Debating Interlocutors’ Report On Jammu And Kashmir- Analysis
By Arpita Anant
http://www.eurasiareview.com/05072012-debating-interlocutors-report-on-jammu-and-kashmir-analysis/
On October 13, 2010, during the unrest in Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India had appointed an eminent Group of Interlocutors—Dileep Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M.M. Ansari—to hold a sustained dialogue with all shades of opinion in the State and “identify the political contours of a solution and the roadmap towards it”. They submitted their report to the Government on October 12, 2011 and it was made public for an informed debate on May 24, 2012. The report was not meant to be a final statement; rather it was to be a beginning. Some commentaries on it have largely been critiques from known perspectives, and others have been complete dismissals. However, there is a case to be made for going beyond a simplistic dismissal of the Report and actually debating it. It is, after all, a document that has evolved from the opinions expressed by a sizable number of people in every part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. By any standard, 700 delegations, totalling nearly 6000 people, is too large a sample to be ignored.
Location of Jammu and Kashmir in India
It is interesting to note that at the present point in time, there is a “broad consensus” within Jammu and Kashmir on: dialogue with those not in the mainstream, a special status for the state within the Indian Union, democratic rights, financial and administrative empowerment through local bodies, economic self-reliance of the State and improved cross-LoC contacts with structures of democratic governance in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Since opinions have been solicited from a wide range of people who are not usually given to writing opinion columns and/or public figures whose views on various subjects are widely known, the consensus itself must be respected, even if not all aspects of it may be palatable to all stakeholders. It is therefore likely that sentiments of ‘azadi’ exist; but it seems that across the State, there is no consensus on it. Similarly, it is also likely that some people may disapprove of any engagement with those not in the mainstream, but the consensus is for such a dialogue.
There is much scope for imaginative thinking on the desirability, compatibility of goals and feasibility of the political, cultural and socio-economic components of the new compact as suggested by the Interlocutors.
On desirability, for instance, consider the suggestion regarding making an amended form of Article 370 a permanent feature of the Constitution. After the State’s accession to the Indian Union and pending the vacation of aggression by Pakistan, both the leaders of the Union and the State have for decades had to improvise in order to administer the State. As years went by, layers of complexity were added and these improvisations made by successive leaders were bracketed as being good or bad, based on the political/ideological proclivities of various groups of people. At every stage, the credibility of the State’s leadership which diluted any provision of autonomy was questioned mainly in the Valley; this was true of the Central leadership as well. Given the consensus on special status within the Indian Union, it may therefore be worthwhile revisit this complex history and put on record the reasons as to why the changes had to be effected. Once this is done, a way may be found to make the acceptable special features permanent.
On compatibility of goals, it is important that the “special status” should be in harmony with other points of consensus that have emerged. The special status, for instance, should not come in the way of creating vibrant institutions of local government, as these are the key to addressing the aspirations of people in all the regions and sub-regions. The on-going struggle of the civil society in the State for devolution of power to the panchayats is a case in point. Nearly two decades after the constitutional empowerment of local bodies in rural and urban areas in the rest of the country, the State Government has finally agreed to empower local bodies by amending the Jammu and Kashmir Panchayati Raj Act (1989) in April 2011. Such empowerment would have been automatic, but for the inapplicability of this part of the Indian Constitution in the State.
And finally, on feasibility, consider the suggestions to take forward the consensus on economic self-reliance of the State. One of the key suggestions made is that the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Limited (NHPC) makes a special concession to the State by enhancing the share of power from 12 to 30 and eventually to 100 per cent. It needs to be clarified that 12 per cent is only the share of free power available to every Indian state where the NHPC has projects; additional power can be purchased. Having said that, such a concession would be hard to make in the light of the commercial logic that underlies the generation of electricity as explained in an interesting case related to the rights of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir to levy electricity duty on generation of electric energy by the NHPC.1 A division bench of the Jammu High Court ruled that electricity is an inter-State “good” (commodity), the sale, supply, transmission, delivery and consumption of which is part of the contract of its generation. Therefore, if 66.8 per cent of the electricity produced at the Salal Hydroelectric Project (HEP) and 66.04 per cent electricity produced at Uri HEP by the NHPC was generated based on bulk power supply agreements with the States of Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Chandigarh and Delhi, the NHPC would be bound to supply the electricity to them. So the State will be able to claim 100 per cent power only if the entire logic of commercial production is changed.
