Denial of democracy has been the ongoing story of Kashmir: Jalal

Newsroom Trial

You have to choose your method of struggle intelligently: Bose 

Ayesha Jalal and Sugata Bose, two noted scholars and historians and renowned academics and authors from America visited ‘Rising Kashmir’ on June 21 to interact with members of the newspaper’s editorial staff and reporters. The duo delivered brief talks which focussed on the politics of identity, regional identity, the question of minorities, intellectual history of ideas in South Asia, the K-issue and the way forward, ‘rise of religious majoritarianism in India’, and China’s economic expansion, etc.  The session was moderated by Editor-in-Chief Dr Shujaat Bukhari. Ayesha Jalal, a Pakistani-born American Professor and Director, Center for South Asian and Indian Ocean Studies, Tufts University, said that Kashmir was not a question of religion for her. Jalal is grandniece of the renowned Urdu fiction writer Saadat Hasan Manto and a recipient of ‘Sitara-i-Imtiaz’, one of Pakistan’s highest civilian awards, in 2009. Sugata Bose is the Member of Parliament and also the Director of the Netaji Research Bureau in Kolkata, India. Bose is also Gardiner Professor of History at Harvard University.

·         Gowhar Geelani: Since your work has mostly been on politics of identity, political economy and Muslim identity in South Asia, how do you see the Kashmiri struggle, in which multiple identities have played a role in mobilising public opinion since 1931?

Ayesha Jalal: I think the politics of identities have come later, but in the first instance it was basically about rights. It was movement for rights that have been denied by the Dogra rulers that sparked off the rebellion against Dogra regime. It has been actually the denial democracy and rights that has been the continual story of Kashmir. In that identity has obviously been a factor. The saffronisation basically preceded the Islamisations of Kashmir. I still feel that has not been adequately paid attention to. I think Kashmiris were far more interested in their regional rights than their religious rights. Kashmir is not a religious question but a rights question for me. The time has come in Muslim politics, globally, to go beyond identity politics and to understand that it really is not religious issues that are salient but socio-economic issues of the people. The issue historically remains there.

·         Faisul Yaseen:  Do you think India is asserting itself as a Hindu civilization rather than democracy?

Sugata Bose: Definitely there has been a rise in religious majoritarianism.  Now naturally with the rise of this new government led by Modi, the forces of religious majoritarianism have reached to its peak. But this is not to say earlier secular regimes had also not confused uniformity with unity so sometimes there is a curious conversion of religious nationalism and religious majoritarianism both wanting very centralized forms of state. But I think in Asian subcontinent there can only be unity based on respect of the free life of regional people and also of different religious communities. About asserting Hindu civilization, what is happening is politics of Hindu majoritarianism gained certain kind of momentum and even if we think about this Yoga Day, as many observers have pointed out this has nothing to do with ancient Yoga. It has everything to do with the way that Yoga was reinterpreted and how a tradition was reinvented in colonial times since the 19th century, and it continues to be invented today. It has certain political uses perhaps but it is not, by any means, the reassertion of Hindu civilisation because if there was such a thing called Hindu civilisation it also is actually very diverse. It also has many regional forms of expression. But yes, I do see the rise of a kind of religious majoritarianism and I happen to belong to 16th Lok Sabha, which does not reflect the diversity of India as a genuine democracy should. Think of Uttar Pradesh, out of 80 MPs there is not a single Muslim MP. With the rise of religious majoritarianism we also have unrepresented or under-represented minorities within our political process.

·         Suhail Ahmad: A section of Indian media repeatedly refers to Pakistan as a "failed state". How do you respond to that assertion?

Jalal: I think it is a complete myth that Pakistan is a failed state. The narrative of India is really straightforward on Pakistan that it was a ‘mistake’, that it's a ‘failed state’ and now increasingly an ‘irrelevant’ state. I disagree with all of these and my new book 'Struggle for Pakistan' is precisely written against this argument. India has problems that are enormous but it manages a media campaign about how grand and how wonderful and how great India is. Pakistanis are very critical so they don't do a very good job of marketing themselves. If you are talking about the failed state as the one that has failed to deliver on the promises of independence, then India is no different. One of the examples is Kashmir. If a failed state is one that has gone the way of Somalia or is falling apart then I am afraid all of you must come and see Pakistan. There is too much of criticism and too little celebration of where Pakistan has achieved something whereas India is all about achievement and nothing about failure. There is a genuine need for some balance in this respect. It is as if Pakistan has to look bad for India to look good. Unless you change that you are not going to get a perspective.

