PS BALI: Article 370 and Indian Politics

PS BALI: Article 370 and Indian Politics

http://www.theworldreporter.com/2014/06/article-370-indian-politics.html

Article 370 and Indian Politics

By Pardeep Singh on June 22, 2014

credit: deccanchronicles.com

It would not be perhaps wrong to say that like most parts of the country, Modi wave was also witnessed in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, wherein stakeholders of diverse communities reposed faith in the politics of BJP candidate Narendra Modi. And the winning of three important Lok Sabha seats by BJP candidates from the J&K state made it evident that people wanted NaMo “mantra” to resonate in the state. Some similar wave was swelled up in Kashmir, but had altogether different meaning and definition. In Kashmir, a Muslim majority region, people did not wish to see Hindu wing to rule, but at the same time the people wanted relief from monopolistic NC and Congress. The options before people were very few and specific. Taking advantage of the peoples’ dilemma at the moment of choosing either from tyrant and arrogant-NC-Congress or ‘inimical of Muslims’-BJP, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) managed to secure rest of the Lok Sabha seats in the state.

Then arises a million dollar question what was so predicament among Kashmiris’ about BJP? What kind of feelings they had for Narendra Modi? The people in Kashmir were certain that they will prefer to vote for BJP but will not allow NC-Congress to exploit them anymore. People justify their stand of defying NC-Congress, maintaining that it is certain that people in Kashmir will die and suffer as long as these two political parties remain in power, but if BJP came into power, there would be probabilities. BJP’s biased inclination towards Hindu groups like RSS and VHP will either create havoc in the state to make J&K as an integral part of India or will perhaps let the aspirations of the people of the state to live.

Then, came Narendra Modi at the center heading BJP to garner record 380+ seats, surprisingly three from J&K. With this escalated the unspecified fear among the Kashmiris, because among his (Modi) various objectives, making J&K an integral part of India was on priority.

Although, NaMo at various instances during pre-polling campaigns spoke about the length and breadth of the susceptible technicalities of Jammu and Kashmir. Among his predetermined objectives, abrogation of Article 370 attracted a huge criticism as well as praise from all corners. He (Modi) knew that People in Kashmir Valley will not accept lotus, therefore he maneuvered to salve the so-called victim of step motherly treated Jammu by raising the issue of abrogating article 370. He (Modi) apprised the people of Jammu (mostly Hindus) that the abrogation of 370 will help Jammu to stand at par with Kashmir, which was taken as a politically motivated ploy by common people in the Kashmir. This blind shot of NaMo succeeded and BJP managed to secure three important seats.

What is Article 370?

Article 370 of the Indian constitution is a law that grants special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir. The article is drafted in Part XXI of the Constitution, which relates to Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions notwithstanding anything in this constitution:

(a) The provisions of Article 238 shall not apply in relation to the State of Jammu & Kashmir.
(b) The power of Parliament to make laws for the said state shall be limited to
(i) those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List which in consultation with the Government of the State, are declared by the President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of Accession governing the accession of State to the Dominion of India as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for that State and
(ii) Such other matters in the Said Lists as, with the concurrence of the Govt of the State, the President may, by order specify.

1. Explanation. For the purposes of this Article, the Govt of the State means the person for the time being recognized by the President as Maharaja of Jammu & Kashmir acting on the advice of the council of Ministers for the time being in office under the Maharaja’s Proclamation dated the fifty day of March 1948.
(c) The provisions of Article (1) and of this Article shall apply in relation to this State;
(d) Such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State Subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify;

Provided that no such order which related to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph (i) of sub clause (1) shall be issued except in consultation with the govt of the State.

Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred to in the last proceeding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of the Govt of the State.

(2) If the concurrence of the Govt of the State referred to in para (ii) of Sub Clause (b) of Clause (1) be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing the Constitution of the State is concerned. It shall be placed before such Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.

(3) Notwithstanding the anything in the foregoing provisions of the article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may notify.

Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in Clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.

Post-victory, BJP in general and NaMo in particular again raised the issue of 370, which till now was ok for common people of Kashmir, as most of the people in Kashmir are well versed with the Indian Constitution as well as its amendment procedure, which in Article 368 says that parliament can amend all, but basic structure of the constitution and abrogating 370 was equivalent to violation of the basic structure of the constitution. People in Kashmir also knew that to amend Article 370 parliament needs to constitute an original constituent assembly, which is next to impossible. So, there was nothing with NaMo to create panic about among the people of the Valley.

Sooner, the Member Parliament from Jammu, Dr Jitender Singh during his first ever press meet in Jammu after swearing-in raised controversial issue of the abrogation of article 370. The statement of MP received huge criticism from all corners of the state with daily newspapers swamping with intellectual opinions on the issue. Sensing gravity of the controversy, Dr Singh resists to continual denial mode, which showed that Lotus is not yet ready to confront people in Kashmir. Though, BJP’s promise to abrogate article 370 caused great inconvenience to the people in Kashmir, which started believing that Modi is inimical to Muslims and to some extent this fear cannot be over ruled. Reacting to the criticism over the abrogation of the Article 370, Modi government put it into back-burner and went into damage control mode by justifying their stand on special status of J&K.

