By Ajay Chrungoo

The Kashmir Pandit petition to the NHRC was a history sheet of happenings and events culminating in their genocide at the hands of Kashmiri Muslim fundamentalists. It is true it did not essentially conform in size and form to a petition but it did recount wants and happenings that faced the community at the hands of these well armed and treacherous people. To treat it as falling short and shora  of the legal form or being lax in its strict determinations called upon in such matters in the prevailing circumstances was to expect for the moon.

The community in fear and terror, uprooted from its ethos and roots, haunted and disgraced for being Hindus i.e., Kafirs to Muslim fundamentalists, was at its wits end and even so managed to cry foul of this dread pestilence, though it may not have conformed to strict codes of ‘definitions’ formalities, which under the circumstances was neither possible nor practicable and insistence upon the same with digressions of space and time has made the petition more or less infructious merely on technicalities. It is a pity that the hon’ble Commission has not appreciated the wounded collective psyche which formed the body of the petition. It is no wonder that the hon’ble Commission none of whom had to be a witness to this high tragedy not to say suffer its agony could bring itself to the agonised level of the victims of this catastrophe and therefore not expected to do full just ice to their trauma and tragedy.

The commission has insisted  too much on the letter of the law the ‘intent’, i.e. the intention. behind the collective crime to classify or place the tragedy within the ambit of ‘genocide’ which it has found lacking in the killings of the KPs by the Kashmiri Muslim fundamentalists. It has instead found the immediate intent in their i.e. of the fundamentalists urge for secession, the resultant ‘genocide’ removed a fool farther behind this urge and therefore resultant and not the instant intent. Indeed such calamities cannot be found to fit the confines of this or that authority on the subject of genocide which assumes different aspects in different historical situations. Definitions can not evunciate situations the latter in fact modifying definition from time to time according to the exigencies of each situation.

Law can not be a shait jacket if it is assumed the so, it become an ass! Any definition or motivations is provided by the circumstances obtaining in each historical case. A definition arrived at decades leak can not mechanically be transplanted and applied for entirely a different set of historical circumstances. It has to be in a flux, continuously assuming different contuous in different historical settings. It is difficult, if not impossible to find two similar cases in different historical contexts to fit squarely within the confines of an earlier definition. The definitions too do ask for enrichment a continuous involvement, or else they fade out as irrelevant. This the historically provided motivation is more relevant then any other mechanical application of “definitions” evolved in different historical contexts.  There is nothing innuctable not even the so called “definition”. It is the historical motivation that is relevant and a determinant in each and every case. Let us, therefore, visit the history of Kashmir to form an idea of the intent behind the repeated ‘genocide of Kashmiri Pandits at the hands of Muslim fundamentalist from time to time, the fast impulse the first intent providing the eradication of ‘Kufur’ infidelity-either by killing them wholesale or mass conversions. And these episodes directly from the history looks written by men of faith and not Kafirs are revealing and as well instructive.

Records Baharistan-i-Shahi with the help of some of the chiefs of this land, some of them had reverted to the customs of infidels and polytheists. These apostates had resumed idolatry some of the infidels related that during the hours of offering prayers and worshipping of idols, they would place a cops of the Quran under their launches to make a seat to sit upon. Thus idol worshipping proceeded him as they sat on the divine book, when the news and details of these doings were brought to Amir Shamsuddin Iraqi he summoned Halik Haji Chak to him accompanied by Malik Ali and Kh Ahmad, his two counsellors and administrators, Halik Kaji Chak presented himself before the venerable Amir who declared to them.

This committing of idolators has after entracing and subnuthey to the Islamic faith now gone back to defiance and apartsay... Thus seven to eight hundred  infidels were put to death”.

Baharistan-i-Shahi further records “those killed were the leading personalities of the community of infidels at the time, men of substance and Govt functionaries. Each of them wielded influence and sway over hundred families of other infidels and hactics. Thus the entire community of infidels and polytheists in Kashmir was coerced into conversion to Islam at the point of sword.

During the Govt of Malik Musa Raina, all the depraved ... of this land-Kashmir-had been converted to Islam, recofs Bahrishan-e-Shahi.
The Bahrustan-e-Shahi also records But with the support and authority of Malik Musa Raina, Amir Shamsuddin Mohd. Undertook a wholesale destruction of all those idol houses as well as the ruination of the very foundation of infidelity and disbelief on the site of every idol house he destroyed the ordered the construction of a mosque for offering prayers after the Islamic manner... It is publicly known that during his life time, with the virtuous efforts and elaborate arrangements made of the fortunate Malik Musa Raina twenty four thousand families of staunch infidels and shibborn hectics were enrolled by being converted to Islam.”

Reads Tohfatul Ahbab- “At the behest of Shaus Irafi, Musa Raina had ordered 1500 to 2000 infidels to be brought to his door steps any day .. his followers. They would remove their sacred threads, administer ‘Kalima’ to them, circumcise them and thrust lumps of beef into their mouths”.
ii) As may as eighteen big temples in the city of Srinagar and in rural areas of the Valley were completely destroyed under the instructions and orders of Shamsuddin Iraqi and Malik Musa Raina”.

Towards the fag end of his life Sultan Sikander was injured with a zeal for demolishing idol houses, destroying temples and idols of the infidels. He destroyed the massive temple at Bijbehara. He had designs to destroy all the temples and put an end to the entire community of infidel-records Baharistan-i-Shahi.

“Many of the Brahman rather than abandon their religion or their country poisoned themselves, some emigrated from their houses while a few escaped the evil of banishment by becoming Mohammadans” writes Farishta. Twenty four thousand families were converted at one stroke to the faith of Islam by force and compulsion (qahran and gabran” ) Records Hassan in Tarikh-i-Kashmir page 223. Enough of these historical samples where number is though legion.

The aforesaid quotes from the histories of Kashmir are a pointer to a particularly consistent and common running through ale the loots, the massacres and killings of the community as an ethno religious minority. This has not however, been peculiarly common to a certain period in history but has been the usual feature in the modern times too from time to time the genocide of 1989-90 not being at all an exception for which any other dominating factor has to be sought for; the only distinctive feature being transition from swords and sticks to bullets and bombs etc supplied in an external agency for reasons of its own which bears a larger dimension against the Hindu majority of India. In the case of Kashmir, the perpetrators already having history of genocide propensities right for the advent and Muslim rule. Mercifully been the hon’ble commission had in its judgement in para-62 through observed interalea... And there can be no gainsaying the acute suffering and deprivation caused to the community... the commission is constrained to observe that while acts akin to genocide have occurred in respect of the Kashmiri Pandits, grave as they undoubtedly are, fall short of the ultimate crime genocide.

In other words, it is conveyed that the acts akin to genocide, the commission is restricted by the formalities prescribed in this behalf by experts who though have had an experience of an entirely different character in a different context.

The historical witnesses quoted here-in-before are proof enough of the orgy repeated genocide of Kashmiri Pandit Community from time to time for no other reason than of being a religious minority in the Valley of Kashmir, the same intent and impulse having also generated the genocide of 1989-90 in a new historical situation when the local maranders found new allies extra territorially.

The Hon’ble Commission has exclusively depended upon the reports of the state agencies and not deemed it necessary to make an independent and impartial investigation to arrive at the truth. While state has the capacity and the means to distort the truth, the dispossessed and expropriated victims have neither the capacity nor the means to compete in this sordid business in which the truth is casualty. An in-depth and impartial investigation above is expected to bring out the real truth without the need of an over dependence on professionals for their fees are supposed to represent both the victim and the bully with equanimity and the least pangs of conscience.

The acts akin to genocide having been acknowledged to have happened along with the motivation in the minds of some perpetrators. There would appear no reason why the Hon’ble Commission falling short of calling a spade a spade thus making truth itself a casualty supposedly in the minds of people on account of competitive secular--non-secular considerations.

A distinction would need to be made in the proceedings as between a commission and a govt the later strictly depending upon the capacity of the parties to prove their point on the strength of their witnesses and the capacity of the extending legal luminaries which necessarily does not lead to the divulgence of truth for both the witnesses and the law-without of course, any disrespect to any quarter can be purchased which, however, is beyond the capacity of dispossessed and expropriated community. In the process truth becoming the casualty. The Hon’ble Commission would therefore, need to go deeper into the roots of the tragedy on its own inlegal parlance suo-moto again a fresh without much dependence on the state agencies which have mutiliated and manipulated the whole truth are in every way interested in camoflouging the reality as the state administration was and is all along biased against the complainants. Indeed it is the very same cover up of the truth off and on that has perpetuated this menace. It is worth while mention here that the entire state administration a right from the beginning of the socalled, “Peoples Raj” and move particularly so since the onset of ‘terrorism’ against KP community has made common cause with this brutal force as the state bureaucracy and the law and order machinery comprise largely the elements from anti-national outfits like the Al-Fateh and Plebiscite Front etc instructed all along on the lore of Muslim fundamentalism. Thus the whole atmosphere been fouled dependence upon the state agencies to present a factual position to the commission has been misplaced which explains the imperatives of an independent enquiry; the only means to arrive at the unvarnished truth.

The state government has enlarged the time frame from 1989 to 1997 instead of restricting it to 1989-90 as such a course has provided the state statistical support for dilution of the change of genocide against the Pandits committed largely since the end of 1989 to the end of 1991 when definitely no Muslim was targeted and the ourslaught was exclusively directed against the Pandits, the only victims who had to leave their homes and hearths to escape the fate of hundreds of their co-religionists and were on notice of the terrorist outfits to quit or face the inevitable. Subsequently Muslims also fell victims of these terrorists. It was and has largely been for reasons of inter and intra terrorist gang rivalries and not for any other reason and if some of them have assumed the garb of ‘migrants’ it has been a contrived affair by both the state agencies and the political wing of the terrorists in attempt to escape the shame and slur of genocide of Pandits. Here it may also be stated that the exception of some Pandits having stayed back and survived in fact proves the rules as even in similar situations in the past which bears testimony there existed once only eleven KP families in the Valley. In any event these unfortunate Pandits are living as Pandits on borrowed time.

There still is hope in the Pandit mind that the truth will at last prevail.

Dr Ajay Chrungoo

The developments in the Middle East have certainly created an impact in Jammu and Kashmir which witnessed a disturbed last summer. The happenings in Egypt and elsewhere have almost evaporated the public demoralization in Kashmir valley that had set in after the failed ‘Quit Kashmir’ campaign and once again created a hope amongst the rank and file of the separatists that their tactics on the street may bear fruits in the near future.

The ‘Quit Kashmir’ campaign relied on a semi violent mass mobilization and non-cooperation methodology resorting to sustained stone pelting assaults on police and paramilitary forces, hartals and protest demonstrations to bring the public life and the government functioning to a standstill. It is being described as a non-violent transformation of an armed uprising.  

The campaigners were driven by a hope that the sustained mobilizations would galvanize the international opinion in favour of their objectives. They believed that the public outcry would force President Obama who was scheduled to visit India to exert more pressures on Government of India to come to terms with the separatists and Pakistan. They also hoped that Indian political consensus on Kashmir will be further weakened to resist pressures for change of status quo in Kashmir in favour of the separatists.  

After the happenings in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East  the Prime Minister of India  tried to assure the nation that, “whatever happens in the Gulf or in West Asia including the countries mentioned ( Egypt ) is a matter of concern to us…. replication of such events is not possible in India, because India is a functioning democracy…. There is no question that things that have happened in Egypt and other Arab countries can be replicated in India.” Prime Minister’s statement underlined the hope and confidence of a rational being but could not hide the nervousness and apprehension which has beset his own government in the Centre and the ruling alliance in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. “I hope summer this year will be peaceful… I have no power to predict the future. I can only say that there are continuous efforts on our part to ensure that there is no repeat of summer unrest in 2011,” has been the refrain of the Chief Minister of the state Sh. Omar Abdullah. More conspicuous is however the disconnect between the perceptions of the Prime Minister and the perceptions of the people in Kashmir valley.  

Perceptions in the valley

Merely a day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that the political developments in Egypt cannot be replicated in Jammu and Kashmir, the Hurriyat (G) Chairman Sayed Ali Shah Geelani said Egypt like revolution is possible in Kashmir. He said, “This is a blatant lie. By muzzling voice of Kashmiris through brute force, India can’t claim victory. World will see one day there will be a bigger revolution in Kashmir than Egypt and other uprisings.” The moralizing by Geelani notwithstanding, the separatists in the valley over the years have demonstrated the capability of mobilizing public in the streets and creating a siege on the local government. The mobilizations during the summer of 2010 were not as huge as during the Amaranth land row or various marches conducted earlier to Chrar-i-Sharief or United Nations Military Observers office in the out skirts of Srinagar city in Kashmir.

The PDP leader Miss Mehbooba Mufti whose political party has received more than generous support from both the Vajpayee led NDA coalition and subsequently by the present Manmohan Singh led UPA coalition at the Centre commented on the uprising in Egypt and Said, “We congratulate the people of Egypt on their success and for achieving the goal in peaceful manner…. It is necessary to mention Egypt because they were fighting for democracy and we are fighting a war in spite of democracy.” She did not hesitate to compare the last summer’s unrest in Kashmir valley with the uprising in Egypt and said, “Lakhs of people had thronged the roads in Cairo, but nobody leveled allegations on them. Our people are being dubbed as LeT militants, paid agents and now recently as drug addicts by the state government only for raising the voice for resolution of Kashmir issue...”

The sections of separatists, whom Government of India never hesitates to call as ‘moderates’, also drew parallels between the situation in Egypt and Kashmir. All of them hoped that Egypt can be replicated in Kashmir.

How the ferment inside is shaping can be gauged from the following two sample responses. One from a former terrorist and now a self-professed moderate whom many in Kashmir  believe to be closer to government of India, Mr. Firdous Sayed , one of the first of  the initial band of young men who took to arms and also one of the first to renounce them. And second, Mr. Hassan Zainagiree who has been a pro Jamaat and pro Geelani columnist and writes regularly for the local English dailies.  Sh Firdous compared the situation in Kashmir with Egypt thus, “On February 11, when Hosni Mubaraq was forced to resign and Tehrir Square burst in impromptu jubilations, people in Tehran were observing the thirteenth year of Iranian revolution. Iran’s and Egypt’s revolution share a date February 11. The comparison does not end here, February 11 in Kashmir is remembered as a day when Maqbool Bhatt kissed the rope and kindled the flame of Azadi with his blood.” Mr. Hassan Zainagiree wrote in his column, “No political manipulation or military might can stop simmering lava of rebellion from accumulating a critical mass and then blowing up citadels of hubris into smithereens….. If today Al-Tehrir Square sent twenty first century Pharaoh of Egypt in the dark dungeons of History, some other squares are waiting and gearing up for replicating Al-Tehrir. ” Referring to the role of Islamic organizations in Egypt Mr. Zainagiree notes, “ The Islamist Organization (in Egypt) remaining invisibly visible behind the scenes used its organizational strength and mobilized large number of its supporters for the protest that was mainly non-religious and spontaneous in character. Despite being banned from political activity it accepted the invitation for discussion on political transition…. Projecting a more pragmatic image of itself to domestic and international audience Ikhwan declared it as an ‘Egyptian Revolution’, and not an Islamic revolution. With one stroke of political acumen and dexterity it blunted many arrows aimed at it from Washington, Brussells and Tel Aviv.” Mr. Zainagiree has almost revealed the mindset of the cadre based Jamaat as also the core content of the processes which are making the radical and more popular separatist leader to behave as he has been. Geelani, by engaging with the governments at the state level and the Centre and cohabiting with the likes of Arundhatti Roys, once in a while extending his hand of patronage to hapless Kashmiri Hindus and Sikhs living in the valley, is exhibiting a flexibility which many are describing as a change of heart of the ailing and aged leader. When the septuagenarian leader chose to be one of the first leaders in the entire Islamic world to condemn the killing of the dreaded Osama bin Laden he only demonstrated a ruthless commitment to pan Islamic movement for which Osama is an undisputed icon. Geelani by declaring Osama bin Laden as a martyr in the cause of Islam also mocked at those in India within the government and outside who have been claiming a change of heart in him.

The issue in Kashmir valley is not whether Egypt like uprising can be replicated. The separatist regimes have the confidence and expertise of mobilizing people far more in numbers.  They have the maturity to ignore the multiplying fractures within their rank and file. The stone pelting campaign last year amply demonstrated this. They have demonstrated it at many occasions in the past, be it marches to UN Military Observers Posts in the outskirts of Srinagar, or march to Chrar-i-Sharief and many similar mobilizations during the Amarnath Land row. The issue which they are addressing is how such mobilizations on the ground could be used to wreck the status quo on Kashmir. When the Prime minister talks about the value of ‘functioning democracy’ he is ignoring the fact that the political class across the spectrum in the valley recognizes it as a ‘managed democracy’ and they also believe that the world at large is just a very small distance from recognizing it so. He also is blissfully unaware about the fact that his own government has allowed the democratic process to be undermined with impunity.

Undermining of the Democratic process

The ‘functioning democracy’ argument as a counter weight to the mass upsurges in Kashmir valley guided by regressive political ideologies has certainly a great value. But if the government has a policy structure which essentially undermines and also delegitimizes the ‘democratic process’ which it has established in an extremely stressful environment of terrorist intimidation,  then the ‘functioning democracy’ argument loses its value and cannot be harnessed as a protective shield.

Only very recently the New Delhi appointed Chief Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir said that the participation of people in Panchayat polls and the Kashmir problem were two different issues. “Polls and Kashmir issue are far away from each other. People are participating in elections to address their basic issues,” said Dileep Padgaonkar at a two day ‘Peace Conference’ organized by J&K Peace Foundation in Srinagar on May 16, 2011. In an earlier interview on Doordarshan, Radha Kumar, another interlocutor appointed by the Government of India, described the elected government in Jammu and Kashmir as almost non-representative because as per her a very large public constituency fell outside the boundaries of the democratic sphere. These are not isolated views of persons who might have been nominated as interlocutors by the Government of India for reasons other than their views on the democratic experiment in Jammu and Kashmir. A significant section of Kashmir experts and track 2 actors employed by none other than the Government of India itself profess the same views.

When government of India allowed Mufti Mohammad Sayed and Omar Abdullah to advocate publicly, as the Chief Ministers of the state, that their elected governments were just a day to day arrangement to handle the day to day problems of the people and they have no locus standi to decide about the larger political issues it renders the entire functioning democracy in the state to a stature of even worse than that of a  ‘managed democracy’ which the educated middle class in Kashmir valley chooses to call it. If the elected government in Jammu and Kashmir is accorded the status of a mere interface between the governments of Pakistan, India and the people of Kashmir by the governments in the state and the Centre then the democratic legitimacy automatically shifts outside of the democratic sphere to the regimes orchestrating secessionist public mobilizations but which have stubbornly opposed the democratic process in the state over the years. The international opinion which the secessionist mind in Kashmir is targeting cannot be expected to ignore this reality.

Why will the international opinion not take the cognizance of the fact that the Indian Government itself does not accord the respect of a functioning democracy to the democratic process which it has established under the nose of a terrorist gun?  Can Americans afford to call the elected governments In Afghanistan and Iraq as non-representative and merely as day to day arrangements?

The strategic fraternity in India and an overwhelming section of the Indian political class advocated the initiation of democratic process in the state in 1996 to restore the democratic rights of the people. Initiation of the democratic process served two other major strategic objectives. First has been to deploy democracy to mobilize opinion against terrorism and separatism and isolate the armed separatist regimes in the state. And second to use the democratic interface as a legitimate moral shield while conducting counter terrorist operations on the ground. Democratic interface acts as a constant deterrent against Human Rights violations and does not allow terrorists to use the argument of Human Rights violations, which inevitably happen once in a while as collateral damage when security forces confront violence organized from within the sanctuary of the society itself.

The decision to initiate democratic process then was a critical decision as the terrorist regimes in the state were far from being vanquished even though falling into disarray under the attack of counter insurgent operations. More critically subversive entrenchment in the organs of the state administration had remained untouched and there was every possibility that restoration of democratic process might lead to widening and deepening of the subversive entrenchment. But as the policy of Government of India unfolded the democratic process in the state far from becoming an anti-dote to secessionism got transformed into a process where separatists were accorded an extra constitutional veto over all the political interventions devised by the elected government itself.

All the three Round Table Conferences on Jammu and Kashmir were primarily devised to ensure participation of the separatist leaders. The importance accorded to the separatist participation in these conferences was actually a process of delegitimizing the democratic process itself. The outcome of each such conference and the reports of the Working Groups created during these conferences aimed primarily to further woo the separatists. With each cycle of concessions the separatist leaders, including particularly those whom the Government of India calls as moderates, further stiffened their stance and stubbornly refused to give any credibility to the democratic process. The influence and the concomitant pressures which the democratic process could have generated were neutralized by the very character of the democratic process employed on the ground.

Conversion of Democratic Process into a Subversive Space

During the stone pelting campaign last year, the Central Government was exposed in ample measure to the contradictions and pitfalls of the democratic process which it has employed in Jammu and Kashmir. The failure of the elected government in the state was called erroneously as a ‘governance deficit’ by the Central Government. The unwillingness of the state government to stand up against secessionist mobilizations in the state and many times if not always acting as an accomplice to the secessionists cannot be merely called as a ‘governance deficit’.

At the peak of ‘stone pelting’ campaign the Chief Minister of the State said without inhibitions that the “the aspirations of the people of Jammu & Kashmir cannot be assuaged only by development, good governance and economic packages but needs a political solution…. We must work together to find a solution that can lead to a lasting peace in Jammu & Kashmir as per the aspirations of the people of this great land.” This position was exactly in sync with the separatist line. How many times have we heard Ali Shah Geelani say that development, unemployment, miss-governance were non issues and the real solution was settlement of Kashmir issue as per the wishes and aspirations of the people!

Attitude of the State Government during last year’s so called ‘Quit Kashmir’ campaign was both of helplessness as well as political unwillingness to stand up to the secessionists . Unwillingness to stand up against secessionist forces because there is a definite

overlap between the objectives of the secessionists and the main party of the ruling alliance and helplessness because all organs of the society seem to be on the other side. They are in fact two poles of a vicious cycle which feed each other.  Unwillingness generates helplessness and the helplessness feeds the unwillingness.

Omar Abdullah, while responding to the criticism of his handling of the situation made a very revealing statement. “By focusing on my style of governance, you are distracting from the main issue. In which protest did you see slogans against my government? The slogans were ‘Hame chahiye Azadi, Go India Go’. What has that to do with my style of governance,” he said. “There are lessons to be learnt from this crisis - lessons I have to learn, lesson the state has to learn and important lessons the Government of India has to learn. Don’t underplay the complexity of the issue that if I change my style of governance, miraculously, everything will get better. Till June, you hadn’t a problem with my style,” Abdullah observed.  The real paradox of the situation is that the people on the streets raise brazen secessionist slogans and the Chief Minister does not at all consider them as against his government. The ruling party in fact finds a resonance in the secessionist din raised in the streets.  

In Jammu and Kashmir one thing which has been overlooked over the years by the think tanks of the mainstream political parties as well as the experts on strategic affairs in India is the consensus within the separatist constituency in the valley that they have to control the ‘space of governance’. This consensus reflected for the first time after the defeat of Pakistan in the 1971 war. Sheikh Abdullah agreed to join back the electoral politics because he was aware that the separatist class in the valley, at least the overwhelming majority of it, was convinced about denying the pro India politics in Jammu and Kashmir the space of governance to survive in the aftermath of Pakistan’s humiliating defeat.  Control of the state government emerged as an imperative strategic necessity for the separatist elite in the valley. That Sheikh Abdullah had taken up the course of joining the power politics in the state not because of any ideological transformation but to meet the exigencies of the times was clear when he responded to the statement of the then President of Pakistan, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, that the fight for Kashmir’s right of self-determination was lost in 1948. What Sheikh said in response revealed his ideological disposition as well as urge for an alternative strategic paradigm. He said, “Mr. Bhutto’s statement as reported in the Indian Press is not clear to me… It is a historical truth which had been amply proved that any country which has depended on other powers for achievement of its objectives has always met with disaster….It is very difficult to understand that the fight for the right of self-determination was virtually lost in 1948.”

Sheikh assumed the helms of affairs in the state and assiduously saw to it that the cadres of plebiscite front and even Al Fatah were accommodated within the new power structure.  Pro –Pak and radical Islamist formation of Jamaat- i-Islami of Kashmir was first to realize the import of capturing the legislative space to sustain secessionism in the valley. The then Jamaat supremo, Ali Shah Geelani, contested elections to the State Legislative Assembly and won in 1972, 1977, and 1997. He had the full endorsement of his party and also Pakistan to do so. This is how one young participant in the 2010 stone pelting campaign explained the participation of Ali Shah Geelani in the electoral process of the state, “….And there are some people who say Geelani contested elections earlier, yes he did, but why? At that time the entire pro- freedom groups contested elections, they all wanted to raise Kashmir issue through Indian Parliament.” Geelani himself describes his participation in the Assembly elections in a brazen uninhibited way, “Yes that was a compulsion; when National Conference, Congress and other parties fight elections, they raise slogans of socialism, secular democracy and the accession of India, and these slogans are anti-Islam. We people are for Islam, so whenever these principles and ideological systems are being forced to the Muslims, we must fight against these anti-Islamic theories. That was the main objective for which we were fighting the elections.” 

The transformation of the democratic space into a subversive space started with earnestness after Sheikh Abdullah assumed the reins of power in 1975. Indira Gandhi realized its unfolding sooner than later. To an explanation from Syed Mir Qasim who was instrumental in persuading her to hand over power to Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah, she did not mince words to rebuff him and wrote back, “… For the present it is sufficient to recall that you misled me and the Congress party about the nature of your talks with Sheikh Sahib….. For me the accord was, and remains a method of fruitful cooperation among all secular and patriotic forces in the state. It certainly did not mean that Congress should fade into oblivion. I did not and cannot accept this interpretation of the accord…. At this critical juncture in our history, when international forces are working for the destabilization of India… and you admit that you are not unaware of these facts— was it not incumbent on all Congress workers to work selflessly to fight all forces that are against the secular and democratic unity of our country. Would we have carried any credibility had we done what you prompted us to do i.e., abandon the battle in the valley?”

The difference between the methodologies adopted by the terrorist regimes in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the separatist regimes in Jammu and Kashmir needs to be recognized with clearity. In Afghanistan and Pakistan terrorist regimes seek creation of ungoverned spaces. In Jammu and Kashmir armed separatism views control of governed space as a key component of their strategy. That is why we see symbiotic relations between regional Muslim parties promoting religion based identity politics who participate in elections and the frank secessionist formations who oppose elections.

When Indira Gandhi harnessed the democratic process to neutralize the secessionist tendencies of National conference by voluntarily vacating space for Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah she was basically committed to join the battle with the secessionist and visualized a critical role for the national political formations in the state. The present Congress regime has abandoned the battle in Kashmir. When Azad became Chief Minister during Congress-PDP coalition in the state, Congress allowed PDP to nominate candidates for the assembly bye elections in constituencies which as per coalition sharing formula belonged to it. Abandoning Kashmir to political parties espousing Muslim sub-nationalism has in recent years been advocated by top security experts who have served Government of India at the highest level. Former director RAW, Sh A.S Dulat, is on record of having advocated such a line for Kashmir many times in the past.

Indira Gandhi visualized the role of Congress to preserve the ‘secular democratic unity of India’ in Jammu and Kashmir. Present Congress regime is considering Musharraf formula as a solution of Kashmir problem and in fact conceding to carve out a separate territorial sphere of Muslim influence in Jammu and Kashmir. It has sent unambiguous signals to the displaced Kashmiri Hindus to submit to the dominant politics of the valley. The present Congress regime seeks to hostage Hindus to the imperatives of Muslim Identity politics in the state to preserve its relationship with the Muslim communalism in the state. It has used its clout in Jammu only to paralyze the growing restlessness in the state against the increased clout of Muslim identity politics in the state.

During Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh regimes in the Centre we have seen a perverted democratic attitude being allowed and promoted in the state which operates beyond the Constitution of India. We have seen many times Legislative Assembly in the state taking up issues which do not constitutionally belong to it. The Greater Autonomy resolution by the National Conference or the Women’s Permanent Residents Bill, are the glaring examples. When the Chief Minister used the podium of the assembly to comment on the accession of the state with the Union of India we were witnessing the crossing of sacrosanct lines being allowed by the Centre in the name of conflict resolution.

The conferring of almost a veto to the separatist leadership operating outside the boundaries of democratic process by the Government of India has led to democratic process assuming a character to target the credibility of the process itself. In this situation extra constitutional importance accorded to Geelani or Omar Faroq is in fact an expression of the government policy to shift the democratic legitimacy outside the democratic sphere. Democracy in Jammu and Kashmir is mutating into a subversive space.

Conclusion

We cannot overlook the core content of the democratic process employed in the state even if we choose to have faith in Government of India and assume that it has allowed soft secessionism in the constitutionally sanctioned democratic space only to purge the secessionist sentiment. A peach fruit graft on an apple tree grows peaches not apples.  A secessionist graft on a sovereign democratic body grows only secessionism. In fact secessionist political grafts assume a malignant tendency to throw up metastasis elsewhere on the body polity. The interplay of Maoists and Islamists in Kashmir is an expression of this phenomenon. Democratic process can only neutralize secessionism if it chooses to contest it and not cohabit with it. Democratic process can become effective if it does not allow itself to become an insulator of regressive content of secessionism. Democracy wins if it does not offer itself as a willing accomplice in creating a false consciousness based on historical distortions and falsehoods. The Prime Minister’s hope that ‘functioning democracy’ argument can act as a critical deterrent against one more secessionist upsurge in the valley may be misplaced because international actors know it very well that Prime Minister of India has shown a proclivity not to defend what is sacrosanct in Jammu and Kashmir. These players have ample experience that Government of India undermines its own leverages in Jammu and Kashmir. They must be baffled that in a worsening situation for the separatists in Jammu and Kashmir Government of India is more than willing to lose.

*(The author heads Panun Kashmir)

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

April 2011

The Weirdness

There is a perceptible weirdness in the handling of the issue of return of Kashmiri Hindus by the state government. The Relief Commissioner of the state government recently came out with the figures of 1069 employees having joined their jobs in the valley out of the 1800 posts made available from the employment package of 6000 jobs of the Prime Minister’s return and rehabilitation programme. Not far back the state government had submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court stating that only around 700 candidates had joined in the Kashmir valley. The government affidavit stated that it had discovered that, “most of the families were not keen to return to the valley.” The affidavit of the state government also categorically mentioned that “till date, no migrant family has returned possibly due to the conditions that prevailed in the state and also in the valley in 2008 because of the Amar Nath land row. During the summer of 2010, the migrants who had already applied to return were yet to take a final decision.” The state government claims that the displaced Kashmiri Hindus are uninterested in returning to the valley and at the same time in the same breath proclaims that they are very much interested to return and have welcomed the new recruitments. The officials in the valley have been giving figures of even around 2300 selected candidates having joined in Kashmir valley knowing very well that the same government had issued notification for only 1800 jobs. The candidates who have chosen to join the jobs in the valley say that the original documents including certificates and state subject proofs which are normally required to be produced before the authorities to verify the credentials and then returned are held back by the authorities as a guarantee for staying put. The PDP leaders who visited the lodging boarding facilities provided by the state government in the valley for the new recruits have confirmed the dismal and poor quality of all these arrangements where the returnees have been huddled into ghetto like accommodations. There are many candidates who have chosen not to continue with their new jobs but are afraid to reveal the reasons and do not want to annoy the authorities. Many of them think that government will eventually shift the jobs to Jammu and by keeping silent about their assessments about the ground situation in the valley they may still have a chance to keep their jobs intact. In the meantime there is a talk doing the rounds in Jammu that the concerned minister in the cabinet is thinking of shifting the women folk amongst the new employees back to Jammu.

The day Omar Abdullah formally released the recruitment orders for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus selected as per the PM’s employment package and took pains to self-pat himself and his government for the bold step, he chose to share an anecdote with the audience invited for the occasion which brings out the weirdness in government’s approach more clearly and conveys that there is much more in the whole process of return than meets the eye. Interestingly the same has not been covered by the media. The audience on the occasion consisted mainly of the government handpicked Kashmiri Hindus constituted into an Apex Committee to oversee the process of return and rehabilitation as the leaders of the community. As per eyewitness reports Omar told the so called KP leaders that his father’s local physician in Kashmir valley was once visited by a group of terrorists at his home. The armed group told the physician that they had come with a marriage proposal of one of their colleagues for his daughter. The physician shocked and terror stricken however did not lose his cool. He humored the visiting terrorist group by showing a willingness to accept the proposal but asked for some time to consult the elders in the family and get their consent for the marriage proposal. The band of terrorists confident of their power readily agreed and left the house. The physician gathered his family and quietly left the state and the country. He has been since living in a foreign country. The CM told his Kashmiri Hindu audience that since then the physician has visited the valley several times but has never asked for the rehabilitation of his family back in Kashmir.

Sharing of such an anecdote on such an occasion carries a lot of meaning. Was the Chief Minister very subtly trying to warn the community leaders of the uncertainty prevailing in Kashmir valley and dissuading the selected candidates from joining their new jobs in the valley? Or was the Chief Minister only adding an escape caveat to the entire process which his own government had employed to lure or coerce the needy and naïve displaced Hindu aspirants so that in case of any eventuality he can escape responsibility for the decision which his government has ruthlessly tried to implement. Public perception is that the close cabinet colleagues of the CM had for quite some time opposed the entire employment package of the Prime Minister. However, the reasons put forward by the CM to convince his colleagues to support the package at least that part of it for which government of India has agreed to bear the financial burden is not in public knowledge.

The uncertainty

The anecdote shared by the CM while releasing the recruitment orders for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus is a measure of deep and dangerous uncertainty that has gripped Kashmir. This uncertainty is quite manifest. And his willingness to push the Kashmiri Hindus into this uncertainty is a measure of the insensitivity and hostility for the displaced Hindus in the political class of Kashmir valley. When brother of Faroq Abdullah rebuffed him for apologizing to Kashmiri Hindus for what had befallen upon them it was only a declaration of the ruthless zeal of the order before which all seem to be powerless in Kashmir. The general uncertainty prevailing in Valley is quite manifest. A Kashmiri Hindu boy Susheel Raina S/o Sh. Badri Nath Raina living in Chandugam, Ashmuqam in valley along with his family which stayed put in valley all these years while most of the Kashmiri Hindus were living in exile in Jammu and rest of India, has been missing for days at the time of writing of this article. He is suspected of being kidnapped by the terrorists and his family fears he might have already been killed. Head of the religious order Ahle-Hadis, Maulvi Shaukat was killed the other day in the mosque when a remotely controlled IED was exploded by the terrorists. The deceased had been opposing the stone pelting and hartal campaign lead by the radical Islamist leader Ali Shah Geelani. The pro-Pak and stridency was on display amongst the masses on the day when India –Pak cricket semifinal of the World cup was being played in Mohali on March 30. As per local reports crackers worth crores had been purchased and kept in reserve to celebrate Pakistan’s victory in the match. Wazwaans had been arranged in numerous localities to hold public feasts after Pakistan defeats India. The schools, colleges and government offices saw very thin attendance and the markets assumed a deserted look. Security establishment was so scared that they imposed Section 144 to stop people from gathering on roads. Many areas police prevented shopkeepers to provide TV sets and screens for the telecast of the cricket match. The posters of prominent Pakistani cricketers were being pasted on cars and prominent places and many areas police had to intervene to prevent it. In the evening when it started dawning upon the people that Pakistan was losing the match terrorist outfits issued instructions for a general black out in the entire valley. Terrorists entered the house of a local NC leader Ghulam Mohiuddin Bhat and fired indiscriminately killing him on the spot. Although the killing was interpreted as the beginning of the anti-election campaign by the terrorists many believe that Bhat was killed because he had not put off the lights of his house which had irritated the terrorist commanders of the area. The uncertainty in valley has only deepened after the happenings in Middle East. The slogan in the streets is,” Khoon ka badla June mai lengey… we will take the revenge of the loss of life during stone pelting campaign in June.” So perceptible is the din of this simmering unrest that even the Prime Minister of India and the chief Minister have expressed their apprehensions about the impending trouble in the summer of this year.

Powerlessness of the Victim

But in this whole sordid drama powerlessness of Kashmiri Hindus, the victim of genocide is most glaringly evident. This powerlessness has been primarily because government of India has chosen to abandon them in search of a deal with those who perpetrated the genocide on them. During the meetings of concerned Working Groups created by Prime Minister the existential threat to the Kashmiri Hindus posed by the communal political order in Kashmir valley with all the instruments of violence at its disposal were repeatedly brought to the notice of government of India. Such concerns were meticulously and ruthlessly ignored. Causes which had led to internal displacement, chances of backlash violence in case of repatriation, nature and intensity of instability in Kashmir valley, accountability etc. does not concern those who are at the helms. In fact during last more than two decades successive governments in the state and the center have jointly participated in a campaign to hush up and trivialize the destruction of Kashmiri Hindus. The National Human Rights Commission took the suo moto notice of the backlash massacre of Kashmiri Hindus at Wandhama in Ganderbal district of Kashmir valley during the previous stint in the government of the National Conference and sent an enquiry team to the valley. The findings of the enquiry were never allowed to come to light. After the Nadimarg massacre during Mufti Sayed’s tenure as the Chief Minister, the then Union Home Minister Sh L K Advani publicly displayed his discomfiture to listen to the victims. The alleged connivance of the police in not acting in time to prevent the crime and a deliberate insensitivity of the authorities in the state and the Centre demoralized and frightened the victims that they chose to leave the village and forget the crime. The victims of the Chattisinghpora massacre who were willing to come forward as witnesses had a same experience and chose to remain silent. The government created an Apex committee of the representatives of displaced Kashmiri Hindus to give an impression that they were being taken into confidence with regard to their return and rehabilitation. But in fact everything was decided beforehand and that too in written. Those who objected were forced to walk out and their places were eventually filled with henchmen. The apex Committee, like the Jewish councils created in concentration camps in Europe before the World War 2, has become only an instrument of the government to promote its policy. Everything which comes in the way is being ignored or suppressed. Government has now transformed itself from a bystander into a collaborator. Powerlessness of the victim gives confidence to the perpetrator and the collaborator to continue with their acts. Professor Henry Theriault, a descendent of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide in 1914 captures this viciousness by explaining, “Deniers operate as the agents of the original perpetrators (of the genocide), pursuing and hounding them through time. Through these agents the perpetrators reach once again into the lives of the victim long after their escape from the perpetrators physical grasp.” Recruitment drive of Kashmiri Hindus in valley has nothing to do with rehabilitation because it does not address the issue of rehabilitation at all. Recruitment drive is a cosmetic intervention to disguise the compromises which the governments in the state and the Centre have jointly embarked upon. It is a device to insulate rabidly communal order from criticism and accountability. The willingness to hostage displaced Kashmiri Hindus to a Muslim communal order has widened the reach of the grasp of the perpetrator who subjected them to genocide.

The Takers

But why are there takers amongst the displaced Kashmiri Hindus for the Prime Minister’s employment package? At least a thousand have agreed to avail of the employment opportunities provided by the package and return to the dangerous uncertainty as is prevailing in the valley. Holocaust expert Joel E Dimsdale says, “In destruction process the perpetrators do not play the only role, the process is shaped by the victim too. It is the interaction of perpetrators and victims that is fate.” To understand the issue one has to understand what happens to the victims when they are abandoned by their own governments in whom they despite all reasons to the contrary continue to repose their trust. Psychological studies on victims of extreme persecution and genocidal destabilization have revealed peculiar behavior which is difficult to comprehend under normal circumstances. Saporta and Van der Kolk make a profound observation in this regard in their seminal work Psychological Consequences of Severe trauma, “In a government sanctioned torture, the betrayal of the victim by its government can be viewed as the loss of an important attachment bond, both real and symbolic. Regardless of one’s conscious attitude about one’s government, there tends to be a hope, or aspiration that will embody parental qualities such as the provision of protection and security. The betrayal of these expectations and thus loss of this form of attachment compounds the impact of torture…. in their attempt to maintain attachment bonds victims turn to the nearest source of hope to regain a state of psychological and physiologic calm. Under situations of sensory and emotional deprivation they may develop strong emotional ties with the tormentors.” This has been called as ‘traumatic bonding’. Traumatic bonding of victims usually is preceded by a state of denial amongst the victims themselves. Ervin Staub refers to a this denial as a defense mechanism. “ Denial is one of the primitive defense mechanisms. It means screening out part of reality or making it unreal in our minds… interpreting events in a way that suits our needs.” This type of denial and traumatic bonding with the perpetrator is manifestly evident when we talk to the returnees.

Three main factors: Destitution, naivety and a suicidal wishfulness, seem to have influenced the Kashmiri Hindus who have decided to join in valley after being selected for the employment package.. There are families who have lived on the meager relief for more than two decades. To withstand the pressures of destitution for more time has almost become unbearable. There are over aged unemployed and unmarried ladies whose parents hope that getting a job will help them finding a partner. There are divorced ladies whose parents want to overcome the fear of what might happen to them in case they are no more. There are village folk who think that a job in Kashmir may help them to reclaim and develop their lands and property. Enforced destitution of the displaced population has been a conscious policy of both the perpetrators and the collaborators within the government and outside it. Systematically different types of coercive influences have been unleashed during their exile to produce anxiety and stress for a protracted period and the destitute displaced Hindus from Kashmir are responding by trying to adapt or conform.

Naivety, lack of understanding and ignorance about the major political happenings which have a bearing on the very survival of victims drives the victim to suicidal actions. Dimsdale writes about the behavior of Jews as they were being pushed towards a holocaust, “the Jews did not always have to be deceived, they were capable of deceiving themselves.” Some of the selected candidates of the employment package and their close kins who were approached by well-wishers to reconsider their decision stubbornly refused any counseling. A somewhat comical anecdote which happened sometime back will reflect the nature of this naivety more than anything else. A married young Kashmiri Hindu who is working as an officer in a central government department accompanied his wife to Kashmir valley. His wife had been selected for a teacher’s post and had decided to join the post. Young man’s father had been killed by Islamist terrorists in valley during 90’s. Young man had told his wife not to remove her Bindi mark on the forehead and flaunt her ‘Dejhaur ‘, the ornament which is a sign of a married woman amongst Kashmiri Pandits and hangs from the ear lobe to the front of the bust. He told her that by doing so he will be able to gauge the reaction of the Muslim officer receiving the joining report and thus will be able to decide whether she would continue with the job or not. The selected lady reached Kashmir valley and went to the school to submit her joining report along with her husband. On reaching the school they found only the peon in the school who told them to sit and wait for the education officer. Another Kashmiri Hindu lady was already sitting in the reception room along with her husband. She had also come to join for a teachers post. The young man asked his wife to sit in the reception room and he himself went out to smoke a cigarette. When he returned to the reception room he found her wife had already removed the bindi mark from her forehead and hidden her ‘Dejhaur’ in the locks of her hair. He asked her why she had done so and his wife told her that the other Kashmiri Hindu lady sitting there had advised her to do so. While he was narrating this episode to his friends in Jammu, one of his friends interjected and said, “Tell me if your wife would not have removed her bindi and continued to flaunt her ‘Dejhaur’ and the education officer and other employees of the school had received her warmly and with respect, would you conclude that everything is hunky dory and keep your young and beautiful wife there to serve as a teacher in a village.”

A scholar who is doing research on the Hindu survivors of the Tribal Raid in Kashmir Valley in 1947-48 reminded me of the viciousness of the naivety of people in situations of emergency and extreme distress and cautioned me not to get surprised by it. He reminded me that Kashmiri Pandits living in Srinagar continued to remain engrossed in performing the marriages in the marriage season, played tumbakhnari and music, while the invaders had almost reached the outskirts of the city in 1947. A survivor of the tribal raid from Baramullah revealed that he was a school student when the raiders entered Baramullah. The Hindu residents of his locality assembled in a village to discuss the issue. Blissfully naïve they came to a conclusion that the best response to the impending raid was to remain a kilometer away from the main roads. They held the view that raiders had mainly 3 not 3 rifles with them and such a rifle had a firing range of not more than a kilometer so if they remained out of the range they will be safe. Cultivating naivety is also a sort of an escape response. There is deliberate inclination of the victims of genocide and protracted persecution to black out inputs, shun out unpleasant inferences and remain in a make believe world to maintain a feel good perception. When confronted by serious life threatening situations, “the victims can react in five ways: by resistance, by an attempt to alleviate or nullify the threat (the undoing reaction), by evasion, by paralysis, or by compliance.”

The suicidal wishfulness or a very perverted cleverness seems to have effected many of the selected candidates who have decided to join. The persons in this category are fully aware of the dangers of returning to the uncertainty of the valley. They are aware of the grim situation there and the sway and dominance of the radical communal forces there. None of them has faith in the government’s capability to protect them. They accept that sooner or later some mishap may happen there. And ironically all of them have a hope that if a mishap happens then they will run back to Jammu and stake their claim as a migrant employees and the government will have no choice but to adjust them in Jammu. And all these clever persons individually think that the impending mishap on which they are laying their hopes to escape and get a redemption will not happen with them.

Looking at the attitude of Government of India, the state government, the political establishment in Jammu and Kashmir as well as New Delhi towards the problem of internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus, one cannot but be haunted by the lines of holocaust expert Ervin Staub, “ there was a progression of steps along a continuum of destruction.”

*(The writer is chairman Panun Kashmir)

Dr Ajay Chrungoo

January 2011

On December 5, 2010, the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, formally issued the recruitment orders for the displaced Kashmiri Hindu youth, selected as per the Prime Minister’s Package for relief and rehabilitation of Kashmiri Migrants. On the occasion the Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, while addressing the selected candidates said, “You have suffered a lot. You went through a difficult period…. Your new generation is unaware of the cultural heritage and secular amity Kashmir has been abode for ages….So far we have only heard slogans in your favour and in favour of your return to Kashmir…. Creation of economic security by way of providing jobs in government sector to young educated Kashmiri Pandits was a milestone in restoring their confidence and return to valley….” The self-patting was quite conspicuous in his address. But more conspicuous was the perception which trivialized the whole issue of forced exodus of Kashmiri Hindus as merely an issue of economic deprivation and insecurity. As if Kashmiri Hindus had left valley because of unemployment. Omar’s speech, delivered on the occasion, reflected either a dangerous naivety or a single minded ruthlessness to put innocent lives to risk to score a political point.

Exploiting Destitution

While seeking to make others believe that internally displaced Kashmiri Hindus were merely awaiting economic security in the form of government jobs, Omar Abdullah, inadvertently accepted the stark reality of enforced destitution to which the displaced Kashmiri Hindus have been subjected to during their exile. More than two thirds of Kashmiri Hindu employees in State government services have retired since their expulsion from Kashmir valley. With almost an undeclared ban on their recruitment, during more than two decades of their exile, the cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus from State administration has become a glaring component of their religious cleansing from the valley. This is the second stint of National Conference government after the democratic process was initiated in the State in 1996. In the previous stint National Conference government succeeded in getting a massive package from the Central Government of one lakh government jobs for Kashmir valley. According to some experts the employment package eventually touched almost 1.5 lakh of jobs for which only Kashmiri Muslims were recruited. Kashmiri Hindus were kept out of this package and the then National Conference Chief Minister brazenly cited the dearth of funds for recruitment of Kashmiri Hindus. Since 1990 when the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus took place the successive State governments have refused to bear any financial burden of relief and rehabilitation of displaced persons from Kashmir. All the funds for the purpose, including the salaries of the displaced Hindus working in the State services, are being borne by the Central Government.

Omar describes the stand of the successive governments in the State so far on return of Kashmiri Pandits as not more than a slogan.   He tries to impress that these governments lacked the commitment to provide economic security to the displaced youth from Valley in the form of employment in the State government. It is in fact an admission of the state of siege and marginalization to which the displaced Hindus have been subjected to over the years in exile.  Does the new recruitment drive mark the end of this siege? After a resolute dithering the State government has eventually agreed to provide around 1800 government jobs to ‘Kashmiri Migrants ‘out of a total of 3000 jobs whose financial burden will be borne exclusively by the Central government. And these jobs constitute only half of the total of 6000 jobs as enunciated in the Prime Minister’s employment package which was endorsed by the state government. As per the Prime Minister’s package, the financial burden of rest of 3000 jobs was supposed to have been borne by the State government. Even after publicly accepting the Prime Minister’s Package for the ‘Kashmiri Migrants’ the state government has already refused to fulfill its part of the employment package and declared such recruitments  as against the provisions of the State Constitution.

Understanding the plan

The State government actually has intervened to cut the Prime Minister’s employment Package to half and then moved to fulfill only the half of the remaining and that too when it has no financial implication for the State government. By linking the package to return and delinking it from all factors which led to the cleansing of Hindus from Valley, it is actually using the Prime minister’s package as a tool of political blackmail. It is revealing in itself that the jobs are being provided to the aspiring candidates amongst the internally displaced Kashmiri Hindus only if they agree to return to the  Kashmir valley and to ensure that a written undertaking is provided to the state government by them to stay put in the Valley under all circumstances come what may. To seek such an undertaking is not only highly discriminatory but in fact a coercive measure which tantamounts to hostaging Kashmiri Hindus to conditions which are far more vicious than they were in 1990s when they had to run away. Denial of genocide and refouling of the victims is glaring in the entire process.

For government of India treating internal displacement as a peripheral low priority economic issue has served the purpose of continuing with its compromise with the communal identity politics in the state. Religious cleansing in Kashmir valley otherwise marked the demise of the nation building model it chose for the state of Jammu and Kashmir. National conference has not even treated it as an issue at all. That explains why it kept the displaced Kashmiri Hindus out of the employment packages for which it has got massive financial support from the Central Government from time to time. In fact the entire political class in Kashmir valley, which includes National conference as well as PDP, has chosen to treat the problem of internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus as a problem of Government of India. This political class either chose to consider the problem as an artificial one and not more than a ploy by the Indian State to undermine its aspirations. In fact this class viewed the perpetuation of the destitution amongst Kashmiri Hindus as a political necessity to manage their opposition. Destitution has kept a segment of displaced community available to collaborate both with the Muslim establishment in the Valley as well as the Central Government alwayseager to craft a compromise with the same establishment.

Predicament or  connivance

To be fair to Omar Abdullah, he had a healthier and consistent position on the issue of forced displacement of Hindus in Kashmir valley till he assumed the reigns of the state as its Chief Minister. In one of the last current affairs programs on Kashmir of the Star Channel, when 24×7 channels had yet to take off, He made a bold confession when Harendra Baweja asked him as to why NC government had failed to make Pandits return, ” Hum Kya Karey… hum ek ko vapas ley jatey hain aur vo dus ko mar daltey hain…. What can we do… when we take even one back to the  Valley they kill ten of them.” The memory of Sangrampora and Wandhhama backlash massacres of Kashmiri Hindus living in the valley were perhaps fresh in his mind then.  Omar openly disagreed with the return policy of PDP for Kashmiri Hindus. In a seminar organized by Observer Research Foundation he was candid enough to accept the insecurity prevailing in Kashmir valley as the most important impediment to the return of the displaced Kashmiris. He was very forth right in saying, “When we ourselves as leaders of Kashmir are insecure how can we take them back to insecurity.”

What has changed in Kashmir for the better that has made Omar to change his approach particularly about the issue of return of Kashmiri Hindus? His personal insecurity, political and otherwise, has increased to the extent that he had to bend on his knees to sue for peace from Ali Shah Geelani. His party is fast losing ground in its strongholds. It was unimaginable even at the peak of unrest in 1989-90  for non-NC formations to lock the doors of Secretariat and dare the NC to hold a rally in its bastion Srinagar. Collaboration of the administration and the organs of the society with communal separatist politics was nakedly evident during the three months of unrest in Kashmir valley. The violence has again started surfacing in the State in a big way. There is no dearth of support to radical, communal and Jihadi forces. Only the other day massive demonstrations were held in Tral township in South Kashmir in protest against the arrest of the sister of the District Commander of Hizbul Mujahidin. Lashkar-i-Toiba, Jash-i- Mohammd terrorist regimes are making their appearance now and then. In his journey to become the legitimate owner of the NC legacy Omar is changing fast unfortunately not towards an egalitarian direction. It is clear that he has not been able to change the party. Instead the party is changing him fast.

In a political environment which is essentially totalitarian and guided by ideology normal healthy individuals start changing in case they want to survive. Psychological studies have revealed that otherwise normal, good in behavior and sensitive citizens of Germany chose to be either bystanders or collaborators during the Jewish Holocaust. The same thing is being observed amongst the behavior of so many Jews living in Israel with regard to what is happening with Palestinians. Many experts on group psychology have observed, “Group processes can dominate the psychology… embedded in a group, trained in submission to authority, and further indoctrinated in ideology, people give up individual decision making to the group and its leaders. The ‘We’ acquires the substantial power than ‘I’. With the boundaries of self weakened, there will be an emotional contagion, the spread of feeling among group members, and shared reaction to events. The members’ perceptions of reality will be shaped by their belief systems and by the support they receive from each other in interpreting events. Deviation from the group becomes increasingly unlikely.”  The group sensitivity in Kashmir gets hurt when Kashmiri Pandits talk about their expulsion; when they say Kashmir has been overwhelmed by a regressive , exclusivist, communal sentiment; when they say forces which brought about their expulsion from the Valley have become stronger and more numerous; when they say there is no freedom struggle going on in Kashmir but only a violent campaign to destroy all freedoms which a modern people should have and when they refuse to endorse the solutions which emanate from various strands of separatism. And the group response and requirement to this is to deny what happened to them and support any policy measure or effort which delegitimizes the internal displacement. The policy on return of Kashmiri Hindus pursued by the state government is guided by this group sensitivity.

Apology or Politics

In a rare defiance to this group sentiment the Patron of National Conference, Dr Faroq Abdullah stated in New Delhi recently that, ” One of the major tragedies that we have had to go through was the ethnic cleansing that took place in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. I think it was one of the darkest chapters in the history of the state that will always remain and for which even for years if we ask God for forgiveness I wonder if it will ever come.”  Immediately after this statement his brother Mustafa Kamal responded by saying, “In no way it was ethnic cleansing of a particular community. It was the Army and other Central Agencies that were in the forefront of hatching conspiracies aimed at creating a situation that would cause exodus of Kashmiri Hindus and enable them to butcher the Kashmiri Muslims following the outbreak of armed rebellion in 1990.” In another statement Mr. Kamal has blamed Mufti Mohammad Sayed and Jag Mohan for engineering the exodus. It seems that the policy of the NC led State government is more governed by the perceptions of Mustafa Kamal than the patron of NC, Dr Faroq Abdullah. If it would not have been so the NC leadership would have realized that those who brought about ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus are roaming free, are far more numerous and are calling shots in Kashmir. NC would not have overlooked the fact that violent insurgencies are more dangerous for the common man when they are losing control and soft targets are most vulnerable in this situation.  And NC government, in case it agrees with their Patron, and also in case the Patron has offered his apologies to the beleaguered community from heart and not for merely public consumption, would move decisively and agree to temporarily shift all the new jobs created for the internally displaced community to Jammu before it is too late.

In 1990 there have been numerous instances when enlightened Kashmiri Muslims escorted many of their Kashmiri Pandit friends or neighbors to safety in Jammu.  Many more through timely information and advice forewarned the Kashmiri Pandits who were close to them to escape to safety. This time as well many Kashmiri Muslims have warned their Kashmiri Pandits about what is behind the return plan. They have advised them to be circumspect and suspicious about the whole process.

For the time being don’t  touch them.

A Kashmiri Pandit working in a government department in the border area of North Kashmir revealed an interesting experience to his kin in Jammu.  One day he was asked by his colleagues to leave the office premises immediately as they apprehended danger to his life. This happened a day after Ali shah Geelani, the separatist patriarch, was heckled by Kashmiri Hindus in New Delhi. He enquired from his Muslim colleagues and well-wishers about the reasons for their concern. He was told that a meeting was going on in the nearby mosque where the heckling against Geelani is being debated and they apprehended trouble. His Muslim well-wishers lifted him in their vehicle and dropped him at his rented accommodation in a nearby Sikh village. He remained perturbed for the whole day. In the evening another of his Muslim friends came to his place and happily informed him that the danger was over. He asked him, ” How?” His friend told him that Geelani Sahib had issued instructions to them not to hurt any Kashmiri Hindu for the time being. “  Kansi batas sueet lagi zav na athu philhaal. Natu gatsi amutch kwaker pati… for the time being don’t touch any Kashmiri Pandit. Otherwise we would lose a winning game.” Many Kashmiri Muslim friends and well-wishers of Kashmiri Pandits have informed them to beware of the return plan.

Can GoI overcome its own Predicament ?

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

This write-up was published on the building ‘intifada’ in Kashmir one year back. We are reproducing it again because we feel it reflects the intricacies of the situation in Kashmir in depth and detail. We have also incorporated some portions of this write-up in the editorial of this issue as we think it very relevant to the present situation in the state.

July 2010

The tactical dimensions of the Intifada in Kashmir valley are coming to the fore sooner than later. Any doubts that the recent public mobilisation drives in Kashmir Valley have been deft manoeuvres to create space for both Pakistani Government and the separatists in Jammu and Kashmir state in the existing international environment should by put aside taking due notice of what is emerging from Pakistani side at unofficial as well as official level.

The views of high profile former ambassador of Pakistan to USA Miss Maleeha Lodhi which appeared in press recently are pertinent in this respect. She very clearly acknowledges a linkage between the public protests in Kashmir Valley last year during the Amarnath Land Row and the spate of protest campaigns there after the discovery of female bodies in Shopian. “The year 2008 witnessed the highest number of anti-India protests in Kashmir’s recent history. The catalyst was the controversial government decision to transfer forest land to the trust that administered the Hindu Amarnath Shrine…….This was no passing episode as the renewal of protests in 2009 testifies.” Ms Maleeha Lodhi also alludes to the immediate political objective of the continuing intifada in the Valley.Ms Lodhi says, “to understand these questions, it is necessary to place them in the context of what has been happening in Jammu and Kashmir since 2008. This is the year the Indian authorities declared as the most non-violent since 1989, when Kashmir uprising began. The militancy according to Indian officials had been crushed. A relative though surface calm prevailed…The eruption of protests shattered this allusion of normalcy”.

The eloquent Pakistani diplomat further underlines the tactical perspectives as recognised in Pakistan about the intifada in Kashmir by raising the question, “what could happen if the Kashmiri struggle that has increasingly assumed the shape of a non-violent movement fails to achieve its objectives, if its grievances are not addressed; if the stalled Pakistan dialogue is unable to alleviate the demands of the movement? will this be a game changer?”

After the Kargil war, the Intifada in Kashmir Valley is being employed as one more game changer. The hope is to break the status quo of Indian position in Jammu and Kashmir. To impart sufficient momentum to this ‘game changer’ Pakistani government has come out for the first time to support the proposition of ‘independent Kashmir’. A day before Maleeha Lodhi’s views appeared in the press the Pakistani foreign office spokesman Abdul Basit made a statement on August 5 articulating this stand, “There, has been no change in our foreign policy. We want  an independent Kashmir. We want the Kashmir issue to be resolved in accordance with the wishes of people.” Having given this signal Pakistan recaliberated its international stand to the previous non-committal posture on the issue of ‘Independence’ to Kashmir. Responding to various questions on Kashmir the Foreign Minister of Pakistan stated, “Kashmir is still an outstanding issue and Pakistan wants its solution according to UN resolution through plebiscite.”

The to and fro-postures of Govt of Pakistan on the third option (independence) have been aimed at widening the space of Pakistan’s manoeu-vrability with separatists, Amer-icans, the entrenched subversive class in India and facilitate cooperation between pro-Pak and pro-Independence groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir. At more subtle level Pakistan is aiming to deepen the ideological wedge between the National Conference and the Congress, the parties which are in alliance and running the government in the state.

NC’s response to Pakistani postures has been on expected lines. Its MLA from Hazratbal constituency and the younger brother of NC patron Dr. Farooq Abdullah responded to Pakistani stance by stating, “Pakistan is now pleading for independent status for Jammu and Kashmir…It is a welcome step”. Dr. Kamal referred to Late Sheikh Moh. Abdullah’s interview given to London observer in 1948 in response to the establishment of UN Commission for India and Pakistan to play the role of mediator on Kashmir issue and claimed that Sheikh Abdullah had said then, ‘the only viable option would be for Jammu and Kashmir to have a neutral status vis-a-vis both India and Pakistan. However because of ruptured politics within Jammu and Kashmir and given the diverse political, religious and ethnic affiliations within it, the sovereign and autonomous status of the state would need to be acknowledged and guaranteed not just by India and Pakistan but by the United Nations and the World Powers as well”. During the incaceration of Sheikh as well as after his release right till his death NC had maintained that charges to sedition against him were false and fabricated.

Through Dr Kamal’s response NC aims  to claim a moral vindication for its politics which has vacillated between the stance of maximum autonomy and Independence over the years. Through the Kamal’s posturing NC also has sought to preserve the space of deniability to ensure minimum strain on its alliance with the Congress party. Dr. Mustafa Kamal did seek an apology from Pakistan for the tribal raid in 1947 but its purpose seems less to embarrass Pakistan and more to placate Indian opinion. The sudden and open espousal of independence by one of the credible faces of Sheikh’s family reminds one of the sudden release of Greater Autonomy report by NC in its previous tenure. That time Kathwari visit to India and his plan was the catalyst. This time it is perhaps the realisation of the widening support in Pakistani establi-shment for ‘Independence’. Pakistan’s foreign office spokesman while supporting independence option virtually recognised it as the dominant wish of the people of Kashmir.

Both the separatist establishment in Jammu and Kashmir and Govt. of Pakistan are building a core theme which they hope would crystallise enough support from USA, Europe and more crucially within India for a change of status quo in Jammu and Kashmir. The features of this theme are that the separatist movement in Kashmir is purely an indigenous phenomenon; separatism in Kashmir is a mass movement which graduated into a violent phase in 1989-90 only after the failure of its non-violent phase; the movement has once again rediscovered its non-violent character through the present intifada providing a unique opportunity for peace; the democratic dispensation in the state is only a makeshift arrangement which is incapable of mitigating the injustice of Indian imperialism; separatists and Pakistan are open to all solutions of changing the status quo in Kashmir which includes greater autonomy, self-rule and even Independence; finding a solution as per the wishes of people of Kashmir will create a congenial atmosphere for defeating terrorism in the region and last but not the least as per Ms Lodhi ‘tensions between the nuclear neighbours can easily be reignited by turmoil in the Valley. Paralysis in peace making and international apathy only heightens the danger in a volatile region that is poised at a tipping point”.

Indian state is facing a serious predicament in its Kashmir policy. This predicament is mostly self created.  Instead of contesting and exposing the regressive content of various variants of separatism in Kashmir, GoI has, over the years concentrated mostly in transforming its violent expressions into non-violent form. GoI has been more ill at ease only with the violence of separatists rathen than their ideology. While doing so it conveyed implicitly as well as explicitly that it was violence which was taking the separatism towards a regressive manifestation. GoI never exerted itself to bring to the fore that the violence unleashed in the state was inevitable consequence of the regressive exclusivist content of separatism. When GoI started describing terrorism as militancy and terrorists as misguided youth it has been not merely a cosmetic or tactical ploy but reflected the outlook which guides its Kashmir policy. This outlook accords respectability to separatist cause.

The attitude of not contesting ideology of separatism is explained as a deft physiological intervention which seeks to minimise the affront to separatists mind with the hope of taming it.Gross distortions of Kashmir’s history are allowed to be carried forward as gospel truths under the cover of this attitude. The separatist think-tank uses this space to project the blatant falsehoods like Kashmir being an unfinished agenda of partition, article 370 having a treaty status between two sovereign bodies namely constituent assembly of India and Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir which was eroded unilaterality by India absolving Kashmiris of any obligation to respect accession, Kashmiris had signed only an instrument of accession and not instrument of merger and that is why Jammu and Kashmir is still not an indivisible part of Union of India, so on and so forth. Such falsehoods have sustained separatists consciousness. GoI instead of putting facts in correct perspective has sought to convey that Indian Constitutional organisation was flexible enough to even provide space for autonomies based on religious identity with only the sky as their limit. As the non-violent intifada unfolds in the Valley GoI is caught on the wrong foot. It has through its own outlook armed separatism with respectibility and disarmed itself of legitimate and crucial arguments.

The predicament is not merely how to counter the thrust of a non-violent mass mobilisation. GoI is in fact face to face with a dangerous cocktail of non-violent Intifada and caliberated violent Jihad. Recent events in the state have shown that violence has not abated at all in intensity or sophistication. In the first week of August at least 18 militants, five troopers and two civilians were killed in Jammu and Kashmir in militancy related violence. Gun battles lasted for days forcing even the army chief to admit that militants ‘have changed tactics’. With Pakistan seeming to succeed in convincing the world at large that it was distancing from sponsoring the terrorism in J&K and other parts of India, it continues to threaten the world that autonomous terrorists regimes may crystallise an event which can lead to a war between India and Pakistan. It stresses a solution to Kashmir problem as an imperative so that the present non-violent phase of separatist upsurge is not allowed to relapse into violence bedevilling peace in the region

Indian predicament only deepens the way it has allowed the elected democratic dispensations to be undermined by none other than the elected governments themselves. GoI facilitated PDP’s emergence on a soft secessionist plank. It introduced fierce competitive secessionism between PDP and NC on the ground. When PDP lead government assumed reigns, its leader described the elected government as merely an interface between Pakistan, India and people of Jammu and Kashmir. Impression has been inculcated that elections are merely a makeshift arrangement for day to day requirements.

The presently ruling NC, taking a cue from PDP even before getting elected, described elections not a solution but only a day-to-day use arrangements. Hundreds of political workers have perished during the democratic mobilisation in the state during last one decade. When the world started recognising J&K elections as credible GoI allowed the governments, of which it was a partner, to undermine their own legitimacy and credibility by describing themselves as mere ‘interfaces’ or temporary arrangements. The entire democratic mobilisation against the blackmail of armed separatism was disowned by allowing ‘Soft Secessionism’ as a guiding principle of Governance.

Democracy in the state has assumed a form which seeks a reach beyond the Constitution of India. It has started ceasing to be an expression of sharing the sovereignty of India on a principal of equality. Instead GoI has allowed the democracy in the state to unleash assaults on the very sovereignity of India. We have now a government in the state whose front partner does not hesistate to support ‘Independence’ of the state. The separatism has a partner in the government which otherwise is expected to fight separatism.

Last but not the least the GoI has allowed segments of our own strategic community and track-2 diplomats to flirt with ideas of Independence of J&K or fully autonomous J&K. These ideas have been introduced from our side and the rationale provided has been that counterpoising these options would checkmate Pakistan in Jammu and Kashmir. With Pakistan giving clear indications of supporting both autonomy and Independence options GoI appears to have only checkmated its ownself.

The indulgence of a section of Indian State in promoting religious based identity politics in Jammu and Kashmir including the options of Greater Autonomy and Independence has not been always very subtle. It has been many times crude and ugly.  During the IInd Round Table Conference on Kashmir organised at the behest of Dr. Manmohan Singh in Srinagar

one of the delegates, the then MLA from Bandipora Sh Usman Majid, posed the following to the Prime Minister of India “Sir, you are witnessing the violence and shutdown in the Valley during this conference. Why was the Jamaat Chief Ali Shah Geelani released just a few days before this conference? If he was released why was he allowed to hold a rally near the airport itself? Who advised the government on this account? Do you known sir that the flags hoisted there were that of Lashkar-e-Toiba? Do you know sir what where the slogans which were raised there – Lashkar Aayee Lashkar aayee-Manmohan Ki Maut aayee, Lashkar-aayee, Lashkar aayee-Aazad Ki Maut Aayee” His posers forced some of us who were also delegates to the conference to ponder subsequently. We asked ourselves a question – was Geelani released to raise more radical noises outside to make us recognise that by comparison the ‘self-rule’ slogan of PDP and ‘Greater Autonomy’ slogan of NC, were moderate options and as such should command our support? was GoI itself promoting the ideas of ‘self-rule’and ‘greater autonomy’. During the entire mobilisation for the present intifada in Kashmir Jamaat and Dukhtaran-e-Millat cadres have been given a free hand last year as well as this year.There are very few persons who know that none other than former Pakistan Army Chief Mirza Aslam Beg is on record of saying that even Jamaat of Kashmir may support autonomy or independence.

The predicament which Indian state has built in its handling of Kashmir is gradually turning into a self goal for an ignominious defeat.

*(The author heads Panun Kashmir)

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

The state government notification, for recruitment of displaced Kashmiri Hindus (Kashmiri Migrants) as per the Prime Minister’s package, incorporates a new definition of who is a ‘Migrant’, which  has profound implications. This definition when read together with the ‘agreement’ which the selected candidate has to sign provides a comprehensive picture of the mindset of the state government.

