| |
VIEWPOINT: FIFTH COLUMN
Grounded Realities
Instead of a pragmatic policy on Kashmir, the Government
is relying on ad hoc steps
By Tavleen Singh
If we needed proof
that the Government's attempts at peace talks in Kashmir were just a charade,
a joke on us the people, it came in the appointment of K.C. Pant as the
prime minister's chief negotiator for peace in Kashmir. It is hard
to understand what it is about this old has-been from Congress times that
so impresses Vajpayee. Can Pant solve India's most serious political problem
when he is already weighed down with a hundred other tasks, none of which
he performs with any distinction? Vajpayee's man for all seasons already
looks after the Planning Commission and the Population Commission besides
several task forces on subjects as complicated as infrastructure and building
those dream highways. Are we to understand that between juggling these
many important tasks he will spare a few moments for Kashmir?
 As
his first move towards dialogue, Pant dug up another old has-been from
Congress days, Mir Qasim. After conversing privately the two old codgers
posed for television cameras as if they were key players in some significant
moment in history. Not surprisingly, Kashmir's more relevant leaders were
quick to point out that Mir Qasim was the wrong man to begin talks with.
He has been so far away from current events in the Valley that most people
had forgotten he was still around. But Pant pronounced that he was a "visionary"
for having stepped down as chief minister (when Sheikh Abdullah returned)
in "the interests of peace in Kashmir". Pant omitted to mention
that, in the days when Indira Gandhi was boss, chief ministers who did
not step down when ordered usually met a sticky end.
In any case, only someone completely unaware
of ground realities in Kashmir would pick poor old Mir Qasim as an interlocutor
for the Kashmiri people. But then, as a minister in Vajpayee's Government
said wickedly, "If the Government isn't serious about peace then
Pant is the best man to choose. These talks could continue well into the
22nd century." Those who have worked with him know that Pant is famous
for obfuscation and delay.
If Pant was all that was wrong with Vajpayee's
Kashmir policy-if we dare call it that-there may not have been so much
to worry about. Alas, there is almost nothing right with it. All the Government
has done is stumble along from one ad hoc decision to the next. So, we
have technically had a cease-fire in the state since last September. When
it was announced it was welcomed by ordinary Kashmiris as the first sign
that there would be some respite from the violence and bloodshed that
has gone on for more than 10 years. As someone who visited the Valley
shortly after the cease-fire began I can report meeting any number of
people who said that the announcement was greeted with a wave of palpable
relief. This has been dissipated because the violence has continued and
innocent civilians have continued to die in the "crossfire".
The Indian Express newspaper's death count last week put the toll at 801
since January this year. Of the dead 292 were civilians (including 34
women and 11 children), 352 militants and 157 security men. If this is
a cease-fire, what is war?
Peace cannot come unless the Government finds
itself an agenda for bringing it about. Is there, for instance, any point
in talking to the Hurriyat or any of the other self-appointed representatives
of the Kashmiri people unless the Government is clear about what it can
offer? The Hurriyat consists of those who want an independent Kashmir
and those who want Kashmir merged with Pakistan. Are we ready to consider
any of these options? Their most immediate demand is that a Hurriyat delegation
be allowed to travel to Pakistan to talk to militant leaders there. Pakistan
welcomes this idea because it would give its general a chance to prove
that tripartite talks are the only way out. But it is hard for us to allow
this little excursion because we do not consider Kashmir as separate to
India. The Hurriyat has been sulking since, so we would need to offer
it something to make a dialogue possible. Do we know what that is?
To widen the question, can we also ask where
the prime minister is going when it comes to Kashmir and will he be taking
the home minister with him? Rumour in Delhi has it that L.K. Advani is
deeply unhappy with the Government's peace initiatives because they come
from the Prime Minister's Office and not from him. If this is true he
has himself to blame. At no stage has Advani shown any sign of evolving
a proper Kashmir policy. All he did was continue with the one he inherited,
which was based on the assumption that a military solution was the only
one that existed. He is entitled to support a military solution but we
have a right to know if it is working, and if not, why does it continue
to be pursued. And, if all the prime minister has to offer is K.C. Pant,
the situation is grim indeed.
|
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives