Now that the G20 meeting in Kashmir has concluded, it’s time to look at the event from a perspective that’s often ignored by political commentators at home and abroad. While all discussions are limited to the positives and negatives, it’s equally important to note that the event passed off peacefully and without any unfortunate incidents.
Unlike past, the atmosphere wasn’t disturbed by acts of violence by anti-elements operating both inside and from across the border. Even though the government had to cancel some of the planned destinations at the last minute for security reasons, it can be credited with ensuring a happy ending.
However, this isn’t just a one-day achievement but reflects the change that the government was able to push through after August 5, 2019. While the Manoj Sinha-led government has efficiently restored stability in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, New Delhi has clipped Rawalpindi’s wings to an extent that it has lost both its reputation and its courage.
One of the funniest yet most useful ways to put things in perspective is to make a comparison.
While Jammu and Kashmir hosted its first G20 event without internet blocking, movement restrictions, crackdowns and all those familiar things of the past, the situation across the border was just the opposite.
The Rawalpindi had suspended the constitution, and the Internet, set up military courts for its civilian population and launched a crackdown on political operatives, including women and children. To make matters worse, Bilawal Zardari, the foreign minister appointed, was in India delivering sermons on human rights and international law.
The participation of the overwhelming majority of G20 countries in the meeting underscores India’s position, not just, as one might suspect, because of economic interests and geopolitical reasons. It has much to do with the confidence the international community has in India and its democratic values.
While Rawalpindi continues to use military tribunals against its civilians who dared to challenge its political constructs and suspension of voting rights, the international community has witnessed India grant fair trials in civilian courts even to hardcore terrorists like Ajmal Kasab, who killed dozens of people in the deadly September 11 attacks.
The comparison may be out of context with the topic of discussion. But it’s relevant to the context of the debate because it’s perhaps the first time that Kashmiris have enthusiastically embraced an event and participated in an event wholeheartedly.
While the administration has worked for months to raise awareness about the importance of the event’s significance, its efforts to align infrastructure development with the event as part of the Smart City project have met with public approval.
The renovation and reconstruction of public spaces within the city limits and their outreach to the public on the eve of the G20 event not only brought cheers from residents but allowed them to engage with the G20 theme. Residents not only flocked to these places to spend time but also actively participated in the online campaign for the G20 summit in Kashmir.
The Manoj Sinha-led government deserves recognition and appreciation not only for its planning but also for its approach. However, past politicians have criticized the administration tooth and nail for “restricting public movement.”
This criticism isn’t valid because they equate inconvenience with restriction. Inconvenience is normal for any place hosting an event of this magnitude. Perhaps they have forgotten that under their watch, roads and highways were closed to allow the smooth movement of their convoys.
The point isn’t to ridicule them but to acknowledge that they had safety concerns. They’re well aware of this and should therefore be courteous and admire the efforts of the administration to cause as little inconvenience as possible to the local population. Given the iffy political scenario of Kashmir, hosting the G-20 meeting was an extraordinarily crucial move. At the end of the day, delegates went with a representational picture of Kashmir full of its potential.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author.
The facts, analysis, assumptions and perspective appearing in the article do not reflect the views of GK.