As per the notification ‘Migrant Means A Person’ who “has migrated from Kashmir valley after 1st November, 1989 and is registered as such with the Relief Commissioner or has not been so registered on the ground of his being in service of Government in any moving office, or having left the valley or any other part of the State in pursuit of occupation or vocation or otherwise and is possessed of immovable property at the place from where he has migrated but is unable to ordinarily reside there due to the disturbed conditions and includes an internally displaced person, for the purpose of the clause an internally displaced person means a person who had to migrate within valley from his original place of residence in Kashmir valley for reasons of security and is registered as such with the Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner Migrants.”   The state government while starting the recruitment process for the Prime Minister’s package has chosen to modify the definition of the ‘migrant’ which guided the policy of the state government so far.

The new definition for migrants incorporates the following qualification, “…. and includes an internally  displaced person, for the purpose of the clause an internally displaced person means a person who had to migrate within valley from its original residence in Kashmir valley for reasons of security and is registered as such with the Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner Migrants.” Till now the state government recognized only those as migrants, who had migrated from valley after November, 1989. Now it seeks to recognize persons living in valley, who have shifted from one place of valley to the other for security reasons, also as migrants.

A story, which is in circulation amongst the displaced Kashmiri Hindus in Jammu, may help us to understand the purpose and purport of the modification in the definition of the ‘migrant’. Before  the state cabinet eventually decided to start the recruitment drive for around 3000 posts for the ‘Migrants’, for which central government had committed the financial assistance as per the Prime minister’s package, news papers in Jammu reported  on several occasions the decision of the state cabinet to go ahead with the recruitment drive. People in Jammu were baffled as to why the same decision was being taken repeatedly by the government. After one such news paper report, that the state government has decided to go ahead with the recruitment drive,  a group of Kashmiri Hindu activists were  reportedly prodded by a journalist friend to go to the Revenue Minister  to thank him for the same. The activists reportedly met the Minister who told them that no such decision had been taken by the state cabinet till then and also informed them that they had a wrong notion that they were the only migrants. He reportedly told them that Kashmiri Pandits constituted only a small fraction of migrants of Kashmir and they should not expect more than a few hundred jobs. The activists’ delegation returned dejected after meeting the Minister and complained to their journalist friend who had arranged for the meeting.  While discussing the issue at Press club a Congress leader, who happened to be there, reportedly told them that the State Cabinet had in fact discussed the issue but the NC leader and the senior Cabinet Minister Abdul Rahim Rather had opposed the move vehemently and also suggested that the Kashmiri Hindus were not the only migrants and there were many migrants living in the valley itself.  The story, true or a rumor, however became the talk of the town for Kashmiri Hindus living in Jammu.  The motives of the  State Government became clear after the notification was published and modified definition of 'migrant' came to public light.

This modified definition of ‘migrant’, when seen together with the ‘agreement’ which the selected candidate has to furnish before joining, completes the picture of the mind set guiding the state government. The new definition empowers the government to recruit persons amongst the locals in the valley for the Prime Minister’s package which was essentially devised for persons displaced from the valley. And the ‘agreement’ that in case the newly recruited employee migrates from Kashmir valley again ‘at any stage for any reasons whatsoever, he will automatically stand terminated from services and shall have no claim against any post under the State’, ensures that the new recruit accepts the social and political order in the valley totally and unconditionally. 

The grim irony of the whole process is that the state government has vehemently opposed the employment package for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus outside the valley on the plea that the situation has improved significantly on the ground in the Valley and at the same time sought to enlarge the definition of the ‘migrant’ by claiming that there has been internal displacement within the valley  itself from one place to another in recent years because of security reasons and such persons should also be treated at par with ‘migrants’ outside the valley.

The intentions of the state government are brazen enough to be missed. The State government by opposing the employment outside the valley creates condition of attrition for the Kashmiri Hindus not to avail of the opportunity of a job for which the Central government has furnished the necessary resources. It also seeks to take a significant slice out of the employment package by creating a new category of migrants living in the valley and creating space for Muslim recruitment.  To the secret list of Muslim migrants in Jammu and the Political migrants whose names and whereabouts have always been kept under the warps, one more secret list of migrants  who are internally displaced within the valley itself must have been already added well before the recruitment drive started. At the same time the State government resorts to strip the employee of all fundamental rights by making him or her sign an agreement of the type already referred to here.

November 9-10, 1936, in the history of Jewish holocaust, has come to be known as Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass) outside the Germany and ‘Night of Pogrom’ within the Germany. That night Nazis looted and then destroyed thousands of Jewish homes and business establishment in every part of the country in Germany. After the Kristallnacht writes Richard Rubenstein, “the hoodlums were banished and the bureaucrat took over.” In the weeks that followed key Nazi officials led by Henirich Himmler saw to it that the measures against the Jews were strictly ‘legal’.  Kristallnacht started for Kashmiri Hindus in the latest phase of their genocide after the locks of Ram Temple in Ayodhya were opened in December1986 and the Muslim vengeance was wrecked on Kashmiri Hindus in Anantnag with the burning and looting of Hindu houses and plunder and desecration of Hindu Temples. But the Kristallnacht didn’t abate after a few days for Kashmiri Hindus. It emerged in its full fury on 19 January, 1990 and continued thereafter till whole of the Hindu habitat in the Valley was destroyed.  The bureaucrats and the political class in the valley had taken over well before the unleashing of destruction to make many of the acts of attrition to look perfectly ‘legal ‘and their control has only strengthened since then.

When the displaced population was named as ‘migrant’ it was an act of ‘legal’ attrition seeking to dispossess the victim even the sympathy of the population willing to help and deprive them of the help of any  proper legal framework which could have guided the government policies.

Almost all aspect of the handling of the problem of Kashmiri Hindus, in exilewhere they were in a relative safety from the direct physical assault of the perpetrators, have been subjected to this legal and administrative attrition. At the peak of militancy in early 90’s promotion orders of migrant employees were issued posting the promoted Kashmiri Hindu women folk in the areas like Kupwara which were remote and in the grip of militancy. All the women folk at that time chose to forgo their promotion orders and the vacant positions were duly filled from amongst the local Muslim. The processes of usurpation chosen was given a veneer to appear perfectly legal When land and property records were allowed to be tampered with and Hindu properties fraudulently occupied or encroached upon the perpetrators used again a methodology to give an impression that usurpation was 'legal' Prolonged and protracted litigation by displaced Kashmiri Hindus  to salvage their properties is a saga of struggle in extreme penury.

Bureaucrats and the communal establish-ment took over to decide the parameters of ex-gratia relief or insurance claims for the Hindu properties burnt and destroyed in the Valley. A cursory comparison with the parameters of relief and cash assistance given to the residents who had suffered damage during the earthquake in the valley will bring out in ample measure the mindset at work.  It took almost hundred orders for the government to restore the basic rights of the ‘migrant employee’. For each order to materialize the displaced Hindu employees had to wage a relentless struggle of protests, dharnas and rallies in scorching heat. Hundreds of them perished during these mobilization drives because of heat strokes.

More recent example is about the HRA-CCA allowance for the displaced employees which had been denied to most of them all these years. Employees went to the State High Court for the redressal of their problems.  Even after the double bench of High Court upheld the plea of the employees. But the State Government refused to restore the right and instead chose to challenge the verdict in the Supreme Court. The State Government  plea was dismissed by the Supreme Court as well. It is now months since the Supreme Court dismissed the government plea but the State government is yet to move in the matter.  In the process hundreds of employees have retired and those who are in service are still not sure whether they will eventually get the benefit which was always their right.

The attrition in exile has assumed the legal form guided by the perpetrators and collaborators of genocide within the government and the political establishment. The phenomenon is manifest glaringly in the return policy of the government. The policy is being used to force the victim to conform and submit or face the spectre of abject destitution and perish. The recruitment drive for ‘Kashmiri migrants’ is basically a process to strip him of his right to live with dignity and honour.

What the government is doing is brazen and yet those who should act are refusing to see the writing on the wall. Joseph Goebbels once confided about his methods in a confidential meeting with the German Journalists, “ up to now we have succeeded in leaving the enemy in the dark concerning Germany’s real goals.. just 1932 our domestic foes never saw where we were going or that our oath of legality was just a trick… we wanted to come to power legally, but we did not use power legally… they could have suppressed us..... They could have arrested a couple of us in 1925 and that would have been that, the end. No they let us through the danger zone…. They let us alone and let us slip through the risky zone and we were able to sail around all dangerous reefs.”  Kashmiri Hindus are being subjected to a new phase of genocidal attrition by an enemy who is thinking that it has crossed the ‘danger zone’ and can now wage the war with more confidence. The government of India is living in a twilight between “knowing and unknowing” and is refusing the ‘full realization of facts because it feels unable to face the implications of these facts’. Kashmiri Hindus cannot afford to refuse to see the facts because the genocide is far from having abated. The return process initiated by the government is not a rehabilitation process but only a grave refoulment.

*(The author heads Panun Kashmir)

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

The evil guiding the government policy on internally displaced Kashmiri Hindus has to be fathomed and faced in its stark nakedness. On 21 January, 2010, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Service Selection Board, brought out the Advertisement Notice for 81 posts, supposed to be filled as a part of the employment package for 3000 'Kashmiri Migrants' declared by the Prime Minister of India. The Notice published in the local news papers also included the proforma of the 'Agreement' to be signed by the applicant Kashmiri 'migrant' in order to be appointed after getting selected for the particular post. The format of the agreement to be signed is revealing:

The executioner has been appointed on probation as_______in the______ Department____subject to execution of this Agreement and inter-alia on the explicit condition that this appointment as such shall subsist only so long as he serves in the Kashmir Valley; and

Whereas, that the appointee shall be considered for regularization on the basis of performance and satisfactory completion of period of probation in accordance with afore mentioned rules and

Whereas, that the appointee agrees to serve in Kashmir Valley and will at no stage opt or seek for transfer outside Kashmir Valley; and

Whereas, that the appointee agrees that in case he migrates again from Kashmir Valley at any stage for any reasons whatsoever, he will stand automatically terminated from the services and shall have no claim against any post under the State; and

Whereas, if the appointee wilfully neglects or refuses to perform duty in Kashmir Valley the appointing authority shall immediately terminate the service; and

Whereas, the appointee will at no stage seek to opt for transfer outside the Kashmir Valley.

Now, therefore I accept the said terms and conditions of appointment...

For any Kashmir Hindu, what is being said in this agreement, brazenly and between the words and lines, should not be difficult to understand. But there are willing amongst the Kashmiri Hindu to give such undertaking only to get the job.

The studies conducted on the behaviour of victims of genocidal processes clearly tell us that victims of genocide cultivate a fatal wishful thinking. They always, want to believe that the worse is already over. Or that what has already happened is the climax and the world in which they are living and the government which is at the helms will not allow the worse. The victims have a suicidal naivety of reading each step taken by the perpetrators to tighten the genocidal noose around them as a concession.

A small sample of the contemporary empirical evidence reproduced below will help us to measure the depth of the evil enshrined in the text of the 'Agreement' reproduced above.

• Kashmiri Pandit Sangarsh Samiti, an organization of Kashmiri Hindus still living in Kashmir Valley, sent an open letter to the Prime Minister of India on 16 November, 2009 as well as the Chief Minister of the Jammu and Kashmir state, as also to the various Muslim leaders of the Valley. The letter states, "On 15th November, 2009, two of our members went to Bhairav Ghat, Chattabal, at Srinagar, to take some pictures of the temple ruins so that its fate could be settled with the concerned authorities. But the members of the Majority Community who had encroached the temple land abstained them from taking pictures and used un-parliamentary language against the Kashmiri Pandits and their religious places. They started the slogans like ‘Jis tarah humne tumhare mandiroan ko jalaya hai vaise hi tum logon ko jalayenge, aur kisi ko pata bhi nahi chalega’.The way we have burnt your temples, in the same way we will  burn you and no one will know about you. 'Yahan sirf Islam chalega'. Only Islam will prevail here. "India ko lagta hai ki tum logon ko vapas layega, jo bi aaye ga mara jayega, hum log phir se gun uthayenge'. India thinks that they can bring Kashmiri Pandits back to Valley, whosoever comes will die, we will again raise arms against you. The mob there even manhandled the members of KPSS and they had to leave the place. Even they could not file an FIR against the mob due to the life threat given by these hooligans belonging to a particular community... KPSS strongly condemns the act and appeals to the separatist leadership to look into the matter and reply back within a stipulated time so that when at one hand they recommend the return of Kashmiri Pandits to the Valley then why on the other hand their men are thirsty for KP blood...KPSS requests the State and Central administration to re-think about their proposal to bring back the Kashmiri Pandits to the Valley instead register the fresh lot of migrants who will leave the Valley in coming days if the situation is not taken care of in due course of time...KPSS also appeals to the international community to take the matter seriously and ensure that all necessary steps are taken to safeguard the Kashmiri Pandits in the Valley."

This appeal by an organisation of the Hindus still living in Valley is revealing given the fact that it involves grave risks.

• The state government recently gave the numbers of the Kashmiri Hindus living in the Valley on the floor of the assembly. The State government puts the number of Kashmiri Hindus living in Valley just above 800 families and the actual  number of persons below 4000. The figures given by the State government are much more than the figures which various surveys conducted by the Kashmiri Hindus living in Valley have underlined. These independent surveys have put the number of total Hindus living in Valley presently well below 3000. In 1996 when the elected government took over after a prolonged stint of Governor's rule in the State, the number of Kashmiri Hindus given by the government from time to time was always between 10,000 to 15,000. For political reasons of undermining the gravity of situation in the Valley, the governments at the helm of affairs have always indulged in exaggerating the number of Hindus living in Kashmir. But if we take the government figures as true, even then, retrospectively the deterioration of   the situation cannot be hidden or fudged. The number of Kashmiri Hindus living in Valley, compared to the government figures of 1996, when the democratic process started, has fallen by more than sixty percent. The number of small entrepreneurs who chose to stay put in the Valley even after events of 1990 has almost evaporated.

The appeal by the Hindu organisation of Valley to Prime Minister reveals a dark reality of a continuing genocide.

• The state police approached Panun Kashmir office recently to help them in persuading the survivors of Nadimarg massacre to come forward to give witness against the arrested terrorists involved in the massacre. Nadimarg survivors outrightly refused to come forward to give witness. They had very pertinent reasons relating to the total lack of faith in the sincerity of the state government and their own security. The reasons they gave are revealing. They said that immediately after the massacre in which 22 Kashmiri Hindus were killed Sh. L.K. Advani visited the place but to their utmost dismay, insisted his security personnel not to allow any of the victims to come closer to him. One of the victims broke the security cordon and shouted what security assurances can the state government offer when, all the policemen living just in the adjacent house refused to come to their rescue while  terrorists were making their way into the houses eventually killing twenty two persons. They revealed that one of the eyewitnesses was approached by the government officials themselves to withdraw his witness. They said that the state government wilfully revealed the names of those, to the public, who had offered themselves as eye witnesses of the massacre when the same should have been kept strictly confidential. They said when Dr. Farooq Abdullah publicly said that the judge, who pronounced the judgement for Afzal Guru, needed security, it sent shivers down their spine and they decided against offering any witness. They also asked the reasons for the reluctance of the State government to transfer the case to Jammu or any other part of India. They said  they had already paid enough price for staying put in Valley and were no longer ready to pay more price.

• Two Hindus from the same Nadimarg village were appointed as laboratory assistants in the migrant teachers cell in Jammu. Subsequently they were promoted as teachers and transferred to Shopian in Kashmir Valley. They joined their new posting in January. After joining they experienced intense harassment at their new place of posting. They approached their officer in charge who was not only dismissive but also insulting in his behaviour. Feeling totally insecure, the two teachers abandoned the place of their posting and approached the government to adjust them at their previous place of posting in Jammu. They also gave a written consent to retrospectively forego their promotion and the benefits there off.

• A Hindu unmarried girl (name kept secret) was appointed on compassionate grounds under SRO 43 in a government deptt at Ganderbal after her father who was working in Relief Commissioners office passed away. She had to abandon her job after experiencing intense harassment and is now back to Jammu.

• Another Hindu girl (name kept secret) was appointed some time back in a government department in Anantnag district. The very first day in office a Class-4th employee made obscene overtures towards her. She appealed to an elderly employee of the same department for intervention. His behaviour was more obscene and insulting. While the other employees of the department looked helplessly, a clerk of the same department advised her to have ‘nikah’ with him to escape humiliation and harassment. The young lady returned to Jammu and approached a Pandit leader, who has been in recent times canvassing for return of Kashmiri Hindus to Valley, to help her. The leader told her that for escaping from such humiliation she will have to give up her job or otherwise she will have to put up with this situation.

• Two more recent anecdotes are of value in the context of our discussion here. A Kashmiri Hindu of Kupwara district went to his native place to offer his condolences to the family of a Muslim friend who had passed away. The late friend had helped the Kashmiri Hindu during his exile in Jammu. He went to the graveyard where his friend was buried to lay flowers on his grave. Local Muslims were accompanying him and they also offered their ‘Nimaz-e-Fatiha’ at the grave of the departed soul. On his return just outside the graveyard he found children playing marbles. (Saz-u-Guti) . The boy who was hitting one marble with the other would say, ‘Kafir Haa Moodh  -I have killed the infidel’, whenever he succeeded in hitting the marbal on the ground with the marbel in his hand. From the graveyard the Kashmiri Hindu proceeded towards the house of his departed friend. Just in the compound he found children playing hide and seek. One group which was seeking the hidden ones was reciting, “Bata Kot, Bata Kot Ratitoaney, Honyi Hund Doad Chyavnavitaney' (catch, catch the Pandit boy, and make him drink the milk of a bitch). Seeing the discourse communalised to this extent that even the folk plays of children were filled with communal hatred, the Kashmiri Hindu returned to Jammu crest fallen.

A Kashmiri Hindu living in Valley all these years came to attend the marriage of his relative. His close relation with whom he was staying was shocked when the minor daughter of his relation from Kashmir said in all innocence to his father, ‘Daidiya, Daidiya, Yeti Kyazi Chi Lokchi Naatu, Kasheeri Hai Chi Asi Asaan Baji Naatu’-

‘Why do we have small mutton pieces here. In Kashmir we have big pieces’. The pieces of mutton from a lamb are always smaller than the pieces of beef.

These very recent anecdotes reveal a lot. They should make anyone particularly a Hindu to see the ‘Evil’ deep inside right upto its core. The ‘Agreement’ which Kashmiri Hindu youth have to sign in case they are employed means that they have to accept the social order existing in the Valley radicalised, communalised and criminalised beyond description in toto and unconditionally.

The agreement, whatever its legal validity, is a proforma of consent for total capitulation. It is also a declaration of voluntarily abandoning of all rights and immunities which the constitution offers to any citizen. To have the job, a Kashmiri Hindu, has to persevere and put up with any situation in the Valley. The irony of the situation is that for all the jobs for which the Hindus have to sign the type of ‘Agreement’ produced here, will be financed by the Central Government.

The message is clear, any concession to Kashmiri Hindus from government of India entails a submission to the social and political order in the state which unleashed the genocide on Kashmiri Hindus and also persisted with its perpetuation. We are witnessing the denial of the genocide as well as its abettment by both the State and Central governments. The ‘Agreement’ by implication alludes that the internal displacement of Hindus was not a necessity and the relief which Hindus have been receiving is basically a burden.

The successive State governments have followed a dictum in their handling of the colossal tragedy of internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus and that is, “We will do nothing for the migrants which will be an incentive not to return”. This dictum has made the government and the political class to block any help to Kashmiri Hindus and pushed the government to enforce and perpetuate destitution amongst Kashmiri Hindus particularly the youth.

We are witnessing a process of making victims of genocide to capitulate totally in front of the perpetrator. Internationally reputed scholars and imminent citizens came out with a strong joint statement in commemoration of the Armenian Genocide of 1915. The statement said, “Denial murders the dignity of the survivors and seeks to destroy remembrance of the crime”.

The ‘Agreement’ which displaced Kashmiri Hindus have to sign to get a job for survival destroys their dignity and also any process of remembrance of the crimes which were committed on them and which are being committed on them and which will be committed against them in the future.

Last word, when government of India chose to declare a relief and employment package to displaced Kashmiri Hindus linking it to their return, it was only a declaration of their abondonement. And when Manish Tiwari said that Kashmiri Pandits were forced out by Jagmohan and Arun Jaiteley told his activists in Jammu not to be use the word ‘genocide’ for the tragedy which had befallen Kashmiri Hindus, it only signified that the noose of genocidal attrition of Kashmiri Hindus is tightening further.

*(The author is Chairman of Panun Kashmir)   

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

On 14th September this year (2009), during a series of commemoration programmes,   the displaced Kashmiri Hindus once again remembered their martyrs- mostly the victims who fell to the terrorist bullets; they remembered events and incidents which underlined the growth of communalism, intolerance and terrorism ; they reflected upon the collapse of the authority of the government , demise of their elemental rights and the failure of the state to come to their rescue; they reflected upon the fundamentalisation and militarization of the social milieu in Kashmir and the systematic  destruction of their habitat-the burning of their houses, plunder of their temples, grab of their properties and the distress sales; they pondered about their exile, the camps, the Diaspora and dispersal; they discussed the government’s law to prevent the distress sales without addressing their distress and they tried to comprehend their state of being a ‘migrant’, not even an ‘internally displaced’, not to speak of being a ‘refugee’ in one’s own country. Barely a day after, on 15th September, the state government, by declaring The Apex Cmmittee to oversee their return to Kashmir in essence declared that communalism, fundamentalism, terrorism and the politics which breeds them is not relevant to their return and rehabilitation in the Valley. The government once again underlined its commitment to an approach which reduces the entire issue of religious cleansing to merely an economic dimension. The approach at its core seeks to reverse genocide of Kashmiri Hindus by a process of 'Denial'.

For Kashmiri Hindus the implications of such a state of affairs is very grave. This is so because the reason of this ‘Denial’ is not just political expediency. Lying in its bosom is an intent of ‘refoulement’. The genocidal attrition of Kashmiri Hindus never stopped even in exile and the forces responsible for it have used their reach to perpetuate it. Return of Kashmiri Hindus to Kashmir Valley as the government envisages it means a return to an order which brought about their expulsion. It signifies a state of total abandonment of the victims by those who have a responsibility to protect them. And it also means subjecting them to a fate of total submission and surrender to the prevailing order in the valley. Erind D. Mooney who was a special advisor to the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Internally displaced Persons and has a long experience of working in the Office of United Nations High Commission for Human Rights in Geneva emphatically states, “Simply providing aid to persons whose physical security is under threat not only neglects their protection needs but can actually exacerbate and perpetuate their plight, for instance by providing a false sense of security, shoring up repressive regimes, fostering long term dependency, and even resulting in so-called ‘well-fed dead’.” 

Why has the State Government embarked upon a policy on return which resulted in bloody backlash massacres at Sangrampora, Wandhama and Nadimarg in the past? The political parties at the helm in the successive governments in the state have shared many an ideological objectives with the separatists and terrorist regimes in the state. They support the strengthening of the religious based identity politics in the state. They support weakening and impairing of the National sovereignty in the state. Their view of Kashmiri Hindu as the ‘other’ is the same as that of the separatists. Denying the genocide and delegitimising the issue of internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus is a goal they share with the armed separatists with more intensity than recognized. Displacement of Hindus has only exposed the ruthlessly communal and exclusivist nature of the political culture in the state. It has brought to the fore such issues which the mainstream parties in the valley as well as the separatists want to fudge and push under the carpet. An approach which treats the issue of return as if it is an issue akin to those of fire, earthquake or flood victims serves the political class in the Valley well. A symbolic return of the Kashmiri Hindus helps this class to purchase a secular credibility without having to pay any price. Last but not the least a symbolic return may help to make the solutions of greater autonomy- self rule as palatable to the people of India and camouflage their disruptive and balkanizing content.

More important question however is as to why does government of India endorse this approach of the state government on the issue of return of Kashmiri Hindus? If the whispers in the corridors of power in the state are true then the sudden activism on the return issue has emanated more at the Centre than in the State. The Union Home Minister has done well by visiting Jagati construction site for new upgraded facilities for the inmates of the camps in Jammu and tried to assuage the simmering apprehensions of the displaced community. His visit has brought some reassurance to the displaced Hindus   but the questions have not died down. The relief and rehabilitation of the Kashmiri Hindus falls within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Revenue headed by a Congress man and it is this Ministry which is overlooking the implementation of Prime Minister’s package for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus.

There is no evidence to suggest that Government of India is so confident about the ground situation in the state of Jammu and Kashmir that it is ready to take the risks which are inherent in the return of Kashmiri Hindus to the Valley. Democratic experiment in the valley has somewhat stabilized after the initiation of democratic process in the state in 1996. But the discourse of the two main parties NC and PDP as well as the civil society in the Valley has become brazenly more communal anti-India and pro-secessionist. The violence graph has shown a downward inclination. But the infrastructure of the terrorists and their reach and support in many areas has grown.

The GOC-in-C Northern command recently talked about ‘agitational terrorism’ which caused a lot of uproar in the Valley.  The new coinage infact refers to the increased reach of the terrorist regimes operating in the state to effect massive public mobilizations on the issues determined by them. It is an admission about the strength of the instruments of indoctrination and opinion building as well as coercion at the disposal of terrorist operatives in the state. The Prime Minister’s statement expressing concern over the deteriorating security situation in the state was flashed prominently by the print media the same day when the State Government declared the appointment of The Apex committee to oversee the return and rehabilitation of the displaced Kashmiri Hindus to Valley.

It seems that a section of government of India is in some haste to clinch a deal with Pakistan at this juncture. In its eagerness to push forward the agreements arrived with the Musharaff government this section seems to be working hard to create an internal logic to exert pressures to force consensus on the deal already worked out. One of the building blocks of this logic has already been created during the two campaigns of India Ragdo- Intifada in the state during last two years—the separatists are disowning and abandoning violence and militancy and rediscovering their non-violent moorings, so this is the appropriate time to settle issues with them.

And the second and more crucial aspect the structure of this internal logic is being sought to be created by somehow pushing a segment of displaced Kashmiri Hindus back to valley by stratagem, allurement or coercion. This will impart a secular legitimacy to the separatist cause there by facilitating a proactive engagement with the separatist leaders and eventually a deal with them.

The displaced Kashmiri Hindus realize fully well that this time the talk of their return to Kashmir is basically a talk about return to a new dispensation and not even the Kashmir as exists today.

There is, however, a deeper pathology involved in the denial of the Indian State with regard to the genocide and cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus than in the Turkish attitude in denying the genocide of Armenian Christians around1914-15 or the attitude of the Christian world and even the state of Israel who have sided with Turkey.

Donald Bloxham writes, “Turkish nationalist denial has at its heart the agenda of Turkish territorial integrity and specter of some form of compensation to the Armenians….. International accommodation of denial (of Armenian Genocide) also dates back to the crime itself. Indeed the Powers had long been prepared to distort the truth of Ottoman Atrocities on their own initiative, so it is of little surprise that they were later prepared to concur with Ankara’s denial agenda if their interests coincide with those of Turkey”.

The attitude of Indian State to deny what has happened to Kashmiri Hindus is not determined by its concern to preserve territorial integrity or sovereignty of India or some nationalist agenda in Kashmir. It is driven by a sick psychological proclivity which seeks the success of Indian secular vision in its capacity to compromise and accommodate with Muslim communalism. This perversion is seen in an influential segment of the rank and file of both the major parties Congress and BJP at the national level.

Professor Henry Therault, a descendent of the Armenian genocide survivors while discussing denial of genocide explains, “Deniers operate as agents of the original perpetrators, pursuing and hounding victims through time. Through them the perpetrators reach once again into the lives of the victims long after their escape from the perpetrators physical grasp.” The overwhelming rejection of the return perspective of the government by the Displaced Kashmiri Hindus is aimed at keeping themselves out of the physical grasp of those who perpetuated genocide on them and are alive, kicking, more numerous and stronger than they were in 1990.   

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

On 14th September this year (2009), during a series of commemoration programmes,   the displaced Kashmiri Hindus once again remembered their martyrs- mostly the victims who fell to the terrorist bullets; they remembered events and incidents which underlined the growth of communalism, intolerance and terrorism ; they reflected upon the collapse of the authority of the government , demise of their elemental rights and the failure of the state to come to their rescue; they reflected upon the fundamentalisation and militarization of the social milieu in Kashmir and the systematic  destruction of their habitat-the burning of their houses, plunder of their temples, grab of their properties and the distress sales; they pondered about their exile, the camps, the Diaspora and dispersal; they discussed the government’s law to prevent the distress sales without addressing their distress and they tried to comprehend their state of being a ‘migrant’, not even an ‘internally displaced’, not to speak of being a ‘refugee’ in one’s own country. Barely a day after, on 15th September, the state government, by declaring The Apex Cmmittee to oversee their return to Kashmir in essence declared that communalism, fundamentalism, terrorism and the politics which breeds them is not relevant to their return and rehabilitation in the Valley. The government once again underlined its commitment to an approach which reduces the entire issue of religious cleansing to merely an economic dimension. The approach at its core seeks to reverse genocide of Kashmiri Hindus by a process of 'Denial'.

For Kashmiri Hindus the implications of such a state of affairs is very grave. This is so because the reason of this ‘Denial’ is not just political expediency. Lying in its bosom is an intent of ‘refoulement’. The genocidal attrition of Kashmiri Hindus never stopped even in exile and the forces responsible for it have used their reach to perpetuate it. Return of Kashmiri Hindus to Kashmir Valley as the government envisages it means a return to an order which brought about their expulsion. It signifies a state of total abandonment of the victims by those who have a responsibility to protect them. And it also means subjecting them to a fate of total submission and surrender to the prevailing order in the valley. Erind D. Mooney who was a special advisor to the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Internally displaced Persons and has a long experience of working in the Office of United Nations High Commission for Human Rights in Geneva emphatically states, “Simply providing aid to persons whose physical security is under threat not only neglects their protection needs but can actually exacerbate and perpetuate their plight, for instance by providing a false sense of security, shoring up repressive regimes, fostering long term dependency, and even resulting in so-called ‘well-fed dead’.” 

Why has the State Government embarked upon a policy on return which resulted in bloody backlash massacres at Sangrampora, Wandhama and Nadimarg in the past? The political parties at the helm in the successive governments in the state have shared many an ideological objectives with the separatists and terrorist regimes in the state. They support the strengthening of the religious based identity politics in the state. They support weakening and impairing of the National sovereignty in the state. Their view of Kashmiri Hindu as the ‘other’ is the same as that of the separatists. Denying the genocide and delegitimising the issue of internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus is a goal they share with the armed separatists with more intensity than recognized. Displacement of Hindus has only exposed the ruthlessly communal and exclusivist nature of the political culture in the state. It has brought to the fore such issues which the mainstream parties in the valley as well as the separatists want to fudge and push under the carpet. An approach which treats the issue of return as if it is an issue akin to those of fire, earthquake or flood victims serves the political class in the Valley well. A symbolic return of the Kashmiri Hindus helps this class to purchase a secular credibility without having to pay any price. Last but not the least a symbolic return may help to make the solutions of greater autonomy- self rule as palatable to the people of India and camouflage their disruptive and balkanizing content.

More important question however is as to why does government of India endorse this approach of the state government on the issue of return of Kashmiri Hindus? If the whispers in the corridors of power in the state are true then the sudden activism on the return issue has emanated more at the Centre than in the State. The Union Home Minister has done well by visiting Jagati construction site for new upgraded facilities for the inmates of the camps in Jammu and tried to assuage the simmering apprehensions of the displaced community. His visit has brought some reassurance to the displaced Hindus   but the questions have not died down. The relief and rehabilitation of the Kashmiri Hindus falls within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Revenue headed by a Congress man and it is this Ministry which is overlooking the implementation of Prime Minister’s package for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus.

There is no evidence to suggest that Government of India is so confident about the ground situation in the state of Jammu and Kashmir that it is ready to take the risks which are inherent in the return of Kashmiri Hindus to the Valley. Democratic experiment in the valley has somewhat stabilized after the initiation of democratic process in the state in 1996. But the discourse of the two main parties NC and PDP as well as the civil society in the Valley has become brazenly more communal anti-India and pro-secessionist. The violence graph has shown a downward inclination. But the infrastructure of the terrorists and their reach and support in many areas has grown.

The GOC-in-C Northern command recently talked about ‘agitational terrorism’ which caused a lot of uproar in the Valley.  The new coinage infact refers to the increased reach of the terrorist regimes operating in the state to effect massive public mobilizations on the issues determined by them. It is an admission about the strength of the instruments of indoctrination and opinion building as well as coercion at the disposal of terrorist operatives in the state. The Prime Minister’s statement expressing concern over the deteriorating security situation in the state was flashed prominently by the print media the same day when the State Government declared the appointment of The Apex committee to oversee the return and rehabilitation of the displaced Kashmiri Hindus to Valley.

It seems that a section of government of India is in some haste to clinch a deal with Pakistan at this juncture. In its eagerness to push forward the agreements arrived with the Musharaff government this section seems to be working hard to create an internal logic to exert pressures to force consensus on the deal already worked out. One of the building blocks of this logic has already been created during the two campaigns of India Ragdo- Intifada in the state during last two years—the separatists are disowning and abandoning violence and militancy and rediscovering their non-violent moorings, so this is the appropriate time to settle issues with them.

And the second and more crucial aspect the structure of this internal logic is being sought to be created by somehow pushing a segment of displaced Kashmiri Hindus back to valley by stratagem, allurement or coercion. This will impart a secular legitimacy to the separatist cause there by facilitating a proactive engagement with the separatist leaders and eventually a deal with them.

The displaced Kashmiri Hindus realize fully well that this time the talk of their return to Kashmir is basically a talk about return to a new dispensation and not even the Kashmir as exists today.

There is, however, a deeper pathology involved in the denial of the Indian State with regard to the genocide and cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus than in the Turkish attitude in denying the genocide of Armenian Christians around1914-15 or the attitude of the Christian world and even the state of Israel who have sided with Turkey.

Donald Bloxham writes, “Turkish nationalist denial has at its heart the agenda of Turkish territorial integrity and specter of some form of compensation to the Armenians….. International accommodation of denial (of Armenian Genocide) also dates back to the crime itself. Indeed the Powers had long been prepared to distort the truth of Ottoman Atrocities on their own initiative, so it is of little surprise that they were later prepared to concur with Ankara’s denial agenda if their interests coincide with those of Turkey”.

The attitude of Indian State to deny what has happened to Kashmiri Hindus is not determined by its concern to preserve territorial integrity or sovereignty of India or some nationalist agenda in Kashmir. It is driven by a sick psychological proclivity which seeks the success of Indian secular vision in its capacity to compromise and accommodate with Muslim communalism. This perversion is seen in an influential segment of the rank and file of both the major parties Congress and BJP at the national level.

