Biased, or merely shallow and lazy ?

Yet another "analysis" of the Kashmir situation without even a cursory read of the various issues, arguments and stances involved.

Yeah India's had the army in there for ages now, and that creates huge issues with the local population (anywhere, be it Naxalite dominated areas, the NE, or Kashmir). But the escalation was not a one way street - though surely not the best way to solve it. We've also had rather hostile neighbours around there, and the time there was lowered presence of personnel, we had to go to war to reclaim territory, and lost a few hundred brave men in the process.

Its also a fact the Kashmir enjoys special powers and an independent constitutional status, something very few countries would've permitted within their borders. Kashmir is almost an independent nation within India - and its been a one way street from that point of view. They've even managed a couple of really free polls and have had a shot at improving their situation with Kashmiris at the helm - how long can they keep on passing the buck to "New Delhi" ? Bihar has been in a worse spot, gets lesser from the Centre, yet cribs lesser, and is not clamouring for independence. If they could not make it work, and I'm not saying it didn't work - they are - within a free, democratic setup, then all the best within a mess like one that Pak is in today.

As for the plebiscite, India owes nothing to anyone, legally. If the Pak army had moved back, and freed up all of Kashmir, and if the vote happened in all of the region, the UN resolution argiment would've been admissible. Right now, it has no bearingon the case.

Also, the Valley is a small part of J&K (&L, if I may dare to include the voice a huge mass of people otherwise unrelated to this issue). Not all of those people are demanding Azaadi.

Yes, I think India should hold a referendum in the Valley - because we should take the higher moral path and try and get this resolved - and because we've tried hard enough and long enough. If they really want out, well, let them. not to honour defunct resolutions, but because we cannot get over their distrust of us anymore, and we'd rather not have them hang around in their current state.

Jammu, Ladakh are Indian, and happily at that. We cannot drag them into this.

And international reporters really really need a little deeper sense on the issue before they pass judgement. Its just too shallow, and presumptuous.

The Choices For Kashmir

Gurcharan Das writes a very simple, straightforward and relevant piece on Kashmir's choices.

I agree (I point to the Valley alone when I say Kashmir). I have a fear that the wrong choice may already have been made - owing partly to poor PR skills on the Indian government and media's part, and to Neanderthal reactions from some political parties seeking to score political points in this issue of serious implications.

However, if the choice is indeed what the cacophony suggests it is, and if its proven to be thus by a referendum that we must conduct, then we must let go. And let go with a complete dissociation. All those who choose the idea of India our welcome. And all those with a parochial outook - bye.

I hope, if the average Kashmiris do think India's a better bet, that they muster the courage to come together and subdue the shrill voices we're hearing right now.

More on the Kashmir now-debate

Reuters picked up the 2 columns, and sparked off a debate.

From the comments, its obviously a tough battle - getting people to agree to even put let-Kashmir-go on the list. Years of chest beating have attuned us to patriotism based on weird stuff. It matters not that its an impediment to our march forward as a nation, and drag on resources, and to top it all, the people of the place want out.

The only stakeholders who can think otherwise with some legitimacy are the Pandits, whose home this land was and who've suffered there. But I suspect a lot many will be pragmatic, and look ahead rather than backwards.

At the very least, keeping this out of the scope of the discussion is certainly both short sighted and counter productive. I even think a lot many Kashmiris will themselves wonder about how it'll work out for them once this option becomes a possibility, however bleak. I'm sure they realize how Pakistan's progressed, and how Indian has. Even the Pandits that were pressurized into leaving have done way better outside of Kahmir.

We've got to look beyond the land itself, and boundaries. We've got to move ahead and get to other problems. Too much effort, money, time is being spent on this, with little in return.

Update: Jug Suraiya gets into the act too. Its a pretty strong vote for considering this possibility already. The shrill noises from the other end, as experienced from the users comments to this, mean that a lot of PR work remains if this option is to made workable, but totally discounting it isn't healthy for us, right now.

The Valley of no hope ?

I've been having similar thoughts to those that Vir Sanghvi expresses. Its only with a heavy heart, and despair, that one is forced to say this. I've always believed no problem is big enough if people are rational, open minded and fair. Sorry, those have turned out to be big ifs.

If we cannot own a people, there's no point owning the land. Tactical superiority and all that be damned - armed defense no longer depends on who owns the higher hill. And our false machismo about "how can we give away even an inch of our land" needs to be relooked at - since the Kashmiris do not consider their place part of "our land", who are we to ?

I'd love to be friends with the Valley and its people, but like Sanghvi, it looks like its gone beyond the point of no-hope. As he points out, plenty and more has been done. In fact I suspect that the special status might be one reason for Kashmiris thinking of themselves as a different country altogether. Bihar has had rigged elections, and pretty much every other state to some extent. A lot many places have less progress, more poverty. Yet you do not see this degree of a desire for secession, and at this scale.

If indeed most Kashmiris want to join Pakistan, or be an independent country, let them. ONLY the valley, of course. Not Ladakh, not Jammu.

And then, make sure we have NOTHING to do with them. Economically, politically, from the tourism point of view, whatever. Let's see how well they do without the larger embracing idea that India is. Let's see if narrow parochial, diehard ethnicity does better than what India's been managing to do. Even if the Valley then runs into problems, or needs help, sorry, you asked for it, idiots. You think we're out to get you ? Wait till you do it to yourself, or worse, the mess that Pakistan is happens to you. Alvida, guys.

I suspect the resilient Pundits have already kind of given up on the Valley, and in fact, many have done well in other parts of India. I have friends amongst them, and think we should do our all to ensure they are well settled in India. [ Or at least as well settled as the rest of us are :) ]

I hate thinking in terms of a "them", but in case, to hell with them, and good riddance.

Update:

Just came across a similar thought expressed by Swami Ankesaria Aiyer too. Reproducing the conclusion of his point of view :

India has sought integration with Kashmir, not colonial rule. But Kashmiris nevertheless demand azaadi. And ruling over those who resent it so strongly for so long is quasi-colonialism, regardless of our intentions. We promised Kashmiris a plebiscite six decades ago. Let us hold one now, and give them three choices: independence, union with Pakistan, and union with India. Almost certainly the Valley will opt for independence. Jammu will opt to stay with India, and probably Ladakh too. Let Kashmiris decide the outcome, not the politicians and armies of India and Pakistan.

So its definitely not an isolated thought. Its not gained political currency yet, but I guess as a first step, someone needs to make the thought of making this outcome an acceptable possibility - and to ensure this is presented as an extreme one-off step, with disastrous consequences for those who want it - but alas, we cannot really help them if they want out of a nation on the path of greatness. We had promised a plebiscite, so we're just making good on a promise.