Inter-regional
aspects of Kashmir
By M. Y.
Tarigami
The culturally
diverse regions, speaking
different languages, professing
different faiths and practicing
different customs, were brought
together into what became known
as the state of Jammu and
Kashmir. This, no doubt, suited
the administrative and colonial
interests of the British and
their local hangers on. In the
case of Kashmir, the British
imperialism added a shameful
chapter in the world history by
receiving cash payment in lieu of
the destinies of its living men
and women, through the sale deed
of Amritsar, for a sum of 75 lac
rupees. The infamous deed paved
the way for a century-long
dynastic and autocratic rule over
the toiling people of the state,
who were crushed under an unjust
social and economic order. Though
the people watched these
developments helplessly, a silent
revolt was brewing up in their
hearts.
Till the abolition
of the dynastic rule, which
oppressed the people of all the
regions equally, there was a
common goal viz., to get rid of
the autocratic rule. But with the
dawn of independence, the goal
post changed. Not only the
regions but also the sub-regions,
minority and linguistic groups
and other sections became more
and more self-conscious of their
cultural, economic and social
rights and this was expected in a
democratic setup. In this
context, it needs to be noted
that the requirements of distinct
cultures, ethnicities, religions,
languages and customs cannot be
uniform. Each region has its own
peculiar needs. Unfortunately,
neither the state constitution
nor the existing system of
governance recognizes this
reality. As a result, the
decisions are imposed from the
above, without taking into
account the special requirements
of each particular region. This,
often, results into grievances,
real or imagined, against the
state or one or the other region,
which ends in an uncalled for
regional confrontation. Such a
situation generally assumes
communal proportions, on which
the sectarian forces thrive,
leading to the weakening of
democratic movement. The slogans
of bifurcation and trifurcation
of the state are its dangerous
manifestations. In such a
situation, even if some solution
of Kashmir emerges, it would be
of no avail and the peace would
elude the state, unless the
inter-regional aspects of the
issue are tackled to the
satisfaction of all the regions.
Whatever the solution, it cannot
work in a situation where
regional peace and harmony is not
ensured.
Separation of
regions is no solution at all.
Those who talk of separation are,
in fact, avoiding the real issue,
which is: equitable treatment of
and equal opportunities for each
region to grow according to its
own genius. The real issue cannot
evaporate, as if by the magic
wand of separating the regions.
In this context, the questions
that arise are: the separation
from whom? From the people
themselves? Have we run short of
creative thinking for the
accommodation of all? Is there no
way left for living together?
Really, the process of divisions
and sub-divisions will lead to
infinite divisions and then to
nowhere. Differences are bound to
arise even in what may be termed
as homogenous societies. Have we
then to divide mohallas and
streets as well? We have isolated
pockets, the minority and
linguistic groups, the neglected
areas, which require special
treatment. Where will all these
go if we seek uniformity and
apply the only mantra of
separatism? At the time of the
Partition of India, the argument
adduced in favour of the division
was that since the Hindus and
Muslims cannot live together in
one country, the only way to put
an end to communalism was to
carve out a separate nation.
Having done this, what do we see
today? The communalism became
permanent and the hatreds and
hostilities increased. Even after
separation, the two nations never
remained at peace with each
other. Bitter wars were fought
and a race for armaments,
including the nuclear ones, that
too at the cost of the welfare of
millions, ensued between the two
separated countries.
Undoubtedly, in this
world of globalization, dominated
by imperialist powers, no
country, state or region can
remain unaffected. We need to
join a parallel and ongoing
movement of increasing
co-existence and cooperation,
based on humane considerations
and the principle of "live
and let others live". In
such a world, the diversities do
not work as disabilities but
bring credit and strength to the
social fabric. The alarming
situation in the entire South
Asian Region, today, poses an
immense challenge to its
democratic masses. In such
circumstances, Kashmir has to
become a bridge of understanding
and friendship between India and
Pakistan instead of a source of
confrontation as at present. This
can prove to be a significant
factor in assuring an era peace
and harmony in the region. For
that the unity of the State is
the condition precedent.
