Jammu and Kashmir interlocutor and former Central Information Commissioner M M Ansari tells Gyan Verma what the state really wants.
The three interlocutors handling the Kashmir issue have completed meeting most of the important organisations and individuals in the valley. How soon can we now expect the committee to send its report to the home ministry?
An interim draft report on political contours has already been submitted to the government about a month ago. In this report, we have recommended strengthening the system of self-governance at regional and sub-regional levels, promoting free movement of men and materials across the line of control, ensuring de-militarisation of the state, release of political prisoners against whom there are no serious criminal charges, withdrawal of draconian laws such as Armed Forces Special Powers Act (Afspa) and Public Safety Act (PSA), redressal of grievances of migrants, displaced persons and other victims of militancy, removal of alienation among youth, improving governance and delivery of basic services and ensuring justice to the victims of human rights violations.
Do you think the solutions that will be recommended by the interlocutors will be acceptable to the Union government and the people of Jammu and Kashmir, as different regions have different aspirations in the state?
It is difficult to speculate at this stage whether our report would be acceptable to all the stakeholders concerned. The Kashmir issue is very complex and is compounded by many pulls and pressures of political parties at the Centre as well as the state levels. Unless all the major parties agree to a negotiated settlement and evolve a consensus in the interest of securing peace in the region, it would be difficult to achieve the goal of resolving the issue. We hope to produce a draft outline, based on inputs from opinion makers, which should facilitate the process of a political settlement.
The recent Panchayat election in the state was a major success, with more than 80 per cent polling for 72 Sarpanches and 471 Panches. Is it a vote in favour of the Union government or the people voted for their basic demands at the grass-roots level?
This vote is in favour of the betterment of the aam aadmi (common man) who wishes to uphold democratic principles. The people have exercised their basic democratic rights of self-governance; with which they would be able to realise their socio-economic and political aspirations. In effect, thus, the overall governance and delivery of services, particularly under the central flagship programmes, could be improved. The people seem to have taken charge of shaping the destiny of the state, rather than depending on leaders who have failed them.
After 1977-1978, this is the first time that the Panchayat elections have been successfully conducted. Since you have been to Kashmir several times and you know the issues well, how have things changed now?
Despite the separatists’ call to boycott elections, there was an overwhelming response. The people have realised that violent methods of pursuing their objectives have proved counter-productive. Adopting democratic means is the best option. And, at the same time, the security forces and local government have also become somewhat responsive to the needs of the people. These developments have changed the ground-level realities, which are duly reflected in the outcome of the Panchayat elections.
Last year, the Kashmir valley was burning with daily clashes between security forces and people, especially youngsters, but so far no such incident of stone pelting has been reported. How do you assess the situation?
In my assessment, the situation has changed vastly, due to the government’s concern about the welfare of people and, more importantly, people themselves have realised as to what is good for them. There are no new cases of human rights violations. And, so, there is peace.
More From This Section
Do you think the state government has done enough to reach out to the people and make them feel confident, so that they do not clash with the security forces again? What would you like to recommend to the security forces, especially the army and CRPF while dealing with the people?
We have already suggested the following: (i) The government concerned should review and withdraw the draconian laws such as Afspa and PSA. Such harsh laws should be sparingly used to contain violence; (ii) The security forces should use non-lethal weapons of crowd control such as tear gas, water canon, etc, and (iii) The government should allow peaceful agitations, processions and demonstrations, which are permissible in a democratic society. The police and security forces ought to improve their image in the eyes of the general public through proactive friendly measures to remove the fear of harassment.
The Hurriyat Conference has so far maintained they will not discuss any issue with the three interlocutors. How do you think that there could be a solution without Hurriyat’s involvement, as it has a substantial support base in the valley?
I don’t agree that the Hurriyat has a substantial support base in the valley. I ask a simple question: if they have a broad base and support, as you say, and the fact that the Hurriyat has earlier boycotted Assembly (2008) and Parliamentary (2009) elections, how was it possible for National Conference, People’s Democratic Party and Congress to score large votes — between 62 and 72 per cent — and to record their massive presence in the state?
In my view, the support base of the Hurriyat has dwindled and it would be further reduced and marginalised when political and material support from external sources is curtailed. In the recent past, the people have not responded to Hurriyat calls for hartals or closing of shops and other establishments. This is for anyone to see on the ground. Nevertheless, we are trying to reach everyone. We are in touch with some of the active members of the Hurriyat, though informally. They have shared their concerns with us. They are reluctant to come out openly to meet and discuss with us, lest they should be harmed by certain anti-national elements, as has happened with their leaders who have been eliminated in the past. We are, however, keen to take them on board sooner than later.
There are larger questions being raised on issues of providing jobs, basic amenities and a better life to the people of the state. Why do you think major companies or tourists would want to go to Kashmir when it is not an investors’ paradise?
Nowhere in the world has a conflict zone such as Jammu & Kashmir been regarded as an investors’ paradise. The state has suffered a great deal in the last two decades. This has jeopardised the functioning of institutions and resulted in economic frustration and alienation among people. There is a considerable loss of employment and business opportunities, including tourism-related businesses. On the basis of recommendation of the Prime Minister’s working groups, the government has already initiated massive infrastructure development projects, schemes for skill improvement of the youth, strengthening of vocational and technical education institutions, etc. The National Skill Development Council has also been engaged to improve the employability of the youth in industrial sectors that pay higher wages. Industry and business organisations, Ficci and CII, have also been exploring ways and measures for accelerating the pace of development in the state. A number of projects in public-private partnership mode are also under consideration.
All the outstanding issues of development can be effectively dealt with, once a negotiated settlement is reached to resolve the Kashmir issue. We hope we will succeed, insha Allah.