|
J &
K and Trifurcation
R
Upadhyay
Is
there a Kashmiri identity? Those in POK are actually Mirpuris. Those
in Jammu are mostly Hindus and Sikhs and the Buddhists dominate
Ladakh. People tend to equate the politics of Kashmir with the
politics of Srinagar valley. Is trifurcation a viable solution or
will it create more problems? This paper examines these issues.
Director
The
endless turmoil in the state of Jammu and Kashmir has also generated
a debate for its trifurcation. The supporters of the theory
favouring the division of the state put forward the following points
in their arguments-
*
Historically, the present conglomeration of three heterogeneous
regions of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh were never an organic political
entity.
*
There is inherent inter regional contradictions in terms of history,
physiography, ethnicity, language and culture.
*
This sharp inter-regional contradiction has a ‘spill over’ in
the political perception of the three dominant communities of the
respective region and integration is absent.
*
Political domination of Kashmiri Muslims and their discrimination
against Jammu and Ladakh kept the latter neglected. Ladakh has
persistently raised the issue of Islamic domination.
*
The Hindus and Buddhists of the state are apprehensive of the likely
demographic change in their respective regions due to large- scale
Muslim influx from Kashmir valley. The Doda district for example has
changed from a Hindu majority to a Muslim majority district.
Heterogeneous
character of the three regions
For
an academic discussion, one may like to argue that the state of
Jammu and Kashmir is a rare synthesis of Islam, Hinduism and
Buddhism, but historically all the three regions of Jammu, Kashmir
and Ladakh always maintained their distinct regional identity. Due
to distinct ethno-regional division of the state into three regions
and their separate physiography, history, culture, and language, the
people never developed any emotional link among themselves.
The
language spoken by the inhabitants of Ladakh is Tibetan in origin.
Buddhism as a religion with distinct social customs and ethnicity
has very little in common with the 95% Kashmiri speaking Muslim
population of Kashmir valley. Similarly, the Hindus of Jammu region
with Dogri as their language and Vedic culture never had any
emotional communication with either of the two regions. Thus in
absence of any emotional link no common identity could ever emerge
as a binding force required for an organic political entity. The
political geography of these three regions did not undergo any major
change even during the rule of Moghul kings as they were never under
single administrative command.
The
present geo-political territory of Jammu and Kashmir emerged as a
state only in the middle of the nineteenth century. Ranjit Singh,
the ruler of Lahore Kingdom annexed the Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir
in 1819 and apportioned the rule of Jammu to his Dogra Commander
Gulab Singh in 1820 after crowning him as king. In 1834 Gulab Singh
annexed the Kingdom of Ladakh. In 1846, when Kashmir was ceded to
Dogra King under the Treaty of Amritsar with British Government –
all the three regions of Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir came under a
single administrative control of the autocratic regime of Maharaja
Gulab Singh. Thus, historically there is no ambiguity in the factual
position that the three distinct regions of the state of Jammu and
Kashmir were conglomerated under a single geo-political boundary
only in 1846.
Inherent
Inter-regional contradictions
Due
to inherent inter-regional contradictions, the successive Maharajas
belonging to the Dogra clan of Jammu, who ruled this state for about
one hundred years before its accession to India in October 1947
failed to create any emotional link among them. The Kashmiri Muslims
under the influence of Islamic fundamentalists never compromised
their subjugation under a non-Muslim Dogra regime. In fact the rule
of Jammu clan over the Muslims of Kashmir since 1846 generated
animosity between the two regions to an extent of an oppressor and
an alien. This historical antagonism between the two gradually
transformed their political mindset, which never allowed them to
develop a united attitude towards any issue.
Taking
advantage of the political movement in India against the British
Government, the Kashmiri Muslims formed an organisation known as
Anjuman-e-Islamia in 1924 with a slogan to scrap Amritsar Treaty
under which Kashmir was ceded to the Kingdom of Dogra clan. In 1931
Muslim Conference that subsequently changed into National Conference
also focused their agitation more for freedom from the autocratic
rule of the Hindu Maharaja of Jammu clan than against the British
Government. The Quit Kashmir Movement of National Conference and
Quit India Movement of Indian National Congress had different
political perceptions for the Kashmiri Muslims and Hindus of Jammu.
Inter
regional contradiction in political perceptions
The
sharp inter-regional contradiction in the political perception
between the Muslims of Kashmir and the Hindus of Jammu during
freedom movement also proves that they were mentally not attuned to
integrate themselves emotionally. Even after transfer of authority
from an autocratic regime to a democratic government in October 1947
the situation did not undergo any major change. While the Kashmiri
speaking Muslims of the Kashmir valley by and large remained
Islamist and were votaries of greater autonomy, the Hindus of Jammu
had no problem in amalgamating with the mainstream political set up
in India after the accession of the state. The Buddhists of Ladakh
due to their animosity against the Muslims of the valley wanted to
free themselves from the Muslim domination. But the then political
leadership in India did not bother to understand the
multi-dimensional dis-similarities in language, culture, ethnicity,
history, geography and political perception of the region and
transferred the dynastic authority of Dogra ruler solely to the
Muslim leadership of Kashmir. They failed to work out a political
mechanism for emotional integration of the people of all the three
regions.
