The last time I visited Kashmir, in November, I was struck by an apparent contradiction: it was more peaceful than it had been in years, at least in the capital Srinagar, and yet the overwhelming mood was one of gloom. With the peace process between India and Pakistan going nowhere, there was a sense that thousands of people had died for nothing in the violence that had convulsed the region since a separatist revolt erupted in 1989. Although the soldiers had disappeared from the streets of Srinagar, and tourists were flocking back, it retained the some of the same tinderbox atmosphere that I had known at the height of the violence. One spark, people told me, could ignite it again.
When that spark came, in the form of a land dispute between Hindus and Muslims that triggered some of the biggest protests since 1989 (you can see my last posting on this here), the surprise was perhaps not so much that it happened but that so few analysts in Delhi (or Islamabad for that matter) saw it coming.
The sheer size and unexpectedness of the protests have prompted some Indian analysts to ask a question that has been anathema in Delhi for decades: Is it time to consider giving Kashmir independence, or at least to let Kashmiris vote on their future?
“If the experience of the last two decades has taught us anything, it is that the situation never really returns to normal. Even when we see the outward symptoms of peace, we miss the alienation and resentment within. No matter what we do, things never get better, for very long,” writes Vir Sanghvi in the Hindustan Times.
“I reckon we should hold a referendum in the Valley. Let the Kashmiris determine their own destiny. If they want to stay in India, they are welcome. But if they don’t, then we have no moral right to force them to remain. If they vote for integration with Pakistan, all this will mean is that Azad Kashmir will gain a little more territory. If they opt for independence, they will last for about 15 minutes without the billions that India has showered on them. But it will be their decision,” he writes.
“Whatever happens, how can India lose? If you believe in democracy, then giving Kashmiris the right to self-determination is the correct thing to do. And even if you don’t, surely we will be better off being rid of this constant, painful strain on our resources, our lives, and our honour as a nation? This is India’s century. We have the world to conquer -the other- and the means to do it. Kashmir is a 20th century problem. We cannot let it drag us down and bleed us as we assume our rightful place in the world. It’s time to think the unthinkable.”
The Times of India runs an editorial along similar lines. ”I was once hopeful of Kashmir’s integration, but after six decades of effort, Kashmiri alienation looks greater than ever. India seeks to integrate with Kashmir, not rule it colonially. Yet, the parallels between British rule in India and Indian rule in Kashmir have become too close for my comfort,” writes columnist Swaminathan Aiyar.
“We promised Kashmiris a plebiscite six decades ago. Let us hold one now, and give them three choices: independence, union with Pakistan, and union with India. Almost certainly the Valley will opt for independence. Jammu will opt to stay with India, and probably Ladakh too. Let Kashmiris decide the outcome, not the politicians and armies of India and Pakistan,” he concludes.
For two such reputable columnists to make a suggestion like this in national newspapers is extraordinary. India has long maintained that Kashmir is an integral part of the country. It has argued that giving up Kashmir would encourage secessionist movements elsewhere in the country and undermine its commitment to secularism by acknowledging that Kashmir, as a Muslim-majority region, could have special treatment. And it has traditionally blamed Pakistan for stirring up trouble in the region, convinced that if only Islamabad could be persuaded to end what it called “cross-border terrorism”, the benefits of Indian democracy and financial support would eventually win the people of Kashmir over.
Of course, a couple of op-eds calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir does not mean it is going to happen. The issue is phenomenally complicated, not least because the much-vaunted U.N. resolutions passed in 1948 calling for a referendum were meant to apply to the whole of the former kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, now divided between India, Pakistan and China. The people were to be given the choice between acceding to India or Pakistan, but not of independence; while the resolution also required that Pakistan withdraw its troops first from its side of the region, followed by the bulk of the Indian forces, before a plebiscite were held.
And any vote, even within the Indian part of the former kingdom, could stir up bitter divisions between and within the three regions that make up the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir – Hindu-dominated Jammu, Muslim-dominated Kashmir and Buddhist- dominated Ladakh — that would dwarf the recent protests. Pakistan would also be faced with tough choices over how to handle the people on its side of the former kingdom, including Azad Kashmir and the strategic Northern Areas.
However, they do suggest a new thinking in India, which, determined to win its place as a global player on the political and economic stage, no longer wants to be dragged down by the Kashmir conflict. The question is whether this new thinking — coming at a time when Pakistan is struggling to reinvent itself as a civilian democracy — could contribute to a genuine effort towards a durable peace. Or will it simply make an intractable problem even more complicated?
