The National Conference and the Government it leads in Jammu & Kashmir believe that only the Muslims of Kashmir matter and that so long as that population is humoured, all will be well. This partisan approach has created heartburns in Jammu and ladakh
National Conference working president and Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has never appreciated the Indian stand on Kashmir. He has umpteen times stated in and outside the legislative Assembly, and even in the presence of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, that “Jammu & Kashmir is a political problem that needed a political solution”. And by political solution he means the 1953 politico-constitutional status and a regime that limits the jurisdiction of New Delhi over the State to only defence, foreign affairs and communications and leaves all other subjects to the care of Kashmir.
The memory of what he said on the floor of the Assembly only 10 days after Parliament adopted a unanimous resolution on Pakistan and Jammu & Kashmir on March 15, 2013, is still fresh to be forgotten. Ridiculing the Indian lawmakers and questioning the national resolve that “Jammu & Kashmir is and shall always be an integral part of India”, Mr Omar Abdullah had said: “By repeating the words atoot ang (integral part), you cannot change the political status of Kashmir” and that “Jammu & Kashmir had only acceded and not merged with India”. It is hardly necessary to point out here the dangerous implications of his formulation on Jammu & Kashmir. Suffice to say that he batted for Kashmiri sub-nationalism completely overlooking the political urges, aspirations, needs and compulsions of the minorities who constitute nearly 40 per cent of the State’s population.
However, it was on May 13, this year, that Mr Omar Abdullah crossed all lines and demanded a solution that is acceptable to the Muslims alone. “You cannot give any solution which will be acceptable to each and every citizen of the State. You have to work out a solution which will satisfy the aspirations of a majority of people. Nearly 67 per cent of the population of Jammu & Kashmir comprises Muslims. Such a solution is difficult to sell yet this is the only way-out”, he said while addressing a seminar titled, ‘Discussion between India and Pakistan on JK — A historical perspective’. The seminar was organised by the Institute of Kashmir Studies, University of Kashmir, Srinagar. His father and National Conference president Farooq Abdullah and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s special envoy on Kashmir, Mr SK lambah — apart from a large number of University teachers and students — were present at the seminar. Actually, Mr Omar Abdullah had expressed his disgust over the presentation made by Mr lambah and declared that what the latter said couldn’t satisfy the Muslim urges.
Mr lambah had spelt out what was termed as the ‘first possible draft of Kashmir solution’ worked out between India and Pakistan over the period. Mr lambah revealed that the seven-point Kashmir solution that had been worked out between the two countries rejects the re-drawing of the borders and envisages self-governance (read: greater autonomy, bordering on sovereignty) for internal management on both sides of the line of Control. The other five components of the drafted solution include free movement from one side of the loC to the other; progressive removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers to ensure ‘meaningful’ trade between the two sides of loC; end to hostility, violence and terrorism; minimum deployment of Army on both sides of the loC; and respect for human rights and reintegration of militants into society.
Mr Omar Abdullah not only advocated the need for an exclusivist solution that recognises the Muslim urges and aspirations, but also denounced the views of BJP’s prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi on Pakistan and Kashmir. In fact, he termed the prospect of a Mr Modi-led Government at the Centre as “a worst case scenario” and said that “if his (Narendra Modi) stated policy is going to be converted into official policy, then this dialogue process (with Islamabad) is going to die very swift and unlamented death in the corridors of power in Delhi”. He also said that if Mr Modi becomes the Prime Minister, he will have little influence in the framing of Kashmir policy in the new Government. This was a significant statement that suggested that Mr Omar Abdullah had been influencing the UPA’s foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan. To be more precise, Mr Omar Abdullah underlined the need for a solution similar to one that the Muslim league had fought for, and for 41-long years — a relentless struggle that culminated in the communal partition of India in August 1947.
As for Mr Farooq Abdullah, his intervention was no different. He, inter alia, said: “We have been waiting for a Kashmir solution for the past six decades but it has always eluded us. How long do we have to wait moreIJ There is little hope from the back channel talks. All of us Kashmiris will be dead and India and Pakistan will still be talking to resolve Kashmir”. He was so angry with Mr lambah that he left the venue, saying, “India says that Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India”.
Should New Delhi endorse the atrocious communal and break-India solutionIJ Should New Delhi compromise the national stand on Jammu & KashmirIJ Should we go in for a solution that is as per the aspirations of the MuslimsIJ The answer to the first two questions is an emphatic ‘no’. The nation just cannot afford another communal partition of India. On the contrary, the need of the time is to integrate the State fully into India by repealing all those provisions which have created a wall of hatred between Kashmir and the rest of the country. In other words, Jammu & Kashmir has to be brought at par with other States of the Union of India.
As far as the answer to the third question is concerned, it again is a big ‘no’. You cannot work out and impose a solution that ignores the minority communities, including the Hindus of Jammu province that has a land area two times that of Kashmir valley, and Buddhists of the ladakh region, that constitutes nearly 65 per cent of the State’s land area. The Hindus constitute over 70 per cent of the population in Jammu province and the Buddhists nearly 60 per cent in ladakh. Then, there are the over three lakh internally-displaced Kashmiri Hindus and more than five lakh Sikhs who are spread across the State. Their aspirations too cannot be ignored. They believe, and rightly, that under the dispensation the likes of Mr Omar Abdullah have been striving to achieve, their plight would be no better than that of the Shiite Muslims, Ahmediyyas, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Mohajirs in Muslim Pakistan.
Remember, the battle-cry and watchword of all these minorities is complete integration with India and the application of the Constitution of India to Jammu & Kashmir in full, barring Article 370 under which the State enjoys a separate status within the Union. It is also important to note that Muslims are not a homogeneous lot.
The Muslims of Jammu province and ladakh region, barring a few, have nothing in common with the Kashmiri Muslims. They are not part of the movement. They are historically, ethnically, culturally and politically different from the Kashmiri Muslims. Even the Kashmiri Muslims are divided a lot. In 1997, Mr Farooq Abdullah, then Chief Minister, had himself said in a seminar, held at Asia Hotel, Jammu, that Jammu, like Kashmir, was also heterogeneous. “let the people of Jammu say whatever they want to say, but the fact is that Jammu, like Kashmir, is also heterogeneous”. Underline what he said in unambiguous terms.
(The writer is former Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Jammu)