“Respect for Democratic Aspirations of Kashmiris Must be Basis for Kashmir Solution”

On 8th June 2001, Janhastakshep held a meeting at Gandhi Peace Foundation in New Delhi focusing on the forth coming Indo-Pak talks. It was addressed by Shri R.M. Pal (Editor, PUCL Bulletin), Gautam Naulakha (civil rights activist and progressive intelluctual), Rajendra Sachar (PUCL) and Shri Abdul Majid Pandey (Hurriyat Conference spokesman in Delhi). Around a hundred people were present in the meeting including many distinguished progressive intellectuals of Delhi.

Setting the agenda for the meeting, the Janhastakshep spokesman pointed out that when the Govt. of India announced a ‘cease-fire’ in Kashmir last November, the Director General of J&K Police ionnmediately clarified that it did not cover police activities. Many civil rights organizations who sent a team to Kashmir during the ‘cease-fire’ have confirmed that repression on people continued unmitigated. Initially the Govt. of India appeared to be ready to talk to Kashmir militants. Now talks between the heads of States of India and Pakistan have been announced, but Govt. of India is categorical that the representatives of Kashmir will not be party to the talks. While we welcome talks between India and Pakistan and normalization of relations between the two, we ask why the Govt. of India is not ready to let Kashmir’s representatives be party to the talks? How can the two countries decide between themselves what will be the future of Kashmir without taking into account the democratic aspirations of the people of Kashmir? Janhastakshep feels that for any viable and genuine solution to the problem, tripartite talks should be held and the aspirations of the people of Kashmir must be respected.

Taking on the conduction of the meeting, Dr. N.K. Bhattacharya (Convenor, Janhastakshep) said we want to focus the discussion on what is the position of the Indian people especially the people of Kashmir in these talks. The first speaker, Shri R.M. Pal, said contrary to the myths propagated that Indians will ‘rise up’ and the Govt. will fall if the right to self determination of the people of Kashmir is upheld, the truth is that Indian people will be happy if the problem is solved and the money being wasted on military activity is redirected for people’s welfare. He reminded that whenever we talk of Kashmir, we must remind ourselves of the fact of partition in 1947. In brief points he said that several years back he had stated that Pandit Nehru’s internationalism will be buried in Kashmir, and though many had reacted with hostility to this position, the subsequent years have proved it to be true. He held that today the problem in Kashmir has become intractable, and the human rights violations by Indian security forces, especially army, is responsible for this. He pointed out that all Indian Govts. till date have had only one solution for Kashmir – the Army. This shows their intellectual bankruptcy if not their moral bankruptcy. The problem is a political problem, needing a political solution, but India lacks a statesman who can handle it properly. Rhetorically he asked whether it can be the task of an army to kill its own people. Rather the people of India should rise and demand from the Govt. that this problem be solved politically.

The second speaker, Gautam Naulakha, began by placing his position that the Kashmir question is a question of self determination by the people of Kashmir and includes the question of azadi. He then presented his reasoned argument to prove his point by historical facts. Among the facts he pointed out were that during 1948-1952, over 2 lakh 20 thousand acres of land in Kashmir were redistributed without compensation by National Conference. Some work on the land reform question was done in India in the 1950s and the 1960s, but they ignored this fact. Kashmir has never seen fair elections. From 1951 onwards, the method was of rejecting nominations of all those who did not favour the Delhi regime, and also rigging. Third, in 1961 there was an Indo-Pak agreement on water distribution of the Indus River and its tributaries; the water was shared between India and Pakistan in a manner totally ignoring the claims of the people of Kashmir on their own water. Presently there is severe power crisis in the state even today. Citing many such examples, he said that India had 40 years to win over the people of Kashmir which we squandered. For the past 12 years, except for the Naxalites, no political forces whatsoever, including the ‘left’ parties, have raised any demand for solving the problems of the people of Kashmir, or for stopping the terrible repression being unleashed on them. Till 1987, the people of Kashmir used peaceful protests against violation of their rights, but after that gradually a militancy movement has built up. He reiterated that the problem of Kashmir can only be solved by upholding the right of self-determination, and any referendum must respect the demand of azadi.

Shri Rajender Sachar condemned the repression unleashed by India’s armed forces on the people of Kashmir. However, in his opinion, regarding the forthcoming Indo-Pak talks, the issue could not be taken back to self determination. We have to cautious of imperialist designs and that US is looking for a foot hold in Kashmir. In his opinion, Article 370 must be upheld, and we must restore the pre-1953 status. India should withdraw all legislation extended to J&K on all other counts including ID Act and other welfare legislations, and on all these issues J&K assembly would be supreme. It was also his opinion that before raising the question of self determination, we must be cautious because Jammu and Ladhak may also choose to exercise it.

Shri Abdul Pandey (Hurriyat Conference) said that the people of Kashmir resented that their state had always been considered as a sort of possession by India and Pakistan, about which these two sides decided between themselves. When people of Kashmir were willing to cast their vote, their voting right was neglected and ignored; when they resorted to boycott of votes, they are forced to vote at bayonet point. The betrayed people of Kashmir want their voice to be heard. He condemned attempts to communalize the question, especially through the proposal to divide the State into administrative districts on the basis of religion. He clarified that the Hurriyat Conference wants to solve the issue through talks. Even if talks cannot be tripartite, the Hurriyat must be given a chance to place its position before both the Indian and the Pakistan delegations. He also stated that Hurriyat is ready to take part in any vote process in Kashmir conducted under the supervision of international agencies. He warned that there could be no solution without the participation of the people of Kashmir.

After this the issue was opened to the house for questions. Vibrant debates and interventions followed, with relevant contributions from many among the audience In the course of this debate many valuable additions were made, e.g., regarding the danger of communalization of the problem both from the angle of majority communalism and also fundamentalism; the form of self determinism which could be by a referendum with the principle of majority decision being acceptable to all; on whether or not others have the right to still decide what is ‘good’ for the people of Kashmir etc. At the end Shri Anil Chamoriya read out a resolution which was passed unanimously.