India should hold its nerve on the China-Pakistan gang-up at UNSC and focus on tackling the political challenge within Kashmir. As restrictions begin to ease in the coming days, New Delhi must go the extra mile in building consensus and winning over Kashmiri people. The world will fall in line.
India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.
Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.
Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.
J&K was part of India, since Oct 1947, which included POK. Removal of Article 370 should not have been the issue but the method. However, given the choice there is no alternative. There was a need for disruption and Modi-Shah combo did that. Having done, the only way forward is to provide a clean administration, help the people around to gain their confidence, focus on providing the security and stern action against separatists. Easier said than done, but no other alternative.
Having now taken the K gamble, the way forward is as follows:
IMF, FATF, Afganistan etc means that Pakistan’s ability to unleash the jihadi brigade in to Kashmir is severely constrained, at least for another few months. Rest of the world is busy managing Brexit, Huwavei, China-US trade war, Hong Kong etc. This gives India the much needed breathing time to take some baby steps towards earning people’s trust in J&K. May be create some specific employment zone for Kashmiri youths, far away from J&K, in other parts of the country, to suck out all the youngsters from J&K. When youngsters have alternative options to channelise their energy, stone pelting will stop. Then re-build Kashmir. Pandits can come in much later, once Kashmir has truly integrated with India.
The way the central government is handling the Kashmir must be viewed by scrutinising the nature of democracy in India. Nations can be placed on a democracy spectrum, with one end being completely autocratic, and the other, full democratic. It won’t be a fallacy to state that India falls slightly towards autocracy. It is not a fully evolved democracy with a completely secure psyche. India should take the cue from the United Kingdom which itself is threatened by secessionism at the political level; Scotland’s politicians are increasingly restive and talk of independence periodically. However there is NO ban on freedom of expression, no charges of sedition and debate on patriotism. There is a vent which keeps the issue alive yet contained. However, with Pakistan ever ready to radicalise youth and instigates them to cause Pulwama like tragedies and keep the wound open, then what are India’s options? It is very simple for people like ashok to absolve Pakistan of these terror activities. Kashmir is a much more complex issue than his basic understanding, and unfortunately, Kashmir is more like Northern Ireland of 1970-80s,. Finally India is still an evolving democracy unlike UK which is the oldest democracy in the world. But thank God, we are not China.
It is not really a question of how old a democracy is. Consider how badly Brexit is being dealt with by the entire political class. When faced with complex issues, leaders have to find the best way forward. Some years after a major decision is taken, whether it is the enactment of Article 370 or joining Britain’s joining Europe, it can look unwise, worthy of abrogation. Do so by all means, taking care to ensure that the replacement is much better suited to present needs. 2. The point Admiral Arun Prakash was making is that the Kashmiri people have certain views about their political status and identity. If we do not accept this basic fact, blaming an external actor or changing a feature of the Constitution may not prove to be the panacea some believe it to be. 3. At my age, I am too old to read up about Northern Ireland, it is not worth a pint of Guinness to me. However, I care very deeply about Kashmir and its people.
But your solution is that India should resume dialogue with Pakistan. Fair enough. But with whom in Pakistan, the military, the ISI or the elected government?
You make similar simplistic comments on SG’s article today without understanding the complexity. Also, you assume that BREXIT may turn out to be a wrong decision. It may not turn out to be too bad, just as this Kashmir decision may not.
Finally, I do pay extra attention to your comments because you write well, but most I can agree with you is that the way this 370 decision was taken was not a reflection of a mature, well-developed, secure democracy.
Asking Kashmiris to choose between Tourism and Terrorism may not suffice. 2. In a column in IE yesterday, Admiral Arun Prakash recalled his childhood in small towns in Kashmir in the fifties and sixties, a time of communal amity and social interaction, the average citizen sustained by largesse from Delhi, tuning in to Radio Pakistan in the evening, a clear recognition that Kashmir was not India. He feels India has still not learnt that neither money nor jackboots nor guns can convince the Kashmiri that he is an Indian. Flags the case of the Pulwama bomber who was a local resident. 3. Viewed against that assessment from a service chief, an unwillingness to recognise the political nature of the problem and start a meaningful dialogue is difficult to understand.
