Kashmir is decent. You may have named this land whereviolent conflict is raging on. It is also the place where the voters did notcome out to vote in adequate numbers – the voter turnout was dismal in theparliamentary elections. No amount of security forces could instill much neededconfidence among the people to vote. This is something that will rattle thepolitical minds and the Election Commission of India that is in blessed with aunique capability when to hold the polls and when not to. It would be wrong tosay that it is not taking call on the Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir,it is doing precisely that. It is a matter of understanding how you view andinterpret.
Amidst all the misinformation campaign about Kashmir by thehistory illiterate groups and individuals, there was a bright spot. Thepolitical rivals did not stoop low during the campaign for the sixparliamentary election in the Valley as their counterparts did in the rest ofthe country. Luckily BJP and Congress leaders were absent from the campaignthat lasted for over a month.
There were host of issues, which many consider asnon-issues, about the Valley, its people and their aspirations. Accusations andcounter accusations against each other by the National Conference and PDP nevergot personal. Much of the dignity and respect was personal attacks. Theweaknesses on the domestic front of the individual leaders were never broughtin the campaign.
When PDP chief and former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti’scavalcade was stoned in her home town Bijbehra, her rival National Conferencevice president Omar Abdullah was the first to disapprove of it. While the tworivals were attacking each other for mishandling Kashmir and bringing theValley to brink and exchanged the notes on the history of failures of eachother – Omar Abdullah’s days of distress in 2010 summer and his handling ormishandling of the situation, and Mehbooba Mufti’s administrative deficiencyduring 2016 when stones and pellets made it to the international headlines –the two never lowered the level of discourse.
There also were exchanges on each other’s alliances withsaffron party. It was like your party first type of taunt. Omar was reminded ofhis days as a minister in the AtalBehari Vajpayee Government ( 1999-2002) , while Mehbooba was targetedpolitically for her party’s alliance with BJP and the coalition of PDP-BJP thatruled the state for a little over three years. These provocations werepolitical in nature. Neither side hit the other below the belt. There were no expressionslike “Chor”or thief, nor there was any reference to the familial past of thepolitical rivals, though policies of the two parties were criticized day in andday out by one another.
There can be any number of arguments with Omar’s pitch for aseparate Prime Minister for Jammu and Kashmir, but the history cannot bechanged – there were times until 1965 when the State had its own PrimeMinister. The Article 370 and Article 35 A too have a history, and there arehistorical reasons for it. There can be a debate on the issue and there can bemany arguments against and in favourof the issue. Did things change for betterwhen the title of Prime Minister was replaced by that of Chief Minister in1965. Did J&K celebrate the national festivals in those days or now whenthese are characterized as “black days.” At the same time, will the restoration of the title of PM bring peace toJ&K, Omar needs to answer that. Titles make little difference. His fatherFarooq Abdullah will tell that better when he refused to contest the polls inDecember 1995 after the then Prime Minister late P V Narsimha Rao made an offerto restore the titles of ” Sadar-e-Riysat” for head of the state, and PrimeMinister for the head of the government .
All such issues can be debated threadbare. But what isneeded is to understand that Kashmir isnot all about Pulwama of February 14, 2019, and it was demonstrated amply whenwhile voicing their sharp differences over policy issues, the political groupsin Kashmir, whether the NC and PDO, or API of Engineer Rashid or new born JammuKashmir People’s Movement of Shah Faesal, the discourse was clean and fair.
If Gandhi could seeray of hope in Kashmir in 1947 when the sub continent was engulfed in thecommunal frenzy, it is time for the national parties and their regional alliesor opponents in other states to see how the bitterly divided campaign can alsobe kept decent.