(Forest Minister and Law Minister of the PDP, who processed the order of Land Transfer Order, Arun Kumar and Congress Ministry are mainly responsible for bungling the Shrine Board. Shyama Prashad Mukerjee's offer to Nehru may be final solution of regional tensions)
The current polarisation between the people of Jammu and Kashmir, the two principal regions of the state has no precedence. It took place following the government order dated May 26 transferring 800 kanals of land to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board, headed by the Governor and its revocation on July 01.
The popular upsurge in both regions was almost spontaneous. Though initially started around religious slogans and led by religions parties, gradually the secular parties also joined the fray. In Kashmir the demonstrators carried Pakistani and Islamic flags and Syed Ali Shah Geelani's the extremist separatist leader's took the lead and emerged as the rallying personality. He was joined by his arch rival Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, leader of the parallel Hurriyat Conference which represented much larger conglomeration of the separatist groups. The two factions of the Hurriyat were split in 2002. Soon the two mainstream parties—the National Conference and the PDP—joined the protest rallies.
In Jammu the movement was started by the BJP privar, under the banner of Shri Amarnath Sangarsh Samiti, with religions slogans like Har Har Mahadev, other groups including the Jammu Bar Association, headed by a Congress man, organisations of traders and industrialists also joined it. A little later ex Congress ministers, ex MLA's and MP's also supported the demand of the Samiti.
Land for Yatra Issue
The issue on which so much passion has been aroused was very simple. Before May 26, the Shrine Board had no land. All arrangements for the pilgrim were made by departments of the government and local Muslims, including the members of the Muslim Malik family whose ancestors had discovered the Shiv lingam in 1860. The government order for transfer of forest land to the Board was for temporary period of the pilgrim to provide some facilities to the yatris. But the word spread around that it was part of the controversy to settle outside Hindus to change the demography of the state, reducing its Muslim majority to a minority.
While it is fantastic to believe that outsiders can settle at high altitude near the Shrine, the task of those who spread the suspicion was facilitated by the governor and his secretary who was the Chief Executive Officer of the Shrine Board. Instead of leaving the controversy to be handled by his government, as head of the state should have done, he offered the defence of the land transfer order. Moreover the Board had organised many activities which were not within its domain. Whatever be his intentions, these activities were suspected by a large section of Muslims as attempts to reinterpret the concept of Kashmiri Islam and Kashmiriat.
Sinha's secretary Arun Kumar, an IAS officer, who as a civil servant was not expected to issue press statements, said, in his capacity as CEO of the Board that it had purchased the controversial piece of land permanently after payment of Rs 2.5 crores. As it became clear that the land was neither sold not payment had been received by the government. According to the government order of May 26, the government was to get rent from the Board for its temporary use during the period of the pilgrim.
Meanwhile the PDP ministers also joined the popular protest, even though two of its ministers, holding Forest and Law portfolios, who were directly responsible for the land transfer order and its other members in the cabinet, were a party to its unanimous decision. The Law minister rejected the Supreme Court’s direction that transfer of forest land for non-forest purposes should get its clearance. For he ordered that under Article 370, Union Forest (Conservation) Act and hence Supreme Court direction, were not applicable to the state. But swimming with the popular wave the PDP gave notice to the Chief Minister to withdrawn the order of transfer of land by 30 June. If not, it would quit the coalition government. But it quitted a day earlier.
Meanwhile, the new governor NN Vohra who had taken order the charge of his post on June 25, and was ex-officers head of the Shrine Board, intimated to the government on June 29 that if it could provide all facilities, as it used to do, the Board would not need the land for the purpose. On July 1, the government revoked the order of transfer of land to the Board and undertook to make all arrangements for facilities of the pilgrims. The Board, it added, could take care of religious rituals and ceremonies at the Shrine. The government which was exclusive of Congress ministers did not take account the possible reaction in Jammu.
