Devils Do Lie In Details!

In Response To PDP's Naeem Akhtar

Nayeem Sahab is a committed contrarian and a wise cynic. His incessant ability to profess doom seems effortless if not organic. While his post-retirement satire has entertained some and amused some, his enviable tendency to hand out moral indictments is unsurpassed.

Nayeem Sahab has a right to criticize the National Conference and glorify Mufti Sayeed as an angelic savior sent from above. He, despite his age and stature, also has a right to hurl invectives, sexist analogies and slurs in the guise of a rational debate – as despicable and tragic as that might be.

However this obnoxious name-calling is also a tragic demonstration of how PDP continues to be invested in the conventional realm of venal, nasal and bitter politics – one that this generation has grown tired of. These highly personal, crude tit-for-tats for demonstrating loyalty to the party bosses is revolting and repulsive.

PDP’s image of a bitter, perpetually negative opposition contradicts its claims of being a progressive alternative in our system. And I say so as a young Kashmiri, not as a columnist and not as a politician.

But I also understand PDP’s need to distort history by pretending that Mufti Sayeed was born in 1999 and is but an innocent 15 year old who has no taints to hide, no baggage to carry. Unfortunately for PDP though, Kashmiris do not suffer from a collective memory loss and their consciousness about their history goes deeper beyond 1999 – when Mufti Sayeed formed the PDP.  

Even though Nayeem Sahab has stooped low in writing like a self-indulgent nawaab with a long hookah hose in his hand who looks at politics from the prisms of mujras and “orgies”, he (after getting this unfortunate urge to demonstrate all of this out of his way) has also managed to put forth some half-baked arguments and it is important to debate those.

I will not get into Nayeem Sahab’s  convenient, retrospective analysis of what Sheikh Sahib should have and shouldn’t have done in the 1950s or the 1970s for the precise reason that unlike him I have realized that one cannot dissect history and pass judgments on what was done and not done six decades ago and then attach moral attributes to such decisions. That’s a luxury best left to Nayeem Sahab. A fundamental problem with a retrospective analysis of history in conflicts like those of Kashmir is that we don’t depict the past in objective, historical contexts but instead view and judge history through either the jaundiced lenses of ideology or through the prisms of contemporary ramifications.

However, I find Nayeem Sahab’s objection to Omar Abdullah’s presence in Vajpayee’s cabinet ironic given how PDP has repeatedly lauded Atal Bihari Vajpayee and his initiatives in Kashmir. The nature of the conflict and the ramifications of the unresolved political sentiment here merit that statesmen in Kashmir engage with Indian leaders who believe in redressing the wrongs committed in Kashmir and are invested in reconciliation, reconstruction and peace. NC did that with Vajpayee and Vajpayee’s initiatives for Kashmir justified that cooperation.

PDP cannot justify its infatuation with Narendra Modi by pointing at NC’s alliance with Vajpayee’s NDA. It can try doing so but Mehbooba Mufti’s frequent outbursts of admiration for Modi will make this defense a tough task. She will continue praising Modi even if Nayeem Sahab continues to trivialize this issue. Also stating that Modi is a Vajpayee reincarnate and hence PDP is justified in cozying up to him is a tough task – even for Nayeem Sahab.   

Mufti Sayeed’s role in Kashmir’s contemporary political history needs to be studied more elaborately in view of PDP’s efforts to distort history. When Nayeem Sahab speaks of power coming from Delhi and not from the people of this State, he conveniently forgets to mention that Mufti Sayeed journeyed to Kashmir from New Delhi as its chosen one and not the other way round. The former Home Minister and former Tourism Minister of India had virtually no political presence in Kashmir when he was crowned in Delhi.

Nayeem Sahab speaks of POTA while forgetting to mention Mufti Sayeed’s role in implementing AFSPA in J&K, in overseeing a collective assault on Kashmiris through Jagmohan – in being the architect of ‘Operation Tiger’ and ‘Operation Catch-and-Kill’ and in being one of the most ardent integrationists in J&K’s history – in secretly harboring an ideological opposition to Article 370. He doesn’t mention Mufti’s role in intriguing against and dismissing democratically elected governments in the State – in Mufti’s invariable complicity in everything that is twisted in our contemporary political history. In how ruthlessly Mufti dealt with militancy in J&K and pledged to crush it by hook or by crook.

As for the matter of J&K’s economic self-reliance and the achievements or lack thereof of successive governments in harnessing our power potential – I in my humble, non-satirical capacity invite Nayeem Sahab to a public debate in this very newspaper. However, that debate would also raise questions about Mufti Sayeed’s spectacular refusal to help this State when he could have as a part of the Union Cabinet and also PDP’s consipcous silence on the return of power projects from 2002 to 2008.

Nayeem Sahab, in closing his Nawaabi harangue defined by his analogies of “orgies” and “mujras” has also alleged “NC has employed a number of officially and unofficially paid apologists to hit at PDP for links with Modi”. This perhaps might be an obtuse reference to me and a colleague of mine in view of our columns on this issue. Yet another unfortunate fall from grace for Nayeem Sahab. As far as PDP’s links with Modi are concerned - there is little need for any efforts from our side to highlight this blossoming affair as long as Mehbooba Ji goes around town being a Modi cheerleader. 

(Junaid Azim Mattu belongs to National Conference. Views are personal. Email at junaid.msu@gmail.com)  

Mehbooba Praises Modi, Ridicules Rahul

Is a BJP-PDP pre-poll alliance really possible?

Mehbooba Mufti has done it again. In the face of how sensitive Kashmiris are about Narendra Modi – a divisive, communal figure they see drenched in the blood from the Gujarat pogrom, Mehbooba Mufti has heaped praises on Modi – this time out rightly glorifying him as a strong, decisive leader. And like last time, Mehbooba Ji has praised Modi Ji at an exclusive event in Delhi – while she might understandably continue to posture differently in the Valley. While most regional parties across India are choosing to remain ambiguous about Modi, Mehbooba Mufti has clearly indicated that PDP – despite being a regional party from India’s only Muslim-majority State – is open to exploring the ends of a political flirtation with the Hindu Right Wing.

Speaking at the Idea Exchange Programme at the Indian Express in New Delhi – in yet another clear attempt at wooing BJP into a pre-poll alliance with her party in J&K – Mehbooba Mufti has gone above and beyond the call of duty to praise the BJP Prime Ministerial candidate. Mehbooba Ji has suggested that Modi has the power, will and authority to take certain “tough” decisions on Kashmir. She has however, understandably chosen not to elaborate on what these “tough” decisions could be.

While speaking at a rally in Jammu recently, Narendra Modi had given two clear indications. One – that he is trying to reach out to partners within the State’s polity and two – that he is committed to abrogate Article 370 and remove the State’s special status. While the first indication, in light of PDP’s repeated pro-Modi statements, is making more and more sense now – the second pledge is being seen as the “tough” decision that Mehbooba Mufti has now publicly alluded to for the first time.

In 2011, Mehbooba Mufti had kicked up quite a storm in Kashmir when Sushma Swaraj of the BJP had quoted Mehbooba’s praise of Narendra Modi at the National Integration Council (NIC) Meet in 2011 at Delhi. Although the event was closed to the media, the speeches made at the NIC were posted online by the Ministry of Home Affairs on its official website. Unaware of this, Mehbooba Mufti impulsively denied the veracity of the claim by Sushma Swaraj that even minority leaders supported Modi. Sushma Swaraj then went on to present the transcript of Mehbooba Mufti’s NIC speech where she had clearly praised Modi and stated that people, especially minorities were “looking forward” to his style and type of politics.

Speaking at the Idea Exchange Programme a few days ago, Mehbooba Mufti has reiterated that – (the question of what the people are looking forward to best left to the people) – the PDP is clearly looking forward to Modi in the PM’s seat. PDP has of late been increasingly expressive about this “looking forward” perspective in the context of a Modi led country – “looking forward” to Modi’s “style and type” of politics, his authority and will to take “tough” decisions.

Mehbooba Mufti has also done something else this time – one that clearly brings to fore a growing animosity that the party harbors for Congress and especially its Vice President, Rahul Gandhi. PDP sees Rahul Gandhi as a prime reason for close, all-weather ties between NC and Congress in J&K and has recently started to take personal pot shots at the young Congress leader, who in all probability is slated to be the Congress Prime Ministerial candidate for the 2014 polls. Mehbooba Mufti, at the Idea Exchange has lashed out at the UPA and Rahul Gandhi – ridiculing Rahul Gandhi’s recent forefront-efforts against corruption by comparing them to “Sheila Ki Jawani” Item Songs in a film, which has by and large “flopped”.  This is the first time Mehbooba Mufti has openly accused the UPA of failure.

