Hey Ram: Let's give away Kashmir

Ramananda Sengupta

Give away Kashmir. Give it the azadi that the people are demanding. Because our democracy, God bless it, does not allow us to ‘trample over’ the wishes of the people. And while we are at it, perhaps we should ‘give away’ parts of the northeast as well. Because people there too are chafing over ‘Indian rule.’ In other words, instead of summarily trying and executing the people who blatantly abuse, denigrate and desecrate our nation, who openly raise anti-national slogans on our soil, we should actually bow before their demands. That has been the long-standing demand of our friendly neighbour, Pakistan. But all of a sudden, sections of the Indian mainstream media -- and people like Arundhati Roy -- are echoing these views. ‘What if he (Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a separatist ‘leader’) and his followers were to adopt the strategies of non-cooperation and satyagraha, which were used (by Gandhi) to gain independence?’ asks Jug Suraiya in an article titled ‘India Minus K-word’, in the Times of India dated August 20, 2008. ‘Could the Indian state use physical force against such a peaceful mass movement — if in fact it did arise, as some say it now has — and still retain its moral idea of itself?’ By the same author: Why am I proud of India? | A troubled Pakistan bodes ill for India | Youngistan needs You “If you believe in democracy, then giving Kashmiris the right to self-determination is the correct thing to do. And even if you don’t, surely we will be better off being rid of this constant, painful strain on our resources, our lives, and our honour as a nation?” argues Vir Sanghvi in the Hindustan Times. (Think the unthinkable, August 16) “India needs azadi from Kashmir as much as Kashmir needs azadi from India,” pontificates Ms Roy, the writer turned whatever. But if I was scared when I read all this, I was downright terrified when a reasonably reliable contact in one of our intelligence agencies hinted that this was actually a “trial balloon” being floated at the behest of the UPA government, to gauge the people’s reaction to such a proposal.

It’s Jammu vs Kashmir --- finally

Arvind Lavakare

Arvind Lavakare may be 71, but the fire in his belly burns stronger than in many people half his age. The economics post-graduate worked with the Reserve Bank of India and several private and public sector companies before retiring in 1997. His first love, however, remains sports. An accredited cricket umpire in Mumbai, he has reported and commented on cricket matches for newspapers, Doordarshan and AIR. Lavakare has also been regularly writing on politics since 1997, and published a monograph, The Truth About Article 370, in 2005. When several of our mainline English dailies recently splashed what they thought was the novel headline, “Jammu vs Kashmir”, on account of the unprecedented angst and anger in the Jammu region of J & K state over the denial of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board, I was amused. Jammu shutdown extended till Aug 31 I was amused because as many as seven years and 11 months ago a major web portal had posted an article of mine bearing the headline “It could finally be Jammu vs Kashmir”. My forecast then was not based on astrology or prescience but on a study of the past agonies of Jammu that had run over into the present. And study is something that current bred of “Breaking News” journalists hardly do, if at all. UN monitoring Kashmir situation It did not require meticulous research, but just some serious reading, to know that Jammu’s troubles had begun soon after the monarch of J & K, Maharaja Hari Singh, from the Dogra community of Jammu, chose to sign his princely state’s accession to India, rather than to Pakistan, in October 1947 under the British Parliament’s Indian Independence Act, 1947. The troubles emanated from Sheikh Abdullah, the towering National Conference leader from the predominantly Muslim populated Kashmir Valley, who, for reasons as yet unclear, was the pet of Jawaharlal Nehru, our first Prime Minster among several Congress ones who believed that the Hindu community was a danger to free India. It was just a matter of time therefore that Nehru coerced Maharaja Hari Singh to hand over the reins of the J&K state to the interim government of Sheikh Abdullah and his National Conference Party --- the first time that Muslims, not Hindus, became the rulers in J&K.

No question of peace formula: SAYSS

Talks will resume today between the Jammu and Kashmir Governor's mediator and the group spearheading the agitation over the Amarnath land row amidst reports that a peace formula was in the making.

S S Bloeria will hold talks with the Shri Amarnath Yatra Sangarsh Samiti (SAYSS) here on the issue. The talks were deferred over the last two days because Bloeria was unwell.

Amidst reports of peace formula in the offing, the group spokesman said there was no such proposal and the Government had to concede to the main demand of restoring the land to the Shrine Board for yatra use.

"Where arises the question of a peace formula or compromise formula when the fourth round of talks between Governor's panel and the samiti's committee has not taken place so far?

"During the first three rounds of talk on August 23, we have already given written demands to the Governor's panel headed by his advisor S S Bloeria," SAYSS spokesperson Narinder Singh said here.

"The fourth round of talks was delayed twice and is now scheduled for today and we are waiting for it to be held," he said, adding "the Government has to respond to our demands and then the Samiti will decide on it".

Referring to the peace formula, the Samiti's spokesperson said such repots were deliberately being "planted" in the electronic media to create confusion among the people in Jammu and "please separatists and other leaders of Kashmir."

