A number of developments in the last two days took place in regard to ideologies that question the legitimacy of Indian nation – state. Though the events are already well known, I will go over those and my arguments and leave you to judge for yourself if those were good for India or bad. Call me a stubborn optimist if you want, but I think it was the former.The first was the meet organized by Geelani and Arundhati Roy in Delhi. It was effectively broken up by Kashmiris of a different kind – the Pandits. They shouted slogans such as “Vande Mataram” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai” and did not allow the proceedings to take place. Arundhati, when she got opportunity, put in a word that Kashmir should separate from “bhookha – nanga” Hindustan, just she herself had already done. The headline news was that Kashmiris (read Pandits) broke the meeting of separatists in Delhi.
The second was the controversy the so called “interlocutors” appointed by UPA government to “engage” all shades of opinion in Kashmir have already generated, in less than 48 hours of heading for Kashmir. Dilip Padgaonkar, about whom I said that his mature demeanour is bogus and there is a vicious, abusive man inside who descends to street language at the sign of any successful push by Hindu nationalists, said, after talking to some Kashmiris that Pakistan needs to be involved in final settlement of Kashmir “dispute” !! The sort of thing that no Indian government or politician dares to mouth.
Very strange that this Padgaonkar considered his responsibility to be to work out a “final” solution to Kashmir issue. We all thought he is there to soothe Kashmiris and figure out some actions by Indian government and society that will give them mental comfort about being Indians. Instead, he jumped, within hours of arriving at Kashmir it seems, to working out a “final solution” which the likes of Nehru, Indira Gandhi (after winning a war), Atal Behari Vajpayee and many others failed to do.
This demonstrates, to my mind, once again, the sheer immaturity of India's secularist editorial class. Anyone experienced in handling sensitive matters where people's emotions are involved, would be far more cautious in approaching the whole matter. One does not expect diplomatic skills from editors, but at the very least, someone who has held any significant responsibility (and I emphasize the word responsibility, not status which an editor's job in secularist press seems to be) would hear out all shades of opinion to a point where he / she has a high level of empathy with all the different stakeholders, and then only make any statement about what he thinks should be done.
Padgaonkar's behavior is in stark contrast. He seems to have landed in Srinagar, talked to God knows how many people (some have already refused to talk to him) and then given his brilliant insight for all the lesser mortals in India – Ah! But don't you see! This problem cannot be solved without Pakistan!”. Vow, such lightening intelligence!! If it was not such a serious life and death matter for India, one could simply laugh him off as a national joker at par with Laloo Yadav.
The next event – Bihar election's two phases are over. Maoists called for boycott of elections. The people, in the minds of secularists referred to above, supposed to be all hatred for India's “elitist” democracy, supposed to have lost complete faith in it and ready for a bloody revolution, refused to listen. While voting percentage is moderate – between 50% - 55%, it is not low to a point, which would show any kind of sympathy, existed for boycott call existed, nowhere close in fact. There was some violence by Maoists in both phases, but nothing remotely resembling a popular support for Maoists.
And finally, I heard a few minutes back on TV, Arundhati Roy is back in Srinagar with Geelani holding another conference on lines similar to the one three days back in Delhi. In this conference at Srinagar, all video cameras were disallowed in the hall. Subsequently, it was announced that all those from the Times Now channel should leave the hall immediately! I was laughing as I heard this last bit. It is comforting to see that hatred and intolerance of hateful and intolerant people comes out sooner or later.
The implications of such an action should not be underestimated. In one stroke, Roy and Geelani killed a lot of the sympathy in media for themselves. Indian media are like a tribe. An offence against one is an offence against all, unless it be an ideological organ and a pariah such as Organiser weekly of RSS. Times now is by no means a pariah. It is an avowedly pro – India channel with a slight rightward slant, but by no means a BJP sympathizer as such. I can bet Roy / Geelani's offensive behavior towards Times Now is going to make even Barkha Datt pause and wonder if her sympathy for Kashmiri separatism was misplaced.
So, was all this news good for India or was it bad for India? While the answer to this question will also be a function of how India responds to such behavior, I think the above incidents were mostly beneficial for India. We can see that giving offence to media is going to reduce sympathy for Kashmiri separatism and thereby weaken this so called movement. Bihar is doing well. The elections will weaken Maoists and from all indications, Nitish – BJP alliance is winning which will keep Bihar on a growth path. Dilip Padgaonkar's comments will not result in any involvement or dialogue with Pakistan more than happens already but he once again looks like a fool and such correct perception of secularist buffoons like him is good for India. And Pandits brought home to all India and the world how oppressive the ideology of Kashmiri separatists is.
But how much India gains will also depend on how we respond. BJP gave a correct response in seeking clarification from PMO about Padgaonkar's remarks. Pandits need to build up the pressure and we all should join this fight shoulder to shoulder with them. I am convinced that these events sustain the national momentum in favor of Hindu nationalist ideology that got impetus from Ayodhya judgmen
I agree with much of what you said, but look at things even more positively. You apparently are looking at Padgaonkar through a lens of your understanding of him, rather than what his actions mean in a Kashmiri context. I think he is also doing great good for the Indian cause. For one, he is fully aware of his role, and his rights and most importantly, his authority, or lack of it. Him saying that Pakistan will be a factor soothes the populace, creating a belief that he is indeed open to anything that may work out for the best (and he well may be, in his freedom of not having an official power). The second best thing he did was speak with the militants. They are the emotional zenith of Pakistani interest in Kashmir. In other words, he has, in two strokes undermined all the propaganda that paints India as an intolerant abuser with a hatred of Pakistan. It does no damage to India, because India never was that rabid about Pakistan. However, it does create a situation where anti-India elements are forced to do a double take and reassess India, if only for the purposes of revising propaganda. This can create valuable space for India to act. Whether the government actually does so is a different matter.
ReplyDeleteI saw Padgaonkar the way I did because of the kind of views he has expressed earlier on different issues. It is safe to say that he is one of hardened secularists with little understanding or empathy for different ideologies and lost in a world view of his own.
ReplyDeleteI hope you are right that interlocutors dialogue soothes Kashmiri Muslim sentiment though I have my doubts. In my view, anti - India sentiment amongst Muslims is not rooted in anything India has done. It has more to do with Islamic intolerance of anything non-Muslim, especially if the non-Muslim entity happens to do better in life than Muslim ones.
Sanjay