There is a growing opinion that this new avatar of PDP – one that’s getting increasingly cozy with Modi and unabashedly critical of the UPA – signals both the end of PDP’s efforts to break the NC-Conress ties in J&K while also indicating the start of PDP’s efforts to woo the BJP into a pre-poll alliance with the party in J&K ahead of the Assembly Elections. What happens in due course remains to be seen.

Mufti Sayeed is a staunch integrationist and his own personal political track record in the Congress testifies to his behind-the-scenes opposition to Article 370. What is PDP’s offering to BJP from their side of the bargain? Is PDP willing to support BJP in abrogating Article 370 as a bargaining chip to try and enter into a pre-poll alliance with the party? That too – remains to be seen. Speculations however suggest that something is churning between the two parties. It was the BJP after all which had facilitated PDP’s sudden emergence onto the State’s political stage.

(Junaid Azim Mattu belongs to National Conference. Views are personal. Email at junaid.msu@gmail.com) 

Aam Aadmi – Empathize or Impersonate?

Don’t need impersonation or rhetoric

Politics is changing – the way it is done and the way it is perceived. There is absolutely no doubt about that. Is this solely because of the Aam Aadmi Party’s spectacular debut in Delhi? No, not solely. The voter is evolving, and in the context of Kashmir – so is the ‘non-voter’. This evolution is a result of disgruntlement with decades of status quo politics that has been inherited now by an intensely opinionated and articulate generation – a generation that refuses to conform to the traditional specter of politics, as we knew it. Something is churning at the grassroots level. And that churning and restlessness needs to acknowledged and respected. As political parties – we need to change from within to relate to the change outside.

However, rhetoric is the nemesis of change. There are two ways to deal with an evolved electorate – we either impersonate him by dressing in a certain way, speaking in a certain way and acting in a certain way – wearing masks of austerity and posturing as purists ordained by God to save the world. That, in my opinion, is the fastest and most effective way to show our contempt for the common man – by stereotyping him and undermining his intelligence. This ‘impersonation’ of the “aam aadmi” has already become nauseating. Reminds one of the inimitable R. K. Laxman’s common-man cartoon strips.

The common-man cannot be defined and suffocated into a convenient political mould. And how will impersonation translate into genuine change? How will rhetoric save the sinking ship?

The other way is empathizing with the common-man. The common-man needs empathy – not impersonation. The leaders don’t need to go to great heights to look like them and live like them. What the leaders need to do is work for them – day in and day out. What the leaders need to do is understand the rank pessimism that has engulfed the electorate and the need to do away with traditional, rusty, hierarchical partisan politics. The deliverance of change will be a derivative of how dynamic and imaginative political parties choose to become inside the four walls of their institutions.

I’m a big fan of the charismatic, affluent and blue-blooded John F Kennedy. I’m equally inspired by Jose’ Mujica – the President of Paraguay, popularly known as the “poorest President in the world”. Does a Mujica trump a Kennedy by default? No – absolutely not. Leadership is beyond the definitive games of curating a popular, synthetic brand-image – leadership is about effecting drastic, systemic changes that have long-term benefits – about leaving behind a legacy. And measuring that change can only be done on the basis of performance – not tall promises or rhetoric alone.         

As for newcomers and aspirants for leading the State, it is understandable that they cannot be measured and judged on the basis of performance. And that cannot be held against them. However, they should certainly be judged on the basis of their ideas and plans. For now, none of the new political formations and alternatives in J&K have defined their vision of reform – there are no policy papers, no concrete plans. Nothing. Just rhetoric and rhetoric about the need to reform the political system. And that too is a manipulative approach to exploit the empowering evolution that is taking place at the grassroots level – unfortunately an effective way to nip it too.  

And as for those who have already been prominent, powerful parts of the political dispensation since decades – they are duty-bound to justify their past actions as well as inactions on crucial policy fronts and simultaneously offer definitive and unambiguous solutions to the problems that confront us. That too has not happened.

Unfortunately the political engagement between established political entities in the State as well as in the entire country has been a typical tit-for-tat, acrimonious and negative quarrelling in newspapers and TV channels. Nothing discourages the common-man more. Nothing feeds the ocean of cynicism with greater efficiency.    

We are dealing with an educated generation with comparative perspectives and with an exposure that is unprecedented – both in scope and depth. Let us – irrespective of political divides and differences – respect the evolution that has taken place and engage with our citizens by involving them in shaping policy. That and that alone is what will satisfy the Aam Aadmi’s’ thirst for change.

(Junaid Azim Mattu belongs to the J&K National Conference. Ideas expressed are personal. Feedback at junaid.msu@gmail.com)

Not so 'Aam' "Aam Aadmis" of J&K Politics

How “Aam” are those masquerading as “Aam”?

Kashmiri politicians, from opposition benches, “third” and thirty-third fronts as well as some apparently sinless political purists, are parachuting in from all directions to fill in the space of the “Aam Aadmi” in our State. This comes a week or so after they excitedly started tripping over each other in claiming the exclusive moral right to congratulate Arvind Kejriwal and drawing self-venerating parallels between themselves and the crusaders of the Aam Aadmi in Delhi. Some even complained that the media in our State wasn’t as supportive and objective as was the case in Delhi – suggesting that it is the media’s job to support tall, vainglorious rhetoric at the cost of reality.

There are so many interesting dramas being enacted with such hair-raising rhetoric. Here you have the main opposition party comparing itself to Delhi’s Aam Aadmi Party and there you have sermonizing Johnny-come-latelies calling themselves “fresh-faces” and seeking individual moral copyrights on the spirit to effect change in the same political system that they have been a part and parcel of, in different shapes and shadows.

PDP patron and founder, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed recently suggested that J&K had scripted its “Aam Aadmi Moment” in 2002 when the PDP came to power in J&K. This comes days after PDP revealed that it would consider elections “fair” in J&K only and only in instances where PDP came out victorious. By those standards, 2002 elections where PDP bagged 16 seats were “fair” because PDP formed the government. However, 2008 elections where PDP went on to bag 21 seats were “unfair” since PDP was kept out.

First – Mufti Sahab’s claim on Aam-Aadmi-ness is laughable if it wasn’t so out rightly outrageous. PDP came into being by bringing together conventional, old hands in politics who were either driven out of other parties or left them for their personal ambitions. How on earth do “PDP’s 16” in 2002 qualify to be “Aam” – so that they could have defined “J&K’s Aam Aadmi moment” in 2002 as claimed by Mufti Sahab? Some of those “Aam Aadmis” are worth hundreds and crores of rupees. Some of those “Aam Aadmis” have thriving business empires. Some of PDP’s “Aam Aadmis” are the sons of former politicians and some are retired bureaucrats who have questionable records of corruption at their back. And honoring poetic justice, they all came together under an “Aam Admi” who is the former Federal Home Minister and Tourism Minister of India and has been in and out of Congress thrice in his past. Which facet of this story is comparable to the rise of the “aam aadmi” in Delhi?

Then you have the curious case of our Johnny-come-latelies who are condemning all political parties to the dungeons of traditionalism and disservice right, left and center. They too have lunged forward to “felicitate” the Aam Aadmi Party while grudging the local media of not being supportive enough of their ‘revolution of rhetoric’. By the standard of their own hoarse rhetoric, one does not qualify to be an “Aam Aadmi” while coming into politics from the familial route and one certainly doesn’t not qualify to be a fresh alternative after being in politics for decades and after having forged alliances – overt and covert – with all “traditional” forces in the State at different junctures. History, they need to be told does not start in 1989.

J&K has gone through a phase of violence, destruction and chaos not because of any single political party – but because of a political sentiment and because of the failure of our political system to deal with that sentiment effectively, maturely and convincingly. When PDP alleges that the turmoil was solely a consequence of the way the 1987 elections were handled, they are trivializing the people of this State and belittling their political aspirations. You cannot belittle a people by consciously misinterpreting their aspirations or their grievances and then go on and claim to be the defining light of the “aam aadmi” in J&K.

Mufti Sahab has been a more perennial feature of the same system– in his capacity as a senior cabinet minister in Delhi on two separate occasions, in his capacity as the President of Congress in J&K (including in 1987 – when he alleges that NC rigged the elections). How can Mufti Sahab now posture as a rebel against the same system?

Mufti Sahab, in an interview, had once blamed Rajiv Gandhi for the mess in Kashmir and held him responsible for ordering the rigging of 1987. That was after Mufti Sahab had joined and left the Congress multiple times. He is also on record to having stated that a life-long opposition to National Conference has guided his politics. That was the reason for his departure from the Congress at every juncture in history when Congress and NC joined hands. So what is to say that the same guile of unconditional opposition to NC will not make BJP an acceptable friend in 2014?

Which part of this history and this reality is comparable to the “aam aadmi” revolution in Delhi?

(Junaid Azim Mattu belongs to National Conference. Views are personal.)      

Rural Emergency Medical Service (EMS) in J&K

We can save thousands of precious lives!

In what is now being seen as a shocking, misplaced sense of implementing the law more in letter and less in spirit, a Special Mobile Magistrate (Traffic) in Sopore stopped an ambulance carrying a critical patient from Handwara to Srinagar for using the “wrong” siren. The “inordinate” delay is being seen as a major factor in the patient’s death and the Honorable Chief Minister has personally initiated an inquiry and decided to write to the High Court.

While this incident is upsetting and yet again underscores the perceived lack of sensitivity and empathy in law enforcement agencies, it is important that we look at systemic flaws and deficiencies in our healthcare system – especially in the dispensation of critical-care in rural, far-flung areas.

We lose hundreds if not thousands of lives every year to the inaccessibility of millions of people to quick, emergent healthcare. This happens especially in cases where patients need urgent, life-saving interventions within the first hour of the medical emergency; for instance - accidents, brain and spine traumas, birthing complications, cardiac distress or injuries resulting in severe blood loss.

There are no two ways about the need for a couple more state-of-the-art super specialty medical institutes like SKIMS – one each in North and South Kashmir or improvements in the existing tiers of our public healthcare infrastructure. We need well-equipped and adequately staffed District and Sub-District Hospitals in our towns and Government Dispensaries in our villages. However, it will take decades for the existing system to reach a position where every critical patient in our State has timely access to super-specialty critical and emergent care.

I have written frequently about the need for better healthcare in our rural areas and I have also written about the need for a complete, adequate and grid-integrated ambulance service with presence all around the State – through existing public healthcare units.

The unfortunate incident of the stalled ambulance at Sopore got me thinking about a hybrid solution that would combine not just the transport and out-of-hospital emergency-care part of the problem but also help in saving thousands of lives by ensuring that critical, life saving care can be provided on spot in rural areas by trained paramedics, following which patients can be properly transported to places of definitive care.

In cases of bus accidents, natural health emergencies in far-flung areas, natural disasters or violence related injuries – we face two challenges. First – Providing on spot, out-of-the-hospital acute medical care. Second – Ensuring proper, well coordinated and life-support integrated transport of critical patients to definitive/intensive care. Had there been a system in place, both these objectives could have been attained and the old man from the stalled ambulance could have been saved. We have thousands of such cases every year where critical patients don’t get immediate medical care and where they cannot be transported in a timely and proper manner to super specialty hospitals and medical institutes in the city. Very often, severe traumatic injuries (especially brain and spine injuries) need near-perfect attention in how the patient is lifted, carried and transferred to the hospital. A failure to do so results in permanent disabilities and could also result in death. 

Then, there comes the question of rescue and relief operations – a car that has plunged into a gorge or a river, a bus that has toppled into a ravine with dozens of school children, a house or a commercial building on fire, flash floods, earthquakes, land-slides, avalanches, etc. All such cases require specialized rescue personnel with specialized training, equipment and logistical support. Here too, a delay in rescue and first-aid or an improper, chaotic mode of transportation can result in an avoidable loss of lives – especially if these accidents or situations were to take place in rural areas or towns that are at distances of greater than an hour’s travel time from intensive care and specialty hospitals like SKIMS and SMHS. 

We need an entirely new policy to deal with this issue. There is no doubt in my mind that we lose thousands of lives every single year due to this deficiency in our system. Most of these deaths are avoidable. We need an integrated, well-funded, well-equipped and professionally managed Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Department in J&K with First-aid, Emergency, Rescue & Relief, Flood Rescue, Accident Response and Vehicle Extrication Squads. Each district in the State could have a District EMS Headquarter from where EMS operations for the entire district could be coordinated and life-support ambulances with trained paramedics could be stationed at the Tehsil Level per the population of the area.

The J&K Traffic Police has tried to put in place a coordinated system where the Police would be informed of ambulance movements. However this system in isolation is bound to fail in the bigger objective of saving precious lives. An EMS Department, with its own fleet of ambulances, call-center and liaison functions (with police, hospitals, government departments) is the answer. The EMS Department would also provide constructive employment to thousands of unemployed youth and place J&K at the top of the list in public healthcare in the country. Till the time every citizen of our State has a specialty/intensive care hospital within an hour’s distance of his village/town – this is the most suitable, practical solution.

(Junaid Azim Mattu belongs to the J&K National Conference. Views expressed are personal. Feedback at junaid.msu@gmail.com)         

The Article 370 Debate

Roots, History and Story of Erosion

The BJP’s Prime Ministerial Candidate at a public rally in Jammu made some factually inaccurate, distorted remarks about Article 370 of the Constitution of India. Although Mr. Modi’s call for a “debate” on the Article indicated an unusual departure from the party’s traditional radical stance, this rather ‘positive development’ too was dashed on Thursday when BJP Spokesperson Vijay Sonkar Shastri stated with an unambiguous clarity that the BJP would “scrap” Article 370 if voted to power at the center. While neither BJP nor any political party can scrap Article 370, I would like to take this opportunity to counter some domestic political distortions of history in the context of the erosion of the State’s special status. I will write a few more columns about the external dimensions and narratives surrounding Article 370.  

As most of us know, Article 370 of the Constitution of India grants a certain special status to the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Incorporated into the constitution by the Constituent Assembly of India in 1949, the Article was drafted by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and forms the definitive constitutional ‘bridge’ between the State of Jammu & Kashmir and the Union of India.

According to Article 370, the Indian Parliament requires the concurrence of the State Assembly for applying central laws in the State of J&K except those pertaining to defence, foreign affairs, finance and communications.

In its original form, which has hence unfortunately undergone considerable erosion due to various Presidential orders that have made most central laws applicable to J&K, the Article gave Jammu & Kashmir its own Prime Minister and ‘Sadar-e-Riyasat’, hence replaced by the nomenclatures of Chief Minister and Governor respectively.

On account of Article 370 certain separate laws govern the residents of the State of Jammu & Kashmir. The most debated in the now diminished list are the laws governing citizenship, residency and ownership and inheritance of property in the State.        

The contours and features of Article 370 were personally envisaged by Sher-e-Kashmir, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah to safeguard the State’s sense of identity and nationalism within the Union of India. Realizing that the State’s political, economic and strategic future and that of its citizens was best served and protected by acceding to the Union of India, Sheikh Sahib wanted certain “iron clad” provisions and conditions to accompany the accession. Sheikh Sahib was strongly opposed to such conditions and provisions being constitutionally categorized as “temporary provisions” and fought hard to change this till the very last moment.     

The story of the erosion of J&K’s special status can neither been explained by a demonization of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah nor through a persistent distortion of history. As stated by Dr. Mustafa Kamal, a significant part of this erosion was carried out through pliant governments in the State that were installed through surreptitious methods at frequent intervals. These self-righteous critics and self-proclaimed saviors of Kashmir have traditionally stayed silent about the roles played to this effect by the governments of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad (1953 to 1964), Ghulam Mohammad Sadiq (1964 to 1965) and Syed Mir Qasim (1971 to 1975) under the patronage of a particular national party. While Sadiq and Qasim were Congress leaders, Bakshi was as much a National Conference leader as much as Goneril and Regan were loving and obedient daughters to King Lear.  