·         Nazir Ganaie: India calls Kashmir as its “integral part” while Pakistan says it is her “jugular vein”. Where do you find Kashmir for both the nations?

Jalal: I think both the countries are still caught in the colonial mentality were everything is territorial and land dispute and Kashmir is not about land or territorial dispute but it is about the people of Kashmir. People come first, but in the case of Kashmir it has always been the land that comes first. I think that is something that is the fundamental problem with both the countries. Kashmiris have to generate more knowledge about Kashmir. Nobody is going to do it for you.

·         Rashid Maqbool: There is an impression that Pakistan was creation of Muslim elites? And Jinnah once said that “Kashmir will fall in our lap like a ripe fruit”? How do you view both the statements?

Jalal: Firstly, if Pakistan was an elitist project so too was India. India also didn’t have universal adult franchise at that stage. It was precisely the limited base of Congress that allowed the Congress to dictate terms at the time of negotiations. As far as Jinnah is concerned, he made many miscalculations. After all, he was human. Nehru made many more mistakes than Jinnah, that is not talked about enough. As far as this quote of Jinnah goes, I have not seen it documented anywhere. People say, many think that Jinnah said this and that but there is no evidence of many of the purported quotes.

Shujaat Bukhari: Was Jinnah aware of tribal raid in Kashmir? If the tribal raid had not taken place then fate of Kashmir would have been different?

Jalal: It is a well-known fact that Jinnah was furious when Gracey told him that Pakistan Army is not in a position to take Kashmir. Then the Tribals were utilised by Qayoom Khan and Sardar Shoukat Hayat. So, I don’t think it is secret. As far as the raid is concerned, had the raid not taken place then whole of Kashmir would have been with India.

·         Naseer Ganaie: Why hasn’t the image of “grand India” impressed Kashmiris?

Jalal:  The reality is what India is facing in Kashmir is too real. The resentment has existed in Kashmir against India right from 1947. I think Kashmiris couldn’t possibly be impressed because they were getting the impression of “grand India” first hand. The image of “grand India” (as the world sees it) is constructed and crafted by the corporate Indian media. So that something Kashmiris didn’t need to accept because they got a different taste altogether.

·         Fahad Shah: Do you think there is an inevitable threat that another power structure would evolve to challenge India?

 Jalal:  Collapse of Indian power structure in Kashmir is a bit difficult. I think what has to happen is the recognition in New Delhi of a real genuine accommodation which probably has to bring in Pakistan as well. So there are two occupying forces here. I think what has happened to Kashmir is that you people have lost it after 9/11. Kashmiris have to keep at it and bring about change that suits them. At the moment I don’t think people know about their destiny because it is presently shaped by much larger events. Kashmiris presently are not in a state of dictating terms and until you do that there will not be any change in power structure.

·         Fahad Shah: Do you see India’s action towards Kashmir more like the West has towards Middle East?

Jalal: India is a post-colonial state. India has purely British Sahab attitude which is how they treat Kashmir. And for India, Kashmir is a territorial question. And how dare one can talk about Kashmir! It is the only land that counts for India and not Kashmiris. It is the hangover of that colonial era. India needs to decolonise and be more responsible.

·         Junaid Kathju: Do you think Qaid-e-Azam got the best deal from partition? Or could he have achieved more?

Jalal: I think if you read my book ‘Sole Spokesman’, it is clear that Jinnah sat about to achieve a lot more than he managed to achieve.

·         Junaid Kathju: Subash Chandra Bose was a great admirer of armed struggle against the British. How do you see the armed struggle of Kashmiris which has been branded as terrorism?

