Author: Balbir K Punj
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: November 8, 2002
Great expectations have been roused
in the Kashmir Valley, with its favourite son Mufti Mohammad Sayeed taking
over as Chief Minister. Though disbanding the Special Operations Group
and the release of some political prisoners were a part of his election
manifesto, one doesnt know how the Congress has reconciled itself to these
prospects in the larger national interest, while allying with the Peoples
Democratic Party on a rotational power-sharing basis. No Chief Minister
can function effectively if he begins his innings by blighting the very
instruments that are meant to enforce law and order. And if the Mufti does
so, will not the country be justified in concluding that he has a hidden
agenda?
One significant pointer towards
things to come is the release on bail on the eve of the Muftis swearing
in, of one of the kidnappers of his elder daughter Rubaiya in 1989 when
he was the Home Minister of the country. The kidnapping served its purpose
then and a group of militants were released in exchange for the freedom
of the Home Ministers daughter. This revealed the Indian state to be a
soft target. Militancy thus began with a big bang in Jammu & Kashmir.
Some analysts have gone to the extent
of alleging a behind-the-curtains coordination between the then Home Minister
and some of the separatists. In the context of the subsequent events for
which the Rubaiya incident appeared to be a green signal, the allegation
has a ring of plausibility.
The result in any case was that
militancy has continued for well over a decade now. Statesmanship then
would have been not to give in to the kidnappers and demonstrate to the
militants that the Indian state could not be cowed down. But neither the
then Prime Minister VP Singh nor the Home Minister Mufti Sayeed showed
that spine.
Irrespective of this shadowy past,
as the Chief Minister of J&K, the Mufti can count on a lot of goodwill
both within the State and without. He has declared that bringing peace
back to J&K is his prime mission. In this, he can work in tandem with
the Centre. The Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and the NDA Government
have invested heavily in this election and the dividend is already discernable-the
international community has come to accept that there could be no going
back on the United Nations resolutions in J&K.
The repeated attempts of Pakistan
to get the international community to invoke the UN resolution on self-determination
have failed in the past, mainly because India has convincingly demonstrated
that the history of the past 50 years cannot be wiped out. Now it is the
international community that is telling Pakistan that the clock cannot
be turned back.
The only option available for the
Mufti and for others is to go forward. Confidence-building measures, the
restoration of the battered economy of the State and the healing of wounds
have to be undertaken in a massive programme of all-round and simultaneous
initiatives. In the Mufti-led Government, all important portfolios are
held by the Ministers from the Valley. This is not very comforting to Jammu
and Ladakh, which have been complaining that the cream of the States resources
were being siphoned off for the Valley despite the fact that Jammu contributes
much greater revenue.
The ruling PDP is no doubt pledged
to undo many of what it sees as the "wrongs" of the Administration so far.
These include the freedom that the previous Administration gave to the
SOG and the alleged violations of human rights while combating militancy.
The PDP played heavily on the genuine grievances of the people of the Valley
who suffered in the anti-militancy operations. But the PDP in Government
cannot afford to forget that it is the nature of militancy to create the
environment in which the Government has to take stern and unpopular measures,
like search-and-destroy operations to locate militants who dont spare even
holy places like mosques. This is a deliberate strategy to involve the
civil population in the after effects of militancy.
The Administration is highly vulnerable
to accusations of violating human rights. Such operations, however well-disciplined,
do generate resentment, and that is a gain for the militants. The Mufti,
as PDP leader, might have sought votes on this resentment, like politicians
often do. But, as Chief Minister, he cannot afford to ignore the strategic
advantage the militants gain when those in authority themselves decry search-and-destroy
operations against heavily armed militants.
The NDA Govern-ment made a signal
contribution to the change in the Kashmir situation by making it clear
before the elections took place that it had no favourites in the State.
It was a statesman-like decision for Mr Vajpayee and Deputy Prime Minister
LK Advani to proclaim it unambiguously and follow it up by strictly adhering
to the ground rules set, even though two of the contesting parties, the
BJP and the National Conference were part of the Centres ruling coalition.
Both the NC and the BJP lost heavily in this election, but the nation gained
due to this statesmanship. The impact of the policy is already visible
in the change in the international communitys perceptions of their favourite
General against their favourite whipping boy, India.
Even six months ago, The Economist
pointed out that "the ISIs field officers, out in the hills of Pakistani
Kashmir, may not be as willing as the General (Pervez Musharraf) is said
to be, to end the bleeding of India." The implication is that a section
of the political forces in Kashmir-receiving active help and inspiration
from Pakistan-will not be interested in ending militancy unless any settlement
enables Pakistan to realise its long time aspiration to annex J&K.
Therefore, the Mufti must be careful when he insists that all sections
are to be involved in the peace process. Evidence shows that groups like
the All Parties Hurriyat Conference are not free agents. So they will only
be interested in derailing the peace process.
In any case, New Delhi is not obliged
to consult those who have rejected the offer to demonstrate their support
base through democratic process. Ideologically also, these groups do not
subscribe to democracy and secularism. They want an Islamic state in which
some of them will call the shots in the name of Islam, nothing less. Their
demand that Pakistan be involved from the start in the process is also
unacceptable in the context of evidence from neutral sources regarding
what Pakistans real objective in Kashmir is.
It is the opposite so far as India
is concerned, as analysts have noted. If peace is restored or the intensity
of militancy is reduced, much of the army redeployed can be withdrawn.
Resources that now go to maintain that force in J&K could be put to
better use. There is a stake for India in bringing peace back to Kashmir;
there is a stake for Pakistan in keeping militancy alive.
For Pakistan, the proxy war is cost-effective,
but results in keeping a large section of the Indian Army tied down and
bleeding. This is a part of the Pakistani policy of bleeding "India by
delivering a thousand cuts". While the Mufti may fail to understand the
dynamics of these contradictory positions, at least the Congress as the
larger party in the coalition, with its interests on a national scale,
must undertake to educate the J&K Chief Minister on this point. The
country will be watching with anxiety how the Congress serves the national
interest with regard to the steps designated by the PDP-led Government.
The danger seems to be that the party will let the Mufti lead it by the
nose to where it does not want to go.
