Mainstream Politics Gasping For Breath In Kashmir

Mohammad Sayeed Malik

(from kashmirtimes)

Trapped between political disconnect between Delhi and Srinagar on the one hand and suffocating homeground-hostility on the other, mainstream political parties in Kashmir Valley are getting squeezed into a tight corner. The ‘nationalist’ portion of their agenda is already a casualty in the face of a radical shift in the local discourse. The setting is such that even mere talk of (assembly) elections sounds grossly incongruent, if not blasphemous. One has yet to find anyone willing to stand up and be counted unambiguously. It has never been so hazardous for them; not even in the run-up to the 1996 polls when militancy was at its peak. Obviously, collective sense of emotional hurt, fuelled by brazenly militaristic response to largely peaceful upsurge of protest, is politically more lethal than the fear of gun. Mainstream politics has been totally immobilised along with its ideological agenda although every Tom, Dick and Harry in that category is protected by hordes of state-provided gun-men. ‘Protected’ species is feeling like the most endangered species. Main reason being that Delhi’s inexplicable non-political attitude, smeared by perceived sectarian double standard in dealing with identical situations, is catalysing an over-powering social cohesion that is incompatible with mainstream politics.

Confused and confusing utterances of some of the mainstream ‘stars’ relating to topical issues, as also their body language, is quite revealing. It depicts the trajectory of conversion from an ‘Indian-Kashmiri’ to ‘Kashmiri-Indian’ and down to ‘Kashmiri’. Though vastly different in size, reach and stature, National Conference and the Peoples Democratic Party, two main propellers of the mainstream politics in the Valley, more or less equally symbolise the predicament of surviving a hostile homeground. Their style of functioning is so cramped that it is difficult to determine their respective bearings in relation to key issues like elections and the prevailing ground situation. Positions keep changing, depending on time and space. Unfortunately for them both, times are getting worse, not better, and space is shrinking too, thanks to Delhi’s militaristic attitude.

This aspect of Delhi’s attitude is somewhat puzzling. Deliberately provocative conduct of the CRPF in dealing with the situation in the Valley suggests that there is method in the madness. Hospital sources confirmed that about 90 per cent of causalities were found with bullet wounds in and above abdomen, implying ‘shoot-to-kill’ orders. The ‘free hand’ given to paramilitary forces includes licence to vandalise private property, desecrate places of worship and humiliating local population. If the objective was to force ‘anti-national’ protestors into submission, the result is just the opposite. It is the ‘nationalist’ mainstream political camp which is feeling the squeeze.

With each passing day the resemblance between their body language and that of the ‘anti-national’ lobby is growing. Perhaps no one in Delhi is interested today in calculating the political cost of such adventurism which might have found some justification vis-a-vis armed insurgency. The ground situation in the Valley has changed qualitatively but Delhi’s response seems stuck in old grooves. Separatists cannot thank ‘India’ more for such a precious gift. Conversely, a right thinking ‘nationalist’ cannot curse them more for being denuded and left high and dry at a time when they were going great guns for the elections. That, however, is history now.It would be no surprise if, in the present adventurist mode, Delhi feels tempted to taking the suicidal course of holding assembly elections. The last two or three months have virtually laid out a graveyard for electoral politics.

It would be interesting to see how Delhi, which in Kashmir is synonymous with ‘India’, demolishes the fragile political assets it had painstakingly created over the past decade or so. Restoring partial credibility of electoral system with a respectable level of popular participation was one such asset. The difference between perception of what it was like way back in 1996 when assembly polls were held after a long pause and what it is today 2008 is that between the impact of non-state terrorism then and state terrorism now. Harsh analogy! But an unavoidable honest depiction.