Reaction in Jammu
As soon as the governor wrote his letter to the government, situation tended to clam down in Kashmir, but it provoked spontaneous protest in Jammu. The bandhs continued till July 8. The civil society intervened to appeal to the people of Jammu to first insist on complete communal harmony, then not to condemn people of Kashmir, whatever grievances they might have against their leaders or the government. Thirdly adopt peaceful method of protest. The Samiti’s response was positive. It sought cooperation of Muslims. The BJP national president Rajnath Singh met Muslim leaders of Jammu and appreciated their cooperation. Despite initial aberrations when some anti-social elements attacked Muslims and burnt their hutments here and there, Muslims joined in joint protest demonstrations mostly in Hindu majority part of Jammu for not only immediate issue of restoration of land to the Shrine Board but also against what they called continued discrimination against the people of Jammu, of which they were the worst sufferers.
After some days of blockade of Kashmir, Advani, on my request, opposed it, followed by similar opposition to it by the Sangarsh Samiti, the BJP, Chamber of Commerce and other organisations. Thirdly the Samiti opted for peaceful methods of protest, like hunger strike and dharnas.
Inflamed Passions
July 8 to 23 was a time when a consensus could be worked out between leaders of the two regions. But on July 23, a youngman Kuldip Varma committed suicide for the cause of the Shrine Board. The way his dead body was handled and desecrated by the police, who forcibly removed it form the city to his ancestor village and tried to cremate it, was prohibited among Hindus. It inflamed the popular sentiments and revived the violent nature of popular protest followed by curfews.
It was in this surcharged atmosphere that the governor visited Jammu on July 31 and invited the Sangrash Samiti for talks. The Samiti insisted on concrete proposal from the governor in the absence of which it declined to meet him. It also resented participation of Kashmri leaders like Farooq Abdullah, the patron of National Conference and Mehbooba Mufti, president of the PDP in the all party conference that the governor had proposed on the following day. They were kept hostage at the airport for three hours by angry crowds till they were rescued and brought to the Raj Bhawan under heavy police escort.
The Prime Minister had to intervene in the situation and apart from speaking to the BJP leaders, convened an all party conference on August 6 which decided to send a delegation to Jammu for talks with the Sangrash Samiti on August 9. The Samiti objected to the presence of Kashmiri leaders Farooq Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti, the state Congress Chief Saif-ud-Din Soz in the meeting on 10 August. It eventually agreed to meet the all party delegation after Kashmiri leaders left Jammu. Though ice seems to have been broken, the talks were inconclusive.
The delegation left for Srinagar next day to have similar talks with the Kashmiri leaders. Various formulae were mooted but yet no commonly accepted solution is in sight till the leaders of the two regions agree to meet. So far dialogue is confined between the Governor's panel and the Amarnath Yatra Sangarsh Samiti. It had three rounds and fourth, which is may be conclusive is expected to he held any day. But its reaction in Kashmir is any body's guess.
Meanwhile Kashmir had again flared up by reports as well as rumours of atrocities on Muslims of Jammu by the agitation and blockade of supplies to Kashmir and export of fruit from it on the highway despite official denials. Crores of rupees worth fruit was, alleged to have rotten due to the blockade. The fruit traders moved to the Srinagar Muzaffarbad road supported by not only separatist parties but also some mainstream leaders and large number of people. The Home Minister, who was in Srinagar, assured that blockade had been completely cleared and promised to pay compensation to the loss that the fruit exporters had suffered.
The firing on a march to Muzaffarbad on August 11 took a toll of 7 lives, including Hurriyat leader Sheikh Abdul Aziz. The massive march had taken place despite the assurance of the Home Minister that there was no blockade. The funeral procession of Sheikh Abdul Aziz was attended by a larger number raising slogans of Azadi and even for Pakistan. The Hurriyat leaders had declared that land to the Shrine Board was no longer their main objective which was right of self-determination, withdrawal of draconian release of prisoners. A prolonged curfew has been imposed in most parts of the valley and Hurriyat leaders have been detained. The demonstrations and clashes with security forces were resumed thereafter, taking a toll of 22 persons. Meanwhile the agitation and bandh in Jammu continued. The continuous bandh for 40 days agitation for 60 day till the end of August are a record in Jammu.
Though the movement led by the Sangarsh Samiti is being supported by the Muslim leaders in Hindu majority districts of Jammu, communal tension started in Muslim majority districts of Rajouri, Poonch and Doda, partly as a reaction to sporadic attacks by undisciplined anti social elements on bus passengers en route to these places and partly due to the sympathy expressed by local Muslims with the victims of firing in Kashmir.
By now the emotional and political divide between the two regions had become widest ever. While immediate causes of regional divide with some communal overtones have been described in bare outlines, they do not touch the root cause of the ever widening regional divide.
It is worth noting that the recent unprecedented popular upsurge in Kashmir started at a time when militancy was at its lowest ebb and the separatists lost sympathy of the new Pakistan government. Much of their local support had been encroached upon by the mainstream parties which tried to be better champions of Kashmiri aspirations. Syed Ali Shah Geelani was a person a non-grata with the Musharraf regime and more so with his successor civil government. The new Pakistan government gave recognition and reception to mainstream leaders like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti and cold shouldered Mirwaiz and other separatist leaders.
Regional Grievances
Militancy was the main outlet of popular alienation in Kashmir which has many local causes and for which the government of India was as much responsible as ISI or Pakistan. As that outlet tended to close, Shrine Board controversy provided an alternative outlet. Likewise, Jammu had been nursing a grievance against what its people perceive to be Kashmiri raj in which they had been discriminated against. The current agitation is essentially an outlet for the pent up regional grievances.
While alienation in Kashmir seeks outlet in secession, militancy or religious orthodoxy, in Jammu its traditional outlets have been communalism or ultra nationalism i.e. integrationist slogans like abrogation of Article 370.
Unless and until aspirations of the three ethnically distinct regions of the state are reconciled, the tension would cause one complication or the other in the Kashmir problem. Even it the current tussle over land transfer to the Shrine Board is resolved, root cause of the trouble would seek other outlets to burst out.
History of Grievances
I became conscious of the importance of this fact soon after the state's accession to India in 1947. I had warned Prime Minister Nehru of the consequences of the simmering discontent in Jammu soon after state's accession to India. His reply was that while a Kashmiri leader would be the head of the Government, Jammu's Maharaja would be the head of the state. This should satisfy both the regions. I argued that the arrangement was unjust to Jammu. For while political power will remain with Kashmiri leaders, people of Jammu would merely have an illusion that their man was living in the palace, who was a constitutional head, without any power and access. Nehru pleaded to let this "unstable stability" a trial.
The trial did not last too long. The Maharaja and Sheikh Abdullah were not even on speaking terms. By June 1949, the Maharaja had to abdicate in favour of his son Karan Singh. After a prolonged campaign, I was able to persuade Nehru and Abdullah to declare on July 24, 1952 at a joint press conference, that the constitution of the state, when framed, would provide for regional autonomy. This would have provided a lasting solution of relations between Kashmir and Jammu regions, and to the Kashmir problem. But the Praja Parishad, Jammu affiliate of the Bhartiya Jana Sangh, started an agitation against the Delhi agreement on Centre-State relations, supplemented by the State-Region relations. Dr.Shyama Prasad Mukerjee the founder president of the Jana Sangh came to lend support of his party to it. He was kept in detention at Chashma Shahi guest house in Srinagar. During a prolonged correspondence with Nehru, he offered, in his letter dated February 17, 1953 to support the Delhi agreement and Article 370 provided regional autonomy was also granted. Nehru replied that this was granted in July 1952 and if he had realised his mistake, he should withdraw the agitation. Unfortunately he died in June 1953 in Srinagar jail before the final agreement between his party and Nehru could be announced.
Meanwhile the state government sent a 45 page draft on regional autonomy to Durga Das Verma, the underground leader of the Parishad agitation. After consulting some constitutional experts, he returned the draft with his party's approval. Eventually the agitation was withdrawn after Nehru's assurance on regional autonomy to the Praja Parishad leaders, who after their release, went to Delhi to meet him on July 3, 1953. But according to Balraj Madhok, who became the president of the Jana Sangh, after some time later, the party reversed this decision after some months on the direction of the RSS.
