Young Thinkers Meet 2018

7thYoung Thinkers Meet (YTM), an annual two day conclave of emerging young
thought leaders, was hosted by India Foundation on 28-29 July, 2018 at Kasauli, Himachal Pradesh.


In the inaugural session on “Defining New Age Leadership”,Shri Ram Madhav, Member, Governing Council, India Foundation said that leadership does not mean political leadership alone and that there are other forms of leadership like community, social and religious leadership. He also cited various areas of leadership like student, trade union, farmers, civil rights, human rights and media leadership. He welcomed emergence of young leadership in diverse areas. He spoke about how ideology can influence ideas and the need for having open mind for new ideas and having a grand vision.

Dr. Krishnagopal, Joint General Secretary of RSS said that India’s diversity is an unmatchable asset and that in India there is inclusiveness and willingness to walk together. He said that spirituality is in the genes of India and that India’s heritage is one of wisdom, kindness, ethics and sacrifice. He narrated the simplicity of Dr. Babu Rajendra Prasad, who after serving as the President of India, spent his retirement years in a two-roomed house in an ashram in Bihar. He also spoke about integrity and moral courage of Bipin Chandra Pal who being editor of a paper refused to disclose the name of a writer in his paper and took responsibility for the publication although the British had put him in jail for one year for the same. He also spoke about the simplicity of Lokmanya Bal Ganghadhar Tilak and his profound concern for fellow countrymen. He referred to the leadership role of Dr. Vikram Sarabhai in leading India’s space programme in the face of adversities and challenges. Quoting APJ Abdul Kalam, he narrated how Dr. Satish Dhawan took total responsibility in the face of adversities and let the then team leader Dr. Kalm address the media on successful mission launch.

In a session on “Youth Activism in India,” Shri V. V. Lakshminarayana, a former IPS officer explained what motivated him to take voluntary retirement from service in order to work in the areas of education and rural upliftment. Hinting that age is more an aspect of mind rather than body, he narrated the example of Shri Daripalli Ramaiah, a recent Padma Shree awardee, now aged about 81 years, hailing from Khammam District of Telangana, had single handily planted over one crore trees and how he even today at his advanced age daily collects hundreds of seeds for plantation. He narrated how Adi Shankaracharya did not hesitate to break rules of Sanyas in order to perform the last rites of his mother. Citing Lord Budha he said that it is better to find solution rather than merely criticise. He said that physical, emotional, intellectual, aesthetic and relationship wellbeing are pre-requisites for youth to be able social activists. He said that youth has got tremendous potential and that they must focus on entrepreneurship and agri-activism in order to herald transformation.
In a session on “Activism-based Politics at the Grassroots,” Ms. Roopa Ganguly, Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha) from West Bengal said that although she entered politics at the age of 50 years, she has been doing social work from much earlier. She said that one of the fundamentals of grassroot politics is to stand against injustice. She said that leaders have to be accessible to karyakarthas round the clock and must lead from the front. She narrated challenging circumstances in West Bengal because of political violence unleashed by the ruling party and sometimes the partisan attitude of the police forces.

Shri Anurag Thakur, Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha) recollected how he despite being youngest president of BCCI got constructed, in short span of five years, seven stadiums in Himachal Pradesh including the one at Dharamshala, which is hailed as one of the most beautiful stadiums in the world. He referred to the importance of physical wellbeing and narrated his experience of starting and expanding mobile healthcare vehicles which are rendering great services in remote areas of Himachal Pradesh. He said that social and political movements result in emergence of new leaders. He recalled his experience of leading the moment to host the national flag in Kashmir. He also recalled how he as president of Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morch with brief planning and quick execution organised more than 2000 programmes all over the country against the then corrupt administration of UPA.

All the sessions included an interaction with the participants. Mr. Pema Khandu, Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh spoke about his experiences in politics and government and the tourist potential of Arunachal Pradesh. A mock parliament session witnessed active participation from the participants who were divided into various political parties with floor leaders. There were some interesting presentations – Mr. Shobhit Mathur and Mr. Sahil Agarwal made a presentation on ‘Making Young India Friends for Our Geostrategic Future”; Mr. Kishen Shastry KS on “Religious-Political Leadership: Rajaji’s pertinence today”; Ms. Temecula Imsong on “Leadership – A few experiments”; Mr. Amitabh Soni on “Bringing together the farmers, the labourers & students for social change – Learning from strategies devised on the ground”; Ms. Manoshi Sinha on “New Age Leadership in the Context of History”; Mr. Vishal Ajjampur on “Sport as a tool for Diplomacy and Socioeconomic Development”; Mr. Raghav Pandey on “The Need for Presidential form of Government; Mr. Akshat Goel on “New Product Development for the Emerging Economies”; and Mr. Praket Arya on “Are Leaders Born or Nurtured?”
(This report is carried in the print edition of September-October 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

India Foundation Delegation Visit to Brussels and Berlin

India Foundation, in collaboration with Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) organized a delegation visit to Germany and Belgium from June 24-29, 2018. This delegation of experts and politicians from India exchanged views on foreign and security policy with experts, politicians and military officials from Germany and understand key German and European security institutions.

The visit began in Brussels with a meeting with Mr. Gunnar Wiegand, Managing Director Asia and Pacific, European External Action Service, who spoke about a warming up of EU-India relations and acknowledged the successful visit of Smt. Sushma Swaraj, Minister for External Affairs, Government of India, earlier in the month. He mentioned that EU is coming with a strategy document on India relations later this year and even under its present EU-Asia strategy there is a very strong effort to grow our engagement beyond trade to other policy areas like cross-border terrorism, cyber-security and migration.

Mr. Wiegand emphasized that the 2016 US elections and Brexit have increased EU’s interest in Asia and it wants to be India’s main partner in its modernization drive. Acknowledging the Hon’ble Prime Ministers speech at Shangri La Dialogue, he highlighted the convergences with India on regional security and principled connectivity. The fiscal sustainability of Chinese infrastructure projects like Hambantota port has raised concerns in EU and efforts must be made to ensure that projects are fiscally sustainable.

The second meeting was with Dr. Wolfgang Klapper, Ambassador and Vice-President, East West Institute. He was joined by Mr. Kawa Hassan, Director, Middle East and North Africa Program Regional Security Initiative; and Ms. Annie Gowan, Program Associate, Afghan Regional Security Initiative. Dr. Klapper explained that the institute played a key role in building trust between traditional rivals like Iran and Saudi Arabia which held a dialogue in 2015.
The third meeting was with Major General Manione, Deputy Head, European Union Military Staff. He said that EU was basically a political and economic union which had been pushed to create military capability which could intervene during a crisis. Some operations of EU Military include Operation Sophia in Mediterranean and Operation Atlanta in Gulf of Eden. The operational command of the military mission was nationally owned but lent to EU and there is a multinational staff at EU quarters.

Last meeting for the day was with Mr. Gabor Iklody, Director, Crisis Management and Planning, EEAS. He said that the unit was instrument for EU Common Security and Defence Policy and in charge of operational and civilian planning. It was an integrated civil and military entity. Mr. Iklody noted that although defence expenditure of EU members had declined in the last decade they were still spending 220 billion euro per year which was more than Russia and China. Countries are focusing on total defence approach and whole of government approach at national level and EU is looking for defence co-operation with international partners. The crown jewel of this international cooperation would be a partnership with India.

On June 26, the delegation participated in a breakfast event on the topic “Geopolitical Trends and Challenges: Implications for India’s Regional Security” which saw participation from various foreign missions in Brussels, think-tanks and political establishment. This was followed by a visit to Mr. ElmarBrok, MEP, Member of Delegation for relations with India and Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament. He highlighted his concerns about BRI being one of the most aggressive initiatives by China to get dependence of other countries including in Europe. He noted that the cancellation of TPP has created a vacuum in Indo-Pacific and that is of concern to European companies looking for open market access.

The delegation’s final meeting in Brussels was with General Mikhail Kostarakos, Chairman, European Union Military Committee. He began by expressing his hope for greater military exchange with India. He said that EU is not a military alliance and EEAS functions as its combined military and diplomatic arm. EU was interested in keeping sea lines of communication open and wanted to work together on maritime security.

On June 27, the delegation began meetings in Berlin starting with Mr. Jan Techau, Senior Fellow and Director, Europe Program, German Marshall Fund. His presentation focused on the loss of order at three levels: within EU, in transatlantic relations and domestically within member countries. It was a consequence of the adaption of an old political system to the new social realities of a united Europe. Deep integration with a single currency and one social policy is being met with resistance. This combined with external pressure is a double whammy for stability of EU and it is facing adaptation stress.

The second meeting was with Dr. Christian Wagner (Senior Fellow, Research Group Asia of SWP). He began by highlighting the difference between South Asia, Southern Asia, Extended Neighborhood and Indo-Pacific- each being a progressively larger geographical concept. China’s BRI was changing South Asia and the conception of the region. He noted that regionalism in South Asia was weak and all nations in the region played the China card. There was more bilateral trade with China than intra-regional trade and therefor no incentive for regional cooperation. India was accordingly cooperating with other powers to respond to BRI with initiatives like North-South Transport Corridor and India-Africa Growth Corridor.

The next meeting of the day was an interaction with Member of Parliament Mr. Markus Koob, Member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and other members of German-Indian Group of Parliaments on the topic of Germany’s current international and security challenges with regard to India.

In course of the interactions there was exchange of views on security situation in Afghanistan and Iraq-Syria and the MPs noted that the situation in both countries was neither stable nor optimistic in the near future. Finally MPs reiterated the need to conclude a Free Trade Agreement between India and EU to further deepen our relationship.
Final meeting of the day was with Prof. Dr. Gunter Krings, Parliamentary State Secretary in the Federal Ministry of Interior, Building and Community to discuss BMI in the context of national and international security requirements. His presentation was primarily focused on threat of radical Islam especially from foreign returned fighters of ISIS to Germany and secondly on cyber-attacks.

Several ISIS fighters and jihadis who returned were actually German citizens and it was very difficult to turn them away. They mingled with migrants freely and could easily radicalize such migrants. This meant a greater reliance by security personnel on intelligence networks. He observed that the war on terrorism was always in conflict with privacy norms and one had to strike a balance. While data privacy should be built into our digital architecture, there should be need-based access because the threat of extremism was too overwhelming to be ignored.
On June 28 the first engagement was a breakfast discussion on the topic “India: Current Security and Foreign Policy Challenges”. The panelists were Mr. Swapan Dasgupta and Major General Dhruv Katoch from the delegation along with Brigadier General Rainer Meyer zumFelde, Senior Fellow at Institute for Security Policyat Kiel University. The discussion was moderated by Dr. Garima Mohan, Research Fellow, Global Public Policy Institute, Berlin.

The second meeting was with Commodore Axel Deertz, Head of Division 22, the Federal Chancellery, on the topic “Germany’s current international and security challenges with reference to India in context of Global Governance”. He highlighted the twin problems of migration crisis and Russian aggression as key security challenges for Europe.
The final meeting of the delegation was with Mr. Mark Hauptmann, Head of the International Commission for Foreign Affairs, European Affairs and Security Policy. The agenda for discussion was “International and security challenges in the current parliamentary term.” He focused his remarks on energy security and trade agreements. He noted that Germany had made substantial investments to shift to renewables energy, including providing subsidy to individual farmers engaged to become energy producers. While talking about a pending FTA agreement with India, he was also apprehensive about the end of a US-led international trade regime. He acknowledged that concluding FTAs was not easy and depends on the country involved.

After the final meeting, a city tour was organized for the delegation followed by a dinner to conclude the visit. The delegation returned back to India on June 29.

US and India – Convergence of the Strongest and the Largest

The US high power delegation led by the Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, and including the US Army Chief, has just concluded its visit to India. The two countries are moving towards closer cooperation in their efforts for regional and global peace and development. The US lately recognizes that the strongest and the largest democracy in the world should have convergence on approach to many regional and global problems with terrorism at the top of them all.

