Author: MV Kamath
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: October 24, 2002
URL: http://www.samachar.com/features/241002-features.html
Let the world know even if the deaf
and blind European Union refuses to accept the fact that in Jammu &
Kashmir, democracy won an impressive victory. When, speaking in Copenhagen,
Prime Minister Vajpayee said that the people of Jammu & Kashmir have
given their verdict and the winner, clearly, is Indian democracy, he was
telling the bare truth. But it is more than that.
Not only do the elections emphasise
Delhi's fairness, they are a tribute to the dogged determination of the
Election Commission and its scores of employees who dared death to man
the polling booths in the face of grave threats and to the people themselves
who came forward to vote in an impress show of strength. October 10 is
a day of which India could be truly proud of. When the elections were first
announced not many leaders expected voters to come out in large numbers;
but they did.
While the state average was around
44 per cent in some places the voting was as high as 76 per cent, something
unheard of in the past. Gen. Musharraf's terrorists did everything possible
to dissuade people from voting. They gunned over eighty people, including
46 political activists. Law Minister Abdul Ghani Lone, was shot dead while
electioneering, in a despicable act of cowardice.
In the end the election results
were a slap in the face of Gen. Musharraf and of Pakistan. The General
has not a leg to stand on. The people of Jammu & Kashmir have effectively
rejected Pakistan. In future it can have no voice in the political development
and status of Jammu & Kashmir.
That much is now abundantly clear.
As for the Hurriyat, by boycotting the elections it has marginalised itself.
Like its godfather in Islamabad, the Hurriyat has proved itself as the
enemy of the people. All credit should go to India, to the Central Government
and to Prime Minister Vajpayee personally. He surely knew that the elections
would not bring the National Conference, his ally in Delhi, back to power
in Srinagar. But his courage in holding elections has paid rich dividends.
As Mufti Mohammed Sayeed whose people's
Democratic Party (PDP) said: "The biggest certificate that this was a credible
election comes from Omar Abdullah's defeat in Ganderbal. I don't think
any other part of India has had such clean elections!". He can say that
again. In Kashmir, the old sense of cynicism has given way to hope and
joy.
According to reports, there is an
unmistakable air of great expectations in the state, and importantly, a
sense of achievement, that the will of the people has prevailed. All India
can rejoice in the final results. No wonder that the US State Department's
spokesman, Richard Boucher applauded Vajpayee and commended the Prime Minister's
personal commitment to making the elections transparent and open.
Vajpayee did something much more
than that. He upheld India's honour by refusing foreigners to "monitor"
the elections, even while allowing foreign diplomats to freely visit Jammu
& Kashmir to see for themselves what was going on. Those who came to
criticise stayed on to praise.
The British `Financial Times' hailed
the elections as the first free one in a generation. `The New York Times'
said that the unexpected results are "likely to do much to restore Kashmir's
faith in the democratic process", and even more "to bolster India's international
stock". The election result radically transforms Kashmir's landscape, gushed
the `Guardian'. Indeed it has and all for the good.
Just as, following the end of Emergency,
Indira Gandhi was defeated, even so Farouk Abdullah's National Conference
has been worsted, not quite as badly, but badly enough. Whether the National
Conference manages to retain power or decides to stay in Opposition, by
now it should know the limits of dynasticism.
Dynasticism does not go well with
democracy. Meanwhile pressure is growing in India to resume dialogue with
Pakistan. Thus, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina
Rocca addressing the American Enterprise Institute in Washington following
the announcement of the election results said that the time had come for
India and Pakistan "to do their part to resume diplomatic dialogue at the
earliest possible opportunity, to address all the issues that divide them,
including Kashmir". The question might well be asked: to what purpose?
Pakistan has done everything to make life one big hell for the Kashmiri
people. They want peace, not any more Pakistani interference. Any dialogue
that is called for is between Delhi and the Jammu & Kashmir State Assembly
consisting as it does the true spokesmen of the people. Peripherally the
Government might also wish to speak to the Hurriyat leaders, but Pakistan
just does not come in the picture. For all practical purposes Pakistan
is out. And Ms Rocca would be wise to understand this.
