Notes on the Saga of Violence in Kashmir

 

Notes on the Saga of Violence in Kashmir

Circa 1989. Kashmir- a placid, calm and peaceful place- implodes. Kalashnikov wielding young men disavow politics and the political process and rebel against the Indian state. This resonates with Kashmiris and massive protests take place against the Indian state. Institutions crumble. The shrill cries of Azadi(freedom) reverberate across the length and breadth of Kashmir. This unprecedented development is almost like a revolution. Hitherto quiescent and peaceful people, Kashmiris get introduced and socialized into violence. The massive protests and the support for militants and rebellion against the Indian state breaks the status quo and everyone is taken by surprise. Both seem cathartic to Kashmiris. The violence and the insurgency take on a life of their own. This is then taken head on by the Indian state and crushed.

Two or more decades pass. A patina of peace and tranquility appears to descend on Kashmir. A reasonably well instituted political process is established. People appear(ed) to have moved on and their focus is apparently on quotidian concerns. This lull is broken down and Kashmir erupts again. The catalyzing factor this time is the alleged sale of land to the Amarnath Yatri board. The protest this time falls under the rubric of what came to be called as Ragda I. These protests then fizzle out and life in Kashmir again veers to ‘normal’. After an interregnum of a couple of years, Kashmir’s collective consciousness catches fire again. Cumulative grievances pile up and young boys take to the streets again. Kashmir is held hostage to the adrenalin surges of young teenagers. The baton has been seamlessly passed onto the gen next of Kashmir. A saga of violence and counter violence by the state defines Kashmir. This runs its course and another lull fills the void. And then the Dastgeer Sahib incident happens. People anticipate violence.

 The theme that undergirds this decadal portrait is that Kashmir is and remains a problem and political uncertainty defines it. Whether the state will be able to contain the current disturbance accruing from the burning of the shrine or not is a moot point. What is and should be of significance and concern here are the implications and the attendant lessons that this portrait offers. The clear cut lesson and implication, to repeat, is that Kashmir is a problem and is festering and simmering underneath the patina and apparent façade of peace and calm. And that ‘solutions’ prescribed and enacted by powers that be amount to anodyne solutions that merely treat the symptom not the disease. The question is what can and should be done to render Kashmir normal and resolve the conflict for good?

This does not lend itself to an easy answer. The best and brightest minds have dwelt on this and failed. As such, the prescriptions offered here may fall into the category of failure as well, However, given what is at stake and peace and calm in a region that has been defined as the ‘most dangerous place in the world’ warrants making an attempt and delineate proposals that me salubrious for Kashmir and the subcontinent.

The first and foremost step is acknowledging the problem in Kashmir by powers that be in India. This does not amount to caving into Pakistan or internationalizing the conflict. It merely means being realistic. Acknowledgement of the problem may help in diagnosing the real nature of the problem and then working to alleviate it. Specifically, it means instituting a political process that is not top down but is bottoms up. This means listening to Kashmiris and offering them choices: political, economic and cultural. The reference here is not to a referendum or a plebiscite but a larger and expansive set of choices within the Indian firmament. Reaching out to all Kashmiris in a different idiom is an indelible part of this process. The rest is mere detail and corollary.

The second aspect or prong of this process is introspection by Kashmiris. It is not really cleat what we really want? A clear cut consensus on our aspirations and future is the need of the hour. We have to be clear headed and hard nosed about this. The bottom line should be the comprehensive welfare and improvement of life conditions of all Kashmiris. Would these be sated in a multicultural, democratic federation of India? Or would we be better off living in a mono cultural state of Pakistan which is mired in profound and existential structural problems? Or would be better off on our own? Is this practical and possible? Or does globalization give short shrift to this?

A debate and discussion –shorn of emotionalism-on these rather existential questions is the need of the hour.  It behooves all stakeholders to re –examine the Kashmir issue in the light of history and contemporary conditions. An honest and sincere approach may yield both insights as well as answers that will settle Kashmir once for all. Muddling along and hoping for Kashmir to settle down is a recipe for disaster. It will only mean that Kashmir will always be punctuated by periods of calm and violence. This is unfair and unsalutary for all. Let us Kashmiris go to the now destroyed Dastgeer Sahib shrine, ask for forgiveness and wisdom and then collectively engage in debate and discussion over our future. Let Sufism be our motto, defining attribute and soft power once again. We owe it to our future generations.