Resolutions of deceit

The least Chidambaram could do was send the three jokers packing. But, of course, that isn’t meant to happen

The Core by Nawaz Gul Qanungo

Kashmir Times | January 25, 2011

ONCE A CHILLY new year’s winter morning, walking purposelessly over a blanket of snow into a field, Calvin was talking to Hobbes explaining why they were kicked out of the house. “I asked Dad if he wanted to see some new year’s resolutions I wrote. He said he’d be glad to. He was pleased to see I was taking interest in self-improvement. I told him the resolutions weren’t for ME, they were for HIM.”

That’s why we are outside now, he tells Hobbes. A pensive Hobbes looks at Calvin, and says, “I WONDERED what the rush was.”

Walking on, looking far ahead at nothing, Calvin says, “I’m getting disillusioned with these new years.”

Looking skywards, Calvin suddenly raises his hands in helplessness and opens his mouth wide: “They don’t seem very new at all! Each NEW year is just like the OLD year.” Hobbes scratches his chin.

Calvin’s mouth gets bigger, “Here another year has gone by and everything’s still the same! There’s still pollution and war and stupidity and greed! Things haven’t changed!”

Calvin opens his mouth really wide now and raising his fist in the air, thunders: “I say what kind of future IS this?! I thought things were supposed to improve! I thought the future was supposed to be better!” Hobbes keeps looking at him, listening intently. Meandering into snow-covered woods, they both walk on.

“The problem with the future,” a resigned yet sagacious Hobbes quips, “is that it keeps turning into the present.”

* * *

“I am announcing from the platform of this convention on Kashmir that nobody should meet the interlocutors when they visit the State.” It was Syed Ali Shah Geelani talking at the now famous Azadi seminar in New Delhi. “Do they not know what people in Kashmir want?” (Emphasis added.)

He continued, “What will these interlocutors do in their one-year-long mandate? They want to meet students, shopkeepers and everyone else but what do they want to know?”

The three jokers seem to have since consulted “all” the people – “even the poor” people, as the “eminent” journalist told us – and the poor old rabbit has been pulled out yet again. Geelani must be basking in glory.

Early this month, the Indian home minister, Palaniappan Chidambaram, told the media that a parliamentary panel discussed matters relating to Jammu and Kashmir in December, while the interlocutors visited the state for the third time last month. “The three-month period of agitation was an unfortunate and deeply regrettable chapter. However, after the visit of the all-party parliamentary delegation and the appointment of interlocutors, there has been a significant improvement in the law and order situation,” Chidambaram said. “In particular, the interlocutors have been able to change the discourse and have been able to persuade a number of stakeholders to offer suggestions for a political solution,” the Chidambaram said.

Indeed, less than a month before, a 10-member team of parliamentarians and civil society members led by Delhi-based think-tank Centre for Policy Analysis that had come to the valley on on a three-day fact-finding mission early December came out with its damning report. The report noted: “The situation in Kashmir has worsened dramatically and the death of 112 boys at the hands of security forces and the mass arrests of young people that are still continuing have virtually helped seal the alienation, giving the slogan for azadi popular and widespread support.”

Comprising parliamentarian Ram Vilas Paswan and others, the team also met Hurriyat leaders Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti. Worse, it declared the three-member committee of interlocutors did not have the support of the people. “The current movement is spontaneous, with strong anger against Pakistan making that state irrelevant in the Valley,” the report said. Within less than a month, the three interlocutors have turned the argument up on its head.

Chidambaram it seems didn’t find it important enough to note the unbelievable difference of opinion between the interlocutors and the parliamentary panel. It shouldn’t surprise anyone. It is the policy, after all. Days before, the three interlocutors in their report were believed to have urged the government to not deny the people’s right to protest. What do people want to protest about? The answer is finally out now.

“A small but vocal section of opinion harped on the UN resolutions, plebiscite and self-determination resulting in independence of the state as it existed before august 1947,” Padgaonkar told reporters. “By and large, however, most people we spoke to did not refer to that option. Instead, reiterating their faith in democracy, fundamental rights, pluralism and tolerance, they sought the empowerment of people to enable them to realise in full measure their political economic social and cultural aspirations.”

Someone asked him, “You mean people of Kashmir do not want [independence] from India? How can you say that when you have just met the [elite]?”

“No, we haven't just met the elite,” Padgaonkar replied. It seems the interlocutors, as feared earlier, have consulted “all” the people – stone pelters, unemployed youth, traders, students, Facebookers, doctors, engineers, lawyers, actors, artists, writers, journalists, chemists, industrialists, shikara walas, taxi drivers, bus drivers, their conductors, auto walas, shopkeepers, barbers, grocery walas, fruit vendors, bakery walas, Bihari labourers, pick pockets, north Indian beggars and their dogs – they consulted “all” of them. It seems they even met the “poor” people!

And so it turns out that a hundred and fifteen people were killed in broad day light by the Indian security and police last summer because they were “reiterating their faith in democracy, fundamental rights, pluralism and tolerance” seeking “the empowerment of people to enable them to realise in full measure their political economic social and cultural aspirations.”

The least Chidambaram could do was send the jokers packing. But, of course, that isn’t meant to happen. Whatever happened to all that drama one May in the year 2006:

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Thursday announced the setting up of five working groups to resolve the issues confronting Jammu and Kashmir. The groups will deal with improving the Centre’s relations with the State, furthering the relations across the Line of Control (LoC), giving a boost to the State's economic development, rehabilitating the destitute families of militants and reviewing the cases of detainees and ensuring good governance. The announcement, made at the end of the two-day round table here, was endorsed by the conference and included in a statement. Dr. Singh said the groups would submit reports to the Government and they would be discussed in the third round table. The groups that would deal with the confidence building measures across the segments of society in the State, would comprise members from those present at the conference, or those nominated by parties and groups. The measures that would come under the groups include improving the condition of people affected by militancy, evolving schemes to rehabilitate all orphans and widows affected by terrorism, relaxing the conditions for those who have foresworn militancy and providing employment to Kashmiri Pandits. The steps to improve relations across the LoC include simplifying the procedures to facilitate travel, increasing goods traffic, opening new routes such as Kargil-Skardu, and expanding people-to-people contact, including promotion of pilgrimage and group tourism. Without mentioning the autonomy demand (by the National Conference) and self-rule (by the PDP), the fifth group would study matters relating to the State's special status within the Indian Union and methods of strengthening democracy, secularism and the rule of law in the State. It will also discuss effective devolution of power among different regions. Dr. Singh suggested appointing a convener for each group. The composition of the groups could be decided in consultation with all leaders. Acknowledging that people were put to inconvenience due to the prevailing situation, Dr. Singh said it must be understood that this scenario was the result of the actions of certain elements. He had instructed the security forces to be “more mindful” of human rights and be sensitive to the liberties and self-respect of ordinary people. “At the same time, it is our collective responsibility to create an atmosphere where the people of the State can be free from the fear of oppression and terrorist activities and go about their normal lives like their fellow countrymen. “If this requires strengthening the State police – both in numbers and materially – the Central Government will be willing to support that.” – The Hindu, May 26, 2006

“At least 150 rounds of talks between New Delhi and Kashmir in the past six decades, has changed nothing. India has always used dialogue as a tool to corrupt Kashmiri leadership or buy time to continue with its occupation,” said Geelani once recently. Need we add anything?