It is Mr. Jagmohan, aided by his small band of colleagues, who saved the Valley for India. He slowly established the authority of State. He put the terrorists on the run. His men nabbed many of them. They uncovered vital links of these terrorists within the apparatus of governance. ‘These measurers reminded the people who had got swept by a fear that there was still an India to reckon with. The entire nation owed him gratitude.
“Instead of the gratitude which it was the duty of the National Front government to be the first to voice, the government kept silent as attacks on Mr. Jagmohan mounted most vociferously by the very persons who were most responsible for about the state of affairs which nearly cost the country Kashmir. By replacing him now in the face of pressure the National Front government has done in Kashmir what Rajiv’s government did in Punjab. Mr.M.F.Ribeiro was sent to implement a policy. He implemented it. And then it was made out as if he had been the cause of the problem. The National Front government sent Mr. Jagmohan to save Kashmir for India, to implement the only policy which would do so. He implemented that policy. Repeatedly the Prime Minister, the Home Minister, senior officials assured him that he had the full backing and authority of the Central Government. And now it is being made out not just that he was the cause of the problem. It is being made out that he was the problem…”
A democrat or a fascist?
Indian Express is edited by Arun Shourie. He is known and respected in media circles as a perceptive and fearless journalist. At the same time among minority communities Shourie is known as a fascist. Thus Shourie is simultaneously a Saviours of democracy as well as a fascist. In the above mentioned editorial piece, he talks of “a policy”, “the only policy” and “that policy” without spelling out what exactly is “the policy” that he thinks, can save Kashmir, Punjab and other minority regions for India, In what manner, if any, is Shouries “policy” different from B.J.P’s or Jagmohan’s “policy”. Or, for that matter, the British colonial policy towards the pro-independence India and its people? In plain language what Shouries, Jagmohans and Advani’s (L.K. Advani is President of Hindu fundamentalist Bhartiya Janata Party) want is a militarized India silencing with the force of arms its minorities and minority regions. Thus they are willing not only to wholeheartedly support the security forces but regard the action such as the forces took on May 21 in Kashmir somewhat milder than what they would like forces to take.
Again, this is also true of major “National” political parties of India. Not a single political leader visited Kashmir after the May 21 incident. It was left to the U.S. State Department or the Organisation of Islamic countries to issue stern statements against the mindless firing on Muslim mourners. If certain leaders of Congress (I) made a hue and cry in the Parliament, it was not gone out of their commitments to human rights of minority communities. The aim was to exploit the Muslim electoral constituency that had gone over to the Janata Dal in the 1989 Lok Sabha.
Individual versus policy
The so called leftists were so embarrassed by the action of the security forces on May 21 that none dare to speak out in public either in opposition or in defence. The only demand they raised behind the scenes was for the recall of Governor Jagmohan. Shourie at least has a certain logic, albeit perverted, to his credit. There is no logic to rescue the so called leftists, What is so very wrong with Jagmohan, after all? It is not the actions of an individual that are the heart of the matter in Kashmir or Punjab. How many Jagmohans have been recalled from Punjab? And what difference does Jagmohan’s recall from Kashmir make to the situation? Who are the so called leftists fooling? Jagmohan, after all, was implementing “a policy” set out for him by the Government of India, by the Union Cabinet supported by the Parliament. That was, in effect, the policy drafted by intelligence agencies and the security forces, a policy of brutal suppression. Must that policy remain intact? The leftists, who are no} tired of calling themselves democrats, and others owe to the world a lot of explanation as to what is it that they want the Indian Government to do in Kashmir. Must they cling to the barren and utterly bankrupt slogan of unity and integrity of the country when the entire Kashmir population is fed up with Indian’s armed ‘occupation of the valley?
Swimming against the world current
V.P. Singhs, Advanis, Basus (Jyoti Basu is West Bengal’s Marxist Chief Minister and has considerable influence over the Government of India), Shouries and the like must rise above and get over their petty bureaucratic selves and power drunkenness. They must look around the world to know and assess the course of world history.
A colonial “Great” Britain maintaining the facade of internal democracy on the “mainland” could not prevent the extension of that democracy to the peoples of scores of enslaved countries.
An India or a Soviet Union or for that matter any other country, including Pakistan, could not suppress the aspirations of nations and nationalities under their domination. These nations and nationalities are bound to assert their identities sooner or later whatever shrill voices for saving unity and integrity are made.
What is, therefore, required is not a new Governor for Kashmir, Punjab or Assam etc. but a new policy for them, a new deal for them a deal that must meet the aspirations of the people of these regions and nations. This is a far cry from the induction of Jagmohans and Ribeiro’s (J.F.Rebeiro was the Delhi nominated Director General of Police who worked in 1986-89 in the State and pursued an ironfisted policy).
All this presupposes the dawn of statesmanship. That statesmanship, alas, is a scarce commodity in today’s India. What abounds in India is low cunning and highhandedness, and the fast evolution of a high caste, high finance militarized fascist State that must of necessity suppress all forms of dissent, now raised by minorities and minority regions, and, later perhaps by other democratic elements.
