Coming close on the heels of appointment of special commissioner and special inspector General of Police for North Kashmir, Government has now constituted crises Management Committees (CMC) at State, Divisional and District levels. According to the official notification issued in this behalf, these committees are  to be manned by persons drawn from Civil, Military and intelligence departments. Jokes apart, I find persons from  Indian Navy conspicuous by their absence.

The constitution of the committees makes it abundantly clear that  the  move is written, produced and directed by New-Delhi. Speculation is also rife that the shuttle one-day visit of Dr. Farooq Abdullah, Union Minister of New and renewable energy and father of Chief Minister Omar Abdullah to Srinagar few days ago was to secure the consent of his son in this regard. 

But let us the discuss the move on merits. To do that We must know what is crises? How is it different from a  conflict? And whether in Kashmir we are faced with a crises or conflict? We must know  answers to these elementary questions before we attempt to criticize or endorse this latest step of the Government.

A State faces a crisis  when its subjects  or opponents use criminal means or other extreme tactics for the purpose of expressing hostility or anger toward, or seeking gain from the State  perhaps with the aim of destabilizing or destroying it. Historically, politics and crisis go hand-in-hand. In describing crisis, President Abraham Lincoln once said, “We live in the midst of alarms, anxiety beclouds the future; we expect some new disaster with each newspaper we read. And that is crises.

In contrast, a conflict  means  wars, revolutions or other struggles, which may involve the use of force as in the  case of an armed conflict. It is best described as absence of peace. And peace does not mean absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to such situations. In effect it is a crises-in-perpetuity.

Looking from these clear definitions, it is manifestly clear that what we need is a conflict resolution apparatus and not crises management committees. The crises management committees may have roles to play but only after  the  primary conflict is resolved.

This move is a bizarre step in response to recent public protests flared by innocent civilian killings. A vast majority of people were expecting some concrete political initiatives to diffuse the present situation. Alas they have been totally dismayed by the announcement of formation of these committees which is likely to become the vehicle of repression in the same way in which the infamous task force, conceived by Sr. Abdullah  used to unleash in mid Nineties.

A perennial problem in the thinking of New-Delhi towards resolution of Kashmir conflict  is its more-than-heavy  reliance on the security establishment of the country. This establishment  looks at the problem from its own perspective and a narrow mindset. Since this perspective does not take into consideration the genuine political aspirations of the people, it has to use other templates for the disproportionate violence to be unleashed in Kashmir. And the easiest of those templates is the terrorist or traitor  template. Formation of  CMC is a manifestation of the same mindset.

Omar, the Young politician, looks good, but he is incapable of delivering the goods. we continue to be subjected to the worst forms of political dishonesties. We have a government with a blurred vision, and a cluttered mind. It is a government suffering from conviction deficiency. It is presided over by a man whose inaction leaves sufficient space and vacuum for New-Delhi to fill. This is simply not acceptable to people of the state. 

(The author is a practicing Chartered Accountant and can be contacted for feed back at amzargar1@indiatimes.com)

Lastupdate on : Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:30:00 Mecca time
Lastupdate on : Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 IST