Several other issues raised in the report can similarly be debated by experts in the political, social, economic and cultural realms. Anyone suggesting a way forward in Jammu and Kashmir at this juncture will have to take into consideration the opinions and interests of all regions and sub-regions of the State. Given the historical trajectory of the issue, only a finite number of options can be flagged, at least to begin with. These initial recommendations are suggestions aimed at arriving at a common ground. For this to happen, all stakeholders will have to move away from stated positions. One is indeed free to take an exception with one or more of the recommendations in the report. And it is nobody’s argument that the process will be easy. But, if such a dialogue does not even begin, how will anything out-of-the-box ever emerge?
1. NHPC vs State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others, 2004, http://indiankanoon.in/doc/562021/, accessed on July 02, 2012.
Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) athttp://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/DebatingtheInterlocutorsReportonJammuandKashmir_aanant_040712
About the author:
About K4Kashmir
PROFILE OF Dr SHABIR CHOUDHRY
Dr Shabir Choudhry was born in Nakker Shamali (near Panjeri) in District Bhimber, Azad Kashmir. He went to UK in 1966, and holds a dual nationality.
Dr Shabir Choudhry has done extensive research on the issue of Kashmir and Indo Pakistan relations. He passed BA Honours in Politics and History, and Mphil in International Relations (title of the thesis, ‘Kashmir and Partition of India’); and title of his PhD thesis is ‘Kashmir- An issue of a nation not a dispute of a land’.
Apart from this Dr Shabir Choudhry passed Post Graduates Certificates in Education, and NVQ Assessor’s qualifications; and taught English in London.
Political Achievements
Founder member of JKLF (Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front established in 1977) and got elected as a Press Secretary in 1984.
• Became its Secretary General in 1985, and resigned from this post in 1996.
• Got elected President of JKLF and Europe in May 1999, and decided not to contest in elections of July 2001.
• Said good - bye to the JKLF as it is in many groups and is largely seen as advancing a Pakistani agenda on Kashmir dispute, and set up a new party Kashmir National Party in May 2008.
.
At present, he is:
• Spokesman Kashmir National Party and Director Diplomatic Committee;
• Founder member and Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs;
Previously
• A founder Member and Trustee/ Director of London based registered charity, Kashmir Foundation International and resigned from this position in August 2001.
• Regularly take part in the Sessions of the UN Human Rights (Commission) now Council in Geneva; and address various conferences and seminars to oppose violence and highlight the Kashmir cause.
• Have addressed dozens of seminars and conferences in the British Parliament, European Parliament and other important capitals of the world on issue of Kashmir, violence and terrorism.
• Addressed as a key note speaker in a Conference at New Delhi arranged by Jawahar Lal Nehru University.
• Participated in a Round Table Conference on Kashmir, organised by Socialist Group of European Parliament in Brussels in 1993.
• Addressed as a Chief Guest in a seminar on issue of Mangla Dam during the UN Sub Commission’s proceedings in August 2003.
• Addressed as a key - note speaker in a seminar on the issue of Gilgit and Baltistan, organised by Association of British Kashmiris.
• Addressed as a keynote speaker on human rights conference in Paris in 1991.
• Addressed at Cambridge University as a Chief Guest in a conference on Kashmir in 1990.
• Addressed as a keynote speaker at New Delhi conference on Kashmir, which was part of Track Two diplomacy in November 2000.
• In September 2008, addressed a Conference arranged by Interfaith International in Geneva, topic of which was: “Kashmir Issue, Terrorism and Human Rights”.
• Addressed as a speaker in a NGO Conference on Self - Determination in Geneva in August 2000.
