Author: Hari Om
Publication: Vijayvaani.com
Date: November 12, 2009
URL: http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=927
The Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), a principally ICSSR-funded
institute for the study of social sciences and humanities, organized a day
long seminar on Kashmir at the capital's prestigious Nehru Memorial Museum
& Library, Teen Murti Bhavan, on November 7. It was convened by CSDS faculty
member and feminist Madhu Kishwar, and the famous lawyer Ram Jethamalani,
a well-known sympathizer of Kashmiri separatists and protagonists of greater
autonomy and self-rule.
(Ram Jethamalani and his close associate and
professional colleague Ashok Bhan (Congress) have been, it needs be underlined,
hobnobbing with Kashmiri secessionists in order to find a solution to the
Kashmir issue. Madhu Kishwar, whose political credentials are unknown but
is being projected by unknown sources in the government, has been metamorphosing
into a Kashmir expert (sic) in recent times. She opposed the idea of installing
a Congress-led government in Jammu & Kashmir in November 2005, and wanted
the Congress to allow Mufti Mohammad Sayeed to occupy the chief minister's
chair for a full term of six years. She was of the view that Mufti could carry
forward the "peace process with Pakistan" (whatever that means)
and wrote an article projecting the same in the Indian Express. She and a
bunch of Jawaharlal Nehru University professors lobbied for Mufti and his
People's Democratic Party, indicating a soft corner for Kashmiri separatists.)
The venue of the conference, Teen Murti Bhavan,
indicates that it was given the go-ahead by invisible powers in New Delhi,
with the objective of organizing 'pressure' on New Delhi so that the Kashmiri
secessionists could achieve their sinister goals. It was attended mostly by
those who either want independence for Jammu & Kashmir, or greater autonomy
and self-rule.
These included Mohammad Shafi Uri (National
Conference), Mehbooba Mufti and Muzaffar Hussain Beig (People's Democratic
Party), Yasin Malik (JKLF), Abdul Gani Bhat (Hurriyat Conference) and Saif-ud-Din
Soz and Manishankar Aiyer (Congress). Others invited included Balbir Punj
(BJP) and a couple of Kashmiri Hindus (for parity), but their presence was
no more than symbolic because it was basically a separatist-dominated show.
The basic objective of the organizers of conference
was to forge unity among the Kashmiri separatists and rope in a couple of
weak BJP leaders and others of their ilk so that they could work out a joint
anti-India agenda so that the Union Government cannot sabotage their efforts
by saying that Kashmiri separatists are a divided lot. (Keen political observers
insist the conference was a covert official initiative.)
It is, however, a different story that while
the National Conference and the People's Democratic Party delegates indicated
that their parties were more than willing to work with the Hurriyat Conference,
Yasin Malik punctured their balloon by saying he was not prepared to accept
anything short of independence from India.
This article is not to convey an impression
that the so-called mainstream delegates and separatists were not united as
far as their hatred for India and the Indian Constitution is concerned. They
are all one in this respect. In fact, both the National Conference and the
People's Democratic Party denounced everything Indian in their typical style.
What the so-called mainstream delegates and
the separatists said in the seminar was not altogether unexpected. That they
would pour venom on India and suggest the state's segregation from India was
a foregone conclusion.
It is no wonder that Hurriyat chairman Mirwaiz
Umar Farooq, who has been virtually snubbed by the likes of Democratic Freedom
Party chief Shabir Ahmad Shah for his eagerness to accept the Union Government's
invitation for talks, and whose line of action has been totally disapproved
of by Yasin Malik and the head of the breakaway faction of Hurriyat Conference,
Syed Ali Shah Geelani, took no time in directing the National Conference and
the People's Democratic Party to renounce power and join his outfit.
All this should not surprise anyone. Nor should
the conduct of JKPCC chief and former Union Minister Saif-ud-Din Soz surprise
anyone. After all Soz, who was the National Conference's ideologue right till
1999 and organized seminars on autonomy in Delhi and edited a book on the
same subject, joined the Congress only recently. His ideas about Kashmir remain
unchanged.
Soz said: "The Congress will work as
facilitator between New Delhi and Srinagar to settle the issue of Kashmir…
Hurriyat Conference (should) come to brass-tacks and avail the opportunity
to discuss issues with the Central Government… People's Democratic Party
and National Conference (should) dovetail their autonomy and self-rule documents".
In other words, Soz only sang the song of Farooq Abdullah and Mufti Mohammad
Sayeed and left no one in any doubt that he is one with them and the Kashmiri
separatists, and that he also stands for a solution that is practically outside
the constitutional and political framework of India.
Soz, however, Soz sprang a surprise when he
told delegates that "no power, not even the Indian Parliament and President
of India, can abrogate Article 370" and asserted that "only authority
that could have abrogated it was the Constituent Assembly, which stands dissolved."
This stand on Article 370 was not just provocative,
but exposed his hollowness and lack of knowledge. The remark that "only
authority that could have abrogated Article 370 was the Constituent Assembly,
which stands dissolved", was childish. He should know that the job of
any constituent assembly is only to frame the constitution. Once it does that
and a government is in place as per constitutional stipulations, it is the
government and its legislative wing which enjoy absolute power to amend the
so-adopted constitution, depending on the needs of the time and the requirements
of the people. He should have also known that the Jammu & Kashmir Constitution
he talked about has been amended umpteen times during the National Conference
rule, as also during the Congress-People's Democratic Party rule.
Soz made a mockery of himself by adversely
commenting on the amending powers of the Union Government and the State Government.
He was responding to the nationalist demand by the BJP MP Balbir Punj and
Kashmiri Hindu delegates that Article 370 should be abrogated and the state
brought on par with other states of the Union.
Anyway, the moral of the story is that Soz
has now openly jumped on to the separatists' bandwagon, of course, with the
consent of the Congress high command. Yet another moral of the story is that
the Kashmiri separatists are as divided as they were before. This division
is not a lapse on their part. It is all deliberate. They know that they would
become irrelevant the moment they forge unity amongst themselves. They know
that unity means their destruction and inability to mint easy money, visit
foreign countries and lead a luxurious life in 5 or 7 star hotels. They do
not believe in the age-old proverb "United we stand, Divided we fail".
For them a new proverb is far more appropriate "Divided we gain, United
we lose".
- The author is Chair Professor, Gulab Singh
Chair, Jammu University, Jammu
