For one, the new government which takes over the reins of power in a changed landscape of Jammu and Kashmir with a truncated boundary and demoted status, will be involved in a constant tussle with New Delhi’s appointed Lieutenant Governor.

Secondly, the government will be weighed down by the peculiarity of the mandate, which is a decisive one in the Valley, giving the alliance a clear overall majority but is fractured along regional, to be more precise religious lines, within the Union Territory.

Decoding the Mandate

The NC-Congress alliance led in 49 of 90 seats, with NC securing 42, Congress 6 (five in Valley and one in Rajouri, and CPI(M) 1. BJP dominated 29 seats, all in the Jammu region and mainly in Hindu-majority districts, barring three in the Chenab Valley. Of the 47 seats in the Valley, the alliance won 41, ceding six to PDP, independents, and Peoples Conference. BJP had a clean sweep in the Hindu majority areas but failed to gather much moss in the Muslim majority belts of Jammu province.

The verdict needs to be decoded in its totality. There are many layers to unpack but for now, just an overview would suffice.

Breaking away from the tradition of boycotts and low to moderate polling, not only did the Valley witness brisk polling, but the voters also threw their weight behind one party, despite the many machinations, manipulations, proxies, and sentimental emotional baits. This conveys that the voters in Kashmir voted pragmatically to give a resounding response to the BJP, express their anger against the abrogation of Article 370 and demotion of the state to a union territory, and for change against the present status quo.

The same is true of much of the Chenab Valley, where the BJP won three out of 8 seats but two with wafer-thin victory margins, and the Pir Panjal region, where the BJP’s weaponization of ST status for Paharis completely collapsed.

The core aspirations of this mandate cannot be discarded or set aside. Yet, it’s not as simple as it seems.

If the mandate in Kashmir, Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley was a referendum for the restoration of special status, was the overwhelming majority of BJP in Jammu’s Hindi heartland an opposition to that?

The Troubling Jammu Knot

BJP’s impressive performance in Jammu is a culmination of three major factors – the gerrymandering of boundaries that carved out more Hindu majority seats, the abysmally poor performance of the coalition, particularly of the Congress, whose stronghold Jammu had been before 2014, despite a strong anti-incumbency factor, and the BJP’s shrewd ability to capture the imagination of the voter by diverting the anti-BJP anger into a fear of the Kashmiri domination or re-emergence of separatist sentiment.

Whether it was the use of the Rashid factor, seen as polarising in Jammu, or manipulation of the fear of rising terrorism incidents, which increased in the Jammu region under BJP’s watch, in an electoral battlefield left almost vacant by the Congress, the BJP was able to sell its narrative very effectively in Jammu.

Here lies a paradox: Despite the deepening resentment against BJP’s policies including the dilution of constitutional protections, though not necessarily revocation of Article 370, and the loss of statehood, voters in Jammu opted for the very party that brought this misery on them.

Jammu provides a knotty necklace that is difficult for anyone to untangle. The voters in Jammu chose their loyalty to BJP over their aspirations. Whether the deeply embedded aspirations in Jammu are similar to those in Kashmir or not, the fact is that the BJP, which represents a sentiment antithetical to that has a strong hold over Jammu and that cannot be ignored.

The task for the NC-led coalition government is how to reach out to Jammu and balance Jammu’s dilemma with the restless enthusiasm of Kashmir with BJP waiting in the wings to give a communal twist to every narrative.

While this is difficult, it is not entirely impossible. Minimalist aspirations in both regions – of freedom from the arrogance of bureaucracy, accountable governance, jobs, development, protection of resources, and end to drug abuse – are the same. These provide an ideal ground for building bridges and moving forward. The National Conference can leverage its tradition of pan-J&K acceptability and Farooq Abdullah, owing to his popularity in Jammu, may be better placed to do it.

This, however, cannot be done without Congress, which has been electorally decimated but its vote share has improved. For the sake of the region’s peace and stability, and the party’s legitimacy, it may need to do so some pragmatic thinking, and rejuvenate its cadres for larger and continuous mass contact programs.

However, there is a caveat.

Even if the NC-Congress coalition acts in all its wisdom and navigates this challenge ably, it is caught in a real-time game zone, where the challenges and the menacing dragons never end.

Constantly, the new government will be put in a situation where it faces pressures from within the region and outside.

The UT Framework

The NC-led coalition government will have to reckon with the new reality of operating within the new framework and rules. Unlike states that have autonomous powers and a federal relation with the union government, Union Territories, with or without an elected assembly, are directly controlled by New Delhi through an appointed administrator or a Lieutenant Governor.

Ahead of the announcement of assembly elections in Kashmir, the Indian government amended the rules expanding the role of the Lieutenant Governor, giving him more powers for oversight on the functioning of the local government including in matters related to transfers, security, and prisons.

According to these rules, any decisions taken by the legislative assembly, or the local executive would need to be vetted by the Lieutenant Governor, making the Union government the final arbiter even in the administrative affairs of the region, including control over bureaucracy, anti-corruption bureau, police, and public order besides influencing decisions on prosecutions and sanctions.

These changes have resulted in a power structure similar to that of Delhi, which enjoys a limited statehood status, and other Union Territories with legislatures with trimmed powers. Delhi’s recent controversy over the sacking of bus marshals and the ‘dramatic’ image of Aam Aadmi Party’s minister Saurabh Bharadwaj holding the feet of a BJP legislator in desperation is a sign of the times to come.

BJP has already enjoyed the reputation of a systemic assault on the federal principles of the constitution by trampling over the rights of states ruled by the opposition and jailing chief ministers of opposition-ruled states. Jammu and Kashmir has had a long history of systemic political manipulations from New Delhi by successive regimes.

Given these facts, in all probability, the Omar Abdullah-led government will be engaged in constant firefighting with the nagging terrier on its heels.

BJP’s Wounded Pride

The problems could be far more complex. Even as the BJP is bragging about its splendid show in Jammu, the mandate suggests both an electoral and moral defeat for the party. Despite the change of rules, the redistricting of boundaries to its advantage, the alleged plotting of conspiracies, and the use of its immense resources, it is way below the halfway mark and in no position to form a government. The verdict has ripped bare its false narrative of peace, development and progress in Jammu and Kashmir. This cover now lies in tatters.

The BJP’s pride is wounded and a wounded tiger is dangerous for itself and the others. Powered by a destructive ideology that is inherent in its DNA, there is no telling to what extent the BJP could go to salvage its lost self-esteem.

There can be no room for complacency.

Will Voters’ Hopes Be Dashed?

The victory for the National Conference is huge but it is momentary. The challenges ahead are far too gargantuan to overcome.

While the government formation revives some hopes, a vital question is whether this would restore democracy in the region long starved of it or end up being a mere political theater. Would the limited powers of a prospective assembly, and the inter-regional and inter-religious frictions turn this democratic exercise into a charade that could prevent the government from delivering?

In that case, it could push the people of this restive region with a troubled history into irreparable despair. Driven by the desperation of disenfranchisement, lack of constitutional guarantees and emerging security threats, the Ladakhis are already sitting in protest in Delhi after a long foot march marching to India’s capital. Despondency in the entire region spiraling out of control will be immensely dangerous.

The new government must tread with extreme caution, wisdom, sensitivity, and agility.

Courtesy: The Kashmir Times

The post NC’s Biggest Victory Is Also Its Gravest Challenge appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As many as 7,000 (seven thousand villages)  in India still aren’t recognised as per their revenue to enjoy benefits of the Forest Rights Act 2006 (FRA), reported the All India Union for Forest Working People (AIUFWP) during its second national conference between December 1 and December 3, 2021.

Forest and Adivasi activists gathered in New Delhi to discuss the state of forest rights amidst the present political situation of the country. AIUFWP members discussed the challenges in the implementation of the Forest Rights Act 2006 (FRA).

Speaking during the briefing session of the conference, AIUFWP General Secretary Ashok Chaudhary said, “Our mission is to ensure that the forest rights movement is integrated into other democratic movements. It is important to understand the struggle as a fundamental political issue related to India’s political-economic structure.”

Looking back at the history of the forest rights struggle, he recalled how millions of forest dwelling communities fought for their rights during colonial rule. After a long struggle the FRA was passed to “undo the historical injustices suffered by forest dependent communities.”

The FRA put in place a three-stage process by which the rights of indigenous and other forest dwelling communities were to be recorded and recognised. It listed thirteen types of rights, including individual rights and community rights over land being cultivated, rights to non-timber forest produce, and most crucially, the right to protect and conserve forests which no Indian law had ever recognised as a right before. It also provided immense legal support to the forest-dwelling communities, allowing a proper process for rehabilitation in cases of their eviction and several other protective laws. The AIUFWP has been working for the last seven years to ensure the regularisation of this law across India. Doing so ensures land and livelihood security to indigenous communities.

“However, so far, the law has been regularised only in parts of Uttar Pradesh and north West Bengal. So, the Union is focused on assisting evicted communities reclaim their land, provided they are satisfied with the state of the land. We’ve already succeeded in this regard in places like Sonbhadra, Dudhwa, Kaimur,” said Chaudhary.

Forest rights not an isolated issue

During the conference, AIUFWP members resolved to keep voicing the need to shift the power related to forest decision in the hands of local Gram Sabhas. For the same, members stressed that forest rights is not an isolated movement.

Chaudhary said that the recent farmers’ struggle has largely impacted adivasis as well, who are farmers as well. He argued that land rights and forest rights are integral issues that weave in problems related to labour, human rights.

“The main point is not to see the struggle in isolation because forests contain many diverse communities. It is not just farmers or labourers. Forests also have minorities that have suffered during the coronavirus pandemic,” he said.

Accordingly, he also sympathised with members of the Gujjar and Muslim communities who tolerated severe xenophobia during Covid-19.

To show their support for other democratic mobilisation in India, President Sokalo Gond along with many other members headed towards farmer protest sites on December 4.

AIUFWP regional reports

The second-half of the conference began with regional reports of communities. The Kaimur delegation talked about how women members reclaimed forests despite being sent to jail. The Bihar government’s forest department has not claimed the land. While conflict persists in the area, the women said they will stand firm in asserting their legal and constitutional rights. Leaders considered this an achievement in itself.

Similarly, delegates from Kerala reported how community members were surrounded by authorities and disallowed from stepping outside their area. Latest reports said that the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) party members have approached locals for talks.

Further, communities in the northern part of West Bengal are struggling to regulate the FRA owing to territorial autonomy. While two districts managed to realise this goal post-elections, the Gorkha region remains autonomous.

AIUFWP’s women trailblazers

The strength of women leaders in the movement was highlighted all the more when another woman was elected President by the Union on Friday – Sokalo Gond. According to leaders, women leadership is a crucial step in the way of women empowerment.

“It is important to acknowledge women’s contributions. Sometimes men struggle in being led by women. However, in the forest rights struggle and during the session, the women led the whole discussion,” said Chaudhary.

Sokalo Gond is also among the women forest rights defenders from Lilasi village, who stood up against police brutality in May 2018. She was illegally detained and along with Kismatiya Gond, for months until a sustained campaign by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) helped their release.

For her Presidential speech to attendees Sokalo said, “We know we need to challenge the ruling regime, and for that we need to firstly, make sure the four district members present here voice their grievances. We will show them our work to improve health and education and our next generation will get the opportunities we didn’t.”

The rights activist also challenged the Supreme Court’s 2019 order that called for the large-scale eviction of forest-dwellers, based on the Indian Forest Act 1927.

Introducing AIUFWP Team

Aside from Sonbhadra’s Sokalo, the AIUFWP went through many place-holder changes. While Jarjum Ete became the President Emeritus, former General Secretary Ashok Choudhary became the Working President. Similarly, former Deputy General Secretary Roma Malik became the General Secretary.

