B L Saraf
Hope, the heat and dust raised by the Home Minister’s statement, regarding creation of ‘Composite Townships’ in the Valley for resettlement of the displaced Pandits, has settled down. Let us add some sanity to the frenzied discourse. The return of the Pandits has, unfortunately, become far too complex than may appear on the face of it. Circumstances have created so many stakes and the stakeholders that those who really matter have been relegated to the margins. Many experts have sprung up to speak for them, unsolicited. Some say, no Pandit will return because his child is minting money in some god forsaken country. Others say the displaced have developed a skin so soft that it won’t bear even October cold. Quite a number of them say that exile will only return to live in ‘Villas’ to enjoy scenic climate of Kashmir ,during summer months, and then fly back .
Before building the ‘ Return Narrative ‘ few things need to be put in a perspective. Foremost among them is that the unfortunate exodus of the Pandits is one of the great tragedies; it is story of human sufferings where no one should claim victory. Here , we all losers. Kashmiri Pandits ( KPs ) have lost everything. But Kashmiri Muslim (KM ) is no richer, either. He has lost the KP, an original and integral component of the great ancient civilization. Above all he has lost face in the civilized world , where he is often asked “Why have you turned out KP ?” We are all victims of the circumstances. So , return of Pandits is neither victory for some nor defeat for the others. This is not the game of victors and the vanquished. It won’t help Pandit cause to wear victimhood or have the sense of reclaiming lost territory. Same way, KM will have to come out of the narrow and sectarian feeling that Pandits return will squeeze him out.
In the ‘ Return Narrative ‘ certain assumptions have to be discarded. First, it makes no sense to equate return of aborigines to their rightful habitat with the settlement of ‘aliens ‘ to change the demography. True logic of the argument is that absence of Pandits from the Valley has inflicted a demographic impairment. Possible return of the KPs will restore the that balance and credibility of the KMs and relieve them of the paranoia.
This is totally flawed argument that Pandits are coming to squeeze the Muslims and that the Indian State, in rehabilitating them, is planting one more ‘agent’ to support its cause. Pandits can’t be bracketed with the Armed forces to counter balance the Muslims. They are not the agents but have an initial claim to the Valley. It is highly preposterous to bring in Israel parallel to the discourse.
Pandits are told to live at their old places. Well , who won’t like to be at his original home. Pray, where are those places ? They are lost not only to the Pandits but also to their, once up on a time, Muslim neighbors.
Dwelling houses stand raised to the ground. Lands encroached up on. And in some cases taken over by the Government on the, unimaginatively, invoked ‘ public interest ‘theory. Then, it is said that only 10-15% Pandits will return. Some legislators have temerity to say that no Pandit will return. We do not know on what empirical evidence it is being said , so. Such statements help no body’s cause. It is also said that Pandits will not return because their wards are ‘lucratively’ placed over the globe and that they will not find such placements in the Valley. To put the issue in proper perspective we will have to understand that, even in normal times, who amongst us had not to leave his home to earn a livelihood. No one remains physically attached to his home for a life .Compulsions of living and the contingencies, which rule the mundane matters , often take us away from the home . But we retain an in alienable right to live there as and when we like. We always remain attached to home socially, psychologically and spiritually; and, unless we have voluntarily given it up, when occasion demand we make it to home to full fill the commitments and, then, move back to the place of earning. Every human being has a right to have a “choice “. In the given context “choice ” has a great role to play.
He must have a right of ingress and egress to exercise the choice . It can be exercised positively or in a negative manner.
We have to grant person a choice to live at a certain place, entailing a corresponding choice for him not to live at that place. More than emphasizing on a person’s physical presence at a place, his right to live or not to live at that place should be insisted on. All of us will have to strive for restitution of that right . Restitution of home will, automatically, fall in a place.
However, we must remember that restoration of that right demands an environment which, apart from providing a feeling of physical security, is rich in spiritual and social content. Having lived far away, Pandits need social and spiritual comfort. So, they must have near and dear ones close by, as indeed they need locals to strengthen that comfort. Administrative convenience , logistics and the security feasibly have to be factored in.
True , my child lives for earning at a different place ,but it is my duty to secure him an unfettered right to visit his native place, as and when he desires so.
Just as I have to appreciate his right not to live at the native place. At present, unfortunate circumstances have put a clog on his right. That clog must be removed and the choice restored.
Pandits have braved very hostile weather conditions. Winter is familiar to them and they know how to enjoy it. It won’t deter their resolve to return to the Valley. Let everyone withhold comment at the moment. In the past , governments have floated enough trial balloons: stage for a trial and errors has gone. Time for a holistic action and exhibition of strong political will has arrived .
(The author is former Principal District & Session Judge)
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel