J&K, university protests and a shaky government

23^rd February, 2016

Chennai, Tamil Nadu

  

A note on Jammu and Kashmir: My home state has not seen as much violence and/ or bloodshed as the Kashmiris have. The troubles that mar the northernmost state gradually abate in magnitude as we head southwards. But, each time we read about an attack on the Kashmiris by militants or insurgents, and each time an Indian soldier lays down his life to protect them and all of India we are deeply pained, even though we are miles away and safe from the bullets and shells that massacre the Kashmiris. We may not feel the pain they face in the physical sense, but our minds are deeply affected by them.

We are all well aware how J&K came to be a part of India. The circumstances which prevailed during the formation of India prompted the ruler of J&K to accede to the Dominion of India, in order to protect his state from the invaders who had come from across the border. However, autonomy of J&K was ensured by the Indian Government in the instrument of accession and it continues to be effective to this day to a great degree, despite a lot of water having flown under the bridge since its accession. The UN later declared that the decision on whether J&K should be a part of India or it neighbour Pakistan would be arrived at via plebiscite, which is a democratic means to self- determination.

Today, the noise, the frequent protests, terror attacks and many unconstitutional/ unlawful events are transpiring because some elements believe that the Indian Government is blocking plebiscite in J&K. I recently attended a talk by a Kashmiri, who has lived there most of his life and governed the state as its Chief Minister and his version of this issue was to the contrary. Omar Abdullah explained in simple words why a plebiscite is difficult now (and how it was never made possible earlier). The preconditions laid down by the UN to conduct a plebiscite were- one, withdrawal of Pakistani forces and Pakistani nationals from J&K and two, subsequent withdrawal of Indian forces from J&K. These were the conditions to be met for the plebiscite to be conducted. Although India accepted to these preconditions, Pakistan did not. The presence of Pakistani forces (military and non- military) continued, thus ruling out the abatement of Indian troops on ground.

Even today, insurgents and militants from across the borders are still on the soil of J&K. The withdrawal or even reduction of Indian army cannot happen with the presence of these elements. Four wars have been fought between the two countries over J&K and large numbers of Indian soldiers have become martyrs in these wars and they continue to lay down their lives in so many attacks that continue to occur even to this day. Wars and terror attacks have altered the dynamics between the two nations, including the practicality of implementing a plebiscite, among others issues. So, this calls for a relook into the terms of the referendum, from what was laid down earlier by the UN.

Also, J&K state was populated predominantly by a certain community, but large numbers of people from other communities were also living and continue to live there. If the people choose to merge with Pakistan, say, then there will be a reprisal of the effects of partition (if not of the same magnitude) where the majority community will be forced to drive out the rest, purely because the laws of Pakistan forbid practice of other faiths on its soil. If J&K continues to remain with India, then these other communities can continue to live and carry out their lives alongside the majority community, as India is a secular state. Now, the plight of so many members of so many different communities must be factored into while deciding the way forward. In the event of a plebiscite, the district to south of J&K may want to join Pakistan, while a north-western districts may want to continue with India, making it a geographical impossibility and a complex mix and match situation to arrive at a final settlement, leading to further discontentment and even violence (god forbid).

India has always acknowledged the autonomy of J&K. Although there are difficulties in implementing the UN resolution of the 40s, for reason(s) mentioned above, a relook can never be ruled out. A mutual acceptance of any solution that is explored by both countries alone can remove a stalemate and make positive progress towards a solution. Reaching a common ground by both the nations is vital. The Governments of both these nations have always endeavoured for this and today, the renewal of talks by various agencies and ministries of the Government are giving a renewed confidence.

Blocking infiltration of militants into J&K and other parts of India, curbing funding for terror activities perpetrated on the Indian soil, understanding the needs of the people of J&K, exploring multiple options for a peaceful solution and zeroing in on the most beneficial option is the way forward. Now, I am no expert on this issue, and there may be other factors that may be require a serious look. I am confident that there are people on both sides of the border who are best equipped to solve the problem.

Protests in Jawaharlal Nehru University: Now, while the Governments of the two nations are in discussion, with the Pakistani premier asking his countrymen to refrain from damaging the ongoing peace process, while the Indian ministers are trying hard to reach out to their counterparts in every conventional and unconventional way and while many separatist groups have decided to keep faith in these efforts,  there continues to be discontentment among people from J&K, probably over the pace at which the whole affair is progressing and also at the constant ups and downs that have become characteristic to it. It is thus natural for them to raise slogans in protest, to vent their displeasure. Protests help appeals, which are usually unheard or ignored, to fall into the ears of those concerned. This may be why the students at JNU began such a protest, so as to make their demands for Kashmir’s independence be heard. But, in their protest, they used a route which hurt the sentiments of many others. Some students of JNU decided to orchestrate their displeasure by invoking the name of a certain Kashmiri who was declared a terrorist by the Indian courts of law and sentenced to death by it. The slogans that were shouted on that day at JNU glorified this terrorist and told (although some may prefer the word ‘threatened’) India that many similar men will emerge from each household in Kashmir to fight for its cause and they vow to disintegrate India.

I do not want to get into the humanity and/or human rights aspects of a death sentence, as I have even lesser authority on that subject. I am confident that there are well read people who are doing something about that in a constitutional manner. The fact of the matter is that the terrorist and his associates were part of an attack in 2001 on the Parliament of India. People were killed in the attack and lives of many (including some of our elected representatives) were under threat. Although, it is natural for Kashmiris to view the terrorist and his associates as heroes, due to their position on liberating J&K, they must however take into consideration the unconstitutional methods that were employed in the due process and how a billion other Indians may react to it.

In my opinion a fight for the right to self-determination and the future of J&K, do not require invoking names of certain people (especially those deemed terrorists by Law). If nothing else, it’s a sensitive subject that must be handled with caution, lest is hurt someone else’s sentiments. If the Kashmiris really want their voices to be heard and their demands be met, they must try and avoid making such remarks which prove counter-productive to their cause. The students can take a more democratic route and affiliate with parties which are fighting for the cause already. The Hurriyat Conference is already doing that and it has serious people who are taking lawful steps to air their demands. Although they are deemed separatists, the Indian state has acknowledged their position and is actively engaging with them for a peaceful solution. The major political parties in J&K have people in them who are serious about this issue and endeavour to cautiously balance the interests of the people and the violence that is perpetrated in their land.

In JNU, as a consequence of the sloganeering and the events that followed, the police arrested the student leader and now a case is pending against him in court, which I am sure it will reach its logical and fair conclusion. The arrest was called unlawful by the students of JNU and the whole question of anti- nationalism and what actually is nationalism arose. Today, the students who raised the slogans, which the police feel were seditious, are contemplating to surrender before court. I always felt that union leaders were gutsier and did not cry foul when courted arrest, well…

Protests in Hyderabad Central University: The other incident that has hogged so much of media space is the suicide of a student of the Hyderabad University and how his death is linked to him being from a lower class and to a certain MP whose letter to the union HRD ministry and the subsequent replies to it. This student had a case pending against him in connection to assaulting an ABVP activist on the University campus. The court of law upheld the case and the judicial proceedings were underway at the time of his death. As a consequence, he was expelled from the university and the hostel, although he continued to protest on the campus. His suicide and the circumstances surrounding it are being investigated by police and the courts, and I hope justice is delivered and the matter is brought to its conclusion fast, if not for anything else, to bring relief to an aggrieved mother who has lost her son. But the facts remain grim; this student had done the exact same thing as those students of JNU, when he empathised with the hanging of yet another convict, associated with terror attacks in Mumbai in 1993 which killed many and subsequently was sentenced to death by the court of law. The ABVP among others had raised objections to this. Now, the supporters of the hanging have as much right as the dissenters of it to air their views. Imagine if this student had lived and was proved innocent of his charges by the court. He could’ve fought a legitimate battle thereafter.

