Vijay Hashia
Kashmir politics has always been confounded and chaotic, so are the swindling tricks of esoteric politicians. Political pundits and psephologists believe, they are adept in biloquism and more often have been opposed and accused of selling Kashmir for the sake of power. These politicians could be secular as well as communal, democratic as well as dictatorial, accessionist as well as pro-Pak. The underlying motivation is not principles but political power, personal and for coterie around. If the central leaders allowed them to rule the state in whatever manner they liked, whether or not it was in the interest of the country or in the interest of the state, they swore, on the one hand by the principles of democracy, socialism, secularism and accession to India and on the other hand, any question in regard to the exercise of authority or any personal ambition, the oath of allegiance got violated to anti-India sentiments, autonomy and communal shrill of gullible masses.
Vote Bank Strategies
The support of one leader or the other, one political group or the other has been fluctuating from time to time. People displayed alienation with the Sheikh in 1953, joined Bakshi, Sadiq, Mir Qasim, later again Abdullah dynasty and now PDP which came into existence in 1998. It stood on the ideology of self rule opposite to NC ideology. At one time, it had been in the forefront of agitation for Amarnath land transfer controversy that aroused communal tension. It orchestrated a political putsch by objecting to CBI giving clean chit to Omar Abdullah in the infamous 2006 sex scandal case and demanded a judicial probe into the issue. The party MLAs were open to fisticuffs in the legislature. Syed Bashir Ahmed, when raised the issue of ration supply to Kashmiri Pandit migrants of Jagati camp, was seen slapping a marshal in the legislative assembly. Recently, one of its legislators Mohd Ashraf Mir, who scored victory over Omar Abdullah, was seen celebrating over firing several rounds in the air from AK-47. The CM is himself critically viewed for having changed allegiance frequently in the past. That, it was during his tenure as union HM, AFSPA was promulgated; mourners participating in the funeral of Moulavi Farooq were shot; is accused of manipulating kidnapping of his own daughter in exchange of five militants. The party’s new political venture hobbles it in favour of Pak and separatists. It exploded controversy over separatist Masarat Alam’s release and mortal remains of Afzal Guru for a sepulchre; it created a paradox of separate identity by hoisting state’s flag over the roof top of Secretariat, the order of hoisting, which the CM had to reverse later- all reflects vote bank strategies, fanning of discord and suspicion over CMP and the separatists’ will over the ruling elite.
Ambivalent statements
It reminds one of Sheikh Mohd Abdullah’s off and on fusillades of statements against India and retracting them later. In one of the incidents, clash between army men and civilians which led to unrest in 1980, Sheikh Abdullah at a public meeting said, “We will not allow anyone, whether he is a Hindu, or Muslim, Pakistani or Indian, American or Russian, to play with our state’s destiny.” Projecting Indians with Pakistanis, Americans and Russians distressed New Delhi. He was summoned to New Delhi to clear up matter with Mrs Gandhi. The Sheikh later explained the statement as an ’emotional’ one which was not meant to spark off a confrontation with the centre or revive the separatist past. He later claimed that the PM had told him that she did not support any efforts to unseat him.
The slew of statements from the present CM is enmeshed in dense polemics, one to ensnare masses where the centre becomes a scapegoat and the other subtle praise for Delhi. Commenting on the politics of deception and duplicity, Jagmohan said, “To the flaws that were inbuilt in the soft and permissive attitude were added the flaws inherent in the politics of duplicity and deception which became a characteristic feature of Jammu and Kashmir scene. Around every basic principle, insincerity and inconsistency were woven. Whether it is the issue of secularism, autonomy or democracy, different postures could be adopted at different times or at different places by the same leaders. Of Sheikh Abullah, for instance, it was aid that he could be a communalist in Kashmir, a secularist in Jammu and a nationalist in New Delhi.”
Gullible masses
Kashmiri Muslims have reacted differently at different times to every politician and that too en-masse. Their alienation from one leader or the other has always been at the mercy of political masters. These masters worked clandestinely using their mandate every now and then. When Sheikh was ousted from power in 1953, the Jamaat pushed ahead radicalization, Bakshi extended covert support to the Jamaat’s activities to woo people who were against the Sheikh. GM Sadiq who replaced Bakshi however, issued a blanket ban on Jamaat’s centres of ‘Tableegh’ and education. However, Mir Qasim lifted the ban and used the Jamaat activists for political expediency. Nehru-Sheikh-Indira accords, Rajiv-Farooq and Rahul-Omar equations are seen dangled political carrots. In 1977, during Janta rule, Mirwaiz Molvi Farooq, Chairman of AAC, one time hardliner entered into an alliance with the Janta Party after seeing his base eroded which he compensated by a high profile public relation exercises. He was successful in his campaign and became one of the most sought after politician cum religious leaders. Though Sheikh Abdullah checked fundamentalism to some extent, some factions were imbued by Jamaat-e-Islami during Farooq Abdullah’s rule to outwit those who professed allegiance to secularism.
Old tricks
The present muddle is palpable of bogey on polemics of several theories, one opposing centre for azadi; two, voicing autonomy or self rule; three, Art-370 stratagem; four, AFSPA revocation at the cost of national security and return of mortal remains of Afzal Guru for a sepulchre to incite local sentiments against the centre. The release of so called political prisoners (terrorists) is another rebuke. Seen will be, how many more of such statements and actions will erupt and at what stage? Whether the coalition sustains and, if so, for how long under the whacked leadership which has started fissuring and whose leader is muddled between nationalist forces and secessionist elements?
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel