Harsh Gupta | From editor’s desk | Immediately after the elections in J&K I along with my family went to Kashmir. It was a sojourn which happened after almost a decade It was pleasently surprising to see the hustle bustle everywhere and throughout the journey. If I’m not wrong I didn’t see any security personnel or even much police for that matter across the length and breadth of Srinagar reminding me of this beautiful city of the eighties The nostalgia revived.
I mean nobody could thought of visiting Lal chowk 10 years back and now it was 11 pm at Lal chowk and now tourists and locals were mingling with each other.
With so much of normalcy and guard free setup, I won’t lie but apprehension cropped up. My apprehension cropped up mainly because of the change of guard after the elections here, some may find it political but the fact is that the change of guard would certainly dilute the deterrence for terrorism that has been created by central leadership.
This deterrence, fear among terror groups brought normalcy and eventual prosperity for an average Kasmiri (though that was not reciprocated by Kashmiris during elections. Well, again that’s a separate debate).
To put things bluntly I feel “friends” across the border took the result of elections as an encouragement because apparently they felt that a ‘Hindu‘ administration has been replaced by a ‘Muslim‘ dispensation there by expecting some ‘sympathisers” in the Corridors of Power (that’s to put things rather crudley).
This exactly resulted into the surge of violence wherein terror attacks in Baramulla, Sonamarg, Srinagar took place killing and injuring innocents from outside J&K and even locals. Convoys of security forces have also been targeted. This all happened in a fortnight after the election results.
Now see this all is happening when J&K is a union territory and technically the Home, NIA, SIA, Security forces are still under centre (MHA and Defence).
Now the big question: Should the Demand for Statehood be adhered to?
The answer cannot be either a complete Yes or a complete No.
The winning alliance had got the mandate and all the power for different departments/ministries must be delegated to them, because if the centre takes things on the contrary then I’m afraid that it is ridiculing the mandate of 15 million of the population. I mean that you cannot downgrade the stature of a Chief Minister to a Chief Secretary. I will not hesitate to say that it clearly indicates the arrogance of the power that be in the center. But as far as Home is concerned which handles law and order, a big fat ‘NO‘ is my answer as I strongly apprehend a catastrophe if the statehood is given along with the Home.
Now how that can be made constitutionally acceptable is for the experts to ponder and analyse because if things are done otherwise, the perpetrators of the terrorism across the border would further be emboldened.
Here it would be in place to mention that the major beneficiary would only be Kashmiris as they are the main stakeholders. I’m sure they would not like to leave this prosperity-filled Kashmir with unprecedented vibrant economy to a gloomy, depressive valley of hartals, stone pelting, curfew, depeopled streets, zero tourism and what not.
All political entities must come out of their petty political preferences and move forward towards unanimity on this sensitive issue because the last thing we would like to see is a blood-soaked Kashmir again.
