Jammu & Kashmir divide

First published in daily Greater Kashmir, 13 Sept, 2009

Time for Divorce?

Looking at the deep divisions and prejudice, J&K state today stands at a crossroads. One way from here goes to absolute anarchy and eventual divorce between Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. Another way leads to honest introspection and reconciliation. We must opt for the latter option.

Arjimand Hussain Talib

Marriages of convenience have an inherent problem: they are chronically volatile, but yet compulsively binding. In a relationship where emotional bonding and togetherness remain absent, profit-loss calculations dominate.

The age of colonisation changed the face of our planet in brazen ways. The adventures of drawing boundaries on maps – creating political entities in disregard to ethnic, national, religious and geographical considerations – has created a weird world.

In the post-colonial period, Africa got countries, dividing tribes and ethnicities, which even to this day do not recognise country-boundaries. The Arab world, bound by a common culture, language and religion, got divided into several ‘nation-states’. The Indian sub-continent’s reorganisation was far from a perfect project. Much of the Far East lost its original shape once the western colonizers left.

Similarly, let us honestly accept that history, like in most of the post-colonial world, has given birth to a political and geographical entity in the shape of Jammu & Kashmir state which is far from perfect. The State’s present geographical and political make up is a reflection of the same historical accidents, rooted in colonial imagination of post-colonial borders. The Treaty of Amritsar compounded that historical accident. And then during the subsequent decades of autocratic Dogra Maharaha rule over the majority community, division of the State gave birth to a complex and chaotic polity.

Some of the recent recruitment results of the State Selection Recruitment Board (SSRB) and the Public Service Commission (PSC) to government services are seemingly shaping up as a perfect storm. The administrative disempowerment of the Kashmir region seems to be in line with political disempowerment now. This situation looks like a powder keg, which needs immediate attention.

It is not only the three regions, even the sub regions and sub ethnic groups are simmering with discontent and feelings of discrimination today. But the moot question is: who is gaining at whose expense?

The contention of regional imbalances in J&K State is nothing new. It was way back in 1961 that the G. M. Sadiq government was advised by New Delhi to appoint a commission to look into Jammu’s grievances of discrimination. What followed was P. B. Gajendragadkar commission.

There is no secret in that the commission’s recommendations were politically influenced. One of its core recommendations was the creation of special administrative structures like Regional Development Boards. In Srinagar, most of the recommendations were received with alarm, but New Delhi used its influence to ensure they were taken seriously.

In 1965, Dr. Karan Singh, went a step further by proposing that J&K be ‘reorganized’ on linguistic (communal) lines, and Jammu be merged with Himachal Pradesh. Then, this demand was viewed as an extreme thought both in New Delhi and Srinagar. The idea died down on its own.

In 1978, Jammu’s sense of discrimination took a violent turn when riots broke out in Jammu and Poonch cities. That was the time when certain government recruitments were seen to be unevenly in favour of the Kashmir region.

Soon the violence got little nasty, targeting a particular ethnic group. In the preventive police action, about eighteen people were killed. The then chief minister, Sheikh Abdullah, felt the political heat unbearable and announced setting up of yet another commission to inquire the grievances of discrimination. This time round the commission was headed by a retired Chief Justice, S. M. Sikri. The Sikri Commission, among other things, recommended creation of a State Development Board chaired by the Chief Minister. That never happened.

Since the 80s, almost all State government departments and agencies have been bifurcated or trifurcated. State-level posts were replaced by division and province-level posts. The reservation for socially backward classes and ethnic groups created further social and political divisions.

Ladakh region, for all practical reasons, became a state within a state. But let us don’t ignore the fact that the region’s separatist tendencies have nothing to do with ‘discrimination.’ The region’s preference for a separate status has its roots in early 1949 when its rulers proposed Ladakh’s direct incorporation into the Indian Union.

Today’s debate over discrimination with Srinagar and Jammu city’s predominance ignores the root causes. Over the years, vast surrounding areas have been added to Jammu city to make it the principal entity of the State in terms of population. Systematically, Srinagar’s peripheral areas were dismembered from it, making it a smaller entity.