Professor Henry Therault, a descendent of the Armenian genocide survivors while discussing denial of genocide explains, “Deniers operate as agents of the original perpetrators, pursuing and hounding victims through time. Through them the perpetrators reach once again into the lives of the victims long after their escape from the perpetrators physical grasp.” The overwhelming rejection of the return perspective of the government by the Displaced Kashmiri Hindus is aimed at keeping themselves out of the physical grasp of those who perpetuated genocide on them and are alive, kicking, more numerous and stronger than they were in 1990.    

Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

The capturing of Indian peaks overlooking Kargil did pose a grave danger to the entire Ladakh region and even the Kashmir valley. But this does not sum up the entire story of Pakistani intentions. The sweeping generalisations that Pakistan expected only a low key military response from India defies simple logic. Particularly when India had shown all the resolve to defend as remote a place as Siachen in the same region at a very heavy human and material cost. It is time we look beyond the possible territorial objectives of Pakistani invasion in Kargil. There are reasons to believe that Kargil intrusion constituted a subtle politico-military manoeuvre for creating appropriate environment and pressure for the dilution of Indian sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir state to set the stage for its final separation.

Pakistani analyst Ayaz Amir’s remarks in Dawn should have been taken note of. While making a critical apprisal of Pakistan’s operation in Kargil he makes an interesting observation. “..to put the most charitable construction on what is going on in Kargil sector, if this was the opening move in a bid to liberate Kashmir by force, something could be said in its defence. It would be seen as a part of the larger scheme of things even if this largest scheme was decried foolish or foolhardy... A war or even fighting of a limited kind as we are seeing in Kargil and Drass sectors must have a political objective if the expenditure of blood and resources is to be justified... It cannot be conquest or liberation of Kashmir because we lack strength for it. It cannot be the desire to internationalise the Kashmir problem because it is a quixotic venture to rush into a war for so a paltry aim”. The political developments prior to, during and subsequent to Kargil intrusion indicate a deft political strategy to force India a step back in Kashmir.

When Lord Avebury visited Kashmir he revealed in disgust to the media that Hurriyat was expecting some sort of a big bang which was never going to come. Subsequently the Pakistan talked of holding a districtwise plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. Another significant political development took place  when the ruling National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir submitted its ‘Autonomy Report’ in the state assembly at a time and in a way which surprised everyone in India.

During the Kargil crisis Benazir Bhuttoo proposed an approach towards solving the Kashmir problem which she called ‘deliberate incremental advance” It essentially envisages porous borders between the two parts of Kashmir; demilitarisation of entire Kashmir and its patrolling by either an international peace-keeping force or a joint Indo-Pak peace keeping force; opening of borders for unrestricted trade, cultural cooperation and exchange leading to the creation of a South Asian Free Market Zone etc. These measures Mrs Bhutto believed will act as confidence building mechanisms to pave way for negotiations after a fixed time frame for the final settlement of Kashmir issue. Benazir’s admissions that she regretted the policies during her Prime Ministership which had only led to increase in the tensions between the two countries added the flavour of reasonableness to her proposals.

The discussions between Parvez Musharraf the Pak Army Chief with the US delegation of General Anthony Zinni Commander-in-Chief US General Command and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Gibson Lanpher as reported by Dawn showed that the Benazir’s overtures represented not just a public relation exercise in her self imposed exile but contained certain aspects of a broad consensus within the Pakistani establishment on the possible political approaches on Kashmir.

The newspaper Dawn reported that during the discussions with the visiting US delegation Gen Pervez Musharraf had hinted that Pakistan on its part would be prepared to consider as a part of a permanent solution the inclusion of the entire Valley and the Muslim parts of Jammu into the Pak held ‘Azad Kashmir’ territory-a settlement on the line of Dixon plan.

Mr Selig Harrison a fellow of the US think tank The Century Foundation, suggested during Kargil war that India for its part must show Pakistan and the international community that it is prepared to deal more sensitively with the Kashmiri aspirations than in the past by negotiating increased autonomy in accordance with the recommendations of the study recently conducted under the aegis of Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah.

All these political manoeuvres aimed at some sort of political solution for Kashmir made before and during Kargil, crisis.  When studied alongwith other proposals on Kashmir made by various US think tanks from time to time, reveal an underlying commonality of purpose. All of them essentially constitute the various variants of the model for Kashmir solution proposed by Owen Dixon commonly known as Dixon plan. The district wise plebiscite as proposed by Pakistan and the ‘Autonomy’ as outlined, by National Conference constitute the two ends of the spectrum of solutions which encompass various variants of Dixon Plan like Limited or Shared Sovereignty Doctrines, Sovereignty without International Personality, Greater autonomous Muslim Kashmir etc etc. The essence of this vision is that it endeavours to reconstitute Kashmir along communal lines, ease borders between the Indian Kashmir and Pak held Kashmir and seek nullification or dilution of Indian sovereignty in Jammu and Kashmir.

The systematically orchestrated publicity campaign over a decade has created a reference framework in India which emphasises the compatibility of ‘Autonomy Demand’ with the secular, democratic and federal structure of the Indian nation state This framework is yet to be challenged. Besides the methodology pursued by NC of articulating this demand with a very high anti-Pak rhetoric has left its impact on a section of Indian intelligentsia which actually has come to believe that the greater autonomy is a counterpoise to Pakistani aggressive machinations.

The Kargil intrusion has created subtler impacts. It has lowered the threshhold of international tolerance particularly in view of the regional nuclear environment. Besides the high cost of defending Kashmir is also being played up on Indian mind.

The tough talking which  Michael Kripon is reported to have done during his recent visit to Jammu and Kashmir state and the proposal by Karl Inderfurth of US willingness to help in the rebuilding of Kashmir in case of a meaningful solution are indicative of that the ‘Autonomy Solution’, will have wider international support.

A silent consensus appears to have developed within various concerned quarters in US and Pakistan as well as the Kashmiri separatists that ‘greater autonomy’ should be vigorously pursued as a solution which may please all and break the stalemate.

For India the choice is becoming limited now, particularly as the internal war in J&K threatens creation of so-called liberated and setting up of parallel administration. Accepting the ‘Autonomy’ as envisaged by NC means according a constitutional legitimacy to Muslim subnationalism and as such accepting the two nation principle. It will knock out the secular principal as the ideological foundation of Indian nation state. Rejecting it implies basically defending Kashmir from the point of view of issues and ideology and not through expediencies. It also means bidding a farewell to buffer policy which over the years only envisaged a symbolic secularism and symbolic democracy.

The political battle in Kashmir will be now won less on the game of numbers and cosmetic political manoeuvres and more by standing up to the challenges of ideology. The tragedy is that we are yet reluctant to fight this political battle from a higher pedestal.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

The new government in USA lead by President Obama has claimed to create a new regime of thinking to fight Islamic terrorism. The focus is gradually shifting from Iraq to Pakistan which is being gradually recognised as the epicentre of global terrorism. Adrian Leve and Catherine Scott-Clark in their work 'Deception' have reflected the view now shared by a large corpus of experts on international politics and terrorism when they say, “when politicians in London and Washington describe Musharraf as a key ally in the war on terror, what they really mean is that he is their only Islamic ally in the region. So with the White House and 10 Downing Street unable to countenance an alternative, Musharaff's Pakistan remains at the epicentre of terror, a disingenuous regime with its hands on the nuclear tiller".

The apprehensions in India that Barak Obama links the improvement in situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan to the solution of Kashmir problem have not died. But US governments categorical advice articulated by Obama himself that India is not a threat to Pakistan and that Pakistan needs to change its views about India creates a space for a new thinking on the region.

For the first time at least from a very optimistic and theoretical point of view one can venture to debate now that the problem of Pakistan is the nature of Pakistan itself. Unless this nature undergoes a transformation the motor which drives the polity in Pakistan to virulent anti-Americanism, compulsive hatred for India and voluntary embracing of Jihad, cannot to turned off. To think that Obama meant this when he urged Pakistan to change its outlook with regard to India is perhaps reading to much between and into the lines.

The release of 1.5 billion dollars of aid to Pakistan at this juncture once again pin points to the fact that USA has not as yet shunned the suicidal expediency with regard to Pakistan which has plagued its outlook to contain the global Islamic stridency and violence.  A former advisor to Bush Regime on weapons of Mass Distruction who lead researches tracking Pakistan's nuclear progress from its inception categorically states," Pakistan is top of the list. It is the number one threat to the world at this moment in time. If it all goes off, a nuclear bomb in a US or European city. I am sure we will find ourselves looking in Pakistan's direction."

Without generating a legitimate and vigorous introspection into the vital and important components of the polity in Pakistan, the financial bailout by USA only helps to nourish the vicious cycle of duplicity, deceit and deception which the Pakistani state has practised. To believe that the Pakistan Government and army have shunned ambivalence and duplicity and are rallying round to decisively counter radical Islam and its military might is very premature. To convey that the consent and compliance of Pakistani state in the war against Al Qaeda, Taliban and Muslim international is critical to US lead war on terror is fraught with the same consequences as has been the patronising of the Zia-ul-Haq regime and eventually Pervez Musharraf. How many time did President Bush describe Pervez Musharraf as 'his best friend' and the most important 'ally' in the war against terror. These dictators always thought that the US alliance with Pakistan was more critical than the concerns of USA on nuclear proliferation and the imperatives of global war on terror.

Many believe that USA is fully entrenched in Pakistan, has defanged the nuclear smuggling network run by notorious KRL from Kahuta and has taken control of at least that command centres of the Nuclear Bomb possessed by Pakistan. A few examples will suffice to make us re-examine our premises.

Pakistani military continued its nuclear procurements even after the smashing of the network of Dr Qader Khan. While Musharraf was negotiating AQ Khan's expulsions and eventual house arrest with Bush in New York, Pakistani Military establishment was continuing with the procurement of material related to nuclear proliferation. Asher Karni of Top-Cape Technology, a Captown firm that imported US electronic goods to South Africa, was asked by a Islamabad based firm which was only a front for Pakistani military, to procure thirty-six US manufactured oscilloscopes for Pakistan, costing $1.3 million Bush refused to raise the issue with Musharraf at Camp David on 24 June 2003. Three days later the South African company confirmed Islamabad that they had procured spark gaps in the US at $950 per piece. The first batch of sixty-six spark gaps arrived in South Africa on 8 Oct, 2004. That very day Richard Armitage and General Pervez Musharraf in Islamabad were having a discussion to finalise how to settle the A.Q Khan issue. On October 21,2003 Humayun Khan took the delivery of the first batch of spark gaps in Pakistan. The shipment was useless because customs agents and anti proliferation sleuths had switched the spark gaps for harmless components keeping the whole affair out of Musharraf's knowledge. The entire affair came to court in March 2005 in USA. Intriguingly the US State Department had closed down many requests to travel to Pakistan to interview Humayun Khan, who if extradiled and found guilty could have been jailed. It was openly reported that 'Suddenly the US government was affraid of offending Pakistan, its partner in war on terror," During Zia-ul-Haq's time also the US government had ambushed court cases, sealed them and those accused in smuggling equipment and material related to nuclear proliferation were allowed to leave USA.

General Musharraf took over the Khan's mill manufacturing nuclear components immediately after he had made himself President, restructuring it and transforming it into a world class facility with extraordinary input. In 2005 Lt. General Abdul Qayum Khan, the chairman of the mill said, "It was through Musharraf's daring, honest and visionary leadership that we have seized the moment". What did he mean was explained candidly by General KM Arif who had run the nuclear programme. He said about the nuclear business and the People's Steel Mill created by Dr Qader Khan as, "We have labs and the industry to rival the west. Once we sulked around. Now Pakistan is producing high-frequency invertors. They used to come from the UK and now we are selling them ourselves. Maraging  steel too. Once we struggled but now finally we are manufacturing it at People's Steel Mill and exporting it. It is better than you can get outside". Maraging Steel is used in high quality centrifuges used in enrichment of uranium. For Pakistan state to untemalise the view that USA will overlook its national interests to accommodate Pakistan is not a wishful state of mind the ground.

Proliferation experts have almost confirmed that Pakistan has continued to sell nuclear technology even after Musharraf became the best friend of Bush. Nobody has taken notice of the release of Dr Qader Khan from house arrest by the Pakistani courts under the supervision of Zardari government which has been having turbulent times and which cannot survive without the American support. Release of Khan is an affront which USA has swallowed as it has done many times in past to preserve its relation with Pakistan.

During the uncertainty in Pakistan caused by the lawyers long march the former Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharief said in an interview to an Indian channel that, "I am not worried about happenings in Swat. I am worried about what is happening in Baluchistan." The implications of the statement were ignored. The statement basically reflected the dominant view in Pakistan that does not view Islamisation and consequent radicalisation as a threat to National Unity and progress but sees the repressed subnational urges as the threat to Pakistan.

To see army operations in certain parts of Pakistan as a corrective applied by the Pakistan state to change itself is erroneous and the new US regime is perhaps committing this error. The army operations against Taliban and non-state actors is in essence a vicious struggle for control of power. In essence Pakistani army is seeking only to tame the non-state actors so that they agree to work within the discipline and parameters created by Pakistani  state more specifically the Pakistan Army. The Taliban and other Non State actors on the othre hand are exerting the pressures on Pakistani army to conform to the dictates of Pan Islamic vision and act as its sword arm. If Pakistani Army wins it will seek to play the determining role not only as a frontline Muslim state but also as a nuclear Muslim state to shape the politics which will be none other than Islamic. If Taliban and Al Qaeda win the will of Pakistani army, will be subassumed into their will. Both ways the space for egalitarian and moderate politics is either obliterated or exists only as a mirage. US has been chasing this mirage to its own determinant.

When Barak Obama says Pakistan has to change its outlook with regard to India does it mean a fundamental change in outlook or is it only diplomatic assurance to Pakistan that India has been forewarned of any misadventure while Pakistani Army is grappling with its internal menace.

If Barak Obama means a fundamental change then we will see restructuring and recasting of international debate in Pakistan. Pakistan in such a scenario will have to cease to be a Muslim pocket created in post War period as a twin brother of Israel to contain or divide Asia. To help Pakistan to recast its outlook means changing its character. Pakistan has to emerge as a country where pluralism takes roots on a principal of equality which cannot happen so far political Islam takes precedence in its National Vision. Pakistan even if it wishes to emerge as a polity on the principal of equality, cannot do so unless it delinks comprehensively from Kashmir. Kashmir is the cardinal expression of Pakistan being a frontline Muslim state for the expansion of Muslims power towards east. So Kashmir acts as a motor to drives the mills of Jihad. Any solution to Kashmir which placates Jihad will never help in dousing its fires. It well only act as its fuel for expanding to new frontiers.

By Dr Ajay Chrungoo

Kargil intrusion has raised an array of fundamental questions about the functioning of our intelligence set up, strategic thinking to political decision  making. Terms of reference of the Committee declared by the Prime Minister to go into the various aspects of Kargil intrusion are broad enough to answer these questions. Only if the committee applies itself with integrity and the political leadership plays just a facilitator’s role. However the process of such an introspection may still fall short of the desired objectives of making nation wiser to evolve a comprehensive response to the Pak mechinations. The reason is the reluctance which the Indian nation state has been showing in  qualifying the ‘war form’ Pakistan has unleashed. The nation has to come to terms with this ‘war form’ if the aftermath of Kargil intrusion, which marked the upgradation of Pakistani agression at all levels, is to be handled properly.

WAR FORM AND DEFECTIVE STRATEGIC PARADIGM

The commonly used terminogologies for the Pakistani aggression of various forms during last decade have been ‘Proxy-war’ and ‘undeclard war’. Prox-war term, which is more commonly used, squarely fails to qualify the nature of this war because it creates a  misleading impression about the instrumentalities used in this war. The human factor involved through such a qualification, becomes an element devoid of any will, conviction as well as independence of action. Focus remains primarily on the external element.

The ‘undeclared war’ terminology is also grossly inadequate, but does at
least qualify one attribute of the ‘war form’ which is that the initiator of
the aggression maintains a leverage of deniability and never formally owns the responsibility for the aggression.

Both the nomenclatures are the product of the extant strategic paradigm of a low-intensity conflict which is neither able to perceive the gradual upgradation of the aggression at various levels from within nor visualise and pre-empt the quantum leap in the conflict from without. These commonly used qualifications of Pakistani war also do not encompass the various components of the aggression as well as its objectives long term or short term.

In the aftermath of Kargil intrusion the experts on strategic concerns
however, appear to be getting conscious of the limitations of the existing paradigm on security issues. They have  infact become highly critical of it.

‘A Kashmir policy must be invented supported by an operational doctrine that will persuade Pakistan to respect the ‘sanctity of LoC’, comments major Gen. Ashok Mehta a military expert of repute. Another analyst on strategic affairs Raja Menon reflects similar concerns while trying to explain reasons for Kargil intrusion. “A range of faulty signals from India created not so much by bad nuclear strategy but absence of any strategy conventional or nuclear”.

QUALIFICATION OF THE WAR FORM

The deputy director of Institute of  Defense studies and Analyses C. Uday Bhaskar, one of the best known defense experts, describes the complexity of the war by Pakistan in Kashmir  as, “Kashmir symbolises a large range of issues  including terrorism, low-intensity coflict, concept of Jehad, Islamic terror and also the patterns of ISI’s destablising designs in different parts of our country.”

This statement, even though a little overlapping in its content, takes into account the broadest spectrum of attributes of the Paki-war. More
specifically the Pakistani aggression against our nation for last two
decades constitutes three forms of assaults-subversive, demographic and territorial. The distinguished political scientist from Kashmir, Prof.  MK Teng hits the core of the issue when he describes the undeclared war as the -‘War of Subversion’.

The aftermath of Kargil intrusion provides the defense and strategic
analysts of our country a very conducive national environment to go into various aspects of the failure which led to the intrusion in Kargil. It also provides a very excellant and crucial opportunity to understand the nature of the war being waged by Pakistan in its totality.

Kargil intrusion constituted the interplay of all the three forms of
assaults-subversive, demographic and territorial. Before the intrusion we
have seen the interplay  and impact of only the subversive and  demographic assaults. Inspite of the much drummed up Shia-Sunni divide a very significant part of the logistics for the Kargil intrusion was provided by the subversives within. Kargil crisis had also a very significant implication of rendering the security and manitainance of Kargil town untenable creating the potential for a severe demographic pressure on the Buddhist majority Leh. The territorial implications of the intrusion have been thoroughly debated and the dangers to entire Ladakh region highlighted.

The atypicality of the military operations in Kargil have been summed up by another expert on strategic analyses Sh Sreedhar, “for the first time in post independence India, the armed forces are fighting two types of armies of Pakistan. It is becoming clear that Pakistan’s regular army from Northern Light Infantry Divisiion is in action. At another level the Indian army is also fighting a regular-irregular army raised by Pakistan during the last two decades.”

WAR OF SUBVERSION-ATTRIBUTES

The war by Pakistan as already discussed comprises of three main components - subversive, demographic and territorial. However, the subversive component constitutes core of the entire ‘war form’.

a)      Basic objective:- Basic objective of this war form is purely
ideological. Pakistan is an ideological state with a proclaimed
incompatibility with Indian nation state. This incompatibility is not
Kashmir specific as commonly believed. Kashmir is only an alibi for
expansion of Muslim power towards east taking the entire Himayalan barrier into its fold to ultimately overwhelm India.

The Comments of one of the leading authorities on contemporary Islam John Laffin should make our strategic analysts stand up and ponder, while they formulate approaches to deal with the Pakistani aggression. Laffin says, “The Sunni Muslim code of civil legislation according to Hanfi School of Islamic Law expresses the matter clearly. The Jehad is the normal and permanent state of  war between the Muslims and the people of Dar-al-Harb, the code points out. It can end only with domination over the unbelievers and the absolute supremacy of Islam throughout the world. All war like acts are permitted on the territory of the infidels ... As it is not feasible to fight against all the infidel people simultaneously, Jehad allows for the eventuality of a provisional suspension of hostilities. Such unavoidable truces constitute another form of holy war for they serve to reinforce the military potential of Darul-Islam.”

b)      Interim objectives:- This war of subversion, conditioned by its basic objectives, has interim objectives. The major flaw in our national discourse on security issues is that it continues to be territory centric. For an unconventional war we have been applying a conventional approach. This paradigm has lead to our failure to appreciate the non-territorial objectives of Pakistani aggresson in general and Kargil intrusion in particular.

Strategic thinkers within this country and outside have regarded Kargil
intrusion as a high quality military operation of ‘ingenuity’. Tony Clifton
who had reported 1971 war between India and Pakistan on both sides comments, “Ironically it has really been a brilliant operation on the part of the Pakistanis, but they can never say so, that is horribly for their morale.”

Indian military experts have also openly complimented this operation from the point of view of military  standards. Ironically there is a simplistic generalisation being offered in this country that the Pakistani think tank behind Kargil Operation was surprised by the high intensity response from India. We are spending two crores a day for defending a very remote area  of Ladakh - the Siachin Glacier, and even had successfully repelled more than a dozen bids to capture it in the year preceeding Lahore diplomacy. Yet we tend to believe that on the other side people were stupid enough not to judge our  reaction even when  the entire Srinagar-Leh axis was being jeopardised.

It is time our strategic analysts accord due respectability to such
objectives of Kargil intrusion which have been articulated but only  in a
way that they appear to be incidental to the main objective of endangering the entire Ladakh region. These objectives are essentially non-territorial from the short term perspective.

For example through the operation in Kargil, besides inflicting a heavy
cost on India Pakistan has also probed various strategic thresholds.
Specifically Kargil intrusion has lowered the threshold for international
intervention and at the same time raised the threshold of Indian
conventional reponse. But more importantly the intrusion has aimed to create a favourable environment for Dilution of Indian Sovereignty in Jammu and Kashmir.

In the prelude to Kargil intrusion Pakistan’s support to district-wise
plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir state and almost simultaneous floating of proposals for reorganising the Indian part of Jammu and Kashmir on communal lines with Indian control only on three subjects of defence, communication and foreign affairs, are perhaps not incidental happenings. During as well as after the Kargil operation we are witnessing  the veering round of the so called moderate liberal opinion both in Pakistan and India around various variants of the Dixon-Plan advocated vigorously by US think tanks on Kashmir.

Pakistani analyst Ayaz Amir’s remarks in Dawn provide a critical insight
which is worth consideration. He while making a critical apprisal of
Pakistani operation says, “to put the most charitable construction on what is going on in Kargil sector, if this was the opening move in a bid to liberate Kashmir by force, something could be said in its defence. It would be seen as part of a larger scheme of things even if this larger scheme was decried as foolish or foolhardy. But unless there are higher secrets yet to be revealed, the fighting in Kargil appear to stand all by itself...  A  war or even fighting of a limited kind as we are seeing in theKargil and Drass sectors, must have a political objective if the expenditure of blood and resources is to be justified. What is the political objective of the present fighting?

It cannot be the conqest or liberation of Kashmir because we lack the
strength for that. It  cannot be the desire to internationalise the Kashmir problem because it is a quixotic venture to risk a war for so paltry aim.”

Strategic security paradigm in India has to assimilate the fact that most
important interim objective of ‘war of subversion’ in Jammu and Kashmir by Pakistan is the Dilution of Indian Sovereignty over the state. Also what we are witnessing in the entire state is not a territorial surgery but
territorial dissolution. Relentless Demographic assault has considerably
narrowed down Indian social base in the state. This loss of demographic
leverage is aimed to facilitate the process of territorial dissolution to
critical levels where the front either will not exist or there will be
fronts all around.

c)      Response Control:- ‘War of Subversion’ through its subversive process has created,  sustained and perpetuated a reference frame work in our country which is crucial for its continuance and attainment of objectives. The contradictions between various nation building approaches in India are being used as the operating space . Military experts in India now admit that even without territorial gains Pakistani operations have attained a ‘strategic depth.’

With the upgradation of various components of Pakistani aggression,
subversive assault has assumed a critical dimension which if not controlled can be catastrophic. Upgradation in subversion has further brought  about a qualitative deterioration in the existing reference framework of Indian responses. For example before 1989 and forced exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, secular approach of various political regimes in valley was judged not by the secular content of their politics but by their approach towards accession with India. After 1989, the demographic composition of the exodus became the hall mark of the state of secular affairs. In recent times the pressures of subversion have pushed the secular paradigm to ridiculous clichés. Symbolic return of Pandits gave away to the tourism returning to valley as the basic parameter of the status of secularism in the valley.

Theories of ‘alienation’ have helped in the dangerous internalisation of
the crisis. Everything that happens gets attributed to the failures of the
state thereby creating  more alienation.

Most dangerous implication of the subversive processes is their  success in forcing a process of self-disinformation upon the Indian state. Kargil
intrusion becomes a fallout of returning tourism and normalcy in the valley. And intensification of violence in the valley becomes a  fallout of Kargil intrusion. Massacres in Jammu become a result of desperation of terrorists in the valley and the massacres in valley an outcome of their desperation in Jammu. Nation appears to have entered a vicious cycle of self-delusion and self-mortification.

d)      International Environment:- The ‘war of subversion’ is operating in a conducive international environment of unipolarity. India continues to be seen as a part of the other pole of the bipolar era which was dismantled.

The international environment has restricted the healthy expression of our sovereignty. Kargil war took place on the terms and conditions of the enemy which we could not alter because of our continued isolation on strategic matters.

The ‘war of subversion’ by Pakistan should be seen in   complementary
relations rather than contridiction with the international opinion which has restricted the expression of Indian sovereignity. American and western endorsement of Indian point of view came as late as when most of the military objectives were achieved by Indian forces at a very heavy cost. The belated support to Indian position in Kargil has not to be visualised as veering round of US and west to Indian view on Kashmir but only in the context of forestalling any new regional alignments. “No less extremist ones are those who have somehow convinced themselves that America’s abhorrence of Islamic fundamentalism combined with terrorism, more particularly the nefarious activities of Osma Bin Laden, the growing attraction of Indian market and the realisation  that in the Asian balance of power India matters, the US is now ready for a breakthrough in Indo-US relations even at the cost of its long term alliance with Pakistan”, these words of caution by Inder Malhotra are fully justified.

The interim objective of dilution of sovereignty in Indian Kashmir of the
‘war of subversion’ by Pakistan is in perfect harmony with the positions
taken by US and west on Kashmir. The vision of Asia in 21st century as
revealed by the Pantagon Papers envisages creation of an Independent
Kashmir. There are concrete reasons to believe that this vision has not been as yet disowned by the US Government.

e)      Economic support:- The war type by Pakistan is supported both by legal as well as illegal economy. Overemphasis on the state of affairs of official Pak economy may lead us to faulty conclusions. Illegal economy derived from the over all control of drug traffiking in particular and crime Mafias in general form the core of the support base of this ‘war of subversion’. It is mind-boggling that equal amount of Pakistan’s GDP in 1997-98-Rs 2,750 million was generated by the parallel economy. Sums generated by smuggling are at the disposal of armed forces and spending Rs 100 million or so for a Kargil type operation is not a problem.

BEYOND KARGIL

The realisation of the totality of the war by Pakistan is a pre-requisite in
combating  it. Approaches  of self mortification have lead to the
internalisation of the problems which Pakistan has created. Approaches of externalisation have to be part of the future operational doctrine.
National sensitivity to Pakistani designs should not be only  territorial.
Subversive and demographic assaults are as crucial as the terrotorial one.

Nation has to develop a threshold for these assault  forms as well and let it be known to the world. There in lies  the key to contain and defeat this aggression.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

The nation celeberated the tercentenary of the Khalsa on Baisakhi this year. On this day, Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth Sikh Guru founded the Khalsa-a brotherhood of saint-soldiers. They were to wield the sword to protect virtue against vice and to put an end to the intolerant religious policy of Mughals represented by Aurangzeb. Guru Govind Singh was of the view that the forces of intolerance and tyranny can be countered only by reinvigorating the faith and inculcating fighting spirit among the people.

PATRIOTIC ROLE

Ideas of patriotism and martyrdom inculcated by Guru Govind Singh, the prophet of resistance has left a chequered legacy. The Sikhs have been in the forefront of the country's freedom struggle and acted as the sword-arm of India's defence after 1947. When the Britishers came, the Sikhs were the last to lay down the arms. They were also the first to raise the banner of revolt against them.

The two major anti-British movements of 1920s-Ghadarite movement of Komagata Maru fame and the Gurudwara Reform movement were exclusively Sikh movements and shook the foundations of the colonialist empire. In these struggles four hundred Sikhs lost their lives, about two hundred were maimed andanother thirty thousand arrested. Out of 2,175 patriots who gave their lives for India's freedom, 1557 were Sikhs. During the anti-colonialist struggle 2446 Indians were banished to Kala Pani, out of this 2147 were Sikhs. 127 martyrs were hanged and among these 92 were Sikhs.

KASHMIRI PANDITS AND SIKH GURUS

This historic moment of tercentenary is an occasion for exiled Kashmiri Pandits to rededicate themselves to the ideals of Sikh gurus and express their gratitude for saving their faith. Only those communities who remember their saviours, survive in history.

In 1669, the bigoted Mughal ruler Aurangzeb unleashed a policy of religious persecution against non-Muslims. This caused large-scale demoralisation and fear among the people. Seeing all this Guru Tegh Bahadur, the prophet of reassurance felt the need to rekindle their crest fallen spirits. During 1673 and 1674 Guru Tegh Bahadur undertook intensive work in the Malwa and Bangar areas, inspiring people with confidence and encouraging them to face all odds and difficulties. This was his silent but sure protest against Aurangzeb's aggressive policy of persecution. Thousands of them came to have his holy darshan and to receive his message of courage and hope embodied in the dictum, 'Fear not, nor give fear to others'. The people of Northern India, particularly the Hindus, found their natural saviour in the person of Guru Tegh, Bahadur. He became the symbol of India's civilisational resistance at that time. After reawakening the people's spirits, Guru finally retired to his headquarters, Chak Nanaki, presently called Anandpur Sahib.

On May 25, 1675 a band of sixteen Chief Brahmins of Kashmir, under the leadership of Pandit Kripa Ram Dutt reached Anandpur Sahib to seek his intervention. The Mughal Governor Iftikhar Khan had ordered them to covert or face death. It was in Gurudwara Manji Sahib that Guru heard their tale of woe and went into pensive mood. Deeply moved by their appeal, the Guru pondered a while and then announced his decision that he would even sacrifice his life for the protection of their faith. The Guru had been keenly watching the grave situation enveloping the country in the wake of Aurangzeb's policy of religious persecution. He was convinced that only his martyrdom can stem this tide.

Why Kashmiri Pandits sought the intervention of only Guru Tegh Bahadur has remained a subject of much curiosity. Though the impact of religious persecution was felt all over India but only on the issue of Kashmiri Pandits' persecution Guru decided to undertake the supreme sacrifice. This has also aroused much interest among serious students of Indian civilisation.

Though it must be admitted that Kashmiri Pandits approached Guru Tegh

Bahadur for immediate succuour, but its implications were far reaching. Much before Pandit Kripa Ram's mission to Anandpur Sahib, Pandit spiritual leaders and the Sikh Gurus had been in intimate contact and shared their ideas in the spiritual realm. Pandit Kripa Ram was no stranger to the Durbar of Sikh Gurus. He was a descendent of Pandit Brahm Das, who had met Guru Nanak in Mattan. Kripa Ram had known the Ninth Guru and also taught Sanskrit classics to the young Gobind Rai. During the reign of Jehangir, Guru Hargobind came to Srinagar and met Kashmiri saintess Mata Bagh Bari, who lived at Rainawari. It is interesting that Mata Bagya Bari's spiritual interaction with the sixth Sikh Guru is so well-preserved in the Sikh religious tradition. In Pandit tradition Mata Bagya Bari is a reference model for the highest attainment of spiritual merit. In their daily discourse, Pandits often refer, 'Zan Chhak Bagya Bhad' Translated into English, it means 'As if you are Bagya Bari'. Why Kashmiri Pandits approached Guru Tegh Bahadur can be explained by the fact that they were in desperate search for a centre of resistance, which would recognise the civilisational challenges overtaking the country then.

And by appealing to the Sikh Guru, they were subtly conveying to the countrymen that this was the only credible and competent institution, which could overtake this gigantic task. Secondly, Kashmir Pandits had been feeling natural affinity with the Sikh Gurus. They empathised with the egalitarian ideas of Sikh Gurus and maintained regular contact with them right since the times of Guru Nanak. Kashmiri Hindu society had rejected the caste rigidity that characterised the Indian society. Long sway of Buddhism and the non-dualistic Shaivism had totally undermined the caste system and made Kashmir a casteless society Ideas of Sikh Gurus thus looked so natural to them.

Guru Gegh Bahadur recognised the importance of preserving the civilisational centre in Kashmir. Its collapse, he felt would have grave impact on the future of civilisation struggle in rest of India. Kashmiri Hindus had provided intellectual and spiritual leadership to Hindus of India. Benaras Brahmins to whom Aurangzeb had approached first for conversion told him that they could take a decision only if Kashmir Brahmins accepted it. Seeking intervention of Guru Tegh Bahadur by Kashmiri Pandits and Gurus supreme sacrifice-the real impact of these two events in the evolution of Khalsa has yet to be fathomed.

About this, the renowned Sikh scholar, Fauja Singh writes, 'the appeal of the Kashmiri Pandits for help, coming towards the end, played a decesive role in so far as it helped the Guru in making his final resolve on the issue. However, from the manner in which the circumstances shaped themselves and finally led to the crucial point, it may be clear that the issues involved were wider and deeper than the compassion for a few woe-stricken Brahmins of a disant area'. Guru Gobind Singh's statement in his famous composition, Bachitar Natak, on the martyrdom of his father reads as follows--

The Lord (Guru Tegh Bahadur) protected their paste-mark and sacred thread,

And performed a mighty deed in the Kali Age. To protect the holy he spared no pains; Gave his head but uttered not a groan. For the protection of dharma He did this noble deed; Gave up his head but not his ideal. Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom for protecting the faith of Pandits made him a messiah for Pandit Kripa Ram and his other companions. They settled down In Anandpur Sahib for good. Pandit Kripa Ram was later baptised by Guru Govind Singh. He gave his life heroically fighting the treacherous Mughal forces at Chamkaur along with Guru Gobind Singh's two elder sons.Later, in another battle at Muktsar, Keshav Bhat, a Kashmiri Pandit was one among those forty Brahmins, who fought alongside Guru Govind Singh and achieved martyrdom.

Guru was so moved by their heroism that he named them MUKTAS and himsel performed their last rites. Much of the information about the events of these times have been chronicled by immigrant Kashmiri Pandits. Their accounts called as Bhatta Vahis (Pandits' accounts) have been carried from generation to generation by Punjab's balladeers until these were recorded in the last century.

