*Kashmir: Understanding Article 370*


*Ram Puniyani*





Those gripped by religious nationalism are unable to understand the
regional-ethnic aspirations of the people. Many an ultra-nationalists of
different hues also fall into this trap many a times. With formation of
Indian nation the integration of regions like Himachal Pradesh, North
Eastern States and Jammu& Kashmir created some challenging situations.
Though in all these cases the challenges were met in different ways and are
even now continuing to pose some issues of serious national concerns, but
those related to Kashmir require some more pressing attention. Located in a
strategic geographic area of great significance, the global powers have
also added their own weight behind complicating the matters in Kashmir.
Kashmir remains one of the most contentious issues between the two
neighbors, Pakistan and India. In addition the communal forces in India
have been making it a bone of contention all through.



It is in this backdrop that when the BJP’s Prime ministerial aspirant,
Narendra Modi gave a call for debating the article 370, a whole hell broke
loose. His intention in saying ‘who it has benefited’ was to indicate that
it is unnecessary and should be abolished. To buttress his point, BJP
leaders Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitly reiterated that abolition of article
370 is an integral part of agenda of Hindutva-RSS, BJP’s parent
organization. Jaitly also went to uphold the stance taken by Shyama Prasad
Mookerjee, the founder of Bhartiya Jansangh, the predecessor of present
BJP, that of complete and immediate integration of Kashmir into India.
Jaitly also distorted the contemporary history and events by saying that
‘Nehruvian vision of a separate status has given rise to the aspirations
for pre 1953 status, self rule and even Azadi. Many a TV debate participant
on the issue have shown their ignorance about the status and content of
Article 370 as such.



It is true that in Kashmir today there are many tendencies, which vary from
asking for total independence, Azadi to Autonomy. There will hardly be any
popular support for debating or abolishing article 370 as such at broad
layers. Difficult to say how many fall in which category, but a large
number are for more autonomy, with article 370 in place.



There is a complex history to the issue. As is well known Kashmir was one
of the princely states without direct rule of the British. Dogra dynasty's
King Hari Singh, who ruled Kashmir, refused to join the constituent
assembly under the Cabinet mission plan.  Eighty per cent population of J&K
was Muslim. With India’s independence the Maharaja had two options, one to
remain independent, two either to merge with India or with Pakistan.
Maharaja was tending to remain independent. The Hindu leaders of Jammu
supported Maharaja in this separatist plan. ‘J &K Rajya Hindu Sabha’
including the ones’ who later on joined Bharatiya Jana Sangh, vociferously
argued that “a Hindu state, as Jammu and Kashmir claimed to be, should not
merge its identity with secular India" (Kashmir, Balraj Puri, Orient
Longman 1993, 5).  The attack of Kabaili-Tribal, supported Pakistan
military changed the whole scenario.



After this attack the Maharaja due to his inability to protect the Kashmir
requested the Indian Government to bail him out of this problem. Indian
Govt. wanted the state to accede to India before it could send the armed
forces to ward off the Pakistan's aggression. The accession treaty was
signed with the provision of article 370. *It was not a merger*. India was
to look after defense, currency, foreign affairs and communication while
Kashmir was to have its own constitution, flag, Sadar-I-Riyasat and Prime
Minister. Justifying this action Pt. Nehru in a broadcast to the Nation on
Nov.2, 1947 said, “…Both the Kashmir Govt. and the National Conference
pressed us to accept this accession and to send troops by air, but made
condition that the accession would have to be considered by the people of
Kashmir later when the peace and order were established…"(Nehru, CW, XVIII,
421). India approached the UN with a request to get the aggression vacated
and to supervise in the process of plebiscite. Multiple factors operated
here in due course of time and the holding of plebiscite got postponed sine
die.



With this another process began at home. Jana Sangh Chief Shyama Prasad
Mookerjee's insistence, supported openly by the Jana Sangh and covertly by
some bigwigs in Congress as well, asked for the total merger of Kashmir
with India. At this point Nehru was under the external pressure of Jana
Sangh and internal pressure from some of his colleagues in the cabinet to
totally integrate Kashmir with India. Nehru pointed out "We have to be men
of vision and there has to be a broad minded acceptance of facts in order
to integrate (Kashmir, added) really. And real integration comes from mind
and the heart and not of some clause, which you may impose, on other
people. "

Since then lots of water has flown down the Jhelum. The pressure of
communal forces, the doubts raised in the minds of Sheikh Abdulla due to
murder of Gandhi and rise of communal politics, led him to think whether he
has done a right thing in deciding to accede to India. He wanted to be part
of a secular polity, but communal teeth of the country started becoming
more visible. His doubts and their articulation led to his arrest for 17
long years. And this is where the process of alienation of Kashmiri people
began. This alienation was duly aided by Pakistan, in supplying arms to
disgruntled youth. The matter got worst compounded with the entry of Al
Qaeda elements in Kashmir in the decade of 1980s. These elements, whose US
sponsored mission of defeating Russian army in Afghanistan was over and
they were looking around for other areas for implementation of their
mistaken notions of Jihad. They joined in and the earlier struggle in
Kashmir, on the grounds of Kashmiriyat, was communalized by them.  An
atmosphere was created which made the Kashmir struggle as the distorted
version of Jihad, undermining its Kashmiriyat. This is what led to
targeting of Kashmiri Pundits. This gave a big handle to the communal
elements in India to propagate the separatism of Muslims.

The things started improving in the first decade of this century. Still the
accumulated agony of Kashmiri youth started manifesting in ‘Stone thrower
youth’ emerged along with a total disenchantment with the state of affairs
prevailing in Kashmir. In the light of this the Central Government
appointed a team of interlocutors. The recommendations of the group of
interlocutors, Dileep Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M.M.Ansari (May 2012) in
nut shell asked for rejection of the return to pre 1953 position, at the
same time asking for measures for restore the autonomy of Kashmir. The team
suggests that the parliament will not make any law for Kashmir unless it
relates to the security, internal and external of the state. Significantly
it gives the status of ‘special’ instead of ‘temporary’ to the article 370,
which is the bone of contention for the ultra nationalists like the BJP.
Very correctly the team says that the proportion of officers in the state
should gradually be changed to increase the weight-age of the local
officers. It also talks of creating regional councils with financial
powers, and measures to promote cooperation across Line of Control (LoC)
while talking of resuming dialogue with Huriyat and Pakistan both. The
Government has been non committal about it so far. While the BJP has
rejected them on the ground that it is a dilution of the accession of
Kashmir to India. The separatists find it insufficient saying that there is
no political settlement of the issue.



While calling for debate around article 370, one needs to understand as
what the Kashmiris want, a mere assertion from ultra nationalist tendencies
will harm the process of healing of wounds and the march towards a better
democratic process in the state. As Nehru pointed out, what is more
important is to win the hearts and mind of people, the laws can follow.
Integrating the people by considering their aspirations is what is the need
of the hour, such outbursts are counterproductive for the people at large.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to