Click to play videoFor the last two months, Jammu and Kashmir has been witnessing relentless violence in which at least 40 people have been killed.
Alarmingly, it’s not just political polarisation that’s threatening to divide the state. For the first time in the history of the state, emotional polarisation has wedged a divide between the fragile Hindu-Muslim unity not only in Jammu and Kashmir but also across India.
Even as politicians, separatists, intellectuals and prominent members of the civil society debate and squabble for a “solution to the J-K problem”, CNN-IBN explores if there’s light at the end of the tunnel and if a reconciliation between the colliding voices from Jammu and Kashmir is possible.
On Weekend Edition with Rajdeep Sardesai, an eminent panel - comprising former deputy CM of J-K, Muzaffar Baig, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi, BJP’s Seshadri Chari, senior journalist Prem Shankar Jha, Hurriyat Conference Chairperson Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, spokesperson of Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti, Jitender Singh – suggested the following solutions and debated on them.
Solution no 1: Both sides need to move away from extreme positions
At the heart of this solution lies the basic question: Why does a 40-acre piece of land given for a Hindu pilgrimage create such uproar? Baig agreed it was time for a compromise as the situation was worsening. “In Kashmir we welcome yatris. The only issue is whether it should be permanently transferred or the infrastructure should be issued only in the time for yatra,” he said, saying PDP had no problems giving out the land for the three months of yatra, along with infrastructure.
Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, however, veered away from a clear answer and said asking this question reflected on the confusion that’s prevalent in the media about the issue. “Nobody is against providing facilities to the yatris. That’s been taken care of by government. Why do you need a government or a court order for the use of the land?” he asked.
Jitender Singh of the Sangharsh Samiti said before arriving at a solution it was important to draw a line between the anti-national rhetoric and pro-India struggle. At this point, Prem Shankar Jha intervened and said he disagreed with Singh. “I am more of a nationalist than this man will ever be. I have given back to country more. The only anti-national people are those who are blockading the Valley of Kashmir,” he said.
Jitender returned to his point and said the said land belonged “as much to Jitender Singh as to Mirwaiz”. He alleged the real hurt to the psyche of Kashmiris was caused by the revocation of the order on the land at the behest of certain Separatist voices. “Even the mainstream parties like the PDP also got into the game of one-upmanship,” he said.
Upon being asked if he was okay with the land being given for yatra purposed for three months, Jitender agreed provided it was a “respectable allotment”.
Sheshadri Chari joined the debate and said the land was never transferred to the Amarnath Shrine Board in the first place and so there was no question of an allotment. He said the revocation of land was the actual problem. “The land was transferred by the PDP ministry. The government never spoke of it,” he said. BJP appeared to have the opinion that the land must be given back to Amarnath Shrine Board which must be reconstituted.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi said while Congress agreed with this point of view, it was clear that Amarnath issue was being used to communalise the state. “What’s said inside the studio is relevant. But outside it’s all hypocrisy. First of all, at no point in time, the land ownership ought to have been transferred. Secondly, the problem arises as this is being made an excuse for other problems. There’s a communal agenda in the Valley by people like Hurriyat who don’t want to join talks and the PDP,” he said.
Jha was asked to give the final word on solution no. 1. Was it time to go back to the order of May 17, 2005 that ruled temporary shelters be given to yatris?
Jha said people of Jammu and Kashmir were being taken for a ride and put against each other when the real issue was greed and corruption. He also hinted at a real-estate scam.
“The Shrine Board is in possession for use of 190 hectares of land in seven camps in the two routes. No one has ever challenged that. The attempt made in 2004 – to transfer the land – is being taken a step further. Behind the scenes, everyone’s taken money from investors promising them clear title for land on which they can build permanent assets. There are capitalist interests along with bureaucratic ones who are trying to transfer this land,” he said, saying if one got a land on a pilgrim route, it would be a goldmine.
The likes of Mirwaiz usually speak of “Kashmiriyat”. The question is why can’t their Kashmiriyat be a little generous and help Hindu pilgrims create shelters on the 40 hectares of land? Mirwaiz, instead of answering this pointed question clearly, put the onus on Sangharsh Samiti instead. He said the Samiti had no locus standi on the case. “I don’t know what these people are agitating for?” he said, adding, “The yatra is conducted by people in the Valley and the Shrine Board has come only six years ago. As far as Jammu is concerned, it has no direct link with the yatra,” he said.
The segment ended on a sharp question directed at Jitender. The question was why can’t the yatra be allowed to be conducted in peace? Is the election year being used to polarise masses? Jitender hit back at Mirwaiz for his argument. “Even in 2008, there have been attacks on pilgrims. So it’s ridiculous to say that Samiti has no locus standi and Hurriyat has,” he said. Baig, however, disputed this immediately and said there had been no attacks on any pilgrims this year.
Solution 2: Bifurcating the state to give Jammu another identity
This contentious solution or possibility elicited strong reactions from across the panel. However, it also united the panelists in agreeing upon having softer Indo-Pak borders.
While Singhvi disagreed bifurcation was not a feasible option, at least immediately, he agreed it could be the way to future with a possible consensus. Singhvi also suggested the idea of opening up of borders.
“We can work towards making both parts of Kashmir – both the Indian and Pakistani part – within the sovereignty open to each other for cultural, political and social exchanges,” he suggested.
For once, Congress’ opinion found an echo in the BJP and Chari said it was a workable solution. “My personal view is completely agreeable with Singhvi to the extent of denying the trifurcation of the state,” he said, pointing out that it was, in fact, the NDA that opened up most borders.
