Trouble in Kashmir-a democracy in peril

Kashmir is in turmoil again; well that is not the news, it has been in turmoil since summer or more accurately since many summers. May be my cynicism is over powering me because I started for seeing the trouble in Indian democracy itself. Indian democracy has been through many eras of troubles and even through the times when everything seemed to be lost, only to see it emerge not only unscathed but even healthier than before. It has been that very democracy in its chaotic form that even enabled a multinational and disparate country to not only remain united against odious odds and dubious premonitions of pundits, rather allowed it to stake its place as an emerging economic power house on its own at the world stage. All this has been possible when despite all short comings the country never let go of its chaotic democracy and democratic rules always prevailed and civilian democratic institutions held precedence over everything else. In contrast to neighboring Pakistan, army and allied institutions were always held subservient to the elected civilian authority. Fading out of Field Marshal Manekshaw under Indira Gandhi after his misspeak in press and dismissal of Admiral Vishnu Bhagat by the Vajapayee government represented the high points of Indian democracy putting it in same league as the dismissal of roguishly brilliant General Douglas MacArthur by Harry Truman. The intransigency and insensitivity on the part of successive Indian governments to address the Kashmir problem is not only making any solution intractable by the day but it has started eroding the very core of Indian democracy that has sustained India as a country. The promulgation of completely undesirable armed forces special power act to deal with armed insurgency becomes a complete anathema in democracy if allowed to deal with stone pelting crowds demanding their rights. Epithets of incompetence hurled at Omar Abdullah by vicious rightist saffron thugs become meaningless until he is able get very genuine demands including abrogation of armed forces act fulfilled. A completely unnoticed and out of character development has been the public airing of opposition against removal of the act by the forces including chiefs of the staff. This opposition by security services is being played to the hilt by shameless BJP and will eventually prevent even a semblance of progress on the issue. Syed Ali Shah Geelani is able call shots in Kashmir because insensitive Indian regimes never offered any concessions when moderates were in ascendancy. And worst of all, in the guise of insurgency in Kashmir, the military officials continued to make statements beyond their mandates. Omar Abdullah is not asking for withdrawal of the infamous act from entire state but only from the districts where unarmed people are demanding their rights and where armed forces have not been and should not have been asked to intervene. The situation in Kashmir through blatant mishandling has reached a point of no remedy but it is the Indian democracy that is reaching its peril by allowing civilian authorities to be pushed by the subservient institutions. To let decisions drag at the time of mounting civilian casualties and to let hardliners set agenda are never signs of a healthy democracy. Offering of concessions never bring down the countries but stupid intransigencies do.

Obama-presidential moorings

These days Obama hardly resembles the leader who was elected President against all odds; nevertheless, the biggest factor that contributed to his being elected was a catastrophic predecessor. But since then again against all hype and hope Obama has spectacularly lost his way just eighteen months into his presidency. Though it may be ironical it starts to look that history might be cruelly repeating itself. The year was 1976 and Jimmy Carter from being Jimmy who was catapulted into the White House as the country was looking for a salvage from dark saga of the Watergate scandal and wanted to leave behind the ignominy of Vietnam war and its after affect on the American society. Painfully the Carter Presidency never took off and it soundly wound up at the end of one term to make way for the incorrigible Ronald Reagan who not only carried entire right behind him but also bound independents and substantial democrats to himself throughout his two-term Presidency. Is it happening all over again? Does Obama increasingly start looking like Jimmy Carter? To the horror of many the answer at the moment would be undeniably in an affirmative. Ironically, the Obama Presidency started immediately upon being elected and much before being inaugurated. The economy was floundering and George W. Bush on a cue from equally inglorious Republican President Hoover was performing an act of masterful inactivity. It was during those days when President-elect Obama appeared on the scene along with economists like Paul Volker, Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers and many others to reassure the country and world; he was equally instrumental getting stimulus packages through the congress. Nevertheless the corporate greed coupled with disastrous logic practiced by the predecessor had pushed economy into much deeper abyss than perceived. The abyss stared hard at common people while the corporate capitalists even made profit out of the turmoil. Somewhere along the way Obama lost the sight of the fact that in the eventual reckoning of success it is the 'stupid economy' that after all matters and in those dire times Obama should not only have put his diligence into economy but at the same given it a high visibility to assure the independent voters who in the first place elected him. Obama's grandiose dream of building consensus a la Lincoln was doomed from the start. Abraham Lincoln did not live in an age of sound-bites and did not have a rabid talk show host loudly wishing him failure on the day of his inauguration. Though, Lincoln did reach Washington for inauguration in a disguise to dodge a rumored assassin. Nevertheless, while seeking consensus Lincoln did not shirk from hard decisions otherwise Obama wouldn't be President today. Any astute politician must have known that after Rush Limbaugh's diktat no Republican would dare to support any Obama initiative and that should have sent him full throttle towards attaining his agenda in first two years with Democrats in control of the Congress. But that was not to be. He did as Jimmy Carter did though not exactly in the same manner. He squandered. We might never know the reason and will have to wait for historians to tell us. But squandered, he did. He had all right thinking people wishing him to be successful and advising him strategies to put economy up front. The cliché silver lining in the dark cloud has never been truer than now. Though it is very probable that Republicans in November will take control of either one or the both houses in Congress and will start reveling in dirty investigations all over again but that might at the same provide Obama an outside chance to prove his fighting character all over again. The scenario is grim to imagine; as Paul Krugman wrote that the spectacle of government shutdown during prosperous Clinton years may not be as amusing in these hard times. On a brighter note Obama can still be re-elected in 2012 only if grizzly moose hunting Sarah Palin manages to attain Republican nomination to join the immortal club of Barry Goldwater and Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Brazen agenda of communalists

