Jammu and Kashmir: Forever a Quagmire?

The crisis raging in Jammu and Kashmir currently, not to mention the absolutely deplorable handling of it by the state and central governments, is particularly illuminating with regard to how much change needs to happen now to secure peace in the state.

First, some history. The state of Jammu and Kashmir's boundaries are largely those of the princely kingdom of the same name that existed prior to independence. As such, it consists of three distinct regions: Hindu-majority Jammu, Muslim-majority Kashmir, and Buddhist-majority Ladakh. It's an unnatural combination forming a state at best and at worse times, the regions of the state can act as bitter enemies.

So what's precipitated this bitter crisis?

• On May 26, 2008 the government of Jammu and Kashmir transferred 100 acres (~40 hectares) of forest land to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board for the construction of proper facilities for pilgrims on the annual Amarnath Pilgrimage in Muslim-majority Kashmir.
• There was opposition to land transfer by environmentalist groups on the grounds that it would damage the delicate ecological balance of the region. There was also opposition to the land transfer by many in Muslim-majority Kashmir who argued that this was an attempt to change the demographics of the region -- an accusation that I find totally absurd since this land transfer was to facilitate building facilities for pilgrims, who are by definition temporary visitors, and especially in light of the fact that Muslim separatists have already altered the demographics of Kashmir Valley by the forced expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Hindu Kashmiri "Pandits".
• In late June, Muslim separatists (having had their influence wane in recent years) caught on to the land transfer issue and started rioting in the streets of Srinagar, in Muslim-majority Kashmir and also the capital of Jammu and Kashmir.
• Political parties in Kashmir quickly bent to the demands of the separatists. The People's Democratic Party (PDP) which was part of the government and thus implicitly supported the land transfer initially quickly withdrew support to the government of Congress Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, reducing it to a minority government.
• In a shocking about-face, Azad capitulated to the terrorists' violent actions and revoked the land transfer order on July 1, 2008 after just four days of rioting in Kashmir -- god forbid that he actually deploy security forces to control the rioting, which was instigated by the separatists. That would have actually been an act of governance.
• The revokation of the land transfer order provoked intense protests in the Jammu region of the state with the Hindu nationalist parties quick to latch on to it, sensing a golden opportunity with which to fight the next elections.
• For much of the past few weeks, an economic blockade has been forced on Kashmir Valley with Hindu groups not letting any trucks into or out of Kashmir through the only highway that connects Kashmir Valley with the rest of India.
• Yesterday, Kashmiris trying to march across the Line of Control into Pakistan-occupied Kashmir with fruits and other produce, that are now rotting in trucks, were fired upon by security forces, killing at least 13 people and one prominent separatist leader.

My thoughts:

First, the revokation of the land transfer order by the Jammu and Kashmir government was unacceptable. The proper way to protest in a democracy is through legal channels that are available, such as a petition or peaceful marches. And the proper way to address an issue in a democracy is on its merits and demerits and considering the laws of the land. Neither were accomplished here. Separatist politicians encouraged rioting and violence in Kashmir valley and the government of Jammu and Kashmir, with utter disregard to the rights of Hindu pilgrims or the merits or demerits of the land transfer, capitulated to the Muslim extremists' wishes.

What did they seriously expect to happen? I am a secular person and traditional supporter of the Congress party, but you can really only push Hindus so far. Jammu has always received secondary importance compared to Kashmir and has been badly neglected by the state government. Did the government of Jammu and Kashmir seriously expect the people of Jammu to stand by idly as they capitulated to Muslim extremists in Kashmir? Hindus in Jammu and Hindus' interests in the state, beginning with making Kashmiri Pandits refugees in their own country, have been mistreated and disregarded for so long, it must have seemed almost like second nature for the Ghulam Nabi Azad government to capitulate to the extremists' demands, with nary a thought to the people of Jammu or to Hindus' interests or even to the Constitutional rule of law, for that matter.

The people of Jammu were right to rise up in protest and I absolutely support them in that regard. They have been mistreated for too long and it was high time to let the politicians know that they were in charge of the state, Jammu and Kashmir.

While I support the protests by the people of Jammu, the economic blockade of Kashmir is unacceptable. You do not have the right to starve and cut off economically an entire region and population because of disagreement on some policy or the other. Again, the economic blockade showcases the government's impotence in being able to keep the highways clear. Come on, it's called "government" for a reason and it's high time they begin governing.

The highway through Jammu and is the ONLY link between Kashmir and the rest of the country and it must be kept open at all times and all costs. Trade through Muzzafarrabad in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is not an option because that will only further alienate Kashmir from India.

So what should be done now, with the crisis at current levels? My suggestions, in order are as follows:

Short-term measures

1. Sack the governor of Jammu and Kashmir N. N. Vohra immediately; he has primarily been responsible for the current situation with the land transfer order revokation.
2. Elections are expected later this year in Jammu and Kashmir and until then, Ghulam Nabi Azad is continuing as the caretaker Chief Minister. Sack him immediately and invoke Article 356 of the Constitution, putting the state under direct Central Government rule until elections.
3. Meet the Fruit Growers' Association in the Kashmir Valley and other economic entities and assure them that the highway through Jammu will be open; act on that assurance by escorting fruit-laden and other trucks with military convoys through Jammu. Protesters trying to block the highway should be dealt with harshly, including the use of tear gas and rubber bullets, if needed to clear the highway.
4. A state of emergency should be declared in the short-term in both Jammu and Kashmir regions, with mass arrests of both Hindu protesters in Jammu trying to block the highway/uproot railway tracks, etc and separatists in the Kashmir Valley trying to inflame tensions.
5. Constitute a special expert committee to study the environmental impact of the land transfer issue; this and only this should determine whether the land is eventually transferred or not. The committee should come up with a recommendation within a month and it should be immediately implemented. Any violent protests, such as rioting, regarding the final order should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.

