the Northeast; and
the key to peace in Assam is the defeat
or political neutralisation of the ULFA.
It is also important to notice that,
though there has been a wild
proliferation of militant organisations
in the State over the past years –
there are as many as 34 currently
identified – it is the ULFA that is
the backbone of th insurgency in Assam.
Most of the important groups, including
many that have apparently conflicting
goals and ideologies from those of the
ULFA, are in fact, trained, armed and
supported by, and sometimes coordinate
activities with, the ULFA.
The sense
of loss of control in Assam (and in the
Northeast in general), notwithstanding,
these are tangible, achievable, goals.
Operations under the Unified Command
structure over the past two years had
virtually brought the ULFA and its
affiliates to their knees – though
this was at a rising cost of lives.
Indeed, total insurgency related
fatalities in the State in the year 2000
were as high as 816, the highest number
since the beginning of the conflict,
rising from 503 in 1999 and 783 in 1998,
but a rising proportion of the casualties
1998, but a rising proportion of the
casualties have been among the ranks of
the militants themselves (1998:180; 1999:
212; 2000: 321), who had been contained
within small corners of the State, where
they could still strike and flee to safe
havens across international borders. That
is why much of the militant violence in
the past year has taken a particularly
aimless and brutal character, such as the
repeated incidents of mass killing of
poor villagers and woodcutters in forest
areas in the Kokrajha district along the
Bhutan border.
What is
needed now are strong, narrowly targeted
intelligence-based operations within the
ambit of the State police, to bring
substantially criminalised movements,
which had lost their political and
ideological moorings years ago, to their
logical conclusion. Along with these,
however, the Government will have to go a
very long way to ensure the restoration
of the integrity of the administration,
to plug the ‘leakages that have
consumed virtually the entire pool of
developmental resources available to the
State in the past, and to establish a
measure of administrative competence and
efficiency demonstrably superior to that
of the predecessor regime.
A great
deal has been written about the need for
new directions, for a
‘creative’ vision, and for the
exploration of radical alternatives in
policy, to address the crises of
India’s Northeast. While such
explorations and an open and experimental
orientation are essential to the
enterprise of democratic governance in
such a complex, pluralistic society, the
fact is, the restoration of peace and
order in Assam demands much less: if even
the minimal requirements of good
governance are met by a leadership that
displays a modicum of sagacity in dealing
with the conflicting aspirations of
different ethnic and communal groups
entirely within the ambit of the existing
constitutional and legal order – the
remnants of legitimacy and presumed
‘public’ sanction for violent
resistance that the various insurgent
groups currently benefit from will vamish
without a trace. And in their wake, so
will the terrorists and their
leaders.INAV
|
|
Indo-Pak
relations
By Daya Sagar
Bharat (India) is
recognised by her land, rivers, mountains,
traditions epics, literature, hsitory and the
culture the world recognises to-day as Hindu
Culture (though it has no such reference in Veda,
Upnishda, Ramayana, Mahabharta etc). Indian
boundaries are known for centuries. Indian people
are known for their love for peace &
sacrifice. Indian people are known for their
having not attacked other countries for extending
the boundaries.
Dangers are
more for India to get disturbed under the
influence of foreign powers and their Indian
agents. Those who repeatedly keep on talking of
India as a country of people belonging to
different religious, different, faiths,
practising different cultural traditions,
speaking different languages and living in
variety of climatic conditions are every day
damaging the unity wills of people of India. This
is very sensitive state of affairs and hence the
foreign powers and their agents have easy grounds
to work with the growing the fields of distrust,
social disrespect, unrest in the unemployed
youth in the name of religion, faith or region.
Pakistan has always been attempting it over last
five decades and loss we have already suffered in
Punjab & Kashmir is not unknown to many.
China too has not spared using such tools in
J&K and North East India. This Unity in
diversity has been badly mis-understood by many
to the sheer advantage of our enemies.
Non-Political groups must start a movement in
India to correctly inform the Indians and remove
the mis-understandings as have been created over
the years.
