Harsha Kakar
Post the Sunjuwan attack, Mehbooba Mufti asked the government of India to initiate talks with Pakistan. She even stated in the state assembly, ‘If Farooq Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti say talk to Pakistan, they are dubbed anti-nationals. There is no alternative except by holding talks’. She went on to add, ‘we have fought three wars, 1947, 1965 and 1971 and have won all of them, even the Kargil war, but our basic problem (Kashmir) has not been resolved’.
Her concerns may be genuine, but they are far from reality. The fact is that till militancy reigns in the state, development would be impacted. Further security forces would continue to dominate domestic policies. Historically too, it has always been India which has taken the first step forward for talks only to be rebuked or forced to retreat. Every government in Delhi has sought to initiate peace, with Pakistan, as soon as it assumes office, but has never been able to proceed forward. Thus, her statements may make good logic, but remains unrealistic.
The nearest opportunity that India had on resolving Kashmir was post 1971 operations, when it held over 93000 Pak prisoners. It missed this opportunity for reasons never clearly documented. Such an opportunity is unlikely to ever return.
For Pakistan, Kashmir is essential. Over the years it has created a hype within the nation and externally that unless it regains Kashmir, it cannot rest. Its continuous raising of it on international platforms is an indicator of this fact. Three wars have been fought, thousands of lives sacrificed on both sides, yet Kashmir remains an illusion in their minds, which they refuse to give up. They have also realized that a war would never give them victory, hence need to change tack.
They have thus resorted to adopting to the terrorism model as also funding separatists, hoping to create an internal uprising, which could pave the way for its amalgamation into their nation. India would never allow this to happen, irrespective of cost, hence Kashmir would remain unresolved. The only sufferers would be the locals, an aspect which few are willing to understand. With a Hindu dominated BJP government at the centre and hard line religious views in the valley, the distance is only increasing, which benefits Pakistan.
Hence, when Mufti spoke this week at Kund in Kulgam district asking youth to shun the path of violence she was very correct. Her statement, ‘If you pick up one gun, 1000 guns are ready to fight you back. I came to tell you that militancy will yield nothing.’ Unless the youth understand that violence would only beget violence and peace would enhance development, the state would continue to reel under the might of security forces.
Even if her suggestion for talks are to be considered, there are immense roadblocks. No nation would ever consider suggesting talks from a position of weakness. In the Indo-Pak case, until the militancy is under control and Pak army is kept subdued by heavy retaliation, it is India in a position of strength, unacceptable to the Pak army. If terrorist strikes are on the rise and India proposes for talks, then it is the other way around. This see saw state would never enable talks to proceed. It would as previously be scuttled before any tangible progress is ever made.
Further, for Pak, the current situation suits them the best. Militants, who are akin to cannon fodder, whose losses are easily acceptable to Pak are causing damage to Indian forces, they have no desire to engage in talks. Local Kashmiri’s participating in stone pelting and losing lives has again no impact on Pak. Thus, for them talks could impose restrictions on their current operations, hence they are unwilling.
India remains in a bind. It escalates employing soldiers, lives of everyone is precious. It also battles militants employing them. Each attack, each loss of life, hurts the nation. For Pak, it is the other way around. It refuses to accept even the bodies of its militants, families of whom would never know what happened to their kin. Kashmiris killed are only exploited by Pak diplomatically and internally to seek more cannon fodder. There has and would never be genuine concern. Protests against their handling of PoK and Gilgit Baltistan are proof of a Punjabi Pakistan dominating minorities and exploiting them.
In this context, it would be better and more prudent to initiate talks within Kashmir, seeking a solution, rather than with Pak. For this to happen all valley political parties need to put aside their differences and work together, within the gambit of the Indian constitution. They need to spread the message to the masses on the true intentions of Pak and the damage it has caused to the state. They need to convince the locals to rise against militancy if they desire to witness the growth of the region. It is only when the local population is made to understand, the way Mehbooba is attempting, would progress be made.
Farooq and Omar should seek to join hands with Mehbooba and work for the betterment of the valley, rather than seeking to divide it or ignite internal fire by blaming everyone, but themselves. No single party or force can change the character of the valley, it would have to be a combined action. With the Pak proxy separatists slowly being side lined, this is the moment.
The above may sound utopian, however unless sense prevails and the desire to rise above temporary political gains is engrained in the minds of local politicians, Kashmir would remain on the boil, with losses on all sides. The sad state is that in India, it is political gains first and the nation/ state and its people last. Can valley politicians take the lead and change it? If they desire to, interacting with the interlocutor is the first step.
(The author is a retired Major General of the Indian Army)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel