|
COVER STORY
Kashmir's
bloody puzzle
(Contd.)
Can a
political solution be found?
Before
Dar approached the Government, negotiated a cease-fire and grabbed the
headlines, Delhi focused its attention on back-channel diplomacy with
the Hurriyat. The idea was to exploit the inner conflicts in the Hurriyat
leadership and reach out to those sections who are wary of Pakistan's
growing hold over the militants. Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, for example, was
bitter over attacks by his colleagues for his gesture of calling on Chief
Minister Farooq Abdullah after his mother's death last month.
With the
Hizbul cease-fire, the importance of the Hurriyat hasn't ceased. Pressured
by Pakistan, Salahuddin was compelled to declare that the Hurriyat would
be its representative for political talks and that "Pakistan has
to be a party to the dialogue". This, in turn, compelled the Hurriyat
to review its initial denunciation of the cease-fire offer. "There
is," says Hurriyat member Abdul Ghani Lone, "a fair possibility
of a dialogue." Coming from the member of a body Pakistan calls the
authentic political voice of the Kashmiri people, that's some progress.
But the question
remains: what political solution will the Government discuss? When Principal
Secretary Brajesh Mishra reiterated the Government's well-known position
of talking "within the Constitution" Salahuddin threatened to
call off the talks. This led to the Government hedging the issue because
it didn't want the Hizbul to walk out peremptorily. However, the issue
of a framework within which a political dialogue can be instituted has
not been addressed.
Farooq tried
to force the issue by making the state autonomy issue paramount. He hoped
to steal some of the Hurriyat's thunder. But not even Farooq was prepared
for the unanimity with which the entire political class -- the Government
and the Opposition spoke in unison -- denounced his bid to reopen the
terms of the Indira-Sheikh 1975 agreement. Now, if Farooq's demand of
restoring state autonomy to its pre-1953 levels is rejected by the Cabinet,
what will be the political bait that can be offered to those whose range
of options extend from a referendum to outright merger with Pakistan?
"Political
solution", it would seem is one of those hollow terms that doesn't
lend itself to scrutiny. The Government is anxious to keep on talking
with the Hizbul. It would also not be unhappy if the Hizbul and Hurriyat
fall out eventually. But neither does it want to alienate the Hurriyat
entirely. If the Hizbul talks collapse, it may once again have to look
to the likes of Mirwaiz, Yasin Malik and Lone for yet more talks. Not
to forget Farooq who remains an NDA partner and the elected chief minister
and who is just biding his time to return to the centrestage of Kashmir.
Does
Delhi have a larger game plan?
Yes and
no. All governments proceed on the unshakeable assumption that Kashmir's
accession to India is non-negotiable but that everything else is. That
politics is implicitly defined by existing constitutional parameters.
These principles imply that "domestic dissidents", like former
rebels in Nagaland and Mizoram and erstwhile Naxalites, must be persuaded
into joining the political process. Laldenga entered electoral politics
after the Mizo accord of 1985 and became chief minister. The hope is that
the Hizbul may be persuaded along the same lines with the promise of genuine
elections in Kashmir. After all, even someone like Salahuddin took to
the gun after his attempt at a political career was foiled by the flawed
assembly election of 1987. If things work exceptionally well, the fond
hope is the Hizbul would successfully transform itself into a Kashmiri
nationalist force.
There is
an international dimension as well. With Kashmir becoming an international
concern, India is anxious to show it is doing its utmost to engage all
representatives of the Kashmiri people in meaningful dialogue. In the
short term, it means Vajpayee can address the UN General Assembly in September
and talk about progress in Kashmir. He can tell Clinton about India's
good intentions and then proceed to the more substantial items on the
agenda, like the two its -- information technology and international terrorism.
There is a belief, perhaps substantiated by the experience of China, that
between abstract self-determination and concrete self-interest, it is
the latter that prevails. Kashmir has been a nagging irritant for India
in its dialogue with major countries. The Hizbul initiative addresses
that issue -- even if temporarily.
The problem
is that there is nothing in it for Kashmir. If the Hizbul is persuaded
into respectability, Pakistan will rush to ensure there is no void in
the armed struggle. If the talks collapse, Kashmir will be back to its
bloody mess. Hizbul or no Hizbul, as long as Pakistan is a player, Kashmir
seems destined not to enjoy peace.
-with
Rory McCarthy in Islamabad
Top
Back
|
India
should learn the kung-fu of business or get hammered by China after it
joins the WTO, says Sudeep Chakravarti in
"It
is a frustration that India and Pakistan have not grown up enough to pull
their heads out of the sand." Read an exclusive interview with 