Dehradun Adivasi leader and veteran activist Munni Lal became the Treasurer and Delhi’s Amir Khan took the post of National Organising Secretary. Seven individuals took up the post of Vice-President including three women: CJP Secretary Teesta Setalvad, Malapurram’s Chitra M. R. and Lakhimpur Kheri’s Nabada Rana. Other VPs are Mujhahid Nafees, Kishore Thapa, Balkeswar Kharwar and Mata Dayal. Newly appointed AIUFWP Secretaries are K. Krishnan, Sarath Cheloor, Shiva Sunwar, Tapas Mondal.

Towards the conclusion of the event, the AIUFWP thanked other organisations like the National Trade Union of India (NTUI) for attending the event and expressing their support for the struggle. NTUI General Secretary Gautam Modi promised the Union’s continued support in the communities’ efforts to protect their jal, jangal, zameen.

Related:

Teesta Setalvad calls out modern day “zamindars” who are trying to usurp control of India’s forests
AIUFWP’s 2nd National Conference begins in New Delhi
AIUFWP’s second National Conference to discuss land, legal, constitutional rights and more
Jal, Jungle, Zameen: Chhattisgarh Adivasis march 300kms to oppose coal mining projects

The post Struggle for forest rights, not an isolated movement: AIUFWP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The All India Union of Forest Working People (AIUFWP) has announced its second national conference from December 1, 2021 to December 3, 2021 in New Delhi. It will discuss land, legal and constitutional rights of adivasis and other minorities in India at this conference. AIUFWP leaders Jarjum Ete, Ashok Chaudhary, Sokalo Gond, Roma Malik, Munnilal and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) General Secretary Teesta Setalvad will be participating in the three-day event along with other speakers such as Land Rights Movement leader Hannan Mollah, NTUI leaders Gautam Modi and Thankappan, APIWA leader Kavita Krishnan, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jathha Dinesh Ebrol. 

On the first day, leaders will discuss how forest rights issues intersect with land rights, the ongoing farmers struggle, draft amendments to Forest Conservation Act (FCA) 2021, draft Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) 2020, attack on workers’ legal rights, Muslims and other minorities and Dalits. The keynote address will be given by Setalvad. The proceedings will take place starting 3 PM at the Constitution Club.

“The idea is to collectively mobilise mass peoples’ movement groups and organise programmes at the national level highlighting the anti-people government policies and corporate loot of India’s natural resources,” said the AIUFWP in its press release.

On the second day, the AIUFWP will gather at the Gandhi Peace Foundation to discuss forest rights struggles, the milestones of the persisting battle, its challenges and future course of collective actions and strategies.

“Since the onset of independence, forest dependent communities in large numbers have been fighting for their forest rights. Though in 2006, the Forest Rights Act (FRA) was passed with the intention to compensate for historical injustices meted out to these communities, implementation at the ground level is still lackadaisical,” said the AIUFWP.

Despite the enactment of the FRA, forest-dependent communities continue to face violence and discrimination by the forest department, police, paramilitary forces and district administration. According to leaders, more community members are stopped from entering forests – their land rights are cancelled without proper investigation and they are threatened, manhandled and implicated in false cases. For this reason, the union’s regional community leaders will talk about reclaiming tribal folk’s physical and political space in all regions and building a comprehensive development programme in forestry and agriculture along with traditional local industrial development on Thursday.

“Owing to Covid, 2020 has seen the livelihood of forest communities, landless farmers, tenant and migrant laborers, and fishermen folks affected in an unprecedented way. In the last two years, we’ve witnessed the government bringing forth anti-people laws and masses protesting against those with all their might,” said the AIUFWP.

By this, it referred not only to contentious laws like the FCA and EIA amendments, but also the labour codes and farm laws that have recently been repealed. Still, the fact remains that the Covid-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown resulted in forced evictions of forest-dependent communities from the forest areas by the government department.

To address this, the AIUFWP members will also explain how to build an inclusive health, education and social security programme while encouraging future generations to continue the struggle against hegemonic regimes. In spirit of its inclusive endeavour, the AIUFWP will also talk about alliances with working-class struggles and curbing of labour rights by the current regime.

The third day will be a continuation of the previous day where members discuss future plans of action.

“The AIUFWP has always endeavored to emphasize the implementation of FRA (2006). It is vocal about issues like land rights movements, the historic farmers and peasants protest, and in upholding legal rights of workers, minorities and Dalits against any and all kinds of atrocities meted out to them,” it said.

Related:

Nearly 20 days later, MoEFCC shares FCA proposal in regional languages
Jal, Jungle, Zameen: Chhattisgarh Adivasis march 300kms to oppose coal mining projects
Dilution of environmental laws, a persistent tactic: AIUFWP
India farmers, Adivasis and forest dwellers condemn FCA draft changes
Forest Conservation Act: GoI suggests fundamental changes Act, despite widespread objections

The post AIUFWP’s second National Conference to discuss land, legal, constitutional rights and more appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Anantnag goes for election on May 6, 2019. This particular seat, one of J&K’s six Lok Sabha constituencies has remained vacant for almost three years now.

The comment received flak from media channels and various outlets.

NC had tweeted, “We have seen the video of Syed Tauqeer Ahmad, JKNC segment in-charge Kokernag. The party does not endorse this sort of language on these sorts of threats. Syed Tauqeer has been spoken to and advised to exercise more care when choosing his words. We have been assured by him that this was a momentary lapse in the heat of the moment and will not be repeated. We hope the matter is allowed to end here.”

DFO Anantnag, Feroze Ahmad Chat, said that Chief Conservator Forests (South) has taken up the issue with District Election Officer (DEO) Anantnag.

As per the region’s popular newspaper Greater Kashmir, an FIR-No. 7/19 U/S 116, 506, 153 RPC against the former sessions judge at Police Station Larnoo”. Greater Kashmir also reported that the district administration was investigating the contents of the video in which the leader is heard making these statements.
 

