Secularity, Autonomy, and Article 370

Article 370 was drafted in 1947 with the intention of being a temporary provision due to the ongoing territorial conflict between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region. This clause grants special autonomous powers to the state and the debate over whether it should be abrogated or retained is still ongoing. 

The concessions given by Article 370 showed clear discrimination between the majority and minority communities. It resulted in the religious oppression of the Kashmiri Hindus who are the largest minority community in the region causing the numbers to dwindle even further. So while the rest of India enjoyed secular rights, a greater divide was formed in Kashmir due to the unequal rights of the communities. 

Source: thehindu.com

When Article 370 was drafted the condition for its abrogation was an agreement between the President of India and the Constituent Assembly. That Assembly is now defunct as it was disbanded in 1957 and hence, Article 370 can be abrogated without much delay - a point that has been raised quite often in arguments regarding this issue. However, this topic is multi-dimensional and can’t be viewed from just a single viewpoint. 

Any changes or the removal of Article 370 may result in a more secular and equal state but it would also cause dissatisfaction among the people of the Muslim majority community. The government is dependent on the votes of this community as well, causing a certain amount of delay and thought to be put into the option of making changes to this clause. People in this community aren't eager to become a part of the Indian nation either, claiming to be comfortable with their socio-economic scenario. 

Indian citizens may express discontent at not being allowed to enjoy the same privileges in Kashmir that they do in other states of India. While there may be an ongoing conflict about whether Kashmir belongs to India or Pakistan, a part of it remains under the Indian Territory and Indian citizens should be able to exercise their rights even there. This also gives rise to the question of whether every state in India should have its own laws governing the extent to which people can exercise their freedom.

Around the time of Independence, the Kashmiris were reluctant to become a part of India and preferred to remain an autonomous state as they felt separated from the rest of the nation. Now, India is secular and every religious community enjoys a certain amount of freedom and rights within the nation while Kashmir remains separated without that reason remaining. 

- Purnima Bala 

This is an opinion piece written by the author who has been credited, and the views that are expressed are exclusively hers.

Kashmir: Our Problem?

The Kashmir issue is many sided and has more layers than people would care to admit, since not admitting to the complexity of a problem is a lot easier than respecting the multi- varied dimensions of it. As said before, the problem that Kashmir poses to New Delhi is similar to any other counter- insurgency operation that has been undertaken by any government.

In military parlance the term used for a situation that had multiple points of origin and no clear targets, or easily identifiable/ tangible objectives (such as Afghanistan and the International NATO forces) was called a "Cluster Fuck". Which while apt couldn't be spoken of in the presence of official, so it was abbreviated to CF and then referred to as Charlie Foxtrot. The insurgency threat in the valley is a CF if there every was one.

You have a mostly Hindu peace keeping/ security force that is an almost entirely Muslim area. This split on communal lines need not exist, but the fact that it exists must not be ignored by politico's who have the power to shape the lives of entire families who inhabit the Kashmir valley. The constant threat that a child in the valley is in, can't be easily described.

A riot in progress
Source: http://kashmirinfocus.com

The Indian government has not done a great job at inspiring any sort of trust in the people. In addition the politicization of every issue that the state deals with ensures that the state will continue to be split on communal lines as long as political parties see it fit to do so. A recent example is how the BJP decided it was ethical, or at least alright to start accusing Abdullah and his National Conference of not ensuring that flood victims were rehabilitated and the disaster as a whole was contained.

The Jhelum floods over
Source: ibnlive.in.com

The Assembly election have presented another significant problem. The alliance between the PDP and the BJP seems quite perfect, but if one looks deeper, it seems to be a little counter- intuitive to have an alliance between two parties that are on completely opposite sides of an ideological spectrum. One of the strongest criticism of the UPA I and UPA II was that even though Dr. Singh might have been well meaning, he was curtailed by different factions of his coalition that just refused to co- operate on certain issues. Thus are the perils of a parliamentary system. The PDP and BJP alliance in the state legislature are going to be beleaguered by problems that can't even be imagined, and we didn't even have to wait very long before a comment crediting the Hurriyat for ensuring that elections went off without a hitch ensured that a parliamentary session was interrupted.

There might be any one solution to this problem, in truth there can't be, not when there are so many different factions that are vying for their own version of the promised land, or at least their home. Here is where David Malone again comes to my mind, and like he said, if India bases it's argument on the fact that the people of Kashmir are Indian, then why don't we begin acting like they are?

- Anirudh R.

This is an opinion piece written by the author who has been credited, and the views that are expressed are exclusively his. 

The Exodus that Nobody Remembers

January 19 (or 21st by certain accounts) is infamous in India for being remembered as the anniversary of the exodus of the Pandits from their home, the Kashmir valley and also as the anniversary of the only ethnic cleanse in the modern history of the sub- continent. The Pandits who might have numbered anywhere between 15% and 20% at one point of time have slowly been whittled down to about 3,000 odd. Though these numbers are contentious, they tell a striking story of a people whose government has forsaken them.

Many are of the opinion that the reason for the Exodus (which really came to head in the 1990 riots) was Jagmohan (former Governer of J&K) who not many remember very fondly. Though the number of Pandits who have actually been killed by militants is a contentious question (figures range from 200 to 600 plus), the Exodus implies a threat that was felt by the community that was both implicit and explicit.

Rehabilitation has been attempted, as said by Omar Abdullah, former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, but has so far been fairly unsuccessful. If history has taught us anything, when a community is displaced so absolutely, it is going to take more than a good dental plan to lure them back.

References and Future Reading:

On the steps taken by the government.

Sanjay Tickoo, head of the KPSS and a Kashmiri Pandit.

Author Mridu Rai speaks about the Exodus.

Indian Express Opinion Piece on the Conflict.

Hindu Op- Ed on the Issue.

NDTV on Omar Abdullah and Rehabilitation Efforts.