J&K: There's support for azadi, but backing for idea of India greater

In the run-up to the Assembly polls in J&K, militants tried everything they could to deter the voters from casting their ballot. They murdered six sarpanches, attacked army camps, even during the polls and pasted notices threatening people not to vote or else. The Hurriyat leaders, the over-ground supporters of terrorists in Kashmir, worked hand in glove with terrorists. From ex-terrorist Yasin Malik to Syed Ali Shah Geelani, every separatist issued statements asking people not to participate in the "sham" democratic process. Syed Salahuddin, the self-proclaimed head of Pakistan-based United Jihad Council, said people who vote in the coming elections would be "considered traitors." Pakistan left no stone unturned to ensure that elections in J&K would come a cropper. Three days before Prime Minister Modi's rally in Kashmir, Pakistan supported terrorists attacked an army camp in the border area of Uri leaving 17 people including four security personnel dead.

People of Jammu and Kashmir, however, braved threats and came out to vote in huge numbers showing the ink stained finger to terrorists, Hurriyat and Pakistan. Before I am told that people wanted to keep the BJP away from power let me tell them that in the 13 constituencies where the BJP hadn't fielded its candidates, the turnout was better than the average turnout of Kashmir.

Another argument which is routinely thrown around both by the separatists as well as the mainstream parties is, well, people are voting for bijli, sadak and paani and this should not be construed as a vote for reaffirmation of Indian system of democracy. 15 years ago when militancy was at its peak and very few people would come out and vote, the same group would say people don't believe in the Indian system of democracy, thus they do not vote. Either they were lying then or are lying now. Unfortunate as it may be, there are a lot of collaborators and propagators for this kind of myth making, a lot of them very influential broadcasters and columnists.

What then explains Mufti Sayeed's thank you note to terrorists, Hurriyat and Pakistan? Anyone who has studied Mufti's politics especially after the formation of the PDP would remember he has always advocated a pro-separatist or quasi-separatist stand in Kashmir. He has openly flaunted his self-rule document which advocates shared sovereignty, making borders irrelevant and instituting a "Council of Greater Jammu & Kashmir" which would have members from PoK as well. He has always referred to militants as misguided boys and advocated complete withdrawal of troops from all civilian areas in J&K. He has made it a point to say it time and again that Pakistan is a party to the Kashmir "issue". That is not to say that the other regional party has pandered to the separatist sentiment any less than the PDP. The National Conference too has its "Autonomy Document" which in essence wants to turn the clock back to pre-1953 position.

So we have a peculiar situation in Kashmir (not in entire J&K) where people come out and vote to reaffirm their faith in the democratic process yet both the "mainstream" political parties while running governments based on these votes claim that the elections do not "address" the "issue" of Kashmir. This is not to say that there is absolutely no support for separatists in Kashmir but doesn't a voting percentage of 65 per cent indicate that there is a far greater support for the idea of India. Why then do the two "mainstream" political parties advocate talks with Hurriyat or Pakistan, when people actually pay no heed to what Hurriyat or Pakistan say? If indeed people would have paid heed to Hurriyat there should have extremely low turnout in entire Kashmir valley. At best Hurriyat influence today is limited to eight police stations, most of them in downtown Srinagar.

There is no gains aying that Hurriyat is a mouthpiece of Pakistan and raises issues at the behest of its masters in Pakistan. In any other part of the country Hurriyat would have been an equivalent of extremely disruptive force that can use street violence and mobs to incite trouble but could never really have an electoral base. Sadly in Kashmir it has an external dimension. It is supported by Pakistan which uses it to achieve its political ends. By itself that is a problem. However the problem gets even more complicated when the two regional parties in a show of competitive separatism start echoing the issues of Hurriyat (read Pakistan) as the wishes and aspirations of the people of Jammu & Kashmir.

While it wasn't wrong for Mufti to describe terrorists and Hurriyat as Pakistan's assets in Kashmir, the truth is that these assets are best used by the two political parties as bargaining tools with the dominion of India. By itself Hurriyat(s) is/are a spent force, a terribly fractured group with waning influence and an ailing patriarch. We were all given to understand that if Afzal Guru was hanged all hell would break loose in Kashmir, which didn't happen. The constituency of peace, and when I say peace, I mean those who see a future within India is far greater than those who believe otherwise. But the regional parties will always tell you that, that is not the case.

In Kashmiri there is a term "Khoke". Erring kids are often told if you don't behave or eat, this Khoke will come and take you. Regional parties use Hurriyat as a Khoke while negotiating with the Centre even when there is a minor law and order issue. Unfortunately most governments at the Centre have believed that the Khoke is powerful enough to create an uprising and have more often than not meekly submitted to what may have been the wish of the local party but not of the people of J&K. If there was ever a need to call their bluff it is now.