[Reader-list] Time for democratic fundamentalism in J&K

[TaraPrakash]

by Harish Khair
>From The Hindu

Under assault here is not just the territorial integrity of India but also 
the idea of India, from the separatists as well as from the Hindutva 
brigade.


Protests in Srinagar.Time for the Centre to reiterate a few fundamental 
axioms.

A tiny section of the effete elite in New Delhi suddenly seems to have lost 
its nerve. So mightily impressed are these Bloomsbury-fied “intellectuals” 
with
the Hurriyat’s capacity to work up mobs and instigate violence in the 
Kashmir Valley that they have begun to wonder aloud whether the time had 
come for
India to give in to the azadi-chanters. After 61 years of independence, 
there is no need for any confusion or doubt. All that is ne eded is to 
reiterate
a few fundamental axioms.

The territorial integrity of India is non-negotiable in Kashmir, as in any 
other part of the Union. Bad politics, inept administration, and the 
occasional
security heavy-handedness do not constitute sufficient ground for secession 
in Kashmir or in any other part of India. These infirmities, indeed, are not
confined to the “periphery,” and can be easily discerned in large sections 
of the so-called “mainland.” But these lapses do not give anyone a licence 
to
walk away from Mother India. This democracy provides sufficient 
institutional creativity to address grievances and alienation.

Let us also be clear about the nature of the “Kashmir problem.” A section, 
possibly about a quarter, of the Kashmiris was always in thrall of the 
Muslim
League ideology and wanted merger with Pakistan. It is this section that has 
remained un-reconciled to the idea of secular India. It is this section of
the Kashmiris that the Hurriyat factions represent; all the Hurriyat leaders 
also know that their constituency is a limited one and that they do not 
speak
for the majority of the Kashmiris. Instead, the Hurriyat and other 
separatist leaders have cleverly used the mosques and the militants to crank 
up dissent
and dissatisfaction.

It needs to be understood clearly that the Inter-Services Intelligence of 
Pakistan (ISI) and its guns have used the Amarnath Yatra controversy to try 
and
retrieve the situation for the hardliners and the militants, who had been 
pushed off centre-stage. The mobs of self-styled “nationalists” in Jammu 
created
precedence for the Hurriyat to whip up crowds in Srinagar, Anantnag, 
Baramulla, and Sopore. A stand-off between mobs and the security forces 
anywhere is
an unpredictable affair; and the Kashmiri separatists are experienced agents 
provocateurs. In the current phase the turning point was the killing of the
Hurriyat leader, Sheikh Aziz. But it remains far from clear as to whose 
bullet it was that killed him.

With Pakistan being internally distracted, the ISI once again has a free 
hand in Kashmir. It does not require great foresight to suggest that the ISI 
strategy
now is to force a postponement of the October 2008 elections to the Jammu 
and Kashmir Assembly by creating violence and chaos in the Valley. This 
strategy
is predicated on continued foolishness in the Jammu region. Those in the 
separatist camp will be relieved to have been spared the onus of having to 
prove
once again how much — or rather, how little — affection and support they 
enjoy among the people they claim to represent. Those who are talking of 
deferring
elections are playing into the separatists’ hands. It is time to have a 
fundamentalist belief in the curative power of Indian democracy.

Under assault in the troubled State is not just the territorial integrity of 
India but also the idea of India, from the separatists as well as from the
Hindutva brigade. The mere fact that the agitators in Jammu carry the Indian 
Tricolour does not mean that their agenda is in conformity with India’s 
constitutional
design. Democratic authenticity does not accrue to mobs and crowds ipso 
facto; nor does the Praveen Togadias’ invocation of the “100 crore Hindus” 
make
the Jammu violence any more legitimate or acceptable than the Hurriyat 
warlords’ incendiary tactics. Those who talk of the “Jammu psyche” are 
essentially
parroting the Hindutva catechism.

Need for cautious force

It is obvious that in the next few weeks the Indian state will have to exert 
itself to make up for the many recent follies by the politicians. No one 
should
be allowed to entertain any doubts about New Delhi’s will and capacity to 
stay put in Kashmir. In the immediate context it means the willingness to 
use,
if necessary, cautious force — caution not borne out of the European Union 
type of pusillanimity but out of respect for the ISI-Geelani faction’s 
capacity
to manufacture trouble. Particular care will need to be taken to ensure that 
the hardcore separatists do not take advantage of the chaos to eliminate 
moderate
Hurriyat leaders, a la Abdul Gani Lone.

Second, it will be sobering to remember not to repeat in Kashmir the 
mistakes New Delhi made in Punjab in the 1980s and 1990s. Clarity of command 
and instructions
from New Delhi to Srinagar should be ensured. The Governor and his 
colleagues cannot be made to feel as if they are answerable to many masters.

Third, the Congress leadership owes it to itself and the country to be 
unequivocally clear as to what is at stake in Jammu and Kashmir. The 
Congress leaders
need to realise that as the ruling party they have to decide what is right 
for the country, irrespective of its political and electoral consequences. 
It
was this internal confusion that in the first place escalated a minor 
political problem into a major national crisis.

As the ruling party, the Congress also needs to educate the country on the 
BJP’s divisive politics in Jammu and Kashmir. The BJP’s talk and practice of
an “economic blockade” was an anti-national activity and ought to be exposed 
as such. Despite its secular protestations, the Congress leadership remains
mortally unsure of the country’s mood. Without a renewed fundamentalist 
faith in the idea of secular India, the Congress will find it difficult to 
communicate
the difficult choices in Jammu and Kashmir.

Lastly, it is time to take maximum use of the richness of our civil 
society — particularly the peace-constituency, conflict-resolution-wallahs, 
and the
reconciliation crowd — to wean Kashmiri society away from the prolonged 
habits and traditions of violence, distrust and suspicion. Kashmir has been 
the
theatre of intrigue and conflict for so long that there is very little 
capacity for reconstruction and reconciliation. This vacuum has to be 
filled.

It is a combination of India’s hard and soft powers within the overall 
democratic design that will carry the day in Jammu and Kashmir in the 
difficult weeks
ahead. We need not overreact to provocations and slogans at Lal Chowk, but 
we also need not be apologetic about our democratic values and practices.

PHOTO: NISSAR AHMAD

Protests in Srinagar.Time for the Centre to reiterate a few fundamental 
axioms.

A tiny section of the effete elite in New Delhi suddenly seems to have lost 
its nerve. So mightily impressed are these Bloomsbury-fied “intellectuals” 
with
the Hurriyat’s capacity to work up mobs and instigate violence in the 
Kashmir Valley that they have begun to wonder aloud whether the time had 
come for
India to give in to the azadi-chanters. After 61 years of independence, 
there is no need for any confusion or doubt. All that is ne eded is to 
reiterate
a few fundamental axioms.

The territorial integrity of India is non-negotiable in Kashmir, as in any 
other part of the Union. Bad politics, inept administration, and the 
occasional
security heavy-handedness do not constitute sufficient ground for secession 
in Kashmir or in any other part of India. These infirmities, indeed, are not
confined to the “periphery,” and can be easily discerned in large sections 
of the so-called “mainland.” But these lapses do not give anyone a licence 
to
walk away from Mother India. This democracy provides sufficient 
institutional creativity to address grievances and alienation.

Let us also be clear about the nature of the “Kashmir problem.” A section, 
possibly about a quarter, of the Kashmiris was always in thrall of the 
Muslim
League ideology and wanted merger with Pakistan. It is this section that has 
remained un-reconciled to the idea of secular India. It is this section of
the Kashmiris that the Hurriyat factions represent; all the Hurriyat leaders 
also know that their constituency is a limited one and that they do not 
speak
for the majority of the Kashmiris. Instead, the Hurriyat and other 
separatist leaders have cleverly used the mosques and the militants to crank 
up dissent
and dissatisfaction.

It needs to be understood clearly that the Inter-Services Intelligence of 
Pakistan (ISI) and its guns have used the Amarnath Yatra controversy to try 
and
retrieve the situation for the hardliners and the militants, who had been 
pushed off centre-stage. The mobs of self-styled “nationalists” in Jammu 
created
precedence for the Hurriyat to whip up crowds in Srinagar, Anantnag, 
Baramulla, and Sopore. A stand-off between mobs and the security forces 
anywhere is
an unpredictable affair; and the Kashmiri separatists are experienced agents 
provocateurs. In the current phase the turning point was the killing of the
Hurriyat leader, Sheikh Aziz. But it remains far from clear as to whose 
bullet it was that killed him.

With Pakistan being internally distracted, the ISI once again has a free 
hand in Kashmir. It does not require great foresight to suggest that the ISI 
strategy
now is to force a postponement of the October 2008 elections to the Jammu 
and Kashmir Assembly by creating violence and chaos in the Valley. This 
strategy
is predicated on continued foolishness in the Jammu region. Those in the 
separatist camp will be relieved to have been spared the onus of having to 
prove
once again how much — or rather, how little — affection and support they 
enjoy among the people they claim to represent. Those who are talking of 
deferring
elections are playing into the separatists’ hands. It is time to have a 
fundamentalist belief in the curative power of Indian democracy.

Under assault in the troubled State is not just the territorial integrity of 
India but also the idea of India, from the separatists as well as from the
Hindutva brigade. The mere fact that the agitators in Jammu carry the Indian 
Tricolour does not mean that their agenda is in conformity with India’s 
constitutional
design. Democratic authenticity does not accrue to mobs and crowds ipso 
facto; nor does the Praveen Togadias’ invocation of the “100 crore Hindus” 
make
the Jammu violence any more legitimate or acceptable than the Hurriyat 
warlords’ incendiary tactics. Those who talk of the “Jammu psyche” are 
essentially
parroting the Hindutva catechism.

Need for cautious force

It is obvious that in the next few weeks the Indian state will have to exert 
itself to make up for the many recent follies by the politicians. No one 
should
be allowed to entertain any doubts about New Delhi’s will and capacity to 
stay put in Kashmir. In the immediate context it means the willingness to 
use,
if necessary, cautious force — caution not borne out of the European Union 
type of pusillanimity but out of respect for the ISI-Geelani faction’s 
capacity
to manufacture trouble. Particular care will need to be taken to ensure that 
the hardcore separatists do not take advantage of the chaos to eliminate 
moderate
Hurriyat leaders, a la Abdul Gani Lone.

Second, it will be sobering to remember not to repeat in Kashmir the 
mistakes New Delhi made in Punjab in the 1980s and 1990s. Clarity of command 
and instructions
from New Delhi to Srinagar should be ensured. The Governor and his 
colleagues cannot be made to feel as if they are answerable to many masters.

Third, the Congress leadership owes it to itself and the country to be 
unequivocally clear as to what is at stake in Jammu and Kashmir. The 
Congress leaders
need to realise that as the ruling party they have to decide what is right 
for the country, irrespective of its political and electoral consequences. 
It
was this internal confusion that in the first place escalated a minor 
political problem into a major national crisis.

As the ruling party, the Congress also needs to educate the country on the 
BJP’s divisive politics in Jammu and Kashmir. The BJP’s talk and practice of
an “economic blockade” was an anti-national activity and ought to be exposed 
as such. Despite its secular protestations, the Congress leadership remains
mortally unsure of the country’s mood. Without a renewed fundamentalist 
faith in the idea of secular India, the Congress will find it difficult to 
communicate
the difficult choices in Jammu and Kashmir.

Lastly, it is time to take maximum use of the richness of our civil 
society — particularly the peace-constituency, conflict-resolution-wallahs, 
and the
reconciliation crowd — to wean Kashmiri society away from the prolonged 
habits and traditions of violence, distrust and suspicion. Kashmir has been 
the
theatre of intrigue and conflict for so long that there is very little 
capacity for reconstruction and reconciliation. This vacuum has to be 
filled.

It is a combination of India’s hard and soft powers within the overall 
democratic design that will carry the day in Jammu and Kashmir in the 
difficult weeks
ahead. We need not overreact to provocations and slogans at Lal Chowk, but 
we also need not be apologetic about our democratic values and practices.