Author: Admiral Arun Prakash [Retd]
Publication: Covert
Date: November 1, 2008
Recently, millions of Indians watched in anguish
television footage of Jammu and Srinagar burning, even as India's Neros continued
to fiddle. As they traded charges and counter-charges, our unscrupulous and
short-sighted politicians concentrated on scoring electoral points, and achieved
what they do best - arousing the worst kind of passions for short-term gains
with elections in sight.
It has just been 61 years of Maharaja Hari
Singh signing the Instrument of Accession which legally and Constitutionally
brought the whole State of J&K into the then Dominion of India. He did
so while fleeing his State in the face of a Pakistani inspired and led tribal
invasion.
In September 1947 Pakistan had mounted a blockade
of the Muzaffarabad-Uri road and stopped all goods traffic to Kashmir [déjà
vu?]. On 22 October they sent their tribal hordes swarming into J&K. Providentially,
while the Pakistani kabailis [tribesmen] lingered in Baramulla to indulge
in rapine and plunder, the Indian Army airlifted enough troops to save the
Valley. Our Army and Air Force fought gallantly for 14 months in difficult
terrain and weather to push back the invasion in substantive measure. It was
a combination of our own naiveté, coupled with the duplicity of the
British rump in the subcontinent that gave away Gilgit, Chitral and Swat,
and thwarted Indian Army's plans to recover the critical Muzaffarabad-Kotli-Mirpur
belt which now constitute the Northern Areas and PoK [or "Azad"
Kashmir] respectively.
Having barely reconciled himself to a "truncated
and moth-eaten" Pakistan, Jinnah was bitterly disappointed at the turn
of events in Kashmir. He naturally chose to ignore the fact that the two-nation
theory was debunked at the moment of Partition, because there were more Muslims
in India than in their putative new homeland. Furthermore, these Muslims were
full and equal citizens of a secular democracy; unlike the victimised minorities
who remained in theocratic Pakistan. And yet, for these 61 years we have allowed
Pakistan to harass, intimidate and bleed us over Kashmir through overt aggression
and covert terrorism on the specious grounds that as a Muslim-majority state,
Kashmir belongs to them.
Given our characteristic lack of vision and
determination, we have behaved like an irresolute tug-of-war team which has
allowed itself to be steadily pulled by the opponent over six decades to within
a few inches of the red line. Today, not only does our adversary believe that
one final heave will bring us stumbling across the line, but even faint-hearted,
myopic and thoughtless Indians have started talking about Kashmir and India
needing azadi from each other. It does not require much reflection to pinpoint
the fault line.
As far back as 5th century BC, the Athenian
philosopher Plato, while arguing against democracy, said that it "inexorably
leads to mob rule" with those in power pandering to "pleasure seekers
whose principal goals are the satisfaction of personal desires". For
good measure, he added that democracy not only results in "rule by the
stupid" but also disagreement and conflict. One would imagine that the
system would have evolved in the 2,400 years that have lapsed since Plato.
But we then have Winston Churchill saying in the House of Commons in 1947,
"In handing over the governance of India to these so called political
classes, we are handing over to men of straw."
The most egalitarian democracies of the world
go to extraordinary lengths to ensure that they are ruled and administered
by the intellectual elite of the nation. But we in India have distorted democracy
beyond recognition and ensured that our lawmakers and rulers include many
who are the dregs of society - some barely literate and many guilty of serious
transgressions of the law. Since their own livelihood and the fortunes of
their families depend on the profession of politics, it should not surprise
anyone that these men place themselves, their financial well-being and their
political survival, well above the nation in their list of priorities.
Our politicians have not only effectively
stymied Parliament with their screaming, shouting, haranguing and waving of
currency notes, they have also managed to displace "national interest"
with emotive issues of religion, caste, region or language, which can be used
to inflame passions instantly. They have also taken the political process
to the streets, and any issue is good enough to organise illegal dharnas,
bandhs and chakka-jams. Why have a Parliament if this is how democracy is
meant to function?