Pakistan failed Washington very
badly even if the Bush Administration does not want publicly to acknowledge
it. Musharraf had repeatedly assured the U.S. that he will permanently
end cross-border terrorism. He had cheated America. India never trusted
him and it would do well not to trust him again. It is necessary that the
United States is so told in emphatic terms.
Delhi's dialogue is going to be
with the people of Jammu & Kashmir's elected representatives, who alone
represent the voice of the people.
There has been talk again of "autonomy",
a vague and ill-defined term. What exactly is meant by autonomy? Obviously
autonomy does not mean independence. No party in India would accept that.
India's sovereignty over Jammu & Kashmir is not a matter for negotiation.
The 29-year old Mirwaiz Maulvi Umar
Farooq, often described as the "moderate face" of the Hurriyat speaks of
an "autonomous identity" for Jammu & Kashmir without specifying in
clear terms what that means. In a recent interview to `The Statesman' he
said: "An autonomous region with the other side being a party to it could
address the issue in such a way that India can sort of live with that,
Pakistan can also live with that, too and Kashmiris can also get something
they have aspired for".
But whose aspirations is the Mirwaiz
talking about? The aspirations of the Ladakhis who want their part of the
state to remain as a Union Territory? The aspirations of the Kashmir Pandits
some four lakhs of whom have remained displaced and now want some space
they can call their own?
And who can speak for the Jammu
& Kashmiri people now: the 28 legislators of the National Conference?
The twenty who were voted in on the Congress ticket? The sixteen belonging
to the PDP? The four elected on the Panthers' ticket? The fifteen independents?
What will be the nature of a Kashmir policy that Delhi will now have to
evolve to satisfy so many divergent groups? In effect Delhi has to wait
for the newly constituted Assembly to formulate a policy that could then
be debated. The Assembly's task is not just to elect a government. It must
get down to specifics and that will take time.
The "dialogue" will first have to
be among the parties elected. They should come to an understanding among
themselves as to what should be sought from Delhi.
Ghulam Nabi Azad, representing the
Congress has said, for instance, that his party does not want the pre-1953
status, and the 1975 Sheikh-Indira Gandhi Agreement could be the basis
for discussion on autonomy. Will others agree? Then there is Mehbooba Mufti,
vice President of the PDP and who is virtually the party's voice who says
that she supports a fair, democratic government rule within the Indian
Union, but wants to draw the militants into the peace process.
Mehbooba has been urging the Central
Government not to treat local militants as terrorists. Though the PDP won
only 16 seats to the NC's 28 and Congress's 20, it is generally believed
that she represents the spirit of the Kashmiri people in a far more meaningful
sense than does Omar Ahdullah who had the misfortune to lose in what till
the other day was considered a safe constituency.
Mehbooba has been with the people
in a real sense than even Ghulam Nabi Azad, an ethnic Kashmiri from Doda
district who had not contested even a panchayat election in his home state.
The next few weeks are going to be very important for every one. The newly
elected legislature could also invite the Hurriyat leaders for talks if
they soften up and are agreeable to hold discussions without insisting
that Pakistan should also be called in.
The important thing is to come to
a common understanding of what the Kashmiri people want, apart from peace,
cessation of violence and respect for human rights. During this period
of internal talks Delhi can only wait, which it is most willing to. Inherent
in this situation is the total marginalisation of Pakistan. It has lost
face.
The people of Jammu & Kashmir
have rejected it with bell book and candle. It is now up to the people
of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir to demand free and fair elections to decide
their own fate.
This could, perhaps, lead to a united
Jammu & Kashmir of pre-1947 vintage, enjoying maximum `autonomy' underwritten
both by India and Pakistan and registered with the United Nations. Can
it be that the end of terrorism is at hand and the process has begun? And
wouldn't the BJP deserve credit for this development?