He also alleged that People's Democratic Party (PDP) patron and former chief minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed was also placing hurdles in resolving the issue. (PTI)

Situation in J&K ‘far less serious’ than projected: Narayanan

Even as curfew and protests continue in Jammu and Kashmir following the Amarnath land row, the Centre feels the situation in the state is "far less serious" than "portrayed" and normalcy should return within "a week to 10 days".

National Security Adviser M K Narayanan refused to agree that the situation in Kashmir is similar to 1990 as is being suggested by various sections.

"I think the (situation is) far less serious than what is being portrayed but at the same time certainly something that we are very unhappy about," he said on Karan Thapar’s ‘Devil’s Advocate’ programme on CNN-IBN.

"I mean people have started comparing it with the 1990s and what not. Certainly the situation is nowhere around that," Narayanan said.

His comments came even as curfew continued to be imposed in Kashmir for the seventh day after a series of protests spearheaded by separatist leaders.

The National Security Adviser, however, conceded that the recent developments had eroded the signs of improvement in situation in the state.

"What is causing us concern is that four years of improvement in the situation, (we) believed that we have reduced levels of alienation, (there were) substantial signs of normalcy in the state. People had forgotten about issues," he said.

"No major concern other than day-to-day problems of living, better electricity, internet connection etc. Suddenly (these) seem to have been sort of pushed into the background and mobs have come out onto the street," he noted.

Narayanan said blockade of the Jammu-Srinagar National Highway produced certain "concerns" among people in the Valley but there are visible signs of improvement in the situation and normalcy should return in the State within a week to 10 days.

On the upcoming holy month of Ramazan, he said the Government will have to do "relaxation of various kinds and various purposes so normalcy should be round the corner."

"We are hopeful that this could be achieved in the next one week to 10 days," he said.

The National Security Adviser said the Government was trying to pacify the agitators in Jammu so that they don’t block the highway.

"In the cold comfort I would say the fact of the matter is that the concern about the blockade could have brought so many people out onto the street is a matter of concern for us.

"That is why we are placing so much emphasis on reducing the agitation in the Jammu region because as long as that agitation persists, the danger of the likelihood of the crowd coming onto the National Highway (will remain)", he said.

Asked whether the Government agrees that there was a blockade of the highway considering that there have been differing versions, he said "For a day and a half, there were some discrepancies."

He said the truck traffic had dropped. "If there was let us say 100 trucks going, it came down to 15 to 20 for a day and a half and today it is back to about 85 to 90."

Commenting on the Hurriyat Conference’s claim of being the representative of people of the state, Narayanan said the amalgam was not the "principal voice" in the Valley.

Asked whether a mood for secession is brewing in the state, the National Security Adviser disagreed.

He said reference to the Amarnath land issue as "transfer" of land, which triggered the agitation, was wrong and should have been avoided.

"I think what really—there was an agitation over the issue of the what was wrongly referred to as handing over of land or diversion of land when actually (it was not), it was not necessary, it was an uncalled for...Mistake."

Narayanan also insisted that police was not involved in killing of the Hurriyat leader Sheikh Abdul Aziz.

He claimed that there was "concern" among the Hurriyat after the killing of the leader as they also probably knew police was not behind it.

He said Aziz was shot in the back while police was in the front during the Hurriyat-led "march to Muzaffarabad’.

"This is a concern even among the Hurriyat and others saying that who is now amongst us who is trying to eliminate some of us," he said.

Asked specifically whether Hurriyat knows that police did not kill him, he said "yeah, they will never admit it I suppose, but the fact of the matter is that it was certainly not the police. He was shot in the back."

Asked who could be behind the killing of the Hurriyat leader, he refused to answer, saying "You will know at the right time, I presume and assure, of who it is or which group is responsible."

When asked whether he was pointing fingers at Pakistan in connection with Aziz’s killing, Narayanan said the government does not have any facts about it.

"No, we have no fact at the moment about A or B or C. What we are clear at this moment is that it was not the police...There are lot of things, circumstances... The fact of the matter is that he was not a martyr to the cause that is being made out to be."

He said had the police been able to do a postmortem of the body, then facts could have been much "clearer".

"They took the body away before there was a chance for postmortem. Then the fact would have been much clearer," Narayanan said.

Justifying the government’s crackdown in Kashmir, he said initially the government allowed movement of the protesters but when the situation deteriorated, it had to resort to certain restrictions.

"There was a period Muzzafarabad Chalo, then there was a the sort of one or two other bandhs relating to the funeral processions. First we allowed a lot of movement across. There was no effort by the administration to interfere with that ..And a new issue comes up all the time.

"When the Lal Chowk Chalo came up and the feeling was that now these people are moving from what could be concerns worries and problem into really a problem of trying to build up other...Region thats when the crackdown took place." (PTI)