Bankruptcy of ideas threatens J&K’s future

Political parties in Kashmir, irrespective of the separatist-mainstream divide, claim to be working for the resolution of the dispute. Ironically, all of them owe their survival to the existence of the dispute. Some days back, the media in Kashmir prominently carried the news of ‘former militants’ planning to float political parties with the help of ‘army and home ministry’.

To generate sensation, some spices were added: “The 'move has unnerved strategic planners in Pakistan” (read ISI). Two ex-militants, one among them a counter-insurgent who could not even win an assembly election despite repeated attempts, could “push the already marginalised pro-Pakistan group in the Valley into a corner” hence altering the political landscape in the valley, is the crude joke. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has rightly commented, “Former militants floating a political party in the state has been blown out of proportion. I want to make it clear that it is not army’s job to float political parties”.

Kashmir watchers know that this is an old game. Intelligence agencies of both India and Pakistan, from time to time, indulge in kite flying. By supporting their proxies, they dream of changing, perhaps controlling, the political scene in Kashmir. Before the assembly elections in 1996, a section within the army, with the active patronage of Raj Bhavan, was sure that its man, Kuka Parray, the infamous counter-insurgent (who is believed to have killed hundreds of innocents), would become the chief minister.

He could only win his seat, that too after the army actively campaigned for him. In conflict-zone engineering, politics is not a pastime of the intelligence sleuths. Having unhindered access to vast body of information, eventually they come to believe that they can not only control but also create their choice of events.

Pakistan’s ISI has the illusion that it can perpetuate a conflict on Kashmir endlessly. Conversely, Indian intelligence agencies think that without resolving the conflict, they can manage the situation, which will ultimately lead to a dilution of the conflict. It is no exaggeration to say that over the years, billions of rupees have been spent by the intelligence outfits with little or no success at all.

Pakistan manipulated the 2008 unrest to draw some mileage, but it could not deter more than 60% Kashmiri electorate to participate in assembly elections barely two months after the unrest.

Likewise, New Delhi has invested huge sums of money in creating an intelligence network, why was it taken aback in 1990 when thousands went across the border for militant training?
It was not caught napping just once: during the summer uprising of 2010, New Delhi failed to anticipate the intensity of the unrest.

Had it known, it would not have bungled the entire situation in such a messy manner.

Paper tigers with the support of Delhi and Islamabad can occupy the TV screens and newspaper headline for all times to come; manufacturing a headline is easier than winning a panchayat election. Didn’t Sajjad Lone, despite his high-profile image, lose badly in the parliamentary elections? And can ‘propped-up’ Yasin Malik win an election from his mohalla in Srianagr.

A few weeks ago, Syed Ali Geelani’s close confidant was arrested by the police for his involvement in hawala transactions; the police allege that Pakistan had sent a huge sum of money to Geelani during the recent unrest. Geelani is presently in Delhi, he has been asked by the Delhi police not to leave without recording his statement. His party is crying wolf that by involving in him in a hawala case, the police wants to malign Geelani and called for a Kashmir bandh.

Without commenting on the merits of the present case, is it not a known fact that separatists are funded by the ISI? The People’s Democratic Party (PDP), since its inception through opportunistic ‘soft separatism’, has been trying to occupy the separatist space.

The National Conference leaders allege that PDP was created by the Centre to fragment Kashmir’s polity. By depicting the areas of erstwhile J&K controlled by India, Pakistan and China, in saffron, green and red, it has not only displayed its bankruptcy of ideas but also the level it can stoop to remain relevant.

And PM Manmohan Singh, apprehensive of any future unrest in Kashmir, has kept his “fingers crossed”; he also believes that by providing one lakh jobs to Kashmiri youth, the “mindset” will change in Kashmiri. Economic development changing the ‘mindset’ in Kashmir sounds hilarious? An economist-turned-prime minister is not to be blamed for his faulty understanding; he solely depends on a bureaucratic brief, certainly the source of all the ills in Kashmir.