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
|