|
"[W]hat gave
rise to violent separatism in Jammu and Kashmir, could such a development
have been avoided, and what does the Kashmir conflict tell us about
the role of ethnicity in conflicts and the risks of large scale
war in South Asia?"
These
are the questions Sten Widmalm attempts to grapple with in his book
Kashmir in Comparative Perspective-Democracy and Violent Separatism
in India. Widmalm, assistant professor and director of Development
Studies at the Uppsala University in Sweden, has carried out reasonably
in-depth research into the causes of the Kashmir conflict. A continuation
of his 1997 dissertation, the work examines the Kashmir issue from
the point of view of internal politics in India rather than the
usual India-Pakistan conflict.
This
unique examination of the issue differs from most of its predecessors
in focusing more on the political situation and the failure of the
democratic process in Jammu and Kashmir, which resulted in the descent
into violence in the early 1990s. Widmalm explains the political
events from independence onwards which led to creating the situation
as it exists today.
He
begins with the geographical, historical and political situation
of the provinces of the north-Indian region which were collectively
known as Kashmir. Following independence, Widmalm traces the intrigues
and interests which resulted in the division of this state into
Pakistan Occupied and Indian Occupied Kashmir.
From
this point forth, the focus is largely on the democratic process
and the political scenario within India. A constant on the periphery
of this political environment is the conflict with Pakistan and
the United Nations' efforts, however ineffective, to resolve the
situation.
Pakistan's
involvement, other than the wars that were fought with India over
Kashmir, is seen to be minimal during the initial decades after
independence. Widmalm talks to a number of high-ranking officials
from the Pakistan armed and intelligence services and his research
concludes that the most contributive factor towards the disintegration
of civil life and the birth of violent separatism was the political
manoeuvering that resulted in the dismissal of all pretences to
democracy in 1989.
Before this, Widmalm argues, democracy had thrived in Kashmir
and the democratic process had enabled Jammu and Kashmir to be integrated
into the Indian Federation. "From 1977 onwards, for almost
ten years, it seemed possible to refute Jinnah's two-nation theory
by pointing to the democratic state of Jammu and Kashmir, integrated
with India after free elections." However, for numerous reasons
he explains and examines in the book, from 1983 onwards, democracy
became a sham and the political situation continually worsened.
At
this point, towards the end of the Zia regime in Pakistan, Widmalm
sees Pakistan and the Pakistan army taking up an increasingly active
role in the drama that played out in the early 1990s.
Widmalm compares the Kashmir conflict with similar scenarios that
played out in other regions of India, specifically Tamil Nadu and
West Bengal. He brings forth this comparison by first examining
the rise of violent separatism in Jammu and Kashmir and then looking
at the situations as they were in the other two states and how they
were dealt with by the Indian government.
The
biggest difference between Jammu and Kashmir and the other two movements
is that the other movements never escalated into large-scale violence.
They remained contained within the confines of political dialogue
and demands, much like Kashmir in the late 1970s. Separatist parties
and groups were content to function within the democratic framework
and allow the political system to take its course. A violent course
need not have been plotted in Kashmir either, had the major concerns
of the separatist parties been addressed by the ruling Congress
Party in India.
For
Widmalm, the biggest contributing factor to such violent disturbances
is the lack of integration of ethnicities and the treatment of such
ethnicities by the centre. India's treatment of the Kashmiris, according
to Widmalm, has left a lot to be desired. Indian central government
has never been able to fully integrate the Muslim-majority state
into the federation because of the way they have dealt with separatist
demands.
Finally,
Widmalm discusses the violence and its escalation from violent protests
to all-out war. He criticises the Jammu and Kashmir and Indian leadership
for not being able to curb the violence at its inception. According
to him, Farooq Abdullah, Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, did
nothing to help appease the separatists. The central government
was unable to institute policy and strategy changes to accommodate
the separatists and kept playing the blame game which resulted in
the reciprocal war that has waged for more than 15 years.
Widmalm's work, comprehensive as it is, is not for the informed
reader. Although his arguments offer a fresh perspective on the
violence and its emergence in Jammu and Kashmir, the presentation
and writing are often weak. In particular instances, it becomes
obvious that the author is writing a dissertation and not a book.
The academic nature of the read detracts from the information it
unveils.
For
those well versed in the political situation that surrounds India-Pakistan
relations and the Kashmir dispute, this book will provide very little
by way of new information. For all other readers, this book has
a unique perspective to offer and provides enough background information
and detail to familiarise its readers with the intricacies of the
Kashmir conflict.
|