The unholy mess created by Kashmiri politicians
out of the holy Amarnath Yatra land issue defies comprehension. However, one
wishes that Kashmiri hotheads had paused to contemplate the spirit in which
the Indian state [as distinct from the politician] has strenuously striven
to safeguard its minorities, and recalled the ironclad protection accorded
to J&K by Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, before toying with religious
sentiment.
The wild allegations about "demographic
change" being attempted by India in the icy wasteland of Baltal and comparisons
with Palestine were as ridiculous and uncalled for as they were inflammatory.
One does not expect maverick organisations like the Hurriyat to lose sleep
over India's sensitivities, but responsible people should have remained alive
to the repercussions of such rhetoric on India's delicate secular fabric.
South of Banihal, why grievances concerning
the alleged "neglect of Jammu" going back decades should have surfaced
as an issue at this particularly delicate juncture is another mystery. Getting
ordinary people out on the streets, and igniting passions in a tense and polarised
environment is a simple task for professional agitators. Political parties
should have shown some concern about larger national interests and counselled
restraint on their followers.
Having lit these fires and vigorously fanned
the flames, the politicians sat back to watch the fun. It is really immaterial
whether the people of Jammu actually organised an economic blockade or just
held up traffic for a couple of days; but the fact is Pakistan was delighted
at this turn of events, and exploited it to the hilt. A beleaguered Musharraf
who should have been more worried about his impending impeachment was handed
the opportunity to sermonise about India's human rights violations in Kashmir.
The best brains of the ISI could not have done more to damage India's integrity,
secular structure and international standing, than what our small-minded politicians
have wreaked on this country.
I was a three-year-old when, on 30 October
1947, my family had to flee the small Kashmiri town of Badgam where my father
was a revenue officer, before the kabaili onslaught. With just our clothes
on our back, we piled into an RIAF DC-3 Dakota which dumped us in Delhi. We
rejoined my father six months later to start life again from scratch.
I grew up in the Valley in the Fifties and
Sixties. My neighbours and playmates were all Kashmiris, of Muslim, Hindu
and Sikh faith. Our parents were friends. We ate in each other's homes and
celebrated all festivals together. But even as children, we clearly understood
that Kashmir was not [yet] India, and that the average Kashmiri's attitude
towards India was, at best, ambivalent.
Food, education, clothing and medicine in
Kashmir were either free or heavily subsidised - India provided huge financial
assistance to the State. The Kashmiris took the largesse, but every evening
tuned into Radio Pakistan that never failed to play on their religious heartstrings,
spouting propaganda about Indian Army atrocities and heaping scorn on the
"Indian occupation of Kashmir". It was not at all unusual to hear
strains of the Pak national anthem Qaumi Tarana.
In 1953 it was rumoured that the Americans
had offered to make Sheikh Abdullah the king of an independent Kashmir. The
tallest Kashmiri figure and a staunch secularist, the Sher-e-Kashmir was arrested
as he was allegedly on the verge of crossing over to Pakistan. I recall, as
a nine-year-old, seeing Baramulla go up in flames as agitators waved Pakistani
flags and shouted pro-Pakistan slogans. The Army opened fire and many were
killed before the Valley relapsed into sullen silence.
Ironically, the crores that India blindly
poured into Kashmir were the biggest cause for resentment against it amongst
the populace. The reason was simple: the State was a nest of corruption and
nepotism, and possibly up to 95% of Indian funds went to line the pockets
of the ruling politicians and compliant officials. Instead of crafting a well
thought out politico-economic strategy for winning over Kashmir and its people,
India simply threw money at the problem. This money did not create jobs, industry
or infrastructure, but merely served to enrich Kashmiri politicians and aggravated
the alienation of the people.
The theft of Prophet Muhammad's sacred relic,
kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed, seizure of Hazaratbal Shrine, capture and burning
down of Charar-e-Sharif, persecution and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from the
Valley, hijacking of IC-814 all followed each other in a depressing sequence.
They clearly pointed to the ineptness of our intelligence agencies, a lack
of civil-military coordination and the complete strategic bankruptcy of New
Delhi.
