The bilateral relations between India and Pakistan have in recent years degenerated into petty squabbles punctuated by occasional hysteria. As parliamentarians of both the neighboring nations make too much noise and indulge in empty rhetoric that lacks substance in their zeal to outwit each other for gaining an upper hand in the highly vulnerable and sensitive politics of Kashmir, the Kashmiris have unfortunately been left in the lurch.
The meaningless display of antics on the floor of august houses of lawmakers in Islamabad and New Delhi within a span of 24 hours on the pretext of Afzal Guru’s hanging will only heighten the prevailing tension in an already volatile region. True, Afzal’s surreptitious hanging ignited a renewed disillusionment for a whole lot of Kashmiri citizens and will surely have a lasting impact on an entire generation.
But what purpose will such tit-for-tat war of words serve apart from plunging Kashmiris on both sides of the boundary headlong into further miseries? More so, when the administrative bungling and unending legal controversy over Guru’s execution has added to the Indian president’s discomfiture and even shaken his conscience, as this author learned reliably.
President Pranab Mukherjee, having displayed great alacrity in rejecting mercy petitions lock, stock and barrel since assuming office, is now loath to taking up more cases of prisoners on death row. Above all, the judiciary too finds itself in a dilemma after the Home Ministry arranged a secret execution to deprive Afzal of his right to judicial recourse. Such act is not only against all norms of civilized jurisprudence but also a reflection of the degrading nature of judicial ethics prevalent in India today. When the cannon of judicial ethics runs dry, the high degree of impartiality that the Indian judiciary is known and respected for will get undermined, acknowledge the leading lights of Indian legal system.
Indeed, the Indian government’s shabby handling of Afzal’s case and blatant refusal to hand over his mortal remains to the family will not only stir up popular disaffection in the state of Kashmir but also make it a potential electoral issue in the run-up to national elections in both Pakistan and India. No wonder why an influential Pakistani parliamentarian and Afghan peace talk interlocutor Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s resolution on Afzal Guru received bipartisan support from the outgoing members of Pakistan National Assembly.
The Maulana’s Indian counterparts were, as if, waiting for the loose delivery with bated breathe so that they can counter it with an equally inane resolution. When all the lawmakers sitting within the hallowed precincts of the Indian Parliament are well aware of the reality of Kashmir, claiming ownership of the territories of the disputed province as it existed in 1947 is nothing more than hyperbolic legislative expressions adopted for mere public consumption.
Perhaps, the mainstream political spectrum in India and Pakistan for long has consciously decided to indulge in shadow boxing when the likes of Dr. Tahir ul Qadri and Anna Hazare are breathing down their neck. Intriguing it is that this duel of competitive parliamentary resolutions was preceded by a private trip of the Pakistani Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf to India.
Even, right-wing political outfits like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) know their limitations when it comes to the issue of reclaiming the portion of Kashmir that is under Pakistani occupation presently. Despite all their hard talk meant to convey macho aggression and bravado, it is an open secret that the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance coalition government captained by none other than Atal Behari Vajpayee ended up restricting the Indian armed forces from crossing over into Pakistan-administered Kashmir during the 1999 conflict in Kargil.
Unfortunately, the dominant discourse of Kashmir in the media revolves around such brouhaha while forgetting conveniently that there is a human aspect to the entire crisis. As leadership on both sides reduce the plight of Kashmiris into a political issue of trivial nature, the sense of alienation and frustration gradually take a gigantic shape.
It is therefore high time the politico-military leadership of the subcontinent comprehended the long-term repercussions of treating Kashmiris as a pawn in their larger strategic game plan endlessly. There is no denying the fact that Kashmir remains one of the world’s most militarized zones and the impact of this protracted conflict on the lives of innocent civilians has been severe.
The people on both sides of the fence are equally depressed for being marginalized when it comes to the question of negotiating their wellbeing. The Kashmiris have been systematically sidelined in all discussions held so far on resolving the vexed issue. Both Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru — a man of Kashmiri descent himself — did not hesitate to accord special status in the respective parts of Kashmir.
Any move to impose a premeditated solution on the Kashmiri people will backfire given the fact that they are gifted with inherently independent psychological moorings. Not many in today’s India are conscious of the secular values of “Kashmiriyat” as we set about stereotyping a community on the basis of state propaganda.
Come what may, Kashmir is destined to be South Asia’s Andorra and there is no option other than searching for ways to meet the democratic aspirations of the Kashmiri people on the basis of a cooperative approach between India and Pakistan.
Kashmir’s search for identity
