Rekha Chowdhary
Two recent articles in Daily Excelsior revolving around a common theme related to the demand of a separate Jammu State, have made very interesting interventions in the debates around the present and future of Jammu region and its relationship with Kashmir. On 13th November, Kashab Kumar wrote an opinion piece: ‘The Dogra Paradox: When Ancient Bonds face modern Divisions’ and on 14th November Ansh Choudhary wrote another opinion piece titled ‘Jammu State is a Chimera’. Though both the articles have made strong case against the idea of a separate State for Jammu, what is most appealing in both the articles is the way Jammu region has been defined and the way its relationship with Kashmir has been envisaged.
In sum, these two articles present an altogether new discourse about Jammu’s identity. It is a discourse that can be seen as an alternative to the one which has been generally invoked – the discourse which sees Jammu mainly in a conflictual relationship with Kashmir and which rather than referring to Jammu’s realities and its identity in a positive manner – refers to it in reaction to Kashmir. Kashmir, in this narrative remains the major reference point of Jammu’s political identity.
In contrast, what is offered in these two articles is a glimpse of Jammu as a Region that has its own distinct characters that should make any Jammuite proud of being a part of it. What is unique about the region is its complex plurality, its multilayered diversity, its rich history of co-existence of multiple cultural, ethnic and linguistic identities and its inclusive ethos. Beautifully Stated by Kashab, ‘the region’s strength has always lied in its diversity- a tapestry of cultures, religions and languages that have coexisted and enriched each other. This inclusivity is not just a matter of peaceful existence but of active cultural exchange and mutual influence’.
One can see that this is a very different perception about the region. Contradicting those who view the region in terms of its dominant religious and cultural identity; these two authors would prefer to see Jammu in all its complexity – its multilayered diversities not only in religious terms but also in cultural, linguistic and ethnic terms.
And in that perspective both perceive diversity as a positive rather than a negative value. Ethno-linguistic and religious diversity is reflected as a source of strength rather than the weakness of the region. Hence while Kashab emphasises the need to ensure ‘that diversity is seen as a strength rather than a source of division’ Choudhary notes that even though heterogeneity is seen ‘as a stumbling block in creation of Jammu’s identity’, there remains the appreciation that it is a ‘symbol of J&K’s syncretic culture’.
Incidentally, both the articles link this essential character of the region with the Dogra history. While Choudhary talks about a ‘grand State being created by Treaty of Amritsar’, Kashab, refers to establishment of the Dogra State in itself as a grand experiment in multicultural coexistence that shaped the very essence of Jammu and Kashmir’s identity. The multi-religious and multi-cultural ethos of the State, its inclusivity and unity, is attributed to the efforts of Dogra rulers. As Kashab notes,’for over a century, the Dogra rulers worked tirelessly to maintain and strengthen this unity, fostering cultural exchanges and economic ties between the regions. This period was the emergence of a distinct Jammu and Kashmir identity that transcended regional and religious boundaries. The inclusive nature of this identity is evident in the region’s art, architecture, cuisine and social practices’
What is peculiar about this narrative of Jammu’s regional identity is the holistic treatment of Jammu as a region which has Dogra culture at its core but which also is accommodative of other ethnic, cultural and linguistic identities. In both the articles, there is a clear emphasis on taking along the peripheral areas beyond the Jammu plains and bringing them to the centre of the region’s narrative. Ansh Choudhary makes it very clear by stating how the ‘Dogri speaking population forming a majority in 5 districts is being held into embrace’ by what he calls Western Pahari Districts of Doda, Kishtwar, Ramban and Eastern Pahari Districts of Rajouri and Poonch’.
This holistic perspective of Jammu region therefore takes into consideration the region as a whole and not merely the ‘centre’ or the dominant part of the region. A region that is not defined from narrow or exclusive perspective but from an inclusive perspective. A perspective that is as much ingrained in Jammu’s Hindu/ Dogra identity as in the non-Dogra communities like Gujjars and Paharis and other minorities. A perspective that tends to speak as much of the people of Jammu plains as of the people of borders; as much of the mainland as of the peripheries.
It is in the context of the holistic understanding of Jammu as a region that a new perception about Jammu’s relationship with Kashmir is offered. Since Jammu’s identity politics is no more confined to its reactive nature (mostly existing in reaction to Kashmiri identity politics); it assumes a form that is positive and assertive in itself. Being unique and enriched by its diversity – it becomes an identity to reckon with.
With this unique regional identity of Jammu in mind, both the authors emphasise on a cohesive rather than binary inter-regional relations. They talk of partnership between the two regions, the cultural confluence that has evolved historically and their economic interdependence. And for finding the solutions to regional problems, they talk about federal possibilities, fair regional representation, fair share of resources, decentralisation processes, creating systems with stake of all communities in the unified development of J&K. While Choudhary talks about the ‘need to seriously engage in multilevel stakeholder dialogue across various domain’ of J&K, Kashab suggests, ‘promoting a nuanced understanding of region’s shared history, emphasising the legacy of unity and cultural synthesis that has defined Jammu and Kashmir’ .
Referring to Jammu’s invisibility in the grand narrative of Jammu and Kashmir, both feel the need to bring this region to the Centre, but in a different way. ‘The story of Jammu needs to be told’ Choudhary argues, but it needs to be told not in a negative or communal way, but in a positive way where Jammu is an equal partner to Kashmir. And when told in that perspective – it would be a story told not from the perspective of Jammu’s weakness but from the perspective of its strength.
Reinventing the famous Vajpayee slogan of ‘Kashmiriyat, Jamhoriyat and Insaniyat’, Chowdhary offers a new slogan for this inclusive vision of Jammu and Kashmir – the slogan of Kashmir-iyat, Jammu-riyat and Jamhooriyat.
P.S. For anyone who has some curiosity or anxiety about Jammu’s regional identity – reading of these two articles is a ‘must do’ thing. Personally speaking, these articles have so motivated and provoked me that I would like to continue the debate started by them in a series of articles. A number of questions have been raised – for instance about the lack of cohesive leadership in Jammu region; about the the question of parity between Kashmir and Jammu regions; about the real meaning of regional discrimination and neglect and the right response to deal with it. It would be imperative to deal with these questions.
(Feedback is welcome at rekchowdhary@gmail.com)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