This is not meant to be a history of Kashmir's
travails, but merely a reminder to those who profess shock and horror at the
recent happenings in the Valley that since 1947 we have failed to convince
the Kashmiri that he is an Indian. Despite the Army's valiant efforts with
"Op Sadhbhavana", the political struggle for Kashmiri hearts and
minds has at best, remained a work in progress. And it is now obvious that
we have messed up - so far.
As the recent crisis shows, our political
classes have learnt nothing from history, and given their ineptitude, the
Kashmir imbroglio could carry on forever. The Kashmiri leadership, on their
part, have displayed insensitivity, opportunism and ingratitude of the worst
kind. While we must recognise that Kashmir has indeed suffered due to the
games that the politicians have been playing since 1947, the Kashmiris must
acknowledge that much Indian blood has been spilt on their soil, and the nation
has lavished huge resources on the State for the betterment of its people.
In the din of shrill political rhetoric, we
will never come to know whether or not azadi is what the ordinary Kashmiri
wants; and if he does, what exactly he means by it. Meanwhile, the ISI's cat's-paws
will continue to use this slogan to whip up passions in the Valley and thus
provide fodder for other hard liners to do likewise in Jammu.
There is, however, a larger issue before us:
how do we know that there are not many more Kashmirs in store for India? We
have inflicted on ourselves, and we will bequeath to succeeding generations,
a political system which makes effective governance virtually impossible.
With ungoverned areas in the country expanding, it now appears that the integrity
and cohesion of the nation may also be in peril.
It is the elected representatives of the people,
the lawmakers of the land, who should bring about necessary reforms in the
system. It is tragic that they will not raise a finger to make the slightest
change that will rock the happy boat that they are riding in at the peoples'
expense.
In the "mother of Parliaments" in
London, the Opposition is, by tradition, designated as "Her Majesty's
Most Loyal Opposition". This is not mere tokenism, because in difficult
periods, British political parties are known to sink their differences and
coalesce in national interest, as demonstrated by Churchill's War Cabinet,
which included Attlee.
Will Indian politicians ever be able to muster
the maturity and patriotic spirit to rise above petty divisive politics and
stand united for the nation's sake; at least on issues like terrorism, the
Naxalite menace, Kashmir or Parliamentary reforms? If they can do so, there
may, perhaps, be a small ray of hope for the country in the interregnum following
the dissolution of the 14th Lok Sabha and the convening of the 15th. If the
major parties agree, this timeframe could offer a window of opportunity to
formulate some reforms, vital to the proper functioning of democracy, like:
1. A stringent code of conduct for the elected
representatives of the people, including the liability to recall for misconduct,
defection or non-performance. There should be no immunity for misdemeanours
inside or outside Parliament.
2. Rules for attendance, participation and
conduct of business in the Houses of Parliament by MPs to be laid down, and
penalties for violating the dignity and decorum of the legislature to be stipulated.
The "no work no pay" rule should be invoked for our representatives.
3. Use of religion and caste, violent demonstrations
for political ends and destruction of public property should be designated
as serious antinational crimes, inviting heavy penalties.
As a postscript to this essay, let me offer
a small vignette of the 1947 Kashmir war.
Sheikh Mohammad Usman, the youngest of six
siblings, was born in Azamgarh district of UP in 1912. Usman was selected
for training in the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, and received a commission
in the Baluch Regiment in 1934. In 1947 when all officers had to choose between
India and Pakistan, Usman as a senior Muslim officer received messages from
Jinnah that if he came across he could well become the first Pakistani Commander-in-Chief.
Usman chose to stay in India.
During the Kashmir operations, as Commander
50 Para Brigade, Usman played an outstanding role in the re-capture of Jhangar
and defence of Naushera. On 3 July 1948 Brigadier Usman was killed in action
by a Pakistani shell, and was posthumously awarded the Mahavir Chakra. Befittingly,
this war hero received a state funeral which was attended by the Prime Minister
and the Governor-General of India. In this tale are embedded lessons for our
politicians, about the virtues of secularism and the noble ethos of the nation's
armed forces; both institutions derided, devalued and perhaps even despised
by them today [¼]
- Arun Prakash is a former Chief of Naval
Staff