Jha too agreed with the idea of soft borders between India and Pakistan. Baig, too, seemed to have no problem and said it was a cue taken from ex-PM Atal Behari Vajpayee’s speech on April 18, 2003.
Mirwaiz again did not give a clear opinion on this. “The time has come to determine the future of Kashmir. India, Pakistan have to address the issue. Kashmiris want azaadi and they have said it in plain terms,” he said.
Singhvi jumped into the fray and said Hurriyat exhibits its separatist tendencies whenever a constructive solution was being suggested. “As far as Congress is concerned, not an inch of Indian territory is available for compromise,” he said, rejecting the idea of “azaadi” for Kashmir.
But is the problem about Jammu and Kashmir? Jitender said bifurcation was not the solution but opening of borders was in keeping with globalisation. “Having said that, I would also emphasise that this should not be at the cost of the integrity of Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.
Interestingly, Jha advised the panel to take Mirwaiz’s demand for azaadi seriously. He said the anger in Jammu and Kashmir was being caused by communalisation and of a feeling that they were being economically strangled. “Mirwaiz has been fighting for a middle path and if he says there’s no alternative but azaadi, please take him seriously. That does not mean we cannot open borders with Pakistan,” he said.
Jha also insisted there was no difference in the psyche of Jammu and Kashmir. “We have been trying to open borders for trade but it is Pakistan that’s not responding to us. We need to push for this and we need Kashmiris and people of Jammu to push this,” he said.
Chari maintained Hurriyat did not represent all Muslims in Kashmir similarly as RSS did not represent all Hindus of Jammu. “We are fighting separatist tendencies here,” he said.
Singhvi concluded the segment on a strong note. He said separatists have achieved for Jammu and Kashmir what terrorists couldn’t for 20 years.
Across Jammu and Kashmir, the protest has achieved mammoth proportions. Children are being used, ATMs are being targeted and public property is being damaged. What does the civil society think of this? The audience on the show came up with their versions of what the solution could be. “Why is Indian government not initiating a peaceful dialogue?” asked a member of the audience to Singhvi. “Who else is doing it apart from Government of India?” retorted Singhvi. “I am sorry. Home Minister and Pranab Mukherjee have personally called up everyone in the state,” he said.
Mrs Kaul, a Kashmiri pandit, suggested the problem should be nipped in the bud. “First of all, take the politicians out of the system. Secondly, Kashmiris are not obliging anybody by taking care of the yatris, it’s their job,” he said.
Mirwaiz said the focus was different in Jammu and Kashmir and so the two shouldn’t be confused. “In Jammu, the focus is about land, in Kashmir, people are marching in lakhs for the main issue. People in India have ideological affliations towards Pakistan and azaadi. There’s nothing to hide,” he said.
“Everyone’s been talking about it. Journalists have written articles asking the Govt to see the writing on the wall. People in Kashmir don’t want to live with India. Will you kill every Kashmiri?” he asked. Singhvi retorted sharply to this and said people who write articles cannot decide if a large chunk of land that belongs to India should be seceded. “In the last 10 years, why has Hurriyat not fought a single election?” he thundered.
The opinion united BJP and Congress yet again with Chari sending out a clear message to Mirwaiz, “If you like Pakistan, you are free to go to Pakistan,” he said, to an applause from the audience.
Jha said if Mirwaiz does not listen to the cry of Azaadi in Kashmir, he will be swept out of politics into the dustbins of history. “If that happens the place will be taken by people who are infinitely more dangerous than Hurriyat,: he said.
The panel’s solution
Should we expect the Sangharsh Samiti to call off the agitation in the state that’s fuelling calls for azaadi amid mounting destruction?
Sangharsh Samiti: Jitender Singh said Samiti was open to dialogue. “The agitation is people’s agitation which is apolitical. We have to uphold the patriotic spirit of the country. Instead of laying premium on azaadi, ask Hurriyat the same question,” he said.
Hurriyat Conference: Mirwaiz repeated it was “time to hit at the root and not hack at the leaves”. “Today you have Amarnath, tomorrow you’d have something else. Why don’t people in Delhi understand that until and unless Kashmir problem is addressed amicably between India, Pak and Kashmir, these problems would continue,” he said.
Journalist: Jha said most words like azaadi and self-determination were easier spoken than implemented. “You need a process which requires normalization of situation through tough action. Dialogue is important. We are being made fools of by capitalists. It will only be settled with an overall settlement with India and Pak. The only good thing is that Kashmiri nationalists have come under the same banner. Let’s not split them, let’s work with them,” he said.
PDP: Baig agreed it was possible to provide a healing touch to the valley. “Why trifurcation or secssation? Modify HC order. Nominate a divisional commissioner who will set up a superstructure. So far as Kashmir is concerned, the minimum you can do is to sit with Pak and open the route for trade,” he said.
BJP: Chari said BJP was united with Congress on the issue. “BJP was part of the team constituted by the Government to visit Jammu and help resolve the issue. Peace and normalcy must come. Issue will never be resolved if the blame game ends. And if someone states terrorists will take over, I say give it to the Army,” he said.
Congress: Singhvi said solutions were simple. “In Jammu, the only solution is to allow permissive user and give excellent facilities to yatris in line with HC order. As far as valley is concerned, everything is agreeable, it has to have a timeline,” he said, insisting the land issue should be addressed first as it was more immediate. “Govt is in favour of all CBMs if PDP and the Hurriyat help bring down the level of tension in the Valley,” he concluded.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.