RISE OF KHALSA

Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom had far-reaching political effects. The Mughals had, not long after, to face stiff resistance from the Sikhs. Sikh opposition contributed significantly to the collapse of the Mughal empire. After the martyrdom of his father, Guru Gobind Singh, took several concrete steps to give a new orientation to the Sikh community. As a true soldier of the people and conscious of the role he had to play in the aftermath of ninth Guru's martyrdom, Guru Gobind Singh did not get overwhelmed by his tragic loss. Guru's public execution had outraged the Indians. From near and far they moved to Anandpur Sahib to be with the young Guru. They looked to him as the promised saviour and the man of the hour.

A soldier of destiny, the tenth Guru started consolidating his resources and began building an army of saint-soldiers among his people. He gave a clarion call to all the Sikhs on the Baisakhi fair in 1699. Several thousand Sikhs came to participate in the fair in response to the Guru's call. He created the Khalsa in 1699 after baptising the 'Panj Pyara' (Five beloved ones) and asking them in turn to baptise himself. It was really a psychological feat of transformation of the community as also of democratising the religious authority, which had earlier vested in the personality of the Guru exclusively. Personal Guruship ended with his death and Guruship came to be vested in the scriptures and the Panth. After the creation of Khalsa, out of the fourteen battles they fought against the well-disciplined imperial army, not less than twelve times they defeated the enemy convincingly. In his struggle against intolerance,

Guru Gobind Singh suffered grievious losses personally. His father was martyred and mother died in captivity. Two of his sons met their end fighting single-handedly against heavy odds. His two younger sons were walled-in alive. Nowhere in history has any leader given so much personal sacrifice. Aurangzeb ultimately decided to invite Guru Gobind Singh for reconcilation.

Guru sent him a letter known as Zafar Nama, the Epistle of victory. In it he described Aurangzeb as faithless and irreligious. Guru told him, 'what if my four sons have been killed, I live to take their revenge. It's no herosim to extinguish a few sparks. You have only excited a devastating fire. You have the pride of your empire, while I am proud of the kingdom of God. You must not forget that this world is like a caravan sarai and one must leave it sooner or later..' This disarmed Aurangzeb and he was forced to remove all restrictions on Guru. It is said that Aurangzeb then took to his bed and died soon thereafter The writer is the chairman of Political Affairs Committee of Panun Kashmir.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Rajinder Tiku is a famed sculpture artist of Kashmir. His contributions to the art of sculpture has received wide acclaim even at the international level. In recognition of his services, Tiku was recently awarded the prestigious Pollock Krasner Foundation Grant. He was invited to International Symposium at Switzerland (International De Sculptures, Sion) in 1998 and Israel (Stone inGalilee, International Stone Symposium, Maalot-Tarshiha) in 2001. He also participated in international exhibitions - Exhibitions of Sculptures at La-Grenette, Sion, Switzerland (1998), Volume and Form, Singapore, 1998-99, Feuersinne Erden Germany, 2001, Guilin-Yuzi Paradise Contemporary World Sculpture Show, China (2003).

In 1999, Lalit Kala Akademi honoured him with 'Eminent Artist' award. Tiku has been recipient of National Award for Sculpture (1993), 8th Triennale India (International) Award for Sculpture (1994) and J&K State Award for Sculpture (1978-79). Department of Culture, Ministry of Human Resources awarded him with fellowships (Junior) in 1993-95 and (Senior) in 1997-99.

Rajinder Tiku was nominated juror by Lalit Kala Academy, New Delhi in 1998. Since then he has served on jury panel for Exhibitions of Lalit Kala Akademy and J&K Cultural Academy (2000, 2005); for Kalidas Samman (2002, 2004); for Lalit Kala Samman (National Award) 2002; and AIFACS All India Exhibition and Awards, 1999. He has conducted five solo exhibitions - Sculpted Images India Habitat Centre, New Delhi), 2003; Art Heritage (New Delhi) 1990, 1992, 1995, 1998, 2003; and ABC Foundation (Varanasi), 1998.

The noted sculptor has participated in prestigious group exhibition in different Cultural centres of India. These include “Only Connect”, The Essence of Life (New Delhi, 2002); Combine voices for the New Century (New Delhi, 2000); Edge of the Century, Art Today (New Delhi, 1998) Major Trs in Indian Contemporary Art (New Delhi, 1997), The Indian Contemporary Art - Post Indepence (New Delhi, 1997), Harmony Show (Mumbai, 1996-1997); A Tree In My Life (New Delhi, 1995), Sculpture -95 (New Delhi), 8th & 7th Triennale (New Delhi, 1991 and 1994), Trembling Images, an exhibition of works by Kashmiri Artists (New Delhi, 1991), Bharat Bhawan Biennale (Bhopal, 1990), AIFACS International Exhibition of Graphics, New Delhi and Chandigarh (1983), All India Exhibition of Drawing (Chandigarh), Contemporary Indian Art Exhibition, Jammu 1985.

Rajinder Tiku has also been a regular seminarist on Indian Sculpture and has atted International Sculpture Symposiums at Bhopal (2002) and Hyderabad (Shilpam-2002). He took part in International Stone Carving Symposium (Stone-2000) at Baroda and International Sculptors' Symposium at Varanasi(1999). Besides this he spoke at International Sculptors' Symposium organised by IPCL, India at Nagothane (1995), Clay Symposium India at Goa in 1994 and Indo-Japan Symposium on Granite Carving-Baroda (2004). He has been participant in Artists’ Camps at Bhubneshwar (2004), Pune (2003), Port Blair (2003), Jahnor (1998), Surajkund (1998), Gwalior (1996) and All India Sculpture Camp, organised by J&K Cultural Academy, 1980.

Tiku’s works adorn many prestigious and public collections e.g. J&K Cultural Akademy, Lalit Kala Akademy, National Gallery of Modern Art (New Delhi); Art Heritage (New Delhi), MP Lalit Kala Academy, Ram Chhatpar Shilp Niyas (Varanasi), City of Sion, Switzerland, City of Maalot - Tarshiha, Israel, beside IPCL India, Jyoti Ltd. Baroda, NTPC, India, Transpek Silox Ltd. Baroda etc. Rajinder Tiku has also flair for writing. His articles have been published in reputed journals like Lalit Kala Contemporary, Art Heritage and Kashmir Sentinel. He has been practicing and teaching sculpture since 1979 at the Institute of Music and Fine Arts, Jammu. During this period, in his art, he has tried to explore the local possibilities vis-a-vis material and thought. He is working hard to inculcate in his students a sense of affinity for their surroundings and transform the same into a sculptural idiom, that has a global identity but at the same time does not sacrifice the essential individual character. Tiku hails from Wadwan village in Budgam (Kashmir) district. He had his schooling from the local village school and secondary education from SP College, Srinagar. He holds Bachelor's Degree in Science and Law. Tiku received his training in Sculpture from the Institute of Music and Fine Arts, Srinagar.

In formation of his objects, Tiku has used stone, terracotta, ceramics, metals, scrap and their combinations. The forms that have emerged are ambiguous, metamorphic, symbolic or sacred, generating their own place. About his art, Tiku observes, “Man made shapes attract me much more than the natural ones, especially those which in one or the other way depict traces and signs of transition of time, right on their surfaces. Be it a well-used agricultural implement or an ordinary kitchen knife showing wear and tear. All such things act as visual stimuli, invoking a sense of nostalgia.”

On the significance of sculpture, he remarks, “Sculpture is a larger phenomenon of which a medium and its execution into a particular form is only a part. To each and every work, there is lot more beyond its medium. Perhaps the beauty in its potential to reveal truth. The potential to work on us and impart meaning to our existence.”

‘INTERFACE’:

Of late, the noted sculptor has been involved in the project titledINTERFACE. Through the INTERFACE he has been trying to bring out in a tangible form the seemly intangible aspect of silent and sacred embedded in our tradition. Tiku is of the view that if continuity of India’s ancient civilisation is to be maintained, then its civil society has to realize and rebuild the cultural traditions inherited from ancestors. He quotes Vedanta SiddhantRina Triya-the triad of obligations to drive home his point. In an observation of profound significance, Tiku remarks : "A society's grasp of its past becomes a source for creativity in the present. It stimulates all forms of contemporary expression allowing the meaning to seep through to the images, shapes and a plethora of other cultural activities. While, looking at this phenomenon of past and present in a continuum, where lines of distinction between historical memories and personal experiences blur if not disappear, we realise an eternal source of knowledge within our ourselves. A source, which energizes us to flow on to be a part and parcel of this continuum”. Getting inspired from objects ranging from mundane ones located in the immediate surroundings to monuments located in the trajectory of timelessness, Tiku perceives a quantum of images and symbols that seem to usher intellectual and philosophical human eavours into the realm of universal.

'INTERFACE' is a project that envisages an expression to sacred within the format of contemporary sculpture. Seven is an auspicious number with spiritual/cosmic connotations. Tiku has chosen seven places/regions -Kashmir, Varanasi, Konark, Rajasthan, Mahabalipuram, Andhra Pradesh andMaharashtra. He proposes to execute seven monumental stone sculptures which in one-way or the other shall project the perceived contemporaneous at these sites. The selection of the places has been made keeping in view the cultural importance of these areas, their potential to inspire and stimulate meaningful work in sculpture along with actual working possibility. This project was conceived by Tiku while he was working at the ancient KhandagiriCaves, Orissa. He attempted to carve a simple pillar, which from a particular point would intensify the visual impact of the site in the feeling of the onlooker. Through a focussed visual study of these sites, he wants to evolve contemporary monuments and invoke the spirit of these sites.

His work, Falling Columns is an illustration of such an interface with the historical monuments in Kashmir, carved in the local available lime-stone. This 4'x4'x1½' monumental sculpture in a peculiar diagonal disposition is in fact a tribute to the spiritual movement/response/activity that is generated by such timeless movements. Tiku says that using of a similar material and trying to catch on the aspect of mass and movement would generate the inted interface. He is of the view that the display of these sculptures in the vicinity of each monument would relive India’s continuous spiritual creative traditions in particular and those of the rest of the world in generalt

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

2008 elections are now over. A power shift has taken place. PDP-Congress alliance has been replaced in the state by NC-Congress alliance. Chief Ministership of the state government has reverted back to a Kashmiri for full six years, if the alliance lasts that long. All the major portfolios like home, finance planning, revenue and power have been retained by NC signifying the retrieval of the status quo of power.This status quo had marginally changed during PDP-Congress alliance.

There are attempts to analyse the assembly verdict in Jammu and Kashmir through the traditional 'secular' prism and draw inferences which are either false or far fetched. The wrong assessments will eventually effect the success or failure of the 'government' which has been catapulted into power at a critical time when a stand off between India and Pakistan is building in intensity.

UNDERSTANDING THE FAILURE OF BOYCOTT

The turnout of voters in this election particularly in Kashmir valley has been phenomenal, more than 50% on an average. It is invariably a big victory for electoral process in Kashmir Valley. Many a eminent Kashmir analysts in New Delhi had prophecied that, "the government will be lucky if they get more than 10 percent people to come out and vote."

Out of all segments of people living in Jammu and Kashmir only Kashmiri Pandits abstained from voting. Their vote percentage was less than 10% and that too despite the fact that more than 43 Pandit candidates were in electoral fray and there was also no boycott call.

Both the factions of Hurriat Conference campaigned for boycott of elections well before the onset of elections. JKLF through its protracted 'Safar-e-Azadi' campaign focused eventually on boycott of elections at the conclusion of its rallies and interactions across the length and breadth of the Valley. Mirwaiz Omar Farooq Chairman of All Party Hurriat Conference had declared with confidence that 'there will be 100 percent poll boycott' Ali Shah Geelani, to enlarge the appeal of 'boycott slogan' even praised JKLF chief Yasin Malik and stated 'we want boycott Safar-e-Azadi way'. The analysts who conclude that the 2008 elections have been a decisive rebuff to separatists essentially underline the 'boycott call' as the only indispensable strategy of separatists. The flexibility and the deftness of the strategic interventions of Separatists in Kashmir Valley get overlooked in this formulation. The separatists establishment does give consideration to all such tactics which delegatimise the democratic process in the state. But they have always valued deepening of its entrenchment in the power structures within the state. Separatism in Valley has always considered its reach and sway to influence and control the elected governments in the state as its primary support structure perhaps as important as the support of Pakistan. So delegitimising elections by labelling them as rigged or coerced process or by campaigning for boycott are not simple black and white imperatives which the separatists pursue. They operate more in the grey area where they engage directly or indirectly into the election process. They influence the election manifesto and party policies of the political formations participating in elections. They influence the selection of candidates. They throw up proxy candidates into the election fray. The most essential objective which is pursued is not to allow any paradigm shift in the state policy and ensure that subversive entrenchment is only deepened but never eroded.

The entire spectrum of separatist strategies has evolved over a period of time. Ali Shah Geelani got himself elected to state assembly but relentlessly challenged Indian constitutional position and debunked election process. Jamat-i-Islami potrayed National Conference as its ideological rival in Kashmir and squarely blamed it for accession of Jammu and Kashmir with India. The anti-Jamaat rivalry manifested into streets when massive anti-Jamaat riots were lead by NC cadres. But this rivalary was also not a black and while phenomenon. A symbiotic relationship between NC and Jamaat particularly in the electoral sphere existed right till 2002. Jamaat cadres would mobilise voters for NC and NC would reciprocate by increasing Jamaat entrenchment in administration. Jamaat and other separatist formations built the same symbiotic relationship with newly formed PDP well before 2002 and has carried it right through the elections in 2008. There was, of course, a conflict of interests between separatists formations including Jamat-i-Islami and PDP which had come into public domain in last into years. Separatists visualised PDP as a usurper of its agenda. It  sensed encroachment on its space by none other than PDP. The stand off between PDP and separatist formations would have continued but the terrorist attack in Mumbai changed the Course of events in the Valley. Increased isolation of Pakistan and pressures on separatist' feeder channel’s across made Jamaat-i-Islami to change track. Mufti as per reports had been intensely campaigning for their support.

It is difficult to comment as to when exactly Jamaat decided to comeout whole hog in support of PDP but its  involvement in elections started manifesting right after the 1st phase of elections. It built into a crescendo in the later phases. The top Jamaat leaders were seen openly campaigning for PDP in Kulgam, Shopian, Pulwama as also everywhere. Analysts read too much into the anti-election rhetoric of Ali Shah Geelani but ignored the Traditional line of Jamaat-i-Islami which maintained distance from boycott call and cautioned that in the prevailing political scenario such a stance may prove 'counterproductive'.  One thing is very clear now. The separatist establishment intervened in election process not to boycott as was their public stance but actually to increase the turnout of voters.

This assessment does not at all indicate that even if separatists would have campaigned aggressiverly for boycott they would have actually succeeded. In that eventuality voter turnout would have been less but certainly an improvement over 2002 elections.

OTHER FACTORS

The rural urban divide in Valley and developmental issues were a dominant consideration for the people.  Sweeping inference is being drawn by some analysts in Delhi that the growth of PDP in Valley is primarily the reflection of rural urban divide rather than communal campaign. However many credible analysts have come out openly to record that PDP campaign had a brazen communal character. Noted columnist Sh. Parveen Swami states, "for the PDP,  the returns from the incendiary communal campaign it ran this summer, as well as its efforts to reach out to secessionists have been disappointing." Immediately after the election results were declared Farooq Abdullah openly accepted that PDP ran a campaign on 'Islamist agenda'. Many residents of Kulgam area confided in their Pandit friends that Miss Mehbooba Mufti was openly telling voters to choose between a 'school or a mosque'. "We are for Mosque. If you choose a Mosque a school will automatically come. But not the other way". PDP in its expositions has been identifying with Muslim causes globally more than NC. It has sought to project 'Selfrule" document as more in consonance with the movement of Pan-Islamism rather than Kashmiri Aspirations.

However, under playing of rural urban divide as an important influence on the elections will be equally incorrect. Rural-Urban divide has evolved in Kashmir Valley with the emergence of a large rural middle class over the years. Emergence of Mufti Mohd Sayeed, Late Abdul Gani Lone, Jamat-i-Islami and MuF reflects it more than anything else. This time PDP made significant inroads into North Kashmir. PDP has won six seats there while NC has done marginally better by winning seven seats. Central Kashmir extending between Kangan and Ganderbal with Srinagar as its core has been virtually swept by National Conference. However, PDP retained its stranglehold on South Kashmir where it won 12 out of 16 seats. The better performance of PDP is also a reflection of the urge of rural political class to control political power.

This rural urban rivalary has deepened over the years and now spilled into the public domain. Previously this divide was subdued but now it has exploded into open. Reverberations of this rivalary can be heard even after elections. Recently Sh. M.G. Hassan Mukhtar a freelance journalists wrote in Kashmir Times that, "The original citizens of Srinagar treat all villagers as second class irrespective of the language they speak.If a villager goes to moon the urbanities would never digest it and rather pull his legs...In reality the superiority complex (read inferiority complex of foolishness) of urban fellows on the basis of nothing towards villagers is not a good thing" In Srinagar this bitterness can be gauged by a cursory talk on politics at a vegetable vendors shop or a burgers shop.

The increased developmental process during PDP-Congress regime in rural areas has further heightened the divide. Mufti used the Prime Minister's Gram Sadak Yojna to build extensive road connectivity particularly in South Kashmir. Any village with a population of 500 or more was connected by a metalled road. A large portion of the 24,000 crore special aid package to Kashmir was spend in the rural areas. Creation of development authorities in Gulmarg, Tangmarg Pahalgam, Sonamarg and many other places hastened the developmental process in rural areas which did translate into political benefits for Mufti.

Mufti has not only used predominantly the fundamentalist card and soft secessionist slogans, but also the rural urban divide and developmental slogans to stabilise his party.

NC retained its previous number of 28 in the assembly. PDP has increased its tally from 18 to 21. In 2008 elections there has been an overall swing of 5 percent in favour of PDP. It has shown tendency to grow all over the Valley and has made dent in certain areas of Jammu. The new Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has acknowledged this trend by openly admitting, "the results definitely gave a fair idea that PDP is making inroads everywhere in Valley. I think we need to take stock of it."

JAMMU RESULTS

While belittling the communal contours of PDP's rise the 'liberal' analysts infer a rise of communal stridency in Jammu region. Which well-known columnists like Shankar Jha describe as 'historical' as if it is integral to the attitude of people living in Jammu. Even a better informed journalist like Parveen Swami does not contest such sweeping generalisations. His comments that," despite the apparently dramatic improvement in BJP's fortunes-which have taken it from just one seat in 2002 to 11 now, Hindu Chauvinism hasn't yielded exceptional pay offs". The massive support to Amar Nath Agitation in Jammu and hightened consciousness about the systematic and organised discrimination meeted out to Jammu is an expression of Hindu Chauvinism for even the unbiased 'liberal' intellectuals in rest of India. This is perhaps an expression of a faulty vision which recognises concession to the Muslim identity politics in J&K as a secular imperative. .

In Jammu province Congress won 13 seats and BJP won 11 seats. There was almost a 3 percent negative swing against Congress and a 10 percent swing in favour of BJP. BJP has been runners-up in 13 seats and the number three in 7 constituencies in Jammu region which means it has now decisively staked its claims for at least 30 constituencies in Jammu. But is the rise of BJP an outcome of communal polarisation in the aftermath of Amarnath Agitation? Certain features of the election outcome in Jammu have to be recognised to answer this question.

BJP candidates lost in most of the constituencies where the intensity of Amarnath agitation was high. It suffered defeat in Kathua, Billawar, Samba Vijaypur, Bishnah, Gandhi Nagar, Chhamb, Akhnoor Udhampur, Chenani and Ramban. Mostly Congress candidates won from these constituencies with one each going to National Conference and JK National Panthers Party. Congress lost to BJP in those constituencies where Amaranth Agitation was weak like Reasi, Basohli and Bani. The defeat of Shilipi Verma the widow of Kuldeep Verma the martyr hero of Amarnath Agitation is revealing. Also notable is the fact that those Congress candidates won who had a better record as MLA's or ministers and who had also supported Amarnath Agitation. Sham Lal Sharma from Akhnoor and Raman Bhalla from Gandhi Nagar are the best examples to elucidate the fact. Almost all the Congress Ministers in previous assembly lost this time. The best examples are that of Pt. Mangat Ram Sharma and Gulchain Singh Charak. These ministers had not one come out openly in favour of Amarnath agitation. Even the star campaigners of BJP like LK Advani, Rajnath Singh, Narendra Modi, Arun Jaitely, Murli Manohar Joshi, Navjot Singh Sidhu could not succeed in  wooing voters against those Congress candidates who had performed well as sitting MLAs and unambiguously identified with the sentiment of Jammu.

SIDELIGHTS

Towards the end of this analysis it will be pertinent to record some observations which have a value for the future. Sakina Itoo won from South Kashmir against the tide of Islamists. Mohd. Yusuf Tarigami of CPI(M) defeated his PDP rival for whom Jamat lead no holds bar campaign. Mr. Tarigami of CPI(M) who at every opportunity has supported separatists cause and undermined the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits seemed trailing almost to the end of the counting process only to sail across after few hundred Pandit votes caste in his favour where counted towards the end.

The Kashmiri Pandit votes cast in small numbers showed preference in favour of NC where the main choice was between NC and PDP. Dr Shafi of PDP won from Beerwah constituency by a mere margin of 124 votes which included 80 votes from KP's. This may be an exception because he was favoured not for his party affiliation and was considered a better person having close relationship with the Pandits of his constituency.

Congress won 3 seats from Kashmir Valley. Has done well in 5 more constituencies. It has at least a clear demarcated chunk of 10 assembly seats to work for in the next elections.

CONCLUSION

'The 2008 mandate can stabilise the situation if NC plays its cards well. After 2002 elections NC adopted a policy line of mirroring or aping PDP line. It changed its policy on Pakistan and terrorism hoping that it will steal a March ahead of PDP. At the crunch time of elections fundamentalist establishment and Pakistan made a choice in favour of PDP leaving it in lurch. Will NC ride the same ideological band wagon?

Congress has survived on the edge. Will it ignore its legislative base as it has done in the past and loose its relevance in Jammu?

BJP enthused by the response of people during the elections and hoping to win around twenty five seas threw enough hints that it was ready to join hands with PDP or NC to come to government. It has shown ready willing to dispense with its ideological baggage for which it still has space in Jammu. Will it play the power game or the role of an instrument to bring a fundamental change in power balance in favour of Jammu?

CPI(M) has again survived a sole presence in the present assembly from Kulgam constituency in Kashmir Valley. Jamaat declared it as a party of ‘Kuffar’. People still voted it into power in a stiff battle. Will CPI(M) still flirt with Muslim communalism and separatism as it has done so far?

The future in J&K is pregnant with possibilities both good or bad.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Despite glaring uncertainty in Pakistan, the simmering apprehensions about the ongoing peace process with Pakistan have only multiplied in India. Many incidents  in, rapid succession, with profound political implications, have taken place in recent past which cannot be simply wished away.

The senior PDP leader and state finance minister Tariq Hameed Karra claimed sometime back that the state of Jammu and Kashmir will have a ‘separate currency’ after the imposition of ‘Self Rule’. Both Mufti Mohammad Sayeed and his daughter Mehbooba Mufti have been time and again talking about the usage of 'Double Currency’ of Pakistan and India in the near future in Jammu and Kashmir. Peoples’ Democratic Party chose to release its, first official version of ‘Self Rule’ in Pakistan.

PDP Chief Miss Mehbooba Mufti waxed eloquent about ‘Self Rule’ in Pakistan where she had gone to attend PUGWASH Conference.  She addressed a very high profile press conference with Asif Zardari the patron chief of Pakistan People’s Party. Content of her expositions in Pakistan have serious implications. “In order to achieve a stable, sustainable and just solution to the J&K issue we should combine intrastate measures with inter state and supra state measures…Self Rule proposal is the only way that would eliminate the sources of etheno-territorial conflicts entrenched in the traditional notions of sovereignty, self-determination, national and ethnic borders”. She also enunciated the concept of shared sovereignty by advocating a joint ‘Council of Greater Jammu and Kashmir’. This as per her will require "devising an improved constitutional political and economic relationship between the two parts of state and their respective mainlands with a sign off from the international community”.

The NC Chief openly claimed that the Mehbooba, Zardari meeting was facilitated by Indian embassy in Pakistan. GoI chose to remain silent and issued no clarifications. Many now apprehend that ‘Self Rule’ concept of PDP has a tacit approval from Govt. of India.

In the recent past  none other than the National Security Advisor Mr. MK Narayanan said in an interview about the engagement with Pakistan, “ I think there are things in the pipeline, things which are cooking, which are half cooked or three quarters cooked, which we would like to take forward.”  This statement has been one of the most forthright admissions that some sort of final settlement with Pakistan on Jammu and Kashmir state has been arrived at. And since PDP has been allowed to bring to the public realm various facets of the ‘peace process’ right from its inception during the NDA regime what it is saying now has more to it than political rhetoric in the prelude to elections in the state.

What  is ‘cooking’ between India and Pakistan is more a question on the Indian side. Pakistani leadership both within the government and outside, do not appear to be ignorant about the contours of the final settlement on Jammu and Kashmir being debated between governments of India and Pakistan. The new Prime Minister of Pakistan tried to reject Musharraf line but it will be premature as yet to take it as official Pakistani position.

Pakistan President Gen Parvez Musharraf s four point proposal on Jammu and Kashmir has few ambiguities. The four point proposal. “ Self-Governance, Joint Management, Demilitarization and Open Borders.” continue to be debated in Pakistan. Even the separatist leadership in Jammu and Kashmir seems to be very well informed about the contours of the understanding between India and Pakistan on Jammu and Kashmir. The support or opposition to the ‘peace process’ from within the separatist groups seems to be based not on hearsay but very authentic understanding about its contours. The separatist leadership of Jammu and Kashmir is being kept well informed and briefed by none other than the very officials of  Govt. of India itself. An example here will suffice to elucidate the point. To a question on the peace process between India and Pakistan by Sultan Shaheen, the Head of foreign relations Committee of JKLF, Raja Muzaffar responds thus, “......... a senior former Indian civil servant Wajahat Habibullah. known to be close to the Gandhi family told me in a telephonic conversation that while Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is very compassionate person and wants to expedite the peace process and give various sorts of relief to Kashmiri people, some hardliners in his own administration oppose some of his efforts. I told Mr. Habibullah that the slow down of the process can prove very costly for in case of Musharraf falling from power, the flexibility in the Pakistani approach may also become a thing of the past...............I had proposed three years ago in a Washington conference on Kashmir that the peace process be institutionalized through a mechanism that includes opposition leaders  in India and Pakistan as well as Kashmiri leaders who participate as basic permanent members. Along with this whatever progress be registered with United Nations so that changes in government in either country do not effect the ground that has been covered.............."

There is a group of Track-II diplomats and journals who seem to be knowing more about Indo-Pak peace process than the political leadership down the line across the political spectrum. Not to speak of general people in India, who are almost ignorant and still believe that unsettled part of Kashmir problem is only liberation of PoK for which Indian parliament has unanimously committed itself through a formal resolution.

Almost all points of formula of Parvez Musharraf in one way or other concern with the sovereignty and integrity of the nation in Jammu and Kashmir. It is true that government of India has not still crossed the thresh-hold of unambiguity on the nature of understanding with Pakistan and is still preserving some manouverability of retreat and plausible deniabiliy. However the confidence in the commitment of government of India to uphold the integrity and sovereignty in Jammu and Kashmir as well as deny any further concessions to Muslim identity politics in Jammu and Kashmir, is gradually eroding. There are three main reasons for it. One, Govt, of India has allowed the internal dialogue in the form of Round Table Conferences and Working Group Meetings to be used to push through recommendations and measures which ultimately give a decisive direction to the future course in Jammu and Kashmir. This course seems to be complimentary to four point formula of Musharraf The stage appears to be getting set for demilitarization, joint management and creating porous borders in Jammu and Kashmir. Many WG recommendations have been designed for this very purpose. The measures which are being taken have an executional value and at present do not require legislative sanction of the Parliament of India. Security forces number is being brought down in the state and the state forces are being enormously increased to take their place. The travel across LoC will be conducted on the basis of state subject document; borders are being made porous for trade as well as travel; the joint management particularly of water resources, trade and tourism is being accorded a new legitimacy in public discourse in the state for a operational phase in the near future. Creation of a Free Trade Zone with double currency in Jammu and Kashmir is the new buzz slogan for almost any seminar or debate on the economic development with government agencies playing facilitators.

Second, Govt, of India is gradually seeking to delegitimize its own actions against terrorist violence in the state. It has allowed the government actions in the state to be equated with militancy. The WG on Confidence Building Measures chaired by the now Vice President of India recommends on the agenda issue, ‘ Measures to improve the condition of people affected by militancy’ as “ The necessity of curbing human rights violations was stressed by most members of the WG. Emphasis was placed on PM’s assurance of zero tolerance for HR violation as for India's international commitment and intrenational image. It was considered imperative to develop responsibility for specific HR violations can be fixed and derelict officials identified and proceeded against.” There is not a single recommendation under this agenda about how to tackle terrorism. Infact the word 'terrorism' is almost absent in the entire report of the WG.. The last recommendation on the same issue seeks review and revoking of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, Disturbed Area Act. The government itself chooses to side track the issue of terrorism and equates its actions primarily as militancy in the state.

In his package to displaced Kashmiri Hindus PM treats the displacement as if it was a natural disaster like flood or earthquake. The package seeks to delegitimise religious cleansing which must have only pleased Pakistan and the separatists.

And lastly, the gradual induction into the state of such officials. administrators and academicians who have a proclaimed commitment for a sovereign or a semi-sovereign Jammu and Kashmir state along the lines proposed long back by Dixon, puts GoI approach in proper perspective. Mr. Wajahat Habibullah, who is presently the information Commissioner is actually acting as a defecto interlocutor on behalf of Government of India in the state. He is openly on record of expressing views on J&K  which are closer to US position when Dixon enunciated his formula for solution. None other than PM of India invited him to address the crucial Working Group on Centre-State Relations. Sometime before his presentation, he had publicly stated, “.....the absence of element separatists has definitely affected the success of Round Table Conference. It is like the British having a RTC without the nationalists...New Delhi fears the aspirations in Kashmir as it has a Muslim majority population. However, the Kashmiri aspirations are the same as that of a Tamil for Tamil Nadu, a Kannada for Karnataka and a Telangi for Telangana."

Wajahat openly equates separatist leaders with the freedom fighters of India. He openly equates the separatism in Kashmir as a national struggle of Kashmiris. It is pertinent to understand his brazen pro-US and Pro-Pakistan advocacy. In one of his papers he states, incentives to encourage India and Pakistan to settle their differences peacefully can likewise take various forms, from helping Pakistan modernize its armed forces to securing foreign investment for economic revitalization of Jammu and Kashmir.” Mr. Wajahat advocates five regional Assemblies/Councils for Indian part of Jammu and Kashmir, one for Kashmir valley, two for Jammu region and two for Ladakh. He puts forth a developmental arguments to divide Hindu majority Jammu to separate its Muslim majority areas into a separate administrative and legislative unit. His proposal coincides with the Dixon model seeking settlement of J&K along the Chenab river. The model also coincides with the seven region formula of Parvez Musharraf.

Wajahat is not an isolated case. Mr Haseeb A Drabu declared support to “Independent’ Jammu and Kashmir openly on a TV channel. And after few days, he was appointed Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Bank and Economic Advisor to J&K Govt. An expert on Strategic Affairs Mr. C Rajamohan sometime back wrote an article in a leading English daily commenting on the developments in Pakistan and lamenting the inability of Govt, of India to carry ahead the Indo-US Nuclear deal. Towards the end of this write up he poses a question that if India cannot carry forward the Nuclear deal, how could it have the “gumption’ to go ahead with the peace process with Pakistan and China which necessarily involves ‘territorial concessions.’ What is cooking on Jammu and Kashmir? 

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

WHEN the government made its intention to hold the Third Round Table Conference in New Delhi, it appeared to be in undue haste. Out of the five Working Groups constituted by Govt. of India during the IInd Round Table Conference held in Srinagar, only four had submitted their reports. The fifth, and the politically most crucial group, was yet to complete its work.  In fact it was not even half way through with its agenda. Out of the four Working Groups which had submitted their reports, the group dealing with Confidence Building Measures headed by Mr. Hamid Ansari (Now the Vice-President of India) had miserably failed to build the consensus.

Dr. Agnishekhar who represented Kashmiri Pandits in this group had dissociated with its recommendations after duly registering his objections. None of the participants had received the reports of the Working Groups even till just before midnight on the eve of the conference. The delegates were handed over the Working Group reports immediately after the dinner hosted by the Chief Minister of the Jammu and Kashmir State, Sh. Ghulam Nabi Azad. The Third Round Table Conference as per the agenda had to discuss these very reports so that they could be duly adopted. It was humanly impossible for the delegates even to have a cursory look on the reports, not to speak of developing a firm opinion on the contents and the recommendations made. Was it the intention of the Govt. of India not to allow time to the delegates to evolve a firm opinion? Perhaps the intention of Govt. of India was to push through the recommendations during the Third Round Table Conference without a due consideration by the delegates.

I tried to have a look on the recommendations of the Working Group dealing with the agenda of Confidence Building Measures. Dr. Agnishekhar had already briefed us about the deliberations of the Working Group as also his written objections and observations to the Working Group report. For me to make some opinion about the recommendations of this Working Group in the short time available appeared little less daunting. As I went through the contents and recommendations of this Working Group headed by none other than the eminent Hamid Ansari I was alarmed. I felt that Govt. of India had embarked on a course of adopting measures for tackling Kashmir problem which would gradually unhinge not only the sovereignty of the nation over Jammu and Kashmir but also cripple nation's efforts to defeat terrorism and separatism. The delay in providing the copies of the reports to the delegates started assuming a new meaning in my mind. The chairman of the Working Group on 'Confidence Building Measures' declares on Page 3 of its report, "The Working Group concerns itself only with the rehabilitation and improvement of conditions of the militancy victims and did not go deeper into the causes or the genesis of militancy in the state":. I wondered how the chairman could devise a framework for helping the victims of militancy without going into the genesis of militancy. Could any body devise measures to help the victims without understanding the causes why they were targetted?

Perhaps a more relevant question which comes to mind is why in the entire report, not once, has the issue of 'terrorism' been mentioned, not to speak of addressing it. Could the victims of terrorism be helped without addressing the issue of terrorism? The report very meticulously and deliberately avoids or circumvents the issue of terrorism. And what is the understanding of the chairman about what constitutes militancy in the state is reflected very clearly by going through its observations on the--'Measures to improve the condition of people affected by militancy". The report observes, "The necessity of curbing human rights violations was stressed by most members of the Working Group. Emphasis was placed on Prime Minister's assurance of 'zero tolerance' for human rights violations as on India's international commitments and international image. It was considered imperative to develop a mechanism in which responsibility for specific human rights violations can be fixed and derelict officials identified and proceeded against". The observations clearly indicate that the report identifies militancy primarily as state accuses, dereliction or acts of commission and ommission. It does not at all consider the issue of terrorism as the prime cause of violence in the state. The report recommends measures to improve the conditions of people affected by militancy like inculcating Human Rights awareness 'in all civil and military government functionaries and in the public' and reviewing and revoking of 'certain laws made operational during the period of militancy e.g., Armed Forces Special Powers Act, Disturbed Area Act".

With this type of understanding of militancy, advocated by the report of Working Group on 'confidence building measures across the Segments of Society' in the state we were going to the Third Round Table Conference. My apprehensions deepened about the entire gamut of exercises conducted in other Working Groups as well. An attempt seemed to be afoot to set a course for national policy on Jammu and Kashmir, with serious implications--international, regional and local. This could be clearly gauged from the concluding remarks in the same report--

..."It has to be recognized that the problem of militancy and alienation of some sections of the society has to be tackled in a very broad framework in this behalf. Central and State government may consider application of internationally accepted policies in consultation with experts.

...."An unconditional dialogue process should be started with militant groups for finding a sustainable solution to the problem of militancy in the state".

...."The probable role of media should be examined in generating an image of the people of the State so as to lessen the indignity and suspicion youth face outside the state..."

Will the delegates in the Third Round Table Conference be able to grasp and respond to formulation and recommendations of Working Groups which can harm national interest? Will the highest at the helm in Govt. of India including the Prime Minister, Home Minister, National Security Advisor and others attending the Third Round Table Conference see through any measure or recommendation by the Working Group which will damage the national cause in Jammu and Kashmir and will they put their foot down? I had these questions in my mind while I prepared to attend the Third Round Table Conference. The experience of the deliberations of the Third Round Table Conference was mixed. Many delegates rose up to the occasion, called a spade a spade and emphatically cautioned Govt. of India against falling into trap of such perspectives couched in Worked Group reports as observations or recommendations which were detrimental to national interests. The deliberations, did not reflect a unanimous view while the Govt. of India tried hard to ...  a unanimity which could not be arrived at during the conference. However, Govt. of India role during the conference was far from reassuring. It seemed almost helpless and in a state of abject surrender to all such views which undermined and damaged national interests in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. More dismaying was that many a times Govt. of India looked more eager to facilitate these views.

Report Submitted by HM Ansari Working Group is disappointing

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Excerpts of the speech made by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo in the Third Round Table Conference at PM House New Delhi.

"Honourable Prime Minister, Sh. Manmohan Singh Ji, Honourable Union Home Minister Sh. Shiv Raj Patil, Honourable Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. Sh Ghulam Nabi Azad, To be frank I was little surprised about the haste with which this Third Round Table Conference has been convened. You must be aware that one of the crucial working groups looking into the issue of strengthening Centre State relations has not yet completed its task and is still far away from compiling a report.”

“The reports of other working groups were submitted to us only yesterday at around 10 O'clock in the night immediately after the   dinner hosted by the Honourable Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad. The participants at IIIrd Round Table Conference  got very little time to study these reports. I hope you will bear with us if we fall short of responding comprehensively to these reports in this conference which has been organised to discuss in detail these very reports.”

"Sir I have gone through the report of the Working Group which addressed the issue of 'Confidence Building Measures’, during the little time which was available to me. This group had to specifically address the issue of Employment and also Rehabilitation of Displaced Kashmiri Pandits".

"I must say without inhibition that the report which has been submitted by Mr HM Ansari in this conference is disappointing. It has failed to address the issues for which this working group was constituted, in a proper and comprehensive way".

“The report tends to trivialise substantial issues. Its recommendations are disjointed and many times trespass the specific agenda which it had to address.”

"The Working Group Chairman has tended to address the issue of unemployment and rehabilitation of displaced Kashmiri Pandits divorced from the reasons which lead to the exodus and their marginalisation from all spheres of life in the state. Sir, take for example the issue of unemployment amongst the  displaced Kashmiri Hindus. There has been almost a blanket ban on their recruitment in the government services while lakhs from the majority community have been provided employment under special employment packages. Former deputy Chief Minister, Pt. Mangat Ram Sharma tried to bring this issue to the fore by asking the then government that the number of Kashmiri Pandits in the government services be brought to the level as it existed in 1989, just before the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus from Valley. He repeated the same issue in the Ist and IInd Round Table Conferences. Your goodself appointed an interministerial committee which also recommended almost on similar lines. You yourself put the issue on the national agenda by putting the issue of employment and rehabilitation as one of the main issues to be addressed by the working group ‘on confidence building measures’, in the Second Round Table Conference. You must be aware that immediately after the IInd Round Table Conference the State government responded not by moving in the direction of creating an employment package but by making permanent all the adhoc appointments made in Valley against the posts of the displaced Kashmiri Hindu employees.”

“Sir, the problem of denial of employment to Kashmiri Hindus is not a mere callous aberration of the system. It is a very frank symptom of the process of exclusion unleashed by the communal forces entrenched in the government and the political establishment. At the point of gun and terrorist blackmail we were pushed out. Our properties, temples and shrines were plundered after we left. Hundreds of our temples lie in shambles after the loot and plunder unleashed on them. Thousands of our houses have been burnt and destroyed. Leftover properties have been fraudulently encroached and usurped. Through a process of distress sales our homes and hearths are being procured as normal sale deeds. I am mentioning these things only to stress that our  physical cleansing was followed by residential cleansing. And through denial  of employment a form of administrative cleansing of Kahsmiri Hindus has been unleashed. Muslim communal forces in the state do not want us to stay even in Jammu. They have launched a policy of sequeeze to force our diaspora and expulsion from the state. Has the working group addressed these issues? No. To the contrary it has trivalised these issues. The working group has made recommendations on employment and upgradation of camps only in a way that further delay and proctastrination is possible. After so many debates the recommendations of the Working Group still talk about further dialogue and discussion. Why? Our problems have been bracketed with the problems of those who have perpetrated violence in Valley? Did the chairman of Working Group look into the international perspectives and experiences on internal displacements? Recognising the dire necessity of addressing the issue of internal displacement, United Nations Human Rights Commission assigned the task to the Representative of Secretary-General on Internally Displaced persons in 1992. Several years of study by a group of experts under the auspices of this representative took place. The Representative on Internally displaced persons after being requested to develop an appropriate 'Normative framework' recommended drafting of 'guiding principles’ rather than a convention which he suggested would have taken 10-20 yrs to conclude. Sir, 30 Guiding Principles were spelt out. Did the chairman of the Working Group look into these guiding principles before making recommendations for displaced Kashmiri Pandits.”

"Experts of international repute have likened the response to internal displacement to a tripod, with relief, development and protection each forming a leg. Sir government response has so far only concerned itself only with relief aspect and that too in a half hearted way. Concept of protection, and development is absent from the conceptual framework of the government approach. So the government response to internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus stands almost without legs."

"We cannot devise the concepts of protection, development and even relief, if we do not try to understand and identify the forces at play in the state who perpetrated genocide on Kashmiri Hindus and are hell bent upon their expulsion from the state. The chairman of the Working Group has ignored this aspect totally. Principle 1 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement affirm that internally displaced persons enjoy in full equality the same rights and freedoms under international and domestic law as do other persons in their country and stresses that such internally displaced persons shall not be discriminated against in the enjoyment of any rights and freedoms on the ground that they are displaced. Successive governments have denied Kashmiri Hindus employment and set into place a process of blatant discrimination which is the violation of the basic rights and freedoms and the principle of equality.”

"Sir, in the context of rehabilitation the successive state governments have followed a policy of symbolic, coercive return. They have relied on a process of enforced deprivation and denial to force the Hindus to return and submit to the will of dominant opinion in the Valley. The State government visualises the return by relocating the camps in Valley one way or the other. Principle 14 of the Guiding Principles on Internally Displaced Persons reaffirms the right of every human being to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his or her residence and then specifies that for internally displaced persons this includes a right to move freely in and out of camps and settlements. Successive state governments while building tenements for displaced persons in certain parts of Valley have ignored the entire spirit of this principle. Simply creating a set up for persons whose physical security is under threat at a place only neglects their protection needs. Relocating camps in such places where their security is threatened and where they cannot enjoy the basic freedoms can actually exacerbate and perpetuate their plight. It can create a false sense of security and international experts have warned against such a situation. They have also cautioned that such a process can shore up a repressive regime, create a situation of a long-term dependency and result in creating 'well-fed dead.’ Working Group recommendations appear to be totally ignorant about such perspectives.”

"Sir, State government attitude on return continues to border on a perspective of forceful repatriation. We all know how backlash massacres of Kashmiri Hindus in Kashmir Valley were triggered by such return campaigns. International experts have always stressed to look into the refugee law by analogy while developing a framework of the return for internally displaced persons. They have stressed the need to adhere and uphold the principle of non-refoulment which provides protection for refugees against forced return to a situation where they would be at risk of persecution or physical harm. The reference in the Working Group recommendation on return and rehabilitation is devoid of any sensitive understanding of the critical issues involved.”

“Sir, I have repeatedly come across the views of Muslim leaders on the displacement of Kashmiri Hindus in the Round Table Conferences and the Working Group meetings. Today also some of them have spoken on this issue. They want our return because Kashmiriyat has to be repaired. They want the return of teachers and doctors because Kashmiri Muslims want them. Always and everytime when they speak they only discuss Kashmiri Hindus in terms of their utility. And almost always they avoid to discuss the issue of the destruction of a community. It is most unfortunate that the Working Group recommendations emphasise the need to recognise the right of our return and not to ensure our right to live in Kashmir.”

"Sir, Kashmiri Pandits have been subjected to genocide. And we want its comprehensive and permanent reversal. Creation of Panun Kashmir as we have many times stressed is the only way to ensure such a reversal. Government wants to avoid to address the basic issue of genocide and deal with peripheral and superficial issues. It is for these reasons I think that I should not endorse the recommendations of the Working Group dealing with these issues. And I feel it my responsibility to dissociate myself from these recommendations.”

"This Working Group has not addressed the issue of Terrorism at all. In fact it has chosen to describe this heinous crime against humanity as militancy. Under the heading ‘measures to improve the condition of the victims of militancy’ the Working Group on confidence building measures recommends foremost the measures like developing mechanism in which responsibility for specific human rights violation can be fixed and derelict officials identified and prosecuted. It appears that the chairman of the Working Group identifies human rights violation by the government agencies as the foremost concern. It also appears from the recommendations that the militancy in Kashmir is primarily the result of government action or government action is in fact the real militancy in the state. Terrorism as a human rights issue with all its implications seems to be a peripheral concern. Another main recommendation under the same head is the reviewing and revocation of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (Disturbed Areas Act). It is the primary impingement on the fundamental rights-the report suggests. How terrorism tears apart the civil society, destroys fundamental freedoms and creates a civil society which acts as a sanctuary for violence has not been the concern guiding the recommendations for helping the victims of militancy.”

Sir, we have seen how big powers have used human rights as a vehicle to intervene and subvert the independence of those countries who came out of the colonial yoke and won freedom. With imperial motives such countries devised a selective paradigm of human rights which concerned itself primarily with state abuse and excesses. It appears our own govt has the same paradigm of human rights. Entire human rights concern of the government seems to be aimed to generate a selective state specific sensitivity. It is an apologetic and masochist approach. Sir, Universal Charter on Human Rights clearly and unambiguously states that human rights should be upheld by the state, organs of the society and the individuals. Nothing so far has been done to sensitise the civil society about the menace of terrorism. There has been no education of the organs of society whatsoever as to what are the implications when terrorism takes roots in a civil society. People need to be told why terrorism cannot be justified whatever be its value basis and motivation. Organs of the society need to be sensitised so that they mobilise civil society against terrorism. Process of accountability needs to be created for those organs of society which legitimise terrorism, glorify it or act as indirect abettors”.

“Government has chosen to fight terrorism tying its one hand. I am sure if people are adequately educated about the crippling strains terrorism, generates on the law and order situation it will widen the moral space for government action against terrorism. The excesses which get committed during state action will then be placed in proper perspective while government disciplines its own instruments to stop excesses. In such a way public over-reaction will be minimised.”

"Sir, the government has time and again talked about the dangerous situation at the ground created by terrorism. It has talked about subversion of government agencies by the terrorist sympathisers. It has talked about the atmosphere of intimidation at the ground. How can local enquiry commissions operate fairly in such an atmosphere. Can a witness or an evidence which is in favour of government or security forces muster courage and voluntarily put forward its views to the enquiry commissions. The security forces penalised for human rights violations have yet to get a fair trial".

"Sir, the recent campaigns unleashed in Kashmir valley on custodial killings, Afzal Guru verdict and demilitarisation are aimed to reduce the moral space for state action, demonise the state and present Kashmir as an occupied territory. Out of more than one thousand and five hundred alleged cases of excesses by the security forces and other government agencies more than 95% have proven to be false. Have we ever tried to look into as to who rakes up these false allegations. What is the motivation of such forces? What are their resources? The campaign on Afzal Guru has been no less than a contempt of Supreme Court. Why does government prefer to remain as a mute spectator to overground secessionist campaigns? The working group dealing with issue of militancy has chosen to broadly ignore these issues. It is intriguing that the recommendations of the Working Group on confidence building measures emanate from a paradigm which is alien.”

I have chosen to speak briefly on the recommendations of only one Working Group for the reasons already explained.

I once again reiterate that I dissociate from the recommendations of the Working Group on confidence building measures”.

Thank You.

Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Chairman

Panun Kashmir

'We can never agree to a solution that weakens India', says Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

In a conversation with Kashmir Sentinel, Dr. Ajay Chrungoo, Chairman Panun Kashmir, talked at length on different issues concerning Kashmiri Pandits and the Country. Excerpts of the Conversation on contemporary situation are reproduced below.

--The Editor

KS: What is your assessment about the current situation? There has been a steep decline in terrorist-related violence in the State.

AC: The steep decline in violence has to be placed in the context of the pattern of terrorism seen since 1990, otherwise we will miss its significance. At the same time, the heads of the different Security agencies in the state agree that the number of terrorists operating in the state has not fallen much. It means two things. Either the terrorists are lying low, waiting for an opportunity to strike at some opportune moment or else there is a tactical shift in the terrorist strategy or both. During the past year more and more linkages of Kashmiri terrorists with Jihadic activities in Indian heartland are being unearthed.

Secondly, the focus of the pan-Islamist Jihad at the moment is Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, so the intensity of Jihadic violence in J&K state has gone down. We should not discount the notable successes in counter-insurgency operations against terrorists, particularly the Hizbul Mujahideen.

Parallel to the decline in violence we are witnessing shifting of emphasis to consolidation of subversion and leadership symbols of separatism. Separatists are also looking up to the ongoing 'peace process' as an opportunity which can deliver substantive concessions to them. So the decline in violence has a political objective as well.

KS: There have been demands for declaration of de-militarisation and unilateral ceasefire against terrorists by separatists and some regional parties. Please comment.

AC: Who are raising the demands for ceasefire and de-militarisation? Their motivations need to be ascertained. During the past 18 years we have seen separatists and politicians of different hues raising certain demands to placate terrorists and Pakistan for varying reasons. At a time when terrorists have suffered major reverses and ISI's policy of blatant sponsorship of cross border terrorism remains unchanged declaration of ceasefire by security forces will only help terrorists to regroup and rebuild their striking potential. We should not fall in this trap.

So far as the demand for de-militarisation is concerned more than operational logistic advantage it would provide to Pakistan the bigger political game of separatists is to link de-militarisation with sovereignty and project India as an occupation force. Isn't it strange that the leaders who have been in the primary beneficiaries of presence of security forces should now be talking about destabilising demand of de-militarisation. It is reassuring that Governor Gen. SK Sinha has minced no words in saying that even after return of normality there will be no de-militarisation but troops will return only to barracks. If only Indian political leadership sheds its ambivalence on vital issues of national security the nation would win half the battle against terrorism.

KS: Reports from Srinagar say that the mood of the people is changing. Do you attribute it to the 'peace process'?

AC: The 'change of mood' needs to be qualified. On one hand there is greater flow of actionable intelligence to security forces, while on the other we are witnessing massive gatherings at funerals of terrorists of Hizbul Mujahideen who have indulged in worse killings against common Kashmiris. Recently, most of the newspapers carried photographs of such funerals in at least three cases. Earlier, we witnessed such funerals in case of LeT terrorists. In fact, public response is being used as the yardstick to determine the source of unclaimed killings. Where there is no public outcry the killings are attributed to the terrorists. In his Independence Day speech State Governor bemoaned that 133 slit-throat killings by terrorists did not evoke any condemnation from those who were in the habit of raking up human rights violations. The public response can be explained on the basis that either they have fear of terrorists or they endorse the terrorist regimes. In both situations the only inference is that situation is far from normal.

There is one change which needs to be taken note of due to long years of gun culture which has caused social disorganisation. There is disorientation and widespread degeneration in Kashmiri separatist movement due to this. On certain occasions the public is expressing disapproval of this, mostly in private than in public. 'Peace Process' promoted by Govt. of India, rather than consolidating this public disapproval for larger rejection of separatist objectives has only served to catapult rejected separatist leadership to the centre stage.

KS: Many well-known Strategic Affairs Experts on J&K even while emphasizing the desirability of smashing terrorist base advocate granting of meaningful political concessions to Kashmiris. What are your views?

AC: There are two aspects of this issue. One, these experts study terrorism in Kashmir through usual parameters. Their responses to terrorism are thus okay. Secondly, Experts on internal turmoil (due to terrorism) have repeatedly emphasised the need to change the grievance frame. The grievance frame of Kashmiri separatist movement is communal and fundamentalist. So unless you demystify this grievance frame how can you identify legitimate aspirations of average Kashmiri from illegitimate ones. The Indian strategic community you are talking about is reluctant to change the grievance frame. They are being fed distorted analysis on Kashmiri alienation and their aspirations by different actors who are averse to Kashmir's strong links with rest of the country. If you are holding on to a communal grievance frame you will advocate only communal solutions. This, is what you say 'politically meaningful concessions'. These concessions, if granted, would lead to greater destabilisation in future.

Our stakes are that Kashmir should remain an integral part of India, with an active functioning secular society. We can never agree to a solution which weakens India or leads to further destabilisation of Pandits. Alienation of Kashmiris needs to be qualified - whether it is outcome of denial of genuine aspirations or is it because communalism and fundamentalism have made deep inroads into Kashmiri society. When we talk of political concessions in the context of alienation i.e. autonomy, self-rule, porous borders etc. it has to be ascertained whether these concessions would consolidate India or the separatist regimes. Isn't it true that such concessions in the past strengthened separatist feelings, leading to full blown insurgency later? In this context a political package should have delegitimisation of communalism and fundamentalism as its central objective. Intriguingly, these experts who talk about political concessions are silent on reversal of genocide against Kashmir Pandits, the frontline victims of terrorism.

KS: How do you see 'Peace Process'-both external and internal addressing the problem?

AC: What does peace process offer to the country or the Displaced Kashmiri Hindus? There have been plethora of recommendations made through Working Groups which are dangerous for country's sovereignty and integrity e.g. Travel on State Subject documents across LoC, compensation to families of Jihadis, porous borders, joint management, regional assemblies in Jammu along communal lines, so on and so forth. This has emboldened some to indulge in loud thinking on 'double currency'. All these solutions will create conceptual and political space for forces inimical to India's unity. All recommendations which pertain to broader nationalist concerns are being brushed aside in the Working Groups. Peace process in the perception of common people seems to be a creeping process through which retraction of Indian sovereignty is being envisaged.

KS: Virtually similar recommendations have emanated from US think-tanks, particularly United States Institute of Peace (USIP).

AC: That is true. The think-tanks at USIP presume that tangible political concessions to radical Islamists in Kashmir and Kosovo would dilute the anti-American stridency of Jihadis. That is a very naive understanding. Proposals floated by USIP either directly or through their people in India will lead to entrenchment of Jihadis in Himalayas and create destabilisation for India. Setbacks to Americans, particularly in Middle East and Asia, show how naive they are. Americans are engaged in palliative action. We must reject all the advice doled out by US think-tanks, particularly USIP. Europe, Serbia, Russia and China have already taken a strong line on Kosovo. Autonomous Kosovo and Kashmir can become launching pads for Jihadi activities elsewhere. We must prempt that.

KS: Why is America so naive?

AC: The US has a mindset nurtured during decades of Cold War. Changing global and regional situation has brought new problems to the fore. USA is still reluctant to regard Pakistan as the epicentre of global Jihad and Pak army the most important support structure of this Jihad. So policy of engagement with Pakistan turns into policy of capitulation to the imperatives of Jihad.

In its growing conflict with the Muslim world Americans presume and wrongly so that problems in Palestine, Kosovo and Kashmir are  synonymous. It is a simplistic view.

The inability of Americans to grasp that Kashmir problem has nothing to do with historical grievances of Muslims is the root cause of destabilising proposals emanating from Washington. Kashmiris have no political, economic, cultural or social discrimination and are so well integrated in the democratic system. Why should Americans float solutions that would hand over Muslims of Kashmir into hands of anti-democratic, fundamentalist forces? If two-nation-theory is resurrected in Kashmir, what will be its impact on India's sizable Muslim minority? How can you devise a solution for Kashmir without ensuring a strong India?

KS : Where does Panun Kashmir as a movement stand today ?

AC: Panun Kashmir as a movement is more relevant today than it had ever been at any time during the past 17 years. Infact ,for the first time since independence Kashmiri Hindu politics is under focus at national & international plane. Panun Kashmir’s consistent and patient work has started yielding results. Influential think-tanks at national level, working on Kashmir, are realizing that any settlement on Kashmir would remain an elusive dream unless Kashmiri Hindus’ issue is settled as per the aspirations of Kashmiri Pandits. This is a  major achievement.

KS:  What are Panun Kashmir’s engagements at the national and state level ?

AC: There are three dimensions of Kashmir problem. One, Indian sovereignty is being challenged not only by Pakistan /Terrorists (through crossborder Terrorism and diplomatic bluff) but  also by certain vested interests in the Indian civil society and neo-secessionist political lobbies in Kashmir. Attempts are being made to create conceptual and political space for forcing India to dilute its sovereignty over Kashmir through models like ‘shared/ joint sovereignty (Trieste/ Andorra models), ‘Greater Autonomy’, ‘self rule’,so on and so forth. All this will lead to an autonomous Islamist Kashmir where there will be no place for nationalist groups and religious minorities. Secondly, there is the issue of  ethnic- cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus and other Hindu groups in Jammu region. Lastly, Terrorist regimes are trying to hold Kashmiri civil society hostage to their diktat. Terrorists have suppressed all forms of political dissent through violence. Those who stood up to the terrorists have been brutally slaughtered and humiliated in a way that would put civilized societies to shame. Communalisation and Talibanisation campaigns too are influencing Kashmiri society and polity.

Panun Kashmir is trying to sensitise people at the national level to the dangers to Indian national security from crossborder and ‘homegrown’ terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. We are  also telling the nation that  policy of ‘secularism being divisible’ ( secular policy outside Kashmir and communal one in Kashmir) will not work. If the only Muslim majority state ofIndia cannot tolerate a small Hindu minority what would be the message for building secularism as an ideological foundational principle for Indian nation-state. This argument has started making impact. Kashmiri political leadership which has never treated Kashmiri Pandits as equal partners in society is feeling jittery. Attempts to seek ‘Pandit faces’ to counter  legitimateaspirations of Displaced Kashmiris stem from this compulsion.

Panun Kashmir is succeeding in bringing home the point that the dilution of Indian sovereignty over Kashmir would not only imperil Indian unity but would also strengthen communal and secessionist forces in the state. How would Kashmiri Hindus remain secure in a place where Indian control would be weak and  communal-secessionist forces rule the roost?

Lastly, we are impressing upon that unless we counter communalism and fundamentalism and eliminate terrorist regimes Kashmiri society would remain handicapped in formulating genuine aspirations. Any solution which advocates compromise with communalism and separatism in Kashmir would be self-defeating.

KS: What has been the impact of Panun Kashmir at the community level?

AC: Kashmiri Pandit community thinks that the political visibility on its genocide has been possible solely because of efforts of Panun Kashmir.There is a Pandit question today because there is Panun Kashmir movement. Panun Kashmir has made a radical departure from traditional Pandit politics where leadership settled for few crumbs or personal favours through compromise with Muslim Communalism. Social and political awareness in the Pandit community has undergone a sea change.Today Kashmiri Pandit community is seeking concrete frameworks for reversal of its genocide. Panun Kashmir perspective is visible even in cultural and social responses of the community. Even credible NGOs are seeking opinion of Panun Kashmir. By evolving a survival doctrine that would stand the test of time Panun Kashmir has helped the community break its isolation and shed psyche of defeatism. We believe this is vindication of the ideology of Panun Kashmir.

KS: There is a view that Kashmiri Pandits should have their own political party as all political parties have failed the Pandit Community. Do you endorse the view?

AC: There can be no two views that all political parties in the state-NC, PDP, Congress, Communists etc. have publicly shown that interests of Displaced Pandit Community do not count in their political strategies. We do not agree that floating a political party of its own is a solution to this political exclusion.‘Political Party’ slogan is based on a premise that Pandits have a strong vote-bank which can be translated into legislative strength. This slogan is dubious and aimed to mislead Pandit community. An illusion is sought to be created that even without reversal of genocide Displaced Pandits would continue to enjoy political rights. We have two strong objections against the 'Political Party' slogan- One, there is no solid votebank of the community. In the past this votebank was destroyed through political gerrymandering of the electoral constituencies. After our uprootment this has suffered further through dispersal and manipulation of our electoral roles. Even in Habbakadal constituency our voting strength is shown as 11 thousand, way down from 22 thousand. More than 60% of voters in Habbakadal constituency today are shown as non-Hindus. So, where is the votebank?

If the attempt is to show that Pandits support democratic process that also sounds a dubious exercise. Pandits have always cherished the ideals of democracy. We ask how our electoral participation is going to make a difference to us if our genocide is not reversed. We believe gimmicks of 'political party' slogan has a sinister dimension too. It is a diversionary exercise, aimed at trivialising Kashmiri Pandits' problems and his permanent rehabilitation. The basic objective of this exercise is to convert 'issues' of the community into 'non issues' and vice-versa. We would not be surprised if there was connivance of the local establishment in this. Peddlers of this slogan are those people who have always been fence-sitters and have no record of doing any credible work in the community. Their attempts to keep Pandit community's interests hostage to communal leadership in Valley would not succeed.

KS:  In the past there was demand for 'constituencies in exile ' also. What are your views?

AC: Panun Kashmir believes that political rights for the community will flow from constitutional reorganisation of the state which would take care of interests of  all sections of people in the state. 'Constituencies in exile' is a communal demand, based on communal ghettoisation of the community. We reject the demand with the contempt it deserves. On one hand, the vested interests who raise political party slogans or demand 'Constituencies in exile' base these on communal principle but dub Panun Kashmir, which seeks unfettered flow of Indian constitution, as communal.

KS: Jamaat Islami and Hurriyat leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani recently said that Kashmiri Pandits were welcome to return to Kashmir and have nothing to fear from. Earlier, he would rant that Pandits would not be allowed to come till they joined the separatist movement. To what do you attribute this change?

AC: There is no change of heart so far as Geelani is concerned. His ideological and political views, which endorse ongoing fundamentalist-secessionist movement, have no place for peaceful coexistence religious minorities. At the same time of important changes have taken place during the past two years to which Geelani has to respond by devising new stratagems to hoodwink public opinion.

In the internal dialogue process i.e. in Round Table and Working Group meets, different dimensions of Muslims politics are getting exposed. Kashmiri Pandit perspective was effectively projected and well received. This has implications for local Muslim politics vis-a-vis Hindus of state, for country as a whole and for global peace. Muslim separatist leadership is under international pressure to explain its stand on Kashmiri Hindus-their ethnic-cleansing and rehabilitation. At the same time separatist leaders and even sections of mainstream parties do not want to address problems of Kashmiri Hindus and reject religious pluralism.

To escape international opprobrium they seem to be working on two strategies-one, to say publicly they are not opposed to Pandits' return, while doing everything to stall it. Secondly, the separatists and elements friendly to them in the political establishment are targeting few Hindus still holding on in Srinagar. During the past 17 years these Kashmiri Pandits in Valley have been pushed to penury and destitution. Who is facilitating interactions between the separatist leadership and few hundred Kashmiri Pandits in Valley and to what end? Soon after this engagement there were demands that"Pandits Temples/Religious institutions should be put under the care of Auqaf Trust" and "We appeal to the separatist organisations to help protect our identity and rights". These two strategies are to be seen in a broader ISI strategy in which there is a shift in thrust. Pakistan wants to build a strong united political extremist voice in Valley, which is stridently India. Engagement with Pandits serves many purposes-acquire secular legitimacy for anti-national platform and countering Pandits interests by creating 'Pandit faces'. Reports say that lot of money is being spent on this exercise. This engagement has acquired urgency soon after GOI started internal dialogue process and recognized Kashmiri Hindu factor as an integral part of the problem.

KS: What has been the response to this 'engagement'?

AC: The Kashmiri Pandit community sees through this game, which is aimed at creating a strong anti-Indian platform. Kashmiri Pandits are patriots and would not even remotely support something that harms country's interests. They also hold fast to the view that 'symbolic tokenism' advocated by Muslim communal establishment can be no substitute for reversal of genocide. Pandit opinion is more consolidated today that at any time.

KS: What has been the role of mainstream parties?

AC: The role of mainstream parties, to say that least, has been disappointing. Soon after GoI recognized Kashmiri Pandits as s crucial factor in Kashmir problem there was a rat race among different Muslim-dominated parties to create 'Pandit faces' to counter Panun Kashmir demand. Kashmiri political leaders have been orchestrating a campaign that Pandit community was in disarray, with divided

leadership. Round Table meets exposed this campaign as a farce. During these meets while Pandit leaders spoke in a unified voice Muslim leadership reflected sharp divisions not only between different parties but within individual parties also. This was true of NC, PDP, Congress etc. So far as 'toadies' factor is concerned you can have them in every community. There are no more than 1-2 dozen such individual among Pandits whole role in the past and recent past has thoroughly discredited them in the community. It is Panun Kashmir only which defends community's interests and carries its mandate.

KS: Dr. Farooq Abdullah said recently that NC would appoint a high level group to study 'What Pandits want'. He also alleged Mufti Mohammad Sayeed's hand in 1986 communal violence against Pandits. Please comment.

AC: Dr. Farooq Abdullah has never been consistent in his statements. We would like to ask him if Mufti Mohammad Sayeed's hand was there what did he and his government do all these years to initiate probe into it and take action. NC has been making right noises while in opposition. When it was in power its resolve was not to tackle any of Pandits' problems. So far as Mr. Omar Abdullah is concerned he did try to address some of the issues. This has not gone unnoticed. In Geneva Dr. Abdullah blamed Jamaat Islami for Pandits' religious-cleansing. After Wandhama massacre he said Kashmir Pandits cannot go back and described massacre 'as an act of ethnic-cleansing'. Yet on other occasions he blames Jagmohan for it. What else can you call it other than politicking? Not only NC but other parties as well refuse to accept the reality of ethnic-cleansing as point of departure for framing policies to end Pandits' ongoing genocide.

KS: How has coalition government responded to Displaced Kashmiri Pandits' problems during the past 5 years.

AC: The only gesture so far has been that 250 quarters have been allotted to the refugees. Even this took the government one year after the quarters were ready. Govt's own officials had been warning repeatedly that any delay in shifting refugees would be bad in view of the conditions of the old dilapidated quarters. The government continues to dither on the issue of 'bifurcation of cards, employment package and other deprivations. Ethnic-cleansing is an extraordinary situation. It requires extraordinary responses to address the gamut of genocide. You cannot allow routine parameters to address these. Lately, there has been blatant encroachment of Kashmiri Pandits' residential and shrines property. The government is doing nothing to stop it. Influential politicians-mafia nexus is also said to be involved in it. Moreover, a new phenomenon is being seen whereby Kashmiri Pandits' property in particular is being acquired without the consent of owners for so-called'public utility purposes'. This is a grave situation. To rub salts into our wounds the Revenue department claimed that Pandits' exile was a self-imposed one'. Recently 'leave salary' has been substituted by 'Idle wages'to further humiliate the frontline victims of terrorism. Kashmiri Pandits had a feeling that a national level party would have a national perspective where it would treat all sections of people equally. Our hopes have been shattered.

KS: The govt recently said that it was not averse to setting up a 'Sarda University' in Kashmir. Isn't it a good augury?

AC: We have to judge this offer in a broader context. If the government is unwilling to address any of Kashmiri Pandits' problems why should it go so far as to set up a university of this type. It is being floated as a trial ballon to hoodwink Kashmiri Pandits that their aspirations are being met. The bigger game is to use it to justify setting up of religious universities in the Valley and demands of 'greater autonomy', 'self-rule'. Who are the people in the community floating this demand of Sarda University? What is their public stand on Kashmir and Kashmiri Pandits? Answer to all this would put 'Sarda University' proposals in perspective. There could be other motivations for the sponsors-personal benefits that will accrue from this exercise. Ideally, it would have been a nice thing to have Sarda University which would promote Kashmir's historical identity. In view of the political overtones such a university would serve no purpose. Without addressing the issue of return of Kashmiri Pandits what would be relevance of such a university?

KS: Wajahat Habibullah, a former senior bureaucrat has hinted that Kashmiri Pandits still in Valley should decide the fate of Kashmiri Pandits. He said "None of the Kashmiri Pandits in the Valley were invited (to RTC). Will the Pandits who left the Valley decide on its future or those who are still inside?" Please comment. By the way how many Kashmiri Pandits continue to live in Valley?

AC: I think you are referring to Wajahat Habibullah's interview to theKashmir Affairs (a US paper). The most liberal estimates put the number of Pandits in Valley to be not more than 2800. Also, half of the members of these individual families live in Jammu while others stay put in Kashmir to look after business, property etc. Every year a number of these families shift permanently to Jammu because of the attrition they face there. During the past 17 years neither the government nor others have taken even nominal care of them. Rather, they were being coerced to issue statements against Kashmiri Pandits and in favour of separatists. All this has been covered by the press. There have been killings also at regular intervals-Sangrampora, Wandhama, Telwani, Nai Sarak, that of Hriday Nath Wanchoo. In fact, latter's family put an advertisement in paper to show how Wanchoo was betrayed. This will give you an indication of what sort of life they were leading.