Strategic importance of relationship between the US and India lies primarily in their political arrangement of democratic governance. While the US is the strongest democracy in the world India is the largest. Both are multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic, multi-religious and multi-cultural societies. Together they send a message to the entire world that they are living examples of unity in diversity, something which other countries with diversified social structures can emulate and adapt voluntarily. In a world torn by contradictions and controversies democratic dispensation is the time tested module of accommodating different shades of opinion and approach. Protection and preservation of democracy against the forces of exclusiveness becomes a priority with the two countries.

Security and trade are crucial to development. Both countries have stakes in the security of the region which is catalyst to free flow of trade. Three-fourth of oil requirement of the world passes through the Arabian Gulf and equal size of international trade has to flow through the Straits of Malacca. This speaks loudly for the need of security of the Gulf and India-Pacific regions. Good relations between India and the US are a key to the imperative of security and trade with development as the final destination.

The United States was favourably disposed towards the leadership of Indian freedom movement against colonial power. However, during the cold war era the US found its interests served better by patronizing Pakistan. India pandered to the Soviet bloc. Nevertheless, the US did not fail to understand that despite many odds, India was wedded to democratic governance. Therefore relations never reached a freezing point which reflected maturity of statesmanship on either side. This understanding was reflected in the US offering huge quantity of wheat to India to overcome her grave food shortage during 1950s. The PL- 480 programme is a significant landmark in the history of bilateral relations. India improved its agriculture sector as a result of collaboration with the advanced agricultural expertise of the US. This was part of PL – 480 and later on it became catalyst to what Indians call “Green Revolution” or self-sufficiency in food production.

A marked change appeared in India’s policy towards the US after the implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991. Heads of the two governments exchanged friendly visits. India found vast scope for collaboration in many areas of development like strategic security, trade and commerce, science and technology, energy resources etc. But the most significant area was that of civil nuclear cooperation. The civil nuclear initiative has been strengthened by the regular meetings of the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Working Group (CNWG).

Cooperation between two major democracies purports prosperity of people in both countries and the world at large. Modi government’s objective of cooperation with the US is multi-dimensional but regional security and free and fair trade concept is at the centre of this cooperation. At present, the trade side of the U.S.-India partnership is vastly underperforming. Two-way trade in goods and services is about $115 billion. This pales out in comparison with two-way trade between the United States and China, which at about $650 billion is almost six times as large. Modi believes that raising bilateral trade to match the size of Sino-US trade is the key to the success of his doctrine of “Make India”. Here lies the importance of a “free and fair” trade agreement between the two sides that would serve their common interests. A fair and free trade agreement when signed could go a long way in strengthening bilateral relations. However, for the time being the process of finalizing such an agreement remains in suspended animation owing to unjustifiable tariff regulations on either side. Once they clinch an agreement, India could take care of other areas like energy, defense production, anti-terror and the growing influence of China in the region on its own.

Mechanisms like defense and anti-terrorism cooperation; strategic consultation, mutual investment programmers, space civil science cooperation, energy development projection etc. are the instruments that will enhance trade and economic prospect of both countries.

Trump administration’s India policy is a component of US’ South Asia policy overarched by Indo-Pacific strategy. Initially Trump’s strong stand on H-1B, EB-5 visa and immigration caused disquiet to New Delhi. His predecessors were liberal on these matters. Trump’s accusation that India was seeking billions of dollars from advanced countries in exchange for its support for the Paris Climate Change Agreement caused serious concerns in New Delhi. However, Prime Minister Mode’s US visit to the US helped normalize the situation.

Trump-Putin understanding bodes well for New Delhi. It can stop Russia from falling into the embrace of Xi Jinping. It allows India greater room in proposing important projects like the International North-South Trade Corridor.

President Trump’s deviation from the lukewarm policy of the Bush and Obama administration in dealing with terrorism and extremism gives satisfaction to India which is a victim of terrorism. During his visit to India, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis had hoped that India would take her rightful place at the global table meaning the Security Council. The two sides have also focused on strengthening cooperation in the Indo-Pacific and respecting freedom of navigation, over-flight and commerce. It is a matter of great relief for India. Revival of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue among the US, India, Japan, South Korea and Australia last year indicates expanded bilateral engagement between New Delhi and Washington. However, accusing India of raising tariff on US imports is the latest irritant in Indo-US relationship. Their representatives are scheduled to meet soon to find a solution to the issue.

In his South Asia policy statement in 2017, President Trump said India was crucial to America’s interests in peace and stability in Asia-Pacific region. Previous administrations in Washington did not seriously think so. Trump administration also recognizes India’s role in stabilizing Afghan peace and economy. In Trump administration’s “Defense, Technology and Trade Initiatives” India occupies a prominent place as the world’s largest democracy and fast developing economy conducive to strengthening of peace in Asian region and the world. Calling ties with India as of utmost importance, US Defense Secretary Mattis said, “Washington would pursue a long term partnership with India to stabilize Asia-Pacific region.”

Trump has not minced words in declaring US’ determination of fighting terrorism to let humanity live in peace. He has made a resolve to take on these enemies of peace with the cooperation of democratic countries in the region. Indian Prime Minister Modi has been emphasizing on world powers to understand the seriousness of terrorist and extremist threat to peace. This shows convergence of policy of fighting the menace of terrorism.

Trump administration will support India’s membership in the Security Council as well as in NSG. The US supports Quad – 4 viz. Japan, Australia, South Korea and India. Thus Trump administration recognizes the strategic importance of India to peace and security of the Indian Ocean.

However, among the irritants in their relationship are the trade imbalance and Trumps’ decision to do away with EB-5. In both cases prospective Indian investors will be affected adversely. However, the two sides will be talking to resolve differences.

Asia-Pacific idea, dating back to 1960s was related to Cold War strategy of the US in the East. The proposition that future world history would be actually the history of Asia made the American think-tanks focus on broad East Asian cooperation in Asian politics and economic growth. However, China’s rapid economic growth enabled her go militarily strong enough to intimidate the South China Sea states and make naval forays into the Indian Ocean. This posed threat to the vital world maritime trade route passing through the Straits of Malacca. The concept of Indo-Pacific was thus born to meet military and commercial challenges in the Pacific region.

The concept was first expressed by the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in his address to the Indian Parliament in 2006. In 2010 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke about “expanding our work with the Indian Navy in the Pacific because we understand how important Indo-Pacific basin is to global trade and commerce.” The rationale for re-cycling the nomenclature is that the region now boasts the world’s three largest economies, seven of its eight fastest growing markets, and seven of the world’s ten largest armies and it is expected to produce more than half of the world’s economic output in the coming years. The reason why the US prefers Indo-Pacific instead of Asia-Pacific is that it acknowledges the historical reality and the current-day reality that South Asia, and in particular India, plays a key role in the Pacific and in East and Southeast Asia. Secondly, it is in the interests of the region, that India plays an increasingly weighty role in the region. India is a nation that is invested in a free and open order. It is a democracy. It is a nation that can bookend and anchor the free and open order in the Indo-Pacific region, and it’s America’s policy to ensure that India does play that role, does become over time a more influential player in the region
(Prof. K.N. Pandita is the former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University, Srinagar.)

The US-Pakistan Relations at Crossroads

A fracas over a telephonic message from the Secretary of State Michael Pompeo to Imran Khan on 23 August only added to the already strained relations between the US and its former South Asian ally. Pakistani foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi contradicted the content of the call. The State Department had said in readout that during the call “Pompeo raised the importance of Pakistan taking decisive action against all terrorists operating in Pakistan”. Islamabad refuted the US readout as incorrect, saying that this “issue of terrorism” was not discussed. However, when questioned by a reporter, the U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said there would be no correction in response to Pakistan’s complaint and said, “I can only say we stand by our readout.”

Mike Pompeo’s message was preceded by the visit of Iranian foreign minister Zarif to Islamabad and Imran Khan Government’s outright expression of support to Iranian stand in the face of Trump’s threat to rescind the nuclear deal. Pakistani foreign minister’s mind was also worked about the New Delhi visit of the US high-power delegation likely to take place after about a week of its visit to Islamabad. By raising the controversy Pakistan government wanted to give a message to the people that the US had taken the first initiative for rapprochement in bilateral relations that had begun to nosedive with the famous remark of Trump that “we gave billions of dollars to Pakistan and in return, they gave us lies and deceit.” Qureshi’s compulsion of distorting the factual message reflects discomfiture caused by Washington’s insistence on “do more”.

Pak Foreign Minister’s attempt to dilute the content of the telephonic talk becomes meaningless when we focus on Pentagon’s overview of Pak-US relations with reference to the fighting in Afghanistan.
The denial could also be an attempt to dodge the closely guarded commitment that Pakistan army top brass might have made to their counterparts in Washington. What was the army top brass of the two sides talking about all these months? In a statement given at a briefing in the Pentagon the spokesman Mr Faulkner said “Since January, they have consistently engaged with Pakistani military officials at the highest levels, based on both a shared commitment to defeat all terrorist groups that threaten regional stability and security, as well as on a shared vision of a peaceful future for Afghanistan”. Does Pakistan army now want to make the scapegoat of the civilian government for wriggling out of the broad frame of a formula worked out during these parleys for ending Afghan crisis?
Days before Pompeo delegation’s departure for Pakistan, Defence Secretary James Mattis said in a news briefing at the Pentagon that in their talks with Pakistani officials, the delegation will “make very clear what we have to do, all of our nations, in meeting our common foe, the terrorists, and make that a primary part of the discussion.”
Evidently, the issue at hand is Afghan war and Pakistan’s hand in fuelling its flames. Noting that repeated warnings to Pakistan to deny safe haven to Afghan Taliban, particularly the Haqqani and Let networks fighting the US-led NATO forces have fallen on flat ears, Trump administration put into practice its three-point agenda of containing global terrorism with epicentre in Af-Pak region as was announced by him in his speech in Saudi Arabia last year. He earmarked three facets of US’ new strategy for South Asia viz. (a) stripping terrorists of their territory (b) cutting off their funding and (c) exposing the false allure of their evil ideology. “Terrorists are nothing but thugs, criminals and predators”, he had concluded.
Referring to Afghanistan and Pakistan in his Camp David speech last year, President Trump had underlined the basics of his strategy as (a) stopping resurgence of safe havens and (b) preventing nuclear weapons and materials being used against us or anywhere in the world. This very emphatically suggests that Trump administration’s main concern is to find a mechanism that would deny the terrorist groups in Af-Pak region access to Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

Trump administration’s indication of discouraging IMF to bail out Pakistan with 9 billion dollar loan from its crumbling financial crisis is in addition to the cancellation of US dollars 300 million aid to Pak army. The loud and clear warning has come on the eve of the visit to Islamabad of a high powered US government delegation. Pakistan foreign minister Qureshi is trying to minimize the adverse impact of the cancellation of a hefty amount of aid by raising flimsy technical issues. However, Lt. Col. Kone Faulkner, the Pentagon spokesman in an email to the AFP made clear why the US had blocked the amount of aid. He said, “Due to a lack of Pakistani decisive actions in support of the South Asia Strategy… $300m (actually $323.6m to include non-Pakistan funds) was reprogrammed by the Defence Department in the June/July 2018 time frame for selected urgent priorities”.
This statement touches on the essence of the irritants between the two countries. It found reverberation in the statement of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Joseph F. Dunford, who also had attended the Congressional briefing, that the US had “permanent interests in South Asia” and wanted to “maintain a presence (there) to have influence in that region”.

Incidentally, General Dunford’s inclusion in the delegation dispels the impression that this was not a proper visit but just a stopover, as US State and Defence Secretaries were both going to be in New Delhi next week for the first two-plus-two talks between the United States and India.
The “permanent interest in the region” to which the American General was referring has to be understood by what President Trump expressed about dismantling of terrorist organizations active in Afghanistan-Pakistan region, and its threat to American interests. President Trump asserted that 9/11 had originated in that very region. A further clarification of the expression of interest is reflected more eloquently in how Trump looks at India in his vision of the new South Asian strategy. He had made a very clear and threadbare statement:

“Another critical part of the South Asia strategy for America is to further develop its strategic partnership with India — the world’s largest democracy and a key security and economic partner of the United States. We appreciate India’s important contributions to stability in Afghanistan, but India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States, and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development. We are committed to pursuing our shared objectives for peace and security in South Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region”.

