Radio Brisvaani
By Dr Ashutosh Misra
India and Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) are at the cusp of a new dawn, laden with the promise of a new beginning. Firdaus’ paradise Kashmir has been gifted with a new lease of hope, peace and development, after four Indo-Pak wars and over 42,000 deaths in terrorist violence since 1990.
Bollywood productions over a time have portrayed Kashmir’s gradual drift into an abyss. Ranging from the peaceful 1960’s and 70’s featuring ‘Kashmir Ki Kali’ depicting the serenity of the Dal Lake and ‘Aap Ki Kasam’ capturing the enchanting beauty of Gulmarg, through the terrorism-hit phase of the 1990’s producing ‘Roja’ (1992) symbolising militancy and kidnappings, and the post Kargil war productions such as ‘LOC Kargil’ (2003) recounting the valour of the Indian army to reclaim occupied territories, to the most recent blockbuster ‘Uri’ (2019) enthralling the audiences with India’s daring surgical strikes across the Line of Control.
In this atmosphere of despair, hopelessness and unending strife, Narendra Damodardas Modi led incumbent National Democratic Alliance retained power in May 2019 with an unprecedented 351 seats in the national Parliament. What followed soon after was a steady troops build-up in the Kashmir valley, feeding speculations about some ‘big’ announcement to be made, possibly the scrapping of Article 35A of the Indian Constitution which gave Kashmiri residents special privileges to maintain the state’s demographic composition. But few expected the Narendra Modi government to dump Article 370 (a temporary provision) that accorded a special status, a separate Constitution, a separate flag and a separate set of laws to J&K.
In a display of exemplary political will, following the Presidential (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order 2019, Home Minister Amit Shah tabled the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill, 2019, to bifurcate J&K into Ladakh as a Union Territory without a legislature, and J&K as another Union Territory with a legislature. After two days of intense debate, the bill was passed with a 2/3rd majority in both the Houses and with the support of some senior opposition leaders. Seventy years of Kashmir’s suffering seems to have united India, both inside and outside the Parliament.
First, Article 370 had become a convenient tool for the spread of terrorism in Kashmir and to enflame anti-India sentiments among the youth and separatists in the Valley. Second, as the harbinger of ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri pundits, killing over 1300 and forcing around half a million to flee the valley, Article 370 had long ceased to be a symbol of India’s secular ethos and Kashmir’s Kashmiriyat. Third, Article 370 prevented India’s anti-corruption bodies from investigating corruption cases against state leaders, many of whom had siphoned off billions of dollars of tax-payers money, allocated annually for state development.
Fourth, it was anti-development as it dissuaded investors and corporates from investing and acquiring land or property for setting up businesses and industries. Fifth, it kept children aged 6 to 14 from benefiting from the right to education scheme, available to other children across India. Sixth, it kept the state’s safai karmacharis and dalits from benefitting from reservation, available outside the state, the reason for BSP leader Mayawati’s support to the decision. And seventh, Article 370 was anti-women, as it debarred them, unlike men, of all inheritance rights upon their marriage to non-J&K residents.
To many Kashmir and India watchers, the clock for Article 370 has been ticking for some time now. First, it has been part of the BJP/Jan Sangh manifestos since the 1950s, but what lacked was a political will and necessary numbers in the parliament. Second, PM Modi’s decisive leadership — as seen on demonetisation, GST and triple talaq—gave that critical push to the government.
Third, the redundancy of UN resolutions perpetuated by cross-border terrorism and Pakistan’s ceasefire violations and ill-advised move to alter the demography of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, strengthened India’s case. Fourth, repeated snub by separatists to democratic elections, development and peace offers from New Delhi, and insisting on Pakistan’s inclusion in talks had ruled out any realistic chances of a meaningful consultation with the people. And fifth, having been stung by Pakistan’s military offensive à la Kargil incursion and terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Pathankot and Pulwama, there were no takers for a bilateral solution, in the Raisina Hill.
So, should India and J&K have waited for another 70 years and witnessed another 42,000 killed in the quest for an elusive peace? Barring China, the international community, including the key Islamic states and 1.3 billion Indians have thrown their weight behind this historic decision. Hopefully, ‘Kashmir ki Kali’ will blossom again in the Bollywood soon.
The writer is the CEO at Institute for Australia India Engagement and Adjunct Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute
