Elections, a beginning

The Hurriyat is a fractured combination that may not last in its present form when there is a let-up in the current phase of confrontation between India and Pakistan. The hardliners dominate and they have the Islamabad-sent terrorists at their command. The Hurriyat’s demand for associating Pakistan with the talks is understandable but it is putting the cart before the horse. It goes without saying that Islamabad will be brought into the picture before any agreement. New Delhi has itself conceded this in the Simla agreement that representatives of the two sides will meet “for the final settlement on Jammu and Kashmir”.

Dictated by Abdul Ghani Bhatt and Syed Ali Shah, the Hurriyat is spoiling its case by openly siding with Pakistan. The frequency with which the two are in and out of the Pakistan High Commission at Delhi has already raised doubts about their credentials. In fact, the entire Hurriyat has come under suspicion because of people like them. What is not realised is that the terrorists are only creating an anti-Kashmiri feeling in India. How does the present role of the Hurriyat help? As an adversary, it has annoyed even those parts of the country, which used to shrug their shoulders whenever the name of Kashmir was mentioned. And the Hurriyat stand on the Kashmiri pandits makes little sense when its chief Bhatt says that their return to the Valley would depend on the solution of Kashmir.

The Hurriyat has allowed itself to be hijacked by the fundamentalists. They have given religious colouring to a movement which began as a revolt against the rigged state elections in 1987. Still worse is the Hurriyat’s entire focus on the preponderant Muslim-populated Valley. This has alienated two other parts of the state — Jammu with its Hindu majority and Ladakh with its Buddhist majority. Influential official circles in Pakistan do not hide the fact that they want only the Valley. General Pervez Musharraf’s reiteration that ‘‘Kashmir resides in the hearts of Pakistanis’’ only whips up the sentiment; it does not solve the problem.

There is little thinking on the harm the division of the state on communal lines would do to whatever secularism is left in India after the Gujarat carnage. Islamabad is riding the horse of fanaticism and sponsoring terrorists with instructions to select Hindus for their bullets for repercussions in the rest of India.

If Islamabad wants a solution of Kashmir — so do members of the international community — the communal divide has to be ruled out. Unfortunately, Pakistan and its cat’s paw, the Hurriyat, have nothing else on their mind.

There is no doubt that leaders like Malik have failed to influence the thinking of the hardliners in the Hurriyat. But he can take the credit for changing people in the Valley from their tilt towards Pakistan to independence. Is such a solution possible? Islamabad may be encouraging it because it believes that the independent Valley will ultimately join Pakistan. No such proposition is saleable to any political party in India, much less to the ruling BJP which wants to scrap even Article 370 that gives a special status to Kashmir. Even the demand for autonomy whereby four or five subjects are administered by the Centre and the rest by Jammu and Kashmir has been rejected by the BJP-led Central government despite the State Assembly passing a resolution to that effect.

The prime minister, in his Kumarakam musings last year, said that he did not want to traverse the beaten path. Surely, after 50 years there has to be something tangible. Even the military, which has now become part of Kashmir’s landscape, says that the solution has to be political. The reason why the problem has been hanging fire for so long is probably the absence of a policy on Kashmir.

A fair, free election is the means, not the end. Where do we go from there? It cannot be one set of rulers going out and another set coming in. Secession in any form is ruled out but has any exercise been made to find out what else is acceptable to the Valley? Economic package is all right but this alone cannot meet the aspirations of Kashmiris.

New Delhi should realise that it is also to blame for the mess in the state. People were never allowed to rule themselves as was the case in other parts of the country. Election after election was rigged to install the government the rulers in New Delhi found convenient. The administration was repressive and unaccountable. There were innumerable human rights violations. Every protest or dissenter was suppressed because New Delhi did not know what it wanted to achieve. That is still the case.