This was not my day of writing; I didn't want. But then something disturbing provoked me into it. It all seems to be complacent that communalists are lying low after being crushed in the last elections. But the truth is they are not; they are eating the very grass-roots and they are spreading their venom using innocuous channels. They are active in holding their camps in places like Ladakh with obvious target being security personnel; in their scheme of things Buddhists of Ladakh hardly count. Remember when Liberhan commission pointed out to the infiltration of the government and the administration by communal forces at every level and which according to the commission continues to thrive. That didn't happen overnight and again they are not doing it overnight but only difference is now they have become brazen. Otherwise their stage managed enactment with so-called student representatives from Kashmir and deliverance of admonishments would have been circumspect. The worrisome aspect is inclusion in their ranks of journalists and other so-called eminent up-starts who sternly delivered oft-repeated mantra of India not yielding an inch on Kashmir. To delve into the question of state of things reaching such an impasse that the very communalists who were clearly beaten in the elections have temerity to raise their ugly tentacles one might invoke divinity but the very reason are the people and organizations who seem have to lost their sense of responsibility in conjunction with the loss of reason. The political parties on the left were at their admirable best to keep communalists away from getting into power until arrogance and egos took over. What else does explain their joining hands with communalists? And complete bizarre unexplained phenomenal silence of progressive parties on pressing situation like Kashmir in particular and the Maoist movement in general is yielding space for communalists to fill in. It is those parties that should be pressing the Congress government to make steps towards a just solution in Kashmir instead of letting communalists set the agenda. The enactment of farce by communalists through holding so-called discussions with the representatives of Kashmir does not mean that BJP and its allied organizations underwent overnight heart-transplant and replaced with the one that is filled with sympathy for Kashmiris. Their gimmicks are meant more for gullible ignorant Indian middle class, their ultimate vote fodders, whom they want to assure about theirs being a nationalistic party. Otherwise their behind the scene anti-activity, at the time when an agreement on Kashmir through back-channel diplomacy  was on the verge, had reached obscene level. Again they could not resist obscenity even during the stage managed conclave and here I quote Tarun Vijay from his blog in Times of India "Jayant Chaudhary was candid. "You want peace, right?" And everyone nodded. So friends, peace as I read somewhere, is like lovemaking. You have to keep your eyes shut and let the process take its course. Coming on a dialogue table with preconditions spoils the game." For me to put this line from the ugly blog "Kashmir's 'Azadi' with the tricolor" by Tarun Vijay was itself a low point. But then I wanted to make a point. How can these communalists be sincere when their government in Gujrat stage managed encounters to kill innocents and if they really had a change of heart they might ask who killed MP Ehsan Jaffri.

Sanguine Choices

In the last few days the Indian newspaper have finally taken time from their routine trivia to notice the unrest in Kashmir and come out with sanguine advice to the Indian government to resolve the matter within the ambit of constitution. Though, it was quite gratifying to know that those newspapers while busy in reporting on matters like butt of John Abraham could spare some thoughts on precarious situation in Kashmir. But at the end one would think it is probably in the interest of the nation that idiots continue to concentrate on those matters and leave Kashmir alone, if their propositions do not allow them to go beyond the ambit of constitution and they do not see the writing on the wall that the current movement in Kashmir is nothing less than 'Intifada' in making. The self-strangulating beliefs of national pride; not yielding an inch; and Kashmir being integral part will only bring harm and disrepute. As an aspiring power India can raise its stature through magnanimous choices, which include just and proper care of all sections of society. After all, it is people of all hue that constitute a country and that too for a country like India that derives pride from its diversity. Virtually for the last two decade if not earlier India has been ruling the land in Kashmir while forfeiting hearts and minds of the population through wanton suppression. For once the within the ambit of constitution mindset needs to be rethought before irretrievability attains permanency.

Wolves who are not even ashamed about their being wolves

BJP questions PM’s Kashmir autonomy remark

TIMES NEWS NETWORK & AGENCIES, Aug 11, 2010, 01.10pm IST


Then somebody tells me it is just like any other political party and they are not wolf in sheep's clothing

Kashmir conundrum-the human cost

The turmoil in valley took militant turn in 1989. Estimates on the number of people killed, directly and indirectly, in the conflict have largely varied with attendant accusations of over and under-estimations. Nevertheless, that doesn't answer the core question 'Does the exact number of casualties really matter?' Hasn't the greatest casualty been loss of innocence, an integral part of Kashmiri psyche? And worse than all has been the loss of human dignity and value. No one can underestimate loss of human lives that left hardly any family in Kashmir unaffected. Loss of family members, close and distant relatives, friends and acquaintances, prominent personalities and innocent unconcerned individuals must have left a void no unaffected individual can ever understand. I don't think even a book could lessen the grief of Fatima Bhutto over the violent loss of her father. But worst fate is left in store for the living, which besides grieving for their dead, are left to bear the brunt of all miseries and indignities. The violence perpetrated by the militants in the valley has been matched by the armed apparatus of the state. The number of people dead is compounded by disappearance of individuals without a trace, and their kin are left in a space between convulsing despair and unbearable hope. Does anyone in any sanity believe that a population can be won over by unbridled repression; through midnight knocks at the doors by security forces; by shutting down the entire localities and keeping populations out to weather elements; by being constantly strip searched and shouted and shoved at the check points? An unnoticed aspect of the entire sordid saga of violence in Kashmir has been loss of lives of underpaid security personnel and undoubted despair of their families that never makes it to any headlines. Like any predictable shoddy old tale, the scenario of felling of one or two security personnel in a patrol due to fire from a single sniper and berserk indiscriminate retaliations, have been repeated time and again from one place to another. In my naivety I have always asked myself about objectives, if there are any other than filling in of log books, of those security patrols in densely populated areas of the valley achieve, except for provoking fury in general public; becoming targets of miscreant snipers; bringing further alienation through indiscriminate retaliation and causing avoidable casualties of innocents. True Kashmir has been allowed to simmer as part of global power-play and has always been brought curiously back into, rather than back from, the brink, whenever, vested interests felt threatened from the possible ascendancy of normalcy. But digging into the roots and causes doesn't bring any solution until human values and dignity are brought back to the population and misplaced use of violence as mean to find a solution is discarded. And for attainment of those goals paramount onus lies with the Indian government who solely can take necessary measures that include: 1) back channel diplomacy involving eminent and influential people from Kashmir; 2) removal of use of force from equation and complete abrogation of Armed Forces act; 3) restoration of human dignity and institution of a semblance of transparency (how do those families numbering 1000s reconcile, whose members have disappeared); 4) and as Manmohan Singh once declared stars can be limit, Indian government should declare wider autonomy and even if by doing so government loses its majority so be it. If it could withstand assaults of communist parties against nuclear deal it can sure survive onslaught by rightist elements on this also and make India better in the long run. To start with instead of heaping miseries on the days of national celebration government can try to reach out the population through aiding affected people; providing health care facilities; improving power supply or through any other damned humanitarian way instead of organizing sham celebrations with entire population shut down. Independence Day is approaching and the mock spectacles will be repeated all over the valley. May be one is being too naïve to hope for any change; how could vested interests tolerate any infringements into their cozy world; one needs not to forget that those mock parades, mock unfurling of flags; and everything associated keep huge amounts rolling.

