Changing Demography of Jammu and Kashmir?

Punchline

 Target: Demography  

 Z. G. Mohammad

It was not something that happened for the first time during the 2016-Intifada. It is an old story, whenever there is an upswing in the movement in the State for the cherished right, integral to basic human Rights,   the groups of “troubleshooters” from New Delhi start air dashing to the summer capital. Some call themselves as faith healers; some designate themselves as well wishers of Kashmir and some love to be called as concerned citizens.

In 1947, at the most critical stage of Kashmir struggle when people were about to break the yoke of hundred-year-old slavery and were on the threshold of regaining their independence. From ascetics to the half-naked fakir everyone arrived into Kashmir to divert the course of people’s cherished destiny.

Immediately after the announcement of 15 August 1947 as the deadline for partition of India, Lord Mountbatten and Lady Mountbatten arrived in Srinagar on 17 June 1947, with a note from Jawaharlal Nehru in the pocket as Bible for his Kashmir policy- pleading for towing the destiny of Kashmiris to India. On 24 June, when he was still in Srinagar he received a private letter from Krishna Menon strengthening Nehru’ note by instilling fear in Mountbatten’s mind. Krishna Menon in his letter ‘warned him that there might be dire consequences for the future of Anglo-Indian relationship if the State of Jammu and Kashmir were permitted to go to Pakistan this would strengthen Pakistan into the Eastern frontier of a British sphere of influence in the Middle East. It might put at risk the extensive British interests there. So it was essential to bring Jammu and Kashmir within the fold of India.’

The Mountbatten’s six days visit was followed by the arrival of many important Indian National Congress leaders from J. B. Kripalani to M. K. Gandhi. The sole objectives of their visits were defeating the struggle started by the people of Jammu and Kashmir on 13 July 1931. Gandhi’s public healing-touch discourses at Srinagar in 1947 and patting back of wife of jailed leader Sheikh Abdullah at prayer meeting was not different from the discourses of the ‘scholars and politicians’ that visit Kashmir during the 1990s, 2008, 2010 and 2016 Intifadas. M. K. Gandhi, publicly said in New Delhi that ‘the people of Kashmir should be asked ‘whether they want to join Pakistan or India. Let them do as they want. The ruler is nothing. The people are everything.’ Interestingly, days after such public statements at prayer meetings making he made a U-turn and supported airlifting of Indian army to Kashmir– ostensibly at the behest of the Maharaja whose authority he had publicly discredited and challenged.

Since, 1947, for New Delhi’s fathomless gulf between what is said and done, the overwhelming majority of people in the state harbor a mistrust against the political leadership of the largest democracy in the world – those strutting in the corridors of power or outside. For it failing to live up to its commitments, importantly this mistrust has been passing from generation to generation, in 2010 it passed to the fourth and five generation and during 2016, to another new generation.

In 2010, as New York Times had observed, ‘Kashmir’s demand for self-determination was sharper than it had been perhaps any other time in the region’s troubled history.’ It had also opined, ‘India faces a threat potentially more dangerous than ever before to the world’s largest democracy: an intifada-like popular revolt against the Indian military presence that includes not just stone-throwing young men but their sisters, mothers, uncles, and grandparents.’ The world press was full of such reports and opinions. These reports had caused over three dozen members of a Member of Indian Parliament and the think tanks to visit Kashmir. The majority of them left with a reassurance that New Delhi will be asked to revisit its Kashmir policy and initiate dialogue with people of the State and Pakistan. Instead of starting a goal oriented focused dialogue for resolving the dispute it conjured new discourses and created a mirage of dialogue by appointing a team of interlocutors. Intriguingly, it failed even to debate this self-serving report of the interlocutors and sent to the trashcan. Thus, strengthen the existing suspicion about New Delhi intentions in the state.  Believing in the unbelievable that procrastination was the answer for the deep discontent   New Delhi chose to forget its commitments for initiating a purposeful dialogue with the contesting parties. It never realized the situation in Jammu and Kashmir was always like a powder keg just a matchstick away.  Thus left space for the 2016- Intifada.

In this column, I may not recap the happenings during 2016. That for blinding about a thousand children and youth is about to pass into the history   as a year of ‘Epidemic of ‘Dead Eyes in Kashmir.’   Nonetheless, the 2016    uprising apparently born on the spur of the moment on 8 July after the killing of   Hizb Commander, Burhan Wani was, in fact, bursting of deep-seated fury against the discourses and moves initiated by the BJP for changing the demography of the state. Of course with the approval from the alliance partner. The moves included fiddling with the Article-370 of the Indian Constitution, abrogating of the Article-35 A for eroding the State Subject Law, giving citizenship rights to the 1947- WP refugees, construction of permanent shelters for non-state subjects floating population and construction workers and construction of the Sainik colonies.

Like, 2010, in 2016 a delegation of members of the parliament from all parties headed by   Home Minister, Rajnath Singh visited the state. The team was followed by visits of “troubleshooters” and peaceniks like Sadhu in white or interlocutors without official tags for breaking the impasse. Out of all the delegations, the group headed by Yashwant Sinha to quote commentator Manoj Joshi, which was ‘somewhat belated response to sending a Track II delegation to the Valley’ had been to an extent able to establish a rapport with a section of credulous politicians and a motley of civil society activists. Nonetheless, with his words of about working for convincing New Delhi to invite “separatist leaders” for unconditional dialogue for resolving long pending still fresh in public memory the coalition government reverted to its agenda of conferring citizenship rights to the WP refugees.

Of   all other moves started by the coalition government or brought in the public domain by the BJP leadership for engineering a demographic change in Jammu and Kashmir, awarding citizen rights to the non-state subject refugees is more dangerous. It is as dangerous as the massacre in Jammu on 17 October 1947, nine days before the so-called ‘instrument of accession’ was signed by Maharaja.  More than five lakh Muslims butchered and Muslims became a minority in the Jammu region. From Ian Stephen in ‘the Horned Moon’ to contemporary Indian writer Saeed Naqvi in ‘Being the Other’ this massacre has been documented.

It is bewildering why the coalition Sarkar, is once again pursuing the agenda that caused longest ever ‘intifada’ and put the State out of gear for five months. It is a moot point that should engage the attention of the leadership in the state across the divide.

Published in Greater Kashmir on 26-12-16