However, I feel that instead of touching controversial article 370, if BJP in general and Prime Minister, Narendra Modi in particular would have talked about the deaths of more than 370 Kashmiris in past five years during unrest, it would have greatly influenced Kashmiris to introspect that BJP is not inimical to Muslims. If Narendra Modi would have asked state government about the deaths of the Kashmiri youth and had pressurized state government for independent inquiry for every individual death, the people of Kashmir have embraced BJP with folded fists. If Prime Minister would have delved the inhuman treatment Kashmiris met-with outside state and had chalked out plans for their security, it would have won the confidence of the Kashmiris. But unfortunately, like most of the political parties in India, BJP also eyed vote bank. They consider abrogation of special status of J&K more important that the death of the innocent people and usual human right violations, which is prevalent in Kashmir for the past more than three decades. BJP would have attempted to know the condition of half windows, reason for disappearances of youth and sporadic killing of youth in Kashmir either by military forces or by other armed forces.

The day when any political party, cutting across the religious, regional and political motives lend empathic, instead of sympathetic hand to Kashmiris, the people in Kashmir will present memorandum for abrogation of this special status in platter, because Kashmiriyat is famous for his hospitability and those who are hospitable are also generous and god fearing. Thus instead of creating confusion and controversy, BJP should try to get into the hearts of the people, only than Lotus would be accepted by the people in conflict torn state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Of Iraq Crisis And Amorphous Stories

PS BALI

Credit: AFP

The Iraq crisis is not just a phase which can be resolved either by the armed struggle or by the intervention of external agencies, but it is perhaps the long running ideological dispute with a dreadful history. The extremity of religious intolerance and sectarian clashes has given birth to this new facet of pursuing crises, which is leading to the destruction of Middle East nations, especially north of Iraq.

Majority of intellectuals and experts interpret and opine about this crises as a clash of interests between Shia and Sunni Muslims, wherein Sunni rebels feel oppressed and discriminated under the present government, headed by Shias. But, unfortunately the reason is far contrasting and grim. Media shows so-called Sunni Jihadis taking hostage, people dying and important areas being subjugated by the Jihadis, given name of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIL). However, this is just a partial picture, because behind the curtains, these religious minorities are being exploited by vested interests. Has anyone given close look to ensuing crisis? Did anyone contemplate who is sponsoring these ISIL Jihadis to get arms and ammunition and who brings it upto them? ‘No’ is the answer. This crisis is neither just a religious war nor it is an indignation against the present realm, but a literal dangerous sabotaging imperialism on the part of powerful nations, to get hold into resources rich states, by inciting minorities to take weapons.

The clash is of Shia and Sunni philosophy of propagating and practicing Islam. As they say, “narcissist belie even what is praised by angels”, same is theory of Shias and Sunnis, neither Sunis are ready to accept that Shias are professing the same faith, nor Shias are ready to accept that Sunnis are also part of same Islam, which grew with the spirituality of Prophet Mohammad, thus giving vent to powerful nations to invade.

This all started with the Battle of Qadisseyah, where in 637 AD the Arabs drove the Persian Sassanids out of Mesopotamia, and of Ismail-I who from 1501 AD started the progressive transformation of Persia into a Shi’ite state, thus imparting to traditional Arab-Persian ethno-linguistic rivalry the sectarian complexion of a Sunni-Shia confrontation whose historical roots go back to the succession to the Prophet.

The emotional consequences of the assassination of the Prophet’s son-in-law, Ali, in 661 AD in the Grand Mosque of al-Kufa, and the military defeat of his sons, Hussein and Hassan, at the hands of the Ummayad Caliph, Yazd’s army, at the Battle of Karbala, 680 AD, reverberate down to the 21st century, never more strongly than the present when US intervention in Iraq has brought Shia Iran cheek-by-jowl with Sunni-Wahabi Saudi Arabia and the Sunni Emirates of the western coast of the Gulf that they share with Shia Iran on the other side of the same narrow waterway.

Till almost exactly a hundred years ago, Iran’s Shi’ism was principally pitted against the Sunni Turkish Empire of the Ottomans and the Sunni Kingdoms of Central Asia. The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire as a result of their defeat in the First World War led to the emergence of a number of Arab nations generally under the Mandate of Britain or France. Britain got Iraq and the modern history of Iraq begins in 1932 with King Feisal I being placed on the throne of Harun al-Rashid but as a vassal of the British Empire.

But to return to our narrative, the Iraqi monarchy was overthrown in 1958 and a decade later the Ba’ath Party under Saddam Hussein established its murderous rule. Murderous it might have been but it was also modernizing and secular.

Coming back to the track, what invoke these insurgents to kill innocent people on the name of Oppressed indignation? What inspires them to take law and order in hands? What makes them to become inimical to nuclear powers? All these questions have a single answer that this so called insurgency is a design of some powerful nation, who tends to make roots in oil rich Iraq. In this attempt to have some concrete reason to justify their presence in the Iraq, the powerful nation is exploiting Sunni minorities to go rebellion against the system.

Slowly and steadily things are turning as per their wish and without insinuating or making others realize, they are entering into Iraq as a savior. This is just a new kind of imperialism, wherein powerful nations incite minorities on the name of oppression to voice against system, to get their foothold on the land. Now, powerful nation is either exploiting Islamic states with Sunni majority or are manipulating neighboring states of central Asia to sponsor Jehad in Iraq.

It would not be predicament to say that all these kind of crises in central Asia is due to greed of Oil. The powerful nations want to occupy these areas no matter what so ever are the consequences. Therefore, people should understand the true nature of such crisis and do not accept whatever is thrown at them by the media, as a passive audience. It is not what media projects. Media is doing its job to attract audiences, but are fielding communal harmony at stake.