The Kashmir Dispute
R. M. Pal

      Some months ago I spoke to a very well-known human rights activist in Mumbai that we might have a discussion session on the implication of the demand for Azadi in Kashmir. He said we have many other problems like communalism. There is no problem in Kashmir. The Assembly elections in J&K have settled all issues and disputes. He is wrong. The dispute remains and almost all political formations including those who at one time wanted a plebiscite in Kashmir to settle the dispute between India and Pakistan, that is Kashmir being a Muslim majority state should form part of Pakistan, are leading demonstrations for Azadi. In recent times even fundamentalist leaders like Mr. Gilani have not spoken about joining Pakistan.
      The demand for Azadi is strong. What should the Government of India do to tackle the question of Azadi? An independent Muslim state will be a Taliban state for all practical purposes. It is true that Kashmiri leaders including some Pandit leaders like the late Pt. Premnath Bazaz have claimed that Kashmiri Islam is very different from fundamentalist Islam. It is tolerant, liberal and progressive. Well, then why is it that whenever there has been a call for introducing ‘burkha’ to closing down video parlours, beauty parlours to closing down of co-educational institutions, Kashmiri Muslims have overwhelmingly supported such calls?
      In this brief article I propose to deal with the question of handling the demand for Azadi. There were, and will be, huge demonstrations on the streets of Srinagar to support this demand. The army and the police cannot disperse the crowds. Applying violence in the form of shooting down people in order to disperse such demonstrations will only make the demand for Azadi more popular. The international community will raise its voice to support the leaders of the movement. Let us not forget that the Kashmir lobby in the US wants India to make Kashmir an independent state.
      There is only one way to deal with the situation. A little bit of gambling on the part of the Government of India. Indians have to choose between two options. One, to go by the original British Parliamentary Act declaring creation of two countries, India and Pakistan, Hindu majority areas to join India and Muslim majority areas to join Pakistan. The 1947 invasion of Kashmir by Pakistan changed the situation. All that happened after that is known. India did not come out glorious in the UN. After that there was the demand for plebiscite in Kashmir, a plebiscite to give the Kashmiris the right to decide whether to join India or Pakistan. The plebiscite front became a powerful movement. The Government of India and its representative, the Governor of J&K should invite all Kashmiri leaders individually and tell them that India has now decided to have the plebiscite in Kashmir. The Governor may also hold dialogue with the Muslim middle class intelligentsia like professors, lawyers, doctors and engineers. This section of people would not like to join Pakistan. Therefore if they are confronted with the choice of being in India or Pakistan, they would prefer to maintain the status quo with greater autonomy.
      There is an element of gambling in this approach. In politics, at times gambling is necessary. Jinnah gambled and got Pakistan. The other day a highly respected Muslim intellectual and a scholar on Islam, a recognized human rights intellectual-activist in India, told me that if Indian security forces in J&K act with restraint and respect human rights, then Kashmir might opt for India and not demand Azadi. It is too much to expect that from the Armed Forces. After all, India has retained Kashmir in India since 1947 using its Armed Forces. The only way out now is to give the choice of being with either India or Pakistan to the political leaders and the middle class intelligentsia. Isn’t this preferable to crushing demonstrations for Azadi using violent means?
      For India, it will be better to hand over J&K to Pakistan rather than have another Muslim state on its border. After all, India expected Bangladesh to be a secular state. But the mullahs reign supreme there. The same thing will happen in J&K if it were to become an independent State

Mainstream, Vol XLV, No 35