news details |
|
|
| BJP's nationalism sham, may compromise on J&K | | |
RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, May 18: On the contrary, BJP national spokesperson Tarun Vijay, who visited Srinagar for the first time for party work on May 4, talked of "New Kashmir". His "New Kashmir" formulation, though vague to an extent, did convey the impression that the BJP has been thinking in terms of according a very special status to this part of the country - status the NC or similar other Kashmir-based outfits want on the score of religion.
That the BJP has planned to compromise on J&K became quite clear when the then BJP national general secretary did not contest even once those who were demanding for J&K autonomy and self-rule and also directly and indirectly pleading the case of Pakistan during the meetings of the Working Group on Centre-State Relations, headed by Justice Saghir Ahmad. He did not even oppose the Prime Minister's special emissary and Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah, who virtually suggested the division of the state into five zones on communal grounds. He remained indifferent when a couple of members of this group protested against the presence of Wajahat Habibullah saying he was an "extra-constitutional authority".
The BJP national spokesperson also commended the "composite culture of Kashmiriyat". It is obvious that he didn't know anything about the origin of the term "Kashmiriyat", as also about that Jammu-based columnist who coined this term in the seventies of the twentieth century in order to mislead the public opinion and convey an impression that Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and his NC were ardent believers in the concept of secularism and democracy and that they believed in pluralism and peaceful co-existence of Kashmiri Muslims and Kashmiri Hindus.
But more than that, the views of Tarun Vijay on "Kashmiriyat" established that the BJP had forgotten the Kashmir history. Or, should it be taken to mean that Tarun Vijay willfully ignored the fact that the "Kashmiriyat" means nothing but politics of exclusiveness -- politics that ensured the wholesale migration of non-Muslims from Kashmir; politics that started forcing the non-Muslims of Kashmir to quit their original habitat from the time Sultan Sikandar, also known in the history of Kashmir an iconoclast. It appears that the sole objective of Tarun Vijay's visit to Kashmir was to express solidarity with those who were responsible for the exodus of the Kashmiri Pandits from the Valley.
Tarun Vijay also commended the "local Muslims" saying they want the displaced Kashniri Pandits to return to the Valley. However, while commending the "local Muslims" who want the displaced Kashmiri Pandits to return to Valley, he did not take to task the Kashmiri separatists of all hues who have been repeatedly asking the displaced Kashmiri Pandits to return but with the condition that they would be welcomed provided they join their anti-India struggle and work for the separation of J&K from India. It would be too much to say that Tarun Vijay was not aware of the ground situation in Kashmir or that he didn't know anything about the condition the separatists want the displaced Kashmiri Pandits to fulfill if they wish to resettle in Kashmir. He knew everything. In fact, he belongs to that category of politicians who do not appreciate the displaced Kashmiri Pandits because they, instead of becoming part of the solution, have become part of the problem and this they don't like. They want the displaced Kashmiri Pandits to return to Kashmir and live at the mercy of those who hounded them out of Kashmir more than two decades ago saying they were no more than fifth columnists.
Tarun Vijay did not stop here. He went on to say that the "best of the solutions to all issues can be found through the path of Insaniyat". Obviously, he was referring to the Kashmir problem and its solution. What he hinted at was not his own formulation. He only reiterated what Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee had said while referring to the Kashmir problem and its solution. It was he who had used this term in order to conciliate and win over Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists. In fact, Vajpayee, who had once said that "Article 370 shall ever remain part of the Indian Constitution", had planned to sell out J&K as early as in 1999. He failed because of the Kargil conflict, as also because the people of India rejected the BJP in the 2004 general elections. That Vajpayee didn't talk of statecraft; that he was a votary of Article 370 and that it was he who initiated the so-called peace process with the aggressor Pakistan should leave none in any doubt that the nationalism that he and his BJP preached was nothing but a meaningless sham. (To be continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
