The Contrarian View

Being a Kashmiri I do have a certain emotionally ‘entangled’ perspective but at the same time having lived outside the valley for a long time and having had several interactions at a broader level allows me a certain bit of objectivity. (This certainly does not imply that anyone outside the valley would not have any emotional attachment or those from the valley lack objectivity). It is just another viewpoint which needs to be dissected and judged on its merits and demerits. The discourse on Kashmir has largely been uni-dimensional (depending on where you stand) and ironically to a problem which is multi-dimensional, with each dimension feeding into the other.What do Kashmiri’s want? What is the way forward? The answers to these we get are mostly rhetorical. One of the common assertions is that this is another economic and governance related issue and therefore the solutions have to be derived from there. While these are as relevant to Kashmir’s as to anyone else on the planet however they fail to comprehend the problem in its entirety. The recent events have also negated this standpoint yet again.There is no denying the fact that the problem is politico-religious in nature. It is also true that the 'fundamentalist' Islam has made large inroads represented by Mr Geelani in the valley who is also seen to be the vanguard of the movement. The killings and displacement of Kashmiri Pandits in the early 90's also contribute towards giving it a 'jihadi' character. Given the current state of things in the subcontinent the apprehensions about the state turning into’anarchy’ and the consequent effects on the fabric of India in those circumstances do hold water.At the same time, I am tempted to step back and refrain from considering this just another 'Islamic' movement. In view of one of my close Indian 'Muslim' friends who has also lived in the valley if you go by the puritanical Islam 'most of the Kashmiri’s would be considered non-Muslims'. This drawing from the fact that the 'sufi' culture is deeply ingrained among the Kashmiri people. It is also a fact that ‘Jamaat Islami' ,which talked about Wahabi Islam, did not resonate with a large population for many years. It would be presumptuous to assume that in the last 2 decade things have overturned completely. At least on the ground it does not seem to be so. Perhaps it would not be wrong to assert that the militant movement lost its popularity because the average Kashmiri could not relate to the 'jihadi' nature of LeT and such. The overtly ‘Islamic’ slogans which tend to be seen as ‘communal’ therefore may not be so in truth and not to be taken at the face value.The political dimension of this problem is the one that has not only been neglected but abused also. It is one of the key things that an average Kashmiri feels he has always been deprived of. Right from the time when Sheikh Abdullah was imprisoned in 1953 till today the governments have virtually been 'installed' by the Centre. Please don’t read it as just another 'rigging' elsewhere. It has not been about supporting one or the other political equation, it has been about who suited the interests of the Centre and those interests did not match with those of the valley is an open secret. Article 370 which inherently recognized the need to address Kashmir in a 'unique' manner was trampled upon in its infancy itself by abrogating powers of the state that were intended in the original draft. The seeds of suspicion and distrust were sown with this among Kashmiri’s. Though subsequently a lot of provisions made have actually accorded more rights but the initial distrust remains. This is further aggravated by the constant demand for its abrogation by the right wing political parties. In all of this, Kashmiri’s have always felt vulnerable.Even in the current context, by the admission of Home Minister himself, the political process has been in a limbo. Despite the improvement in situation there was little progress in the last 2 years. This was an opportunity for the government to connect and build on its equation with the moderates. Unfortunately, the policy seems to have been again of overlooking the deep set sentiments and believing the elections have resolved the problem. In the process the moderates like Mirwaiz, Yasin Malik, Sajad Lone etc have been relegated to the margins, the stalling of the dialogue process meant that these people would also be accused of having sold out. Like it or not but these are the people who are going to help bring the 'peace' process back. These are the people GOI will have to talk to. Unfortunately, the ground seems have to been lost to the hardliners so far and government of India has compromised the ‘doves’It is also important to understand the full import of 'aazadi' and time for the proponents to define its contours. What does 'aazadi' entail and how will you benefit from it. The answers to this even by those who are shouting the loudest would be nebulous. If it just separation from India what about the rest of the J&K what about the rest of the constituents Pandits, Ladhakhis, Jammuites. I think it the onus is on Hurriyat(both factions) to come together and give a definite shape to their 'vision' Similarly the onus is on the mainstream political parties specially NC to reflect and come out with an alternate way forward that they think would be acceptable to people. It is also imperative for the Centre to stop living in denial mode and have a Kashmir policy in place apart from buying time and hoping that it will solve itself with the influx of tourists. Sadly that is not the case.As far as human rights are concerned, I think this is where all of us have failed. And it is not just 'bullets' but the 'attitude' that has been bringing back the protestors to the streets. The silence of Manmohan Singh is as gross as the inferences that these are sponsored acts. The statements from the leadership are taken seriously, they can help alleviate the pain as much as they can alienate. Of late the media and the civil society have started taking note and this should go a long way in putting a balm on the fresh wounds of Kashmir.Therefore what is the solution? Unfortunately there are no straight answers. The way forward has to obviously look at the problem in totality. It can’t be started by “First Stop this and First Start that’ stances. It does not lie in the past; it has to be found in the ‘future’. On one hand the GOI has to take a hard look at how it wishes to engage with Kashmiris in times to come, on the other the Kashmiri leadership, intelligentsia and civil society need to ponder on how they envisage the future for their next generation.