inam ul Rehman
It has been 30 years since the Kashmiris picked up gun against the Indian system. If someone says nothing has changed then he must be put into a mental asylum. What hasn’t changed is that the Kashmiris fight to redraw the boundary continues.
So, what has the Kashmiri leadership, pro-resistance intellectuals learned in the past 30 years about the Indian state? Apparently, nothing. From trying to physically evict India from Kashmir, the Kashmiri leadership, and pro-resistance intellectuals are now trying to shame the Indian state into submission! No state in the world can be shamed into submission, especially when it comes to secession.
Sadly, there has been no concerted effort to understand the Indian state. No Tehreeki intellectual writes on the Indian state. How does it work? What galvanises it?what riles it?what holds it together?what are its underbellies?what makes it to fear?what will make India to give up its claim on Kashmir? What keeps it united? Who are its policy makers? Who are its doves and hawks? What are its strengths and weaknesses? Is India a monolith, or comprises of disgruntled communities? What worries it: economic collapse, or territorial loss? What will make it to concede defeat? What keeps India united despite tonnes of problems? How is India able to hold Kashmir? How one has to engage India in order to weaken its grip on Kashmir? How are the people going to defeat a state that is militarily, politically, economically, and influentially strong, and seemingly unending?
No Tehreeki intellectual writes on it. You cannot defeat an adversary unless you take note of his qualities. Instead most of them study in Indian, or western universities come here to research on Kunan-Poshpora, Asiya-Neelofar ‘rape’ murder, Gaw Kadal killings, et al. But one does not find any research on why the rebellion of the 90s failed?
The early 90s was an era in Kashmir when militants had paralysed the security grid of the Indian state. Nothing seemed to work for India. The world pressure on India was mounting so much that a US diplomat Robin Raphel said in a press conference that her country does not recognise the instrument of accession (https://kashmirlife.net/the-diplomatic-secret-issue-45-vol-06-72233/)
And, then happened the surrender of militants at the Dargah Hazratbal siege after 31 days in 93, that helped the Indian state to score points. What impact it had on the psyche of Kashmiris, and Indian institutions regaining control on Kashmir? Why militants went after each other? Most Kashmiri researchers, unfortunately like the Tehreeki leadership, are interested only in shaming the Indian state not to understand its matrix!
Look at the intellectuals of India. Every year they write books on Kashmir, tell the Indian state where it needs to tighten up, where it needs to loose its grip; what concessions it needs to give, what it needs to hold back. There is hardly any speck of the Tehreek or the Kashmiri society that they have not touched. And as usual most Tehreeki intellectuals dismiss these books. Why? Because these intellectuals want that Indian writers should take up the cause of Kashmir! That India media should pedal Kashmiri narrative of secession! Like a lazy native we want our work to be outsourced as well.
Here I recollect one instance among many. In 2008, when protests against transfer of land to Amarnath shrine snowballed into forceful closure of Jammu-Srinagar highway by the Hindu extremists leading the Valley people to protest in favour of opening up Muzzaffarabad road that resulted in killing around 60 protestors, and fall of the coalition government of the PDP-Congress. I saw a renowned Indian journalist, Prem Shankar Jha, arguing in one news channel that the Government of India should immediately announce election dates to quell these protests to become a norm. It was strange observation which looked out of place because the national newspapers of Kashmir give an impression that the whole of Kashmir was in protest mood. When the assembly election dates were announced a lot of political observers, journalists, intellectuals of Kashmir stated that the GoI has erred because not many voters would cast their votes. People coming to vote in droves were a shocking moment, and a moment to introspect. The victory of sex scandal accused Congress leader, GA Mir, in these elections was astounding. But our media, experts, intellectuals, rather than accepting it spun a facade that voting is only for municipal grievances, and vote does not mean secession from the azaadi sentiment. This ruse continues to be in the market. The Indian journalist was spot on while our own political pundits try to fit excuses as study.
Kashmiri intellectuals are not prepared to ask hard, rationale, and difficult questions to themselves. During elections in Kashmir most Tehreeki people, in order to stop people from voting, put quixotic things before voters. They tell people that by exercising their democratic right you are betraying the blood of people who died for the Tehreek! But, in 1947, according to the Tehreeki hagiographers, between some thousands to two lakh people were murdered or displaced from the Jammu region: why then from 1971 to 89 it did not became betrayal to contest elections and cast votes? Or, why does not anyone who took part during those elections apologise? Why is vote considered a betrayal but taking blood money and job in lieu of killing by the government forces not? How is election boycott going to help those Tehreeki organisations which harp on independent-democratic Kashmir? How are Islamists (who harp on Islamic democracy) going to convince people to vote for the same democracy post azaadi? If India and Pakistan have to solve this issue then why should Kashmiris die? What kind of character building the Tehreeki people have done?
Let us face it, building the character of a nation is the most difficult thing, and no Tehreeki organisation has done it, so far. And no Tehreeki organisation has the stamina, and structure to do it. Then how is Kashmir going to get independence from India?how is Kashmiri leadership going to bring India on the negotiating table?
Thirty years and we have not a single book on the Indian state! Its institutions, political parties, bureaucracy, army, and people, no one writes on these. Like everyone else India has doves and hawks, but Kashmiris have been made to believe that India is a monolith country.
Shaming a state into submission has never worked. States are not constructed on morals, instead they are constructed on human bones plastered with blood. Shame is for individuals, states are bereft of it. Almost all nation states are besieged with problems of secession. Every state is brutal against rebellious resistance. To preserve its sovereignty the state doesn’t care for world opinion, and every state does support methods to preserve sovereignty of any nation.
Kashmiri writers, authors, try to shame India by calling it “rapistan”, “In-defecation”, country of poor, intolerant people, et al. But why is India, despite besieged with conflicts, poverty, communalism, and untouchability, successful in holding Kashmir? These questions are never asked, never answered, never put into public domain. Isn’t it shamelessness that people of such “race” are ruling Kashmiris, who vainly consider themselves as an intelligent race? Or, are Kashmiris dour shameless than Indians?
To defeat an adversary one has to first understand it, and give it a respect that every opponent deserves. Despite many armed insurgencies going on in India it has not given an inch of land to anyone. India is such a country that when it is unable to solve any conflict it does business with it. The same Indian state in Manipur, Assam, and Meghalaya gives a monthly stipend, and government land to rebels for holding on to ceasefire (Mother, where is my country by Anubha Bhonsle). If Kashmir is not getting azaadi it is not because Kashmiris are not giving sacrifices it is because the adversary has not been studied, and given its due credit.