This statement of Wajahat Habibullah has to be read with the other part of the interview in which he enlogises Yaseen Malik and JKLF, which initiated the pogram of ethnic-cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus. In the situation this nominal presence of Kashmiri Pandits lives in Valley they can be easily coerced. Is counterposing of these Pandits to the main body of Displaced Pandits part of a larger game-plan to coerce the former to support JKLF? It looks Wajahat's own proclivities lie with exclusivist variants of Kashmiri Muslim subnationalism. In a Working Group in which he was thrusted from the backdoor he floated a proposal which would lead to communal balkanisation in Jammu. There was an earlier controversy also when he wrote a paper'Political Economy of Kashmir Conflict'. It received wide censure in the country.

KS: Wajahat Habibullah is an official Interlocutor on Kashmir.

AC: That is unfortunate. India is a great power in the making. A number of our neighbours and some outside powers are trying to thwart this. We are facing a plethora of national security problems. There should be Institutional based appraisal of threats and solutions desired to maximise country's interests. This would insulate country's national security policy from politicking by individuals and political parties and also help forge a strong consensus on national security.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Introduction

Panun Kashmir was born as a comprehensive response to the challenges faced by the  nation in Kashmir. An in-depth understanding of the reasons which lead to the forced displacement of Kashmiri Hindus formed the substratum of its political perspective. This understanding did not trivilise the religious cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus by considering it as a mere aberration in the local political expression.

Panun Kashmir realised the linkage of the religious cleansing in Jammu and Kashmir to the civilisational and political challenges to the nation-building process in the state.

The organisation has been acutely conscious of the grave implications of the process which sought to insulate the national discourse on secularism and human rights from the happenings in Kashmir.

Panun Kashmir developed a firm opinion that the causes of displacement of Kashmiri Hindus underlined issues which were of fundamental importance to the nation. The efforts, particularly from within aimed at ensuring that the internal displacement of Kashmiri Hindus becomes a non-event constitutes one of the crucial elements of the subversive war to balkanise India and cripple the Nation state.

Political Approach

While formulating its political approach Panun Kashmir took into account following realities :

*Kashmir has contributed substantially to the fund of Indian civilization in almost all fields. Kashmiri Hindus pioneered the movement for Sanskritisation of Himalayas, which ultimately paved the way for the evolution and consolidation of Northern Frontier of India. Kashmiri Hindus therefore Constitute the Indian Civilisational Frontline in Kashmir.

Religious cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus is one more concerted attempt to snap the civilisation link of Kashmir with India. Its wider implication is to prepare the platform for dismantling the Northern Frontier of India by destroying its cultural content.

*Kashmiri Hindus also constituted the Political Frontline for the geopolitics  which aims to undermine Indian position in Kashmir. This social group acted as a symbol of Indian nationalism a vital component of the pluralistic identity of Kashmir and the powerful impetus for democratization of Kashmir polity.

Kashmiri Hindus contested all the variants of Muslim communalism and separatism in the Valley. Their destabilisation was always visualised by the anti-Indian forces in Kashmir as a crucial step towards breaking down of the indigenous political resistance to the separatist politics.

*Muslim separatism in Jammu and Kashmir has three genres which include demand for accession to Pakistan, carving out an Independent State of Jammu and Kashmir and seeking greater autonomy on the basis of Muslim subnationalism.

Relevance

*The political demand of Panun Kashmir seeks to decisively change the paradigm of politics paractised by Kashmiris. This politics was primarily determined by the Muslim religious identity. It had same ideological connotations as that of Muslim League before partition of India.

*The Panun Kashmir demand links the return of Kashmiri Hindus to the free flow of Indian Constitution. By seeking such a dispensation Panun Kashmir declares the compatibility of Kashmiri identity with the constitutional process governing India. It also proclaims that the communal separatism in Kashmir is an inherent consequence of the constitutional fortification of Muslim identity rather than erosion of the constitutional right.

The demand brings to fore the historical and secular imperatives confronting the Kashmir identity.

Panun Kashmir as Corrective

*Panun Kashmir seeks to act as a decisive corrective so far as the National discourse on Human Rights and secularism is concerned.

*The discourse on Human Rights at the national level has been primarily driven by a subversive drive to undermine and cripple the state responses to the challenges confronting national integrity and sovereignty.

This discourse has selectively focussed on state action in a situation where terrorism has established sway on the social milieu.

It has sought to insulate the individual and the organs of the Kashmiri society from the responsibility of upholding human rights. By implication it has provided space and immunity to the terrorist operatives.

*Panun Kashmir through its campaign has sought to focus attention on the individual and group responsibility in upholding the Human Rights.

Panun Kashmir has stressed the role of state action rather than inaction in fighting terrorism. It has tried to widen the moral space for the actions of a democratically-elected government to curb terrorist violence. Panun Kashmir has sought to delegitimise terrorism in all forms and with all justifications.

*Through its campaigns of focussing national and international attention on religious cleansing and terrorism Panun Kashmir has stripped off the terrorist movement in Kashmir of its pretensions of being a freedom struggle.

Secular discourse in the country particularly vis-a-vis Kashmir has suffered from a serious drawback. It recognises any accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India as the only yardstick which should determine judgement on the secular behaviour of the polity in the state. The communal content of the local politics has always been ignored or rationalised. This attitude helped in strengthening the Muslim communal stridency in the state. It has also accorded respectability to Muslim subnationalism in the state.

Over the years the Muslim subnationalism in Jammu and Kashmir and the fissiparous tendencies in many parts of India have developed a symbiotic relationship. Dilution of Indian sovereignty in Kashmir is being visualised as a decisive in put to redefine principles of Indian federalism along divisive subnational denominators for its eventual balkanisation.

*Panun Kashmir demand essentially brings to surface this contradiction of the secular discourse. It exposes the linkages of Muslim separatism in the state with the separatist tendencies elsewhere in the country. It seeks to sensitise the nation to the dangers of flirting with religious subnationalism.

Last but not the least, Panun Kashmir deals a decisive blow to the Dixon proposal or its variants. These seek the solution for the crisis in Jammu and Kashmir by advocating division of the state along the flow of Chenab river which roughly divides the state into Hindu and Muslim areas.

The demand for rehabilitating 700,000 Kashmiri Hindus north and east of river Jhelum in Kashmir valley brings a new perspective into play. It shifts the emphasis from communal division of state to the fractured political cravings of the Kashmiri population. Panun Kashmir demand renders separatist politics full of stakes for the future.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

PAK CLAIMS

Pakistan right since its inception has been engaged in destabilizing Kashmir to annex it eventually on the basis of two nation theory. It makes a dangerous claim that Kashmir was ‘unfinished aga’ of Partition. If this promise is accepted then the position of 14 crore Muslim community living in rest of India becomes untenable. Pakistan’s real strategic objectives in pursuing its game plan in Kashmir can be enumerated as:

• seeking parity with India by fomenting separatist strife;
• pursuing the goal of strategic depth;
• building justification for army’s permanent involvement in Pak politics;
• play its role as the frontline Muslim state for eastward expansion of Islamic fundamentalism;
• dismantling India’s Northern Frontier and
• finally facilitating India’s encirclement by hostile countries and internal balkanisation.

Internationally, Pakistan is trying to project itself as an aggrieved party claiming that India has not fulfilled the international commitments it made on Kashmir.

The truth, however, remains that the basic requisite for this commitment i.e. vacation of Pakistani troops from PoK was never implemented by Pakistan.

Pakistan also created hurdles by joining the cold war to complicate the Kashmir issue. And finally by annexing the northern territories it projected itself as a party that treated Kashmir issue as a real estate and a game of sharing spoils. The numerous agreements have superseded the so-called international commitments of earlier years.

Much is being made of India’s so-called commitment to Kashmiris that the future of Kashmir would be settled by ‘reference to the wishes’ of the Kashmiri people. Under the Indian Indepence Act the future of princely states was to be settled by the ruler. Accession of Kashmir to India was perfectly legal and it was unique in the sense that both the ruler and the then popular leadership of the Valley orsed it. Neither the ruler nor the popular leadership attached any conditionalities to the issue of accession.

Mountbatten’s desire that the reference be made after the accession to the wishes of the people has neither any legal nor moral binding. In fact, it carried the seeds of a future destabilization of India. Nehru made a larger commitment to the Indian nation that Kashmir would become India’s secular crown. India rightly regards accession of Kashmir as a refutation of two nation theory. Secondly, accessions cannot be done and undone every now and then. Any dilution of sovereignty of India on Kashmir will have a domino effect and hasten the process of balkanisation.

Harold S. Johnson in his celebrated work, “Self determination within the community of Nations”, rightly observes, “A belief in Self-determination can have anarchical implications within the present international state system It suggests the opportunity for a group of individuals to disregard all established political relationship in search for new ones...No government could hope to survive which consented in principle to a secession of a part of its territory by a vote of secessionist groups. The stability of the state itself rejects any such claim.”

BLINKERED VISION

The founding fathers of Indian republic recognized continued accession of Kashmir with India as a key element in India’s pursuit of secular nation-building.

Yet their blinkered vision did not link Kashmir’s functioning as an active secular society with India’s secular nationbuilding process. The problem was further compounded as the leaders of Indian national movement overestimated the secularism of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and ignored the strong undercurrents of communalism in the ideology of National Conference.

In many respects the National Conference was pursuing a strategy which was not fundamentally different from the path chosen by Muslim League in the pre-Indepence India. Delineating the many strands in Sheikh Abdullah’s ideological outlook, Dr K.N. Pandita remarks:

"Sheikh Abdullah did try for rapproachment with the Muslim League and Jinnah in 1944-45 but Jinnah was unaccommodating. In 1947 again, Sheikh tried to toe the PC Joshi and Adhikari line (on Two-Nation Theory). P.N. Bazaz who had worked closely with Sheikh and who understood him far better than anybody else, stated that the NC and Sheikh stood for Muslim nationalism and Muslim precedence in the state of J&K but for Congress and secularism outside the state of J&K. One may call it sheer opportunism, nevertheless it was the Central feature of Muslim question of India.The National Conference continued its tactical support to accession but ensured to prevent the integration of Kashmiri Muslims with India (Kashmiri Muslims: Vexed Identity, Business and Political observer, New Delhi 5th June 1993)."

A full scale review of the history and social background of the Kashmir anti-autocratic movement lead by National Conference is outside the scope of this write-up. There was inherent incompatibility in the nation-building models pursued by Indian National Congress and the National Conference. Leaders of Indian National Congress visualized the success of secularism through delegitimising religion-based identity politics. But the very ‘raison-d-etre’ of National Conference politics was avowed pursuit of Muslim identity politics.

In the situation aggravated by imperialist intervention Indian leadership resorted to short cuts.

They ignored that the secularization of Kashmiri society would be the soul of Kashmir’s continued accession with India. Indian leadership abandoned non-Muslim pro-India social groups in Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh to the mercy of Muslim communal leadership of Valley and overlooked the calculated attempts by Kashmiri Muslim leadership to inject communalism in the body politic of Jammu and Kashmir.

To counter the secessionism which was inbuilt in this situation Indian leadership decided to patronize pro-accession communal politics. Prof. M.K. Teng, the distinguished Political Scientist explains:

“The Congress leaders had always believed that improvised power equations, redistribution of political patronage and wider financial inputs into Muslim communalism would  the “Muslim alienation” in Kashmir and provide the settlement for peace. In sheer self-conceit, they clung tenaciously to their belief that the Muslimisation of the state did not conflict with Indian secularism, and they could strike a bargain with the militant regimes, even if it was at the cost of the Hindus and the other minorities.”  (Kashmir-Myth of Autonomy, Anmol Publications).

Over a period of time pro-accession and anti-accession communal politics developed a symbiotic relationship. While the anti-accession groups were building separatist movement to detach Kashmir from India, the pro-accession groups were using separatism as a lever to blackmail Centre and squeeze the non- Muslim groups in the state. Both groups cooperated in strengthening the Muslim precedence, facilitating Muslimisation and the Islamization of Kashmir and adjoining regions of Doda and Kargil and weakening Kashmir’s link with India through instrumentalities of Article 370 or outright secession.

ROOT CAUSE

The emergence of secessionist movement in Kashmir cannot be delinked from the changing sociology of Kashmir Society over the years and the rise of militarized trans-national Islamic fundamentalism.

In the first two decades since independence urban Muslim middle class and the commercial bourgeoisie were co-opted in the political power structure of Kashmir. However, these very groups subsequently thwarted the aspirations of lower middle class in urban areas and resisted the strong urge of the rural propertied groups for rightful share in the political power structure.

This created the groundswell which facilitated the rise of disaffected political groups in the Kashmir Valley. Indian leadership’s policy of patronizing personalized politics syndrome strengthened the oligarchic tendencies among the ruling families of Kashmir. These families created a network of interests which looted the public exchequer creating a big rentier class and alienating people through rampant misgovernance. Pakistan was quick to reach out to disaffected political sections and the alienated populace rallied behind these disaffected political groups. Prof. Mustapha Kamal Pasha has examined this phenomenon in his essay “Between the Two Nation Divide: Kashmir

and Islam” (Perspective on Kashmir ed. Raju Thomas). He says:

 “Increasing social differentiation and rising political consciousness among new social groups coincided with kleptocracy, nepotism, corruption and the politics of greed, rather than a functioning democratic order with political accountability as its chief aspiration”.

The intervention by Pakistan was easy because of the substratum of communalism, kept alive through fortification of Muslim identity politics.

Rise of transnational Islamic fundamentalism both in the context of Gulf oil boom in 1973 and the Afghan war 1979 onwards created the logistic base for Pakistani intervention in Kashmir and arms-financial pipeline for sustaining the terrorist movement.

The western powers’ global designs helped provide the crucial diplomatic support to the terrorist movement in Kashmir.

The unwillingness of the national political leadership of India to adequately fathom the subversive potentialities of the National Conference/PDP politics is the main reason that solutions to  militancy elude us.

There are three genres of separatist politics in Kashmir. One, the avowedly pro-Pak groups which seek annexation with Pakistan. Secondly, the so-called pro-independence groups which seek independent Islamic state. Thirdly pro-autonomy/ self-rule groups which seek an Islamic state on the territory of India with weak constitutional and political links with the country.

The subversive potentialities in National Conference/PDP politics can be enumerated as:-

1) Its penchant to link the Muslim majority character of Kashmir with accession and weaken the constitutional links with the country.

2). Its pursuit of Dixon Plan which implies in the first stage to create Greater Muslim Kashmir and in the second stage an autonomous Greater Muslim Kashmir.

Sheikh Abdullah is on record having orsed the dangerous Dixon Plan, which seeks to take Kashmir Valley away from India.

In a letter to Col. GA Naseer, the then President of Egypt, in 1965, Sheikh wrote:

“Sir Owen took a detached view of things and considered this as the best practicable solution under the circumstances. It appears to be a fair method of resolving the present tangle. In order to avoid a number of complications, that might arise by holding a plebiscite immediately in the territory referred to in clause (c) above, a reasonable way can be found in keeping the said territory under UN Trusteeship for a specified period (i.e. 5 to 10 years). The people of the territory can be given an opportunity for the exercise of the right of self-determination in a suitable way, after that period.”

In 1948 NC created Doda district in Jammu province to consolidate Muslims in Jammu region.

This facilitated the spillover of plebiscite and later fundamentalist militancy politics into the Doda region. In 1979 when Sheikh Abdullah was at the helm NC created Kargil district as a Muslim majority district to consolidate the Muslim identity there. The dangerous regional autonomy plan of NC seeks to balkanise Jammu province on communal basis.

NC’s patronage to Chenab Development Council which seeks to merge Gool and Mahore tehsils of Udhampur with Doda leaves no one in doubt about the seriousness of NC to implement Dixon Plan.

Similarly NC has been trying to patronise Muslim groups in Poonch, Rajouri and Bani (Kathua) to weaken the Dogra identity of Jammu. In Jammu also groups have alleged that under a definite plan National Conference had a greater design to change the demography of Jammu province.

Praveen Swami, a sellknown, Journalist and author of “The Kargil War”exposes National Conference’s gameplan to undermine secular-plural identity of Jammu. He observes:

The Regional Autonomy

Report forms an important backdrop to recent events, and underlining the multiple way in which democracy and secularism in J&K have come under assault. Released by the RAC, the Report calls for the historic regional formations of Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh to be broken up into new entities. In some important senses this holds out more fundamental threats to the prospect of a secular and democratic J&K than any number of Lashkar-e-Toiba insurgents. But the most dramatic impact of the RAC recommations would be on Jammu. The district of Doda, and the single Muslim dominated tehsil of Mahore from the adjoining district of Udhampur, would be made into a new Chenab Valley Province. Largely Hindu Jammu, Kathua and Udhampur districts would become the Jammu province. Poonch and Rajouri districts, for their part, would form the Pir Panjal province. The existing Province of Jammu would thus be turned into three provincial blocks divided along the geographical fault lines of Hindu and Muslim majorities. The strange history of the RAC and its equally bizarre recommendations, suggest that meaningful democratic change is the last thing on the National Conference’s mind...The sole outcome of the RAC proposals will be to enable National Conference politicians in the Jammu region to represent themselves as defers of local Muslim communities against a largely fictional hegemony of Jammu’s largely Hindu urban trading communities.” (The Kargil War). Wajahat Habibullah’s proposals virtually simulate this.

National Conference also tried to silence the criticism of pro-India groups by pursuing a policy of ethnic preference and ethnic exclusion. In the Ladakh region it was patronising the minority Argon Kashmir Muslim group to under cut the Buddhist majority.

In Kargil district aspirations of the Zanskari Buddhists were being counteracted by adding Muslim areas to the Zanskar assembly constituency.

The interests of the strongly patriotic 12 lakh strong community of Gujjar Muslims are being harmed by subverting the benefits of ST reservation and raking up Paharis as a counter group.

In the wake of ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Kashmir, Doda, Udhampur, Poonch and Rajouri the policies of ruling National Conference/PDP have created a situation where the exiled Hindus can never go back to their homes.

STAKES

In the context of separatist violence in Kashmir there are four issues which need to be addressed.

1. Restoration of the law and order by ing the terrorist violence.

2. Reversing the genocide against Kashmiri Pandits and Hindus in Jammu region.3. Rebuilding the edifice of participatory democracy in the state.

4. Weaning Kashmir Muslim populace away from the separatist politics.

Terrorist violence in Kashmir is still not being treated as a war by the Indian leadership. There is an inherent contradiction in the policy of Govt. of India. It only seeks bringing down the terrorist violence to manageable levels in the hope that it would create space for a political solution.

Due to this flawed approach destroying the support structures of terrorists does not become a priority. To defeat the terrorism comprehensively the Indian state needs a new military doctrine.

A key objective of Pakistan’s game -plan in Kashmir is to push out Hindus from the Muslim majority areas. This is being achieved through physical destabilization of Hindu minority and by imposing genocide. So far the successive leaderships at the Centre have demonstrated total lack of vision and will in evolving a doctrine of survival for these patriotic minority groups. The communalization of the Kashmiri Muslim society and its intense socialisation with separatist politics has contributed to the destabilization of the Hindu groups. Thus reversing of genocide entails secular governance as well as secularisation of Kashmir society.

Policy of promoting Muslim precedence by National Conference has lead to the political marginalisation of people of Ladakh, Dogras, Kashmiri Pandits and Gujjars. Even a partisan writer like Gautam Navlakha, whose sympathies lie with Muslim communal leadership of Kashmir concedes:

“It goes without saying that the absence of a clear cut policy towards non-Muslims is a shortcoming of the political leadership in Kashmir. It has seldom bothered to go beyond the generalities, which only assuage the insecurity felt by Kashmiri Pandits” (Economic and Political Weekly, Bombay November 6, 1993).

There has to be new approach in ing communal and ethnic discrimination against the patriotic groups. Restoration of participatory democracy, which accommodates aspirations of all ethnic group will strengthen the nationalist base of polity of J&K.

The Muslim alienation in Kashmir has many strands. One section has political grievance that the ruling national conference had thwarted their chances of upward mobility by following oligarchic policies. Second section is alienated because of rampant misgovernance. The third section feels alienated from India because of heightened sense of communal identity reinforced by autonomy politics, and Islamic fundamentalism practicised by Jamaat-i-Islami. There is a need to reorient the politics by building high stakes for separatist politics and communally-oriented agas. At the same time attention has to be paid to evolve a methodology for the entry of disgruntled political groups into the political mainstream and rebuilding the edifice of good governance.

PROSPECT

The practice of Muslim precedence politics and the long legacy of separatist politics has made Jammu and Ladakh colonies of Kashmir and pushed out Kashmiri Pandits from their homeland. After throwing Kashmiri Pandits out from Kashmir, the Kashmir Muslim leadership is engaged in destroying the secular and plural identities of Jammu and Ladakh. Continuation of Jammu and Kashmir as a unitary state has not only lead to the politico-economic marginalisation of people living in Jammu and Ladakh but it has also lead to the spillover of terrorist violence and separatist politics into these areas. The nation- building model adopted in the form of the present Jammu and Kashmir state is in essence a subversion of secular vision of India.

PANUN KASHMIR

There is no other solution for restoring the Kashmiri Hindus to their homeland and ing communally motivated regional discrimination against Jammu and Ladakh other than political reorganisation of the Jammu and Kashmir State. This reorganisation which entails the quadripartition of the state would restore secular identity of Jammu and Ladakh and help Kashmiri Pandits recover their homeland.

The creation of Panun Kashmir in Kashmir valley would not only restore Pandits to their Homeland, it also holds the potentiality of creating the basis for secular accountability in the Kashmir valley. It is the first strategic response in the Modern India to the sinister proposal of communally motivated Dixon Plan. Panun Kashmir is thus not only a solution to the problem of Kashmiri Pandits as such but is also a solution to the Kashmir problem on a long-term basis. It would also raise stakes for pursuit of separatist communal politics in Kashmir and help in consolidating India in Kashmir on its own strength. With Panun Kashmir the politics of Doda and Kargil will also undergo change.

The creation of two political systems in Kashmir valley holds the potential of creating national consensus on Kashmir.

by Dr. Ajay Chrangoo

Yardsticks of Judgment

The community struggle during a decade of its exiled existence should be viewed in the light of its social personality prior to the present exodus and the contemporary socio-political environment around it.  The displaced Pandit had inherited a 'dishelved personality' with a marked desensitisation to its rights.  It for years had been reconciled to a state of  'passive existence' and had got used to speaking in terms of gratitude besides extolling the virtues of its adversary.  It was 'politically imbecile' with an irresponsible attitude to its collective historical destiny.

The socio-political environment in which the Kashmiri Pandit was placed at the time of exodus was one of extreme isolation.  For Pakistan and its international support structures the Pandit presence in the Valley constituted the vital element for secularisation and democratisation of Kashmiri polity.  The Pandit also constituted the civilisational front-line.  Its destruction had become a pre-requisite for the thrust of Muslim power towards the east.  For the forces dominating Indian political scene, the Pandit constitutes the apex of the pyramid of the so called 'Brahminical order' which they are seeking to dismantle.  Kashmiri Pandit also constitutes a very insignificant social group in terms of vote Politics last but not the least the type of Hindu response which emerged in India during last decade and a half considered Kashmiri Pandit as an extension of Nehru and his political creed.  When Bal Thackery commented sometime back that 'Kashmiri Pandits have to fight both with Pakistan as well as Government of India," he was only underlining the nature of Pandit isolation.

Perspective of Failure

Judging from such a perspective, the Pandits' failure as a social group during last 10 years of exile do not at all fall in the realm of its responses to the militarised fundamentalism and other challenges to the national integrity or the multidimensional genocidal attrition against the Hindus of the state.  On all these accounts Kashmiri Pandits have fared commendably.

The failures of this community lie primarily on two scores.  One that it has failed to appreciate its own efforts and their impact in relation to its isolation and the nature and reach of the forces which unleashed the genocidal war on it.  Secondly the community has not been able to overcome the obsession over the 'paradigm of community unity' which over the years has nurtured only disunity and caused disfigurement of its personality.

Ist Failure

Uprooted from its territory without any credible institutional support structure and with an overwhelming isolation engulfing it, the Kashmiri Pandit had to wage a struggle at many fronts.  It had to secure, an honourable survival in exile, evolve a perspective of survival for the future and assume a dominant civilian role to fight challenges to the national integrity and unity as a whole.  In fact, the Pandits have performed better than many social groups anywhere in similar circumstances.

The eminent journalist and writer Arun Shourie while complimenting the Kashmiri Hindus on their efforts confessed during the World Conference of Kashmiri Pandits, "You have done far better than we Punjabis in responding to the challenges posed by terrorism and fundamentalism.  The outbursts of Dr. Gh.  Nabi Fai the leader of Kashmir American Council in front of Pandit delegates in Geneva after Pakistan was forced to withdraw the crucial resolution against India in NHRC was, only a compliment to Pandits.  "We were defeated by Kashmiri Pandits and not by the Government of India", he said.

A few years back four Kashmiri Pandits were brought down from the bus at the outskirts of Gool and three of them were gunned down.  The terrorists were very selective in these killings and had spared
the lives of all other local Hindus traveling in the bus.  The scrutiny into the causes of this selectiveness revealed that the terrorist mind considered Kashmiri Pandit as a cohesive, articulate and unrelenting social group.  It viewed their presence in Jammu with alarm in relation to their future operatives in the province.  One reason for the killing was to create an atmosphere of insecurity for, Pandits even in Jammu.  However, more motivating objective was that they believed that Pandit killing had a more publicity potential.  The terrorists had gunned down more than half a dozen local Hindus including a doctor in the area without any significant media attention.

The entire spectrum of the separatists, think tank in the state which includes a section of Kashmiri Bureaucracy take Pandit factor more seriously as impediment to their designs.  They openly confess about it and rely on their subversive reach within Govt. of India to neutralise this factor.  The Pandit factor is the only factor other than the Kashmiri Muslims, which has got registered on the international mind amongst the totality issues involved in the Kashmir crisis.  Leading US expert on Indian subcontinent Stephen Cohen once described the future of Kashmiri Pandits' as an 'acid test' to any solution to Kashmir crisis.

We have a pardoxical appreciation of Pandit response.  It has a better external recognition and a worse internal appreciation.  This is a major failure of the community mind.  If only the 'Pandit' could see his struggle and its impact in a broader national and international perspective his persecuted personality will emerge from the inertia created by 'internalisation of his crisis'.  He would fix his - external enemy.  He would realise that for last 10 years, he was and continues to be in a leadership role spearheading the national response against expansion of Muslim fundamentalism and international intrigue in Jammu and Kashmir.

IInd failure

The Kashmiri Pandits are yet to transcend and rise above their existing 'paradigm of unity'.  On the surface and in common parlance such pespective of community unity underlines simplistic expectations.  If groups are controlled or dissolved through a common platform, community action will assume a decisive punch; the government and the political establishment will consider community as important negotiating partner.  So bringing groups or leaders together has become our foremost concern.  We continue to invest lots of energy in such efforts.

But do such unity efforts even when they succeed fulfill even these preliminary expectations?  The results of 1997 unity experiment in London are revealing.  This experiment did lead to the emergence of a common platform-The Kashmiri Pandit political Steering Committee.  Most of the functional and credible Pandit organisations which included All State Kashmiri Pandit Conference, Kashmiri Pandit Sabha Jammu, Kashmiri Samiti Delhi, two groups of Panun Kashmir and Overseas Pandit Organisations constituted the committee.  But neither did such a unity lead to any new thrust in the commtmity action nor did it bring about factorial recognition to the Pandits.  The Government did not give it any negotiating legitimacy.  In fact, while efforts were on for the creation of the 'Steering Committee' to be the sole representative of the Pandits, the government had already started talking to new organisations which had sprung up from nowhere.  Scores of Pandit delegations were encouraged by the Government to visit Kashmir by offering allurements, The 'Steering Committee' became just one more group for the Government.

And we were back to square one.  The emergence of new groups readily recognised by the Government created a need for a, bigger umbrella.  With the existing paradigm we continue to be in a vicious cycle chasing a mirage of unity.  Our adversary within and outside has kept us bogged down.  He cultivates new individuals and keeps us busycoopting them.

The 'London' experiment also brought out an interesting phenomenon.  In any consensual exercise between various groups there should be emergence of a more pronounced stand on such points of view which are common to all the groups as per the simple logic.  There were many common areas in the positions taken separately by the constituting units of the Steering Committee.  However, this comrnonaliy did not get more pronounced through the new formation.

For example, most of the India based functional groups of the Steering Committee had rejected the proposal of the Government's sub-committee on return and rehabilitation.  Yet the joint proposal by the Steering Committee on-the same tended to come closer to the Government position.  During the presentation to the US ambassador to India, Panun Kashmir, All State Kashmiri Pandit Conference and Kashmir Pandit Sabha Amphalla had jointly taken the political position seeking politico-administrative restructuring of the state'.  Other India based constituents of the Steering Committee had also taken similar positions from time to time.  The Steering Committee even diluted this commonalty in political approach which otherwise should have become more, forceful and discreet through the joint venture.

When the senior advisor of the Indo American Kashmir Forum visited Jammu sometime after the creation of  'The Steering Committee' he got very concerned and upset about the all pervading feeling of disunity within the community.  A community representative who met him questioned his state of appreciation by commenting, "You say that all the leaders with whom you have interacted expressed a commonality of ideas in front of you, You have brought almost 90% of them on a common platform.  The remaining 10% have not opposed your experiment.  Why are you still encountering disunity?"

In the mid-eighties, 33 Pandit organisations formed a joint front Hindu Ekta Manch.  The inaugural session of the only convention held by the Hindu Ekta Manch witnessed pro-RSS representatives eulogising their efforts in bringing so many groups on a common platform.  Towards the end of the convention, while the leader of the All India Pandit conference was making its concluding remarks the banner of Hindu Ekta Manch was silently brought down and replaced by the banner of the same Organisation which had taken the dias.  The more comical part of this unity experiment was that none of the individual constituents had any pronounced political position.  They agreed with one another so much that they could have neither justified their separate existence nor the need to come together.  The entire unity exercise was perhaps to disrupt one another when they were doing better individually.  The 1997 unity experiment also caused big disruption.  It demobilised all its constituent units which otherwise had done well within their respective perspectives.

Our unity paradigm below the surface is more vicious and our major failure is that we have not been able to see through it.  It seeks 'unity of heads' and relegates issues and opinions to secondary importance.  Through such a perspective, we try to arrive at consensus before crystallisation of the issues.  Here the vision of survival becomes a consequence of herding of individuals rather than thinking of minds.

This paradigm has also created a sociological myth that all other social groups have better cohesiveness than us.  It has created a monster of an internal enemy.  For it external enemy does not either exist or exists only as an alibi to fight the inner enemy.  It nurtures a perpetual state of self blame and self negation.  It has created a state of helplessness as if we have some sort of genetic disability which has caused our misery.

And above all this paradigm ultimately strives at rendering us in a state of non-opinion.  Such a state suits only our enemy.  This unity paradigm is only a disunity trap which our adversary has imposed on us. A close observation of the nature of efforts to keep us in a state of non-opinion does reveal that the paradigm is more externally imposed through subtle processes of suggestion and sabotage than the consequence of our own persecuted personality.

Salvation for persecuted groups does not come from external support.  It comes through irmovative approaches aimed at breaking or circumventing the defeatism of their persecuted personality.  Appreciating our own accomplishments and breaking the gordian knot of inertia is the only way to our Auto-emancipation.

by Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

SECESSIONISM IN BORDER STATES

The secessionist movements have been the characteristic of only the border states in India. And without exception such states either have a non-Hindu population as the majority social group or the dominant Hindu identity has suffered a crippling erosion over the years. The importance of the absence of secessionist tendencies in the main heartland in maintaining the Unity of India cannot be overemphasised. The political culture as has evolved in the mainland India has in many ways than one contributed to the growth of secessionism in the border states as also the marginalisation and exclusion of Hindu minority groups living there.

While as the growth of separatism in North-Eastern states can be mainly attributed to socio-economic reasons as will as concerted campaigns to bring about dilution and cultural alienation of Hindu social groups, same does not hold true for the growth of secessionism in the northern border states of Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir. The patronisation and legitimisation by the Indian State and the mainstream political establishment of the religious-subnationalism in these two states has created a situation where secessionist politics has assumed international ramifications and an intense war from within.

CLEANSING OPERATIONS IN J&K

The dimensions of this internal war have frightening proportions particularly in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Hindu minority in this border state has borne the main brunt of this war. Suffering a systematic process of ruthless marginalisation and exclusion since independence, the Hindus  in the Jammu and Kashmir State are now face to face with an attrition of genocidal proportions. Terrorist operatives in this state, unlike Punjab, are of the nature of a demographic assault. Indian State as well as political mainstream have yet to acknowledge this stark reality.

Kashmir valley has already been cleansed of its Hindu population. Continuing massacres of the Hindus in Jammu province are neither a diversionary tactic employed by the terrorists nor a sign of their desperation under the supposed pressure mounted by the security forces. They have a very clear cut objective of bringing about a blatant demographic change not just in some parts, but in the entire Jammu region.

‘Cleansing operations’ in the form of selective or mass killings of Hindus form only the obvious component of the demographic assault in the state. The less talked about, but not so hidden, components are engineered purchase of land and properties in targeted areas of Jammu region, fraudulent and illegal grab of Hindu properties and most significantly the demographic invasion, of Jammu city. Creating a ‘New Jammu  City’ with a transformed demographic profile, relegating the existing city to the  backyards, is no longer being talked in hushed tones.

These demographic campaigns besides being crucial to the Islamisation of the state to facilitate extension of Muslim power further towards east have also immediate implications. Such machinations narrow down the social support base for India in the state, thus critically impairing the leverage of the Nation in any negotiated settlement in the light of mounting international pressures to settle the Kashmir issue.  Efforts of the entire nation to stand up to concerted international pressures on the Kashmir issue stand nullified in the long run if the demographic character of the state is allowed to be transformed at a pace at which it is happening in the present time.

Dispersal of displaced Kashmiri Pandits from Jammu to other parts of the country, regular internal displacement of Hindus from the vulnerable border areas of Jammu province to smaller towns as well as the main Jammu city should ring the alarm bills loud enough for evolving a more comprehensive thinking on the issue. Strategic thinking should take a serious notice of the fact that even though Indian security prowess may be able to enforce a status quo on the borders but as a result of this blatant change of demographic profile of the state the borders of the nation are very in-conspicuously receding back.

RESPONSE OF INDIAN STATE

The response of the Indian State to this serious development since 1989 can be at the most termed as an approach of mere ‘physical retention’ of Hindus.

The main features of this policy of retention are that:

i) it seeks to maintain pluralism in the state only in symbolic terms. Attempts at the phased return of the displaced Hindus is a classical example of this symbolism.

ii) it ignores the reality that Hindus in the state in general, and in vulnerable pockets were they are having not a significant presence in particular, are the basic targets  of destabilisation.

iii) attacks on Hindus in the state continue to be visualised in terms of attempts to vitiate communal atmosphere in the mainland rather than in terms of effecting a demographic transformation of that particular area and pushing back the civilisational frontiers of the nation.

iv) it seeks to discourage fresh displacement only through administrative  in the form of presenting a fiat accompli to the victims that displacement may bring a worse situation of economic ruin and wilderness.

