Both the govt and the kasmiri muslim are on cross roads and have their choices -before them -----for the govt the choice is two fold bring the valley under control and get rid of secession once and for all-(-other options open borders , common currency etc are not workable )-- if you do not have the will or stomach for this for whatever reason (political appeasment , communal reasons . minority community reactionsetc), then better to get rid of the valley as the problem is a mill stone around the countrys neck ----but do not waste the countrys resources in this part of the country
There is no point in wasting the countrys money on the valley with additional economic packages for this is a waste / drain on the countrys resources . Let us spend the money in the rest of the country where it is better used . In case we are pacifists and do not want a military option then better to let the valley go its own way ---a soft approach has not been appreciated so far by the kashmiri A independant valley will hurt our ideals -- of secularism , our beleif in idealism , our thinking of a separation of religion and state, -- for all this is invested in kashmir by us.But this will pass and lessons learnt may make us wiser ,otherwise we do not need the valley On the other hand whether kashmiris realise it or not the valley iis in no position to exist independantly -- it will have to align itself with either china or pakistan but azadi as they tout with their geographical , economic position is a far cry .
For a change let us have a open debate in the country / parliament regarding this problem -- not to score debating points and political upmanship but to discuss the problem thread bare and arrive at the national consensus . Armed with this let the govt formulate its strategy to this vexatious problem The problem is only in the valley where the muslims are the majority --let us only think of this and limit it to this valley-- other areas viz jammu are a settled question Any small territory like the valley cannot exist by itself as a independant entity for long -- except for tourism it has no resources . In 1950's we are told by rc guha in his book 'India after gandhi " the American Adlai stevenson visited kashmir and encouraged sheikh in his demand for independance -- he promised sheikh a loan of 60 million dollars and the fact that there will always be 5000 americans in kashmir , occupying their house boats etc to generate revenue-- this he said will prop up the valley . The moral of the story is that even at that time an independant kashmir was to depend on the doles of a superpower
Witness how the communal shades of the problem arose / progressed---the en masse victimisation of the pundits , the protest against the Amarnath yatra , the present proposal to limit the yatra to 15 days etc--- perhaps if the law at that initial stage was applied to kashmir in a secular way as it is applied to the rest of the country/ communities perhaps we would not have seen this sorry mess . The kashmiri was always shown to be as more equal than the rest of indians and appeased continously not only as amuslim but doubly --as a kashmiri as well ---appeasment we know is a loosers game they say An essentially communal situation is not easy to resolve -- we saw it in 1947 as no amount of solutions proposed to avoid partition found favour with the separatists There is no point in wasting time / money in economic packages , -- economic palliatives are unrealistic We should treat it as a purely secessionst problem which unfortunately has a communal basis within / support from extremist in pakistan. without The remedy is simple -- a seccesion movement has to be brought under control by any means , you cannot withdraw army , or remove bunkers from the streets till the time the threat of secession is there .There is no alternative to this
If it was a economic problem then economic palliatives may have worked but it appears to be an essentially communal problem --- originating in the muslim psyce of separtism .I do not think any body can deny this-- plain and simple the muslims are saying they cannot live in india in a area where they have some majority It is a fact that muslims when they are certain percentage of the population make various demands on the body politic -- social , religious . political . We see it everywhere -- present day europe where there are demands for separate schools , curriculum . halal meat in restaurants -- they have aspiration to rename buckingham palace as buckingham mosque after some time, etc etc . In our own times we saw this in the pre partition days and perhaps honestly what we are seeing in kashmir is plain and simple shades of 1946 --- for muslim league substitute many parties operating im kashmir and you have the same scenario / same atmosphere -.Pardon my saying but at the roots all the kashmiri parties have this feeling--- the sheikh himself was supposed to be a staunch secularist. but scratch him and at various times he talked different voices---jinnah also they say was some sort of a "secularist "but it did not prevent him from demanding two nations based on religion
Even a layman in the street knows the problem and repeated highlighting of this problem by the media serves no purpose except perhaps to show its liberalism , activism(so called ) or so called intellectual effervesence( see the references to intifada which are being newly banded about by media). And no end is also achieved by blaming people , leaders etc What we should look at it is solutions -- and here none seem to be forthcoming or being talked about . The problem is represented by media as the frustration of the youth due to economic difficulties -- this has a measure of truth as the biggest industry of kashmir --tourism -has been systematically destroyed by these hartals --perhaps these were enginnered to destroy this industry specifically for politicians / separatists ulterior motives The govt has pumped in enough money at the cost of the rest of the country but apparently this is not enough to assuage the feelings of these youth ---so there is no reason to pump more at the expense of the rest of the country