The post FIR lodged against judge for inciting violence in Kashmir’s Anantnag district appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“We have detained four persons and they are being questioned,” Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Rajouri district Suleman Chowdhary said today.

As precautionary measure, the authorities have imposed prohibitory orders under CrPC Section 144 in Kalakote town, he said.

Two persons were injured in Tuesday’s clash.

The SSP said that a special investigation team (SIT) has been constituted to probe the case.

He said that after the probe report is submitted, action will be taken against the accused.

Meanwhile, NC workers resorted to protest demonstrations and blocked Kalakote road over the incident and demanded withdrawal of a case against its workers.
 

The post NC-BJP clash: 4 detained, restrictions imposed appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

Post-Kargil, imported mujahideen are pedalling a Talibanised Islam in the Valley. And succeeding in good measure, thanks to the unholy nexus between the BJP-led government at the Centre and an unscrupulous National Conference in the state

There has been a significant change not only in character of the movement but in the mood of  the Kashmiri people post argil. The reason for this is the even deeper and greater sense of alienation and outright bitterness among the local people – in the Valley, in Jammu and in Ladakh. As far as militancy is concerned, there has been a sharp decline in the Kashmiri-speaking people component among the militants. 
 

The actions of the militants, too, signal this sharp shift. Earlier, the victims of militants used to be civilians — soft targets. There used to be harassment and extortion of the local population. This has stopped. Today, post-Kargil, the attacks are directly on the army and BSF headquarters. 
 

The militant activities are more dare devilish, more direct, more desperate in a way. A group has emerged that calls itself Fidayeen (Lovers of God). Unlike the activities of earlier militant groups, their targets are not civilians but the army and security forces. There is now no extortion from the local
population, distinct attempts are being made to ingratiate them and win their sympathy.
 

The Kashmiri movement has, as a result, and very unfortunately, been virtually taken over by outsiders. The Jamaat-e-Islami has never had any faith in the Kashmiri brand of a more liberal Islam. A more standardised version of Islam is being offered to the local population that is completely out of sync with the region, with Kashmiriyat, a characteristic that typified the movement before.
 

This weakness of the Kashmiri movement that is fast-losing its Kashmiri identity — and, for this a variety of factors are responsible — is more than compensated on the other side. RSS and even more extreme brands of Hindu nationalism are gaining currency among Hindus in Jammu, as elsewhere in the country. 
 

What are the factors responsible for this hardening of position on both sides? The sham of the recent elections is one of the most significant contributory factors. It is a sorry tale for any country that is proud to call itself a democracy. Elections were far from free. Official figures themselves reveal a fast-declining rate of voter participation, not only among Kashmiri Muslims, but also Pandit migrants and Jammu Hindus. What does this signify but increasing alienation?
 

In its report published on October 6, 1999, The Times of India revealed that the opinion expressed by me on the recently conducted elections in the state were shared by a team of four IAS officers sent as independent observers to the state. I quote from their report: “Elections were neither free nor fair but full of violence. The electorate was coerced by the security forces to vote. The presiding officer at several polling booths corroborated the charges of coercion made by the voters. The observers found even minors in the queue and several mobile voters”. 
 

The observers saw matadors carrying women voters. They intercepted these matadors. The four senior IAS officers made a demand to the EC to countermand the elections. These demands were not even considered by the EC, while in states like Bihar and elsewhere, more prompt action was taken. 

There has been a significant change in the character of the movement in Kashmir with the presence of a militant outfit like Fidayeen (Lovers of God). The actions of the militants are more sympathetic to the locals and are targeting the Indian security forces

The conduct of the election commissioner (GV Krishnamurthy) on a visit to the state was blatantly partisan, when he commented that the “conducting of the elections was the answer to militancy.” The EC would have performed a far more signal and patriotic service to Kashmiris, residents of Jammu and
the whole country if he had simply concentrated on ensuring that the conduct of the elections was ‘genuinely free and fair’.
 

The boycott call by militants and a heavy presence of the military has been a constant factor in the state since the 1996 elections. How come then, that given these constants in the last three elections, there has been such a sharp decline in voting percentages this time? 
 

Look at the official figures. During the 1996 parliamentary elections, in the Srinagar city segment, 35 per cent of the electorate voted; this was down to 30 per cent in 1998 and touched an all-time low of 12 per cent in 1999. The story is similar for Anantnag. In  1996, 50 per cent of the voters came out; in 1998, this was down to 28 per cent; but in 1999 the voting percentage dropped to 14 per cent. In Baramulla, while 41 per cent of the voters came out to cast their vote in 1996; the turnout was the same in 1998, but this time it plummeted to 27 per cent.     If one goes into further detail and scrutinises figures for the Srinagar segment that has recorded 12 per cent of voters, we see that the Charar-e-Sharif and Badgaon segments recorded 45.50 and 45 per cent of voting respectively while Srinagar city registered barely 3–5 per cent votes. The extent of voter disillusionment or alienation can well be gauged from these statistics. 
 

Jammu and Kashmir also recorded the highest rates of invalid votes anywhere in the country; EC statistics tell us there were 9-12 per cent invalid votes in the state. It is worth analysing the factors responsible for such a low voting percentage and high rate of invalid votes in the state. 
 

As stated before, the boycott call by militants, the heavy and obtrusive army presence, the acute disillusionment of the Kashmiri people over the Kargil episode were the main factors. 
 

But an additional factor was the acute disillusionment of the Hindu migrant voters in the Valley and Hindu Pandits in the Jammu region with the BJP. This is evident from the number of Pandits who voted for the BJP. The BJP vote in the Jammu-Poonch region fell from 7,90,000 in 1998 to 2,90,000 this time. This means that only one-third of Pandit voters who supported the BJP last time extended their support to the same party this time. In Udhampur, too, the Pandit vote for the BJP declined from 5,23,000 votes in 1998 down to 1,94,000 this year. 

If there is such a sharp decline of votes within one year, from a particular segment with a particular party, what does it show? Obviously that, completely disillusioned with the BJP, which is also the ruling party at the Centre, Pandits have turned away from it. The BJP has led them up the garden path with false promises.
 

In the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, the percentage of Muslim voters is high. Within the Jammu region, too, 30 per cent of the electorate is Muslim.
 

With an open alliance between the BJP and NC, is it really believable that seats with a high domination of Muslim voters would so willingly back the NC’s collaboration with the BJP? There is hardly a constituency anywhere in India where Muslim votes are sizeable in number and where they have wholeheartedly supported the BJP. So, it is hardly believable that they would do so in Jammu and Kashmir.

The disillusioned local population, both Muslim and Hindu, were looking for an alternative, a secular outlet to channelise their protest against the unholy nexus between the BJP and the National Conference
 

In short, both the Hindus and Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir are completely disillusioned with the ruling parties — the National Conference and the BJP.
 

There was blatant coercion of voters at the voting stage and subsequent manipulation of the results. My opinion is corroborated by EC observer’s report. 
 

In the midst of all this, secular parties, particularly the main opposition party, the Congress, that had converted secularism into a mantra all over the country, was conspicuous in that it put up only a nominal fight in the state. Since nothing can be expected from the opportunistic politics and regime of Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference and the communal worldview of the BJP, secular forces within the country must take their share of blame for the situation in Jammu and Kashmir.
 

Why did they betray the interests of Kashmiri Muslims, Jammu Hindus and the migrant Pandits living in the Valley? This is not what secularism is about. They had a wonderful opportunity during the last elections to intervene. They not only squandered an opportunity for themselves but have also compromised the national interest. The disillusioned local population, both Muslim and Hindu, were looking for an alternative, a secular outlet to channelise their protest against the unholy nexus between the BJP and the National Conference. 

The National Conference was a regional party which should have necessarily pitted itself against the insensitive and centrist politics of the Indian state. But, today, it has willingly been reduced to a mere tool of the BJP. It has completely lost the raison d’être of its existence. The Jammu Hindus, who were against Kashmiri Muslim domination, had under certain circumstances arising out of this, supported the BJP in the past. With the BJP shamefully allying with the NC, the raison d’être of this support, too, has also been completely eroded.

Given this state of a huge political vacuum and accumulated discontent what happens? Like I said before, it was the ideal situation for a secular formation with civil liberties, human rights perspective to intervene. 
 

In its absence, the local population has been pushed to the wall and a fresh lease of life has been given to militant activities. Without local support, no sophisticated weapons, no armed training can help militants succeed in any region.
 

This choice has, in my opinion at least, been forced on both the Kashmiri people and the people of Jammu. In 1996, when Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference came before the people, despite his past record, the people were willing to give him another chance. But over the past three years, his rule has been the worst ever, extremely corrupt, allowing no avenues or channels of protest.
 

All this must be seen in the context of heightened ‘national’ and ‘patriotic’ interest on the territory of the state during the Kargil conflict. The earlier ‘conviction’ and ‘assertion’ of the Indian authorities that, after Kargil, militancy would collapse has been disproved comprehensively.
 

Indian arrogance and insensitivity was manifest throughout the Kargil conflict?  The Indian media, most of it, swooped down on Kargil. But none mentioned the people of the state, the people of Jammu and Kashmir, where the war was being fought. Little mention was made then of the displaced persons either. This failure of the Indian media to even cursorily look at the plight of the Kashmiri people, with an ongoing struggle for democratic rights for decades, in my mind, constitutes a significant omission on the part of the Indian media. 
 

Conversely, there was a studied detachment among the local people at the war being waged. Unlike earlier occasions, there was no enthusiasm for the Indian army, throughout the operation, no donations for the jawans were collected, no blood banks held here. No state government ministers, with a few exceptions, even visited the front at the time.
 

I had made a special visit to Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee on this question. This visit was an attempt to apprise the Indian political leadership with the issues crucial to the people of the Valley, the Jammu region and Ladakh. The Shia Muslims who live in Kargil have a continuing disenchantment and discontent with Pakistan across the LOC, so even tactically it would have been wise of India to address their grievances. Though I was given assurances during my meeting with the Prime Minister, nothing has resulted.
 

The Indian government and the Indian people have consistently refused to address the grievances of the state. There is the struggle for Kashmiriyat. There has also been the expression of Jammu Hindus against Kashmiri Muslim domination. There has also been a movement for autonomy within the Ladakh region in which Kargil falls. 
 

For a month or so, things were silent after Kargil. The Pakistan-sponsored militancy movement remained silent. Local disillusionment with Pakistan, US and UN was also simmering. Pakistan had to do something to keep the movement alive. But what helped Pakistan significantly was the chief minister of the state, Farooq Abdullah’s coming out in open support of the BJP. At an RSS-sponsored function, he sang praises for the organisation and went to the extent of declaring that “the RSS is the most patriotic organisation”.
 

The political vacuum, the issue of acute discontent and disenchantment, during Kargil and post-Kargil especially at election-time, was unfortunately not addressed by any Indian political party, not even the so-called ‘secular’ Congress. 
 

The biggest betrayal of the state was in fact by the ‘secular’ Congress, as we can expect nothing from the BJP outside its self-declared divisive agenda. How interested the Congress party is in reflecting the genuine aspirations of the people of the state can be seen from the fact that the party had one member in Parliament and another in the Assembly. It got rid of both leaders, including Mufti Mohammed Sayeed just before the elections simply for suggesting dialogue with the militants. 

Has the party forgotten that during the last Congress government, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s cabinet colleague, Bhuvanesh Chaturvedi (then minister of state in the PM’s office), had, around 1995, offered unconditional talks with militants in Kashmir? How do political parties accept a resolution of the Kashmir issue without having such a dialogue?
 