Exploiting
the softness of Pandit Nehru towards him, Sheikh Abdullah ignored
the sentiments of the people of Jammu and Ladakh and diplomatically
maneuvered the inclusion of article 370 in the Indian constitution.
Thus, managing absolute political power under this article, he
neglected the political and economic interest of Jammu and Ladakh
and was more like an autocratic successor to the Dogra king. Sheikh
Abdullah for all his greatness failed to win the trust of both Jammu
and Ladakh.
Political
domination of Kashmiri Muslims:
The
democratic process in the state of Jammu and Kashmir was initiated
with first assembly election in 1951. But by maneuvering the
dominant political representation of the valley in the state
Legislative Assembly, Sheikh Abdullah managed to place the political
command of the state in the hands of Kashmiri Muslims. With Kashmir
valley-centric mindset Sheikh Abdullah deliberately earmarked 43
seats for Kashmir, 30 for Jammu and 2 for Ladakh in the then house
of a 75-member Legislative Assembly in the state, even though more
than half of the population and 90 per cent of the land area belong
to Jammu and Ladakh. Presently, in the house of 87-member
legislative assembly in the state, Kashmir valley sends 46 members
and the rest is shared between the two regions with 37 from Jammu
and only 4 from Ladakh. Of the total 6 Lok Sabha seats in the state,
Kashmir valley, Jammu and Ladakh have been sharing 3, 2 and 1 seats
respectively. The regional share of political representation in the
state is not in conformity with the strength of population and
voters structure of the respective region. The voters strength of
Jammu (24,55,174), Kashmir valley (24,22,765) and Ladakh (1,43719)
vindicates the allegation that the people of Jammu and Ladakh due to
uneven representation in the state Legislative Assembly were
discriminated in the decision making process in the state. There are
also allegations that in the absence of the control of the Election
Commission of India in conducting the election in Jammu and Kashmir
till 1967, the National Conference manipulated the rejection of the
nomination of opposition candidates to maintain its hegemony in the
political control of the state.
Since
no sincere effort was made by the dominant Muslim leadership in the
state to integrate the people of these regions emotionally, no
genuine state level leader with his influence all over the three
regions could ever be produced in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The
best course perhaps could have been to bring the state of Jammu and
Kashmir also under the purview of State Re-organisation Commission.
But due to the special status of the state under Article 370 of the
constitution, the re-organisation of this heterogeneous combination
was not possible. On the other hand the absence of a genuine state
level leadership, the Kashmiri identity as being projected by the
political leaders of Kashmir valley had no takers among the Hindus
of Jammu and the Buddhists of Ladakh. In reality, the Kashmiri
identity became a synonym of the Muslim identity in the state. Since
the Hindus of Jammu and Buddhists of Ladakh are historically,
culturally and linguistically poles apart from the Muslims of
Kashmir, the political domination of the latter has never been
acceptable to the remaining two major groups of the state. Thus,
against the never-ending greater autonomy demand of the Muslims from
the central Government, the Hindus of Jammu and the Buddhists of
Ladakh are demanding autonomy from the domination of the former.
Growing
apprehension in Jammu and Ladakh against demographic changes:
The
ethno-religious divide continued to haunt the dominant inhabitants
of Jammu and Ladakh regions. Creation of a separate district of Doda
for the Muslim majority area of Udhampur district of Jammu and
similar Muslim majority district of Kargil after bifurcating the
Buddhist majority district of Ladakh is viewed as an ill-designed
fundamentalist approach of Kashmiri leaders for ethnic cleansing of
the state. The plight of about two lakh Hindu migrants from Kashmir
valley has confirmed their fear. Their deep apprehension that the
Islamic fundamentalists with the support of the state Government are
systematically trying to bring a demographic change in the regions
with a view to make them also a Muslim majority area – has
alienated them from Kashmiri Muslim. Lama Lobzang, a prominent
Buddhist leader of Ladakh and also a member of National Commission
of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes said, “The NC(National
Conference) Government is deliberately settling a large number of
people from the valley with a view to reducing the Buddhist majority
in Ladakh into minority” ( Organiser dated August 13,2000 page
10).