J&K was part of India, since Oct 1947, which included POK. Removal of Article 370 should not have been the issue but the method. However, given the choice there is no alternative. There was a need for disruption and Modi-Shah combo did that. Having done, the only way forward is to provide a clean administration, help the people around to gain their confidence, focus on providing the security and stern action against separatists. Easier said than done, but no other alternative.
Having now taken the K gamble, the way forward is as follows:
IMF, FATF, Afganistan etc means that Pakistan’s ability to unleash the jihadi brigade in to Kashmir is severely constrained, at least for another few months. Rest of the world is busy managing Brexit, Huwavei, China-US trade war, Hong Kong etc. This gives India the much needed breathing time to take some baby steps towards earning people’s trust in J&K. May be create some specific employment zone for Kashmiri youths, far away from J&K, in other parts of the country, to suck out all the youngsters from J&K. When youngsters have alternative options to channelise their energy, stone pelting will stop. Then re-build Kashmir. Pandits can come in much later, once Kashmir has truly integrated with India.
The way the central government is handling the Kashmir must be viewed by scrutinising the nature of democracy in India. Nations can be placed on a democracy spectrum, with one end being completely autocratic, and the other, full democratic. It won’t be a fallacy to state that India falls slightly towards autocracy. It is not a fully evolved democracy with a completely secure psyche. India should take the cue from the United Kingdom which itself is threatened by secessionism at the political level; Scotland’s politicians are increasingly restive and talk of independence periodically. However there is NO ban on freedom of expression, no charges of sedition and debate on patriotism. There is a vent which keeps the issue alive yet contained. However, with Pakistan ever ready to radicalise youth and instigates them to cause Pulwama like tragedies and keep the wound open, then what are India’s options? It is very simple for people like ashok to absolve Pakistan of these terror activities. Kashmir is a much more complex issue than his basic understanding, and unfortunately, Kashmir is more like Northern Ireland of 1970-80s,. Finally India is still an evolving democracy unlike UK which is the oldest democracy in the world. But thank God, we are not China.
It is not really a question of how old a democracy is. Consider how badly Brexit is being dealt with by the entire political class. When faced with complex issues, leaders have to find the best way forward. Some years after a major decision is taken, whether it is the enactment of Article 370 or joining Britain’s joining Europe, it can look unwise, worthy of abrogation. Do so by all means, taking care to ensure that the replacement is much better suited to present needs. 2. The point Admiral Arun Prakash was making is that the Kashmiri people have certain views about their political status and identity. If we do not accept this basic fact, blaming an external actor or changing a feature of the Constitution may not prove to be the panacea some believe it to be. 3. At my age, I am too old to read up about Northern Ireland, it is not worth a pint of Guinness to me. However, I care very deeply about Kashmir and its people.
But your solution is that India should resume dialogue with Pakistan. Fair enough. But with whom in Pakistan, the military, the ISI or the elected government?
You make similar simplistic comments on SG’s article today without understanding the complexity. Also, you assume that BREXIT may turn out to be a wrong decision. It may not turn out to be too bad, just as this Kashmir decision may not.
Finally, I do pay extra attention to your comments because you write well, but most I can agree with you is that the way this 370 decision was taken was not a reflection of a mature, well-developed, secure democracy.
Asking Kashmiris to choose between Tourism and Terrorism may not suffice. 2. In a column in IE yesterday, Admiral Arun Prakash recalled his childhood in small towns in Kashmir in the fifties and sixties, a time of communal amity and social interaction, the average citizen sustained by largesse from Delhi, tuning in to Radio Pakistan in the evening, a clear recognition that Kashmir was not India. He feels India has still not learnt that neither money nor jackboots nor guns can convince the Kashmiri that he is an Indian. Flags the case of the Pulwama bomber who was a local resident. 3. Viewed against that assessment from a service chief, an unwillingness to recognise the political nature of the problem and start a meaningful dialogue is difficult to understand.