If the government can talk to Naga leaders in Paris, and other people ‘without conditions’ why not in Kashmir? This was the issue on which Mufti Mohammed Sayeed felt let down and resigned, and the Congress put up a token fight during the recent elections in the state.
 

The failure of secular forces to give an adequate response to the ground-level reality in Jammu and Kashmir was most visible in the failure of established political parties and NGOs and civil liberties groups to campaign for Saifuddin Soz who stood as an independent. It was Soz’s single vote on which the BJP’s central government had fallen.
 

None of the national secular parties have raised a single voice against Farooq Abdullah’s support to the BJP. There has been not a word of disapproval for this open and unprincipled collaboration. The Congress goes to town criticising Sharad Pawar and Mulayam Singh for their individual “hobnobbing with the BJP”. But here is a leader who is openly allying with a communal force and there are no comments, no condemnations, no interventions from the top Congress leadership.
 

Former information and broadcasting minister, Pramod Mahajan was blatant about this cosy relationship before elections were held. On a visit to the state, when asked to comment on the prospects of the BJP-led NDA coming to power, he said that the “six seats from Jammu and Kashmir (all these are seats over which the National Conference had claim) are already in the NDA basket.”
 

How can we complain against the BJP and their agenda? Their agenda is clear and open, as is the Jamaat-e-Islami’s. But Farooq Abdullah’s open support to both these ideologies has been ignored and allowed to pass by secular parties. This is a great act of omission on their part.
 

There is every evidence of a serious comeback of militancy in the state. If militants can get at the very nerve centre of the Indian security system, the army, it means they are back. But what needs to be emphasised is that it is out of sheer desperation that local sentiments are being exploited like this. This is the only way they can express their resentment and that is why there is this silent but growing support for militant activities.
 

The political vacuum, if unaddressed, will be filled by extremists on both sides. The process has been assisted by lack of secular commitment on the part of Indians to the state. In Jammu, the BJP’s failure to meet the aspiration of the Hindu section of the population, will, soon give birth to outfits that are more extremist than the BJP even. 

The local Kashmiri leadership, too, is isolated and cannot be heard. Shabbir Shah is a leader who had projected a more tolerant ideology but whose voice was hardly heard in between. Soon after the recent elections, he and others were jailed by the National Conference without any charge. Why? 
 

Personally, I am not inspired by All-Party Hurriyat Conference, especially after they accepted the leadership of the Jamaat-e-Islami’s Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who is openly pro-Pakistan. Yasin Mallik, who once showed so much potential as the young and daring leader of the secular JKLF, has also fallen in with the official Hurriyat line. None of these Kashmiri leaders, by the way, condemned Pakistan’s conduct during Kargil and that I think was a major failure on all their part. 
 

India is obsessed with blocking the Kashmir issue internationally, outwitting Pakistan etc. Why are we not concerned with trying to solve problems within our control? If we regard the people of the state as our own, why do we not espouse or display any desire to hear their legitimate grievances and thereafter attempt solutions?

I now fear the political eclipse and redundancy of saner voices such as mine in such a situation. Physically, too, I am vulnerable. So far, I have been able to communicate with both sides in the dispute. But with the complete shrinking of space for sane and secular dialogue, I fear that with hardening, extremist stances on both sides, I will lose my space completely. 
 

A far stronger figure, like Gandhiji, found himself redundant in 1947 and eliminated in 1948; what chances has a far smaller man like me under the circumstances?
 

Just like the RSS and the BJP have assumed the sole monopoly on the Indian point of view, the Kashmiri protest movement has increasingly been epitomised by a Pakistani Muslim fundamentalist flavour. On both sides, extremists have taken over. The military coup has not helped matters but generated further confusion.

A very stable and dangerous triangle has emerged after the last elections. 
 

The three points in the triangle are Farooq Abdullah, the BJP (driven by the extremist RSS) and the Hurriyat (now openly supported by a pro-Pakistan, Jamaat-e-Islami).  While the three points of this triangle appear to oppose each other, they are in fact supporting each other. Hindu communalism supports Muslim communalism and an opportunistic National Conference makes political gain for itself, crucially dependant as it is on both the extremes. No points ever threaten each other; they depend on the other for their own survival. 

Archived from Communalism Combat, November 1999, Year 7  No. 53, Cover Story 1

The post Talibanisation of Kashmir appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It was an embarrassing moment for many secularists in India watching Bihar’s Laloo Prasad Yadav’s response on Star TV, prime time, as election results from his state pronounced the near rout of his party in Bihar. “Mr Yadav, do you think this is due to the voters’ disenchantment with the government for lack of any development in the state”. “No”, replied Yadav bravely, “the issue in the election was secularism, not development”.

 Can secularism ever be a one–point agenda unrelated to other concerns of people?  
In the midst of the election campaign in August, a Muslim petty trader, Rehman, was burnt alive at a village market in Orissa. One of the eyewitnesses told the police that Dara Singh — the man charged with the torching alive of Graham Staines and his two sons, in the same state earlier this year — was the man responsible for the latest incident. A week later, a Christian priest, Fr. Arul Doss, too, was done to death in the same state. 

The Bajrang Dal, the RSS and the BJP were quick to condemn such brutal killing of minorities in Congress–ruled Orissa. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad even issued a press statement, maintaining that whoever was responsible behind such killings “could not be a Hindu”. But, ironically, the Congress party — the party that swears by secularism, the only party capable of challenging Hindutva on a national plane, the party that depends crucially on minority votes — maintained a deathly silence. 

Is secularism a mere mantra  — to be enshrined in the party manifesto and chanted reverentially on convenient occasions — which has nothing to do with issues like the security of life and property of all citizens, irrespective of their faith? 

