Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
Demographic surgery in Kashmir

Demographic surgery in Kashmir

Author: M. L. Kotru
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: May 27, 2000

The contours of Pakistan's latest designs in Kashmir are beginning to take shape.

These may not approximate to the original plans harped upon over the past half-century but they do clearly reflect a shift forced no doubt by powers beyond its control.

The American pressure on Islamabad to work for a peaceful settlement with New Delhi on the Kashmir issue and its insistence that Islamabad must stop crossborder terrorism are the major factors forcing Pakistan to reconsider its options.

There are other factors as well, domestic as well as external, a crucial one perhaps being China's stance on terrorism. China, which once opposed UN sanctions against Taliban, hoping that it could help insulate its fundamentalist Uighur Muslim rebels in Xinjiang province, is apparently having second thoughts now.

The Uighurs, who were trained in taliban camps under Pakistan Army's supervision, have intensified their activities in Xinjiang, a predominantly Muslim province in China. Beijing is in fact believed to have asked Pakistan to do away with whatever Uighurs it finds, be it with Taliban or in the Afghan camps in NWFP. To compound Pakistan's problems Russia, Turkey, Iran the Central Asian Republics in addition to India, have made common cause with the Americans on the issue of terrorism. All this, together with independent American pressure on the country, has forced Pakistan to think in terms of changing gears in Kashmir.

Interestingly, the first indications of Pakistani rethinking on Kashmir had come about during Mr Nawaz Sharif's term as Prime Minister nearly two years ago. His Foreign Minister, Mr Sartaj Aziz, in an off-the-cuff observation had said that one way of resolving the Kashmir issue could be holding a referendum in Muslim- dominated districts of Jammu & Kashmir. This was an indirect admission of Pakistan's willingness to accept the division of the State on communal lines, which means that if it cannot push its claim to the entire State, Islamabad can renew its adherence to the Two- Nation theory which had led to the creation of Pakistan. Thus, Mr Sartaj Aziz probably did not see any contradiction in the position taken by him then.

It may be a coincidence but the truth is that the Pakistani terrorist command structure got into action soon after, enlarging its arc of terror in Jammu province, particularly to far-flung areas with substantial Hindu populations. This happened in 97-98, and terrorists have been targetting districts of Udhampur, Rajouri, Kishtwar, Doda and Poonch, causing most Hindus to migrate to safer places. The Sikh community, which had been left largely untouched in the Valley, also attracted terrorist attention, first with a series of isolated attacks in places like Baramulla or Tral followed up by the massacre of the entire male population of the Sikh village of Chittisinghpura.

Ironically, the demographic surgery was perhaps unwittingly initiated by the State Government itself when, in the name of better governance, it carved out Kargil as an independent district, giving it an exclusive Muslim identity, with Buddhist dominated Leh remaining a truncated district. Without attributing motives to anyone, the State Government has since created several other districts with identical demographic implications. And the latest move by the State for regional autonomy to the three major geographical units constituting the State will only accentuate the religious divide. Surprisingly, there appears to be no room for the 3.5 lakh Kashmiri Pandits who were forced out of the Valley to Jammu and another two lakh who are working in other parts of the country.

Given the background of Mr Aziz's not-so-innocuous observation then, and the current international pressure, it is not surprising that the above-ground pro-Pakistani secessionist political conglomerate like the Hurriyat should have openly talked through its top leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani of dividing the State along communal lines. If all the components of the Hurriyat have yet to endorse the Geelani stance, it is only for tactical reasons. As it is the Islamabad based chairman of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), Amanullah Khan, has condemned the proposition. The leaders of Gilgit and Baltistan constituted as the Northern territories by Pakistan, have demanded independence too.

The Hurriyat, somewhat ostrich-like, is banking on US pressure on India to sort out its internal problems in Kashmir and choosing to ignore Mr Bill Clinton's unambiguous advice to Pakistan to respect the LoC and to put an end to cross-border terrorism.

Thus, when Mr Geelani speaks of division as a possibility you cannot rule out his doing so with the full knowledge of his mentors across the border. Maybe one is reading too much into it but how can you ignore the fact that some of the top Hurriyat leaders on their release from various jails made a beeline for a three-hour dinner meeting with the Pakistan High Commissioner in New Delhi?

The point to ponder for New Delhi is whether the talks with Hurriyat will serve any purpose in the context of the latter's pro-Pakistan commitment. India's resolve to keep the talks on Kashmir with in the Constitutional framework is all very well. But then the Government must insist on bringing peace on the ground.
 


Back                          Top

«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements