Not
merely a crisis of identity
Hari Om
The
demand of the people of Jammu province for a separate State is genuine, given
that the Congress-backed Kashmiri leadership has reduced them to being a
non-entity, neglected and discriminated against in their own land Jammu province and Ladakh in Jammu &
Kashmir were perhaps the only regions in the country where people demanded
division of the State immediately after India attained independence. They
demanded reorganisation of the State on the ground that they despised the
separatist and communal ideology of National Conference president and Emergency
Administrator of Jammu & Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah, and did not expect
fairness from him.
In
Jammu, the people, under the leadership of Balraj Madhok, who subsequently
became president of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, demanded division of the State on
November 1, 1947, six days after the State’s accession to India. The demand was
supported by the BJS founder, Syama Prasad Mookerjee, in October 1949, when
then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, at Sheikh Abdullah’s behest, granted
special status to the State on purely religious grounds.
Mookerjee
repeatedly said that the people of Jammu and Ladakh had the right to seek
separation from Kashmir, as the Kashmiri leadership’s approach towards the
country and Jammu & Kashmir was patently communal. In Ladakh, the Buddhists
under the Head Lama, Kushak Bakula, raised the banner of revolt in November
1947 against Sheikh Abdullah and his administration. Bakula declared that the
people of Ladakh did not want any truck with the separatist and communal
Kashmiri leadership. They approached Nehru and urged him to merge Ladakh either
with Jammu province or with Punjab or Himachal Pradesh.
The
people of Jammu and Ladakh launched numerous struggles to achieve emancipation
from Kashmir leadership between 1947 and 1987, but failed to achieve their
stated goals. The Union Government, under the baneful influence of the Kashmiri
leadership, rejected their demands as being ‘communal’ and against ‘national
interest’.
The
1952 Delhi parleys between Jammu & Kashmir Wazir-e-Azam Sheikh Abdullah and
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru on the political future of Jammu & Kashmir;
the 1975 Indira Gandhi-Sheikh Abdullah accord, and the 1987 Rajiv Gandhi-Farooq
Abdullah accord prove one point: All these agreements were made to strike a
deal with the Kashmiri leadership over the interests of the people of Jammu and
Ladakh.
Things
changed dramatically in 1989, when secessionist violence gripped Kashmir. The
immediate fall-out was the loud clamour in Jammu for a separate State and for
Union Territory status to Ladakh. The demands unambiguously pointed to the
danger of being submerged under the rising clamour for ‘azadi’, plebiscite and
the restoration of the pre-1953 politico-constitutional set-up or greater
autonomy.
In
October 1989, people in Ladakh took recourse to violence on an unprecedented
scale. Two persons died and several others got injured. An alarmed Union
Government had to yield and start parleys with the agitating Ladakhi
leadership. The then Union Minister for Home Affairs Buta Singh persuaded them
to give up their demand for Union Territory status and, offered them an
Autonomous Hill Development Council instead. The Ladakhis accepted the proposal
as a first step towards the final goal. Since the people of Jammu province did
not create any law and order problem, their demand was not considered.
Convinced
that New Delhi will not consider the demands of the people of Jammu Province,
some prominent university teachers, advocates, businessmen and industrialists
founded the Jammu Mukti Morcha on March 2, 1990, and launched a statehood
movement with great verve. But weak leadership and conspiracies hatched by
certain Jammu-based agents of Kashmiri leaders resulted in the JMM’s collapse,
though the struggle for separation from Kashmir continued.
It
was before the 2002 Assembly election in Jammu & Kashmir that the Rashtra
Swayamsevak Sangh took a concrete step by adopting a resolution at its
Kurukshetra annual meet, directing its State unit to establish the Jammu State
Morcha and contest Assembly elections in alliance with the Bharatiya Janata
Party. The JSM and the BJP contested the election on the statehood and
reorganisation plank respectively. Together they won nine seats out of 37 in
Jammu province. They would have won more than 25 seats, had Congress and the
Jammu & Kashmir National Panthers Party not contested the election on
purely Jammu-specific planks.
The
Congress hoodwinked the Jammu electorate by holding out two categorical
commitments — chief ministership for Jammu and adequately-empowered regional
development board — and won 15 seats. JKNPP contested on the slogan of
reorganisation and for the first time won four seats. Two independent
candidates also won election on statehood plank and later became associated
members of the Congress to become Ministers.
In
other words, the BJP, JSM, Congress, JKNPP and independent candidates won as
many as 30 seats in the name of Jammu. The Congress, the People’s Democratic
Party and the JKNPP formed a coalition Government in November 2002 with the PDP
president as Chief Minister, but did not fulfill any of the promises. In 2008,
all these parties again contested the Assembly election invoking Jammu’s cause
and won 29 seats. The Congress won 13 seats holding out a commitment that “If
voted to power, shall amend the State Constitution to federalise the State’s
polity and establish regional council”.
The
JKNPP won three seats and the BJP for the first time won 11 seats on the plank
of “political empowerment”. The Congress again became part of the coalition
Government but ditched the people of Jammu to keep Kashmiri leaders in good
humour. The demand of the people of Jammu province for a separate State is
genuine, given that the Congress-backed Kashmiri leadership has reduced them to
being a nonentity. The following instances demonstrate the level of
discrimination against the people of Jammu. The Chief Minister is always from
the Valley and from one particular religious sect. So is the leadership of
major political parties like the Congress.
Jammu returns two members to the Lok Sabha and 37 to the Assembly at the
rate of one per 15.59 lakh voters and 84,270 voters, respectively. In contrast,
Kashmir returns three members to the Lok Sabha and 46 members to the Assembly
at the rate 9.61 lakh voters and 62,673 voters, respectively.
Jammu’s
share in the Civil Secretariat is not even 25 per cent and the number of
Secretaries to the Government is negligible. The unemployment rate in Jammu is
over 69 per cent and in Kashmir less than 30 per cent. Over-developed and
highly prosperous Kashmir has 10 districts at the rate of one per 1585.3 sq km.
Jammu has an equal number of districts but at the rate of one per 2629.3 sq km.
The road density km/sq km in Kashmir in 2006 was 310.4 and in Jammu it was
138.7.
The
State power plants produce a paltry 25 MW electricity in Jammu as against
335.36 MW produced in adjacent Kashmir. A person from Jammu working with the
Public Health Engineering under the Community Participation Scheme gets a
monthly wage of Rs 500, whereas his Kashmiri counterpart gets Rs 2,100. The
share of Jammu’s youth in Kashmir-based technical and professional institutions
is negligible. On the contrary, Kashmiri students are in great strength in
similar Jammu-based institutions. The
harsh reality is that Kashmir occupies almost all the higher and lucrative
positions in the Government, be it revenue administration, the finance
department, the police and judicial departments and political institutions. The
net result is widespread frustration and dissatisfaction. The demand in Jammu
for Statehood needs to be viewed in this context.
(The writer is former Dean, Faculty of Social
Sciences, University of Jammu)
Source:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment