Interview with Prof Kanti Bajpai,
Jawaharlal
Nehru
University
What has the Pant
Mission
achieved until now?
The Pant Mission has initiated the basic framework for a dialogue with the Kashmiris. This should have been initiated much earlier. A lot of time has been lost. But it is still worthwhile to have a person at a high level dealing with political affairs in
Kashmir
.
What role should the Pant
Mission
play in
Kashmir
?
There are a number of groups in
Kashmir
that need to be engaged. The Pant mission should basically consult a wide range of groups and make recommendations on the relationship between the Union government and Kashmiris. The mission should also attempt to define who should be involved in determining the above-mentioned relationship with the Centre.
How should the All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) be handled?
Handling the APHC is very difficult. The APHC is incoherent and greatly divided. It would be better if a clear leadership emerged in the APHC. But the Union Government should not do anything in this regard. That would be self-defeating. At this stage, the Union Government should avoid showing any preference in dealing with the numerous leaders belonging to the APHC.
India
should engage the APHC and resist any temptation to split or delegitimise it.
Should
India
allow the APHC to travel to
Pakistan
?
Yes, the APHC should be allowed to travel to
Pakistan
.
New Delhi
should have done this a long time ago.
India
is a liberal country and must allow the APHC to travel to
Pakistan
. The APHC has already said everything that is ‘objectionable’; what else can they say in
Pakistan
, which they haven’t already said here?
The APHC’s going to
Pakistan
may result in its finding out
Pakistan
’s actual position on
Kashmir
. There is also every possibility of the differences between the APHC and the militants coming out into the open. All this is necessary for the peace process to move forward.
India
is too strong for the APHC, and if the Indian government is afraid of this group, then the case is already lost. Allowing it to go to
Pakistan
would increase the prestige of
India
at the international level, not derogate from it.
At the governance level in
Jammu and Kashmir
, what should be done to improve the situation?
The governance issue (as distinct from the human rights issue) in
Jammu and Kashmir
is not worse than any other state in
India
. Like all other states,
Jammu and Kashmir
also suffers from corruption, a bad work culture, lack of leadership, etc. Obviously all these should be remedied, as anywhere else in
India
. The violence in
Kashmir
makes good governance even more difficult. Curbing the violence is therefore the core issue.
What are your views about Regional Autonomy and State Autonomy?
Grievances in
Jammu and Kashmir
can be redressed only by giving the people of the state more autonomy. Regional autonomy is one part of the autonomy issue, and this needs to be worked out to the satisfaction of all people in
Jammu and Kashmir
. The criticism that providing regional autonomy would communalize the State is politically motivated and is not correct. All over
India
there have been a number of instances in which such measures have been taken (eg. the Autonomous Hill Councils). Why should the issue become communal only in
Jammu and Kashmir
?
On the question of State autonomy, Center-State relations must revert roughly to the 1950 position. The State may choose to maintain some structures such as the Chief Election Commission and jurisdiction of the national judiciary. Article 370 needs to be honoured in its original form. This would increase the confidence of the Kashmiris in the Center.
On the various solutions suggested – plebiscite, trifurcation,conversion of LoC into international border etc…
Plebiscite as a solution is difficult. Had
India
used the plebiscite option in 1948, it would have gone in favour of
India
. There are a number of problems in holding a plebiscite. What are the modalities? What would be a decisive result (e.g. fifty-one percent, sixty percent, or seventy-five percent of the verdict)? Who would vote in the plebiscite – Kashmiris, Jammuites, people in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir? Who would conduct the plebiscite? What questions need to be asked? And, can an effective plebiscite be held? Given these factors, a plebiscite is not the answer.
Conversion of the LoC into the international border is not acceptable to all three parties.
India
has a parliamentary resolution which is against such a decision and the people of
India
by and large do not approve of such a move. On
Pakistan
’s side, conversion means maintenance of the status quo, hence they do not approve of the idea. For the Kashmiris, such a solution means a permanent division of
Kashmir
, and so they are against it.
A suggestion towards a solution is to make the LoC into a soft border with municipal functions increasingly being shared by the two Kashmiri governments. Both
Pakistan
and
India
should grant maximum autonomy to the Kashmirs under their control. Kashmiris should be permitted to move freely and trade should be allowed between the two parts of the state.
Jammu
, Ladakh and Northern Areas could be given
Union
Territory
status by
New Delhi
and
Islamabad
. The armed forces of both the governments could then be completely withdrawn, policing functions could be carried out by Kashmiris, and a joint defence council could be established to tackle any untoward situation.
Facebook
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
