| When
scenes of Kashmiris – men and women, young and old alike
– waving green flags amid frenzied screams of ‘azadi,’
hit Indian television screens, the people were taken by surprise.
It was reminiscent of the ’80s when the Kashmiris had
similarly taken to the streets, demanding independence, and
violence had erupted, leading to a crackdown by the Indian security
forces.
It
all began when the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) government decided
to transfer 800 kanals of land to Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti
(ASS), the managing board for the massive annual Hindu pilgrimage
to the Shri Amarnath cave shrine in Kashmir. The land was ostensibly
only to be utilised during the pilgrimage in order to provide
the yatris better accommodation facilities, like prefabricated
huts and toilets. The Amarnath Yatra is one of the major sources
of income for the people of the Valley and, often the only source
to much of the nomadic population in the Valley.
The
United Parties Alliance (UPA) government at the centre has been
so preoccupied with the US nuclear deal and its own survival
woes, that it failed to grasp the gravity of the situation.
It was left to the recently appointed J&K Governor, N.N.
Vohra to decide the course of action: he unilaterally cancelled
the land transfer order on June 30. This, in turn, angered the
Hindus of Jammu, who blocked the strategic Jammu-Srinagar highway,
suspending the transportation of food and essential items to
and from the city.
So,
a seemingly innocuous act on the part of the government has
now snowballed into a major crisis in the conflict-ridden state.
Incidentally, Article 370 of the Indian constitution prohibits
the sale or transfer of J&K land to non-state subjects,
while allowing state subjects of J&K to buy land in the
rest of India. This transfer of land for the Amarnath shrine,
which has been referred to as a “permanent transfer”
by the former right-wing governor of J&K, Lt. S.K. Sinha,
has fuelled suspicions and provoked the Muslims of the Valley.
The Hurriyat leaders launched a campaign against this transfer
of land and charged the board with attempting to change the
demographic composition of the Valley by settling Hindus from
other parts of India. Seeking to gain political mileage in the
run-up to the elections, the People’s Democratic Party
(PDP), that had originally approved the transfer order as part
of the ruling coalition, blamed the Ghulam Nabi Azad government
for the debacle and pulled out of it, paving the way for governor’s
rule. Leading newspapers in the Valley called the yatraa a “monstrous
phenomenon” and a “cultural invasion.”
The
residents of Jammu are equally defiant. They believe that they
have always been asked to sacrifice their interests for the
“greater cause” of retaining Kashmir within India,
and that the decision-making has always been in the hands of
Kashmiri leaders.
Jammu
is predominantly a Hindu-majority area, but it has a considerable
Sikh and Muslim population (Muslims form a majority in three
of the state’s provinces: Doda, Poonch and Rajouri), while
ethnicities such as the Dogras and the Gujjars are also settled
there. Nevertheless, politics in the state has predominantly
been so Valley-centric that a feeling of discrimination has
started taking root in the minds of the people. Balraj Puri,
a leading analyst on Jammu and Kashmir, points out that with
the exception of Ghulam Nabi Azad, the chief minister of the
state has always been from the Valley. Although Jammu has a
larger population, it only has 37 seats in the legislative assembly,
as against Kashmir’s 46 seats. Jammu generates 70% of
the state’s revenue but receives only 30% of it. Jammu
is also home to more than the 300,000 Kashmiri Hindus who had
fled the Valley when trouble began in the late ’80s.
Incidentally,
the BJP, which had won only a single seat in the 2002 J&K
state elections and no seats from the state in the parliamentary
elections, politicised the issue to garner popular support.
Soon people, not only in Jammu, but across India, began talking
about the subsidies that the Indian government provides to Muslims
for Haj. The Shri Amarnath Sangharsh Yatra Samiti, an adhoc
citizens group, was formed to spearhead the agitation against
the annulment of the transfer of land. Since the Samiti refused
to talk to politicians from the Valley, the governor set up
a four-member negotiating team chaired by the governor’s
adviser, Sudhir S. Bloerio. “We are against this unilateral
decision, without taking the people of Jammu into confidence,”
says Sheikh Shakeel, president of the Jammu Bar Association,
which has been supporting the Samiti. Though many of its members,
including its president, Leela Karan Sharma, are affiliated
to right-wing Hindu groups such as the RSS and VHP, the group
also has the Congress party and non-political members in its
ranks. The Kashmiri pandit community is actively supporting
the agitation, as is the Jammu Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
the Jammu Industries Association, the Jammu Retailers Federation
and the Jammu Doctors Association.
Jammu
has always sought more integration with India, says Puri, while
Kashmir has sought more autonomy to preserve its identity. Hence,
when the land transfer order was revoked, Jammu perceived it
as giving in to the secessionists.
A few days into the agitation, a curfew was clamped on Jammu,
while allegations were made that no curfew was enforced during
the entire agitation in the Valley. Sporadic communal clashes
broke out in areas like Bhaderwah, Samba and Kishtwar, but were
soon brought under control. Seventy huts belonging to Muslim
Gujjars were torched, which were widely reported in the Valley
as instances of Hindu communalism.
But it was really the statements of the BJP state president,
Ashok Khajuria, about imposing an ‘economic blockade’
on Kashmir, that led the Hurriyat, the PDP and even the National
Conference to stir up anti-India sentiments. Amid shutdowns
and strikes called by the Samiti, the Jammu-Pathankot road was
blocked for days, with no movement of trucks carrying supplies
to or from the state. Some drivers from the Valley were even
attacked, resulting in the death of one and injury to others.
Though the government later provided security to trucks moving
out of the Valley, truckers were reluctant to travel, resulting
in losses for the Valley’s Rs.2,500 crore fruit industy.
According to Ghulam Rasool Butt, chairman of the Kashmir Coordination
Committee of the Kashmir Valley Fruit Growers’ and Dealers’
Union, around 60% of the packed fruits that were ready for transportation
had become spoilt. He estimated the losses to be around Rs.400
crores. Butt claims that he sent a fax to Governor Vohra on
July 26, regarding the fruit growers’ concerns and seeking
an appointment to discuss the issue, but received no response.
They
then threatened to cross the border into Muzaffarabad and sell
their produce, especially apples which were in danger of rotting,
in Pakistan.
“The
entire thing has been blown out of proportion by the mainstream
parties for political mileage,” says a disgruntled former
Congress MLA in Kashmir. And, as a result, trade and tourism
has suffered, while life for the ordinary Kashmiri has become
paralysed. “The average Kashmiri is caught between draconian
security laws and the interests of our selfish politicians,”
says a teacher. Add to that, the general discontent with the
daily checks and harassment by security personnel, the disappearance
of thousands of people, unemployment, a growing drug addiction
problem and the increasing radicalism being instilled in the
youth by organisations like the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Tablighi
Jamaat – life for the ordinary Kashmiri is nothing short
of miserable.
The
situation for the Indian government spiralled out of control
when the Kashmir Fruit Growers Association, the Kashmir Chamber
of Commerce and Industry, the Traders Federation, both factions
of the Hurriyat and the PDP called for a ‘Muzaffarabad
chalo’ march to the Line of Control (LoC) on August 11.
There was excessive use of force on the thousands of marchers
proceeding towards the LoC. Legal expert Ram Jethmalani even
suggested that the marchers be allowed to cross the LoC but
not be allowed back. Many had expected a preventive curfew to
be imposed on the Valley, but it was only imposed – for
the first time in 17 years – when news of Hurriyat leader
Sheikh Abdul Aziz’s death broke, and 21 Kashmiris lost
their lives in the ensuing two days of violence. Across the
Valley, demonstrators chanted ‘Azadi’ and ‘Ae
zalimon, hamara Kashmir chorr do,’ while others shouted
‘Jeevay Jeevay Pakistan’ and ‘Hindustan, tere
maut.’ The crisis helped bring different factions of the
Hurriyat together. While most of the demonstrations were peaceful
and non-violent, mobs forced businesses to shut down. The Central
Reserve Police Force bunkers were destroyed, and the Indian
tri-colour flag was torn and burnt. And on India’s Independence
Day, it had to be taken off by security personnel soon after
it was hoisted at Lal Chowk, the heart of the city. Soon after,
demonstrators hoisted the Pakistani flag in its place.
The
state decided to hit back. After days of uninterrupted protests
and demonstrations – during which Hurriyat leaders submitted
a memorandum to the UN office in Srinagar, asking it to “actively
engage” itself in Jammu and Kashmir – Hurriyat leaders
Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Omar Farooq, Ashraf Sehrai, JKLF
chief Yasin Malik, and a host of other separatists leaders were
arrested – on the eve of the separatists’ calls
to march to Lal Chowk. A strict curfew was imposed across all
districts of Kashmir, with shoot-at-sight orders, and all news
channels were ordered off the air.
These
frenzied scenes witnessed by the Indians on their television
screens, have, for the first time, started the ‘azadi’
debate for the Kashmiris. While some intellectuals have been
advocating the right of self-determination for Kashmiris for
some time now, certain mainstream columnists, have also touched
upon the ‘azadi’ word. In a hard-hitting column,
the famed Arundhati Roy propagated freedom for Kashmiris. She
remarked: “For all these years, the Indian State has done
everything it can to subvert, supress, represent, misrepresent,
discredit, interpret, intimidate, purchase – and simply
snuff out the voice of the Kashmiri people.” However,
a recent opinion poll conducted by Times Of India in nine major
cities across India, predictably enough, found that the majority
of the respondents felt that India should not let go of Kashmir.
National
Conference leader Omar Abdullah went on national TV to say that
azadi was not a “feasible option” for Kashmir, while
Mirwaiz, leader of the moderate Hurriyat faction, in an interview
with Outlook, remarked that “When someone on the streets
here says Pakistan or Nizam-e-Mustafa, what are they trying
to convey? What he [the Kashmiri] is saying is that he rejects
the present system. This does not necessarily mean he would
choose Pakistan. People here know what has been happening within
Pakistan.” The JKLF chief Yasin Malik’s slogan,
as always, was: ‘Is paar bhi lenge azadi, us paar bhi
lenge azadi.’
“Most
of the demonstrators were boys below the age of 25,” says
PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti. “They have not only witnessed
the worst abuses at the hands of the militants, but also humiliation
by security forces. For them the demonstrations and slogans
against India are a way of releasing their pent-up frustration.
For them azadi means azadi from suppression, from blockade”
– and not necessarily Pakistan.”
Analysts
and commentators, meanwhile, have started advocating greater
patience with the Valley, minimal use of force, engagement with
all political players and greater autonomy. The Hurriyat, as
well as the mainstream parties, say they want trade through
the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad route, withdrawal of the Armed Forces
Special Powers Act and the Disturbed Areas Act, and release
of all Kashmiri detainees from jail.
The
Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service has resumed but the confidence-building
talks between India and Pakistan have stalled. The attack on
the Indian Embassy in Kabul, which has been blamed on the ISI,
the Pakistan National Assembly’s resolution on the current
Kashmir crisis, the alleged infiltration of soldiers across
the LoC and renewed clashes have not gone down well with the
Indian establishment. Speaking to Newsline over the phone, Saifuddin
Soz, president of the Jammu and Kashmir Pradesh (state) Congress
Committee and minister in the current Union cabinet, categorically
stated that the peace process between India and Pakistan had
taken a backseat due to Pakistan’s internal exigencies.
“There can be no trade through the Muzzafarabad-Srinagar
route because there has been no response from Pakistan on this
offer yet. We are waiting for a response from them.”
Meanwhile,
India seems to be following its favourite policy – that
of using the stick first and then, the carrot – in Kashmir.

|