Mediation only after a clear line is drawn Part-II
By Daya Sagar
The need for appointment of ‘Team Interlocutors For J&K’ after September 2010 visit of Parliamentary delegation had not arisen simply in view of unemployment / regional disparities / for developmental disparities. The interlocutors were expected to read the “impressions” on the ground with minimum possible bias. No doubt they had to also to give their opinion but the inferences were expected not to be primarily influenced by their personal likes / dislikes / preset notions. Rather the Interlocutors were also supposed to explore new channels / means of information , test the information they had so far carried , ‘examine’ the face of J&K so far projected over last six decades and if needed rework on the concepts that they might have so far considered as total. IRs claim that a detailed study of J&K affairs has been made. But, it could be found from the contents of their report that not much independent and serious look has been taken. The text of the report shows that they have hurried to complete it with in ‘ twelve’ months. Some of the short comings, deficiencies and wrong quotes had also been referred to Dileep Padgaonkar for comments by the writer during last week of July 2012. Dileep Padgaonkar did acknowledge that the report had been seen with a very fine eye and wanted some time for attending to the observations that covered some quotes, contradictions, rushed through exercise, pre set approach , valley centric influences and incomplete references. May be he is still working on the subject. Mandate given to the Group was to hold wide-ranging discussions with all sections of opinion in Jammu and Kashmir in order to identify the political contours of a solution and the roadmap towards it. No doubt the report reflects that the interlocutors have known a lot also about the dimensions of the areas and people of J&K outside Kashmir Valley . But, the conclusions drawn and recommendations made do indicate that they have not been able to come out of the information /concept ‘web’ that has been allowed to be woven over the years by opinions emerging from only Kashmir Valley forming less than 15 % of the whole dimensions and opinions of the people of the State of Jammu & Kashmir.
Like other reports (Js Saghir Ahmed PM’s Vth Working Group Report ),the IRs report does appear instead doing some damage to the interests of Indian nation. But it also does not have much of immediate relief for the anti India Government elements what to talk of Anti India Nation elements except that its lying undisposed by GOI is giving some opportunities to anti elements for raising fingers on ‘India’. A bit of references that may appear going to the choice of Anti India Government elements too are such that these can not be implemented being vague and lacking logic for standing to technical tests. Some suggestions that appear to be beyond the constitutional sanctions and sanctity of the 1947 Accession of J&K with India ( though casual and self contradicting ) do cast shadows on the national ( Indian) interests. It was feared that GOI may not handle this report too with seriousness thereby providing opportunities to anti elements for using some isolated references from the report to accuse GOI and that did happen.. The same could be said about the fate of ‘critical terms of reference’ that were made to Js Saghir Ahmed Working Group on J&K that was presented to JK Chief Minister Omar Abdullah at Jammu on 23rd December 2009.
Five working groups were constituted as decided by then PM Man Mohan Singh in the 2nd multi party Round Table Conference held at Srinagar on 24 and 25 May 2006. Looking at the requirements of turmoil hit State of J&K the most important of the working groups was the Vth Working Group that included the Center State relations – had on agenda NC’s autonomy, PDP Self Rule, Article 370 of COI, issues of refugees and problems of backward areas etc. G M Mir who had contested the 2008 election from Handwara was quoted as having said on 30th August 2012 at Srinagar during a get together arranged by Dileep Padgaonkar & Radha Kumar :::, “we need to address the larger issue of the State’s relationship with India and Pakistan”……. If mainstream parties are pro-India, they should admit it publicly and if separatist are pro-Pakistan or want freedom, they should clearly State that” :: This aspect has also not been plainly addressed by IRs in the report where it should have been pointedly done . Nor has GOI so far taken the suggestion like that of Mir that seriously since without that it will not be possible for Government of India to apply a lasting ‘political medication’ to people of J&K . Unless a clear line is drawn out between the Anti India Government and Anti India Nation elements , no one can ‘medicate’ the sufferings of the people of J&K .Some portions of the IR report 2011 have even draw serious objections from the constitutional angles keeping in view the responsibility that was put on Interlocutors by GOI in terms of the Mandate that has been disclosed in the IRs report as made public on 24th May 2012. So , there was a lot for the Interlocutors as well as the Home Ministry GOI to clarify as regards some of the references , observations and conclusions made in the IR report and the same have remained not attended even after nearly 4 years of the report having been made. Keeping the report in the shelf will do more of damages and the UPA-II government must dispose this report. Ofcourse before going for any new exercise Separatist and Mainstream ideologies must be clearly spelled out from Indian point of view. Concluded
( Daya Sagar is a Sr Journalist and a social activist can be reached at [email protected]).