Undoing injustice to
Kashmiri Pandits
Kashmir Times, Op-ed, 25 April 2015
http://kashmirtimes.com/newsdet.aspx?q=40277
http://kashmirtimes.com/newsdet.aspx?q=40277
Kashmiris have long standing and
arguably genuine grievances against the Indian state. They have resorted to
several ways to voice these, including militancy, as is indeed their right.
However, one way in which they appear to be furthering their agenda is in
keeping the displaced Kashmiri Pandits from returning to their homes and
hearths. Is keeping Pandits out, one more pressure point against the Indian
state?
Kashmiris would reflexively
protest such an interpretation. They would claim that not only has India
suppressed their voicing of their grievances but it is not they who are keeping
the Pandits from returning. They believe they have extended a sincere invite to
Pandits to return, but one that has not been taken up. Instead, Pandits by not
returning are enabling India to have yet another stick to beat Kashmir with.
Also, the manner of insertion of Pandits back into Kashmir in self-contained
residential enclaves is reminiscent of Israel’s colonising behavior in occupied
territory.
To Kashmiri Pandits, the idea
that their expulsion is self-exile is preposterous. They have been ousted from
their historical homeland now for a quarter century. Their return has been
aborted by instances of continuing threat, such as the Wandhama incident. And,
one that is set to continue so long as Kashmiris flirt with extremism that
lingers increasingly darkly and closer with the advent of the IS that has even
put the Al Qaeda into shade. Security concerns necessitate innovative measures
for sustainable returns; the idea of clusters being one such.
Where does the truth lie (no pun
intended)?
Clearly, there are multiple
versions of the truth. There are possibly multiple truths. No version of the
truth can be rejected out of hand. There may be shortfalls in the truths held
by each community. As part of debate, these can be highlighted and mitigated;
but their right to their version of the truth cannot be disputed. These truths
are the kernel of the identity of the community and cannot be trifled with. If
this bottom-line is accepted then there is scope for next steps.
The past quarter century has made
amply clear that both communities have gone through enough. Kashmiris have
weathered security operations ad infinitum, while Pandits have become an
internally displaced people. Both have recovered somewhat with considerable
peace returning to Kashmir and many Panditsfinding a new life. Balance is
returning normalcy to Kashmir.
This final touch can only be
through a dignified return of Pandits back in Kashmir, preferably to their
original homes.The vulnerable group here being the Pandits, the Kashmiris need
to take the first step.If, and since, the cluster model does not find favour
with Kashmiris, there is only one alternative: enable Pandit return direct to
their homes. This would be in keeping with their rhetoric.
Historical experience does not
enthuse. Seldom have communities once internally displaced managed to return
with dignity. Reconciliation of such an order has little precedence. In India,
people displaced in violence in Assam in the nineties continue in relief camps.
People who fled villages and localities in Gujarat have settled in ghettos.
Some villages continue to remain empty of their minority members after the
riots in UP of last year. Within in the region, minority community members
facing discrimination and security threats have largely voted to leave India’s
neighbouring states, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Globally, the return of many
vulnerable groups who fled conflict such as in Georgia, Kosovo and Africa’s
numerous conflicts, is awaited. Can it be any different in Kashmir?
This is not a task the two
communities can leave to the state. If they do, the process is liable to get
politicized and consequently put off. Geopolitics is liable in the state’s eye
to trump human security. To it, logistics of the exercise, such as building
houses for Pandits may be easier than building the conditions to make these
homes. Political actors, that control the state, get to play political football
with the essentially humanitarian IDP issue. Reconciliation therefore cannot be
left to the state alone; even if the state has a critical role to play
eventually.
Instead, center stage must be the
communities themselves. They need to stop firing at each other from the
shoulder of the state, with the Pandits using the center and the Kashmiris the
state government.Silencing negative motivated and opportunist political actors
within each respectively will be the first challenge. Politicians can manage,
contain and mark time. While itself preferable to losing ground and stepping
back, they cannot deliver, transform, enlighten - necessary to bridging,
reaching out, striking out.
There being no Mandela, either in
Kashmir or New Delhi, and life not being a fairy tale, on the face of it, it
does not appear possible. Politically, separatists, while mouthing the right
phrases, cannot instill confidence. They have not given up on
their Pakistani connections. Currently, these are political. However, that owes
in part to the vice grip that India’s military has. Security wise, till the
possibility of proxy war resumption using militants as their cat’s paw is not
stashed away by Pakistan, to chance a return could prove foolhardy.
Logistically, illegal usurpation of property and profiting from distress sales
will first have to be undone.
But more importantly,
spiritually, the chasms in trust that have only deepened with time’s passage
will have to be crossed. Such levels of generosity in human spirit in face of
conflict and absence of leadership, both political and spiritual, are seldom
reached. Even deep Sufi wellsprings,Kashmiriyatand memories of the older
generation may fail to buoy. The younger generation on both sides, more
religious but less spiritual, may be less inclined to be forgiving; for
sustainable return, it is they who have to be incentivised.
What we are liable to see therefore
is a continuing of the dance around the IDP issue. Kashmir would not be able to
transit from a conflict to a post conflict society. The liberal lode will
dissipate when most needed to preserve Kashmir from ill winds from West Asia
transiting the Hindu Kush to draw near. What Kashmiris fear – demographic
change – may consequently appear a suitable strategy option to save Kashmir
from its home-grown extremists. This may even be possible to engineer in the
political circumstance as shall remain operational in Delhi for the remainder
of the decade. Worse, in case of conflict revisiting Kashmir, there are aplenty
today counter violence methods that were only yesterday unacceptable. The
examples of Chechenya, East Timor and the wars in the Middle East bear recall.
To paint such scenarios is to be
strategic. To point to Kashmiris that there are roads they must not take.
However, painting such dire and plausible futures, such as this, cannot draw
out compassion and grace necessary for Kashmir to rise up as a post conflict
society with a difference. It is up to Kashmiris to conquer themselves, subdue
their baser selves for their own sake.
No comments:
Post a Comment