Do even Kashmiris know what they want ?

Why is Congress and Left Lib intlectual and media outraging most Kashmir?

Atrticle first published +ABP NEWS  Click here to read 

A Kashmiri family walks past paramilitary troopers standing guard during a curfew, in downtown Srinagar on July 15, 2016. PIC/AFP. (courtesy +ABP NEWS 

Resurfacing after his most recent – now famous and frequent – R&R break, when Rahul Gandhi thundered -“Lack of foresight & poor management has led to the escalation of violence in Kashmir” – a witty Twitter buddy quipped: “Is he referring to Nehru?”

 It is actually ironical that, this statement could well be applied to any politician dealing with Kashmir – in the last 70 years. No doubt Jawaharlal Nehru made a massive political gaffe – that even the Nehru-Gandhi family and their apologists will find difficult to contest — on the referendum proposal.

 But, looking at it counter-factually – would things have been any different in Jammu & Kashmir today if he had not capitulated then? Arguably, not.

 But, a lot can be said and questioned about the handling of Jammu & Kashmir by successive Governments since Independence. It may be true that, without the shadow of the referendum faux pas, India could have been less apologetic or defensive in its Kashmir strategy. But, only so.

 If it were Pakistan’s state policy to keep the Kashmir issue on the boil as an eternal bone of contention with India, it would not have relented on strategy just for the lack of a purported UN Resolution.

Equally, professional jihadists – whether sponsored from across the border or sons of the soil – would not have stayed idle waiting for the earlier editions of promised “acche din” to arrive.

There is little reason to believe that, in the absence of insurgency and internal strife, Jammu & Kashmir would have developed at a faster clip than the rest of India since Independence. Therefore, the much-flogged justification of separatism, unfulfilled ‘aspirations’ of Kashmiri youth, would have still been there either way.

 In trying to tackle a seemingly insurmountable problem with knee-jerk, short sighted and, at times, ill-conceived solutions, the Indian state has progressively complicated the situation in Kashmir Valley. In the process, it has also created huge cesspools of vested interests not just in political circles but an entire ecosystem that thrives on “Kashmir war chests” on both sides of the LoC.

Although no real industrial development took place in Kashmir Valley, several ‘soft-skill’ enterprises flourished. These range from NGOs to media and, so-called, Track 2 “Kashmir Experts” (or call them the neo-KPs, Kashmiri ‘Pundits’ of a different kind) comprising politicians, journalists, retired bureaucrats, diplomats on sinecure, hibernating intelligence sleuths and even former Generals. They are like quacks to those patients with psychosomatic ailments keep running to.

Finally, there are the touts, brokers and middlemen coming in all forms and hues.

With each passing day these interest groups are growing deeper and wider roots. In trying to counter them, new ones are created and that becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.

The old Dogra Royalty may be on the wane but new political dynasties have emerged who want to rule Jammu & Kashmir —  keeping their families and partners safely ensconced in Delhi or London. But, obviously the rewards of power are far too lucrative for them not to answer the call of the valley.

Against this backdrop, the BJP is the only national political party that has an ideological position on Jammu & Kashmir rather than just a political one. Retaining Jammu & Kashmir as an integral part of India for the BJP is part of its belief system – for which their leader Syama Prasad Mookerjee – the founder of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh — laid down his life.

The BJP and RSS are committed to the idea of Jammu & Kashmir being integral to India, which is not negotiable as far as they are concerned.

But, for Congress and others it is more a matter of political compulsion or geostrategic imperative. One may recall – from time to time – the Congress has in the past tried to soft-pedal a “let go” policy on Kashmir, especially through friendly journalists.

That makes the task of Narendra Modi’s Government all the more unenviable. Any signs of a pragmatic pact with a “Kashmiri” party like PDP immediately draws flak from the BJP’s core constituency of Jammu Hindus and Kashmiri Pandits.

On the other hand, the slightest offensive against militants immediately has the entire world – most notably the Lutyens’s Liberals — coming down upon them like a cloudburst in Srinagar and New Delhi.

One does not recall so much outrage on the decades of military action in the valley as over firing pellet guns in Srinagar (not that the former justifies the latter). The protests after Hizbul Mujahideen Commander Burhan Wani’s death received more prime time and front-page coverage in Indian media than what one can remember about the anti-Kashmiri Pandit pogrom in the valley in the 1980s.

Interestingly, if one cares to note, it is the Congress, the Left and their friends in the media who have been most vocal in attacking the Central Government on Kashmir. In comparison, one has not heard the voices of other political parties, especially the regional biggies at all. Is there a story in that too?

With BJP-PDP 2.0 in power – with the more strident Mehbooba Mufti following a protracted courtship – Jammu & Kashmir watchers assumed that the BJP had put on anklets that would deter New Delhi from taking a hard line against militants.

Suddenly realisation seems to have dawned that power sharing does not necessarily mean going soft on separatists. The Prime Minister’s silence and even Mehbooba’s muted reaction to the events of past week has further brought home this message. This has rattled the self-appointed conscience keepers of the Kashmiri cause.

The question one is inclined to ask these “neo KPs” is: can the Kashmiris be so counter-intuitive to believe that their lot would be better either under independent self-rule or in Pakistan?

How many of their youth who are being sacrificed in the self-styled jihad for ‘Azadi’ really understand what it entails for them. If unfulfilled ‘aspiration’ is really the cause for their taking up arms, as some intellectuals suggest, do they think their fellow Kashmiris across the border are any better off?

If the leaders and benefactors were really serious about their welfare and future of Kashmiris, they would negotiate with the Central Government on a specific agenda for development, health-care, skill-building and employment generation, rather than lead them to a mirage of jannat.

Sadly, ordinary Kashmiris do not seem to know what they really want.

Making haste slowly - 200 days of Modi Sarkar

I was unapologetic about rooting for Narendra Modi  through his Prime Ministerial campaign – though I don’t consider myself to be either a ‘Bhakt’ , as Modi fans are snidely called, or a "Hindutva" die-hard.  Now even after 7 months of his Premiership I still believe he is the best  we could have had.  However, in the same vein, I am not an unqualified supporter of the BJP. In fact, one of the reason for my admiring Modi is that he has been trying to reinvent and re-engineer the BJP for the 21^st century – while the Congress and other regional parties have been regressing under the pressure of pseudo socialism, dynastic and identity politics.

Looking back,  I am not at all disappointed with what the Modi government has achieved in 200 days.   Modi’s foreign policy initiatives were well calibrated, as he realized establishing his profile globally would be essential for him to be the leader of an aspiring super-power.  Besides, he needed to build personal rapport and strike a chemistry with his international peers – given the negative image over-hand  he was burdened with (unfairly, I believe).  The criticism about his foreign tours, I think – were more out of envy and for outsmarting both his predecessors and the self-appointed foreign policy specialists of the country.

Also I don’t think much more could have been achieved on the internal front. The quiet progress made on governance – improvement in the government’s work culture, empowerment of the bureaucracy and building of business confidence have gone largely unnoticed by the domestic constituency obsessed with big ticket reforms.  Far from being cynical, I see merit in his ‘making haste slowly’ and even appreciate the so called “U-turns” in policy – which only shows his courage to accept mistakes and eschew election rhetoric  to do what is right for the country and the economy.

Contrary to what popular commentators (for whom there is only Left or Right and nothing in-between) and the opposition still recovering from psychological trauma after their total rout would like us to believe – those who voted for Modi – do not necessarily see him as a Messiah with a magic wand. Credit them with the minimum intelligence to differentiate between election rhetoric and what is practical in a real politik. Therefore,  much to their disappointment,  #Modi is still high on the ratings in post-poll satisfaction surveys.  If further proof were needed, look at the by-poll results of Jharkhand and even J&K.  On the global front – he has made his mark - and  world leaders are falling over each other trying  to woo him. Successive studies have placed him at the top or near the top of the pecking order of high performing leaders in the world today.