Kashmir conundrum-2

Having superficially dealt with legendary official Indian competence vis-à-vis Kashmir does not absolve other players -big and small- of their sins in creating the mess as it is in Kashmir. I think if a finger can be pointed to any single entity for all the ills then I think prime candidacy for that dubious distinction goes to the Kashmiri leadership starting from Sheikh Abdullah or even earlier. Every single local leader has lived and made others to live in concreted deceit, unshakable self-denial coupled with misplaced self-confidence of getting hold of best of all worlds. Whatever the fundamentals of the partition of the sub-continent; the anomaly chosen by the Kashmiri leadership was not backed by the population in general. It was dithering Sheikh Abdullah who opted for accession with India when every reason sided for an accession with Pakistan. And when things started getting tough, he started dreaming big dreams, which could never become reality. Worse of all, the trappings of power proved too tempting for every single leader who never hesitated to ditch any shred of principles and had no scruples in utilizing any means for furtherance of their petty interests. Needless to say, whatever the fault of Indian government, the government in Kashmir was always in hands of local leaders. If elections were not conducted and people were not allowed to vote, that was done most of the time at the behest of the most popular party of the time National Conference. When rest of India voted in first general elections in 1952; in Kashmir ruling National Conference had nominations of opposing candidates rejected in most of the constituencies, a phenomenon that was turned was turned into a state-of-art by Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad and nimbly utilized by the subsequent Congress led governments of Ghulam Mohammed Sadiq and Syed Mir Qasim. It was not until 1970s that finally elections were allowed to be held and people could vote but even then the most popular leader Sheikh Abdullah and his political party could not and did not participate. The first and perhaps only time free elections ever held in Kashmir was in 1977. But again there is a caveat, the moment during campaigning for 1977 elections the National Conference realized down turn in support that it spread rumors of Sheikh Abdullah being mortally sick to garner sympathy and votes, which they did, though Abdullah Sheikh went on to live until 1983 out lasting and out foxing all erstwhile political allies, and appointing his son as an heir apparent. The heir apparent did dutifully assume the mantle of the Chief Minister and made sure that next elections became one sided affair through intimidation by his party, despite every indication pointing to their victory as the opponent was none but Congress party. Since Congress in Kashmir manifested face of Delhi, the local population reveled in voting against it and in a curious way provided a vent for letting out the built up resentment again Indian government which never lacked incompetency in projecting its villainous image. Though the use of intimidation in 1983 election was not frowned upon by the local population; but it did take sheen away from the legitimacy of National Conference victory, and that became a ruse for the ugly removal of Farooq Abdullah by the Grenvillesque Jagmohan. Farooq Abdullah could be Chief Minister because of being progeny of his father; otherwise he aptly qualifies as an example of total mediocrity and incompetence who during all his tenures in power could achieve nothing except steep corruption and non-manageable chaos, which in any case with every passing generation got steeped into way of life and is in no way a lesser cause of the mess. The history at the moment is being repeated with the third generation of Abdullahs. The political decadence in the state paralleled with deterioration of the service sector, with major culprit being power supply. The visible prosperity starting in 1970s in the valley was coupled with forced misery in wintry darkness that never advanced the cause of state or the central governments. Though in this instance responsibility lied with the local politicians and they never proved anything but corrupt but totally apt in misusing every single fund from any source. And for any local leaders when goings got tough, they never hesitated in misleading people through raising the issue of independence. Another aspect that in no small measure impacted developments in Kashmir is the omnipresence of die hard fringe element, which never deviated from their belief in the role of Kashmir in larger pan-Islamic configuration rather than being slave to infidels. The events on the ground aided by greedy local politicians, incompetent central government and rigid bureaucracy, not only led from one misstep to another but allowed in no uncertain measures the fringe element to exploit the alienating undercurrent in Kashmiri population. And when push came to shove both central and local governments joined hands in ensuring that fringe politics becomes central. In one master stroke of ineptness National Conference led by Farooq Abdullah, which represented the local aspiration joined in an electoral alliance with Congress party led by Rajiv Gandhi, thus creating a vacuum to be filled by all those elements who always wanted separation from India. That culminated in infamous election of 1987 and the events, thereafter, acquired an engine of their own. None, neither central nor state government could do anything but watch events unfolding in total helplessness. With every passing event smugness and ineptness of central government started becoming more and more visible. When negotiations could have brought situation back from the brink; it opted for use of force. When legitimate National Conference government asked for more autonomy; central government retaliated by passing a resolution on Kashmir in parliament for it being integral part of India. Now the time is already too late. Solution cannot come from within the framework of Indian constitution. It would require hard and magnanimous decisions, which would be objected by fringe and hard-line elements everywhere. Because, the perpetuation of trouble in Kashmir would benefit hard core elements of all colors.

Kashmir conundrum

I wanted to write about Kashmir long time back but then always deferred for things to calm down from the preceding cyclic violence in order to avoid being overtaken by hideous emotional zeal. When it comes to dealing with Kashmir or more precisely with the situation there, the logic seems to be first victim. The misplaced frenzy on the part of those closely involved and those not even remotely involved takes surrealistic shape. Bizarreness on the part of latter is completely baffling and it rather displays dangerous mix of arrogance and ignorance than any reasoned and informed knowledge about the place and its history. The common refrain in Indian minds being that Kashmiri people are being misguided and incited by Pakistan and other foreign elements is just another ignorant humbug. The truth that the recent unrest in the valley was spread from one end to another belies that misguided notion; though, it would be naïve at the same time to rule out the roosting by external forces. That under no circumstance justifies use of brutal force unleashed by security apparatus of the state. Leaving aside for a moment the blaming game, a few fundamental things regarding Kashmir require consideration. The much often repeated 'mantra' of Kashmir being integral part of India does not hold any sanctity and in fact it never did. Like any fundamental truth it is a common knowledge that people of Kashmir, no matter what, do not want to be part of India, period. And that is the reality, which can neither be wished away nor explained by inexplicable excuses. To delve into the question 'why people of Kashmir don't want to be part of India?' one needs to open a complete encyclopedia of incompetence of Indian ruling class from time immemorial. History is replete with missteps, misdeeds both deliberate and malicious in conjunction with arrogance and, worst of all, in combination with brazen ignorance. One doesn't need to go too far back in time, one just has to dwell at a short-time window between creation of Bangladesh in 1971 to the execution of Bhutto in 1979. That was time when disenchantment in valley with Pakistan was complete and for once there was a collective but silent relief in minds of Kashmiri people for being part of a democratic country rather than Pakistan where an elected president had just been despicably executed. Zia-ul-Haq's effigies were burnt all over Kashmir and Jamait-e-Islami people were hounded into hiding. Fast forward to 1988 and when Zia died in plane crash on August 17 that year, people in Kashmir deeply mourned his death that was coupled with a total shut down and completed with an imposition of a valley wide curfew. Saner minds and serious and competent governments might have asked; how did status of Zia changed from a pariah to messiah? The answer is shear incompetency, arrogance and ignorance of the Indian rulers. The intervening events that shed light on those assertions are illegal, illogic and ill-conceived dismissal of a democratically elected government of Farooq Abdullah, installation of a corrupt puppet local government in place and most damaging being the presence a divisive figure of Jagmohan as a governor of the state. If anybody ever embodied Indian insensitivity towards Kashmir, there can never be a better example than Jagmohan. His leap to famed administrator originated from his overzealous servitude to Sanjay Gandhi during ill-conceived Indian emergency when he specifically targeted Muslim areas of Delhi in a drive towards beautification. Thus appointment of a governor, with such credentials, of a sensitive state in itself is a testimonial to the sensibility of Indian government and he (Jagmohan) lost no time displaying it by removing Farooq Abudullah and taking over administration after a short interluding puppet regime. One of the decisions of his administration was ban on selling of meat on certain days of Hindu festivals. Here was the much revered administrator at his imaginative best. These might eventually turn out to be just foot notes in the history but nevertheless these underscore the issue of Indian insensitivity in dealing with Kashmir and its population. As the events there after dashed towards total collapse and at every step Indian authorities were left gasping for a response. But the only consistency displayed by all successive Indian governments has been a total lack of imagination. Otherwise, how else was the then governor Sinha allowed to create a mess of gargantuan proportion over the land transfer issue or how else were petty bureaucrats allowed to shell out communalistic agenda from the then governor's office. The worst case scenario, in my opinion, that went completely unreported was that when new committee for Amarnath shrine was constituted under new enlightened governor, it did not include a single Muslim as a member. Amarnath shrine was discovered by Muslims and is revered as much by local Muslims as by Hindus. And Kashmir, particularly in rural areas, was always religiously integrated with a very thin dividing the two faiths. How authorities did choose to be so insensitive? Could it be possible that the well being of vested interests are higher than the state? Once again during latest round of violence in valley the Indian insensitivity and lack of understanding was at total display through use of indiscriminate force and complete harassment of local population. That is not how civilized societies function. When it comes to Kashmir, India as a state failed at every stage. It failed to capitalize when things were going in its favor; it failed to protect Hindus and in fact state under Jagmohan encouraged them to flee that place; it failed to provide dignity to any community of Kashmir because of its heavy reliance on use of security forces and bureaucrats who have nothing but their own ax to grind.
-Rajiv Kumar

