Lessons for BJP

Amidst high pitched provocative slogans, which very easily in Kashmir can be construed as war-mongering, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief Nitin Gadkari on Wednesday January 12, launched the Rashtriya Ekta Yatra, (the national unity march)? The import of the Yatra being driven in a bus converted to look like a chariot, used by Hindu warriors in the past, cannot be undermined. It’s not a national unity march but seems to be conquer Kashmir rally?
Perhaps BJP considers itself the sole custodian of India’s territorial integrity. After a gap of two decades on January 26; it’s again preparing to hoist a tricolour in Srinagar’s historical Lal-Chowk. In 1992 when militancy was at its peak then BJP’s president and rabid Hindutava leader Murli
Manohar Joshi under very heavy military protection and even before the proper sunrise had tried to unfurl the tricolour in Lal-Chowk, in a bid to reassure his countrymen that Kashmir still remains with India. And after the recent five month long unrest which very nearly shook the confidence of many Indians, BJP once again has embarked on the path of aggressive nationalism. Through its 3,100 km-long ‘Rashtriya Ekta Yatra’ in a way BJP is trying to convey a message to the people of Kashmir that Kashmir cannot be allowed to break away from the Indian union. The most significant is the fact that so called ‘Rashtriya Ekta Yatra’ has set-off from Kolkata, the birth place of Jan Sangh founder Shyama Prasad Mukherjee . BJP spokesman Shahnawaz Hussain underscoring this very fact has revealed that concluding of the ‘Rashtriya Ekta Yatra’ is to “highlight Shyama Prasad Mukherjee’s martyrdom for integrating Kashmir as part and parcel of India”. Sangh Parivar, which BJP is a constituent of, has not yet reconciled with the reality
of Pakistan, it is almost impossible to expect from this Hindu right wing amalgamation to appreciate the Kashmiri nationalist aspirations. RSS is a fanatic organisation which largely banks on violence to show their presence? After the sensational confession of RSS Praccharak Swami Aseemanad that cadres belonging to RSS are involved in many of terrorist acts like Samjhauta Express and Malegaon blast, it should be not surprising anymore if the hate- mongering divisive outfit is described as a terrorist organisation. However in the present unjust world order, states practice selective morality. Muslim groups and individuals with much lesser degree of involvement in terrorist activities than those carried by outfits influenced by RSS ideology are summarily designated as terrorists. Conversely, RSS despite its criminal past is regarded as a nationalist organisation; off course proving might is right. Some Indian intellectuals are shamelessly trying to defend the terrorist activities carried by the RSS praccharak’s as sporadic acts and are not ready to accept it as a phenomenon. Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, history of anti Muslims riots and most recent Gujarat carnage are the harrowing examples of the Hindu chauvinism. RSS ideology is based upon militant Hindu nationalism wherein there is very little space available for the minorities to live in peace and dignity. BJP embarking on conquer Kashmir campaign is highly deplorable, yet
it’s hardly unexpected. Again and again Kashmir has suffered due to RSS’s narrow Akhand Bharat infatuation.
The 1947 pogrom of Jammu Muslims in which tens of thousands of Muslims were butchered in and around of Jammu conspired by a section of Dogra palace is thought to be instigated by the criminal minded people acting under heavy influence of the RSS ideology. Sheikh Abdullah in 1947 defying the logic of two-nation theory provided the popular sanctity to the provisional instrument of accession signed by Dogra despot Hari Singh, had he sided with Jinah Kashmir would have easily become the part of Pakistan? Overwhelming majority of Kashmiri intellectuals and writers hold it to be most horrendous blunder of Sheikh, ‘had he acted prudently there would have been no dispute on Kashmir’? Sheikh was enticed to join India with the promise that unique character of Kashmir will be protected within the Indian union, under a well defined constitutional arrangement Kashmir was granted a special status.
It is very difficult to anticipate that if Kashmir’s autonomous character had been protected, dispute would have simply melted away with the passage of time, particularly when Pakistan was and still remains party to the dispute. But it’s also true that despite an international conflict on Kashmir raging on, Sheikh’s popular leadership was a great levelling factor, he was an effective buffer between Kashmir and Pakistan. Kashmir in real terms was not peaceful, political uncertainty was galore, still Kashmir was settling down. In 1953 Sheikh was unceremoniously removed through a treacherous act, with this began the process of Kashmir’s forced assimilation. Sheikh was compelled to lunch a struggle for implementation of UN resolutions on Kashmir. It’s a historical fact which cannot be wished away easily plebiscite movement spearheaded by Sheikh Abdullah despite his signing the 1975 surrender agreement till date provides the bedrock of anti India sentiment.
This is history rather part of living and painful memory. The purpose of discussing history here is to underscore a critical fact that changed the whole course of history: Praja Parishad movement of ‘Ek Vidhan, Ek Pradhan and Ek Nishan’ led by the founder of Jan Sangh, the earlier avatar of BJP, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, triggered a series of incidents which ultimately culminated in the ouster and incarceration of an elected Prime Minister, thus duly exposing the myth of Indian secularism. This not only shook Kashmiri’s belief in Indian polity but also destroyed the very basis of secularism within J&K. The conversion of Muslim Conference into National Conference and later-on Sheikh’s decision to accede with India was based on the hypothesis that different religious communities in Kashmir can co-exist under a common political arrangement--- greater autonomy within Indian union.
The acrimonious communal agitation of Praja Parishad which some historians believe that it was a Delhi sponsored show, blew the myth of not only secularism but Kashmir’s autonomous status also. Praja Parishad agitation breached Sheikh’s trust in New Delhi forever. It also conveyed multiple facts to a common Kashmir. First and foremost: if parts of Jammu are not comfortable with the idea of greater autonomy, where is the reason for Jammu and Kashmir to remain with India? And secondly, New Delhi has never been comfortable with the autonomous character of Kashmir. Point in case, since 1953, Kashmir’s autonomy has been eroded beyond any recognition. Therefore BJP’s so called Rashtriya Ekta Yatra beginning from Kolkata has a clear message: an amicable solution satisfying Kashmiri aspirations within Indian union are not possible. But what to do with the Kashmiri masses struggling for their just political rights? Conquer Kashmir rally is the answer, Kashmiri nationalism has to be trampled under heavy jackboots. There is no space for Kashmir’s unique status within the Indian Union? Sangh Parivar is belying history. No power so far has been able to subjugate the struggling people against their will. BJP is not only destroying the prospect of a peace process with New Delhi and pushing Kashmir towards a wall, eventually it is laying the foundation of an Independent Kashmir.
Certainly conclusions cannot be drawn from the history that amounts to remain captive to the history. Nevertheless lessons have to be learned from the history. More than India and Pakistan, it’s Kashmir that requires peace. It is incumbent upon the pro-freedom leadership to build momentum for a genuine peace process, which can truly accommodate legitimate aspirations of the people. But at the same time leadership has to keep in mind there is a clear distinction between conflict resolution process and signing on the dotted lines. Some political novices might be tempted to repeat 1975. It was not an agreement but mere transfer of power. 1975 proved to be Waterloo for Sheikh Abdullah. Another power transfer deal will only expose the power lust of few otherwise irrelevant politicians. Unless dispute is resolved to the best satisfaction of the people, conflict on Kashmir will linger on that is what we learn from the surrender of 1975. Certainly Kashmir cannot afford another '75.
(Feedback at firdoussyed@yahoo.com)

Do you Like this story..?

Get Free Email Updates Daily!	Follow us!