Over the years
China & US have used Pakistan against India
and provided the working and development worthy
modern warfare material and technology to
Pakistan while preaching non-proliferation of
weaponary. Recent nuclear blasts by Pakistan
have exposed China & US since a country that
does not manufacture automobiles of her own, has
still imported refrigerators & Televisions,
has no production technology of her own, could
frame a self constitution (that too even half)
only in seventies, has total poverty and
backwardness even in urban suburbs, etc. etc.
could never acquire such capabilities that it can
overnight claim Nuclear Power Capabilities.
UK and US have
worked indirectly against Indian interests right
from the early dawn of 15th. August' 1947 and in
1947 October these countries used their influence
over UN to malign India and make Pakistan
protests & allegations more and more
authentic. Surely UK had then just left India
& US could not afford to see the birth of
such a large independent country like India.
Third parties
could never hope see Bharat growing. India &
Pakistan could be simulated to two brothers
hatching separate Kitchens. India has always been
wishing to embrace the ''ANUJ'' but Pakistan
leadership has over the years only tried to
promote bitterness. Over the years Pakistani
leaders have regularly piosoned their post 1947
generation against hindus /Sikhs and have not
spared to miss-use the school books to poison
even the infants. Where as in India you will not
find any social as well as government agency
doing so, Pakistani kids in schools have been
shown the Sikh in books (language) as Jallim
(cruel) and a portrait of a Tilak Dhari for
''Kaafir'' atheist Hence, the things are not so
simple as are put by those like ''Janoon'' group
saying that people of Pakistan and India have
great love/desire for each other. May be the
Indians have but the Pakistani Youth in late
thirties and forties surely has been given hatred
for Hindu (hence India) by his political leaders
and religious gurus.
Of course, the
success of India & Pakistan could lie only in
mutual trust of two real brothers. These two
brothers must come together and open the windows.
The barriers must be thrown open and the third
parties must be kept at bay. A border arrangement
with Pakistan like India has with Nepal could be
the best and this would frustrate UK or US or
China or France but will surely relieve we
Indians of this subcontinent of frustrations.
Task is difficult
but may not take more than half a decade to suck
the poison, provided non-political and religious
leaders guide and correctly inform the common
people across the borders.
India is
questioned by every body. Sacrifice is demanded
from only India and thse who talk of Indian
Nationality. I am saying so because it has become
a fashion in our country for some vocal non-Hindu
leaders to threaten disintegration of territorial
unity of India incase the majority community
(they mean Hindu) does not tolerate undue
onslaughts in the name of ''Secularism &
Rights of Minorities.''
In India we have
only the politicians who have tied the cord of
secularism around their neck and to-day 80
percent of Indians realise that politicians use
secularism just to confuse the Indian Voter but
still the Indians allow the politician to use it.
Truely speaking ''Secularism'' can only be
practised by a non-theocratic state and has to be
respected by the individual who believes in any
religious faith.
To any person who
believe in a religion, his own religion is the
best and the religion of others is just respected
to enable him be secular. One who believes in
theocratic state like Pakistan, in political
parties like Muslim League and Communism has no
right to talk of secularism in the context of
Multireligious Societies.
Otherwise India
will always provide playing ground for disloyal
politicians across the large geographical map of
India. No doubt Pakistan will suffer more but it
will also pain India, the Mother that gave birth
to socalled Hindustan and Pakistan.
|
The
high road to peace in Kashmir
By B K Karkra
When apparently,
flying off the tangent, the B.J.P. led government
at the Centredecided not to extend the cease-fire
in Kashmir any further and at the same time, to
extend an unconditional invitation for talks to
General Pervez Musharraf, many of us felt that
the men at our helm had gone senile and due for
some sort of golden hand-shake. The people are,
however, beginning to feel now that there could
after all be some method in this madness. There
is some definite chance that it may eventually
turn out to be the case of a brilliant chess
player shifting, his piece thinking half a dozen
moves ahead. What has done the trick is this. Mr.
Vajpayee sent the beaten down stock of General
Musharraf sky high, by not only giving legitimacy
to his regime, but also by floating a feeling
that he had the better of the exchanges and was
the eventual winner. It, thus, made his elevation
as the President of Pakistan a smoother affair.