Trackback
112 comments so far
Previous | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | … 1 | Next
JAMMU & KASHMEER STATE SHOULD ASK INDIA & PAKIKSATAN TO HOLD PLEBESCITE FOR THEM TO STAY WITH ALL PARTS J&K STATE OR LEAVE IT FOR GOOD. OTHER THING IS THAT THE CITY OF SHRINAGAR MADE THE CAPITAL OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY(ie MADE UP OF J&K,INDIA & PAKIKSATAN WHERE BOTH INDIA & PAKIKSATAN ARE CONTROLLED FROM …..READERS OVER PLEASE THINK THIS BEST OPTION OF ALL FOR GOOD OF J&K STATE. J&K SHOULD BE FORCED TO CREATE THIS BEST OF ALL RESOLUTION THROUGH UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL(as well J&K must adapt a name change to “JIVENKUMPDEHS”
- Posted by BrainBoxesPakistan itself is disintegrating and contrary to popular myths consists of a number of minorities. Will they get the rigth to self-determination too? No part of Kashmir was accedded to Pakistan by the Kashmiri government in 1948 ands therefore its occupation of Kashmir is illegal. All over theworld new trading blocs are emerging and it is really foolish to think that an independent Kashmir could survive. It is landlocked and will not survive without the support of some local hegemon. Its best option is to seek a degree of autonomy within federal India.
- Posted by Prem“Will India blow its top?” When I wrote that piece on Kashmir in 1994, it was more to probe if India had the patience to tire the opposition. The political map of India still refuses to accept and reflect reality on the ground in Jammu and Kashmir.
http://www.horizonmapping.net/projects/f armers_voice/fv_gallery/atlas_maps/natl_ bnds.jpg
I was surprised that Vir Sanghvi managed to push that column in the Hindustan Times.
Does this new thinking mean India is ready to let go rather than lose its head??
- Posted by Madhucan we discuss a technical aspect of plebiscite,if it is to be held in kashmir ?
in what situation(election result)will kashmir be allowed to become independent ?
a) what if 5,000,001 people favour independence ,
5,000,000 favour india (lead of only 1 vote!)
b) what should be the minimum margin to be acceptable ?
I say kashmir should be granted independence, only if all the non muslims in kashmir favours independence or accesion with pakistan ! (the possibility of which is practically ZERO!)
- Posted by sanjivSo, let us imagine a hypothetical scenario where a plebiscite is held in Jammu and Kashmir and likely results are:
a) majority of people in Kashmir valley vote for independence.
b) majority of people in Jammu and Ladakh vote for status-quo.
And India, being a democratic nation, decides Kashmir valley be made independent. Now this is a highly undesirable scenario for 2 reasons:
1) A porous border with Pakistani-Kashmir means Kashmir valley will become a hotbed for Jihadis. What guarantee is there that this newly independent Kashmir will not allow its soil to be used for violent Islamic fundamentalism in the future? Forget India, no country including Pakistan, will entertain the idea of an independent Kashmir.
2) This newly-independent country will be landlocked and will be dependent upon India and Pakistan anyways for economic purposes. With such great reliance on its neighbors, it is hard to imagine Kashmir ever exercising full sovereignty.
On the contrary, an independent Kashmir is highly desirable for India because:
1) Saves billions of dollars of Indian taxpayers’ money spent on security and economic rebuilding of Kashmir.
2) The human aspect will always be there. Thousands of Indians have lost their lives because of this conflict.
3) Kashmir is a net importer. It exports electricity to India but that is minimal compared to India’s net power generation.
To end, Kashmir will always need India but India does not necessarily need Kashmir. Indian politicians have made Kashmir a major issue for their own political gains, but on the whole, Kashmir is more of a headache for India. But yes, Kashmir should decide its own fate. Unfortunately, it is not in a position, geographically and politically, to exercise its own will. Anyways, it is better if Kashmir is associated with the world’s second-fastest growing large economy rather than a failed state.
- Posted by Deepaki dnt understand why india isinvesting so much on kashmir when they dont want to be with india.leave kashmir for its fate i am sure it will trun out to be an other talebanised afghan ,then people will realise their mistake and let their generations suffer.
- Posted by a khanvandemataram
Nusarat,
U are already enjoying all ur wishes as a part of India. Do u really think Pakistan will let u live at least one day according to ur wish?
- Posted by naveenPlebicite is a promise that we gave not to UN or Pakistan but to ourselves and the people of Kashmir and is never too late to keep that promose.
- Posted by Sharad Shahit is unfortunate that no comments on my posting of the reasons of opposing land transfer by all the readers .
- Posted by mubeen kashmiriI honestly beleive that a truly democratic and secular Kashmir is only possible if its Anchored within the Indian Union. I think Nepal and Sri Lanka should also
- Posted by Narayanjoin the Indian Union but with a high degree of autonomy.
Dear Nusrat,
I as an Afghan fully support your aspiration for a free, independent, sovereign, pluralistic and democratic Kashmir. As I believe in and value my personal and national freedom, I wish the same for everyone around the globe.
Ask the inhabitants of Kashmir the following questions and give them three options:
a) do you wish to be part of Pakistan?
b) do you wish to be part of India?
c) do you want an independent Kashmir?