J&K was part of India, since Oct 1947, which included POK. Removal of Article 370 should not have been the issue but the method. However, given the choice there is no alternative. There was a need for disruption and Modi-Shah combo did that. Having done, the only way forward is to provide a clean administration, help the people around to gain their confidence, focus on providing the security and stern action against separatists. Easier said than done, but no other alternative.
Having now taken the K gamble, the way forward is as follows:
IMF, FATF, Afganistan etc means that Pakistan’s ability to unleash the jihadi brigade in to Kashmir is severely constrained, at least for another few months. Rest of the world is busy managing Brexit, Huwavei, China-US trade war, Hong Kong etc. This gives India the much needed breathing time to take some baby steps towards earning people’s trust in J&K. May be create some specific employment zone for Kashmiri youths, far away from J&K, in other parts of the country, to suck out all the youngsters from J&K. When youngsters have alternative options to channelise their energy, stone pelting will stop. Then re-build Kashmir. Pandits can come in much later, once Kashmir has truly integrated with India.
The way the central government is handling the Kashmir must be viewed by scrutinising the nature of democracy in India. Nations can be placed on a democracy spectrum, with one end being completely autocratic, and the other, full democratic. It won’t be a fallacy to state that India falls slightly towards autocracy. It is not a fully evolved democracy with a completely secure psyche. India should take the cue from the United Kingdom which itself is threatened by secessionism at the political level; Scotland’s politicians are increasingly restive and talk of independence periodically. However there is NO ban on freedom of expression, no charges of sedition and debate on patriotism. There is a vent which keeps the issue alive yet contained. However, with Pakistan ever ready to radicalise youth and instigates them to cause Pulwama like tragedies and keep the wound open, then what are India’s options? It is very simple for people like ashok to absolve Pakistan of these terror activities. Kashmir is a much more complex issue than his basic understanding, and unfortunately, Kashmir is more like Northern Ireland of 1970-80s,. Finally India is still an evolving democracy unlike UK which is the oldest democracy in the world. But thank God, we are not China.
It is not really a question of how old a democracy is. Consider how badly Brexit is being dealt with by the entire political class. When faced with complex issues, leaders have to find the best way forward. Some years after a major decision is taken, whether it is the enactment of Article 370 or joining Britain’s joining Europe, it can look unwise, worthy of abrogation. Do so by all means, taking care to ensure that the replacement is much better suited to present needs. 2. The point Admiral Arun Prakash was making is that the Kashmiri people have certain views about their political status and identity. If we do not accept this basic fact, blaming an external actor or changing a feature of the Constitution may not prove to be the panacea some believe it to be. 3. At my age, I am too old to read up about Northern Ireland, it is not worth a pint of Guinness to me. However, I care very deeply about Kashmir and its people.
But your solution is that India should resume dialogue with Pakistan. Fair enough. But with whom in Pakistan, the military, the ISI or the elected government?
You make similar simplistic comments on SG’s article today without understanding the complexity. Also, you assume that BREXIT may turn out to be a wrong decision. It may not turn out to be too bad, just as this Kashmir decision may not.
Finally, I do pay extra attention to your comments because you write well, but most I can agree with you is that the way this 370 decision was taken was not a reflection of a mature, well-developed, secure democracy.
Asking Kashmiris to choose between Tourism and Terrorism may not suffice. 2. In a column in IE yesterday, Admiral Arun Prakash recalled his childhood in small towns in Kashmir in the fifties and sixties, a time of communal amity and social interaction, the average citizen sustained by largesse from Delhi, tuning in to Radio Pakistan in the evening, a clear recognition that Kashmir was not India. He feels India has still not learnt that neither money nor jackboots nor guns can convince the Kashmiri that he is an Indian. Flags the case of the Pulwama bomber who was a local resident. 3. Viewed against that assessment from a service chief, an unwillingness to recognise the political nature of the problem and start a meaningful dialogue is difficult to understand.