At the Pentagon meeting Secretary Defence, Mattis said, “We see the strengthening of India’s democracy, its military, its economy as a stabilising element in the world. And we want to make certain that where we have common interests, we are working together.”

This is a paradigm shift in US’ South Asia policy. In other words, US acknowledges the significance of India’s role in stabilizing peace in the South Asian region where Afghanistan and Kashmir continue to be the zones of activity of terrorist organizations, particularly those that have been designated by the US or the UN. The first pillar of the new strategy in South Asia enunciated by President Trump and stated above is of “stripping terrorists of their territory”. This means chalking out of a joint strategy with friendly countries to deny space to the terrorists presently active in two conflict zones in South Asia. The message is clear and loud for all terrorist networks and their handlers as well as safe haven providers.

As for the second pillar meaning “cutting off their funding” the Trump administration has taken two explicit steps viz. using its clout with IMF to obstruct bailing out Pakistan from financial crunch and cancellation of 300 million US dollar aid, a proposal waiting Congressional determination likely to come before the close of September.
Curiously, Pakistani foreign minister Qureshi has disputed the $33b figure quoted by President Trump, insisting that around half of the money relates to reimbursements. His contention about the cancelled aid is that the payment, which the US is now considering scrapping, is, in fact, the support coalition fund. “This is not an aid of any kind that can be suspended,” he said. “This is actually the payment of expenses incurred by us during the war against terrorism.” However, forcefully rebutting Pakistan’s contention, Pentagon spokesperson Faulkner analysed the US stand as this.

“Unfortunately, recent reporting has distorted the details of the Coalition Support Fund (CSF) by stating several things out of context. The suspension of security assistance to Pakistan was announced in January 2018. The CSF is included in the suspension and it remains in place. This is not a new decision or a new announcement, but an acknowledgement of a July request to reprogram funds before they expire. Reminding Pakistan that since January, they have consistently engaged with Pakistani military officials at the highest levels, based on both a shared commitment to defeat all terrorist groups that threaten regional stability and security, as well as on a shared vision of a peaceful future for Afghanistan.

He made it clear that the US “continues to press Pakistan to indiscriminately target all terrorist groups, including the Haqqani Network and LeT, and we continue to call on Pakistan to arrest, expel or bring the Taliban leadership to the negotiating table.” Asserting that 2018 DoD Appropriations Act, published on March 23, details $500 million was rescinded by the Congress. He dismissed the Pakistani stand by arguing that owing to a lack of Pakistani decisive actions in support of the South Asia Strategy, the remaining $300 million was reprogrammed by the Department of Defence (DoD) in July 2018 time frame for other urgent priorities before the funds expire on September 30.
In final analysis the message brought to Islamabad by the US delegation boils down to this: Sever all links with Taliban terrorist groups including Haqqani and LeT networks; become our partner in new South Asian strategy of uprooting terrorism of all hues and in stabilizing peace in the region; ensure that nuclear weapon and material does not fall into the hands of terrorists. In return, we shall restore the process of giving the aid money and develop a sound partnership in bilateral trade and commerce.

Evidently, Pakistan will make a deep study of the repercussions of dropping down the Haqqani and LeT networks as that would amount to the all-time departure from the policy of carving strategic space westward and eastward with focus on Afghanistan and Kashmir. Islamabad will also carefully study the outcome of the US high-level team’s parleys with the Indians next week. Interestingly, New Delhi has done some advance spadework in J&K as a complement to the US’ theorem of stripping terrorists of their territory. In this context, some analysts view the dismissal of PDP-led coalition government as a much needed intervention to restrict the support to terrorist organisations from some within the government. As per them, the continuation of the process will see the revival of the suspended assembly to prop up a government with far less commitment to the spectre of separatism and fundamentalism.
Islamabad will closely watch to what extent the US high power delegation will gravitate to the Indian perception of terror phenomenon in South Asia. In the impending 2 + 2 meets in New Delhi, the status of Sino-Russian forays into South Asia and India-Pacific politics is likely to be the keynote subject for discussion. Remember that the Chinese foreign minister is expected to show up in Islamabad soon after the departure of the visiting US delegation.
(Prof. K.N. Pandita is the former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University, Srinagar.)

The breaking of impasse in Kashmir

In all probability the stalemate in J&K is finally heading towards an end and the legislators hitherto hibernating in suspended animation are gearing up for resumption of their normal function of law making. The political scenario unfolding now in Srinagar and New Delhi shows that stakeholders were silently working out a formula for breaking the impasse. It seems that good wisdom has prevailed and re-alignment of forces is round the corner. Political parties were given adequate time to cobble a government capable of delivering the goods.
Analyzing the sequence of events, we find that the Union government has firmly upheld the dignity of the office of Governor by allowing Mr. N.N. Vohra to complete three months of extended term. He demitted office gracefully.
Hopefully,, from her nearly three years’ stint in office, the PDP chief will have learnt at least one far-reaching political lesson, viz. no covert conciliation or espousal of anti-national elements is going to separate the State from the Indian Union. The hard core of her vote bank carved out of radical ideologues was the last arrow in her quivers that is now standing exhausted.
Not only that, owing to her political shortsightedness and flawed conviction she gradually and recklessly paved the way for disintegration of the PDP, a party which she had built with the tacit support of Jam’at-i-Islami of South Kashmir. The cracks in the party became visible soon after the coalition government fell. She lost the strength which otherwise she would have made use of in projecting PDP as a victimized party to retrieve her image. The question of horse trading, an inevitable consequence of suspended assemblies, did not arise for her when she found her herd in total disarray. At the end of the day if the stint in a thorny office has had any lesson for her it is that this nation and its people have to be governed by democracy essentially anchored in justice and benevolence not in hatred and acrimony.
For the NC chief also there is the stark lesson that he cannot extract unjustifiable concessions from New Delhi by dramatizing situations and handing out subtle threats to known or unknown adversaries. He seems to be euphoric about a fair chance of returning to power, something for which he has the inscrutable penchant. However, he needs to realize that sometimes his unpredictable waywardness can become ruinous for him. Now that he is again pandering to nationalist politics after brief honeymooning with a faction of the Hurriyat, he will be faced with the challenge of rebuilding his and his party’s along the old profile. One is tempted to argue that old parameters have collapsed and there is no escape from looking at Kashmir politics through the prism of pragmatism. With his re-assessment of ongoing situation and its candid public expression, Dr. Farooq has to remember that he has chosen to categorize Kashmir situation as indisputable part of Islam’s domestic strife between the radicals and the progressive forces. As such, nearly three decades of violence and mayhem in Kashmir could be called the lull before the storm.
These realizations of current Kashmir politics by the mainstream parties have to be counted as signals for a positive change in Kashmir political scenario after three decades of violence and blackmail. In 1975, when late Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah returned to power after signing the Accord with Indira Gandhi, a correspondent asked him what the achievement of his long years of political exile was. He quipped that for all those years they had done only “awaragardi.”
Dr. Farooq is known for his whimsical statements and contradictory comments. It is difficult to assign him any specific category in the game of politics. Yet proverbially speaking he has a method in madness. Dr. Farooq’s nationalist utterances at the funeral of Vajpayee and his bizarre interview to Arnab Goswami of Republic TV channel have already caused anger and revulsion in separatist groups in Kashmir. At the Hazratbal shrine, the traditional stronghold of NC, he sat with ordinary people in a row to offer Eid prayer. Miscreants unsuccessfully tried to rough him up. The so-called freedom fighters in Kashmir Valley consider it a scandalous setback to their Islamic radicalization movement and threat to their anti-democracy campaign. They have already begun to pour abuse on him in crudest possible terminology. However, Farooq with inherited as well as acquired knowledge is not at all a stranger either to the Kashmirian psyches or to the secrets of who butters whose bread in Kashmir.
Nevertheless, he has never been ideologically comfortable with the Jamat-i-Islami or the Ahle-Hadith factions. True, these rabid communal groups did succeed in diluting some of NC’s constituencies in previous election, yet Dr. Farooq retains the capability of retrieving the lost ground with some meaningful input when he means it. NC and BJP have the history of working in unison at the Union level. Dr. Farooq’s recent statement that while the nation has progressed and moved forward, the State of Jammu and Kashmir remains stagnant, at least gives the impression that the stagnation of the State must come to an end. He candidly holds the separatists and the Jamat is responsible for the sordid phenomenon of destruction. Maintaining the pace of development of the State with the rest of the country is possibly only when there is peace and State’s relations with the Union are smooth and congenial.
The credit of fostering a re-think of ground situation in the State should actually go to the Jammu BJP electorate that sent in a solid team of the national mainstream party to the State Legislative Assembly. For the first time in the history of the State, Jammu has played the crucial balancing role. Its results will be known after some time.
A Good deal of spade work has been done behind the curtain during last couple of months to bring about political stability in the State. BJP top leadership was throwing subtle hints to that effect intermittently. One can find the rationale in Modi government taking Dr. Farooq into confidence while contemplating a thorough shake-up in the ground situation in the State in general and Kashmir Valley in particular.
A new chapter in current Kashmir politics opens with the appointment of new Governor Mr. Satya Pal Malik who has essentially a political background and is not a bureaucrat or a retired army officer. His friend Dr. Farooq was the only Kashmiri leader present at the airport to receive him.
The tasks before the new governor have to be prioritized. Restoring the rule of law and denying politicized and polarized bureaucracy the freedom of defiance with impunity, thanks to the intransigence of PDP’s pro-Jama’at proclivity, is of immediate importance. Entire State administration must go through a purge of anti-national moles that have created networks and dens. Clean administrative system is largely dependent on improving and strengthening of democratic institutions like Panchayats for which elections are overdue. Developmental works have come to a standstill and public services have become farcical owing to widespread corruption. Yet another area that must receive the attention of the new Governor and the in-coming government both is that discriminatory treatment of Jammu and Ladakh regions has to be done away with. Disgruntled Jammu and Ladakh are the source of instability of the State and no government with the well- being of the entire State at its heart can afford to become a prey to regionalism.
(Prof. K.N. Pandita is a former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University, Srinagar. Views expressed are personal.)

1st Dalit Thinkers Roundtable

India Foundation

Centre for Dalit Studies

New Delhi

 

1stDalit Thinkers Roundtable

PRESS RELEASE

Centre for Dalit Studies, India Foundation organised aroundtable with Dalit thinkers on 07th August, 2018 at NMML, NewDelhi.

More than 50 bureaucrats, social thinkers, activists and academics of Dalit community from all over India were invited for a day-long deliberation. The day witnessed a robust exchange of ideas between Dalit thinkers and leadership of government and the party.

The opening session witnessed the participation of ShriRam Madhav, (National GeneralSecretary, BJP&Member, Board of Governors, India Foundation), Dr Vinay Sahasrabuddhe  (President ICCR & Member, Board of Governors, India Foundation), Shri V. Bhagaiah (National Joint General Secretary, RSS),Shri Arjun Meghwal (Union Minister of State for Water Resources, River development & ParlAffairs, GOI), Shri UditRaj (MPLS), Shri Vinod Sonkar (MP-LS & BJP SC Morcha President) and Dr. Sanjay Paswan (Professor and MLC).

Among the group, few dalit entrepreneurs put forward their views on developing business as an alternative mode of empowerment. Senior Academics mentioned about ensuring diversity and adequate representation of Dalits in both bar and bench of judiciary.