Long-term measures:

1. Get rid of Article 370 of the Constitution that grants special autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir; all states in the Indian Union are equal and there should be no preferential treatment to Jammu and Kashmir or any state in the Union.
2. Speed up economic development in the Valley, including the construction of the railway link between Jammu and Srinagar (which has now been pushed back perhaps until 2025 due to Indian politics). Only by winning the hearts and minds of Kashmiris will lasting peace be gained.
   
3. Institute a committee looking into the rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits back into the Valley and provide security for any family that chooses to move back.

Only by conducting all these measures will lasting peace be delivered. Anything less will be just a temporary fix.

Freedom in the World 2008

As regular visitors to my blog would know, every year, I provide an updated version of "Freedom in the World", by Freedom House, an organization that tracks political and civil freedom in countries around the world and ranks them as: Free, Partly Free, or Not Free. This year, they took their own time posting the map on their website, as a result of which this post, which should have come about in January is more than half a year late. Nevertheless, as they say, better late than never. So here we go.

The state of freedom in the world in the year 2007 was as follows:


Here's the link to my blog post detailing freedom in the world in the year 2006 for comparison. So what's worth noting?

1) As a matter of pride, I always like to point out the bright green jewel that is India in southern Asia, contrasted as usual with crimson red China to the northeast.

Around India:

2) Thailand has once again moved to "Partly Free" status as the one-year old military regime once again ceded power to a civilian, popularly-elected government after its 2006 coup d'etat. Lingering concerns exist about the degree of manipulation of the electoral machinery undertaking by the military regime, the Council for National Security, in the run-up to the democratic elections, which nonetheless brought about a reinstatement of exiled former-Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's followers to the government.

At the time of the 2006 coup, I spoke out strongly against the actions of the military regime, in multiple blog posts, arguing that however corrupt Thaksin was alleged to be by his urban elite detractors, the proper way to change the government is through the ballot box, not the tank. It seems that the people of Thailand, especially the rural poor who formed the backbone of Thaksin's vote-bank, were able to teach both the military and its urban elite supporters a strong lesson.

Elsewhere:

3) Tiny Togo, sandwiched between Benin and Ghana in West Africa, saw its status improve from Not Free to Partly Free, "due to the success of the 2007 legislative elections, including the ability of Togo’s opposition parties to demonstrate and campaign without interference." More power to the Togans!

Besides these two status changes, Freedom House generally recorded a poor year for freedom in the world in the year 2007, with substantial declines in freedom in numerous countries such as Russia (with its sham of a presidential election), Georgia (where the ruling party resorted to a state of emergency), Pakistan (where Benazir Bhutto was assassinated by Islamic extremists in the run-up to the elections - which were postponed as a result), and Kenya (with massive bloodletting and intertribal mayhem after elections where the ruling party was widely seen to have rigged the results in its favor).

Some encouraging signs:

1) Almost half of the people living in the world are free (3.0282 billion or 45.85%) and almost two-thirds of the world's citizens are either free or partly free (4.2135 billion or 63.79%).

• India and China are again worth noting here. India is home to more than a third of the world's free people (~1.2 billion out of the total ~3 billion free citizens). Meanwhile, China is ignominously home to more than half of the "Not Free" citizens of the world (~1.3 billion out of the total of ~2.4 billion "Not Free" people).

2) The global trend has been unmistakably positive. In 2007, there were 90 free countries in the countries, as opposed to 81 in 1997 and, prior to the fall of the iron curtain, 58 and 43 in 1987 and 1977 respectively.

Other points worth noting:

1) As in 2006, the freest continent in 2007 was undoubtedly Europe, where 33 of the 42 countries (78.57 %) were free. The exceptions were:

• Russia - Where a sham election saw the baton pass from Vladimir Putin to Dmitry Medvedev without a real alternative.
• Belarus - A dictatorship that has the open backing and support of the Kremlin.
• Moldova (Partly Free)
• Turkey (Partly Free) - Where the military, & its hard-line secularist elite backers, continue to hold much power, often overturning the measures of the duly-elected government.
• Macedonia (Partly Free)
• Albania (Partly Free)
• Montenegro (Partly Free)
• Bosnia and Herzegovina (Partly Free)
• Vatican City (Not Free) - A theocracy

Europe was closely followed by North America, where 18 of the 23 countries (78.26%) were free. The exceptions in North America were:

• Cuba
• Haiti (Partly Free)
• Guatemala (Partly Free)
• Honduras (Partly Free)
• Nicaragua (Partly Free)

2) The most dismal continents for freedom were once again Asia and Africa. In Asia, oppression stretched in an unbroken chain from Jeddah in the southwest to Pyongyang in the northeast and Baku in the northwest to Ho Chi Minh City in the southeast.

In Africa, oppression stretched in an unbroken chain from Luanda in the south to Cairo in the north and from Laâyoune in the west to Asmara in the east.