The case of one student from HCU sympathising with the hanging of a convict and another case where the students of JNU want to protest for a cause by invoking the name of another terrorist has a similarity- in each case the convicts were declared as convicts not by the ruling of a Government, but by the court of Law after thorough investigation, after several appeals to higher courts and pleading clemency. This is the very Law which provides us with the Right to freedom of speech and expression (subject to reasonable restrictions), the very law that they seek recourse under in the event of murders, robberies and among so many others crimes and the very law under which they seek bail and protection. So, if these students have the audacity to question the court of Law, then I really wonder what other institution they respect. I can understand dissent against Government, but is the dissent against a court judgement justified? I am sure the human rights violation card will be invoked here, but why does human rights have to be remembered only when terrorists are being sentenced to death. Should not the students and all human rights activists instead call for a systematic relook and a research into the concept of death sentence through constitutional routes? After all our constitution is organic and has metamorphosed since its ratification, thus providing room for change. 

The timing of these incidents is astonishing. First, I do not see merit in the suicide case of the HCU student being brought to mainstream news. Politicising a death, which is being investigated and from which no conclusions have been drawn yet and creating an atmosphere to pit one caste against the rest is in itself improper, and in this case unfounded. Second, it is suspicious how JNU’s Kashmir struggle and the subsequent slogans are being raised only on anniversaries of dead terrorists. Should not their struggle for J&K’s liberation be continuous? I wonder what would’ve been the fate of the freedom movement of India if our forefathers had decided to fight for freedom only on birth and death anniversaries of select dear departed.

  

Why the protests? From the turn of events, I feel that a smear campaign is afoot against the incumbent Government by forces which are unable to come to terms with the victory of this Government. But let me ask them- Why did you/ me (or your/ my country) vote such a Government to power? So, are you (me) wrong? Are the people of your (my) country wrong in voting such a Government to power? If we cannot digest the fact that the Government in power is in power, then we need to bear with them till the next general elections. That’s the hard truth in a democracy, the democracy that each of us are proud about and appears to have taken for granted. This seems too much like a smear campaign against the Government with the sole goal to block the Budget session of Parliament starting today. First, it was the Lalit Modi issue, to which the Minister of External Affairs was wrongly linked to and for which the Parliament session was blocked, with the Opposition running away (walking out) from debate and discussion. Next, it was the DDCA row against the Minister of Finance, where again the opposition had no legs to stand on and the matters, including the defamation suit filed by the minister, are now in court. This time I am sure it will be the HCU and JNU issues that will be used to stall proceedings of the Parliament.

Would any Government, left or right, have remained a silent spectator when such slogans are being raised? I ask a counter question. Should any Government, left or right in its leanings, take no action if such a speech or sloganeering is made? Will the same people who are protesting against the Government today, be happy if this or any other Government had left the students to go ahead with their sloganeering against the nation? Haven’t we complained enough between 2004 and 2014 because the Government and its leaders were too quiet on major issues that burned our nation then? It’s time to introspect on whether what we protest for is just or not? The matters are clearly political. These incidents have been capitalised (or were hatched to be capitalised?) in order to disrupt the upcoming Parliament session.

Just like how people in my country have fear of not being heard, represented and a now the fear of not having the freedom of speaking what they want to, I too have a fear- a fear where development of my country is stalled by opposition parties under false pretexts and as a consequence of which the poor get poorer, working class gets poorer and we all dive into an age of darkness, economically and socially speaking. Our demands from the Government must be for reforms and not for what is already guaranteed under the constitution. If we feel our civil liberties and fundamental rights are violated and/ or that we have been deprived of them, then we have a solid judiciary in place from where we can get the recourse.

In conclusion I feel that the bitter and scathing attacks on Government by various forces are a pretext to hinder growth, growth which we have not seen in many years and which we hope and pray becomes a reality. The Government too has faltered in handling these situations in a diplomacy that it demands and has lost precious time in the parliament, falling victim to the opposition’s rants, however well-grounded or unfounded they may be. Allegations and protests can go on, but their repercussions on the people of India at large must be thought about. We must be thankful for having a judiciary in place which is largely independent in its actions and however slow it is in its functioning, history says that it is fair in the end. Negative propaganda may win opposition elections in the future, but what else can it do?