Shiban Khaibri
Were monumental mistakes committed by Congress Party right from late 1947- 48 till 2014 in respect of handling Kashmir “affairs” any less that some of its leaders are still weaving and “inventing” concepts and theories which park at more confusion and avoidable doubts ? Ex Home Minister of India, Chidambaram “translates” Aazadi as “more Autonomy” for Kashmir and for having “more powers” under Article 370 as government’s “muscular approach has failed” —-these “golden” words coming in the wake of the central government sticking to its promise of holding talks with people under the confines of the constitution of India, side by side fighting against proxy war launched by treacherous neighbor against the country. Chidambaram was Union Home Minister, a seat which once graciously was held by one of the founding fathers of the Republic of India , Bharat Ratna Sardar Patel or the Indian Bismarck who gave to us a united India without any ulcers. He should have earned a name in the Guinness World Records for unifying 563 princely states into one cohesive united India and taken Junagarh and Hyderabad by employing, both political cum diplomatic prowess as well as showing the glimpse of force. The only state of Jammu and Kashmir was handled by Mr. Nehru and the results are before us.
Congress believing in “First venture and first loss ” or in our ordinary parlance “Sir mundhtay he oolay padana” , it started spreading misinformation , doubts and confusion in respect of appointing of Shri Dineshwar Sharma as interlocutor with a mandate to talk with everyone including the separatists. It wants for its petty political gains, this move of the Modi Government not to succeed like its own appointed three interlocutors Dilip Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M .M. Ansari appointed after the massive violence of 2010 in Kashmir which had claimed 120 precious lives.
Say the UPA appointed group of Interlocutors, “The present situation in the valley would have not taken place had the UPA Government listened to and not ignored our recommendations, this violence (2016-17) would have not taken place and if Narendra Modi government, as such, too would have taken necessary action on time.” Most probably they mean the ground work would have been made in such a way that if their recommendations would have been accepted, Modi Government could have succeeded in taking timely action to contain, if not prevent the massive violence. The separatists had boycotted to meet the UPA appointed interlocutors due to the reason of speaking to the Prime Minister or the Home Minister only as they did not want to talk to “political light weights”. If the pain, feigning it of course due to political expediency, to resolve the Kashmir unrest was so much in the leadership of the “Grand Old Secular Party” , why did it
* not arrange a meeting between the then PM or the Home Minister with the separatists;
* why did it not table the recommendations of its appointed Interlocutors’ report on the floor of the Parliament;
* why did it not share the findings with the opposition parties;
* why did it not allow even a debate on their recommendations;
* how can it charge the present dispensation of not having a policy on Kashmir when it wandered in the wilderness of hits and trials and always succumbed to the pressures of the local leadership, if not the black mail.
The head of the UPA Interlocutors Padgaonkar had said in July 2016 that the “nature of militancy has changed since we submitted our report” and so “you need to take a fresh look”. How can therefore, the Congress Party blame the Modi government that appointing Dineshwar Sharma for holding talks with all stakeholders was just for publicity while it now openly advocates “greater Autonomy” since Congress leader Gulam Nabi Azad who is also the Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha on Oct 24 comes up with a statement that Congress doubted the “intent” of the NDA government in resolving the Kashmir issue and appointing of an interlocutor was “only for publicity” and that this government “had no Kashmir policy”. Was he serious about Kashmir returning to normalcy and employ those ways and measures which he now wants this government to have long back taken. He, as its Chief Minister could have taken the same, preempted those situations which during and after his exit surfaced in Kashmir, why did he not act? Instead, he left a trail of an otherwise avoidable situation of Shree Amar Nath pilgrimage row which turned into a mass Jammu movement for not days together but for weeks at a stretch, wherein not even a shop opened, when not even a public vehicle plied, the agitation inflicting on Jammuites loss of men and material. Business suffered in hundreds of crores of Rupees besides it laid bare open the communal agenda of those who had spread canards over using a piece of land for a few days to cater to the pilgrims’ facilities.
Let the Congress Party do an exercise of self introspection analyzing its balance sheet of decades of rule and allowing Kashmir situation slip out and get drifted – completely directed and dictated by Pakistan , often openly taking advantage of the religious card. Had Hyderabad been not taken firmly by the Iron Man of India Sardar Patel into his hands, and if had followed Nehru’s policy, we would have been having Hyderabad in more serious rather precarious situation than the Kashmir “tangle” as of date. Patel wanted the whole of Kashmir “even if it meant war…..” , the views expressed by him on July 23, 1949. He had the guts to take Lakshadweep integrated in time which was eyed by Pakistan seriously immediately after Aug15, 1947. He preempted rather thwarted Pakistani navy attempt to seize the strategically located island by sending a Naval ship to counter any Pakistani offensive.
Sardar Patel had quit Kashmir affairs portfolio to be handled by Nehru when the latter took the case to the UN which he felt to be as the gravest diplomatic and political mistake. Chidambaram, Gulam Nabi, Mani Shanker Ayer and other Congress leaders must admit the omissions and commissions committed by their party led Governments now having zonked to unmanageable resolutions rather than chiding Modi government of having a shift from “no talks ” to “talks with all stake holders”. Had this government got in heritance some portion of the problem having been resolved, it could have made headways and proceeded further from where the UPA had left. Had the Congress Party given practical shape to 1994 Parliament resolution about the PoK, yes – this government had no justification of sheltering under various alibis.
It would be wise on the part of the separatist leadership to avail of the opportunity of participating in deliberations with Dineshwar Sharma within the ambit of the provisions of the constitution and join the mainstream or else they would miss the bus. Opportunities and occasions do not come very often but rarely. Let them stop at further damaging and ruining Kashmir. Violence and religious bigotry do not pay but bring about blood spilling, ruination and devastation. The Autonomy chanters, on the other hand, in the valley must never day dream that Jammu and Ladakh had any takers of their autonomy plank except a few leaders which could be counted on fingers. Hence Farooq Abdullah’s clarion call from Party Head Quarters that all the three regions of the state must remain “united” in protecting the state’s special status is on gross assumptions and poetic imaginations. He has charged his political ally, the Congress with “snatching the autonomy of the people of the state”. Where does Congress, Chidambaram, Gulam Nabi and the ilk stand?
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel