Author: Arvind Lavakare
Publication: Rediff.com
Date: January 18, 2006
URL: http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/jan/18arvind.htm
Were it not for the decorum of international
diplomacy, the Indian government would be justified in saying 'Piss off' to
General Musharraf after his recently expounded suggestion that the solution
to the 'Kashmir problem' lay in granting the state 'self-governance with joint
management by India and Pakistan' along with demilitarisation initially of
Srinagar, Baramulla and Kupwara regions. He made that suggestion on a CNN-IBN
television masterfully conducted by Karan Thapar and beamed in two parts on
January 8 and January 9.
Now the trouble with Musharraf is his delusion
that he is very clever, and can fool India's polite and peace-loving politicians
into accepting anything in return for cessation of the proven, Pak-backed
terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir as well as elsewhere in our country.
Thus, when Thapar countered by asking whether
self-governance and withdrawal of armed forces would be applicable also to
those areas such as the Northern Areas of Jammu and Kashmir (which are under
Pakistan's control), Musharraf's face visibly lost colour, his eyes blinked
and he embarrassingly answered, 'Yes…that could be considered… yes.'
That quick, combative reaction by Thapar should
make Musharraf realise that educated Indians do know that even after the Jammu
and Kashmir Maharaja had legally acceded his whole state to India in October
1947, Pakistan has been, despite the UN resolutions, in unlawful occupation
of the so-called 'Azad Kashmir' and the geographical entity called Northern
Areas comprising Gilgit, Baltistan, Hunza etc. which together equal nearly
one-third of the former Jammu and Kashmir kingdom.
Another trouble with Musharraf is his delusion
that he is an innovator. Thus it was that he described the suggested 'self-governance'
of Kashmir as being more than autonomy but less than independence, something
in-between, with joint management by India and Pakistan. Now that is surely
novel, but a surrealistic combination of contradiction and confusion.
Just see the meanings of the phrases Musharraf
used. According to Wilkipedia, cited by Google, 'Self-governance is an abstract
concept…Generally when self-governance of nation-states is discussed,
it is called national sovereignty --- a concept important in international
law…In politics, a self-governing city or region e g Kurdistan, Kosovo,
Hong Kong SAR is autonomous. Autonomy is usually a pre-requisite to separation
or secession; however, autonomy does not necessarily lead to separation. Autonomy
is not independence.'
Where in the above scheme does Musharraf's
'self-governance' solution fall in respect of Jammu and Kashmir? He admits
he does not know, except that it is 'in between autonomy and independence';
he says it will have to be discussed with the Indian government and, he hastens
to add, with the Kashmiris. This is the kind of wordsmith, readers, that India
has had to deal with.
The man doesn't know, or doesn't want to concede,
that the Jammu and Kashmir state in India is currently under a democratically
elected coalition and that it is the only one of the 28 states and seven Union
Territories in federal India which has its own state constitution that was
framed by a state Constituent Assembly elected on the basis of a universal
adult franchise; he pretends he isn't aware that only in matters of defence,
foreign affairs and communications does it have to abide by the policies of
New Delhi.
Musharraf pretends he isn't aware that the
geographical territory in which his Hurriyat lackeys live has the most unique
freedom in the political world: it can refuse the applicability to itself
of any law of the Indian Parliament and any amendment to the Constitution
of India. That territory, moreover, has the legitimate freedom to create certain
privileges for one category of its residents and deny those rights, including
employment and voting rights, to another category.
What does the above territory in India be
said to enjoy, Mr Musharraf? Isn't it autonomy short of independence? And
what 'self-governance' do you now want to give it? He will not answer because
he, though a commando, is shy to face the truth.
Musharraf believes the Indian people are ignorant
of the state of affairs in that part of Jammu and Kashmir which has been under
Pakistan's control since October 1947, and therefore he chooses to speak of
a 'solution' to the 'Kashmir problem' exclusively in terms of the scenario
in and around Srinagar. That belief probably arises from our politicians'
cowardly reluctance to openly call a spade a spade, our media's repeated pleas
for peace with Pakistan and the willingness of many an Indian to dump everything
for a biryani in Lahore towards eternal friendship.
But we know the truth, Mr Musharraf, we who
read and study. And the Indian government knows it too. It was the Indian
embassy in Washington, DC which was the primary source of our Outlook magazine's
tsunami expose of how Pakistan was exercising political tyranny in the Jammu
and Kashmir part that it was illegally occupying. In its online issue of July
5, 2001, that magazine told us that:
* 'Azad Kashmir' has been given the trappings
of a country with a constitution, a president, a prime minister and a legislature
of its own. But it's neither a country nor a province in practice. It has
been instead governed through the ministry of Kashmir affairs in Islamabad
and through a chief advisor in the rank of joint secretary. Since 1974, the
main executive authority rests with a 13-man Council of which Pakistan's PM
is the chairman and which he dominates with his six nominees. History shows
that each executive head of Pakistan, be it Ayub Khan or Zufiqar Bhutto, did
exactly what he wanted in 'Azad Kashmir' -- bringing in martial law, suspending
political activities, sacking its so-called prime minister, or whatever.
* The Northern Areas have no status despite
being five times the size of 'Azad Kashmir'. Despite judicial efforts of some
of its people, the entity is not recognized as a part of 'Azad Kashmir' or
as a separate province of Pakistan. They are ruled directly from Islamabad
through a Northern Areas Council headed by Pakistan's minister for Kashmir
affairs. A chief executive, usually a retired Pakistani army officer, appointed
by Islamabad is the local administrative head. The Northern Areas are, in
short, a story of deprivation of a people and their land devoid of any development
and denial of basic fundamental rights. There is no adult franchise there,
no assembly and the people have never participated in an election or sent
representatives to the National Assembly. The prestigious Pakistani magazine,
The Herald, once termed the Northern Areas as 'The Last Colony'.
So where then does President Musharraf place
Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas in his 'solution' to the 'Kashmir problem'?
Is he ready to give them 'self-governance' or 'autonomy' or 'something in
between'? He will not answer because, albeit being a commando, he shies from
the truth of a real battle.
Tailpiece: At the end of the follow-up programme
on Thapar's interview, the ongoing SMS poll of viewers showed that 84 per
cent of them did not trust the Pakistan president. That is the basic trouble
with Musharraf -- his credibility.