In
1964, the Ladakh Buddhist Association (LBA) spearheaded a movement
against Kashmiri domination in the region and demanded a NEFA type
central administration there. After their protracted agitation they
however, agreed to the formation of Ladakh Autonomous Hill
Development Council (LAHDC) in 1995. But scared with the influx of
Kashmiri Muslims in Ladakh, the LAHDC passed a resolution seeking
Union Territory status of Ladakh. Though the state Government
rejected this resolution, Ladakh region raised its voice again for
statehood with the status of Union Territory, when the state
Legislative Assembly adopted a resolution in June 2000 demanding
greater autonomy and pre-1953 status of the state.
An
organisation known as Panun Kashmir formed by the Hindu migrants of
Kashmir also demanded creation of separate homeland for them on the
north and east of Jhelum.
Similarly,
the Hindu dominated Jammu region has been nursing a grudge against
the Kashmir centric politics right from the day of 1952 Delhi
Agreement. An organisation known as Praja Parishad under the
leadership of Prem Nath Dogra had launched an agitation against the
domination of Kashmiri Muslims following the Delhi Accord of 1952.
In 1979 the people of Jammu region again launched agitation against
the economic neglect of the area and discrimination in Government
jobs, setting up the professional institutions and other employment
related Government projects. They also allege that central funds for
developmental schemes in the state have become the sole privilege of
the Kashmir valley due to diplomatic maneuvering by the Muslim
leaders.
In
view of the multi-dimensional inter-regional contradictions followed
by time-to-time agitation like Praja Parishad movement in 1952-53
the state Government set up Gajendragadkar Commission in 1967 to
look into the allegations and grievances of the people of the two
regions. Another commission known as Wazir Commission was set up in
1980 following the Poonch agitation of 1978-79. However, the
Government did not take due notice to the Commissions report.
According to an observation of Gajendragadkar Commission, “The
main cause of irritation and tension is the feeling of political
neglect and discrimination from which the certain regions (Jammu and
Ladakh) suffer. Even if all the matters are equally settled, we feel
that there would still be a measure of discontent unless the
political aspirations of the different regions are satisfied.” (
Quoted from The Region of Jammu: A saga of neglect and
discrimination –By Hari Om published in a book entitled Politics
of Autonomy in Jammu and Kashmir)
Jammu
and Kashmir Chief Minister Dr. Farooq Abdullah’s move for greater
autonomy demand with pre-1953 status of the state encouraged certain
sections in Jammu and Ladakh regions for raising the demand for
division of the state into three autonomous regions. Some local
leaders of the RSS also supported this view. But the issue has so
far not been raised from any corner in the state aggressively. At
national level too no political party has taken any official stand
in favour of the tri-furcation of the state. Even the RSS, which is
quite vocal for the cause of the Hindus of Jammu, Hindu migrants of
Kashmir and Buddhists of Ladakh in a resolution adopted in a meeting
(July 2’2000 at Koba-Ahmedabad) of its Akhil Bhartiya Karyakari
Mandal (ABKM) strongly opposed the greater autonomy demand of Farooq
Abdullah. It urged upon the Government, “to ensure that in any
discussions with the protagonists of autonomy, which is a thin veil
for ‘azadi’, the uprooted Hindus of the valley are rehabilitated
in their home state and involved in deliberations at every level and
the political aspirations of Jammu and Ladakh regions are fully
met."
Conclusion
There
is no doubt that the divergent political orientation, aspirations
and mindsets of the three regions and their geo-ethnic division
fulfill all the criteria required for the tri-furcation of the
state. The Ladakh Buddhist Association has already come up with a
demand for Union Territory status of the region. In Jammu, an
organisation like Jammu Mukti Morcha was formed with its sole aim
and objective favouring tri-furcation of state by creation of
separate state of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. It also set up one
candidate for assembly election in 1996 but lost badly.
Despite
the convincing reasons behind the demand for tri-furcation of state,
its division on communal line may not be desirable in the larger
national interest. When Pakistan is still harping on the two-nation
theory that has been buried deep after the emergence of Bangladesh,
time is not ripe for such a division now with the state facing the
most virulent Jehadi type of Muslim insurgency. The state of Jammu
and Kashmir is having border with both Pakistan and China. Pakistan
has made a number of attempts to grab this state forcefully. Thus
due to over all security reason its tri-furcation may lead to
security complications. Our experience in North Eastern region of
the country has proved that creation of smaller states has only
helped the divisive forces in the country. The need of the hour is
to have an emotional integration of all the three regions of this
state. A fair deal with all the three regions with proportionate
political representation in the decision making process, their
rightful and legitimate share in the economic developments and
resolution of regional imbalance may perhaps be the only solution.
The protagonists of inter-regional autonomy also have valid reason
for their demand that people of Jammu, Ladakh and migrant Hindus
from Kashmir valley must be taken into confidence in the discussion
relating to the problem of Kashmir.
By
special arrangement with South Asian Analysis Group, New
Delhi
>>> back | 