April 4, 1992

Another Futile Exercise

O L I T I C S in Kashmir is taking a new t u r n with some

recent developments. Five top leaders of the opposition in
the valley have been released after years of detention. The
pro-independence militant outfit, J K L F , appears to be moving
away from Islamabad, after the latter's crackdown on the
organisation in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. In the midst of alt
this, speculation is afloat about the centre evolving a 'package
plan' for Kashmir to pave the way for elections there. The
decision to release the Jamaat-i-lslami leader Syed A l i Shah
Geelani, the People's Conference leader A b d u l Ghani Lone, and
three others representing different opposition groups is being
linked with the 'package plan' which in order to restore the
political process seeks to involve opposition politicians in a future
election, so that by all appearances it looks 'fair'. The prime
minister is believed to have urged his partymen in the Jammu
and Kashmir state Congress unita squabbling lot, as in so
many other statesto patch up their differences in preparation
for the polls. It seems that the centre is planning to enact another
farce, in the name of elections, a la Punjab, in Kashmir, without
any sincere effort at coming to grips w i t h the basic problem of
popular grievances therewhich, elections or not, w i l l continue
to feed the centre's bugbear of 'secessionism' or 'terrorism'. The
ritual of elections, by hook or by crookwhether at the gunpoint
by security forces (as in Punjab recently), or by rigging and
capturing of booths by musclemen of locally powerful politicians (as in Bihar, and other parts of the country)is being put
forward as a 'democratic' symbol of legitimisation of what in
practical terms is sheer authoritarianism. Elections and their
resultsboth manipulatedare seen by the centre as a source
of authority which it can use to contain popular grievances in
different parts of India.
In Kashmir, the centre's game is already falling apart. If by
releasing the five opposition politicians the policy-makers in New
Delhi hoped that they would fall in line with the centre's plan
of reviving the so-called political process, the prime minister was
in for a disappointment. Soon after their release, all the five
leaders demanded, in a joint press statement, that the people
of Kashmir be granted the right of self-determination, and
reiterated the call for the implementation of the United Nations
resolution on plebiscite. Although the call for the UN supported
plebiscite (which allows the Kashmiris to opt for accession to
either India or Pakistan, without any third alternative)
contradicts their demand for self-determination (which would
allow the Kashmiris to o p t for independence from the two
neighbouring states), the m o o d of these leaders suggests that
they are unwilling for any settlement w i t h New Delhi unless the
latter stops the repression unleashed on their people and releases
the thousands of their young men held in jails and interrogation
centresthe basic conditions necessary for any dialogue for the

Economic and Political Weekly April 4, 1992

solution of the Kashmir imbroglio. The five opposition Kashmiri

leaders, in their press statement, appealed to all democratic
minded people to pressurise the Indian government to abstain
from the use of brute force, and persuade it to grant Kashmiris
their basic rights. Till now there are no indications that the centre
is wilting to heed these demands. It appears to be working on
the speculation that the militants can be divided, now that the
J K L F is disenchanted with Pakistan. Us decision to release the
opposition leaders, significantly enough, came in the wake of
the Jamaat-i-lslami leader Geelani's appeal from j a i l to the
militants early in March to stop abducting innocent people as
such abductions were un-lslamic and harmful to the cause of
Kashmiri independence.
But is it not too late? Do people like Geelani have any
control over Hizbul Mujahideen or the other Islamic
fundamentalist militant outfits (which are supposed to be under
the hegemony of Geelani Jamaat-i-lslami), from whose
operations he had been segregated during all this period,
thanks to the centre's decision to detain him? Curiously
enough, the centre till now has not come out with any
justifiable grounds for his detention. Why did it decide to
release h i m , for that matter? The entire exercise harks back
to what New Delhi did with Sheikh Abdullaharresting
him without any trial to prove the charges brought against him
and then releasing him when it suited New Delhi's political
interests.
As for the JKLF, Islamabad's clamping down on its leader
Amanullah's march to cross the Line of Control (LOC) in
Pakistanas well as its gradual withdrawal of military support
from the organisationmay have helped it to reinforce its
pro-independence image in the valley vis-a-vis the pro-Pakistan
groups like the Hizbul Mujahideen, who favour the valley's
accession to Pakistan, But this should be of little comfort for
policy-makers in New Delhi, who perhaps hope to harness the
disgruntled J K L F to its package programme or restoring the
so-called political process. Although many from among the
National Conference have joined the J K L F and may return to
the political process once it is initiated, the bulk of the younger
elements in the militant outfit have become anti-Indian, thanks
to the gory record set by the security forces during the last few
years. Even if Pakistan cuts o f f aid to them, they are likely to
remain a sullen lot waiting for a chance of reprisal, unless the
centre puts an end to arbitrary arrests and killings by its forces,
A package plan with a few economic concessions, without any
direction towards greater autonomy in political decision-making,
will hardly help restoration of normalcy in Kashmir or create
a favourable environment for fair elections. The failure of the
electoral experiment in Punjab does not seem to have had any
salutary effect on New Delhi.

671