• Addressed as a keynote speaker in a fringe meeting of Liberal Democrats at their Annual Conference in Brighton in 1995.
• Participated in World Human Rights Conference in Vienna in 1993.
• Before President Clinton's visit to India and Pakistan in 2000, lead a JKLF delegation to the State Department to discuss Kashmir dispute and situation in South Asia.
• Also had two rounds of meetings with senior State Department officials before President Musharraf’s meeting to Washington in June 2003.
• Apart from that had meetings with senior officials including Ministers of different countries, and also held many meetings with the State Department and Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials on number of occasions.
• Played important role in advancing a Kashmiri perspective on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir; and also helped Baroness Emma Nicholson with her report ‘Kashmir: present situation and future prospects’, which was adopted by the European Parliament in May 2007.
• Won first prize in an essay competition in Urdu in 1976. It was organised by High Commission of Pakistan in London, and title of the essay was 'Qaaid-e- Azam's role in Islamic History'.
• Apart from that have addressed conferences in Brussels, Geneva, Toronto, Islamabad, Delhi, and
Publications
• Got first Urdu novel ‘Fareena’ published at the age of eighteen.
• Second Urdu novel ‘Bay-Khataa’ which was about the problems of Asian youths living in UK published in 1983.
• Third Urdu book ‘Pakistan and Kashmiri struggle for independence’ published in 1990.
• Fourth Urdu book is also on Kashmiri struggle, 'Is an independent Kashmir a conspiracy?'
• Apart from that has twenty five books and booklets published in English on various aspects of the Kashmiri struggle.
• Recent publications are: Kashmir dispute as I see it
• Different perspective on Kashmir
• JKLF visit to Pakistan Administered Kashmir
• Kashmir Needs a Change of Heart
• If not self - determination then what?
• Emma Nicholson report- who has won?
• Struggle for independence, Jihad or proxy war (Introduction by Baroness Emma Nicholson)
• Why 22 October 1947 is important in Kashmiri history?
• New dimensions of the Kashmiri struggle.
The following books are published by a German company and available on www.amazon.co.uk
• New Round of the 'Great Game', ISBN 978-3-639-33084-7
• Liberation Struggle, Jihad or a Proxy War,
ISBN 978-3-639-33424-1
• Kashmir Dispute: New Dimensions and New Challenges
ISBN 978-3-639-33566-8
• Kashmir Dispute and Peace in South Asia
ISBN 978-3-639-33732-7
• Terrorism, Kashmir Dispute and Possible Solutions ISBN 978-3-639-34239-0
• Kashmir And The Partition of India, (my Mphil research)
ISBN 978-3-639-34801-9
• Kashmir – an Issue of a Nation not Dispute of a Land, (my PhD research) 978-3-639-35593-2
• Are Kashmiris part of the Kashmir Dispute? 978-3-639-37225-0
•
A brief background
Dr Shabir Choudhry was born in a small village called Nakker Shamali (near Panjeri) in District Bhimber, Azad Kashmir. He went to UK in 1966, and like other people from the region, holds a dual nationality. He left secondary school in 1970 with no qualifications and began his life as a textile worker.
In 1975 he started part time studies and passed Matriculation from Government High School Panjeri, passed ‘O’ and ‘A’ levels from UK, and resumed full time degree course in 1981, and passed BA (Hons) in Politics and History in 1984.
He continued full time and part time jobs until he got his Mphil. He passed his PGCE (Post Graduates Certificate in Education) in 1990, and then started full time job as a Lecturer. Due to health problems he resigned from teaching in 1999. At present he is self - employed, provides private tuition, translation and interpretation and consultancy.
Through out his adult life he has actively worked for the cause of Kashmir, and even during long illness he effectively carried out his responsibilities as a leader of the JKLF, a ‘prolific writer’ and consistent campaigner of Rights Movement and peace in Jammu and Kashmir and South Asia.
Dr Shabir Choudhry
Email:drshabirchoudhry@googlemail.com
Telephone: 0044 (0)7790942471
Recent Comments