Merger is not just a geographically limited process, but the most important part of the process is to involve the people of Kashmir in the mainstream of the country.
 |
| Photo (https://unsplash.com/photos/0ICxgY6vdCA) |
The Central Government has now abolished the special status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir by cleverly using the provisions of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and amending Article 367 by a Presidential Ordinance. At the same time, the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir has been abolished and two Union Territories, Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir, have been created. Following this ordinance, the controversial section 35A has also been repealed. But in doing so, the people of Kashmir are under house arrest today. Kashmir has a curfew under Section 144 and mobile, internet and telephone facilities have been shut down. Cable TV is also off in many sensitive areas. Now that such a big change has taken place in one fell swoop, it is time to consider the implications for Kashmir's internal politics and national-international politics.
Article 370 has always been an election issue for the BJP. The Bharatiya Janata Party and Jana Sangh have been demanding the abolition of Jammu and Kashmir's privilege by repealing 370. Shyamaprasad Mukherjee's 1954 agitation and his death in Srinagar Jail are sensitive issues for this right-wing party. Mukherjee's movement's slogan "One country, two marks, two statements, two prime ministers will not work" was a popular slogan and is still popular today. With Article 370, the BJP has always taken a somewhat awkward political stance that Kashmir has not been fully merged with India and will not happen without the deletion of 370.
As a result, after yesterday's announcement, there is an atmosphere of excitement and joy in the country. In other words, in Delhi, the air is being created with the signing of a merger. But there is a reason for this. And that is the narrow role of the subject of the merger of right thinking. That is to say, if Article 370 exists, the politics of 370 opposition was being pushed forward due to the fear that someday Kashmir would be separated from India. In fact, organizations and individuals working to divide the country never rely on the Constitution. (Or no matter how good events and governments come, their work doesn’t stop). But logic has no place in the politics of patriotism. The fear against 370 was due to the lack of this logic.
'Why did Article 370 come?' The answers to this question are in the Kashmir merger agreement with India and in the specific history of Kashmir. The process of granting special status to Kashmir started in the 1920s and it is clear that it was rooted in the tripartite dispute between Dogra-Pandit and Muslims in Kashmir. But then the Kashmiri Pandit was a supporter of this privilege and the Muslim masses were against it. The provisions came at a time when it was feared that rich merchants from the Punjab would come and change the face of Kashmir.
What is the broader definition of a merger?
Even when Vajpayee was the Prime Minister, 'Equal Civil Code', 'Ram Mandir' and 'Article 370' were the BJP's election issues. However, Vajpayee had followed the same path of discussion on the Kashmir issue.
Amarjit Singh Dulat's very informative book ' Kashmir The Vajpayee Years' also contains many great examples of how Vajpayee dealt with Kashmir with harmony and restraint. At that time, Vajpayee's triad was developed on the basis of 'humanity', 'democracy' and 'Kashmirism'. This 'Vajpayee-Sutra' about Kashmir is still remembered and loved by the people there, because at that time Delhi used to talk freely with Srinagar and listen to them.
Later, the Manmohan Singh government wasted many years without working on Vajpayee's goodwill. This history is well known. But the Modi government, which came with a majority after that, completely ignored the 'Vajpayee-Sutra'. A government with an absolute majority could have come up with a number of creative schemes, but it did not happen. The Modi government completely closed the door to talks with the Hurriyat Conference, and at the same time a new generation of Burhan Vani extremists emerged. Nearly 15 years later, a new generation had taken up arms.
Blaming Pakistan or the Hurriyat is always an easy and straightforward solution when the Kashmiri people look for reasons to resort to violence. The Kashmiri people are under the influence of separatist leaders, as they feel alienated and hostile towards the Delhi government. The government of Delhi does not listen to you and if you think differently, the ISI kills (e.g. the assassination of renowned journalist Shujaat Bukhari). Vajpayee is still remembered in the Kashmir Valley, as he handled complex issues with an open mind. Most importantly, he took the people into confidence.
So can we acquire the faith of those for whom we change the rules by imprisoning them, disrupting their daily lives? Whose hearts will you win by keeping the leaders who participate in your government and, in the electoral process of the country, in custody? If the leaders who are contesting the elections are the ones who are being sidelined, then why should others be contesting the elections?
Merger is not just a geographically limited process, but the most important part of the process is to involve the people of Kashmir in the mainstream of the country. But if we try to understand how difficult it is for the youth of Kashmir today to rent a house in Mumbai, Pune, Delhi, Bangalore, it will become clear how much difference there is between our nationalist ideology and actual behavior. Asked about his views on India, a Kashmiri carpet seller who was brutally beaten in Lucknow not long ago, he said the basic concepts of sensitive citizens would not go unnoticed. So we can express the joy of victory by changing the law by cracking down on repression and exploding firecrackers. But we must realize that winning the hearts of the people of Kashmir and inculcating in them a sense of belonging to positive politics is more important for the future of the country today.
Post a Comment