Now, one good turn deserves another. The General,
responsible for what we see as betrayal, but his
own countrymen a brave patriotic move i.e. the
Kargil adventure, has, if viewed in totality,
responded rather positively this time. The
Vajpayee initiative and the Musharraf response
has emitted a ray of hope that a new history may
be in the making in the subcontinent and the two
leaders may well end up as our men of destiny.
This would, however, be possible only if their
statesmanship is able to find its way through
various situational compulsions that bedevil our
relations. Otherwise, all this may equally prove
to be the wishful thinking of those in the mould
of Inder Kumar Gujral, Kuldip Nayyar, Khushwant
Singh and Mehdi Hasan who feel that India and
Pakistan are the closest kin in the world.
Instead, the ugly realities of our religions,
history and politics may again condemn us to skid
in the stream of hatred that flows between us.
Things would start
happening once the two sides are really ready to
meet each other more than half the way. Rather
than being driven by the Huntington theory that
Hinduism and Islam are adversarial civilizations
that can never reconcile to each other, the two
leaders have to put belief in the view that all
of us are the rays shooting from the same source.
It is in this ethos of universal brotherhood only
that they would be able to walk hand in hand
along the high road to peace. Once adequate trust
and goodwill are generated, many solutions would
emerge to all our problems, including Kashmir.
Any solution on Kashmir has to meet the
sensitivities of the people of India, Pakistan
and of course, the Kashmiri's themselves. These
sensitivities are, however, born out of what the
political leadership in the two countries has
been feeding them on over a long period of time.
Meaningless posturing has already done lot of
damage to the cause of the peace between us. If
India is really not ready to forget about the
P.O.K. territory (One must remember that Pt.
Nehru had publicly offered a settlement of
Kashmir with Pakistan over the cease-fire line as
early as 1956) and Pakistan is not going to
settle for anything less than a plebiscite in
Kashmir (the U.N. preconditions for which it has
evaded for over fifty long years), there is
absolutely no point in talking. Any settlement on
Kashmir would have to be in line with the
following ground realities:- (a) Neither India is
prepared to accept the risk involved in
recovering P.O.K. by military means, (b) Nor
Pakistan has the capacity to secure a military
victory against India to recover the Kashmir
valley. It can bleed India a bit, till it is
allowed to, but it cannot win a war. (c) No
foreign power is any longer interested in
intervening in Kashmir.
If conciliation is
the aim of the leadership in the two countries,
road ahead is quite clear. They have to give and
take and also prepare their peoples for it within
the limited period at their disposal. One
solution to the problem could emerge along the
following lines: (a) Segregate Kashmir from the
rest of the areas that comprised the princely
state of Jammu and Kashmir during the British
regime. (b) Permit Kashmir genuine autonomy on
either side of the L.O.C. However, India and
Pakistan may retain responsibility for its
defence and exercise the inherent police power of
the state on their respective side of the line.
They may also handle the foreign affairs,
communications and some other subjects, as
mutually agreed to. The two segments of the state
may have common currency on the lines of the
European 'Euro' and may also have a legislative
body like the European Parliament. (c) The
borderline between the Kashmir valley and P.O.K.
may be made progressively softer, till it could
be allowed to vanish like the German wall for the
purposes of the Kashmiri's. (d) Territories of
Jammu and Ladakh may be integrated into the
Indian Union and Pakistan may similarly
administer the P.O.K. areas, ethnically not akin
to Kashmir. This is only one of the possibilities
that could be discussed. Given good will, many
more alternative packages could also emerge
during the talks.
If, however, the
two sides come to the unfortunate conclusion that
we are placed in a situation of some inherent
civilizational conflict and we just cannot
co-exist in peace, India would have to proceed on
different lines. The present blood bath in the
Valley and on the borders could just not be
acceptable to us.
The practicable
course in this case would be to integrate Jammu
region as the twenty-ninth state of the Indian
Union and the Ladakh area as a Union Territory
and defend the Kashmir valley with all the might
of the Indian State.
|
|
| |
|
|
