JOIN USDeadlock over dialogue
The Valley of Kashmir is under siege now. The basic individual rights like the right to life, liberty and property are at great risk. For John Locke, the 17th century English philosopher, it is the protection of these three rights that motivated people to overcome the inconveniences of the “state of nature” and enter into a peaceful political community or state.
His predecessor, Thomas Hobbes famously said, “my mother gave birth to twins: myself and fear.” Since the 1990s Kashmiris are born under a similar threat. The Hobbesian brutal “state of nature” finds a perfect resonance in the valley where life of man is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
The Kashmir problem can’t be solved unless India and Pakistan agree to find an amicable solution to it. The founding fathers of India and Pakistan did not envisage antagonistic relations between the two countries. Even though Mahatma Gandhi opposed the creation of Pakistan, he took fast unto death for the release of Rs 55 crore to Pakistan towards the second instalment of arrears to be paid to it under the terms of division of assets and liabilities.
Similarly, although M A Jinnah championed the cause of Pakistan, he had a very positive vision for Pakistan – India relations. He believed that the two states would co-exist in peace and harmony like the United States and Canada. Regrettably, even before the two countries achieved independence, problems started to bedevil the relations. The deep rooted mutual distrust and suspicion, conflicting claims over Kashmir and what Stephen Cohen calls as the clash of state and national identities have put this relationship on hold.
In the past seven decades, India and Pakistan never seriously tried to put an end to the Kashmir crisis. Whether it’s the Tashkent Declaration, Shimla Agreement or the Lahore Declaration, there was no urgency shown to resolve the Kashmir issue. Instead, these agreements did not deal with the Kashmir dispute other than to note its existence. In effect, it was suggested that the issue should be put into cold storage while other more urgent problems were being solved.
Jammu and Kashmir was also one of the eight issues discussed within the framework of composite dialogue process. In four and a half rounds of talks within this framework, it was believed that the foreign secretaries have spent just about 10 hours in discussing the Kashmir issue. There was no forward movement apart from restating their respective national positions. But a few important Confidence Building Measures were put in place like the start of the bus services across the Line of Control in 2005-06 and the resumption of cross LoC trade in 2008.
While the composite dialogue process was underway from 2004 onwards, both countries were engaged in the backchannel negotiations over Kashmir. The backchannel negotiators developed what diplomats refer to as a “non-paper” on Kashmir: A text without names or signatures which can serve as a deniable but detailed basis for a deal. The “non-paper”, drafted in early 2007, laid out several principles for a settlement like softening of borders, autonomy and demilitarisation.
It was only on January 3, 2014, that then prime minister Manmohan Singh publicly acknowledged that secret envoys from the two countries had almost arrived at an agreed resolution to end the conflict in Kashmir. It had been noted that the files recording unsigned documents exchanged by the two sides were personally handed over to Prime Minister Narendra Modi by his Singh at a May 27, 2014 meeting. But there was no follow-up.
After the 2014 assembly elections in J&K which delivered a fractured mandate, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed was tempted to forge an alliance with the BJP. Apart from generous funding
from the Centre, he hoped that the alliance of two extremes would bridge regional divide in the state. But the experiment has failed. Regional polarisation has only increased. Further, the coalition was premised on the “Agenda of Alliance” which talks about dialogue with all stakeholders, softening of borders and a balanced growth.
‘Sala Model’
But the ‘agenda’ has fallen flat on PDP’s face. The sense of betrayal by PDP and BJP’s intransigence vis-à-vis dialogue within and outside contributed to the present unrest in Kashmir. The other contributing factor to the present unrest is what administrative thinker Fred W Riggs calls the “Sala Model” of administration which is characterised by nepotism, corruption and formalism: a distinction between norms and realities.
Our roads, hospitals and other public institutions give a shabby look. Despite the opening of the Chenani-Nashri tunnel for traffic on April 3, the Srinagar-Jammu highway remains closed for days together. The main challenge is to extend the Ramban-Banihal stretch of the national highway which is prone to landslides. Even the four-laning of Qazigund-Srinagar stretch under construction for the past so many years look like a Herculean task.
Although there is a realisation that the elections are no substitute to the political settlement in Kashmir, political uncertainty, continued violence and lack of development contributed to political apathy. That is why the Srinagar by-poll witnessed the lowest turnout in 30 years. The trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future unless a major political initiative is taken to address the growing alienation. The perception that political parties only cater to the interests of their workers must also be overcome.
Kashmiris are fed up with the political status-quo. They can go to any extent to break the deadlock. No amount of exhaustion shall overwhelm them. They live a simple life and can thus sustain the movement for a long. New Delhi must act now. Every killing only adds to the levels of alienation. The conflict is making inroads into new arenas of life. The universalities, colleges and schools are turning into new battlefields with a battle cry: “let’s die together.”
(The writer teaches at the Department of Political Science, University of Kashmir, Srinagar)