Kashmir remains a dispute between India and Pakistan and
India and Kashmir since 1947. Many rounds of talks have been held on this
subject among stakeholders from time to time. Kashmir question was debated at
the United Nations, and apart from that, we also know of Nehru-Liaqat and
Nehru-Muhammad Ali Bogra and Nehru-Noon talks with several rounds. In the
aftermath of 1965 Indo-Pak war, Shastri and Ayub Khan talked about it in
Tashkent and six rounds of talks between the foreign ministers namely Swaran
Singh and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto were also held. Before the war of 1965, Nehru had
sent Sheikh Abdullah to General Ayub Khan for talks on Kashmir. In the run up
to Shimla talks and agreement, open and secret talks about Kashmir were also
held. Rajiv Gandhi and Benazir Bhutto
also talked in their capacity as Prime Ministers. Vajpayee claimed to resolve
the issue in the name of humanism and talked to Nawaz Sharif in Lahore.
Widening the scope of interaction, India opened up talks on Prime Minister’s
level with one faction of Hurriyat. In the current tenure of Indian prime
minister, three rounds of round table conference were held. Recommendations
made by various committees and approved in the Round Table conference were
ultimately consigned to the dust bin. This conference was not held under the
chairmanship of the prime minister of Pakistan but under the Indian prime
minister in which Indian home minister, defence minister and other ministers of
mainstream parties were also present. Earlier after Kargil war, Track II and
Agra Summit were held with the government of Pervez Musharraf and it was given
out that Kashmir issue had been almost resolved.
But despite all these long and short talks and interaction,
Kashmir issue became more and more complicated. The only thing that happened in
the course of these long and tortuous deliberations was that during the tenure
of Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the present prime minister, the canvas of talks was
expanded to include Kashmir leadership in negotiations. Prior to that, Kashmir
issue had remained confined to the limits of two countries only.
This issue did not come up for much discussion after 1964 or
Tashkent Agreement. Kashmiri leadership did not succeed in extracting any
concrete advantage from the governments of Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh. All
this makes us believe that India is only bidding time and is not interested in
any result oriented talks with Kashmir leadership. The hindsight shows that
Kashmir did not get anything out of the talks between the tallest of Kashmir
leadership viz. Sheikh Abdullah and Indira Gandhi. Delhi made loud noise that it was talking to the
Hurriyat but the faction with which it initiated talks is part of all those
organizations which cannot make any commitment without the permission from
Pakistani establishment. Indian policy planners and official representative had
also been talking to the militant organizations despite full knowledge that
these organizations receive full support from Pakistan. The purpose of all
these inconsequential deliberations has been to spread confusion among the
organizations and people in Jammu and Kashmir. It is a ploy to divide people
and bid time. Indian policy framers and rulers have never been sincere in their
talks on Kashmir issue. After all they are not prepared to revive their
promises and the facts of history.
For three long years we have gone through the trauma of
ragda movement of 2008, Shopian double murder case of 2009, rape case of 2010,
and “Quit Kashmir” movements. Huge economic and human loss occurred during
these movements. Now India has staged a new drama of talks called
interlocutors. Previously a team comprising K.C.Panth, Ram Jaithmalani, and N.N
Vohra and was constituted to deal with Kashmir situation. The new
interlocutors’ team comprises a well-known journalist Dilip Padgaonkar, an
academic Radha Kumar, and a bureaucrat and educationist named M.M. Ansari. No
doubt it is a team of well meaning and serious minded persons. They are
mandated to visit all the three regions of the State and interact with a
variety of groups and opinion holders and politicians, and formulate
recommendations for the solution of Kashmir issue to be sent to the union home
ministry. Undoubtedly, this time India degraded the talks and search for
solution. By selecting a team of its choice, the Indian government has tried to
make the Kashmir only its internal issue. After selecting the team of
interlocutors, Kashmiri politicians and people were unable to understand how a
complicated issue that could not be solved through talks between great
historical personalities of India and Pakistan could be solved by this rather
unknown team. That is the reason why the separatist leadership in Kashmir
boycotted interaction with the interlocutors. Interestingly these interlocutors
did issue some statements which normally they should not but obviously they
meant to mollify Kashmiri politicians. Those with whom the team of interlocutors
met were either from the mainstream political parties or other delegations in
the garb of mainstream politicians. Of course the team met with many from the
masses also at different places but the bitter truth is that those who met them
have more interest in their selfish motives than in the politics of the state.
Some of them might have met harassment at the hands of police and security
forces. But among the delegations that met them there were some university
students and intellectuals and men with conscience who apprised them of the
facts of Kashmir issue. They placed before them the grievances of ordinary men
and women of Kashmir, like bribery, police and security forces’ excesses,
unemployment, nepotism efforts of National Conference and Congress activists
trying to find space for their close and near and dear ones and bad governance.
It is appreciable that the masses of people vowed to keep
the state united and equitable distribution of power. In other words, despite
media hype about trifurcation of the State, every organization excluding BJP
and Panun Kashmir supported the unity of the three regions of the state.
Nevertheless serious political observers were puzzled at the statement of Dilip
Padgaonkar in which he said that “only a small section of people was demanding
freedom meaning that they do not want to change the present situation.”
The first thing to know is that the team of interlocutors
has been given the power of submitting its report to the Ministry of Home
Affairs. But from statements like the one stated above, people in the valley
carry the impression that the interlocutors are only pursuing India’s interest
and would forestall any big change in the context of Kashmir dispute. They are
towing the line of Delhi policy planners and that of the army. They are unable
to recognize the freedom movement of 2008, 2009 and 2010 that claimed lives of
so many innocent people. During these three years not only hundreds of
thousands of people but almost every home of Kashmir was involved in the
movement. The cry of freedom rose from
every nook and corner of Kashmir. We are puzzled that the team leader of
interlocutors labels these people as a “small group”. It appears that they have
not at all focused on the history of Kashmir issue that surfaced in 1947. At
the time of constituting the team of interlocutors, many observers including
some from mainstream had given a statement in which they had suggested instead
of a nominated team, a delegation of peoples’ representatives in the parliament
should be formed. But New Delhi turned a deaf ear to this suggestion. Who knows
the efforts and reports of the team of interlocutors may be consigned to the
dustbin as is usually done with reports on Kashmir. The issue is
procrastinated. It is evident that the team of interlocutors, too, will not be
able to make any headway given the statements emanating from them. If their
view that only a small group is demanding freedom in Kashmir is a reality then
it should recommend to the United Nations to hold referendum in Kashmir under
the supervision of an international group of observers to ascertain what the
people want in reality. When only a small group wants freedom, then India has
no reason to be apprehensive of referendum in Kashmir.
We would like to impress upon the Indian policy planners
that Kashmir festering wound will not be healed by providing jobs to rock
pelting youth. Today’s stone pelting youth may be given a job but what about
one of tomorrow and so forth and so on. Mainstream parties have always misled
India only for their self-aggrandizement. We would implore upon the Indian
authorities that before allowing Kashmir issue to take fully communal shape of
sorts, this festering wound should go under knife. People have to be given
their right if lasting peace is to prevail in the subcontinent. We hear that
Track II diplomacy is also in process. India and Pakistan are talking about
their respective interests. They are debating how through the division of
Kashmir, the issue would be resolved. Interlocutors in both countries are
silent about how they want to decide the question of freedom and self rule
demand of 1.5 crore people of the state. Both the countries are making a
serious mistake by not including Kashmiris in their talks. As long as the
people of Kashmir are not satisfied, Kashmir issue will defy every formula of
solution.
