RAJ DALUJA
JAMMU: It’s time for national news channels to revisit anchoring debates on Kashmir with panelists from the Valley or Pakistan, if objectivity remains any benchmark. Taking Pakistani panelists on the programme is like giving oxygen to India bashers, who not only bruise Indian psyche by their irrational and biased arguments but also boost the morale of radical and anti-national elements in Kashmir. The Indian anchors might be taking some solace in cornering Pakistani guests on merits but it hardly matters as these programmes are no more beamed across the border due to ban imposed by Islamabad. At the end of each programme, the so-called analysts from across the border generally get away with threatening India of Pakistan’s nuke might and its ‘illegitimate’ claim over Kashmir.
If opinions from the other-side are on expected lines then why to provide forum to chronic enemies of the nation, unless intentions are dubious? This should have been a logical question to ponder over but if reports are to be believed, the participants from Pakistan are being paid huge fee for indulging in antiIndia rhetoric. Apart from colossal damage to the national interest, the Pakistani debaters indulge in promoting terrorism in the Valley and inciting people against Indian nation. It is irony that some of the national channels are funding terror abettors for the sake of their TRP.
is not that all of them, whether belonging to Congress, National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party, are anti-national but they have compulsion to be on the other side of fence because of threats from elements inimical to India. Of course, some panelists of these so-called mainstream outfits might be having sympathy with the cause espoused by terrorists and separatists but generally they jump the red-line out of fear. Rewind back the debates of premier national television channels, nowhere a Kashmiri panelist will be seen on the side of India. Once any of them dares do so, he or she will be made to pay the price or to get registered with Relief Organisation as a migrant. Their sustenance and survival remains on toeing the line pushed by Pakis through their lackeys in the Valley, which is why most vociferous analysts have turned house-hold names due to their anti-India stance.
Let it be understood that the national television channels have potential of making and marring reputations, which has been seen in immense measure in the case of Minister of State in the PMO Dr Jitendra Singh, who despite being a political novice retained centre-stage in 2014 parliamentary elections due to his pro-active appearance on television. So powerful became his aura and persona that a political stalwart like Ghulam Nabi Azad turned a dwarf and lost his crucial elections to a first timer in the electoral arena. Similarly, some of the discarded and discredited entities from the Valley came to huge lime light just because they took recourse to Indian television channels to abuse India and Indian institutions. It is not that producers in the television channels are unaware about the damage they are causing to national interest in a sensitive place like Kashmir but the instinct of survival and sustenance in competitive show business makes all the difference.
When elected representatives, top mainstream leaders and spokespersons of the ruling political outfits from Kashmir speak the separatists line and cry hoarse over so-called atrocities being committed in the Valley, the message across the country goes adverse, which influences the public opinion negatively. The people in rest of the country don’t know the motivation of television participants from Kashmir to spit venom against the armed forces and Indian institutions due to fear of anti-national elements but they take them on their face-value. By telling lies and fabricated tales, the panelists are demonising India in Kashmir, courtesy national television channels, which go to any extent in keeping their prime-time shows live.