KASHMIR SITUATION

JD: Election Manifesto For J&K Assembly Election, 1996

The Janata Dal approaches the general elections to the State Assembly of J&K with the confidence that the people will assert their democratic mandate to freely elect their representatives without fear.

During the last decade of the rise of disturbed conditions in the State, economic and social development has grievously suffered.

The human cost, of the rise of militancy have been grave indeed. The culture of the gun, adopted by the extremists, and in several cases fully supported by Pakistan, have resulted in the killing of thousands of persons. The militant's deliberate strategy to hit and run so as to provoke the Security Forces to pursue them in towns, villages and valleys and in the hilly terrain led to human right's violations.

The lapses of the Security Forces resulting in avoidable harassment of innocent persons also created bitterness.

The misguided youth who joined the militants either under the frenzied propaganda of Pakistan or the fundamentalists at home committed crimes against the State and particularly against the innocent people in J&K Some of them have realized that they had been misled and have resiled from militancy. It is the duty of the Union Government and moreover the new State Government to be formed after the General Elections that more and more give up that destructive path and join the mainstream.

The Janata Dal assures all such persons that an enlightened policy free from rancour shall be pursue in a spirit of forgiveness and liberality.

Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda is the first Prime Minister in seven years to visit J&K and make contacts with the people. He has made announcements for the welfare of the people, economic progress of the State and generation of massive employment.

The Government is committed to give maximum autonomy to the State. Once an elected Government is in place, consultations will be held with them to arrive at a consensus. While doing this, the aspirations of all regions in the State, namely, Ladakh, Kashmir Valley and Jammu shall be taken into account.

Announcements by the Prime Minister have certainly expressed the sincerity and purposefulness of the United Front of which Janata Dul is a part. But, there are several socio-economic issues which remain and which will be dealt with by the new State Government. The Janata Dal would strive to raise these issues and if it comes to power, it promises to resolve them.

Regional and Local Issues

i) Dogri language shall be included in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution.

ii)Separate regional committees for the three regions of Srinagar Valley, Jammu and Ladakh will be

established.

iii) Elections to all local bodies and Panchayati Raj Institutions shall be hold expeditiously after adopting the requisite legislation on the line of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments.

Social Justice

Recommendations of the Mandal Commission for Socially and Educationally Backward Castes shall be implemented in letter and spirit and for this purpose the Malik Commission shall be urged to finalize the list of S/ EBC's on the guidelines of the Mandal Commission.

Janata Dal would appeal to all people in the State to forgive and forget the traumas of the past. There have been terrible mistakes which have played havoc with the peace, prosperity, well-being and unity of the people and the State. Attempts have been made to separate J&K from the rest of India, to separate the Jammu region from the rest of the State and to divide the people on communal lines. All such attempts have however failed miserably. But they have fouled the social relationships of fraternity and amity.

Now, when a new regime committed to federalism and genuine autonomy whether political, administrative or fiscal to the States and to upholding democratic processes has taken over in New Delhi, the people of our state need have no fear or apprehension that these mistakes would recur. A democratic era of a responsive and responsible governance, social welfare and economic progress is dawning. It is for us to consolidate it, preserve it and prolong it. Only a united people who forgot the past and replace mistrust by trust and suspicion by confidence will be able to do it.

Karan Singh On Kashmir Problem

For seven years the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir, aided and abetted from across the border, has caused untold destruction of Irfe and property, trade and tourism. For any long-range, creative solution we have to come to terms with certain realities and avoid miscalculations made in the past.

The first major mistake is to treat the entire state as a single unit instead of realizing that it consists of five distinct ethnic, geographical, linguistic and cultural units with differing perceptions and aspirations, two of which have been under Pakistani control for almost half a century.

The second misconception is the oft-repeated assertion that Jammu & Kashmir is a 'purely internal affair' in which Pakistan is not concerned. In fact, it is vis- a-vis Pakistan that the whole problem has developed. Our complaint to the United Nations in 1948 over aggression in Jammu & Kashmir was against Pakistan, and it was with Pakistan that we signed the cease-fire agreement in 1949, the Tashkent Agreement in 1965 and the Simla Agreement in 1971, all of which directly mention Jammu & Kashmir. Two of the five regions of the state remain under Pakistan's control; the moment we say that Pakistan is not involved, it virtually means that we are writing off these areas.

The third major miscalculation in New Delhi has been that it can solve the problems of Jammu & Kashmir without consulting the people of that state.

Every effort must be made by the new government to break the vicious cycle of insurgency and counter- insurgency that has disfigured the state.

A dialogue with as broad a spectrum of people from the state as possible, careful formulation and structuring of "maximum autonomy"; a massive programme of rehabilitation and rebuilding the shattered economy... will all have to be given the highest priority at all levels if the wounds of the past seven years are to even begin a process of healing.

In the broader context of SAARC and regional cooperation in a rapidly emerging global society, despite all odds, a detente with Pakistan will at some point be absolutely necessary.

Both countries figure close to the bottom in the human development index, but the tremendous resources of over a billion people are engaged in an endless and ultimately sterile posture of permanent confrontation. If the tension continues... the possibility of yet another armed conflict, this time with vastly upgraded weapons on both sides, could spell the end of whatever slender hopes there are of breaking the poverty barrier, and send The subcontinent spinning into a negative vortex of death and destruction.