Ask the inhabitants of Pashtunistan and Baluchistan the following questions and give them three options:
a) do you wish to be part of Pakistan?
b) do you wish to be part of Afghanistan?
c) do you want to be independent?
Whatever the results, all parties must respect the outcome and permanent national boundaries should be (re)drawn, and internationally recognized. This is a “win win” alternative and prevents further hostilities and wars in South Asia, where instability has become chronic due to these conflict factors that haven’t been addressed since the end of the WWII and the Cold War. U.N. and the international community can contribute a lot in this regard.
If my modest formula for peace and stability in South Asia is implemented, there will be peace and stability in that region. The other alternative will be continued intolerance, racism, religious extremism and terrorism that will be making the headlines from South Asia, which will become more bloody. Poverty, illiteracy, unemployment will be chasing South Asia for years to come.
I want to ask Pakistanis and Indians: Exactly how long are you planning to be hostile to each other? Whenever find the answer to this question, peace and tranquility will prevail in South Asia.
For a free and independent Kashmir!!!
- Posted by kaburaI am a Kashmiri Muslim female who would like nothing more than an Independent Kashmir. But a truly Independent, Secular, Plural, Democratic Kashmir.
- Posted by NusratA Kashmir free of India, free of Pakistan, and above all free of Fundamentalist Islam.
A Kashmir where minority rights including Women’s rights are sacrosanct.
Otherwise it’s just creating another Afghanistan.
Today india is paying a heavy price of Gandhi’s stubborn-ness, Mr. Mohd. Ali Ginha was smarter and long sighted then Gandhi he knew and took most of the muslim away from Hindus.. Today we all should Give Kashmir back to muslim and 20 Million muslim as a gift to Mr.Mohd. Ali Zinha’s dream of one muslim Country, and let Hindu live in India(Hindustan)and at the sametime let Arun Duati Roy be happy who is not Hindu but acting as a well wisher of Hindu…..
- Posted by Full blooded HinduIf Berlin wall can be removed, if Russia can be fregmented as per natives of their states, then Kashmir or Jammu and Kashmir can also be let apart from India and Pakistan, instead of wasting money and lives of bothe countries. Let Kashmir be a country like Switzerland where all visitors from all nations including India and Pakistan may come and enjoy.
- Posted by joginder nathWhy is everyone thinking of giving Kashmir. If the Muslims want to be with Pakistan, the govt of India should arrange mass visas for them so that they can go to Pakistan. With the millions of dollars that Pakistan spends on Kashmir, these can be used to resettle the Kashmiris in Paksitan. After all, we have already given them a piece of our body in the form of Pakistan.
Enough is enough ! Let the govt of India stop pumping money into the valley. Let the Kashmiris find what it means to be independent by creating their own economy and not one being sustained by the millions of Indians like us.
Right now, the monies being pumped by the govt is being enjoyed by a chosen few and so resentment rises in the rest. Let everyone work for themselves.
- Posted by SBJRajesh: If the ground reality allows Kashmiri Pandits to come back then it means the social fabric and economy is healthy. Usually people dont want to change a good situation and autonomy within the Indian Union would suit most people I expect.
I dont think Punjab army dominated Pakistan is really attractive to the Kashmir valley. Most people know they will then get FDI from ISI for activities that have nothing to with anything benign-like collecting for the red cross.
- Posted by NarayanMs.MacDonald says - “no abuse, no swearing and no denigrating an entire people based on their religion, race or ethnic or national identity.”
Unless of course you are white skinned, and from a G8 Nation, then you may very well sit in judgement over the brown and black skinned people.
- Posted by NusratAre Kashmiri Muslims ready to split Kashmir with Kashmiri Pandits?
- Posted by RajeshWe need consider the situation in the former Yugoslavia.
The serbs, croations, and muslims there are slavs.
Politicians on all sides started stoking communal passions
for their own political reason. The results are well known. India must keeps in teretorial integrity and
stand by secular ideals.
Some misguided person from VHP and other organisatons
- Posted by Narayanare making out that muslims are a pampered minority. Quite frankly I find the suggestion to be the
biggest joke I have heard and an insult to ones
intelligence. The Haj subsidy does not turn muslims
into a papered minority. There are quotas based on castes, religion etc, its not ideal but its part of
the social compromise that strengthens the social fabric.
There are some situations where a fire can not shut a fire and we need water for it. The situation in Kashmir is something like that. By arresting people will not resolve the issue moreover will create a major problem for the nation. Instead I would say Govt. should address to the ppl of Kashmir by physical presence or via media and to listen to them, justify and do the needful……
I am not disagreed with the way ppl may think resolving the issue, may be that can be an extreme step by the Govt. to settle everything under control but I believe the way i think can resolve Kashmir issues easely ….
- Posted by Siddharth