Unity in
Diversity
An irreversible
movement for a genuine sharing of
power and self-governance is the
only means to put together the
state of Jammu and Kashmir,
considered to be a variant of
sub-continental diversities, with
its multi-religious,
multi-lingual and multi-cultural
polity. This requires a new
mindset and a new culture of
governance. The state, as a
political entity, owes its growth
to various historical and
political factors. Undoubtedly,
its historical unity, integrity
or cohesion cannot be negotiated
or compromised, except at the
cost of its social and political
stability. At the same time the
existence of diverse ethnicities
in different regions of the
state, which constitutes its
strength, rather than weakness,
need to be recognized. It means
carving out a political structure
that recognizes the need to
preserve the unity of the state,
while fulfilling aspirations of
its diverse regions.
The twin commitment
to the unity of the state and to
its diverse aspirations is not a
mere pious wish or a fashionable
cliché but a social, political
and historical necessity,
carrying with it a long unifying
process, which has gone into the
welding together of the distinct
and diverse regions and the
ultimate formation of the state
of Jammu and Kashmir, along with
the bitter experiences of its
people, in the aftermath of the
end of dynastic rule, extending
over a period of six decades,
now. In this scenario, any break
in the unity of the state will
have disastrous consequences in
the whole South Asian region,
apart from causing a permanent
disruption in the social fabric
of the state itself. At the same
time the unity of the state will
remain a mere pipe dream in
absence of the recognition and
fulfillment of the aspirations of
its diverse regions.
Such a commitment
must necessarily lead to the
evolving of a composite and
harmonious personality of the
state. This means a federal
structure, not only at the state
level but in each region itself.
The objective has to be the
preservation of unity and
integrity of the state, while
recognizing the fact that such a
unity can thrive in an
atmosphere, in which each region
is allowed to grow according to
its own peculiarities. Thus, the
preservation of state's unity and
fulfillment of the diverse urges
of its regions are complimentary
to each other. Such a course
implies better involvement and
participation of people in
different regions for a balanced
political, economic, educational,
social and cultural development
and evolving of instrumentalities
like local organs of power, at
all levels, from the state to the
regions, the district, the block
and the village panchayat on a
democratic basis. Admittedly,
none of these objectives are
realizable under the present
unitary nature of the
constitution of the state, or by
the centralization of power and
administration.
Line of Control
But the matter does
not stop at this. In dealing with
various aspects of Kashmir, even
more novel forms and procedures
will have to be devised for the
special case of Kashmir, which is
itself divided between the two
nation states and which is, on
both sides of the divide, far
from being homogenous. The main
guiding point here should be that
we try to develop flexible ideas
of sovereignty to meet the
requirements of the state.
A virtual iron
curtain exists between the
people, who only a few decades
ago, lived together and shared a
common social life. This has been
generating a painful sense of
deprivation of the part of their
homeland among the ordinary
people. The artificial dividing
line has been proving an
impediment to the people-to
people inter-action, without
which there could be no forward
movement towards reconciliation.
It needs to be noted that the
deep rooted sentiments of
re-unification of the two
Kashmirs gets intensified, as
unnecessary restrictions are
placed upon the people to travel
across the line. As an
appropriate response to this,
there is an urgent need to create
a soft border/LoC and recognize
the importance of a pan-kashmiri
regional identity, irrespective
of Indian or Pakistani
administrations. This line (LOC)
has to be as soft as to remove
the impression among the people,
on both sides, that an
unnecessary barrier stands in
their movement, trade, and
commerce, cultural and other
exchanges. This needs to be done
in a manner that reconciles
Indian and Pakistani concerns
over Kashmir. This envisages
virtually open borders (as is the
case in a number of countries),
allowing free movement of people,
goods and services between the
two parts of Kashmir. This step
may go towards rendering the LOC
as irrelevant, thus removing a
mental barrier to the onward
movement towards reconciliation.
What the two countries can
presently do, is to open as many
travel and contact points as
possible on the dividing line
till the people from both sides
forget that there ever was some
barrier to their mutual
inter-action and that may open a
window to the meeting of the
hearts and minds of a divided
nationality, leading to a mental
revival of an old historic
Kashmir. This, of course, raises
serious questions of control and
security, which need to be worked
out properly.
State-region
division of powers
An arrangement needs
to be devised between the state
and the regions, so that latter
could exercise powers over
subjects of concern to the people
of the region, exclusively. In
concrete terms, it means setting
up of legislatures and elected
regional governments for each
region. The regional Govt. may be
elected in the same manner in
which the state government is
elected. The legislative,
executive and taxation powers of
the regions shall be limited to
the subjects allocated to the
regions. For this purpose the
incorporation of two Lists, known
as the State List (or the List I)
and the Regional List (or the
List II) in the constitution of
the state shall become necessary.
