KASHMIR SITUATION

India Today: A Plea for a New Initiative

The announcement of elections to the state Assembly has set in motion dynamics that could help revive the democratic process in the state.

Any government that is seriously set on solving the problem of Kashmir's status within the Indian Union must first deal with the issue of J&K's promised autonomy within the Union. Despite securing its accession on the promise of maximum freedom from Central authority permitted to any state under the Constitution, the Centre has manipulated and controlled Kashmir ruthlessly. J&K, after all, is the only Indian state with a Muslim majority and one that shares borders with Pakistan. Having fought three wars with Pakistan over Kashmir, India's stakes in holding onto the state can hardly be exaggerated.

Only two Articles of the Indian Constitution were made applicable to J&K: Article 1 which defines India's territorial jurisdiction and Article 370. But over the years, successive governments at the Centre have treated Kashmir's merger with India as a fait accompli and have seen little reason to abide by the terms of the original treaty of accession.

No sooner had the other two princely states, Hyderabad and Junagarh, been incorporated into the Union the former by force and the latter through a plebiscite - than Delhi began pressuring Sheikh Abdullah to accept other provisions of the Indian Constitution. The modified interpretation of the terms of accession was finally agreed to in July 1952 and came to be known as the Delhi Agreement. But Delhi wasn't satisfied with even this modified agreement. Following Abdullah's arrest in August 1953, the Delhi Agreement was practically rescinded as other constitutional provisions - including those that allowed the Centre to issue directions to the state government or even to dismiss it- were made applicable to J&K. In 1975, Abdullah signed the Kashmir accord with Indira Gandhi which reiterated that Article 370 would continue to govern relations with the state, but ensured that all the other constitutional provisions that had been extended to J&K remained in force.

Having "legitimized' its powers to intervene in Kashmir, the Centre lost no opportunity to ensure that power in the state remained in safe hands. Elected governments were dismissed, leading politicians arrested on conspiracy charges, elections rigged, and when all else failed, the state was placed under President's rule... The people of Kashmir have been denied legitimate political activity in the name of national security. In fact, in the decades since Independence and the linguistic division of states, the Centre has consciously sought to down play the ethnic Kashmir identity, preferring instead to deal with the different groups that inhabit the state as distinct religious communities. Thus, as far as J&K is concerned, secular India would rather maintain a delicate balance between the interests of the Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists who reside there lest they be subsumed by Kashmiri nationalism and the prospect of independence from India.

The United Front (UF) Government is in a unique position to break with this policy of manipulation and repression that has cost thousands of lives over the past seven years and brought the state to the brink of open- insurgency. Leading a coalition which derives its strength from the support of a range of regional parties, Prime Minister Deve Gowda is well placed to appreciate the particular sensitivities of the Kashmiri people. The UF has come to power on a political platform that emphasises national unity through a coalition of states and a federated political structure. Deve Gowda is not encumbered by the legacy of the Congress which feels bound to adhere to the shortsighted policies pursued by Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. Nor is he a votary of a strong Centre, premised on dubious notions of cultural homogeneity. The people of Kashmir chose to join India because they believed that its secular polity corresponded closest to their own traditions of a multi-religious, multi-ethnic society. Despite the sorry record, we can still prove them right.

JD: V.P. Singh's Views on Kashmir Situation

Opposition space is very important in a democracy. Suppose all political parties in Jammu and Kashmir unit, who will they unite against? The people? This is the mistake which the Congress under Rajiv Gandhi made with it tied up with the National Conference. With one stroke, it wiped out the opposition space and pushed dissent into militant channels.

The parameters of autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir need to be discussed, at least informally, prior to the elections. India's sovereignty and the Kashmiri people's urge for dignity are the two poles within which the dialogue can take place.

"After all, a national consensus is also necessary on the quantum of autonomy to be given.

No Government in Delhi can survive if it gives more autonomy without trying to evolve a consensus. This Government has excellent federal credentials and they can use it to advantage.

It would be better to initiate a dialogue with various groups in the Valley (including surrendered militants) than enforce an election as well as a "solution" drafted in Delhi on the State.

(Source: The Pioneer, 2 August, 1996)