We we have the courage, wisdom and compassion ta envisage Jammu & Kashmir as a symbol of rapprochement rather than confrontation? Will Pakistan get over its negative obsession with the Valley which has over half a century, cost it so dearly? And will the people of the Valley realize that an unwise recourse to militancy has brought nothing but death and disaster to a whole generation? If these questions are answered in the affirmative, there is hope. If not, we seem doomed to a escalation of conflict.

(Source: The India Today, 31 August, 1996)

CPI(M): H.S. Surjeet's Statement,

 27 August, 1996

It a time when the whole world is looking toward the outcome of the elections in Jammu and Kashmir. Confusion is being created by some of the statements by the government's spokesmen. Unfortunately, some statements have come from the home minister himself.

In his interview to the BBC, he is supposed to have stated that surveys indicated that the Hindu-majority Jammu and the Buddhist-dominated Ladakh did not wish to be part of the present state of Jammu and Kashmir and that religious separatism was strong only in the Kashmir valley. He is also supposed to have said that the government is already considering a Union Territory status for Ladakh. With regard to the future status of Jammu, he has said that the nature of autonomy for the valley is also being discussed.

These comments go fundamentally against the Common Minimum Programme of the United Front. The CMP assures maximum autonomy to the people a Kashmir and envisages a proper status for the people o both Ladakh and Jammu. But in no case has it agreed to the division of the state into three units. Such a proposal will have serious implications nationally and internationally and is disruptive of national unity to which the United Front is wedded.

This has sent wrong signals to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Restraint has to be exercised while advancing new proposals with regard to Jammu & Kashmir which already has been complicated by the maneuvers of foreign powers, particularly by the proxy war by Pakistan. It is a national question. Its solution lies in winning over the people of Kashmir, who unfortunately got alienated for some. The elections in Jammu and Kashmir... alone will consolidate the desire of the people for peace.

Arun C. Bose on Autonomy for J&K, Letter to The Times of India, 9 Sept., 1996

Ramesh Khazanchi ignores many indisputable historical facts and treats Kashmiris as children whose future and welfare are to be determined by others. No doubt J&K is now an integral part of India but it is a part with a difference. The maharaja, under duress, acceded to India only for three subjects: defense, communication and foreign affairs. This is the autonomy which is guaranteed by our agreements and Constitution, and is highly valued by the Kashmiris. After all, virtually no one in J&K agitated for accession to India. They sought accession and assistance only when their autonomy and identity were threatened by Pakistani raiders. They sacrificed their autonomy on three subjects only to save the rest of it. That is why every extension of central authority is resented by Kashmiris (as different from a majority of Jammuites and Ladakhis) as robbery and immoral intrusion into their heritage.

True, much of the 'dilution' of the state's autonomy took place with the approval of the elected legislature, apart from what happened in 1985 during President's rule. But were not those legislators 'elected' when the real leaders of the Valley were either behind bars or externed from the state? Every election in this state, till date, was notoriously rigged, with the sole exception of the one in 1977. And why were those rigged? Because Kashmiris would never have accepted the policies of closer integration with India we wanted to (be) pursued. As Pandit Pran Nath Bazaz wrote in his Struggle for Freedom in Kashmir the news of the Sheikh's dismissal and arrest (he was never tried) "was received by the people with hostile demonstrations on an unprecedented scale". It severed the umbilical cord that had connected Srinagar with Delhi.

Thereafter, the decisions and actions of his successors appeared illegitimate in the eyes of Kashmiris Even the former Congress chief minister of J&K, Syed Mir Qasim admits in his 'My Life and Times": "Rice was subsidized. The purpose was to demonstrate the benefits of closer ties with India. The people were happy with our work, but would not forgive us for the plight of the Sheikh".

To most Kashmiris, his successors in office were no better than puppets propped up by Indian bayonets and their actions no different from those of Barbak Karmal in Afghanistan. So, the more they brought J&K administratively closer to India, the more was widened the psychological distance between Srinagar and Delhi.

Much is made of the fact that when given the opportunity after 1975 Sheikh Abdullah did not take any positive step against the extension of central authority over J&K that had occurred since his ouster in 1953, But let us not forget that he had come back to power not on the crest of a popular movement but through a bargain. and what he did and did not in the seven years that followed cost him... his earlier unimaginable popularity. He was no longer reflecting the aspirations of the younger generation of Kashmir, just as Sir Surendra Nath Banerjee, Minister of Bengal after 1920, was un unrecognizable reflection of the great "Surrender Not" of 1905-06. It was not the Tilak of the Home Rule League but of 1908 who reflected the militant mood of the nation. Instead of enquiring what the Sheikh secured for Kashmiris, one should see what they are now asking for.

It is said that the extension of Indian laws, posting of Indian officers and massive subsidies, have done. immense good to the Kashmiris. So did British rule in India, French rule in Algeria and Russian rule in Central Asin. But a time came when all of us wanted to decide and to do what is good for us. The great Tilak said, "Swaraj is my birth right, and I shall have it". In early 1942, Mahatma Gandhi told the British, "For heaven's sake, leave us to God and to anarchy". These are the two statements which today are dearest to all Kashmiris, but few dare to express them in the face of the unprecedented use of security forces and of the so-called renegades held by them on a leash.

Incidents/Killings in Terrorist Violence, 1988 to March, 1996

(Source: MHA Annual Report, 1995-96)