Chidambaram’s Quest for Kashmir peace

That China has been assigned a ‘monitoring role’ in South Asia by U S President Barack Obama is impertinent. Such abstraction has raised eyebrows in India at a time when ice has started breaking in Kashmir, and behind-the-scene dialogue—or calls it back channel diplomacy—to resolve the ticklish Kashmir issue, has entered a ‘decisive’ phase.

China’s role cannot be upgraded for partisan ends by Obama’s ingenuity. India has a border dispute with both China and Pakistan. The Dragon has illegally occupied chunks of territory, including Aksai Chin, forming part of the undivided state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is egregious.

China, which is closer to Pakistan, and has helped in its nuclear programme against Indian interests, cannot be bequeathed with a monitoring role. This is insulting to India. Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan and any American ‘ill-advised diplomatic activism’ is unwanted.

The overall scenario emerging from Kashmir is encouraging. This is discernible from the fact that Union Home Minister P Chidambaram has informed the Rajya Sabha that a ‘significant’ number of battalions of the Central forces had been withdrawn from Jammu and Kashmir. Local police force had been entrusted with additional powers to deal with militancy, following New Delhi’s peace initiative with the secessionists. This is not an easy job.

Chidambaram had made it public that the government would hold ‘quiet’ talks, away from media glare, with ‘ all shades of opinion’, including people ‘who may be called extremists’, to find a ‘unique solution’ to the problem. Response from the secessionists, mainstream politicians and a section of the hardcore miscellaneous people to Chidambaram’s ‘quiet dialogue’ diplomacy seems to be favourable.

In another development, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah—to show his liberal image—has indicated that he is in favour of holding triangular talks, between India, Pakistan and the separatist leadership. He is ready to act as a ‘facilitator’ if Hizbul Mujahideen, militant wing of the Jamaat-i-Islami, wanted to share Chidambaram’s negotiating table.

In fact, this is what some hardcore elements had been demanding. Omar Abdullah’s overtures about ‘triangular talks’ may be irksome to New Delhi. But it all depends on the evolving situation that might emerge at a later stage. This is what the moderate faction of the Hurriyat Conference, led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, had been asking for, in one way or the other.

Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) wants to put hurdles in Chidambaram’s odyssey. An unidentified terrorist, tried to assassinate separatist leader Fazal Haq Qureshi, a close aide of the Mirwaiz. He is in a critical condition.

The cantour lines seem to have changed since Obama came to power and also keeping in view the insurgency brewing in Pakistan. People are angry with ISI’s manipulations disastrous for Pakistan. How long will they tolerate the nuisance created by ISI? Whether the dialogue process is triangular or otherwise, it hardly matters when Pakistan is withering.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has made it clear that there can be no ‘redrawing of borders’ in Kashmir. He wants permanent peace to be established all along the borders. Unfortunately, Pakistan still harps on the right of self-determination for Kashmiris. Chidambaram has told the secessionists that much water has flowed through Jhelum since 1947. But his government would not shy away from talking to any organization, even those raising the demand of self-rule. “Why should we stop talking if they have put forward certain demands,” he has said. He was obliquely referring to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP)’s demand of self-rule, which is not in tune with the Indian Constitution.

The ongoing Track II diplomacy is essentially aimed at achieving a viable agreement between New Delhi and Pakistan on the one side and between New Delhi and Srinagar on the other, with Pakistan’s ‘blessings’. It is vainly argued that the 1975 accord between Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Abdullah did not have Pakistan’s ‘sanction’. It is absurd.

Mirwaiz, who has held extensive talks with Pakistan High Commissioner Shahid Malik, is of the opinion that “thrust was on finding an interim political solution that can be revisited and built upon after a period of five to ten years”. Such a suggestion has already emanated from PoK.

For Mirwaiz, talks on the Kashmir issue have entered a ‘crucial and decisive phase’. However, he is sanguine to continue talking even after the assassination bid on Qureshi. But differences persist.

The Mirwaiz had set pre-conditions before initiating the dialogue. These related to release of political prisoners, revocation of the Disturbed Area Act, demilitarization and allowing the Hurriyat leaders to move to Pakistan and PoK. The Hurriyat Chairman has been facing stiff resistance from hardcore elements within the conglomerate. He had dissolved his party’s Executive Council recently because of differences on his decision to join the ‘secret’ parleys.

Ali Shah Geelani, heading another faction of the Hurriyat is totally opposed to even tripartite talks, before his conditions are met .He wants New Delhi to announce that Kashmir is a disputed territory. Geelani is not even in agreement with JKLF leader Yasin Malik’s so-called ‘secular ideology of independent Kashmir’ , as if Malik is about to get independence for Kashmir on a platter.

This is how the separatists hoodwink people. With ashes in his mouth, Geelani has said that neither Indian secularism nor British secularism nor Russian secularism will be acceptable to Kashmiris. Such is his mindset.

What can be expected of him? Can his Jamaat-i-Islami tolerate Kashmiri Hindus if they are rehabilitated in the valley after 20 years? Hindus, who formed 15 per cent of the valley population in 1947, have been liquidated.

PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti has responded well to peace talks, asserting that Chidambaram’s description of Jammu and Kashmir as a ‘place with unique history and unique geography that would need a unique solution, ‘is in line with the thinking of the PDP.

Reverting back to 1953 level situation is no solution. Time has changed since then. The valley’s demographic character has vastly changed. But still nothing is lost. There is lot of scope to strengthen the federal system of governance. If the wishes of people like Geelani are considered, Kashmir will meet a chaotic situation. It is useless to waste time in pleading with the diehard elements who will not even feel happy with independent Kashmir. They are on the path of ruin. They are a nuisance not only for Kashmiris but for Pakistan as well. Pakistan is under tremendous pressure from Obama to wind up its terror shop.

In a letter to Asif Ali Zardari, President Obama has warned Pakistan that U S would no longer tolerate its reluctance to act against Lashkar-e-Toiba and other jihadi groups. U S National Security Advisor Jim Jones had recently been to Pakistan to deliver the blunt message to Zardari: “If Pakistan cannot deliver, the U S may be impelled to use means at its disposal to rout insurgents’ bases along Pakistan’s western and southern borders with Afghanistan”.

The message is abusive. U S has told Pakistan that its ‘use of insurgency groups for policy goals’ cannot continue. Amazingly, the U S is ‘begging’ Pakistan that in return for Pakistan changing its ‘strategic trajectory’, Obama has promised a more enhanced US- Pakistan relationship, including ‘working on India’. The last words are significant.

- Asian Tribune -