Thus, Jammu missed an opportunity of getting a status of equality with Kashmir. Jammu missed another opportunity of acquiring such a status when Gajendragadhkar Commission, on the basis of a representation of the Jammu Autonomy Forum, which I headed, conceded in its report in 1967 that regional autonomy would be an ideal solution of regional grievances but it did not recommend it as the idea was opposed by most of the leaders of Jammu. The national executive of the Bhartiya Jana Sangh which met at Shimla in the same year dubbed the idea of regional autonomy as anti-national. Despite its opposition, the idea continued to gain popular support from all communities of Jammu region, particularly in Muslim majority districts of Rajouri, Poonch and Doda as also most of the secular parties of India.
Sheikh Abdullah and Autonomy
The J&K State People's Convention, convened by Sheikh Abdullah in 1968, representing the entire political spectrum of the valley, including Jamat-e-Islami, Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq, pro-Pakistan political conference leader GM Karra, besides Plebiscite Front adopted internal constitution of the state drafted by me which provided for regional autonomy and further devolution of power to districts, blocks and Panchayats.
In early seventies when Indira-Abdullah talks were going on, Indira asked me what would be reaction of Jammu if the Sheikh returned to power. I assured her that his commitment of regional autonomy would satisfy the people of the region. She wanted this commitment to be reiterated which he agreed to do. He convened a convention of leaders of Jammu and Ladakh in 1974 where he reiterated his commitment of regional autonomy.
As head of the Regional Autonomy Committee, appointed by the then Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, I elaborated the concept further. It included an eight point objective and equitable formula for allocation of funds to regions and sub-regions viz population, area, road mileage in proportion to area, share in state services, share in admissions to higher and technical education, infant mortality, female literacy and contribution to state exchequer.
Importance of Regional Autonomy
Regional identities are the greatest secularising force in the state. Any weakening of them might lead to division of the state on religious lines which are not in the interest of Jammu, Kashmir or the nation. There was a time when the BJP party and the government headed by it at the Centre had proposed for such a division. I argued with Advani, who was the deputy Prime Minister in that government of the dangerous consequences of the move. Eventually he agreed with my arguments against division of the state and in favour of regional autonomy as a solution to the Jammu problem. He asked me to revive that idea. The government law minister also declared that parliament had no power to abrogate article 370, which, in any case, had nothing to do with the Jammu problem.
Meanwhile all Left parties and the socialist groups supported the idea of the regional autonomy. I wanted it to be included in the Common Minimum programme of the Congress and the People Democratic Party agreed upon after 2002 election before forming a coalition government. But Dr. Manmohan Singh told me that the Jammu Congress leaders were not keen it to be included in it to be included in the CMP.
Recently National Conference passed a resolution in its favour. It could be a basis of a dialogue with all Kashmir centric parties. For if as per PPP leader Asif Zardari Indo-Pak relations cannot be held hostage to Kashmir problem, the leaders of Kashmir based parties should also realise that regional harmony should not be held hostage to what they call final solution of the Kashmir problem. Thus the natural course that the Jammu agitation should adopt is to convert it or follow by a movement for regional autonomy; so that popular energy spent on it yields optimum results and takes care of the political aspirations of Jammu which is the root cause of this pent up anger.
The demand for Regional Autonomy and further devolution of power at district, block and panchayat level, on the pattern of Panchayati Raj in the rest of the country would not only go a long way in addressing aspirations of people of Jammu and Ladakh but would also safeguard unique identity and civilization of valley. The world over in any democratic setup centralised polity has been substituted by a federal and decentralised structure which goes a long way in empowering people at the grassroots level. It is all the more necessary in the most diverse state of India which alone can harmonize its diversities and satisfy basic human urges of empowerment and identity.
By Balraj Puri
The author of the article is a renowned social activist, writer and journalist known for his unbiased voice on J&K issue for the last six decades.
|
|
Comments:
