The Hindu Business Line : J&K: Welcome to paradise on Earth

Terror attacks in Jammu and Kashmir may be dropping and the people may be seeking power, water and roads. Yet, to say that peace has returned to the Valley would be a gross exaggeration, as neither the ISI nor such other outfits would give up the `proxy war' or the jehad. Measures of `self-governance' need a closer look in J&K, says G. Parthasarathy.

`WELCOME TO Paradise on Earth' reads the huge signboard under snow-capped mountains surrounding the Kashmir hill resort of Gulmarg. It was at this location, full of relaxed tourists from all parts of India, ranging from Gujarat to Karnataka, that the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister, Mufti Mohammed Syed, inaugurated the highest cable-car ropeway in the world on May 28. Worn out by 15 years of terrorism in the garb of jehad, the people of Kashmir are yearning for a return to peace and normalcy.

Like the rest of the country, `Rojgari', `Sadak' and `Bijli' (employment, roads and electricity) are more important issues than violence in the mythical quest for Azadi. Hurriyat leaders, whose influence was in any case confined to the Kashmir valley, are now seen as a bunch of squabbling politicians, afraid of the guns of the jehadis. They still strangely believe that their role can be sanctified only by kow-towing to the rulers in Islamabad.

People in J&K today primarily yearn for good and honest governance. This has to be combined with security measures that are effective, but not heavy handed, or humiliating. At the same, we have to devise arrangements to ensure that schemes such as the Wullar Barrage and the Baglihar and Kishenganga hydro-electric projects are not delayed because of Pakistani stonewalling.

While people in Kashmir yearn for an end to terrorist violence and consequent combing operations by security forces, there are ground realities that cannot be ignored. Terrorist violence is still a feature of everyday life in Kashmir, though the terrorists have become more selective in choosing their victims.

Newly-inducted units of security forces and politicians who join the democratic process remain their favourite targets. The infrastructure for terrorism remains intact across the Line of Control, with the ISI-sponsored `United Jihad Council' openly averring that it will continue its jehad, regardless of the assurance that the Pakistani President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, gave the then Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, on January 6, 2004 that he would not allow territory under Pakistan's control to be used for terrorism in any manner.

I was recently asked if Gen Musharraf had developed a "change of heart" in his approach to relations with India. My response was that while I had not heard of the good General having undergone bypass heart surgery or a heart transplant, I was intrigued that despite his many promises, the `United Jihad Council' remained as active as ever.

Shortly after assuming office, Dr Manmohan Singh told columnist Jonathan Powers: "Short of secession, short of redrawing boundaries, the Indian establishment can live with anything. We need soft borders - (and) then borders are not so important. People on both sides of the LoC should be able to move freely."

Gen Musharraf thereafter told Mr Natwar Singh on July 23, 2004 that he expected that the Kashmir issue should be resolved within a "reasonable time frame" of one and a half years. He thus wanted a solution to this vexed issue by February 2006.

On October 26, 2004, Gen Musharraf sprung a `surprise' by declaring that neither a plebiscite, nor converting the LoC into an international border was acceptable. He added that J&K should be divided into seven different areas, with each area coming under Joint Indo-Pakistan control, declaring independence, or being subject to a UN Mandate.

Gen Musharraf also spoke of `demilitarisation' of the entire State. The seven-region proposal constituted a division of J&K on religious lines. Dr Manmohan Singh rejected this proposal stating: "Any proposal that smacks of a further division of our country on the basis of religion is not going to be acceptable to us."

Gen Musharraf sprang yet another `surprise' to bewildered Indian journalists and politicians last month by again harping on `demilitarisation' of Kashmir. He appeared to endorse the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh's call for `soft boundaries' by suggesting that boundaries become `irrelevant'.

At the same time, he echoed what he said last year when he implicitly called for dividing Kashmir on `regional' lines. He avoided acknowledging that in Kashmir, each region has its distinct religious, ethnic and linguistic identity.

He also glossed over what he asserted on March 27, 2005 that the Kashmir dispute had to be solved soon if `new Kargils' are to be avoided. Gen Musharraf's proposals on `demilitarisation' have been ardently echoed by `liberal' Pakistani `intellectuals' such as the former Finance Minister, Dr Mubashir Hasan.

Like Gen Musharraf, Pakistan's self-styled `liberals' would love to have the Indian army withdrawn from the valley and denied any role in dealing with internal security in Jammu and Kashmir, in the name of `demilitarisation', even while stating that India would be responsible for the defence of its borders with China, in Ladakh.

Surely, the likes of Gen Musharraf and Dr Mubashir Hasan do not think we are naïve. Given our experiences of 1947, 1965 and 1999 and Pakistan's continuing `proxy war' in Kashmir since 1990, no government in India is going to pull its forces out of the State, or abdicate its powers and responsibilities on internal security.

Second, how can we expeditiously move forces to our border with China if the Valley is to be demilitarised? Further, if we were to `demilitarise' Jammu, would Pakistan pull back its strike formations by a couple of hundred kilometres from the border? Would Pakistan `demilitarise' the Northern Areas if we pull back in Kargil?

What we can, therefore, realistically consider when the Pakistan-sponsored `Proxy War' ends, is measured de-induction of forces and redeployment in designated areas. `Demilitarisation' is a non-starter. Gen Musharraf appears to be buying time and coming up with ostensibly new `ideas' to claim `flexibility' on Kashmir every second day. There is no need for us to respond to everything he says.

His `proposals' are similar to those of the New York-based `Kashmir Study Group'. This Group has little credibility or clout today with the Bush Administration.

Pakistan's continuing ambition has been to seek a division of Kashmir on the basis of the `Chenab Formula', which would result in the LoC being shifted in a manner that would give it control of the Kashmir Valley and Muslim dominated areas of the Jammu Region. Its minimalist expectation remains that the Kashmir valley should fall into its lap, along with the establishment of special links with the Jammu Region.

In both cases, the aim is to effect changes in the boundaries of the State on religious lines. Realistic minded Pakistanis, however, now appear to recognise that like the Lashkar-e-Taiba's ambition of wanting to raise the green flag of Islam on the Red Fort in Delhi, Pakistan has to moderate its rather exaggerated ambitions on J&K, especially in the prevailing international environment. Gen Musharraf's proposals for increasing measures of `self-governance' in J&K, however, merit consideration.

We could explore possibilities for equivalent `self-governance' on both sides of the LoC, including in the Pakistan-occupied Northern Areas.

We could also consider setting up forums comprising all sections of people in Jammu and Kashmir — Dogras, Gujjars, Bakarwals, Mirpuris, Pandits, Kashmiri Sunnis, Shias from Kargil, Gilgit and Baltistan and Ladakhi Buddhists — to examine if there could be some consensus on defining their common aspirations.

All this will naturally have to be supplemented, with measures to ensure that people who came into PoK and the Northern Areas after 1947 are persuaded to return to their original homes. Unlike in J&K, there have been significant changes in the ethnic and sectarian composition of the population across the LoC.

(The author is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan.)

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Economics, left behind

A miracle called Airbus 380

They too are enterprising

The death of fiscal federalism?

J&K: Welcome to paradise on Earth

RBI's MIFOR move spurs...
Search for floating rupee benchmarks

Public sector banks

Free power