by DR. NYLA ALI KHAN
A villager, shot by Border Security Force soldiers, was taken to the government medical college hospital in Jammu city, Jammu and Kashmir, on last Thursday. PHOTO/Channi Anand/Associated Press/The New York Times
The conscription of a legitimate political space, attempts to decimate institutions of governance, and the inability of political organizations in the state, mainstream as well as separatist, to uphold and voice regional political aspirations have caused a loss of faith in the populace and, in my opinion, an unfortunate lack of knowledge about the evolution of a nationalist and political consciousness in Kashmir. A lot of people at this time do not have the courage to overtly espouse the putatively wilting political cause of struggling for the autonomous status of Kashmir and for the right of the people of Kashmir to determine their own political future. A state in which the rulers are handpicked by the federal government governance and non-governance are nearly synonymous, because the rulers of such a state are constantly at the beck and call of their Centre, the strategy of which may well be to render the state administration dysfunctional. The so-called packages in pre-partition India, a network of railways throughout pre-partition India, development of international airports and deep sea harbors, establishment of medical and engineering institutions, and a lot more, and the building of a new capital city including Lutyen’s Delhi, and the military GHQ in Rawalpindi by the British colonial power did not stop Gandhi, Nehru, and Jinnah from carrying their mission forward to its logical end as we see today. This brings me to reiterate that Kashmir is a political problem that can be solved only by a political process, which includes the prime and most important party to the problem, the people of J & K.
Have India’s democratic rulers been reduced to being Britain’s heirs? What in the world will turning the Valley into a political graveyard every time Indian VVIPs visit the state yield? Has there been any significant advance toward freedom since Gandhi, Nehru, and Jinnah dispossessed the British? It’s interesting that even the so-called steel framework of the Indian administration like the IAS is the immediate successor to the ICS which was devised by the British to suit their needs. This service is so less stiff-necked than the ICS. How far have we advanced in freedom when even the brave and patriotic armed forces of India require protection and legal immunity by the implementation of laws like AFSPA for their acts of omission and commission. Mind you, these harsh laws are today applicable to almost half the states of the Indian Union, including the North Eastern states besides J & K. In this day and age, it does not take a skeptic to question India’s democratic credentials and the rule of law.
I am not an anarchist and have always believed that violent means of protest do not lead a discontented people anywhere, but a nation-state cannot continue to wield its military might to render the political process in a conflict zone dysfunctional. In the current scenario, India has ensured that no politician in J & K is a threat to it, so the credibility deficit and trust deficit in the state doesn’t bother it at all. By the way, the national drive against corruption led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh himself is make a mockery of by one of his own cabinet ministers who announces freebies ad nauseaum every time he visits the state, which is a great deal more often than any other union minister cares to visit J & K.
Ideally, politics should be governed by conviction and the ability to sway public opinion in one’s favor by one’s moral, legal, and constitutional authority, but in this day and age, politics is the art of pragmatism. A strong and prosperous India is a guarantee to peace in our region, but a strong and prosperous Pakistan would strengthen that guarantee. So gloating over the instability in either one of these countries serves no purpose and proves detrimental to peace in our region. The goal should be to find a practical solution to the deadlock that would enable preservation of peace in the Indian subcontinent, while maintaining the honor of everyone concerned.
The translation of a political and social vision into reality requires an efficacious administrative set-up and vibrant educational institutions, which produce dynamic citizens while remaining aware of the exigencies of the present. Stalwart politicians who were unable to understand that the changing nature of a struggle required a new vision and pioneering spirit ended up becoming marginalized. A political movement that pays insufficient attention to the welfare of the populace, good governance, and rebuilding democratic institutions ends up leaving irreparable destruction in its wake. An insurgency or militant nationalist movement that lacks such a vision is bound to falter. The electoral process and establishment of a government are not ultimate goals or ends in themselves but are means to nation-building and societal reconstruction. Even religious and political rhetoric remains simply rhetorical without a stable and representative government. We cannot underestimate the importance of standing up and being counted. It is important to understand powers are vested in ministers are by the people who elect them to legislative assemblies, unlike the bureaucrat. It is ironic though that India is a country that is run by bureaucrats, because ministers get claustrophobic within the four walls of their offices.
Sabre rattling by the representatives of India and Pakistan is futile, and there will be no headway until the process of political negotiations and accommodation begins. Until the restoration of autonomy as a beginning, even the people oriented approach adopted by the then Vajpayee-led NDA government and Musharraf’s four-point formula would remain merely notional.
Dr. Khan can be reached at nylakhan@aol.com