Kashmir: more the things change, the more they stay the same !

While days lengthen in rest of India, nights keep getting longer in Kashmir -more home-grown separatists, more 'pebbles vs pellets' casualties, more vacuous 'moohtod jawab' and surgical strike rhetoric, more curfews, more internet and TV channel bans, nocturnal raids and what not ! A lame duck Chief Minister cocooned in secure ,cordoned off VIP areas of Srinagar darkens the nights further and adds to Delhi's nightmare.

One expected better from a new political dispensation of the same genre at Centre and State, at least a refreshingly different approach to bear on the dystopia. One sees little evidence of it. Past regimes at different times twiddled with one or more of three approaches without much success- diplomatic engagement with Pakistan, the alma mater of terror groups operating in Kashmir, taking out the militant leadership, and political dialogue with home stakeholders. Modi sarkar treads the same old beaten path. Only, each approach is being tried in isolation by turns, not in simultaneity.  

First it tried honeymooning with Pak. Not easy for a regime riding to power outraging 'weak Manmohan', ' one head for ten' and promising good use of its '56" ka chhati’. To its credit, it did. Against its grains it invited Nawaz Sharif to its swearing in, Mr Modi 'airdropped unannounced' to Lahore for Nawaz's birthday, and the two did well publicised photo ops and ‘optical’ hand waves under international gaze. Nawaz was condoned for Pak’s Kargil misadventure. Some say Kargil was Musarraf’s doing which begs the question, why then invest political goodwill on Nawaz?

Then the Pathankot shock. Still ,PM gave Pak a long rope, allowing for the first time, Pak intelligence to do investigations inside our air base without seeking reciprocity of investigations by Indian cops in Pak territory. Uri was the last straw on camel’s back leading to an avenging surgical strike by Indian army across the LOC that inflicted undisclosed damages on terror havens within Pak. 2014 status quo ante stood restored. Recent beheading of two Indian jawans by Pak will bring back echoes of Mr Modi words spoken in 2013 “The soldiers of our nation are beheaded and after a few days the Prime Minister of that nation is treated with chicken biryani,". Another shot at detente looks pretty remote. 

Though Indian good neighbourly overtures were so cruelly rebuffed by Pakistan, tragically, there was very worryingly no international condemnation of Pak perfidy. So, as before, we are stuck with a neighbour hell-bent on 'bleeding India through thousand   cuts'. Neither Pak nor terror groups took the underlying message in our surgical strike. Terror attacks and unrest at LOC continue at elevated levels, taking heavier toll of our valuable fighting assets and more unmitigated hardships for residents. Pak isolation as the 'mother ship of terrorism' is nowhere in evidence. The first beaten up vintage approach stays beaten.

As for Kashmir, it stepped into the millennium with the dreaded cordon and search operations, CASO, at doorsteps. In 2017, CASO is back, this time maybe in perpetuity as an operative part of army's on-going strategy. After burying engagement with Pak, the regime now is solely focused on eliminating militants.

Is this the way forward - effective area domination and patrolling of streets by armed forces or in 
other words brazen exhibition of muscularity to subdue Kashmiris into making the right choice between ' terror and tourism’ as the put it? isn’t this yet one more of the beaten paths? Further, one can legitimately ask, why the area domination stuff hasn’t already happened? The Armed Forces (J&K) Special Powers Act 1990 granted the armed forces in disturbed areas omnibus powers of search and seizure, arrest, and even to kill on mere suspicion with impunity. Considering the massive deployment of armed personnel, and making liberal allowances for difficult terrain and a hostile populace, twenty-seven years is a long enough time for the army to have done it. In recent times, it has been found wanting in warding off    sneaking terror  attacks inside its very  own campuses,  or to 
effectively sterilise areas en route its convoys. An India Today report listing major terror attacks shows that in 14 years from 1999-2013 there were just four attacks on army camps and one attack on its convoys whereas in two years and four month, 2014-2017(April) there were ten attacks on camps and three on convoys, a quantum jump, indeed. In itself, this is a telling evidence of growing alienation of kashmiris with rest of India.

