[Reader-list] Amaranth Yatra

[Shuddhabrata Sengupta]

Dear Rahul,

Why is it naiive to believe that tens of thousands of protestors  
would take to the streets for environmental reasons? Are you trying  
to say that tens of thousands of protestors do not turn up on the  
streets for environmental reasons? As far as I know, tens of  
thousands of protestors routinely protested in the Narmada Valley for  
environmental reasons, on several occasions, across several years.  
Why should Kashmir be different?

Having said that, I would like to underscore that I am not for a  
moment making a categorical statement, either way, about the  
sincerity of the sudden display of 'ecological consciousness' by  
elements within the Kashmiri separatist constiuency, or within any  
other segment in the Kashmiri political spectrum today. I have no way  
of gauging the sincerity of these entities when it comes to  
environmental issues. No one has any means of gauging their  
insincerity either. I am, in fact, not interested in sitting on  
judgement on whether the protestors are 'sincere'  or not. I can see  
why there should be protests. And if there are protests, I think they  
ought not be dismissed on the basis of speculations about the  
purported 'sincerity' of the protestors.

Furthermore, there is nothing that demonstrates to me that a  
sentiment against a change in the demographic profile of a region is  
identical to a sentiment against Hindu pilgrims. No one has said  
anything either implcitly, or explicitly about pilgrims. I will come  
to my take on the question of 'demographic shifts' later.

Pilgrims are transients. They do not settle and change the  
demographic profile of a place. The protests are against the transfer  
of land. The transfer of land can legitimately raise the suspicion  
that permanent structures will be build on that land, (why else argue  
for a change in the status of the owner of the land). It is clear  
that the permanence of these structures does not have any relation to  
the duration or necessities of the traditional 'Pilgrimage Season' in  
Amarnath. It may be remembered, that even at the height of the  
Kashmir insurgency, when some groups had sought to attack the  
Amarnath pilgrims, the Hizbul Mujahideen, the largest and most  
significant armed Kashmiri secessionist outfit, issued statements  
against any attempts to attack Amarnath pilgrims.

The Action Committee Against Land Transfer, the organization co  
ordinating the Anti land Transfer movement in Kashmir has  
categorically stated that it has nothing against pilgrims or the  
pilgrimage to Amarnath.

None of this amounts, in my book, to an adequate amount of  
circumstantial evidence for 'sentiments' against pilgrims. Would it  
not be better if we saw the reality of this anger against the pattern  
of the forcible acquisition of land by state agencies in Kashmir.

Let me conclude by saying that I do not think that anything done on  
38.99 acres of land can amount to a demographic shift. And those who  
(in Kashmir) , even within the Action Committee Against Land Transfer  
are talking about a 'demographic shift' with reference to the  
Amarnath issue are pursuing a red herring. There is a real issue of  
the forcible acquisition of land by agencies of the state and the  
armed forces in Jammu and Kashmir, that is much wider in terms of its  
ramifications than the single issue of Amarnath alone.

I for one, do not think that the presence of Bangladeshi immigrants  
in say, Assam, needs to be attacked because it represents the threat  
of a demographic shift to some people. There are good reasons why in  
some parts of India (in J&K under article 370 and under the Fifths  
Schedule of the Constitution in certain notified tribal areas in  
different parts of the country) non aborigionals or non-state  
subjects (in the case of J&K) are barred from acquiring landed  
property. These have to do with the histories of disposession and  
land alienation in these areas.  But that does not mean that such  
people (non aboriginals and non state subjects) cannot live in these  
areas. To state that would be to confuse lived practices of  
habitation with  the ownership of property, and to confuse the  
category of the citizen with the reality of the denizen.

best

Shuddha
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
The Sarai Programme at CSDS
Raqs Media Collective
shuddha at sarai.net
www.sarai.net
www.raqsmediacollective.net