The victim is presented a choice between devil and the deep sea.

It is no exaggeration that Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir constitute the dominant component of the social resistance against the separatist politics in the state. The feeling that is gaining ground amongst them is that while they constitute the main target of destabilisation for Islamic fundamentalism as well as larger international intrigue, they are yet only a peripheral concern for the Indian State and the mainstream political thinking. The feeling is critically undermining the morale of their resistance against the separatism and fundamentalism.

SURVIVAL DOCTRINE

It is time that problems of minorities in the State of the J&K are addressed not in piecemeals and puny political posturings. Indian State can no longer afford to shy away from evolving a comprehensive ‘Doctrine of Survival’ for minorities in the Jammu and Kashmir State. Any delay in its formulation may only imperil the minorities with serious implications for overall security integrity and stability of the already weakened northern frontiers of the Indian nation.

This security Doctrine should form one of the main components of India’s Kashmir policy and should be based on the specific threats to the minorities in the regions of the state they inhabit. It also should take into account the role of political elites in the state towards the survival and development of the minorities. The main presumptions for this security doctrine have to be as:

a) No protection measure for the minorities under assault in the state can be evolved unless Government of India takes into account its genocidal contours. Hindus in the state are under attack as a society and not as individuals.

b) The surer immunity against terrorist campaigns is building the physical resistance as well as deterrence, which means therapeutic arming of Hindus.

For this nation needs to rise above the limitations which the existing secular idiom imposes on the policy makers. Taking nation into confidence about the contours and magnitude of the threat to the very existence of Hindus becomes imperative. The larger Muslim minority in country has to be particularly educated about the nature of crisis and precarious position of the Hindus in the state.

c) The return and rehabilitation of the internally displaced groups in the state is to be visualised not in terms of physical return to the lost territory.  The displaced groups’ return essentially means return to the society and economic organisation of the lost territory and hence demands addressing of the issues of communalisation and fundamentalisation of the society.

d) The security doctrine has necessarily to relate itself to the proper political empowerment of Hindus and evolving an approach which undermines the politics of religious subnationalism.

v) The growing feeling amongst Hindus of the state of being disowned by the nation has to be properly adressed as the feeling can breed either surrender or alienation.

The father of the nation had opined helplessly in 1934 that a Hindu prince can only rule in a Muslim majority Kashmir by abdicating the responsibility to rule. But that was before independence during the autocratic rule. The independent democratic Indian Nation over the years has shown the same inclination of conveniently abdicating the responsibility and choosing only soft options. Such approach can no longer be tenable. What is at stake now is very existence of the minorities in the state.

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

Many communities e.g. Palestinians, Jews, Tibetans, Sindhis, Kashmiri Hindus, have been banished from their homeland through an act of religiouscleansing.

Invariably, the aggressor community resorts to cultural effacement in the aftermath of ethnic-cleansing to deny that the victimised community ever belonged to its homeland. Recording the story of this effacement is always a painful journey for the members of victimised communities.

Lahore Nama, a travelogue written by Shri Santosh Kumar Gurtoo, has with subtle sensitivity summed up the cultural cleansing Lahore has undergone in the wake of 1947 partition.

The travelogue also unwinds the social knots and depicts how the praetorian state is bulldozing the aspirations of its own people - writers, Trade Union leaders, political workers etc. Santosh Kumar is a scion of the well-known Gurtoo dynasty. His grandfather, Pt. Mukand Ram Gurtoo (1831-1897) had left Kashmir in mid-nineteenth century, to seek employment in Lahore. Pt. Mukand Ram was an institution builder. He went on to launch Akhbar-i-Aam(Urdu) and Mitra Vilasa (Hindi) papers and also established a printing press. Shri Santosh Kumar, a person of great integrity and depth, has carried forward the family legacy of fearless, truthful journalism. Joining Urdu dailyPratap in Lahore in 1945, he retired as its news editor in 1987. He subscribes to left views and has been actively associated with country's trade union movement under the aegis of AITUC.

An ardent patriot, he was dismissed from service for organising a strike in a British Company, which he was serving, against the INA Trials in November, 1945.

Like other Hindus and Sikhs of Lahore, Shri Santosh Kumar had to abandon his place of birth in September, 1947 under helpless and humiliating conditions.

From June to August, 1947, the Muslim League National Guards, blinded by passion and hatred, succeeded in burning down street after street from Shah Alami gate area to Rang Mahal, finishing and driving out the surviving non-Muslims from the ancient city. The author has included in this travelogue the photographs, depicting this destruction and frenzy that Lahore underwent in 1947. The photographs were taken by Shri Govind Lal, a free-lance photographer of Lahore.

Hindus ethos

Pre-partition Lahore was a town with distinct Hindu ethos, where Hindus formed the substantial majority. It was home to Dr. Gopi Chand Bhargava (later Chief Minister of East Punjab), Mrs. Swaroop Rani Nehru-Thussu (mother of Pt. JL Nehru), Kedar Nath Sehgal, a legendary revolutionary leader etc. Sehgal braved British jails for many years and had worn black clothes on the death of Tilak. He vowed to remain in black till freedom was won. After he came to Delhi as a refugee, he refused to discard the black robes retorting, “Is this what you call freedom”.

Prof. Tirath Ram, who became famous later as Swami Ram Tirath, lived in“Telian di Khi”, near Sanatan Dharam Complex. Santani Swami Shraddhanand, who composed “Om Jaya Jagdeesh Harey”, resided in the Hari Gyan Mandir, situated on Mohan Lal Road, the famous text-book market of Lahore. Pt. Tota Ram Naqqash, a master-painter of Kashmiri School of Painting lived in Harcharan dia Pauriyan, near Wachhowli area. Some of his master paintings were retrieved by Shri Santosh Kumar from his burning house in July 1947 and form part of Lahore Nama.

Lahore had a good number of Kashmiri Pandit families. These lived in Wachhowali quarter of Lahore. Shri Santosh Kumar's family used to live in the Kucha Badri Bhagat. Badri was a disciple of the famous Chhaju Bhagat of Lahore. Santosh Kumar's other relations, including Prof. JP Gurtu, used to live in Kutcha Mehtian.

The famous scholar of Sanskrit, Pt. Laxmi Narain Ji used to teach Sanskrit in the temple complex of Ramdwara. This temple finds reference in the history of Lahore authored by Syed Muhammed Latif. Pt. Laxmi Narain's brother, Pt. Paras Ram was a great Katha-Vachak, while his youngest brother Pt. Madan Gopal, culled the teachings of Bhagwat Gita and presented the results through the medium of a set of playing cards. Shri Santosh Kumar used to learn Sanskrit here. He has also managed to preserve a set of these cards, which are displayed in the book.

Maharaja Gulab Singh's younger brother, Raja Dhyian Singh once served as Prime Minister to Maharaja Ranjeet Singh. It was in a house located in Haveli Dhyian Singh that Pt. Bal Krishna, father of Shri Santosh Kumar was born in 1880.

Another part of haveli housed Dyal Singh High School. Haveli belonged to J&K government. In 1864 Maharaja Ranbir Singh of J&K had allowed Lahore College to be established in another part of haveli. Sardar Dyal Singh, a Brahmo Samajist had established the school and the college. Prof. PN Pandit, a Kashmiri used to teach sciences in this college till 1947.

Another historic building was huge Sanatan Dharam Sabha Complex.Besides housing offices of SD Sabha, it had a school, a temple and a pathshala attached to it. Its vast enclosure was a venue of many social functions.

Leading Congress stalwarts, Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya, Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilk and others used to address meetings here. Vishnu Digamber, who established Gandharv Maha Vidyala in Ram Nagar, Lahore, had sung the popular arti “Om Jaya Jagdish Harey” in the courtyard of this complex.

Nationalist bastion

Lahore has also remained the bastion of nationalist and left movements. ItsBrad-Laugh Hall, once the headquarters of the Punjab Congress Committee had seen such veteran leaders -  CR Das, Moti Lal Nehru, Mrs Sarojini Naidu, Bi-Amma (mother of Ali Brothers of Khilafat movement), Mahatma Gandhi, JL Nehru, Hiren Mukerjee, Dr. Kunwar Mohd. Ashraf, Mian Iftikhar Uddin, Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlew etc. addressing Lahoris. Dedicated to the great British libertarian Charles Brad-laugh, its foundation stone was laid by Shri Surendra Nath Banerji, the Congress President (1895-1902). Shri Santosh Kumar recalls with nostalgia his association with Brad-laugh Hall during his student years. Following Gandhi's call to boycott Govt/Govt. aided educational institutions, the National College was established in a part of this complex. Bhagat Singh, the Indian revolutionary used to be a student of this college when Prof. Chabil Das was its Principal.

Gandhi had once presided over this college's convocation. The Pakistan Govt. to erase this historical memory, has converted it into a technical institute.

‘Pratap Building’, which used to be the head office of Daily Pratap, is another link to Lahore's past. Shops of Umrao Singh and Megh Raj were famous sweets shops. Gul-Bahist (Flower of Heaven) was innovation of Megh Raj. Lahore has also produced great singers -  Nur Jehan, Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, Shamshad Begum etc. who lived in Hiramandi quarter of the city.

Cultural Effacement

Shri Santosh Kumar does not feel shy in telling the readers how Lahore has undergone cultural effacement since 1947, to erase its Hindu past. During his recent visit to Lahore when a young boy asked him to tell the difference between pre-partition Lahore and 1980 Lahore, Shri Santosh Kumar spontaneously reacted, “Pehle is mohalle vich mein wai Mahinder sunda sa, hun wai Sikandar sun reha aan”. (Earlier in this mohalla I used to hear Wai Mahinder and now can hear Wai Sikandar). What used be “Kutcha Kali Mata” (Gumti bazaar) has now become “Kutcha Aurangzeb”.

The temple of the goddess Kali Mata has been turned into a human habitation. Similarly, Grand Trunk Road has been renamed after another tyrant, Mahmud Ghaznavi, “Shahrah-e- Ghazanavi”. The author protested to Pakistanis, “who was Ghazanavi? For 16 long years, he did not annex Punjab lest he becomes responsible for the maintenance of law and order. He just carried out yearly raids.

A raider cannot be hailed as a hero

Before 1947, two shrines -  Sunehri Gurdwara (Baoli Sahib) and Sunehri Masjid stood near Dabbi bazaar. Sunehri Masjid still stands, but the Gurdwara is no more there. It was burnt down during communal violence in 1947. The famous Hanuman Mandir is also not there. In its place an embroidery shop has come up.

A massive statue of Goddess Laxmi, the goddess of wealth, gave name to the chowk which housed it. The statue was burnt after the partition. Gita Bhavan on Nisbet Road was a huge building constructed by Sewak Ram, son of famous philonthropist-engineer Sir Ganga Ram. The message of Gita in Devnagri script was engraved on its outer wall. With the initiation of Zia's Islamisation in early 1980's, this engraving was removed.

According to historians Multan town's historical name was Mool Sthan(original place).

On a maund here stood a temple dedicated to Prehlad, son of King Harnakashyap. Its story commemorates the celebration of Holi. The spire of the pre-historic shrine is still visible. The temple has been closed since 1947. Instead, a hostel has been built within the old boundary wall. Of and on, attempts were made to pull down the old temple, but saner sections voiced strong protests. Finally, the temple was pulled down in 1992.

A photograph of this demolished town has been included in the travelogue. In the past many Indian rulers tried a number of times to liberate the temple but the Arabs threatened to demolish the shrine if Indians advanced towards Multan. The offerings at the shrine had to be deposited in Bait-ul-Maal (Islamic treasury) of the Khalifa.

The believers of two-nation theory have not spared even anti-colonialist symbols. The prison where Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev went to the gallows has been demolished and a fountain erected. Santosh Kumar notes with pain that this has been done “not to commemorate their martyrdom but to erase the memory of the martyrs of India”.

In Golbagh, near the famous Anarkali bazaar, there used to be the statue of Sher-e-Punjab, Lala Lajpat Rai. Santosh Kumar refers to its demolition, “After partition, one finger of this statue of a Kafir (infidel) was broken by the bigots”. On the intervention of Dr. GC Bhargava, the erstwhile Chief Minister of East  Punjab, the statue was brought to Simla and after repairs installed on the famous ridge there.

Punjab Library was inaugurated in December 1885. It used to preserve the old files of the Lahore press. On a visit to the Library, Santosh Kumar found that all the newspapers published before independence had been removed or deliberately destroyed.

The objective was to keep the new generation of Lahoris ignorant about the glorious role played by the Lahore press in the anti-colonial movement.

Kissa Jag Maaye Kya

In 1947, in Gumti Bazaar, one old Hindu lady had continued to live in her house, while all non-Muslims of the area, including her son, a goldsmith shifted out. The Muslim refugees from East Punjab were occupying Hindu houses. One day, the refugees advised the old lady to move to the refugee camp at Lajpat Bhawan (run by Lala Achint Ram, a prominent social worker of Punjab and father of Late Krishan Kant, former Vice- President of India), and leave the house. She flared up and shouted back,” I shall not leave. It is my house and I shall continue to dwell here”. Weeks passed by.

She still had some rations left and continued to cook her food herself. On the Diwali night of November, 1947, the old lady celebrated Diwali by lighting earthen lamps outside main door. Her house was the lone house that was lit up. She herself prepared sweets and distributed these to her new neighbours. Gradually, human feelings took over as baser passions subsided.

The new neighbours started talking to her. Whenever anybody in the neighborhood fell sick, she would visit the family and nurse the sick. It so happened that the family she would visit would receive good tidings. This deepened the affection of new neighbours for her. Her fame spread from Gumti to Syad Mitha and she came to be hailed as Jagmayee (the revered lady of the earth). They took full care of her food. She passed away in 1962. Her neighbours decided to bury her in the Muslim cemetery, as the ancient Hindu crematorium, Ramu da Bagh, had been closed down. Maulvi of the local mosque intervened and advised the neighbours to perform her last rites as per Hindu custom as she died a Hindu. The body of the old lady was carried to the banks of Ravi and neighbours lit the pyre. On the third day, her ashes were collected and consigned to the river. In late 1970s the house collapsed and was auctioned.

Shri Santosh Kumar, on his visit to Lahore met a Lahori Muslim, who used to run a shop in the Mochi gate area. Before 1947 his association with Hindu neighbours had turned him into a vegetarian. He was admirer of Sufi Lachhman Parshad and his monthly Mastana Jogi, the popular magazine of Lahore.

This gentleman belonged to the clan of Bhatti Rajputs, who centuries ago had converted to Islam. Bhatti gate, named after these Rajputs, is the oldest gate of the walled city.

The first edition of Lahore Nama made such an impact on Mrs. Indira Gandhi that she got it translated into English for her perusal.

Title: LAHORE NAMA

Author: Santosh Kumar

Price: Rs 150

Published By: Vibha Publications, J-22, BK Dutt Colony Jor Bagh Road, New Delhi- 110003.

Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

INDIA is on the threshold of becoming a major regional power. Its adversaries have been trying to thwart these ambitions by unleashing a proxy-war against it. What is intriguing  is that a section of our own people should facilitate these designs. These people need to be identified and isolated from the decision-making process. National security has emerged as India's foremost concern. Assaults on social unity and ideological subversion by the Left-Liberal establishment have undermined the efforts to consolidate national security. 'Indutva', the book under review, by Prof. MD Nalapat, a top Defence analyst answers all these concerns. Indutva is a vision of a strong India. Ideologically, it represents the fusion of the essential concepts of secularism and nationalism into a single coherent dialogue structure.

National Security

In India, in recent defence policies, there is not only absence of strategic thinking but even tactical thinking. Consequently, there has been lack of appreciation on having adequate defence systems on security. Pakistan's proxy war and bullying attempts by global powers are the fall-out of our indecision to fashion effective nuclear and political deterrents. In the past also the defensive mindset of our rulers and the fragmentation of the social milieu led to India's enslavement twice, first by the Turks and then by the British. Prof. Nalapat lucidly explains how blunders by the Congress leadership during the anti-colonial struggle strengthened Muslim communalism and delayed the freedom. Emotion was given precedence over reason and ground realities were ignored while working out strategies.

Prof. Nalapat criticises the current policy of 'nuclear ambiguity'. He remarks that the deterrent value of this policy would be effective only when joined to a vigorous programme of development of launch vehicles, creation of fissionable stock-piles and development towards miniaturization of war heads. He declares that the development of Agni and the deployment of Prithvi will improve the security environment significantly and act as a deterrent to Pak adventurism.

Who are the guilty men of India that are throttling India's defence capability? A spineless political class has been ever-ready to barter away the national interests. Nalapat attributes this psyche to the result of the memory of a thousand and more years of servitude to Afghans, to Persians, to the European power. Despite the engulfing proxy-war, the successive Central governments are reluctant to mobilise popular support by elightening people about the nature of subversive threats from within and without. The same government has abandoned the frontline victims of the proxy-war and dumped the groups, who could be useful allies, to win the war against terrorism. Warmer references to a terrorist state and willingness for dialogue by the Central government and the political big-wigs only serve to demoralise the nation.

Bureaucracy, which used to be called the steel-frame, has become an instrument to undermine the national security. The Politician-Bureaucrat nexus has led to the neglect of security systems. This is what Nalapat seriously believes. This nexus wants to turn India into a lackey of Washington. Morarji Desai, Narsimha Rao etc. all created hurdles in India's nuclear programme. Rao starved country's strategic programmes by with holding funds. During his regime Prithvi was capped, Agni was rolled back and the nuclear deterrent made defunct. A powerful lobby even tried to hound out Dr Abdul Kalam from India's missile programme.

A domestic lobby has been more concerned about the security interests of China and U.S. rather than India. This lobby has been encouraging the external backers of subversion. Nalapat says the way to expose the allies of this lobby in India would be to call their bluff and propose and implement policies "that will guarantee security rather than a continuation of the slow bleeding that has been inflicted on this country as a consequence of the timidity of its political leadership. India needs not only secularism but also security". He also establishes a correlation between the declining effectiveness of Indian diplomacy and the increase in externally-backed insurgency within our borders. Doesn't it warrant a parliamentary probe to fix the responsibility for negligence of our security?

An influential lobby, toeing the U.S. line justifies the capping of India's nuclear programme, arguing U.S. would provide the security umbrella. It also pleads unilateral concessions to U.S on nuclear issue saying this would be reciprocated by economic concessions. There are also demands to slash down the expenditure on defence. Prof. Nalapat brilliantly exposes the contradictions in this fallacious approach.

U.S. Role

Entrusting the security of India to a power which has had a history of putting pressure on India to compromise its security concerns to accommodate a hostile Pakistan, would be an act of irresponsibility. U.S. is more a part of the problem. It has been creating security concerns for India in the form of fundamentalist terrorism. The network of Islamist mercenaries it created in the 1980s is a major security challenge to India to preserve its integrity. U.S. policies of bringing up Islamist mercenaries through ISI led to substantial sections of the Pak army coming under the spell of fundamentalism. U.S. drive to back up "moderate Islamists" to beat back "radical Islamists" has reinforced Pakistani assaults against India. An extension of this debate in U.S. establishment has led many think-tanks to propose a "moderate Islamic nation", Kashmir. The entire Track-II diplomacy on Kashmir is sponsored and guided by this lobby. It is desirable to probe the motivations of Indian Track-II groups also. Nalapat rightly asks, "How else is one to interpret the fascination with the "Third option" for Kashmir (i.e. independence) on the part of those attending seminars on "conflict resolution" in South Asia? He adds that should the 'Third option' become a reality, the new state is likely to become as fundamentalist as Iran.

Stretching the argument further, Nalapat asks Americans if they are committed to the territorial integrity of India then why do they, dispute Kashmir's accession. The truth remains that the agenda of U.S. on Kashmir is to internationalise the issue and hopefully secure a result in accordance with the wishes of the Pakistanis. Americans ignore the link between Kashmir and the very survival of the Indian state. Every expression of doubt on the finality of Kashmir's accession provides oxygen to the terrorist movement in the state. American expressions of concern over "rights" of Kashmiris is the driving force in sustaining fundamentalist terrorism in Kashmir.

U.S. is also covertly backing ISI in training Islamist elements for fomenting trouble in Chinese Xinjiang. For these elements Karakoram highway is a vital route for supplies. Nalapat observes that U.S. pressure on India to withdraw from Siachen is to facilitate this subversion, away from the watchful eyes of Indians.

Nuclear Programme

The direction of the present American policy towards the sub-continent is to wipe out the tactical and strategic advantages that India has over Pakistani and ensure parity between the two. This can only be done if Indian technological advances and defence procurement are checked, while Pakistan's is not. The Americans consciously allowed China to transfer its nuclear technology to Pakistan. It has taken no action against North Korea. On the contrary, the Americans are hyping up the Pakistan programme "to convince the Indian public that a capping of both would be an even-handed measure rather than directed against India, which is the factual position". U.S. design is not only to curb nuclear and missile programmes but to roll back the all capabilities the country has achieved during the past four decades in this field.

U.S. is using three sticks to throttle India's nuclear programme. One, it is dangling the carrot of economic concessions. Secondly, it is indulging in moralisation by its references to global disarmament. Lastly, it abets Pakistan's nuclear blackmail against India. U.S. has been trying to persuade India to give up the deterrent using a rationalise of the 'danger' of Pakistan emerging as a nuclear power. Nalapat does not hesitate in pronouncing that those who endorse demands that crucial strategic programmers be aborted are encouraging fresh assaults on Indian sovereignty.

Even the argument that yielding on nuclear issue would placate U.S. in reciprocating through economic concessions, does not hold water. India's unilateral concessions were reciprocate by renewed American pressure on sensitive issues like defence technology and Kashmir. Henry Kissinger, in his book Diplomacy, himself says that unilateral concessions are to be taken as signs of vulnerability and the effort should, therefore, be to squeeze out yet more concessions, rather than reward such naivete by positive gestures.

How do we deal with Americans? Nalapat is not opposed to economic and strategic links with U.S. but warns against conceding anything on strategic interests-Kashmir or nuclear issue. He wants India to give depth to its policy on CTBT by much more active development of nuclear and missile technology, despite the risk of U.S. retaliation. India's strength as a secular democracy and its economic potential may change U.S. ultimately. As a pragmatist he asks Indians to explore Russia-India-China strategic relationship in case U.S. intransigence continues. Recently, there has been loud thinking on build an Asian NATO, where Indian would play its rightful role and would be less vulnerable.

Pakistan

India's ham-handed approach to Pak provocations may encourage Pakistanis to extend the proxy-war to other states. Nalapat warns against making any strategic concessions to Army-dominated Pakistan. However, trade, cultural and other relationship may have positive impact on common Pakistani. In the ultimate, Pakistan may not be able to withstand rising economic burden. Popular anger may burst out and call for an end to unjust wars being waged by Pak state.

Kashmir

In Nalapat's view no Kashmiri politician is a saint. NC patronised cross-border infiltration to seek leverage with New Delhi. After 1997 NC hampered counter-insurgency effort by getting terrorists released. All political groups in Kashmir have patronised religious extremists of fascist Jamaat Islami. State Congress too followed a policy of patronising Kashmiri Sunnis, the group most pampered and mainly involved in the separatist movement. Nalapat criticises Mufti for toeing pro-Hurriyat line, patronising religious extremists in VP Singh's time and helping Pakistan get a foothold in Kashmir by his refusal to take preventive action against many who had been won over by ISI. On Rubiya episode, he quotes a senior state officer who said, "the situation got out of control in 1990, when VP Singh was the Prime Minister. The minister had two options. He could have acted as the custodian of the nation's security and refused to deal with the abductors. Or he could have resigned and appealed as a father to the Kashmiri people to force the terrorists to release his daughter. He did neither. Instead, the government surrendered". Since the credibility of a government is an important factor in controlling an insurgency the Kashmris thought  azaadi was round the corner and the bulk of the population crossed over to the terrorists' side.

There are no long-term solution in view so long as regional factors continue to destabilise Kashmir. Indian state has yet to send a message that terrorism will be fought whatever be the cost. There can be no discussions on the status of Kashmir. Nalapat wants this to be made explicit. On autonomy he says that Article 356, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, C AG and the Election Commissioner, in any internal dialogue, are non-negotiable. An important element in counter-insurgency war is that Indian state should also see that the nationalistic groups in J&K are not being penalised for being loyal to India.

Tolerance

Prof Nalapat belongs to a family, known for holding rationalist beliefs. Abrey Menon and Naryana Menon were his uncles. Nalapat has very strong views. He says respect for India will not flow from a repeat of past barbarity but from the rise of national income to a reasonable level. His other assessments are also scathing. Nehru is blamed for nourishing communalism. He finds much in common among Nehru school graduates, the Left and the religious exclusionists. He ardently believes that the anti-majoritarian definition of "secularism" has only led to Hindu anger. Mulayam Singh's appeals to Muslim and Yadav groups are dubbed as communal. The other contributions of Mandalites to social disharmony include fanning insecurity among minorities and distancing them from BJP.

Nalapat has remarkable sense of humour. This pervades throughout the book. It is a book every Indian, who has good of his country at heart, should find time read.

INDUTVA

Author : M.D. Nalapat

Price : Rs 395

Publishers : Har-Anand Publishers

364-A Chirag

New Delhi-110017

By Dr. Ajay Chrungoo

John Ruskin, the famed British essayist, classified books into two categories - Books of the hour and Books of all time. 'In search of a future-The story ofKashmir', a new book on Kashmir by David Devdas, a well-known columnist, defies this classification. The book offers rich historical material, flaunts interesting formulations, yet it has major structural weaknesses. The very premise on which Dev Das tries to build his thesis of 'alienation' is flawed and untenable. Even his assertions on origins of the terrorist movement are not backed up by facts. Still the book retains its relevance. It is  scholarly and a valiant attempt to contest someo f the myths, assiduously perpetuated by different actors with vested interests.

Frustrated aspirations:

David Devdas tries to locate Kashmiri alienation (read Muslim alienation) in 'Frustrated aspirations' of new groups of educated youth aspiring for jobs. He attributes'historical socio-economic resentment' against Kashmiri Pandits and their disproportionate share' in professional trainings and jobs as the basis of so-called 'thwarted aspirations'. At times the author makes confused and contradictory statements. For example at one place he says 'Selfish aspirations have run amok'. The 'frustrated' and 'selfish' expressions have two conflicting connotations. What can be the basis for study of share of different communities in land, trade, manufacturing, jobs and trainings and even demography other than historically verifiable data? Devdas does not provide any statistics at all. Anecdotal tales do history.

'Frustrated aspirations' thesis has been directly lifted up from 'Frustrated Middle Class', a hackneyed expression used by Prem Shankar Jhain 1990. Jha's sympathies, if his writings and public stances are any indication, lie with exclusivist Kashmiri Muslim sub-nationalism. His contribution to distortion of facts to render legitimacy to this regressive sub-nationalism has been legion. As terrorist movement unfolded in Kashmir a self-righteous section of Indian Civil Society, rooted in left-liberal politics, sought to rake up 'economic reasons' behind the armed revolt..The objective was to obfuscate the theo-fascist character of the movement.How could the religious-based separatist campaign build the emotive pitch for the terrorist movement without raking up extreme religiosity? For this identifying a religious minority as 'the other' was a compulsion. It has been true of all communal movements in history. Inventing imaginary wrongs committed by Pandits against the majority community became a necessity - both to build a 'socio-economic rationale' for the theo-fascist movement as well as to unleash religious-cleansing against Kashmiri Hindus.

Communal view:

Devdas takes a communal view of history. He identifies religious communities as homogenous groups, ignoring class and social stratification. How do few members of the community, who may have held substantial jagirs, make up the whole community? More than 80% of Kashmiri Pandit population lived in the city of Srinagar at all times during the past 200 years. How many of them were landowning families? How many Pandit families were engaged in big shawl trade? Why should a historically persecuted minority be subjected to psychological retribution just because few Pandit families happened to be part of landed gentry? Is it not to build a rationale for permanent cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits for all times to come?

Land Reforms:

During the tribal invasion there were innumerable instances where Pandit families were saved by their Muslim tillers. How could this be possible if Pandit landlords had been harsh towards their tenants? During 1819-1947 one does not come across a single peasant revolt in Kashmir. Why has it been so? If peasant question was missing in National Conference campaign in pre-1947 period it was because landlordism was not a serious issue at all. Peasantry suffered because of low-yield of agriculture and occasionally because of excesses committed by revenue bureaucracy. Before 1931 Kashmiris were reluctant to take land because of difficulty in paying revenue. It was after 1931 when proprietary rights were granted in Kashmir that Kashmiris-both communities began investing in land. In 1948-1950 when new regime initiated land reforms Sheikh Abdullah and Bakshi Gh. Mohammad were cool to the idea. Mirza Afzal Beg, who himself was a landlord, and GM Sadiq supported land reforms for communal and communist reasons respectively. Sheikh Abdullah came to support land reforms at a later stage when threat of plebiscite was looming large and Pakistan was raking up religious emotions to clinch the issue. Pt Rish Dev, a communist leader and Director of 'Debt Cancellation Board'  has authored a study on the land reforms in Kashmir, an English translation of which is now available. He has provided shocking details of how landlords of the majority community behaved towards their tenants and also circumvented land reforms through political patronage. Normally, the tenants should have had more resentment against their co-regionalists. Devdas takes a very superficial view of Kashmir's rural scene, remaining contented in listening to 'daleels' rather than dissecting the problem deeper. If sections of landed gentry, shawl and other traders, educated youth from majority community were fuelling communal passions against Pandits it was because geo-political factors were in operation. The Britishers had been putting enough pressure on Dogra Maharajas over the issue of Gilgat. They were not happy with Maharaja Hari Singh, particularly over his role during Round Table Conference. There was also spillover of communal politics from Punjab.

Job Markets:

Even on the issue of jobs, the greater share of which is supposed to have gone to Pandits the boot is on the other leg. There have been two phases of separatist armed insurgency - 1960s and 1980s. 1960s was the age of plenty. Large-scale development and huge funds pushed by the Central government into Kashmir flooded Kashmir with jobs.. There was, infact, paucity of people to fill the vacancies. If Kashmiri Pandits could also gain entry into State government sector particularly as teachers, it was understandable. At the time of exodus in 1990 the number of Pandit employees was 13 thousand among 4 lakh state government employees. Out of this 6500 worked in education sector alone. So where was the question of resentment over jobs and trainings? Moreover, besides increased number of jobs available there was a revolution in agriculture and dairy, productions increased many fold. There was also boom in carpets/handicraft and horticulture sector. Even the poorest of the poor became beneficiaries of the expansion of Handlooms.

Communalism, Secessionism and Fundamentalism:

To look for economic reasons behind the eruption of armed revolt is to search for black spots on the sun. The origins of communal-separatist movement in Kashmir need to be looked into elsewhere. In 1947 the size of Kashmiri Muslim educated class was small. Due to free education and better economic opportunities it expanded manifold. Whether it was Land Reforms, Debt cancellation or expansion of development sector there were no politically meaningful campaigns to back these. These were implemented as part of'Correcting Historical Wrongs'. This strengthened communal political consciousness among the youth who grew up between 1947-1964. The threat of reopening of accession also  loomed large. This introduced an element of opportunism. And finally, the youth was exposed to communal-secessionist politics of Plebiscite Front since 1953.

Parallel with this campaign the fundamentalist organisations-Jamaat Islami, Ahli Hadith and Allawale were trying to bring religious consciousness in tune with Wahabi orientation. Since 1980 the Kashmiri youth were exposed to transnational jihad also. It was not 'frustrated aspirations' but heightened sense of communal identity and increasing proclivity to fundamentalist-secessionist ideas that was breeding alienation from India. Instead of countering this trend the mainstream politics tried to sail with it.

Bizarre Formulations:

The author makes some bizarre formulations. One that the areas which benefited from Land Reforms and Development were not pro-Pakistan. Secondly, the pockets where land reforms had been rolled back-by consolidating orchards which were exempt from land ceilings the Jamaat dominated. Thirdly, doctors and engineers came to be attracted by Jamaat Islami.

Jamaat Islami's strongholds were Zaingir-Pohru belt and Sopore in north Kashmir, Kulgam-Shopian in South Kashmir and Mochow-Soibug-Wadawan in Central Kashmir. In Srinagar it was the Solina area which Jamaat considered its bastion. None of these areas had anything specific which was not common to rest of the Valley. There has always been a thin line between pro-Pak sentiment and local Muslim sub-nationalism. Infact, there has been inter-changing of roles. To locate pro-Pak sentiment in thwarted land reforms and non-development is to fly from facts. Lastly, it were not doctors and engineers as professional groups who were more enamoured by Jamaat Islami. The cadres from Jamaat came mostly amongst teachers (who had access to Jamaat literature), masons, Pir-Syed group who leaned towards Wahabism-Debandi ideology, some members of low social origin who needed a superstructure ideology for respectability.

Jamaat Islami's top leaders Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Saadudin, Qari Saifuddin etc. started their career as teachers. Geelani's father was a casual night watchmen and not a member of ruined feudal class. Another section which identified itself with Jamaat Islami were corrupt members of bureaucracy and upstart elite. In this case cover of Jamaat Islami provided a smokescreen to camouflage their misdeeds. An excellent study of this phenomenon titled 'Kashmiri Muslim Society-Changing Contours' by Dr. K.N. Pandita was published in Kashmir Times, Jammu in 1991.

David Devdas wrongly singles out National Conference leadership for seeing Jamaat Islami only as a doctrinal grouping and not as a socio-economic force. None of the leaders-Bakshi, Sadiq or Sheikh Abdullah treated Jamaat Islami as a threat-either as a doctrinal threat or as a socio-political force. They maintained opportunistic relationship with Jamaat Islami. Mir Qasim even rewarded them with 5 assembly seats in 1972. In fact, emerging rural elite used Jamaat as a vehicle for getting share in administrative and political power. Qasim-Jamaat alliance was its manifestation.

David Devdas would like us to believe that ISI started training Kashmiris in subversion only after December 1987. Nothing can be farther from the truth. Not only a leading news agency but also government's own sources had confirmed that by May 1984 hundreds of Kashmiri youth had undergone training in 13 camps set up by Pakistan and were paid Rs 20 thousand on return by ISI. Who were these people who underwent training if JKLF/Islamic Student League went for training only after December 1987? Devdas is silent on this.

Dev Das has a solution - Indo-Pak problem can be resolved only if Kashmir heals itself. He remarks, "That healing must be internal. Harmony within Kashmir is not possible without moral courage. It involves accommodation of others' aspirations and that is only possible through non-attachment and discipline".Will Kashmiris listen?