Was secularism an issue at all in the Lok Sabha polls of 1999? To begin with, what does one mean by secularism — not in the academic sense but in terms of how it relates to the lived experience of people?
In the 1991 polls, with the Shiv Sena as its only ally, the BJP secured 120 Lok Sabha seats. With three more allies on its side in 1996, the Akali Dal in Punjab, the George Fernandes–led Samta party in Bihar and the Haryana Vikas Parishad (HVP) in Haryana, the BJP’s tally climbed up to 161. Having emerged as the single largest party, the BJP was invited to form the government and given two weeks to prove its majority in the Lok Sabha. 

But it was still a different India three years ago where the BJP was a political untouchable for most politicians. In the 13 days that his government lasted, Atal Behari Vajpayee and the rest of the saffron stalwarts were unable to win over even a single MP to their side. Leave alone party politicians, even those who had fought and won as independents were unwilling to shake hands with the party whose manifesto contained ‘contentious issues’ — 

Ø Building of a Ram Mandir where the Babri Masjid once stood in Ayodhya; 

ØRemoval of article 370 from the Indian Constitution which grants a special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir;

Ø Introducing a Uniform Civil Code (to replace the different existing personal laws for different religious communities).

Until the BJP’s electoral drubbing in the Assembly elections in UP and elsewhere in late 1993, then BJP president, L.K. Advani, used to revel in the ‘majestic isolation’ of his party. But the acute isolation of 1996 confronted the BJP and its sangh parivar with a difficult choice: retain ‘ideological purity’, remain a political untouchable and make a solo bid to power by hard–selling Hindutva. Alternatively, adopt tactical flexibility and put ‘contentious issues’ on the backburner so as to break out of political isolation.

Since the prospects of coming to power on the strength of its own divisive agenda seemed remote, at least in the current scenario, the BJP and its parivar deviously chose the latter. And reaped rich dividends in the elections of 1998 and 1999. 

The BJP entered the electoral arena for the Lok Sabha polls in February 1998 with 18 allies. Thanks to the alliances, the party improved on its own tally of seats — from 161 in 1996 to 182 in 1998 — and, more importantly, headed a coalition government. But the wafer–thin majority of the BJP–led coalition made Vajpayee hostage to some of his mercurial allies — Jayalalitha being the most obvious. 

On the eve of the 1999 polls, the BJP made yet another quantum leap. In June this year, the Janata Dal, which formed the core of the ‘Third Front’ (the Congress and the BJP being the first two), disintegrated with virtually the entire bulk of the party choosing to ally with the BJP. Leaders like Ram Vilas Paswan and Sharad Yadav, who for years had shouted themselves hoarse at the communalism of the BJP, suddenly had no qualms rallying behind the saffron bandwagon. 

The acceptance of the BJP by virtually the entire political spectrum today is as comprehensive as its political isolation was stark in 1996. If it was Jayalalitha’s AIADMK which teamed up with the BJP in 1998, this time it’s the DMK in Tamil Nadu. If Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference decided to extend support from the outside to the Vajpayee–led government in 1998, this time it fought elections as part of the NDA and is now a part of the government at the Centre. The Telugu Desam Party’s Chandrababu Naidu fought against the BJP in the 1998 polls, agreeing to extend support to the Vajpayee government from the outside only subsequently. This time, the TDP and the BJP jointly fought the Congress in Andhra.

The BJP, which led an 18 party alliance in 1998, now counts on 24 allies. In theory, it now has to lean on many more parties to stay in power. But in practice it also means there are over 300 MPs behind Vajpayee in the Lok Sabha against the precarious figure of 273 in a House of 544. 

What does this augur for secular politics in India?  
Even for some secularists, the present political arrangement is not such a bad thing after all. With only 182 seats of its own — exactly the same number that it had in the last Lok Sabha – the BJP depends crucially on people like Chandrababu Naidu, M. Karunanidhi, Mamata Bannerji, Ramvilas Paswan, Ramkrishna Hegde and others. None of them can afford to ignore minorities’ votes in their respective regions and constituencies. The continued dependence of the BJP on these leaders and parties for their continued hold on power also means, according to these secularists, that issues like Ayodhya, article 370 and the Uniform Civil Code continue to be kept in abeyance. Such a grand alliance also means strengthening the ‘moderates’ and the ‘liberals’ and weakening the hold of the hawks within the sangh parivar. 

If Ayodhya, article 370 and the Uniform Civil Code was all that Indian secularism was about, there may have been some merit in such wishful thinking. But the ‘evil genius’ of the sangh parivar lies precisely in its ability to have, for all practical purposes, reduced the issue of India’s secularism to the BJP’s postponed agenda. 
Be it the reporters who raised questions at BJP’s press conferences during the electoral campaign, or TV anchors and even unsympathetic expert commentators who quizzed BJP leaders before and after the election results, or political parties who in their electoral campaign charged the BJP with playing communal politics. Hardly anyone went beyond asking the BJP to state for how long the issues of Ayodhya, article 370 and the Uniform Civil Code would remain postponed. 

Responding to these queries was, at the worst, a little awkward. Being past–masters in the art of double–speak, different leaders of the BJP and different segments of the sangh parivar said different things at the same time; or the same leader said different things at different points of the electoral campaign. The net result of this was Advantage BJP – the statement of one general secretary, Venkaiah Naidu, convinced the ‘liberals’ and the fence sitters that the BJP is turning ‘moderate’; the statements of another party general secretary, K. Govindacharya, reassured the core supporters of Hindutva that the party remains committed as ever to the Hindu Rashtra ideology.  

Neither the avowedly secular political opponents of the BJP, nor the print and electronic media thought it necessary to educate the voter how in the brief tenure of the BJP at the Centre and in states like U.P. and Gujarat —
Ø Life has come to mean endless anxiety, at best, for Christians and Muslims in Gujarat for nearly two years. After several independent fact–finding teams sent by civil liberties organisations and the National Minorities Commission had established numerous instances of attacks on minorities in Gujarat, Prime Minister Vajpayee, the most ‘liberal face’ of the BJP, visited the state only to return with a call for a “national debate on conversions”.  