Seniorofficialsspoke about discriminatory practices within bureaucracy which is deep seated and needs to be dealt with. Example of schemes like post metric scholarship, Rajiv Gandhi National Fellowship etc were cited and how these schemes can be updated with contemporary social needs. Among other things SC sub plan was also comprehensively discussed. Clarion call for a National Legislation to stop diversion of SC and ST Sub Plan was also given.

The lunch for the thinkers was hosted by the Union Minister of Home Affairs Shri Rajnath Singh at his residence. The concluding session summarised all the deliberations. ShriV. Bhagaiah, National Joint-General Secretary, RSS spoke about empowering Dalit woman by creative positive policy intervention for land allotment. Shri Rajnath Singh, Union Minister for Home Affairs assured the group that he has taken a note of deliberative suggestion and he will share it with the Prime Minister.

Millions of non-Indians in Assam

For long has been the opinion that tens of millions of Bangladeshi Muslims had been facilitated to infiltrate into Assam and to some extent West Bengal and even Bihar by the vote-hungry political parties in power. That there has been a massive influx can be inferred by two facts – unusual increase in the population of Assam and Bengal, census after census and more and more districts in Assam and Bengal becoming Muslim majority.

Growth of Muslim Population ( Fig in %)

[table td1=”” td2=”1951″ td3=”1951″ td4=”2011″ td5=”2011″] [td1]  [/td1] [td2] Hindu [/td2] [td3] Muslim [/td3][td4] Hindu [/td4][td5] Muslim [/td5][td1] Assam [/td1] [td2] 84.1 [/td2] [td3] 9.8 [/td3][td4] 61.47 [/td4][td5] 34.22 [/td5] [td1] West Bangal [/td1] [td2] 79.85 [/td2] [td3] 19.46 [/td3][td4] 70.54 [/td4][td5] 27.01 [/td5]  [/table]

While Muslims of Bangladesh are entering into India ostensibly for better economic prospects, but surely also to “Muslimify” the border states, the Hindus in Bangladesh had been having to migrate to India because of the discrimination and deprivation that are being inflicted by the Muslim majority in East Pakistan /Bangladesh ( since 1972). That this is true can be inferred from the fact that the more than 30% Hindu population in East Pakistan / Bangladesh in 1947 is now only about 7% and is still declining . That there is an ethnic cleansing had been studied by Richard Benkin and this great man has been sensitising the nations of the world about theuninterrupted ethnic cleansing of Hindus that has been going on in Bangladesh. Actually, even in Pakistan the Hindu, Sikh population which was over 17% before 1947 is now about 1%; obviously again due to ethnic cleanings and enforced conversion.

2. The problem is historic. When in Assam Mohammed Sadullah was Minister ( 1924, 1929-35) and Premier (April 1937 to Sept 1938; Nov 1939 to Dec 1941; Aug 1942 – Sept1946) he encouraged the East Bengal Muslims to come and settle down in Assam, ostensibly for improving the agricultural production but assuredly to alter the demographic composition of the Assam state. When SyedaAnwaraTaimura was Chief Minister (Dec 1980- June 1981), she too connived at Bangladesh’s Muslims’ infiltration into Assam. When Fakhruddin Ali Mohammed was Minister in Assam (1957-67) he almost blatantly connived at Muslim infiltration from Bangladesh. Indira Gandhi had to remove him from Assam. She brought him to Delhi into her cabinet and later as president.

3. It may be recalled that the Cabinet Mission ( 1946 ) that came to India at the conclusion of the Second World War proposed that Indian provinces be grouped into A,B,C categories, two of them namely the North West and the North East being Muslim majority and the other one Hindu majority. The North East group was to consist of undivided Bengal and Assam. This would have resulted in two Muslim states squeezing the Hindu majority state, India between them. It was Gopichand Bardolai a sturdy Congress leader of Assam who mobilised the people’s opinion in Assam to resist this grouping as it would mean the “minoritsation” and consignment of Hindus in Assam to the mercies of the Muslim majority. Actually, if the Cabinet Mission plan was accepted ( it was accepted by Congress but later rejected by both Congress and Muslim League) the whole of Bengal and Assam would have become another Pakistan from which all Hindus would have had to flee.

4. The native Hindus of Assam and the tribes there had been consistently opposing the infiltration of Bangladeshi Muslims into Assam and thereby disturbing the demographics in Assam state. It is true that along with Bangladeshi Muslims, Hindus from Bangladesh came to Assam and that is because of the ethnic cleansing measures in Bangladesh. India is the only Hindu majority country (besides small Nepal). Hindus anywhere in the world subjected to religious, administrative and legal discrimination can take refuge in the only large country namely Bharat that is India.

5. The Congress party opposed the exchange of minorities between Pakistan and Hindustan as originally proposed by Md. Ali Jinnah and his Muslim League. The exchange was cogently and vehemently advocated by Dr.Ambedkar in his book, “Pakistan or India Divided” as the only permanent solution to the Muslim problem in India. If the exchange of minority populations had been done in peaceful manner before partition as a condition of partition, the decimation of the Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist population in Pakistan and Bangladesh would not have happened. Under Gandhiji’s lead, the Congress opposed the exodus of Muslims from India to Pakistan while millions of Hindus and Sikhs and Buddhists from West Pakistan and East Pakistan had to leave their lands of birth for generations and become refugees in India. That the Congress party is not uncomfortable if Hindus become refugees is further evident from the fact that from the Muslim majority Kashmir valley of the J&K state of India, 400,000 Hindus had to flee for fear of a holocaust and they are now refugees in India. No Indian governmenthad the guts or the moral fibre to resettle these Hindu Kashmiri pundit refugees in Kashmir itself in a safe area.

6. In Assam, the student launched a movement in the 1980s (which morphed into the Assam GanaParshad ) again the facilitated infiltration of Muslims into Assam, their enrolment into electoral rolls and getting citizenship and other entitlements. It is as a result of those persistent agitations and the Congress governments lukewarmness about identifying the infiltrators and pushing them out, the Supreme Court in response to a PIL had to intervene and direct that there should be verification of the nativity of those who are in Assam and prepare an updated National register of Citizens. The forty lakhs that the National Register of Citizens has identified as of non-Indian origin, seems to be but a fraction of the many more who had somehow managed through various means to establish that they are traditional natives. That the Congress party and some regional parties are creating a furore against the NRC shows that all these have been building up minority vote banks. It is not only in Assam or Bengal but even in far off states like Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu and Karnataka Muslims are being built into vote banks by various appeasement measures like backing the demand for 12% reservations for Muslims, establishing separate schools and hostels for Muslim students; constructing Urdu ghars and ShadiKhanas and showering gifts like Shadi Mubarak ( Rs. 100,000 in Telangana) and sending Muslims on Haj with government money (even as the central government is stopping that on order from the Supreme Court) and the establishment of Urdu universities, Islamic Cultural Centers, payment of salaries to Imams and muezzins etc.

7. A truly national party and its government should not buckle under the baseless charges of Muslim phobia against the BJP government in Assam or elsewhere which identify the illegal residents preparatory to their deportation. The Amnesty International jumps into the fray and says that India is making these four mln people and more stateless persons and that it is inhuman and against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. ( Is it ignorant of the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights which differentiates Muslims as a different species of human beings). Government should not buckle under the pressure of the foreign selective do-gooders and indigenous pseudo- seculars, left-liberals and congenitally anti-Hindu and anti-India Marxists and communist parties. If the government buckles, it would be a tragedy for Hindus in their only homeland that is Bharat.

8. The declaration of the intention of MamataBanerji in Bangla, that is West Bengal to carry out its own exercise to list Indian nationals in the state of Bengal is most welcome. District after district in West Bengal is becoming Muslim majority. And the % of population of Muslims in West Bengal now is fast approaching what it was before partition showing that both by furious breeding as well as infiltration that proportion is increasing. Those who undertake and help the honest identification and listing of the infiltrators and their progeny would be doing the most patriotic duty though such lists may not be recognised by the local or any other government. But the identification and publication of such a register would certainly mobilise public opinion elsewhere in order to force governments to carry out the same exercise in West Bengal as was done in Assam. This country should not become a repository for those people who historically have been inimical to Hinduism and have the most hateful record of inhuman and uncivilised conduct towards the conquered Hindu people and their places of worship and their culture.

9. Finally, all Hindus among the forty million outside the NRC must be given Indian citizenship as these had to come to India, unable to bear the atrocious treatment given to them as kafirs in the Muslim majority state of Bangladesh ( which already reduced the 30% Hindu-Buddhist minority to 7%). Chakmasare Buddhists and were native to and the majority in Chittagang Hills region of East Pakistan / Bangladesh . This region should have been severed form Pakistan in 1947, just as Muslim-majority Sylhet was severed from and made part of East Pakistan / Bangladesh. The Congress party did not press for it (just as it did not press for severance of Hindu majority Tharparkar District from Sindh, and its merger with Gujarat). The BuddhistChakams, just like Hindus had to flee from East Pakistan / Bangladesh , to escape oppression and forced conversions. They are part of the Hindu Dharmic fraternity and so should be given Indian citizenship. Bangladeshi Muslims infiltrators in Assam should be gathered into camps and gradually deported to their country. Malaysia and Saudi Arabia hunted such illegals and deported them not withstanding that they are coreligionists.

(Dr. T.H. Chowdary is a Padma Sree awardee and is Chairman of PragnaBharati, Andhra Pradesh; andDirector of Centre for Telecom Management & Studies. He is a former Information Technology Advisor to Government of Andhra Pradesh and a former Chairman and Managing Director of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Views expressed are personal.)

Ideas Series Talks with Hindol Sengupta

India Foundation in collaboration with Nehru Memorial Museum and Library organized the third edition of the Ideas Series Talks on July 6, 2018. The session was chaired by the celebrated journalist, entrepreneur and author Hindol Sengupta.The young global leader dominates the popular culture with his quintessential narratives and was here to convene the dialogue on his book ‘The Man who Saved India: Sardar Patel and his Idea of India’. The talk observed twenty one participants in attendance and the discourse wheeled around ‘The Missing Patelian Adjective from the National Colloquies’. Sengupta constantly reiterated how Patel contributed pragmatism to the national movement when Gandhi bestowed moral principal and Nehru conferred romantic idealism. The perusal of Patel’s personal and political living reflects his profound regard to nationhood and his momentous contributions in building a country where the dreams of Gandhi and Nehru could sustain.


Drawing the character sketch of Sardar Patel, Hindol Sengupta addressed the need for a varied reading of history that recognizes the role of Patel in the making of India. The speaker expressed his concern on how history in India has primarily been written by only one school of intellectuals that has pretermitted the legacy of Patel. On this note, an anecdote was read wherein Maniben Patel questions her father on the dearth of his writings; to which Sardar Patel answered – “Some people write history and others are busy making it.”
The ensuing Question-Answer Session delved into the finer nuances of Patelian Politics in the disciplines of foreign policy, minority rights, ideological positioning and integration of India States. This academic intervention on Sardar Patel was a significant learning experience for the participants essentially because of the sincere research of Hindol Sengupta on Sardar Patel and the following interactive discussion.

Prepared By: Srishti Singh, Research Intern at India Foundation.

Some Reflections on Pak General Election

On 25 July, Pakistan completed the third general election to the National Assembly. In the run-up to election campaigning, brutal unleashing of violence in Baluchistan and KP leading to hundreds of deaths and wounded marred the sanctity of election.

How should we in India look at the recent election scenario in the neighbouring country with which our relations are not friendly? For more than half of her life, the Islamic State of Pakistan remained under the sway of military dictators who intermittently evicted civilian regimes including elected ones on the oft-repeated pretext of “threat to the integrity of the State”

From the very beginning, Pakistan army established its supremacy over the elected government for more than one reason. During the Raj, the British rulers considered Punjabi soldiers faithful and good fighters like some more communities in the country. Since Punjab is the most populous province of Pakistan and Pakistan army comprises nearly 80 per cent Punjabis, their social and political influence over the country remained supreme. More importantly, taking the geographically strategic location of Pakistan into consideration, the Anglo-American bloc saw great utility in befriending Pakistan army as a bulwark against the burgeoning Soviet Union of the early 1950s and 60s. After the US stepped into the shoes of weakened Great Britain in post-WW II era, it gave Pakistan army special treatment and included development aid to Pakistan army as a head of expenditure in its annual budget.
Continued Anglo-American patronage of Pak army was the main reason for the failure of democracy to find roots in Pakistan polity. However, after its debacle in Bangladesh war, Pak army was obliged to make a very small space for a civilian government albeit under its strictly delineated parameters. The parameter, among other things, encompassed the country’s foreign and Kashmir policy.