UK election-3

I am tempted to make a prediction; defying all polls I think conservatives will end up with a sound majority and the Labour will fare worse than any polls are able to predict. No body will be happier than me if I turn out be wrong. But my impartial guess is that there will be a Tory government in place on Friday and which will have only path to tread; down the hill all the way. The anti-incumbency sentiment has time and again proven to be a power when unleashed can sweep away the very remnants of the discredited governing parties and send them into oblivion. At the end I couldn't help adding this quote from the lead article in today's Independent "We also recognise that Labour's decision to pick up the banner of electoral reform has all the moral conviction of a sinner recanting on his deathbed." They had the mandate and majority for thirteen long years to make electoral system more representative but temptation of securing big majorities with less than a third of popular vote was too endearing to be given up.

UK election-2

The only thing clear thus far is that Labour will not be the governing party on Friday morning and most likely David Cameron will be heading either a minority government or at the most Tories might even manage to limp to the post with a thin majority. The loss of Labour being an inevitable reality that can only be stopped by something complete unforeseen, in short, nothing less than an unlikely miracle. However, should Labour win this election; that will only prolong their eventual political wilderness for a long unpredictable period. Anybody remembers James Callaghan, Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock. On the contrary a Tory victory at this juncture will be nothing short of an albatross around their neck as the issues facing new government are beyond any solution with a right scope of bringing down not only next government but many after that as well. Once imperial and largest colonial power, the country has the distinct claim to being the fountain head of democracy but not always the ideal and tolerant one. The current democratic scenario is left to the mercy of tabloids that know no limits when it comes to spreading rabid intolerance. The way all political parties bend on their knees to get nod from those very tabloids is a gauge of the depth of mediocrity into which the democracy has descended. The reactionary conservative media is master in muddling and mixing and distorting facts and issues; be it Europe or immigration. The reactionary press hailed conservatives will arrive at power with an ax to slash down public spending. George Grenville wanted colonies to pay for themselves. Hugh Brogan is wonderfully right when he said it is wrong to say people never learn from history but rather they are marvelous at learning all wrong things. How can one expect Tories to govern straight; they aligned themselves with fringe extremist parties in Europe. At the end it will serve conservatives right to run a government with deficit levels worse than that of Greece. May be Labour with Gordon Brown in the treasury caused it but it was simply pandering to the tabloid culture of the day which thrives on gossip and reckless spending and anything other would have earned them wrath of electorate much earlier. No matter how the Daily Telelgraph distorts the facts, the truth remains that Gordon Brown was the architect of the plan that saved world from last financial crisis. Nevertheless, end of capitalism wouldn't have signalled end of the world itself.