Kashmir: The Litany of Violence and What Must Be Done About It

Ever since independence from British rule, the Kashmir valley has had a troubled history. Tumultuous events of the past transformed the valley from a veritable paradise to what was described as “the most dangerous place in the world”. Violence is certainly not new to the valley, but recent years held out hope that this had been controlled. Since 2004, when peace talks with Pakistan started, the death-toll linked to militancy in Kashmir has been steadily falling. The last election drew out an impressive 61% of the population to the voting booth. Given that the national average was a little over 59% this was even more commendable. In this backdrop the protests that have ravaged Kashmir in the last month have taken many by surprise. Unlike the protests sparked by the Amarnath land issue that tore the State apart in 2008, the genus of the present protests does not lie in religious conflict; nor admittedly is it sponsored by a foreign hand or controlled by any hidden outfit. The protests are driven by ordinary Kashmiris – stone pelters include youth, women and children – and they are directed straight at the State machinery. This character of the current phase of disturbances is extremely troubling. It raises grave issues that demand introspection and require immediate attention.

In political and security terms, the absence of a central nerve system to the protests means that neither the usual placatives – of dialogue and special envoys – nor the usual threats –of arrests and gag orders – will work. A popular leaderless struggle also marks a widespread discontent amongst the people with the State machinery. Such mass disobedience represents a big failing of the State and must be taken seriously in any democracy, and especially so in one as fragile as Kashmir. The Indian government must realize that although its case for Kashmir is strong, like any democracy, its legitimacy lies in the goodwill of the mass of the people.

If Kashmir is an integral part of India – which it is – it must be treated like one. While the government has to maintain law and order, the handling of the current protests displays use of unreasonable and excessive force. In fact, the immediate reason for the current situation was the death of 17-year old Tufail Mattoo, who was killed by a tear gas canister that struck him during a protest in Srinagar. Since then there have been more than 60 deaths, with most of them due to use of disproportionate crowd control measures. Police have admittedly resorted to use of live ammunition against civilian protestors – a measure which would not even be contemplated had the police been required to act in any other part of India.

The State’s actions in Kashmir also demonstrate a serious lack of empathy. In no other place in India would a bandh be looked upon with so much suspicion. Bandhs and political rallies are routine in our country – from Bengal to Kerala this is normal – and are indeed the mark of a healthy and vibrant democracy. Why then is a bandh in Kashmir treated differently? One reason for this is that Pakistan still clouds our policy in Kashmir – which is why any form of political dissent in Kashmir is viewed as an act of treason. The State must realize that when the people of Kashmir take to the streets, Pakistan is not even on their minds. They are agitating for rights as citizens of India – a right which is presently viewed with suspicion in New Delhi – just because it is being exercised in Kashmir.

Putting more police on the streets to shoot unarmed protesters cannot, and must not, be the answer. The unique character of our democracy has managed to accommodate, even if somewhat messily, the interests of various ethnic, linguistic and religious groups that comprise our country. To win the hearts and minds of the Kashmiri people – and transform the character of the valley into a mature democracy – dissent must be welcomed and not muzzled.

At the heart of the trouble is the failure of the government to recognize that with militancy no longer at the scale it was two decades ago, Kashmiris are legitimately questioning the continued existence of an intrusive State apparatus. New Delhi has fallen into the habit of not treating Kashmir as India or Kashmiris as Indians. The present violence in Kashmir is neither inexplicable nor insoluble. The cry for ‘azaadi’ is a response to this politics of alienation. It is a cry for inclusiveness – and the Indian State would do well to pay heed to it. The first step must start with an acknowledgment that the people of Kashmir have legitimate grievances and genuine aspirations – and as citizens of the country they are entitled to air them and demand their resolution.

Kashmir has been alienated for too long in the name of security – politics of inclusiveness will involve a leap of faith by the entire nation. This is the only solution to this litany of violence.