Similarly, the process of population growth, as presented in census figures in the two regions, requires in-depth analysis. Kashmir continues to lose its demographic edge. All this translates in ‘justifiable’ inequalities in government services and other economic opportunities. The question how all this happened remains.

It is true that some rulers from the Kashmir region in the past have not acted too sensitively to the needs and aspirations of some of the people of Jammu and Ladakh. However, it is also true that Jammu and Ladakh regions always have had New Delhi’s political and administrative favours on their side. Among Kashmir’s civil society and political leadership, New Delhi’s such proximity and special favours to Jammu and Ladakh have bred feelings of psychological and political siege. That feeling is reinforced with each passing day.

Looking at the deep divisions and prejudice, J&K state today stands at a crossroads. One way from here goes to absolute anarchy and eventual divorce between Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. Another way leads to honest introspection and reconciliation. We must opt for the latter option.

The first responsibility towards reconciliation lies at New Delhi’s doorsteps. It has to reverse all the policies which have served to breed divisions in the State. The second responsibility is of every government in power here. They can surely take steps to promote inter-regional understanding. The government policies which serve the ‘island mentality’ in the three regions have to go.

The government must bring out a white paper on the real state of empowerment and disempowerment in the three regions. It has to come up with real statistics, whatever they are. There have to be educational, cultural and political exchanges between the three regions, mainly amongst the youth. There have to be debates surrounding a perfect vision of a common future.

At a different level, the recruitment boards have to be restructured. The way the recruitment boards are constituted in favour of one particular region is preposterous. Recruitment to government services, most importantly to Indian and Kashmir administrative services, must factor in population proportions. They must be free and fair.

No matter our perceptions and biases, history’s accidents are a reality. J&K state looks beautiful together, with a diversity which is gorgeous. Divorced, we all stand to lose. And we will surely miss each other. It is time for us to talk and undo the excesses which seek petty domination and brinkmanship.

Feedback at Arjimand@greaterkashmir.com

Jammu & Kashmir's divorce?

First published in daily Greater Kashmir, Dateline Srinagar Column, 13 Sept, 2009

Time for Divorce?

Looking at the deep divisions and prejudice, J&K state today stands at a crossroads. One way from here goes to absolute anarchy and eventual divorce between Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. Another way leads to honest introspection and reconciliation. We must opt for the latter option.

Arjimand Hussain Talib

Marriages of convenience have an inherent problem: they are chronically volatile, but yet compulsively binding. In a relationship where emotional bonding and togetherness remain absent, profit-loss calculations dominate.

The age of colonisation changed the face of our planet in brazen ways. The adventures of drawing boundaries on maps – creating political entities in disregard to ethnic, national, religious and geographical considerations – has created a weird world.

In the post-colonial period, Africa got countries, dividing tribes and ethnicities, which even to this day do not recognise country-boundaries. The Arab world, bound by a common culture, language and religion, got divided into several ‘nation-states’. The Indian sub-continent’s reorganisation was far from a perfect project. Much of the Far East lost its original shape once the western colonizers left.

Similarly, let us honestly accept that history, like in most of the post-colonial world, has given birth to a political and geographical entity in the shape of Jammu & Kashmir state which is far from perfect. The State’s present geographical and political make up is a reflection of the same historical accidents, rooted in colonial imagination of post-colonial borders. The Treaty of Amritsar compounded that historical accident. And then during the subsequent decades of autocratic Dogra Maharaha rule over the majority community, division of the State gave birth to a complex and chaotic polity.

Some of the recent recruitment results of the State Selection Recruitment Board (SSRB) and the Public Service Commission (PSC) to government services are seemingly shaping up as a perfect storm. The administrative disempowerment of the Kashmir region seems to be in line with political disempowerment now. This situation looks like a powder keg, which needs immediate attention.

It is not only the three regions, even the sub regions and sub ethnic groups are simmering with discontent and feelings of discrimination today. But the moot question is: who is gaining at whose expense?

The contention of regional imbalances in J&K State is nothing new. It was way back in 1961 that the G. M. Sadiq government was advised by New Delhi to appoint a commission to look into Jammu’s grievances of discrimination. What followed was P. B. Gajendragadkar commission.

There is no secret in that the commission’s recommendations were politically influenced. One of its core recommendations was the creation of special administrative structures like Regional Development Boards. In Srinagar, most of the recommendations were received with alarm, but New Delhi used its influence to ensure they were taken seriously.

In 1965, Dr. Karan Singh, went a step further by proposing that J&K be ‘reorganized’ on linguistic (communal) lines, and Jammu be merged with Himachal Pradesh. Then, this demand was viewed as an extreme thought both in New Delhi and Srinagar. The idea died down on its own.

In 1978, Jammu’s sense of discrimination took a violent turn when riots broke out in Jammu and Poonch cities. That was the time when certain government recruitments were seen to be unevenly in favour of the Kashmir region.

Soon the violence got little nasty, targeting a particular ethnic group. In the preventive police action, about eighteen people were killed. The then chief minister, Sheikh Abdullah, felt the political heat unbearable and announced setting up of yet another commission to inquire the grievances of discrimination. This time round the commission was headed by a retired Chief Justice, S. M. Sikri. The Sikri Commission, among other things, recommended creation of a State Development Board chaired by the Chief Minister. That never happened.

Since the 80s, almost all State government departments and agencies have been bifurcated or trifurcated. State-level posts were replaced by division and province-level posts. The reservation for socially backward classes and ethnic groups created further social and political divisions.

Ladakh region, for all practical reasons, became a state within a state. But let us don’t ignore the fact that the region’s separatist tendencies have nothing to do with ‘discrimination.’ The region’s preference for a separate status has its roots in early 1949 when its rulers proposed Ladakh’s direct incorporation into the Indian Union.

Today’s debate over discrimination with Srinagar and Jammu city’s predominance ignores the root causes. Over the years, vast surrounding areas have been added to Jammu city to make it the principal entity of the State in terms of population. Systematically, Srinagar’s peripheral areas were dismembered from it, making it a smaller entity.

Similarly, the process of population growth, as presented in census figures in the two regions, requires in-depth analysis. Kashmir continues to lose its demographic edge. All this translates in ‘justifiable’ inequalities in government services and other economic opportunities. The question how all this happened remains.

It is true that some rulers from the Kashmir region in the past have not acted too sensitively to the needs and aspirations of some of the people of Jammu and Ladakh. However, it is also true that Jammu and Ladakh regions always have had New Delhi’s political and administrative favours on their side. Among Kashmir’s civil society and political leadership, New Delhi’s such proximity and special favours to Jammu and Ladakh have bred feelings of psychological and political siege. That feeling is reinforced with each passing day.

Looking at the deep divisions and prejudice, J&K state today stands at a crossroads. One way from here goes to absolute anarchy and eventual divorce between Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. Another way leads to honest introspection and reconciliation. We must opt for the latter option.

The first responsibility towards reconciliation lies at New Delhi’s doorsteps. It has to reverse all the policies which have served to breed divisions in the State. The second responsibility is of every government in power here. They can surely take steps to promote inter-regional understanding. The government policies which serve the ‘island mentality’ in the three regions have to go.

The government must bring out a white paper on the real state of empowerment and disempowerment in the three regions. It has to come up with real statistics, whatever they are. There have to be educational, cultural and political exchanges between the three regions, mainly amongst the youth. There have to be debates surrounding a perfect vision of a common future.

At a different level, the recruitment boards have to be restructured. The way the recruitment boards are constituted in favour of one particular region is preposterous. Recruitment to government services, most importantly to Indian and Kashmir administrative services, must factor in population proportions. They must be free and fair.

No matter our perceptions and biases, history’s accidents are a reality. J&K state looks beautiful together, with a diversity which is gorgeous. Divorced, we all stand to lose. And we will surely miss each other. It is time for us to talk and undo the excesses which seek petty domination and brinkmanship.

Feedback at Arjimand@greaterkashmir.com