Difficult decisions have also been taken keeping them below the radar.  Be it rise in railway fare or neutralizing some of the reduction in oil bills through additional excise duty. His critics have in hindsight seen merit in the way the WTO negotiations were handled. After a lot of deft maneuvering through choppy political waters - the government seems close to passing GST and Insurance sector reforms. Private sector participation in Defence equipment Manufacture and PPP in Railways already cleared. 

While leading foreign policy from the front (as any Prime Minister ought to do) – he has been making good use of Sushma Swaraj in opening parallel fronts (eg with Vietnam and SAARC Countries) and even co-opting the President in Diplomacy. Though not exactly in the realm of "external affairs", holding elections in J & K was hugely significant from a strategic perspective.

The lot getting restless are the industrialists and businessmen who expected quick returns and  the large Lutyens’ Delhi community of media folks and self-styled left-lib intellectuals – feeling ignored by the new dispensation. The latter especially should realize – governments aren’t made or unmade at the India International Centre. Even foreign investors and governments are more patient and willing to give the new regime to settle down and get over the carry-forward legacies of the UPA as well as the present political dynamics before pumping  gas on  the accelerator.

But, my disappointment with Modi lies elsewhere.  Before, the elections – he had loftily said : to win elections you need a majority but to run the country you need everyone’s support. This indicated that he would seek a more inclusive and bipartisan approach to governance. Then came his famous – act of touching  the ground before entering parliament for the first time - calling it the temple of democracy. But,  this spirit has been less evident  in the style he has displayed so far.

Let’s start with the Government first. The unseemly rush to replace UPA appointed Governors was avoidable – especially where professionals (retired bureaucrats or intelligence officers)  with proven track-record were holding the posts and had just a few months of their terms left.  This was followed by the LOP (Leader of Opposition) controversy – where certainly Modi could have shown more grace and a spirit of accommodation. Similarly, one might ask if they really needed to rush through the judicial reforms bill ?

One can always argue these are minor dots in the life of a regime, which are easily forgotten. But, it does sully the atmosphere and made the Prime Minister lose some of the initial goodwill with which he could have started his Parliamentary innings. But, perhaps, it was necessary to send out some early signals that this government won’t be a push-over.

Next was the stand-off with Shiv Sena in Maharashtra. Surely the Thackerays had to be shown their place but the snub was too hard and for far too long. Abject humiliation – even of an enemy doesn’t help – even if the old adage of grace in victory is now passé.

Obviously, Modi and Amit Shah are working with a road-map and blue-print – which only the 2 of them know and even the RSS can only guess. Part of the plan must be to take advantage of this neo-Hindutva wave and establish a pan-India presence for BJP. Therefore, the vengeance with which the Modi-Shah duo is going into hitherto uncharted territories like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, North East and even J & K – shows they want to free themselves from the clutches of a handful of regional satraps and opportunistic allies.  

Personally, I don’t worry too much about the antics of the so-called “fringe elements”. It’s only a matter of time before Modi brings them under control, like he did with Togadia in Gujarat, as he settles his equations with the RSS. Therefore, winning these states with low RSS presence would also be key to his establishing an unquestionable supremacy. For me – the bigger irritants and distractions are Modi’s own trusted Ministers like Smriti Irani making news for the wrong reasons such as declaring Christmas as “Good Governance Day”. And, I wish he didn’t have to yield to RSS and party pressure in making some patently inappropriate choice of ministers. But, concerns voiced by the self-appointed guardians of democracy – that “secularism” and India’s plurality is at stake are both exaggerated and alarmist.

I would argue that – even if it were not for these ‘red-herrings’ , a recalcitrant opposition would find other excuses for disrupting governance. But, they can continue to do only for a sort while more till BJP populates the Rajya Sabha with their own members from the newly ‘conquered’ provinces.

Till then the government needs to stay its course and carry on with the development agenda – steadily, even if a bit slowly.