The situation in Kashmir, in general, and the incidents of Srinagar of May 21, in particular, should be viewed in the context of the above mentioned tragic political scenario.
The Text of Jagmohan’s “Current” interview
Given below is the text of Jagmohan’s interview with Soumitra Bose of Current, a weekly of Delhi :
“Every Muslim in Kashmir is a militant today. All of them are for secession from India. I am scuttling Srinagar Doordarshan’s programs because everyone there is a militant. I dissolved the assembly because it eliminated mass killing. Though HMT is a Central Government unit, I advised its closure because it harbored militants that’s why its general manager Khera was killed.”
That is Kashmir governor Jagmohan talking to CURRENT (May 26June 1, 1990) at the fortress like Raj Bhavan in Srinagar.
“People sit in fortresses and take decisions for the masses. It’s ridiculous”, said an angry Fernandes while returning after a visit to the HMT factory. “It’s shocking that Srinagar DD’s programs should be scuttled. They are making them under the most difficult circumstances”.
“The situation is so explosive that I can’t go out of this Raj Bhavan. But I know what’s going on, minute by minute. The bullet is the only solution for Kashmir. Unless the militants are fully wiped out, normalcy can’t return to the Valley” asserted Jagmohan.
But Fernandes doesn’t agree bullet is the answer. If it were, there wouldn’t be a letup in terrorism today in the Valley. What is needed is a healing touch, extra patience and a dialogue with the Kashmir society, he says.
But the governor is loath to show any leniency or mercy towards the ultras. “They are macabre. They have Kalashnikovs and other sophisticated weapons. They are ‘out to kill all Kashmiri pundits and pro India Muslims. I can’t let that happen. Will you believe that in Jammu camps, there are many Kashmiri Hindu women refugees who have not had a bath for over four months, just because there are no bathrooms? Shouldn’t it be my duty to bring them back to the Valley? For that, shouldn’t I nornmalise the situation there? I can only do that if, I answer bullet with bullet and nab all ultras”.
Fernandes does not see the need for such extreme steps.
The situation in the valley is not all that abnormal that people have to flee from here. If we show equanimity, rationale, a little bit of extra patience, the situation can be normal in no time. But, if bullet is used constantly and if it becomes state terrorism Vs the so called ultras, then Kashmir can never be normal”.
Opposing views
“We need to be practical; we must aim towards bringing the situation to normalcy at the soonest and start the political process. The development programs should go on and various incentives should be given to the state.”
Jagmohan refuses to talk politics, but maintains that talks cannot be initiated until all militants are rounded up or killed. “What’s the use of bringing back Farooq Abdullah again? All officers will be frustrated. They are toiling hard to eliminate militancy. But, if Farooq is back militancy too will be back. Will any officer wish to work again in the valley?”
Fernandes is keen to start the political process in the state immediately. He met Abdullah’s mother Akbar Jehan. Observers say he is exploring the possibility of a new look, revamped National Conference under the captaincy of Faroog Abdullah. The New NC members could well be the present militants and their supporters. Fernandes is of the view that Farooq is one of the few pro India Kashmiri leaders who was popular till September. Moreover, the legacy of his late father, Sheikh Abdullah, is also there.
Abdullah is stated to be enthusiastic about the Fernandes formula. The two have already met many times and held a series of discussions. Fernandes is also toying with the idea of amalgamating all militant outfits, including JKLF, MUF and People’s Conference and carve out a new political party under the chairmanship of detained People’s Conference chief Shabir Shah who can join hands with Abdullah and his NC. While the latter can be the CM, Shah can look after the average Kashmiri’s problems and suggest remedies to him, a sort of think tank role.
Political process
All these ideas are still nascent. Fernandes wants the political process to start in the valley immediately. Militancy then will cease automatically.
Governor Jagmohan is opposing this move tooth and nail, He has the support of Union Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, the BJP and Arun Nehru. They detest Abdullah for various reasons. The troika wants Jagmohan to use bullets freely and eliminate all ultras and their sympathizers and then think of “something else”.
Thus, while Fernandes is constantly talking of a healing touch, a sympathetic audience, extra patience, and compassionate understanding of the ultras, Jagmohan talks only of bullets. Evidently, the latter is hated by all Kashmir Muslims. The pundits (not all, though) are supporting him because he has obliquely adopted a pro Hindu stance. He fumes at the very mention of Kashmiri Muslims. His off the record utterances were full of venom as he said, “the Muslims have adopted an approach of killing every Hindu in the Valley. I’ll eliminate them first”.
Exploited lot
On being reminded that a mini clue percentage of Kashmiri pundits have exploited the majority Muslim population for decades, Jagmohan remarked matter-of-factly: “Can one help if the Hindus are more intelligent and capable than the Muslims? That doesn’t mean Hindus can be killed.”
Asked if the Muslims would not have done equally well as, if not better than, the Hindus had they got the same economic and academic opportunities, Jagmohan fumed : “No, I don’t think so.”
Article extracted from this publication >> October 19, 1990