Shiban Khaibri
Any attempt to make a dead horse run even using the conventional method of whipping is both wasteful as well as futile. The developments in Ukrain’s Crimea are intriguing and could lead to avoidable conflicts and tensions. For some time, as we know, Ukraine is facing unrest and recently some naval bases in its Crimea area have been brought under the control of some pro- Russian forces and the situation has traveled beyond the confines of Ukraine in as much as the US administration is eager to fish in the troubled waters but for reasons of international peace and non- interference in other countries’ problems, it may not be that easy for President Obama to exert its hegemony in the troubled Crimea. Whether the forces which took Crimea were some pro- Russian or only Russian forces reportedly joined by some groups of Crimea who favour Russia, is not crystal clear as yet. However the “referendum” in Crimea is not legal and justified at all.
Russian proposal of secession, explicit or implicit, is an outdated proposal holding no water in the real perspective. There was a political thinking long ago that secession was analyzed in terms of nationalist, linguistic, or religious homogeneity. In former Yugoslavia, using referendums and self determination have all resulted in chaos, genocide and ethnic cleansing. The conclusion of such political solutions is all pain, sufferings, hate and economic miseries. Crimea falls in which territory, the answer is Ukraine and any one wanting to be Russian citizen, the right course would be to move to Russia and settle there rather than secede from Ukraine. Russia is not that interested to make the Crimean people Russians but is eager to take their land and annex it with the territory of Russia. It is an expansionist move which looks prima facie to be a keen interest in land and territory. Looking by these basic facts, no referendum, no self determination for any groups in Crimea can be justified. It was going to add to the miseries of those who harbor the idea of separation from the parent country. There are countries with groups speaking different languages, professing different faiths, pursuing varied traditions and customs, yet they live in harmony and brotherhood under the principles of equity, freedom and security. India is a unique example of such mutual co – existence of its people. Any body trying to draw analogies or citing examples from the developments in Crimea as a solution to any political problem would be illogical and absurd.
The international covenants and the laws too make it amply clear that no territory or part thereof can be annexed, albeit referendum, simply because of the fact that the people living there now want to secede from that country. If this is allowed and encouraged, then Spain, France, China, the US, Pakistan and host of countries would be involved in losing areas after areas, territories after territories and become hot beds of conflicts and unrest.
Whatever the developments in Ukrain’s Crimea region take place, those have no parallel with any political problem in any part of the Indian Union. We can have political aspirations, some problems, either genuine, created or sponsored by a belligerent neighbour , those can all be always solved either by the change of the elected government and replaced by some new government under the environs of the flourishing democracy of our country and under the constitutional framework or alternatively through dialogue and in no case, can any unrest or declaration of some fringe groups or sections anywhere using force or threat of terror to boost religious exclusiveness, be taken as a “moral booster” to legitimize secession or the so called “independence”. Mirwaiz Omar Farooq who has been known to stand among the moderate thinking group has again raked up the obsolete demand of referendum “drawing strength” from the developments in Crimea. In the heart of his hearts, he too knows as to how much can he be very serious and any hopeful of making his point travel tangibly across the country. However, the statements like these are only attempts to internationalize the so called Kashmir problem. This Crimea threat was going not in the least to be of any avail, he knowing it fully, the Mirwaiz is best advised to fight political problem, if any, through the mite of ballot and the current chance to join the electoral fray to make it to the Lok Sabha is best suited to bring in a perceptible political change in the state in the interests of the people. In the absence of making transformation from the rigid stand into the flexible one as suggested herein and continue with harping on the worn out, obsolete and stale demands would best be termed as a political gimmick. “We should be given our birth right to choose our future”, as per the Mirwaiz is ingeniously incongruent to the historical events and realities shown in 1947 at the time of accession , subsequently ratified by the constituent Assembly of the state and by adopting a constitution of our own in addition to the country’s constitution in November 1956. Repeated high turnout by the voters to elect the members of the State Assembly as well as the members of the Lok Sabha , especially the last three elections which one and all have “certified” to be free and fair, have put a heavy lid on the dilapidated pot of so called referendum or “birth right to choose our future”. Omar Farooq is quite distancing himself from the stark facts of the elections held in the state terming them as “farce”.
Mirwaiz’s further saying that the developments in Crimea would “help the Hurriyat leaders to project in a more structured way its cause before the international community ” is nothing excepting the proverbial whipping a dead horse as most of the Hurriyat leaders have been showered in abundant measure with the magnanimity of our democratic values and the firm belief to have one’s say anywhere in the country and also abroad even if such voice may be all against the interests of the country. Such a soft and magnanimous political freedom is seldom seen anywhere in any part of the world as it is in India vis -a vis the separatist leadership of Kashmir. Has not the central government granted visas and permission quite liberally to such leadership to visit foreign countries including Pakistan and to take part in the proceedings of other organizations like the OIC etc? Has not the Central government provided platforms in the capital and other places across the country to such leadership to articulate its view point liberally even though that could diagonally be all against the constitutional and historical propriety? Has not the central government built a fast developing and progressing state of Jammu and Kashmir like all other states, instead provided more resources and funds for a fast economic take – off? Has not our state progressed in every sphere even more than most of other states not to talk of an economic deprivation, backwardness, poverty and political unrest in the occupied parts of this state by Pakistan? Then which type of “moral booster” is the crisis of crimea going to provide to the Hurriyat? Citing of the example of Crimea is tantamount to equating horses and cows alike when in the state of Jammu and Kashmir the question of freedom and “birth right” have all been constitutionally and legally settled once and for all and no interference or the least intervention either by the UNO or by the US is envisaged or expected in any manner. It is expected that better logic prevails and writing on the wall is read and mainstream politics joined by the separatist leadership. At the same time, however, the central leadership needs to assert itself and assert firmly.
Follow our WhatsApp channel