Asghar Ali Engineer is a rights activist and heads two organisations, the Institute of Islamic Studies and the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism. He has authored or edited 44 books on such issues as Islam and communal and ethnic problems in India and South Asia in general.

For links to his other articles, please go to the top page of this site.

Secular Perspective July 1-15, 2000

he Kashmir Assembly has at last passed a resolution for autonomy. Whether it is exercise in one-upmanship or a genuine one is difficult to say. It is being maintained by some that since the Central Government is going to start talks with Hurriyat, Farouq Abdullah has resorted to this exercise to steal the show. Whatever it may be, I feel it is not merely one-upmanship but a genuine move. I happened to talk to Farouq Abdullah in 1998 in Srinagar and he told me that the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao had promised him to consider the autonomy move. In fact he was keenly awaiting the green signal from Delhi. I had told him it would never come. He then told me "without it you cannot fight militancy in the valley". But now the question is: can one fight militancy even with autonomy being granted? It is difficult to say.

In fact the original sin was committed by the Congress government at the Centre and at the time of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru himself. In fact Nehru was greatly attached to Kashmir and was difficult to say whether he was genuinely disposed towards letting Kashmir have autonomy as laid down under the Article 370. After the arrest of Sheikh Abdullah (which itself was questionable though it is a different story) the Centre was more than anxious to water down Kashmir’s autonomy. It wanted the state under its grip. With pliable chief ministers succeeding the Sheikh it was not difficult. The Kashmir Assembly passed resolutions to slowly surrender its autonomy, first abolishing the posts of Sadr-e-Riyasat and Prime Minister and replacing them by governor and chief minister and then asking for jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to be extended. By the time Sheikh Abdullah was released all these autonomy measures were surrendered by Kashmir ‘voluntarily’. Kashmir had become a state like any other state. The Article 370 remained in name only.

Even the nominal retention of the Article 370 was an eyesore for the BJP and it made it an election issue since late eighties. So much so that it became part of the Hindutva agenda itself. It had very adverse impact on the minds of the Kashmiri people. Not only this, election after election was rigged in Kashmir to make sure that only pliable governments were formed in that unfortunate state. Farouk Abdullah once tried to side with the opposition when the opposition parties under the leadership of N.T. Ramarao held a camp in Kashmir. Mrs. Indira Gandhi was so annoyed that she dismissed Farouq Abdullah’s government by buying off loyalty of a couple of the National Conference MLAs by misusing the article 356 of the Constitution. That was the state of state ‘autonomy’ under article 370 enjoyed by Kashmiris. The fact is that the Central government never allowed Kashmir, being a disputed border state, to function even like any other state, let alone one under article 370.

Thus it is obvious what signal the Centre sent to the people of Kashmir who stood unflinchingly with India when Pakistani tribals invaded the state in 1947. The invasion convinced them that their Kashmiriyat could never be safe in Pakistan and that it was only a democratic secular India which could ensure it. However, there is no doubt that we thoroughly betrayed their expectations. Had Indian government allowed them genuine autonomy right from 1947 and had not entertained unnecessary suspicions we would not have had the Kashmir problem on hand, no matter what Pakistan had said and done. We cannot throw entire blame on Pakistan and absolve ourselves. Kashmir would never be happy under sectarian Pakistan, it would happily prefer India with its secular and pluralist values (which, unfortunately, are under threat today as never before). Kashmiri Islam is a non-sectarian Sufi Islam which never approves of narrow sectarian approach.

Thus it is for us Indians to deeply reflect as to why Kashmir was so much alienated from us? Did Kashmir betray us or we betrayed it? And with our treatment of the problem we are further alienating it day by day. Our party leaders and in particular the government at the Centre plays political games, on one hand, and treats it as a law and order problem, on the other. In view of armed conflict in the Valley, military operations cannot be avoided altogether. But the way our forces behave and violate human rights of ordinary Kashmiris, it is no use denying these gross violations of human rights. 

As for these violations a person of eminence of Jagadguru Shankracharya Swami Adhokshjanand Saraswati Tirathji Maharaj of Goverdhanpuri visited Kashmir and saw for himself the violations of human rights and said in a press conference in Srinagar, "This violence must be stopped. What is happening in Kashmir today is a blot on entire humanity". He said. Jagadguru Swami Adhokshjanand who was on a study trip to Jammu and Kashmir told a crowded press conference in Srinagar that he was pained to see humanity dying its death unceremoniously at a place which was once the abode of communal harmony, tolerance and amity. "Mahatma Gandhi had seen a ray of hope in Kashmir," he said, "but today not only human beings but also animals and flora and fauna are also being targeted here." The Swami regretted that beyond Lakhanpur the impression created was that everyone living in Jammu and Kashmir was a terrorist. "It is actually a misnomer created by politicians to further their own nefarious designs," he said.

The Swami has vowed not to remain a silent spectator on what is happening in Kashmir in the name of politics and religion anymore. He said that India which had spread the message of ahimsa to the entire world should not allow a part of it suffer the way it did. He also said that politicians had failed to restore peace, and then it was the duty of religious leaders from all faiths to unite and come to the rescue of the hapless people of Kashmir. From the agonised and anguished statement of the Swamiji one can very well understand what is going on in Kashmir. Can we ever resolve the question of Kashmir by treating its people in this manner?

It is true that a section of people in Kashmir wants nothing less than azadi. For them accession neither to India or Pakistan is acceptable. They insist on implementing the UN resolution on plebiscite. Even those who insist on accession to Pakistan like the leaders of Jamat-e-Islami of Kashmir insist on plebiscite. But to hold plebiscite in the whole state of Jammu and Kashmir including the portion under occupation of Pakistan will hardly solve the problem. It is true that the percentage of Muslims in the J&K is 65, but it is simplistic to assume that all will vote in favour of Pakistan or in favour of azadi. The Kashmiri situation is quite plural in nature. Even all Muslims are not united, let alone all the people of Jammu and Kashmir. In Jammu there is overwhelming population of Hindus and in Ladakh those of Buddhists. They will never agree even to azadii, let alone to accession with Pakistan. Then there are Shia Muslims of Kargil who see no point in joining Pakistan. Even if they are in minority they can play decisive role as the Muslims of valley are divided. The Muslims are not a homogenous mass in the valley and outside as generally assumed. The Muslims of the J&K are divided both on sectarian and cultural lines. There are Sunnis and Shias in the valley though Shias are in minority. The Shi`as are unlikely to go whole heartedly with the Sunnis on the question of accession with Pakistan or even on the question of azadi in a Sunni dominated Kashmir. Then in valley we have Gujar Bakarwals who, though Sunni, have their own cultural and linguistic identity. Their aspirations and urges are different from the mainline Kashmiri Muslims. Then in the Northern parts of Kashmir under Pakistani occupation there are Shia Muslims (of Ismaili-Nizari sect) who generally fear the Sunni domination. All these facts will count when it comes to finally determining their destiny through plebiscite. Even all Sunni Muslims are hardly likely to vote in favour of azadi or for accession with Pakistan. There is ideological and political pluralism, apart from religious and cultural pluralism. Though plebiscite could hardly be an option right now but even if it comes to that India need not fear the consequences as it does. Many Muslims both from valley and Jammu region are likely to vote in favour of India.

In view of all this the best option available both for Kashmiris and Central government is the autonomy under the framework of Article 370. One should not also fall for the equally obnoxious solution being proposed by a think tank in the USA and the American government seems to be backing it . This solution involves trifurcation of the State of the J&K along communal lines i.e. to be divided into Valley, Jammu and Ladakh regions. It is against our pluralist and secular ethos. Thus considering all this the best bet for J&K is real autonomy, as pointed out above, within the framework of Article 370. There are certain conditions which must be met in this respect. 

First of all the Sangh Parivar should give up its insistence on removing the Article 370 from the Constitution and accept its need for retaining Kashmir with India. Secondly, the Centre should restore all those measures which were taken away from the State under pliable governments in Kashmir and genuinely respect the rights of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. As for the autonomy of sub-regions of Jammu and Ladakh it should be left to the people of the state to decide. Eminent people of the state like Balraj Puri and others are striving for it.

Secondly the Union government should take urgent measures to stop violations of human rights at the hands of military and para-military forces. It should be given top urgency to win over the hearts and minds of people of the Valley. This will set proper climate for initiating a dialogue with the people of Kashmir including the members of Hurriyat Committee. Also, there is great need for special development fund for the state. If more and more employment is created for the educated unemployed youth in the Valley, they would be less attracted towards the alternative option of militancy. The government has not done enough in this direction at all. Development is also a great need for the people to solve their economic needs. The state should not depend entirely on tourism which also has been ruined during the armed conflict bringing people much more misery. Also, steps should be taken to bring back the Pandits to the Valley where they belong. For the ordinary people of Kashmir their Kashmiriyat cannot be complete without Pandits being part of it. I have been experiencing this myself in the valley. It will also restore the pluralist ethos of Kashmir.

Armed with these measures we can talk to Pakistan without any fear. A genuine dialogue with Hurriyat on one hand, and with Pakistan on the other, will be possible. Then it will not be difficult to solve Kashmir problem within the framework of the Shimla Agreement.