The subjects enumerated in the
two lists shall be based on the
respective functions of the two,
as laid down under a mutually
agreed formula between the state
and the regions, on well-defined
criteria, the basic criteria
being that all subjects that need
uniform policy for the whole
state can be handled more
efficiently at the state level,
involving expenditure beyond the
financial capacity of the
regions, its benefits transcend
regional boundaries and deal with
inter-regional problems allocated
to the state. Likewise, the
regional list may include
subjects of inter-district
importance and those as are
within the financial reach of the
regions. The list may also
include subjects delegated to
autonomous regions in certain
countries.
The State
Legislative Assembly, the
judicial system, the state cadre
of services shall remain intact.
They shall continue to deal with
all the subjects except those
transferred to and incorporated
in the Regional List. An elected
Head of the State, should replace
the present system which has,
often impeded the unifying
process in the state. The state
cabinet will continue to
function, except that instead of
the Chief Minister there will be
a Wazir-i-Azam, as the head of
the state cabinet. The changed
nomenclature may help in the
process of recognition of
Kashmiri sensitivities. At this
stage, only a regional list may
be drawn, with residuary powers
remaining with the state. To
provide for some flexibility, a
provision may be incorporated in
the state constitution, which
permits, with the consent of the
regional legislatures, transfer
of subjects from one list to the
other. Again, for the interim
period, state constitution may
incorporate a provision
empowering the State government
to recommend to the Head of the
State to take over the functions
of the regional government, if it
cannot be carried on in
accordance with the provisions of
the state constitution, after
providing enough safeguards
against misuse of power.
Just as the
empowerment of the regions is
necessary for the state's unity,
the districts, as the primary
units of development, will have
to be made autonomous, to
strengthen the unity of the
regions and in the similar manner
the power needs to be devolved to
the block and the village level.
In this context, it may be
necessary to provide for direct
elections to most of the
panchayati raj institutions,
while as of now in the J&K
law, not a single member of the
District Board is directly
elected. Even the Chairman of the
Board is nominated by the
government. This is clearly the
negation of democratic principles
and deprives the districts of the
status and power that are
necessary to make them an
effective link in the chain of
empowerment of the regions. The
least that can be done
immediately is to rectify this
position and take appropriate
constitutional measures. In this
context, the Leh and Kargil
pattern of district autonomy
provides us an example which
needs to be considered for
application to all the districts
of the state. It is because, this
pattern has aroused similar urges
and expectations in the other
districts of the state as well.
It will also be in the interests
of uniformity in the state,
besides the fact that this
pattern does not exceed the
powers and functions of the
district level authority.
In the J&K
Legislative Council, the regions
of Kashmir and Jammu have equal
representation presently, except
that two seats from Kashmir are
reserved for Ladakh, which
manifestly is unfair to Kashmir.
It would be in the interests of
justice if regional legislatures
of Kashmir and Jammu can elect an
equal number of seats to the
council, and Ladakh being given
appropriate number of seats.
Besides this, there is a strong
case for granting divisional
status to Ladakh
In order to effect
the changes suggested above, it
may be necessary to bring about
appropriate changes in the
constitution of J&K, as it
stands presently. Since the
changes suggested are of
far-reaching consequences and not
merely of an ordinary amendatory
nature, a fresh constituent
assembly for J&K may have to
be constituted for bringing about
the above stated changes. The
same may be applied in case of
the other part of J&K state,
with an agreement with the
government of Pakistan.
Evidently, in such a
political framework, the state
would be viewed as the focal
point at which the various
regional and sub-regional
identities converge rather than
as a source from which power is
imposed upon them. Such a
devolutionary measure needs to be
worked out in a spirit of
partnership between the state,
the regions and the sub-regions,
so that all the units remain part
of the state, willingly and with
the sense of genuine belonging.
The clear division of powers,
laid out on well-defined,
mutually agreed and equitable
principles of harmonizing
state-region relations will
result in a more inclusive
federal structure of the state
rather than the one that
excludes, divides or destabilizes
its constituent elements. The
conception has to be of
decentralization and democracy,
which promotes greater equity,
sense of partnership and the goal
of social justice.
|
