Amidst a groundswell of anger and scepticism, Union home minister P Chidambaram heading the all-party delegation began his three-day sojourn by promising the people of Kashmir that “their future, honour and dignity are secure as part of India”. Tailoring his promise to political expedience and ignoring the need to operate at humane levels, he seems to have missed an opportunity of building momentum for peace-making.
In the sensitised atmosphere of Tangmarg where a small gathering was carefully selected by the local MLA, also the state agriculture minister, to save the visiting delegation from embarrassment, a boy asked Chidambaram: “Sir, on one side you say Kashmir is your integral part but on the other side you shower bullets on us. Why don’t you feel pain while giving pain?” Another boy asked, “Security forces protect the people in other states, why do they kill the innocent in Kashmir?”
Instead of promises that nobody in Kashmir accepts at face value owing to bitter experiences, the home minister would have been better advised to begin his journey by displaying some remorse for the 109 deaths at the hands of forces under his control. This would not have lowered his prestige. Rather, it could have struck the right note. People suffering immensely would have construed the gesture as a departure from the rigid policies of the past. Moreover, Chidambaram’s show of compassion would have melted the man on the street, thus enabling a heart-to-heart dialogue.
On the contrary, the delegation visited at a time when the entire Valley was reeling under severe curfew. Residents referred to the parliamentarians as a “curfewed delegation”. Not missing the irony, The New York Times reported, “The delegation’s procession of white Ambassador sedans passed along empty streets and shuttered shops, with officers posted every 50 yards with machine guns. If the delegation had come to reach out to Kashmir, it was extending its hand through barbed wire”.
On the plus side, it was good that the delegation came at a time when the Valley is on the boil. It would have helped the Members of Parliament judge for themselves the level of alienation and drift prevalent. The national media through jingoistic reporting has tried its best to keep the people of India unaware about the conditions on the ground. The all-party delegation met a cross-section, including separatists, during its stay in Kashmir as and Jammu. Delegation members would also have acquainted themselves with the intricacies and differing aspirations.
Separatists in Kashmir describe the visit as a “cosmetic” exercise. It is too early to call it a waste of effort.
Indeed, there is a sense of urgency in Delhi to restore normalcy in the Valley,
and people in Jammu and Kashmir also desire sustainable peace. Yet a stalemate persists, as there is a yawning gap between Delhi’s understanding and Kashmir’s expectations. New Delhi basically views the present unrest as an outcome of “governance deficit”.
Flanked by the leaders of different political parties and the chief minister, Omar Abdullah, Chidambaram said the delegation would give a hearing to the grievances of the people.
However, New Delhi is still not ready to travel the extra mile. A risk-averse UPA seems to traverse only the beaten track. Providing a clue about the thinking in the government, Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee reportedly said the “government will not hold back on resources to support the development of J&K”. Going by experience New Delhi might like to see confidence-building measures as an end in itself.
From the Kashmiri point of view, the preset uprising is driven by aspirations and not by grievances as New Delhi thinks. Grievances versus aspirations are irreconcilable positions. Beyond a point, New Delhi is not in a position to concede and Kashmiris are not ready to budge an inch. Kashmiris have been struggling for their rights for almost five generations; it makes the dispute an intractable conflict.
Aspiring for peace is a natural human instinct, precipitating conflict the act of a tainted mind. Columnist Swapan Dasgupta has argued: “It would be fair to suggest that the resolve of the security forces in the Kashmir Valley hasn’t eroded — although there is an urgent need to fine-tune its crowd control methods. What has waned, however, is the endurance level of the political dispensation in Delhi.”
One fails to understand what Dasgupta is trying to suggest. If efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Kashmir problem imply a waning of endurance, then does he advocate endurance of a bloody conflict for all time to come?
One cannot but tear one’s hair in despair at the level to which otherwise well-meaning people, driven by hate, can stoop. Is Dasgupta aware of the colossal price paid by this region in tugging along the baggage of history and enduring conflict for the last 63 years? It is a matter of fact that the subcontinent has failed to realise its true potential because of this senseless conflict. If and when the conflict over Kashmir is resolved, it will help release enormous recourses otherwise devoted to oil the mighty military machine of both India and Pakistan. Seventy per cent of the population in India lives on less than a dollar a day and Pakistan is at the brink of being declared a failed state.
There is a tremendous urgency to undertake a cost analysis; the subcontinent’s people deserve to know the impact of the Kashmir dispute on the region’s geopolitics and the economies of India and Pakistan. Unable to forge peace, India and Pakistan are busy settling scores in Kabul, thus widening the conflict and enhancing the risk of unforeseen disastrous consequences.
Continued suppression and political uncertainty has dehumanised Kashmiri society. A new generation has been exposed to deadly and extremist ideologies.
When Kashmir suffers, can India stop the spread of hate to the rest of the country?
Is it difficult to anticipate the action-reaction process: jihadi terrorism pitched against saffron terror? The time has come to imagine peace and to not endure conflict any longer.