Ø There is a sustained effort to infiltrate, capture and pack educational and cultural institutions with men and women known primarily for their commitment to RSS ideology. One such RSS leader, who is now going to decide what children should be taught in schools, proudly asserted in his autobiography how he killed a Muslim woman in 1947 because too many Hindus wanted to enslave her for their own lust! (See Pg. 22). 

Ø For the sangh parivar, Kargil became a convenient pretext to communalise the Indian armed forces.

Ø Attacks on minorities have continued before, during and after the present polls in Gujarat, Orissa and Kanyakumari by votaries of Hindu majoritarianism.

Ø It is not for nothing that both in the previous government and yet again, the home ministry (crime and punishment), the human resources development ministry (education and culture) and the information and broadcasting ministry (mass communications) were retained by the BJP at the insistence of the RSS. 
There can be no doubt that through Vajpayee’s earlier tenure as Prime Minister, and now, the saffron project continues to be advanced through other means, even while ‘contentious issues’ have been put on the back–burner — postponed agenda. Avowedly secular parties, political pundits and the print and electronic media have no perspective of building mass campaigns to raise public awareness on these very concrete issues that directly concern people. They could also be used to mount pressure on many of the BJP’s allies who still claim to have nothing in common with saffron politics. Otherwise, secularism will be progressively reduced to a mere chant, while the sangh parivar increases its stranglehold over society, and state. In preparation for the future Hindu Rashtra..

Archived from Communalism Combat, November 1999, Year 7  No. 53, Polls 99 1

The post Secularism: a mere mantra? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

For Pakistan, responsible for this provocation, the commitment to support Kashmiri ‘freedom fighters’ in their revolt against Indian repression, runs deep — it stems from the Pakistani establishment’s ideological resolve to complete the ‘unfinished agenda of Partition’ despite the fact that the very basis of the two–nation theory has been seriously challenged within Pakistan itself and what we have today is a thoroughly dismembered state. But Kashmir still manages to recapture much of this lost sentiment. 

TheQaid–e–Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s derision for the Kashmiri people (he had dubbed the Quit Kashmir movement of the Muslim–majority Kashmiris against Maharaja Hari Singh as a movement of goondas!) is conveniently forgotten. What is being pursued with single–minded devotion is not just a territorial proxy war but also an attempt to impose the highly regimental Wahabi Islam on a valley renowned for its Rishism (Sufism). Schools and madrasas run by the local Jamaat–e–Islami have been systematically used in a continuing attempt to transform the local struggle for Kashmiriyat to visions of life under Nizam–e–Mustafa (The Order of the Prophet).

For India, too, the discourse in the past week has cynically charted familiar territory. The emphatic assertions about the territorial sovereignty and integrity of the Indian nation resound with a hollow arrogance, echoing through the perceptible absence of any Kashmiri voice in the present discourse. The government’s, the mainstream print media’s and television channels’ black out of the voices of the young leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, Yasin Mallik and senior Kashmiri leader, Shabbir Shah from available public spaces is predictable, given the surge of patriotic fervour that such conflicts engender. But also absent are the views of a Balraj Puri, a senior citizen of Jammu and an ardent advocate of sanity and dialogue, or a Saifuddin Soz, senior MP representing the National Conference. The absence of a wide spectrum of other local opinion from the region, and in that category I would include representatives of ousted Kashmiri Pandits, is a sorry comment on the dearth of democratic space available here.

Why would India be at all committed, morally or otherwise, to promises made to the Kashmiri people in 1947, 1950, 1953 and 1975 when it cannot trust the state with even the bare trappings of democratic governance? The only free and fair elections to that state were in 1977, results of which aroused a Valley–wide euphoria. This legally elected government was, yet again, cynically dismissed by the Centre. Going back even further, even the ‘Lion of Kashmir’, Sheikh Abdullah, was humiliated by his most trusted friend and India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Despite a personal commitment to the region, even Nehru could not overcome his suspicions about the Kashmiri Muslims’ allegiance to India.

How much of the suspicions that have only hardened over the last 50 years have to do with the fact that the avowedly secular Indian state, under both Congress and non–Congress governments, barely trusts the people of a sensitively located region basically because they are overwhelmingly Muslim?

A failure to confront this history has been reflected in the past and continuing conduct of both the government and our troops deployed in the Valley. What comes to mind is more than just the enormity of the human loss, tragedies that have gone un–mourned by the rest of India. The cynical disregard for both the local people and their beliefs can be particularly observed from the Indian state’s apparent equanimity despite the systematic destruction, since 1989, of over 16 revered local shrines dedicated to Rishis, symbolic of inherently Kashmiri, Sufi Islam.

The Amarnath yatra has become for all Indians — not just the pilgrims who dare to make it there — an annual test of our military control over the Valley. Television images of Hindu pilgrims braving the militants’ fire in defence of their faith are both soothing and reassuring. But when Charar–e–Sharif, a glorious, all–wood shrine en route to Yusmarg in the Valley was gutted, the Indian government did not even order an official enquiry. Folklore in the Valley, however, still revolves around the relationship between Sheikh Noor Adam and a Shaivite priestess, Rishi Laleshwari, though the bitterness against an unfeeling government simmers. 

Another 14th century shrine, Khanqah at Tral, 39 kilometers south of Srinagar, very dear to the local people apart from being a symbol of the Valley’s composite culture, was similarly gutted by a mysterious fire on December 18, 1997. The list of betrayals appears endless. There has been not even superficial effort at healing bitter wounds.
Whenever Pakistan’s foreign minister steps on Indian soil, the ‘dialogue’ will chart familiar territory. Both the Pakistanis and their Indian counterparts appear united in one resolve —  keeping the talks at a bilateral level, excluding any representative from the region, despite their lip–service to tripartite talks in the last two years. This will remain an in futility until the voices from the Valley as also Jammu and Ladhakh are heard over the gunfire.    

Archived from Communalism Combat, June 1999, Year 6  No. 54, Cover Story 4

The post Battles in the mind appeared first on SabrangIndia.