And mind you, we have among the most professional armies in the world. So, it's not simply a matter of inefficiency. Armies are conditioned to take on enemies beyond its borders where its operations are not fettered by niceties of human rights or law. All is fair on enemy territory. But it can never have the same freedom in domestic operations. It may not shoot down but only shoo off stone-pelters. Armies win territories, quell unrest, but never keep domestic peace for indefinitely long periods. There is much evidence around to substantiate this plain truth.

Kashmir needs out of box thinking. One such could be gradual 'ulsterisation'. An army that speaks in tones like ' ......displaying flags of IS and Pakistan, then we will treat them as anti-national elements and go helter-skelter for them’ or 'those who obstruct our operations during encounters and aren’t supportive will be treated as over-ground workers of terrorists' comes across more as an army of occupation than an 'Indian' army. Ulsterisation will lead to gradual replacement of it by army units raised from carefully selected local recruits. These units may be more acceptable hence more likely to get local support. Besides, it would gainfully employ the youth who are now getting brainwashed into terrorism to take off from where Paki mujahideen of yesteryears left. Already J&K has the highest unemployment rate in the country. As many as 27K govt vacancies lie unfilled.

But not the least, it would reduce casualties of army personnel from rest of India. The bodybags arriving from theatres in the valley are inflaming puerile hatred against valley Kashmiris and those Kashmiris, particularly, students living outside the state. Whipping up hysteria merely complicates reconciliation.

Building domestic peace is the realm of politics. This is even truer in the scenario of a hostile populace egged on by a nasty neighbour with emotional and religious ties to it, and one waging a relentless war 'by other means'. Our Northeast hold a valuable lesson. It too is in much the same boat. But it has relative peace largely due to political breakthroughs  with separatists. Rajiv Gandhi's Mizo accord settled Mizo insurgency without any loss of sovereignty. A new Mizoram state with the insurgent chief Laldenga as CM brought peace. In a like manner, Rajiv-Longowal accord suffocated Khalistan cries once and for all. Of course, in both cases, the army chipped in by doing what it knows best - 'softening up’ the opposition.

On its own the army can do little to bring lasting peace.  As long as Sheikh Abdullah, notwithstanding his oft flirtations with the 'independence’ idea, was around pro-India voices could be heard in the valley. Since then Kashmir has only been hemorrhaging goodwill for 'Hindustan'. Mainstream parties are increasingly feeling the disconnect with masses. Even PDP, once the voice of sympathy for the azadi cause in South Kashmir , finds its turf overrun  by home bred militants.North Kashmir seems no better as evidenced from people's  participation in the just concluded Srinagar LS bye- election- a record low of 7% .In 2014, the voting percentage for whole of Kashmir was 49%. The down slide is disconcertingly steep .Kashmir urgently needs a charm offensive to accompany the disarm offensive of the army. Mr Modi is committing a great folly by relying only on the latter ignoring the former. In this connection, the following words of Nehru, reproduced in the book ‘India after Gandhi’ by Ramachandra Guha sound truly prophetic,

“but however, much we may want this(Kashmir), it cannot be done ultimately except through the goodwill of the mass of the population. Even if military forces held Kashmir for a while, a later consequence might be a strong reaction against this.”

There is no alternative , TINA  , to reconciliation and statesmanship in cutting the Kashmir knot. 

One last thought on history of the imbroglio. The India Independence Act lifted Crown's suzerainty over princely states and lapsed  all obligation to it . It did not, however, require them to join one or the other of the new dominion. So staying independent was an option, however  unviable. Maharaja Hari Singh chose to be  an independent ruler from 15.08.47 to 27.10. 1947, the day Lord Mountbatten accepted his instrument of accession with a remark, “it is my Government's wish that as soon as law and order have been restored in Jammu and Kashmir and her soil cleared of the invader the question of the State's accession should be settled by a reference to the people.” Those who calumniate Pandit Nehru for agreeing to a plebiscite in UN miss the point, plebiscite was a fait accompli. It will be naive to believe that a Governor General, that too a British, of the dominion (India was still a dominion ) would not have had his say in this and the decision to refer  the matter to UN. For Nehru, too it was a case of TINA, there is no alternative!