Washington’s extraordinary warm treatment of Pak army during Afghan mujahideen war against the Soviets was a feather in Pak army’s hat but it dealt a fatal blow to the tender sapling of democracy in Pakistan
This background should explain why no civilian government in Pakistan (Muhammad Ali Bogra, Zulfikar Bhutto, Benazir or Nawaz Sharif) could make any headway in a peace dialogue with India over Kashmir issue.
During his third term in office, Nawaz Sharif essayed to convince General Bajwa that the Constitution of the country had to be respected by allowing the elected government the freedom of framing policies and making vital decisions in the broader interests of the nation. At the end of the day, all those efforts became counter-productive just because in Pakistan real power rests not with the COS but with the triumvirate of the feudal lords, powerful bureaucrats and committed Generals. The triumvirate is bound not only by economic interests but by matrimonial alliances as well.

Observers ask why Pak army did not stage a coup when during last two years the gulf between the civilian administration and the army’s assertiveness was widening. The most contentious issue was the burgeoning of Theo-fascist groups in Pakistan and ever-increasing threats and reprimands by the US. The simple answer is that firstly, Pakistani state is now recognized by world powers as the home and breeding ground of international terrorism, and secondly, Pakistan’s economy is in shamble, no military dictator would take the risk of dragging the nation into the depths of disaster.

Therefore, the army and its brainchild the ISI deeply reflected on how the army would sustain its dominance without opting for a coup, which, against the previous practice, would become only counterproductive. The formula was something like this: (a) frame the incumbent head of the government (b) create and sponsor a proxy as the Kings Party, and (c) demean judiciary. All the three components moved simultaneously. Nawaz Sharif was framed, convicted and given ten years jail term. His daughter has been given seven-year jail terms. In this way, the source of main opposition to the army has been removed days before the actual polling. It is almost the re-enactment of Zia vsZulfi perfidy.

The judiciary played a shameful role in giving not tuppence to its conscience. The three-time former Prime Minister was summoned to the court no fewer than eighty times, something which has no parallel in the history of the judiciary.

And finally, about the King’s party (PTI) the less said the better. In his 2011 autobiography, Pakistan: A Personal story, the Khan blasts conservative clerics for causing the murder of Pakistani senator and Governor SalmaanTaseer through their zealous and fanatical views on blasphemy. In an interview, he had told The Express Tribune that “extremism and radicalism have penetrated our society deeply” and these were harming the youth, adding that “elements like Qadr (Taseer’s assassin) are under the impression that Islam is under threat and act accordingly”.
But the drubbing in 2013 elections seems to have triggered a fundamental change in him. He realised that if one part of the power puzzle could be solved by piggybacking the military, the other was incumbent on a strong pro-Islamist stance. No surprise if his party is now supping with the fundamentalist loonies and Khan is pandering to every regressive cause. In their battle against Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), PTI members asked the public to choose between “the party that flaunts Qadri’s image on election banners and the party that executed him”. Imran is doubling down on the message, telling rally-goers: “No Muslim can call himself a Muslim unless he believes that Prophet Mohammed was the last prophet. Pakistani Ahmadiyyas are rightly disturbed.
In another rally, Imran said, “We stand with Article 295C and will defend it,” referring to a clause in Pakistan’s Constitution that mandates the death penalty for any “imputation, insinuation or innuendo” against Prophet Muhammad, reports The Guardian. A commentator elaborating how Oxford alumni Imran Khan boasted he would change Pakistan but actually Pakistan changed him.

Another dimension of this election which may appear curious to unsuspecting analysts but actually is a very calculated move is that the Theo-fascists groups like those floated by Hafiz Saeed and others of his ilk could not garner even one seat in the elections. The fact is that the army does not want these Theo-fascists to be given any space in the governance arena because that would pose a threat to their own domineering status in Pak polity. But the army is prepared to extend all help, arms, funds and logistics to them to keep them engaged in Kashmir and Afghanistan knowing that with the passage of time their cadres would be decimated by the Indian forces in Kashmir and National Security guards in Afghanistan and that would be a good riddance.
Finally, major world media has openly expressed serious reservations about the fairness of Pak elections. Sharif brothers have rejected it and so have the religious groups who are now preparing for a nation-wide movement demanding the annulment of the result and holding fresh elections under the supervision of UN supervisory agency (strangely not OIC). They have released videos showing carriers with PTI mark carrying ballot boxes to the booths and ladies casting bundles of votes in vote boxes.

(Prof. K.N. Pandita is a former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University)

Maoist Movement in India

Contemporary Maoist movement in India,also addressed as Left Wing Extremism (LWE) in the official vocabulary1 and in a section of academia is a continuation of the Naxal movement which, in turn, was similar to the Telangana (1946-1951) and Tebhaga movements, in form and contents with one pertinent difference. While the Tebhaga, Telangana and Naxal movements were open to the mediation of liberal democratic process, at least, theoretically, the contemporary Maoist movement considers it (the liberal democratic process) regressive, and detrimental to the development of revolutionary transformative social-political process which, therefore, is shunned. In other words, it does not contest the elections in bourgeois democracy.

Organisationally, ideologically and programmatically, the Maoist movement represen-ted by the Communist Party of India (Maoist) carries the legacy of CPI (Marxist-Leninist), CPI (Marxist) and the CPI2 in the reverse historical trajectory which, in turn, inherited the distorted versions of Marx’s, Lenin’s and Mao’s praxis. It was a mechanical application of their praxis, not contextualized politically and socially which also commands a section of urban support, of intelligentsia and academia in different forms prominently reflected in public discourse. Programmatically, it carries forward the application of land to the tiller policy, support to the minority rights, and opposition to the uniform civil code or to the globalisation process.

The failure of the Naxal movement propelled the Maoist to learn a lesson which was, subsequently, to create a Peoples’ Liberation Guerrilla Army (hence forth PLGA) and guerilla zones to sustain and expand the revolution in different regions. And to actuate it, the Party needed committed cadres which, in turn, could be fostered through application of land to the tiller policy on permanent basis. The Party had learnt it hard way through its experiences in Bastar, Telangana and Naxalbari. The experiences of the other regions such as Bihar were equally factored into. Both these process was successfully applied in the Dandakaranaya regions, spread over one lakh square km of area comprising of parts of Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha and Chhatisgarh. This region is hilly and forested, and is periphery, far away from Delhi and state capitals. By the time the administration realised the gravity of their existence and expansion, the Maoist had spread in vast areas, and had begun to control the revenue of the locality. Then, Raipur was not the Capital, neither was Chhatisgarh a State. Till 7-8 years ago, one third of the Party cadre was armed. 40 % of them were women. 5% of the arms were purchased, 15 % were looted and 80% were manufactured by the Party. 3,500 cadres were in military uniforms. The Party spent, in one year, Rs. 4 lakhs on each company, and Rs 450 was spent in a month on each armed cadre for their basic necessities. The annual budget of the Party is approximately Rs. 12 crore3. But this is the estimate of the Party. The official estimate is Rs. 1,000 crore.

The process of arming the Party had begun in 1981, when there were armed cadre from five dalams (squads). Today, in each company, there are 75 members and in each platoon there are 25. Majority of them are of Koya tribe. The government estimate is different : the armed cadres are approximately 9100 in number divided into basic, secondary and main groups. The existence of Central Military Commission and its five sub-units viz State Military Commission, Special Area Military Commission, etc., reflect the degree of its military strength and militarisation of Party. The next intended stage is to create Peoples’ Liberation Army, the base areas (the liberated zones) and the JanatanaSarkar. The idea, as it is claimed, is to create a system, even in embryonic form, in which people directly participate in determining their own destiny. And it claims to begin with three major works, from agricultural production to education: it actuated modernisation of agriculture, facilitated stoppage of Penda (shifting) cultivation, improve health care, and brought in social political awareness. It also brought in inter-villages and inter-tribal interactions through Party mobilisation. The different villages, isolated and spread over, have now better coordination, and are working jointly on different projects.

The Maoist had simultaneously embarked on a new work. It began to recruit women in the armed wing, who constitute 40% of their combat force and 60% of their regular cadres. In turn, it has enhanced their social status, has empowered them to fight for their rights, and has raised their political awareness. Also, their fight to preserve their habitat against the expanding business has consequently saved the forest in the Dandakaranya region despite depletion.

The function of the Party, both organisa-tionally and programmatically, however, has enraged a large population of the tribal. Its daily intervention in the cultural life of the villages, the application of the land reforms agenda in the social context of average poor land holdings (2.34 acre) per family and the anti-development stance have generated rebellions against the Party which has been used by the police in its fight against the Maoist leading to its success. The Maoist did all that they could do to suppress this movement at the initial stage. It might have succeeded, as in the past, but the timely intervention of the administration obstructed its design. It, therefore, adopted other tactics to scuttle the police’s role; it sought judicial intervention through public interest litigation and citizens intervention through civil society groups. Within Dandakaranaya, it was not forth coming. So it sought “outside” help using the inner contradiction of liberal democracy to deflect the inner rebellion against the Party and the pressure of the administration from outside. The English media of the metropolitan towns, the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the higher courts, the public intellectuals and the English speaking civil society groups with national- international profile were used against the government on the pretext that the BhartiyaJanata Party (BJP) with a Hindutva agenda was evicting the tribal from their habitat for the interest of the business4. And in their relief camps, they are being converted to Hinduism. Or, the other argument was that their human rights were being violated. Thus, the use of the judiciary, media and the civil society, which are to the Maoist part of bourgeois structure with limited autonomy, were successfully used to slowdown the administrative acts. And the battle against the Maoist was successfully converted into the battle against the administration. It was such a master stroke that the spontaneity of the tribal rebellion against the Maoist was relegated to the background and their protest against the Party was labeled as government sponsored acts which became the point of social discourse in the national media. The relief camps established by the administration for the tribal rebels, the victims of the Maoist, were deliberately termed as the organisation of the SalwaJudum funded and protected by the government. The condemnation of the Maoist for their acts was no longer on the agenda of public discourse. Rather, it was felt as an occasional aberration. Opposite of it, the fight of the state against the Maoist was presented as the violation of tribal rights.

It may be stated here that the Maoist intend to overthrow the contemporary liberal democracy which it thinks is possible through an armed revolutionary upsurge. It does not believe in this Constitution, which it treats as an ideal bourgeois text, and which can never be applied in its spirit due to the structural dominance of capital. What exists in praxis, therefore, is the caricature of the ideals of the Constitution. Opposite of it, the Maoist claims to fight for socialism; where the bourgeoisie duality won’t exist. From the failure and learning from the past experiences of Russia, China and other countries, it intends to improve it further. It does not believe in the surrender of arms and argues that by monopolising over the arms and denying the citizens the right to own it at their will, the state attempts to control any opposition against its rule. The parliamentary method is corrupt, creates cretinism and devoids its citizens of direct control over their representatives; Or, the system does not foster direct citizens’ rule as at the base is the capital-labor relation which has an in-built contradiction and it cannot be reconciled to.

However, the Party, which posits itself as an alternative to it, itself reflects the hierarchical structure of the existing society in its organisational functioning and ideology. The chain of command flows from top to bottom, instead of from bottom to top; Or, the very idea of vanguardism, the party functioning as vanguard on behalf of people, instead of letting the labor fight for itself in self-emancipatory mode, is problematic. And lastly, its ideology is non-Marxism, more Leninistic and closer to Mao’s Thought. It is distorted, unprincipled, and a compromise with the bourgeois ideology. To explain this point, let me illustrate an example. Maoist’s support peasants’ demands, and they are the bulwark of the organisation. But a reading of Marx tells us that he was antithetical to peasant agenda, always opposed the inclusion of their programs in the manifestoes of the Communist Parties and considered their social economic existence as an unfinished agenda of Capitalism. The second example can be of Maoist’s support to minority rights which again is unMarxism. Marx himself was a Jew which was persecuted in entire medieval European history. Yet, despite it, he never asked for minority right, never supported it. The third example can be of Maoist opposition to globalisation process which is contrary to Marx’s support for it. Marx had repeatedly asserted for a globalised economy and open trade where free movements of capital, commodity, technology and labor are not artificially restricted by national governments. The point here, anyway, is to state that Maoist praxis, programs and ideology do not conform to Marx’s praxis. The inner contradiction between the CPI, CPI(M), CPI(M-L) and the CPI(Maoist) are self-revealing about their Marxism and praxis5.
To conclude, the CPI (Maoist), which is the fusion of three Naxal parties namely the Peoples War (PW), Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) and the Party Unity (PU) is the most armed and deadliest party of the communist in India hitherto formed. Its areas of operation and its base areas have been the largest in terms of territory sustained for over two decades. Of late, however, the determined intervention of the administration has led its police to penetrate into its base area, has shortened its area of operation, has squeezed its revenue and has killed its cadres and leaders6. Yet, it remains a formidable armed force, trying to expand into urban labor unions. Its support base in the metropolitan academia and in the civil society groups remains intact. Only it has become muted for the time being due to the government of the BharatiyaJanata Party (BJP) at the centre.
It’s emergence, however, teaches a lesson; it reflects the failure of the governance. A connect with the people, an efficient, sensitive administration, and development of the regions are the prerequisites to check the further growth of the moemnt, and for the success of the liberal democracy.

References:
1. https://mha.gov.in./division_of _mha/left-wing-extremism-division#
2. For detail, see GiridhariNayak, Neo-Naxal challenges, Pentagon Security International, 211, chap 1.
3. For detail, see Himanshu Roy, SalwaJudum : Another View, Occasional paper, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, 214, p.10
4. Ibid. , p.4
5. For detail, see Himanshu Roy, ‘All the Phony Marxism’, Frontier, Volume 40: Nos. 12-15 October 7- November 3, 2007; Also ‘Peasantry against Socialism’, Science and People, Volume 3, No.2 March 1992.
6. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india ; Times Of India, New Delhi, 28.5.2018
(Dr.Himanshu Roy is an Associate Professor of Political Science at
DeenDayalUpadhyaya College of Delhi University.)
(This article is carried in the print edition of July-August 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

The Kashmir Valley: Quelling the Disquiet

Photographs tell a story. They have an uncanny ability to get etched into our memories along with all their details and then refuse to fade away. And if this photograph emanates from Kashmir, especially from the picturesque Kashmir Valley, then it has the potential to tell a thousand stories, most of which are fictitious though.

It was just last year when the image of a stone pelter, Farooq Ahmed Dar, tied on the bonnet of an army jeep flashed as “breaking news” across news channels and on front pages of news dailies. Within hours stories started pouring in about the excesses of security forces, human rights violations, atrocities being committed on hapless Kashmiris that all the while alluded about stone pelter’s innocence. Detailed accounts have since been presented about Farooq Dar’s vocation1, his family and that he was on his way to cast his vote when an Indian Army Major “captured” him and went on to commit the gravest human rights atrocity2. Barring a few honourable exceptions, none of the fiction writers masquerading as journalists wrote that this “innocent” Farooq Dar was part of a blood thirsty mob of stone pelters who were hurling stones on security personnel with an intent to kill. Tying him on the jeep’s bonnet to create a human shield was done only to help the security personnel wriggle out safely.
Fast forward to May 2018 when a photograph of another Kashmiri youth being crushed under the wheels of a CRPF jeep was in circulation. However, the difference this time is that along with pictures the videos of violent stone pelters kicking and hurling stones at the jeep were also shot and released. After watching the video it can be clearly understood how the mob of violent stone pelters had attacked the lone CRPF jeep and the jeep’s driver had to manoeuvre the vehicle to save his own life. It was under these circumstances that this stone pelter was crushed under its wheels and later died3.

Unfortunately, in the coming weeks this fact will quickly be brushed aside and a perception will be created that it was CRPF’s fault to crush and kill yet another Kashmiri youth in cold blood. Already a section of spin doctors aka journalists have begun to write on these lines to build upon the narrative about oppressor and occupying Indian security apparatus in Kashmir. Sadly this video that has been shared across social media platforms will soon be forgotten but the photograph of a Kashmiri under the wheels of CRPF jeep will remain and fictitious stories will continue to be written for years to come, both in the national and international media.
In fact, this is the crux of the riddle that Kashmir has become in present times. A perception has been assiduously created over the years. Oftentimes perceptions are contrary to the truths. This happens when systematic efforts are made to create a smokescreen to hide the real picture and then dole out camouflage as reality. Nowhere is this more visible than in the Kashmir Valley. The perception is that Kashmiris in the Valley, especially the youth, are alienated with India and that Indian security forces—the CRPF and the Army are inflicting numerous atrocities on the local Kashmiris. This needs to change.

Understanding the Kashmiri psyche

At an individual level Kashmiris come across as soft spoken. But this soft-spoken Kashmiri transforms into a completely different entity when part of a large crowd. Individually, a Kashmiri may be a dove but in a mob they are definitely hawks. As part of a mob even the most rational Kashmiri flows with the tide and rarely speaks up against the Azadichants, feeling too overwhelmed to think beyond the collective mentality of the mob. For several individuals, this transformation is forced upon them.

Several Kashmiri youths confide in hushed tones that oftentimes they are forced to come out of their homes to be a part of the crowd. This could be either a call to attend the funeral of a slain terrorist, to pelt stones or to be part of a procession chanting Azadi slogans. “The window panes of our homes are smashed and doors damaged if none of the male members come out when a clarion call is made by these brokers of Kashmir’s Azadi,” a young entrepreneur at Srinagar’s LalChowk confided in me during my visit to the Valley. His friend, who was preparing for the administrative service entrance exams, added that these Azadi brokers shout provocative slogans that clearly imply action against their family if one refuses to back them.

Slogans such as “jo Bharat kaayaarhai, wohkaumkaagaddarhai” (whoever is a friend of India is the enemy of Islam) are repeatedly yelled to force everyone to come out. If someone stays back the family is earmarked, their women harassed and men roughed up. For years Kashmiris have willy-nilly been forced to be mute spectators in such staged events. The net result is that a large section of Kashmiris now behave like zombies. The Azadi brokers understand all of this and exploit the same by making the local population cannon fodder for stone pelting or as passive bystanders at the funeral processions of terrorists or any such unlawful activity. “As part of the crowd and on our leader’s command we can and we will do anything. For instance, we all may go ahead and pull down an electric pole for no rhyme or reason and after a few days when better sense prevails, we will write to the municipality for its re-installation,” the young entrepreneur said with a tinge of sadness in his eyes.

This youngster had a point. Around ten percent Kashmiris, who most likely are also Azadi brokers, dominate every aspect of ordinary life in the Kashmir Valley. They are present in plum postings at government jobs and in businesses4. An average Kashmiri just cannot bypass this broker class and act on his free will. A dearth of quality jobs or income avenues other than tourism has affected the behaviour of Kashmiris. Rationality, critical thinking and analytical abilities have gone for a toss and most of the Kashmiris are willing to be a part of any activity if it guarantees a few extra bucks5. This behavioural flaw is shrewdly exploited by Pakistan and its network of Azadi brokers. In one of the audios6 slain terrorist BurhanWani can be clearly heard begging the LeT terrorist Hafiz Muhammad Saeed for funds. In return for the cash Wani promises to step up terrorist activities in the Valley.

Lack of entertainment options and other avenues to creatively engage the young and restive crowd complicates issues further. The absence of creative entertainment options has led Kashmiri teenagers and young adults into substance abuse. Psychotropic substances, injectable drugs, syrups that induce drowsiness are slowing creeping into Kashmiri homes and gnawing away whatever was left of the analytical faculties of the youth, leading them further into a bottomless abyss. Yet these issues are rarely reported and talked about.

Concocted stories, falsehoods and canards spread by Pakistan-based news outfits that are readily lapped up by Left-leaning media institutions in India have also resulted in utterly false stories being fed to the teens and youth to flare up their passions. One of these is the unfortunate but infamous rape of Neelofer Jan and Asia Jan. Despite all evidence to the contrary the average Kashmiri still talks about involvement of Indian security forces especially the Army personnel, in the rapes of two sisters-in-law7 in 2009. The impressionable mind of a teenager is easy prey to this propaganda who then talk of seeking revenge for the wrongdoing to their sisters.
On the contrary, one of the darkest kept secrets of Kashmir’s society is the systematic rape of thousands of Kashmiri women during nineties, when terrorism first came to the Valley. It was a time when foreign-funded radical Islamic mercenaries from across the world were exported into Kashmir Valley to wage jihad against infidel India. These mercenaries sought refuge in the homes of Kashmiris and raped their girls and women at will. Scores of Kashmiri girls and women became pregnant due to these daily rapes. It was concerted efforts by Indian Army and their doctors who secretively conducted thousands of abortions for these hapless women in order to save their honour and societal stigma. Most often these abortions and clinic visits happened during night or wee hours of the day. The Valley’s elders know about this ugly truth of “freedom struggle in Kashmir”. Perhaps for this reason they remain passive onlookers to the current era of unrest that is being led by teenagers and youth in their early twenties. This uncomforting truth has remained hidden for too long. The Kashmiri teenagers pelting stones at Army convoys need to know that the same Azadi broker who nowadays directs them to pelt stones or wield a gun were instrumental in getting mass rapes of Kashmiri women. It were these Separatists who had facilitated the entry of mercenaries who raped the sisters, mothers and aunts of their village and now they are eating up the youth’s adolescence.

Terrorist versus Militant debate

It is an opportune time we officially start calling the gun toting men in Kashmir as terrorists. It should be India’s overt stance to call these trigger-happy Kashmiri youth as terrorists. Designating them as militants only gives a legal and moral credibility to mindless violence in Kashmir Valley. The shrewd Pakistanis are able to brand this violence as an ongoing ‘freedom struggle’ in Kashmir.

We need not fall into the United Nations trap of coming to a universally agreed “definition of terrorism” because these definitions are often changed at will. The recent United Nations Human Rights Council report on gross human rights violations in Kashmir is a case in point. The report appears to have been written by compromised UN executives who camouflage themselves as human rights activists and continue to dole out fictitious but blatantly lopsided accounts of human rights violations in the Kashmir Valley. How else can the UN human rights body fail to acknowledge the cold blooded killings that continue week after week? ShujaatBukhari, Editor of Rising Kashmir was shot dead in Sringar along with his security guards just days after the release of this report. What was Bukhari’s crime? He advocated peace and wanted normalcy to return in Kashmir within the framework of Indian Constitution.
It’s time India puts its foot down and brands all killing of unarmed people by mercenaries in Kashmir as terrorist acts. We need to tell the world in unequivocal terms that nothing can justify the killing of unarmed Lt. Umar Fayaz in cold blood. Fayaz’s killing was indeed a blatant act of terrorism as was the indiscriminate firing on the bus ferrying AmarnathYatris in 2017. How can the abduction and killing of unarmed Rifleman Aurangzeb be justified? Aurangzeb was on his way to celebrate Eid when a group of terrorists abducted him from Pulwama and shot him in cold blood. This is indeed an act of terror. We need to tell the world in no uncertain terms.

This list of people killed in cold blood is quite long and should be the justification for calling gun wielders in Kashmir as terrorists. In fact, BJP did right by calling off the unnatural alliance with PDP and imposing Governor’s rule in Jammu & Kashmir. The agenda of alliance had forced nationalist government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi from talking tough to the hooligans and irritants in the Valley. The first thing that the government can now do, is to officially call these mercenaries as terrorists.

A mere change in the taxonomy would mean a sea change at how the world looks at ‘Kashmir issue’. Calling them militants means that the international media, human rights groups and think tanks across the world consider the state of Jammu and Kashmir as the flashpoint of dispute between India and Pakistan. They regard Kashmir as some kind of unfinished agenda of India’s partition. In other words it justifies the killings as Kashmir’s ongoing freedom struggle, thus playing into the hands of Pakistan.

The terrorism angle in Kashmir will also let the world know that the Kashmir struggle is a part of a global conspiracy to establish an Islamic Caliphate. This was being done discreetly but it’s time to pull down the masks and decisively so. Let the world know that the “Kashmir struggle” has nothing to do with Kashmir and is a subset of global Islamic terrorism that was always talked about and discussed, albeit in hushed tones, for lack of evidence. As radical Islamic extremism spreads its tentacles across the globe, there is a growing realisation of the dangers of the thoughts of establishing an Islamic Caliphate. The concept of Islamic Caliphate dates back to seventh century wherein the newly formed Islamic kingdom in Middle East (West Asia) was ruled by a Caliph according to Sharia laws and enjoyed absolute power. This Caliphate persisted in various forms across the Middle East (West Asia) and frittered by the 19th Century. Radical Muslims have always dreamt of re-establishing the Caliphate and bringing new lands under Caliphate rule and consider this as Jihad. The set of laws under Caliphate include severe restrictions on a woman’s freedom and dissent to the Caliph is almost always punishable by death.
Even in Kashmir the façade has fallen thanks to a flurry of audio and video messages by the zealots of Islamic Caliphate. In 2017, Hizbul’s erstwhile India commander Zakir Musa openly advocated for Ghazwa-e-Hind and exhorted Indian Muslims to rise up in revolt against the Indian state8. Terrorist organisations such as al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, Lashkar-e-Taiba and HizbulMujahideen, among several others have for decades recruited youth into their ranks for the Islamic holy war and to fight for establishment of Caliphate. Politically they put up the mask of fighting against oppression and injustice and hence try to turn the international opinion in their favour. This mask has slipped and should now be ripped off completely to let the world know about the danger that Kashmir’s terrorists pose to India and to the world.

It is in our interest that the global audience now realise that the Kashmir struggle is no freedom struggle and all talks of plebiscite is farce. Pakistan has been drumming up plebiscite issue for the last seven decades, it’s time for us to do the course correction. As the world recognises that Kashmir’s struggle is all about establishing the Islamic Caliphate, all support to them would eventually end. The international media will look at the Kashmir issue with a different prism.

And this is not wishful thinking. Outlawed terror outfits such as HizbulMujahideen understand this. It is for this reason that they quickly distance themselves from all such suggestions, at least publicly. They brushed aside Musa’s comments and forced Musa to quit as its India chief. Musa, on his part, remained defiant. He stood by his comments and reiterated that Mujahids like him are fighting only for greater Islamic Caliphate and Kashmir struggle is a cog in this grandiose plan.

There are several other Mujahids who are coming out of their closets and are saying that all the killings is only to establish Islamic Caliphate. India needs to present these facts before the world and establish that the unrest in Kashmir is terrorism.

Fighting the scourge of Wahhabism
It is a fact that only five districts of South Kashmir Valley in the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir are affected with a separatist sentiment. It is also a fact that there is widespread support for stone pelters and terrorists in these districts.

Of late, a thinking has evolved that isolating the population of these districts while carrying out development works in the rest of Jammu and Kashmir will to an extent restrict the separatism sentiment. With time the teenage stone pelters and terrorists will be quelled, neutralised or will simply run out of steam.
This reasoning is fundamentally flawed, simply because the ongoing unrest in South Kashmir is driven by radical Wahhabi Islamists. There is a need to understand and recognise that a very large section of Kashmiri population is under the influence of radical Wahhabi thoughts of Islam. The youngsters who are picking up guns have been indoctrinated into fighting for the larger cause of establishing the Islamic Caliphate. The inherent ideology of Wahhabis is to increase their sphere of influence through any means. Wahhabi literature and poisonous propaganda material can be readily found in prisons of Kashmir.

Wahhabism is akin to cancer that spreads much faster than one can imagine. Already there are reports that Kashmir Valley’s relatively peaceful districts are being infiltrated by these radicals who are using the most lethal and erroneous interpretations of Islam to indoctrinate Kashmiri youth. Reports of disturbance have begun pouring in from the hitherto quaint Northern parts of Kashmir Valley.

There is an urgent need to tackle the menace of Wahhabism anywhere in Kashmir Valley. Interlocutors sent from New Delhi must talk to the state administrative machinery to keep a close watch on Friday sermons in the mosques. It’s here that most of the radicalisation takes place. Any secessionist preaching and incitement against India must be taken note of and the mullah must be immediately booked. Recording of the sermons should be done through discreet cameras to build a fool-proof case against them. Several of the madrasa teachers and maulvis at the Wahhabi mosques in Kashmir Valley have travelled from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar or other parts of India. There should be a proper background check of these maulvis and mullahs and all those with dubious linkages should be immediately deported from the Valley and booked under appropriate charges.

Human Rights as a tool

Perhaps nowhere else has the phrase “human rights” been more abused than in the context of Kashmir Valley. Pakistan-trained foreign mercenaries and Kashmiri terror groups commit all kinds of atrocities on unsuspecting but patriotic Kashmiris. They forcefully enter the homes, demand food and seek refuge for days at length. Almost always the women and young girls in these houses are sexually assaulted by these terrorists. These blatant rapes are never discussed and debated by the human rights watch groups and think tanks. But when our security forces conduct a cordon and search operation and neutralise terrorists hiding in village homes, these think tanks, journalists and human rights watch groups come out of their burrows and shout their lungs out about human rights abuses in Kashmir.
The need of the hour is to conduct a thorough audit of funds received by these self-proclaimed champions of human rights. Their international appearances, hypothesis driven studies on various facets of Kashmir and speeches at international forums should all come under the scanner and must be audited. When income tax and enforcement directorate raids can happen all across India then why spare a few rich and powerful traders of information in the Kashmir Valley? Several such people have amassed wealth in a short time. It’s time to make them accountable.

Issues of PoJK (Pakistan-occupied Jammu Kashmir)

Coverage of Pakistan-occupied Jammu Kashmir (PoJK) is almost negligent in Indian media. This needs to change. Social media is flooded by instances of high handedness by the Pakistan military and repeated incarceration of PoJK activists demanding basic facilities. The more the world knows about atrocities in Gilgit-Baltistan, Mirpur and Muzaffarabad, the more easier it will be to deal with trouble mongers on this side of the LoC. Active efforts need to be made to make news from PoJK available in Kashmir Valley. The people in Valley need to see for themselves the stark contrast in the quality of life on both sides of the LoC.

It will be overly ambitious if we believe that all these issues can be resolved within a fortnight or so. The issue has been brewing for decades that has been compounded by historical wrongs and requires deep thinking. Also, when all strategies to stop stone pelting are not yielding desired results then the need is to sit back and introspect. There is an urgent need to audit the funds sent to various district headquarters of Kashmir Valley to stop stone pelting. Cash is spent by local administration in the Valley, as per their discretion, in the name of maintaining law and order and under several other heads. This needs to be properly accounted for10.

Even at the peak of terrorism in the nineties there were scores of Indian supporters within the Kashmiri society who were often at the receiving end. There is still a sizeable chunk within Kashmir who are fed up with this mindless violence and want to live peacefully. The least that the Indian government can do for them is to provide them security and build a perception of empathy towards them. At present there is a perception in the Valley that whoever sides with the Indian government gets a raw deal. Villagers often cite the example of ex-terrorist KukkaParray9 who was killed by his former comrades and the Indian government remained a mute spectator. This perception needs to change and the government needs to do much more for people whose family members are killed by terrorists.

A rethink on constitutional provisions is required. The nation cannot wait endlessly for the abrogation of Article 370 or of Article 35 (A). We need to make changes in byelaws to allow people from other parts of the country to settle across the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Any delay on this issue means playing into the hands of Pakistani establishment that says Kashmir is partition’s unfinished agenda.

Yet another peculiar phenomenon of the Kashmir Valley is directing all kinds of dissent and dissatisfaction with the administration and the government into demands for Azadi. Dissent and dissatisfaction are the bedrock of any democracy. Protests and demonstrations happen in other parts of India as well, without any secessionist feelings. The Kashmiris should be led to believe that their grievances can be solved within the constitutional and democratic paradigm. This can easily happen if people from other parts of India settle in Kashmir who will bring a fresh whiff of thinking into the society. Over the years Left-leaning media organisations and human rights groups have branded Azadi chants amidst cocktail of money and Pakistani guns as Kashmiriyat. The time is ripe for a re-definition of Kashmiriyat that is correct and reflects the ethos of Kashmir.

References:
1. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/one-year-on-life-in-shreds-for-human-shield-who-once-was-embroidery-artisan/article23474081.ece
2. https://www.firstpost.com/india/jammu-and-kashmir-human-shield-farooq-ahmad-dar-is-a-broken-man-year-after-stone-pelting-incident-4422851.html
3. https://scroll.in/latest/881153/youth-dies-after-crpf-vehicle-runs-over-3-in-srinagar-while-trying-to-escape-protestors-reports
4. https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/8956-isi-s-budget-kashmir-stone-pelting-rs-1000cr
5. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/1261-stone-pelting-incidents-in-jk-in-2017-pulwama-records-maximum-firs-govt/articleshow/63233962.cms
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpxJtVdIHtM
7. http://pristinekashmir.com/topics/stories/story-of-asiya-nilofar
8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2GdIUytK40
9. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Kukka-Parray-A-profile/articleshow/180505.cms
10. http://www.catchnews.com/india-news/can-t-buy-peace-centre-has-spent-rs-4-735-crore-on-kashmir-policing-since-89-1468604171.html

(VivekSinha is a Journalist and Author of novel “Chip in the Madrasa”.
His twitter handle is @VivekSinha28)

(This article is carried in the print edition of July-August 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

North East India: Prospects for Peace

Intricate inter-play of conflict dynamics, trans-border linkages, geo-political complications,
geographical incongruities, ethnic diversity and plethora of demands ranging from autonomy to self-determination to complete secession from India have always been the force multipliers for extremism in the North East. 5,300 km of highly volatile and extremely porous borders that the 2,63,000 sq km North East shares with four enigmatic, if not entirely inimical neighbours only add to the complexity of the situation.

Fertile ground for militancy

North East, which accounts for nearly 7.7 percent of India’s land mass and 3.1 percent of India’s population, was the first region where eruption took place against the Indian state soon after Independence and it is the longest lasting insurgency till date. Militancy in Kashmir and Left Wing Extremism (LWE) came much later. In North East, it began with Nagas in 1952 and the Mizos joined the militancy bandwagon in 1965. Manipur too, saw the sprouting of a plethora of extremist organizations – some espousing the Meitei or Kanglai cause, some pitting SanamahiDhama against Vaishnavism introduced from the land of Bengal, yet others pitting Meiteis against the Naga-Kuki-Chin tribal block. Then, the restive tribals of Tripura too took to arms with the likes of BinodJamatia and BijoyHrankhawl leading the insurgency.

Assam, the most populous of the seven sisters, too had its separatist tendencies long before India’s Independence. Foremost intellectual of the 1930s, Jnannath Bora, had questioned the inclusion of Assam in the British India. Before that Kamalakantha Bhattacharya, editor of AsomHitoishi, espoused the same cause.1 In fact, there has always been a strand of intellectual class that questioned the treaty of Yandaboo of 1826 signed between the British represented by Gen. Sir Archibald Campbell and Governor of LegaingMaha Min HlaKyawHtin of Burma (now Myanmar). It was this Treaty that enabled the British to annex Assam. This strand of separatism, if not secessionism, waxed and waned alternatively over the decades. Fear of being swamped by outsiders added fuel to fire2. Nothing has scarred the psyche of the North Easterners than what they perceived as Jawaharlal Nehru’s ‘hasty’ willingness to bid good bye to Assam in the face of Chinese onslaught in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh) in 1962. Sense of alienation was also exacerbated by the inanities of the Mahalanobis economic paradigm that left geographically inaccessible and infrastructurally weak North East way too behind in terms of development. Thus these economic laggards with a plethora of grouses and grievances became the fertile ground for secessionism and extremism. Ineffective and corrupt governance and sclerotic administration that failed to ensure a trickle down of developmental benefits spawned cycles of disaffection and insurgency in the region.

Exclusion and alienation

By far, the biggest problem in North East is the exclusion and alienation among the tribes, between the tribals and indigenous non-tribals and between the indigenous people and the outsiders from the rest of the country. This is an offshoot of the Inner Line Permit System, which is a vestige of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulations 1873. The British wanted to perpetuate their interests in the region and insulate the tribals from the independence movement sweeping through the rest of the country. This caused alienation, distrust and disaffection among the North Eastern ethnic communities and those in the rest of the country.3 Every integrating and homogenising effort was seen as an inimical construct by the ethnic groups. There was stiff opposition to the process of national integration, democratic consolidation. Unfortunately, successive governments post-Independence continued with these provisions. Even the Governments had in the past felt that any homogenising effort would have its own set of implications for policy formulation and implementation and preferred to play a defensive game.

Ameliorative measures

It is pertinent to note that internal conflicts have been a significant as well as long-term feature of Asian political landscape since the end of the World War II and India too is no exception. Post-Independence, nascent India had to grapple with Naga, Mizo, Manipuri and Tripuri insurgencies till 1980s. Then the NSCN factions – Khaplang and T Muivah in Nagaland-Manipur-Arunachal’s Tirap-Changlang tract -Myanmar border continuum, Remnants of ULFA under PareshBaruah, Bodo militancy emerged as very strong faces of North Eastern militancy and dominated the discourse for over two decades. A series of measures by the Government of India have helped bring most extremist groups to sub-threshold and manageable levels. Nagaland, till then a district in Assam, became a state in 1973. Mizoram, another district at the time of Independence, and NEFA became union territories in 1972 and later full-fledged states in 1987. NEFA was renamed Arunachal Pradesh. Meghalaya was carved out of Assam in 1972. Tripura and Manipur, both C States or Union Territories in 1948, became full-fledged states during the massive reorganisation of the North East in 1972. This thorough reorganisation has put an end to several conflicts as they assuaged the administrative and territorial aspirations of the ethnic groups to a large extent. The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution has also tried to address the sub-regional tribal aspirations for limited administrative autonomy through special institutional arrangements such as territorial councils and district councils.

Pro-active policy yielding results

The Central Government over the years had adopted a multi-pronged approach towards conflict resolution that showed mature appreciation of the ethnic sensibilities and tribal aspirations. Effective cutting off of transborder movements of militants, money and arms, massive area domination exercises, containment of terror operatives, local autonomies and tribal accords, special economic packages and intense negotiations with insurgents. Many insurgent outfits have realised the need to subsume under the rubric of Indian Union and the futility of fighting the might of the Indian state. Greater interaction between the rest of the country and the North East also has contributed in a great measure to the growth in mutual understanding. Large scale recruitment into Government services and the Army has yielded fruits in building bonds of commonness. Today the Assam Regiment, predominantly comprising Nagas, is the biggest bulwark in North East.

Initiatives over the past four years have led to a huge improvement in the security scenario in the North East. In what could be seen as an overall de-escalation of security threat perception, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) has been lifted from Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh, except Naga NSCN-dominated Tirap, Changlang and Longdeng districts. The AFPSA was also lifted from eight police stations in Assam that border Arunachal. Similarly, Protected Area Permits have been relaxed for foreigners, except Chinese, Pakistanis and Afghanis, for visiting Manipur, Mizoram and Nagaland.

Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh has claimed a 75 percent reduction in North East militancy. 4 An MHA official claimed that 2017 has recorded the lowest number of insurgency related incidents and casualties among the citizens and security forces during the last two decades since 1997. He claimed that insurgency has been wiped out from Tripura and Mizoram. He also claimed marked improvement in the security situation in Meghalaya, Nagaland and Manipur.

Several key decisions such as sanctioning ten reserve battalions – two each for Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura – Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) approval to the proposal aimed at enhancing the overall cost from Rs 138.95 crore to Rs 212.85 crore to strengthen the police establishments, setting up of 11 new police stations and upgradation of nine police station in Tirap, Changlang and Longding of Arunachal Pradesh.5 The ground situation across the North East too corroborates these claims. A South Asia Terror Portal (SATP) assessment shows that 2017 saw a dip in the level of violence and this dip is a continuance of the gains made in 2016. By 2016, the districts reporting fatalities stood at 31 out of a total of 108 districts as against 41 in 2015. There were no militancy-related deaths in Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Tripura during 2016. Other parameters like security forces to militant ratio, which stood at 1:4.76, have also shown improvement over 2015.6
Thanks to the proactive measures, militancy is now staring at a downturn. Of the 139 terrorist organisations listed in the SATP database, only 32 terrorist organisations, including 13 proscribed outfits, are active now. As many as 97 have now become inactive. As many as 23 outfits are in various stages of negotiations with the Government.7
Emerging threats
However despite the gains, challenges still remain in North East. Joint operations and common united fronts of lethal terrorist groups is still a potential threat. United Liberation Front of Assam, Manipur’s PLA, & NSCN factions can still make a common cause.

Similarly, six Manipuri militant groups, including Kangleipak Communist Party and KanglaiYawolKallaLup, have made common cause only two years ago. Some of these factions have joined hands with ULFA and carried out attacks within Assam. This is said to be part of Operation Barak. There was an earlier conglomerate titled United National Liberation Front of Wester South East Asia. This has Khaplang faction of the NSCN, ULFA, Natioal Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB-IKS faction), Kamatapur Liberation Organisation, National Liberation Front of Tripura and Democratic Council of Karbi-Langri in KarbiAnglong district of Assam.

Factionalism and splits within the militant groups have implications for the negotiations with the disaffected elements. If one group is placated, the rival group ups the ante. The rivalry of NSCN Muivah faction and the Khaplang factions has been complicating the Naga negotiations. With Government entering into an agreement with Muivah faction, the Khaplang faction is restive. Even the Muivah faction is unhappy at the delay in implementation of the Naga Accord that the Government of India signed in August 2015. As per some reports, the contents of the Naga Accord do not envisage any change in the boundaries of the states, but the accord needs to be placed in the public domain.

The updation of the National Register of Citizens in Assam and the Bodo-Bangladeshi conflict in the Bodoland Territorial Council Area can also explode into violence and militant movements could spiral out of hand. The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016 could unleash violence in both Assam and Tripura. Repatriation of the Reangs (Bru) and Chakma refugees, who have been living in camps for over three decades due to the violent attacks in Mizoram, could also escalate into violence and armed militancy. The threat of Jihadi terrorism is looming large in North East, especially in the Lower Assam and the Barak Valley. JamatulMujahideen Bangladesh terrorists sneaking in and out of Assam is common place and there have been reports of Jihadi violence in several parts of Assam. A nexus between NE militant groups and the Jihadi elements could be a potentially explosive possibility.

Small arm smuggling has serious security implications for North East India. There are reports of Chinese intelligence agencies providing arms to various militant groups. ULFA I honcho PareshBaruah has bases in both Myanmar and Ruili town in China’s Yunan province. Effective curbs are needed to prevent the illicit arms trade.
Though militancy is in sub-threshold level, extortion by militant groups is rampant. In Nagaland, the militants run parallel governments and levy taxes on every household. Siphoning off of money from the public distribution system and rural development departments to help militants are common. Even PSU top honchos are known to pay monthly mamools to the militants. Curbing these financial sources is the biggest challenge for the government in North East. A coordinated and concerted effort is needed to ensure that the financial supplies to the terror organisations dry up.

Emotional integration with the rest of the country and discovering latent commonalities among what externally appear to be differences and divergences of the North East are imperatives. This is where non-Government and non-formal systems have a key role to play. Student exchange programmes, job opportunities for the North Eastern populace in the rest of the country and exploration of North East’s tourist potential can make a difference. They can lead to better appreciation of the underlying universality amid the variegated diversity of North East. The tourism potential of places like Unakoti in Tripura, archaeological remains of Dimapur, Mura Puk caves in Mizoram, Loktak lake and Moirang, associated Subhash Chandra Bose’s INA, Tawang monastery, orchid nurseries and Jaswantgarh in Arunachal, besides scenic and verdant Khasi and Jaintia Hills needs to be fully exploited to build a commercial connection between the North East and the rest of the India. The pilgrimage potential of the places where Guru Nanak in Arunachal, the picturesque ParasuramKund in Arunachal Pradesh, GurdwaraDhubriSahab founded by Guru TegBahadur, the venerable nineth master of the Sikhs, Kamakhya, places associated with the redoubtable MahapurushSrimantSankarDeo and Madhav Deb and the GobindjiMandir of Manipur needs to be realised so that the emotional umbilical connection that links India with North East is refurbished.

Act East – Act North East

Thanks to the Act East Policy of the Government of India, the geographical isolation of North East could soon be a thing of past. From a remote, inaccessible region beset with challenges like the narrow Chicken’s Neck, North East has suddenly emerged as India’s gateway to South East Asia. This opens up immense growth possibilities. This could see a spurt in connectivity improvement, infrastructure building activity, development of dry ports and bustling commercial activity. This could have a deeply transformative impact on the whole of North East and put it back on the path of development. Look East Policy could be the game-changer that could compensate for the lopsided post-independence economic policies that stymied North East’s economic integration with India’s growth story.
It should be remembered that development and emotional integration can play a vital role in ending militancy in North East. Lebanese social scientist Edward Azar has famously summed up on the basis of extensive studies of protracted violence of 1990s thus: Reducing overt conflict requires reduction in levels of underdevelopments. Groups which seek to satisfy their identity and security needs through conflict are in effect seeking change in the structure in their society. Conflict resolution can truly occur and last if satisfactory amelioration of underdevelopment occurs as well.”8

References:
1 Bimal.J. Deb (Ed) Extremism in North East India, Concept Pub, New Delhi, 2015, pp 8
2 Across North East India, the outsiders are looked upon with distruct and suspicion. In Assamese, the outsiders or immigrants are called Bongal (a corrupted form of Bengali), while in Khasi they are called Mayang. In Manipuri, the Muslim immigrants are called ‘Pangals,’ again a corrupted form of Bengali. The immigrant is called Dhkar in Garo language. There are several songs in Assamese folklore that talk about immigrants. For instance,
Kaniya Ahila… KaniPaanKorila
Ghorot Ba Hoiche Ki
MaaraakloigolRanuaBongale
KandhoteBondook to Thoi (The opiate addict is unaware of what’s happening at home. Armed foreigner came with a gun in his arms and took away the mother).
3 For a brief account on the Innerline Permit, refer to P Chakraborty, Inner Line Regulation of North East India, Linkman Publications, Titagarh, 1995, pp 1-3.
4 https://indianexpress.com/article/india/extremism-in-northeast-down-by-75-per-cent-over-past-3-years-rajnath-singh-4805965/
5 https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2018/04/23/home-ministry-successful-in-countering-naxalism-northeast-insurgency.html
6 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/Assessment_NE2017.htm
7 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/Assessment_NE2017.htm
8 Bimal.J. Deb (Ed) Extremism in North East India, Concept Pub, New Delhi, 2015, pp

(Shri K RakaSudhakarRao is a journalist and was asocial activist in India’s North East between 1984 and 1995.)
(This article is carried in the print edition of July-August 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Explide
Drag