Sugata: Subash Chandra Bose believed that final struggle to throw British out of India had to be an armed struggle. He felt that the loyalty of Indian soldiers to the British King Emperor had to be destroyed and the new loyalty instilled that what many considered to be controversial decision to go to those who are enemies of British. Even if we look at Mahatma Gandhi, he said that non-violence for me may be philosophy of life but I am offering it to the Indian National Congress as a political weapon. The Indian populace had been totally disarmed after the suppression of 1857 rebellion (Mutiny) and it was not very easy to actually wage a successful armed struggle against the British. We have to look at a larger context. There are certain contexts in which the armed struggle works; there are other contexts in which you have to choose your method of struggle intelligently. You have to be sensitive to context in terms of how best to pursue a struggle for people’s rights.

·         Akmal Hanan: Was Jinnah pushed to the wall by the Indian National Congress because he supported the federal system?

Jalal: Yes he surely was. INC never wanted to share the power with him.

·         Sumaiya Yusuf: Does Pakistan have stakes in Kashmir?

Jalal: Laughing…Yes it does. I think the major issue is the water issue and it has not been completely talked about either.

·         Sheikh Saleem: Recently, six people were killed in Sopore and people believe that the killings are related to Indian Defence Minister Parrikar’s remarks of “killing terrorist with a terrorist”. How do you view these killings?

Sugata: About the killings in Sopore I just honestly don’t know. You all here will probably have better insights what actually is happening in Sopore. As far as the statement of Parrikar is concerned, it was very unhappy and unfortunate.

·         Sheikh Saleem: Recently, India raised hue and cry over Pakistani flags being hoisted in Kashmir, knowing that it is not a new thing in Kashmir. How do you view these developments?

Sugata: When it comes to Pakistan and Kashmir this BJP government gas been inconsistent. It began by inviting Nawaz Sharief to swearing-in ceremony but then called off foreign secretary level talks. Hurriyat leaders have been entertained at the Pakistan High Commission for long. In fact of all the Indian Prime Ministers, the one who had the most apt attitude in solving the problem of Kashmir was Atal Behari Vajpayee. But we don’t have Vajpayee as Prime Minster today.

·         Manzoor-ul-Hassan: Subash Chandra Bose's death is still considered as the most enduring mysteries in India's history and has been debated whether he died in plane crash or escaped. What is your belief about his death?

Sugata: His death is no more a mystery as there is overwhelming evidence about him dying in the crash on August 18, 1945. This version has been corroborated by several inquiry commissions on the basis of eye witness accounts. Basically, there are some fringe groups who exploit popular sentiment of people about his death. They trigger fresh controversies over the issue to remain in news.

·         Ishfaq Naseem: Kuldip Nayar says that the creation of Pakistan was not a religious project. He also says that communal attacks on the Muslims were carried out because of the very regressive framework which was adopted for the partition? 

Jalal: He sound exactly the same like what I have been arguing all my life. He must have read my book.

·         Rahiba Parveen: There are mainstream political parties and Hurriyat groups in Kashmir. How do you look at such type of politics in Kashmir? How do they benefit or harm the cause of Kashmir?

Jalal: Clearly, the separatists were a creation of certain kind of politics. They even did not begin with separatists. So you have to see what came first. In terms of the kind of politics that had been in Kashmir since 1947 is very clear that one Delhi-backed government after the other failed to deliver on what was needed for the people of Kashmir. If you look at statistics the generation of dependency on India was one of the policies pursued and lot more money came to Kashmir and went to the pockets of the handful of corrupt people. It was never really used for the people. The separatism has cost many lives and the killings still continue. Both have contributed to the miseries of the people. Kashmiris have to wake up to their own potential and make a voice of how much they matter and can make a difference. In order to structure you need ideas. You need to look what is happening in the rest of the world. You need to look at a much broader context to bring about the desired change.

·         Daanish Bin Nabi: How do you view Musharaff’s four-point formula? Do you think it was a win-win situation for Kashmiris, Pakistanis as well as Indians?

Jalal: Look everything happens in a context. Once Musharaff was thrown out of power, all the Track-II diplomacy that was on, achieved nothing while Musharaff was in power. The question is, would the formula have worked? It certainly can’t work today because people need to be committed to that idea. I think Musharaff has made an industry of claiming that he had the problem of Kashmir solved.

Published on June 29, 2015