Author:
Publication: Kashmir Sentinel
Date: January 1 - January 31, 2003
An alarming deterioration in the
security situation in the state has taken place during the past one and
a half month. Tile terrorists have been inflicting harrowing burtalities
on the innocent civilians. In many cases the entire family has been wiped
out on mere suspicion. Even a four-year old child was not spared in Reban,
Sopore. Terrorists have also been attacking the state police personnel
selectively. A spurt in Fidayeen attacks' has led torn all pervasive fear.
The frontier district of Rajouri
is witnessing a new campaign of Talibanisation. This has a two-fold objective.
One, to force the Hindu minority out of the region. Secondly, by building
the pitch for Talibanisation, the terrorists' managers hope to enhance
the levels of local recruitment. Selective attacks on the local Muslim
women, particularly in the Thannamandi Darhal belt, belong to a different
category. Fed up with the excesses of militants, these women are increasingly
turning to security forces for help. This his invited the terrorists' wrath.
Recently, in an act of medival savagery, the terrorists beheaded four young
women.
Changing situation in Kashmir has
also exposed the hypocrisy and the double speak of its civil- society.
For the first time question marks are being raised about its role and relevance
from within the ranks of Kashmir Muslim society. When ever there is an
overreaction by the security forces, there are hysterical demonstrations.
But when an innocent Kashmiri is killed by the terrorists or the 'White'
blood, as a scribe describes it, is spilled the response of the Civil Society
is muted. This deformed Civil Society has been obfuscating the real issues
at stake in Kashmir. Common Kashmiri needs relief from the day to day excesses
of terrorists and restoration of a humane social order, uninfluenced by
the terrorists appartchicks. The state government needs to bring an urgency
in shaping a firm policy against the terrorists.
It is in this context the government
must clear the confusion. For whom is the 'healing touch' meant'?
Victims of militancy and those Kashmiris
who disapprove of terrorism, or those who perpetrate hate and violence.
It is not clear if the 'healing
touch' policy is based on some expert guidance or is just a populist game
to encash a particular constituency. One may well ask that the expert advice,
if any, the state government has sought, has taken cognizance of the geopolitical
realities at the regional level. Pakistan is sustaining the terrorist campaign
ill J&K at a time when we are being made to believe that it is under
pressure. Stridency in Musharraf's statements and the threat of unleashing
a nuclear war should not be underestimated. He is trying to convey that
Pakistan would go ahead with its policy of active hostility against India,
even at the risk of becoming an international pariah. Recent developments
in Pakistan point to a close nexus between Musharraf and the Jehadi groups.
Jehadis have been installed in power in Baluchistan and NWFP with Musharrafs
blessings. Federal government has also eased pressure on Jehadis and their
top leaders have been released. The notorious Jehadi outfit, Lashkar-e-Toiba,
recently held one of its largest congregations.
The 'healing touch' policy of the
new government is flawed on three counts. One, the intelligence agencies
have been warning persistently that the violence graph will rise appreciably
after the elections and the terrorists were likely to attack the new elected
representatives. Where then was the justification for adopting a soft policy
towards terrorists'. Secondly, the PDP-Congress coalition is not a stable
government. The gesture of a soft policy was likely to be misconstrued
by the terrorists as weakness of the government and a concession to them.
Thirdly, through the advocacy of dialogue, the coalition government is
undermining its own legitimacy of being an elected government, that carries
the mandate of the people. The government puts itself in an awkward position
when it pleads talks with those who did not take part in elections at ISI's
bidding or whose representative character remains doubtful. This stance
also wastes the gains India made by conducting elections, which have been
accepted as credible by the international community.
The new regime's opponents are already
crowing that the coalition government's healing touch' policy was an exercise
towards consolidating its political votebank. There are also accusations
that the state government was not serious in making the ground really hot
for the terrorist entrepreneurs sponsored by Pakistan. It is in the interest
of coalition's own survival that it must convince the nation that the 'healing
touch' is not a tool of mere political expediency.
The 'healing touch' policy holds
the potentiality of unleashing a new phase of terrorist violence and competitive
secessionism and communalism. This may squeeze further the political space
for the nationalist effort. It will be good governance, not the emotive
politics, that will be real investment in peace. Average Kashmiri knows
too well that a 'healing touch' may well prolong his tyranny and actually
hurt him.