While Bakshi’s run at power is an almost theatrically engrossing Shakespearian tale of opportunism, betrayal and cold-blooded deceit both with Sheikh Sahib and the people of Kashmir at large, Sadiq’s story is a narrative of how a Kashmiri leader appeased a nationalist Indian agenda of eroding J&K’s special status to operative perfection. As Sumantra Bose points out in his book, “Kashmir – Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace”, Sadiq – the founder of Congress in J&K, was a strong votary for the abolishment of Article 370 and was even invested with the responsibility of dismantling Jammu & Kashmir National Conference and integrating the “remnants” into the Indian National Congress. A. G. Noorani validates the same.

Pertinently Article 356 and 357 of the Indian Constitution were extended to the State of Jammu & Kashmir in December 1964 during the tenure of Ghulam Mohammad Sadiq of the Congress. This, inarguably the biggest single erosion of the State’s special status, did not happen at the behest of either National Conference or Sheikh Sahib but in fact in strong opposition to his continued efforts to safeguard the special status despite incarceration and persecution. Ironically, a certain leader whose late father was a Congress leader during this period in history has recently blamed Sheikh Sahib for the erosion of Article 370. Invoking H.P. Lovecraft, “From even the greatest of horrors, irony is seldom absent.”

Our demand for the restoration of autonomy and the eroded special status of the State is far from an “electoral pitch”. It is the continuation of a consistent battle to safeguard the identity and interests of our people. As far as distortions of history are concerned – there is a special place in history for such distorters – the inglorious footnotes and sidelines.  

(Views expressed are personal and not of the party I belong to. For feedback - junaid.msu@gmail.com)

Why National Conference?

My journey from sidelines to rhetoric to reality 

Why did I – one of the most vocal and vociferous critics of the ruling dispensation –join the National Conference? Why did I quit the Peoples’ Conference? The most simple and honest answer to both questions would be – “I was wrong”. However this merits a more nuanced explanation.

In a lot of ways I’m an ordinary, common Kashmiri boy who was born in Srinagar and went to the Burn Hall School. I completed the final years of my schooling at the Bishop Cotton School in Shimla and then, through my family, migrated to the United States, where I received my college education.

I had always planned on moving back. I scorned upon those who criticized the system without making any effort to change it from within. So, months after I became eligible for an American citizenship in 2009 and while I was working as a Financial Analyst with the Government of Michigan, I moved back to Kashmir and decided to put my money where my mouth was.

While in the US, I would often come back from perfect weekend road trips and then write evocative, pontificating blogs about the need for change and revolution in Kashmir, about a righteous and just battle against oppression in Kashmir, against the ‘collaborators’ – all from the bliss of my normal life in Michigan. That is what Kashmiris like me, from my sort of a background do. We talk about sacrifice, struggle and Azadi while ensuring that the turmoil doesn’t alter any aspect of our own lives. For the dying part of the revolution – well there is always the poor man’s son.  

Meanwhile in the run up to the elections of 2008, Mr. Omar Abdullah had started an informal blog on the NC website. This was unprecedented. No political leader in Kashmir had ever tried to engage with commoners with such honesty. For how riled up and obnoxious we can become on social media, this was a very brave decision. And obviously there were endless back and forth discussions on these blogs. I was the regular “angry” virtual victim who, in feedback debates on these blogs, pontificated from the moral high ground.

In responding to the fiercest and at times most ruthless criticism, I found Omar Abdullah to be an extraordinarily humble and honest individual. Embarrassed due to the discordant tonality of my earlier posts, I humbled down and started introspecting – coming to terms with the glaring mismatch between my life and my political posturing.

Meanwhile back home, the Assembly Elections of 2008 saw Mr. Omar Abdullah become the Chief Minister of a disgruntled J&K that was ripe for a generational shift in leadership. I soon mentioned my plans of moving back and joining politics to Mr. Abdullah – who had by now become a good, dear friend. I clearly remember how he unequivocally cautioned me about the uncertainty and risks such a step would bring with it – the biggest being the possibility of a phase of financial hardship – an inability to maintain the life standard I had now gotten used to in the United States. I did face all those challenges. And today for having faced them and still sticking my neck out and not giving up and not running back to the safety and stability of an expatriate life, I am an entirely new person with a much thicker layer of skin.

In the autumn of 2009, I resigned from my job as a Financial Analyst with the Government in the US and moved back to Kashmir. Unfortunately, partly due to circumstances and partly due to the fact that a phase of darkness and uncertainty at this crucial age comes with an almost organic sort of bitterness and disgruntlement that feeds on itself, around a year after returning from the United States and after grueling months of uncertainty and having nothing to do – I took up Mr. Sajad Lone’s invitation to join the Peoples’ Conference – a small yet old political party that didn’t have a single elected representative in the system and was at that time quite uncertain about its own future course of action. After three years with the Peoples’ Conference and with due respect to Mr. Lone, I eventually decided to not stay in a party which has to function on the whims of one single man. And I wish him the best.

I still have the same belief in the need for ‘Change’ and still treasure the idealism within me. I however have had this evolved first-hand realization that ‘Change’ can only come from institutions and not forums and fan-clubs that revolve around an individual. I also believe that true change will come from a style of realistic, humble and sober politics; not from flowery, unending and ambiguous rhetoric about the academic/philosophical concepts of change and reform.

The more important and completely separate question now – Why did I join the National Conference?

National Conference is the pioneer of reform and ‘change’ in Kashmiri Politics. In politics, history gives glory and baggage in almost equal proportions and more often than not the “moral high ground” is a luxury that only the pontificating spectator or the newcomer can afford. National Conference has a glorious history – one that our forefathers have been a part a parcel of. A history of enduring decades of persecution for the cause of liberation. My grandfather, Khwaja Ghulam Ahmad Ashai, was one of the four founding secretaries of National Conference. It was Ashai Sahib who read out the first inaugural address of the party in 1932. He occupied various important positions in the government such as the Chief Whip of the Legislative Assembly, Inspector General of Muslim Education, the representative of Kashmiri Muslims in the Glancy Commission and finally the first Acting Vice Chancellor of the Kashmir University. History bears witness to his selfless association with Sheikh Sahib, despite a phase of political differences. In 1953 he was incarcerated along with Sheikh Sahib.

As I mentioned in my first speech at Nawa-e-Subh and something I keep reiterating – history doesn’t start in 1989. Kashmir’s contemporary political history starts in the 1920s when a handful of educated young Kashmiris returned home to fight for the rights of their people – to equality, to dignity and to prosperity. National Conference was born from this sacred fire of Kashmiri renaissance in the quaint little “Reading Room” in Fateh Kadal where seven educated young Kashmiris would meet and discuss the changing world, the feudal oppression of the Dogra Rulers and the dream of a ‘Naya Kashmir’. How this group of educated young patriots rallied around Sheikh Sahib took us out from a feudal existence and ushered us into an era of equality, education and institutional reform.

I’m not a historian who can dissect and pass judgments on what was done and not done six decades ago and then attach moral attributes to such decisions. However, I have been a keen student of Kashmiri history. A fundamental problem with a retrospective analysis of history is that in cases like that of Kashmir, we don’t depict the past in objective, historical contexts but instead view and judge history through the lens of contemporary developments, passing phases, current political incidents, accidents and beliefs.

Even for the most biased critics of the party, it’s hard to deny that the role of National Conference in the history of Kashmir has been pivotal and historic. And history is important especially in the politics of a place like Kashmir – provided our analysis of history is contextual, objective and realistic. And in the Kashmir of today, one that is being divided on the basis of regions, religions, towns and villages, be that by the PDP or the BJP or even the Congress – such lessons and legacies of history are invaluable.

In an era of gamesmanship, Machiavellianism and proxy-ism, an era of third and fourth fronts and covert alliances – it is important that we connect our history to our present and carry it on with us into our future. That we stick together and stay strong as a united, secular Jammu & Kashmir.

In Mr. Omar Abdullah we have a perceptive, humble and honest statesman with an impeccable leadership character. He is the last man on earth who would allow a compromise on our special status, our identity and our dignity for personal interests. He never lies. His articulation is earnest and his style of politics is quiet and selfless. How can we afford to not be on his side?

Today, days after I joined the National Conference, I walked into the Nawa-e-Subh central hall and randomly looked up straight ahead of me and saw two life size portraits of my grandfather hung on the wall straight ahead. I cannot explain that spontaneous feeling in words – both of belonging and of repentance. But one thing I know – that I will do justice to that feeling, to our identity and to the sacrifices we have rendered as Kashmiris, including those rendered by thousands of NC workers and supporters.

(Views expressed are personal and not of the party I belong to. For feedback - junaid.msu@gmail.com)