|| K. LEADER DESK
Mufti Mohammad Sayeed had stated in 2014 that the people of Kashmir Valley have sent a clear message that their expectations, political aspirations and convictions are miles apart from that of the Jammu region. Yet in March 2015, BJP and PDP entered into a coalition and everyone hoped for a political upheaval which would bring peace and stability in Jammu and Kashmir.
Among other things the BJP-PDP Agenda for Alliance states:
(i) In a situation where socio-political aspirations and grievances of the people have wide ranging differences, economic development on its own can neither bring about peace nor prosperity.
(ii) While recognizing the different positions and appreciating the perceptions, BJP and PDP have on the constitutional status of J&K consideredthe political and legislative realities. The present position will be maintained on all the constitutional provisions pertaining to J&K including the special status of the state in the Constitution of India.
Clearly the alliance agenda refers to maintaining the present position with regards to the ‘special status’ of J&K in the constitution of India. The question is what ‘special status’ is being referred to here? As per an answer given in RajyaSabha, the constitution of India doesn’t mention about any special status to Jammu and Kashmir anywhere. Hence those who drafted the alliance agenda must make it clear about what special status in the Constitution of India they have referred to. More so, in the Agenda of Alliance, nothing has been mentioned about the PDP’s Self Rule Framework. Will the people of J&K be made to live in confusion about their identities for six more years? Coming together of two parties having entirely different political ideologies surely deserves appreciation. But it is also important to understand what type of ideological differences the two have.
Coming together of two parties having entirely different political ideologies surely deserves appreciation. But it is also important to understand what type of ideological differences the two have. Do they differ on economic, developmental, foreign policies or is the difference on social priorities?
Do they differ on economic, developmental, foreign policies or is the difference on social priorities? These different ideologies that Mufti Sahib had been talking about and Mehbooba Mufti ji too holds on to need to be spelled out in plain and simple words. Otherwise, their hopes for bringing peace and stability may not materialize. It is also necessary to do so because attempts are being made by some to project the people of J&K as being markedly divided on the basis of social as well as political perceptions and ideologies.
Inspite of what regional ideological classification BJP and PDP have interpreted after assembly elections, it can still be said that had the people of J&K been totally divided on the basis of religion and region, then after PDP, NC and Congress had been so badly routed in Ladakh region during 2 014 LokSabha e lections, Congress would not have so mercilessly humiliated BJP in the same Ladakh region during 2014 Assembly elections itself. No doubt taking lead over BJP, Mufti Sayeed had been making efforts for taking his party’s agenda quite fairly to ‘his’ people but it was in no way for bringing peace and stability in J&K. PDP neither talked about self rule after March nor did it do anything to remodel the concept of ‘autonomy for J&K from Indian Nation State’ as contained in the Self Rule Framework draft. Thus, the party remained under question both in Jammu as well as Kashmir regions.
BJP leadership too needs to explain the party’s view point on such references since great hopes had been put by the common man on the said political revolution the coalition was referring to. If not taken to the common man truthfully even now, peace and stability will not return to J&K in the near future and hence, all development & integrity slogans will remain hung only in air.
