The storm over the release of hardline separatist leader Masarat Alam should not surprise those who have been keenly watching Kashmir for some time. The political parties and the media in India have raised hue and cry over the release of an individual who was behind bars for four years now under infamous Public Safety Act (PSA) that has been declared a “Lawless Law” by Amnesty International. True to their conduct of the last 67 years, India’s main opposition party – the Congress – has been at the forefront to tear apart the ruling Bhartiya Janta Party on this decision. The entire media – whether soft or hard on Kashmir – joined the chorus in condemning the Jammu and Kashmir’s coalition government, headed by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed. Earlier, his statement about Pakistan and militants also consumed much of the evening airtime projecting the issue as if the state had seceded from India. The issue of the release of Masarat Alam, who became prominent in the 2010 public unrest, merits a serious debate about how a state like Jammu and Kashmir is seen through by the political establishments and the media.
Elected Chief Minister:
When people in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly the Valley, came out for the vote in December 2014 assembly elections, it was projected by the same media as a rebuff to separatists and people reposing faith in democracy. As a consequence, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed was elected as Chief Minister with the support of BJP. Since he enjoys the mandate of the people, he is ought to take decisions in the interest of the state and the people, as is the case with any other state or Chief Minister. But here the practice that has been on for the last 67 years is that the office of Chief Minister has been “subservient” to Delhi. If Mufti has acted as Chief Minister, he did so in accordance with his powers as Home Minister. Releasing Masarat Alam is a subject that comes under his domain as Home Minister. If he took a decision to release him and other political prisoners languishing in jails for many years, it should have been welcomed. Because he knows the urgency as well as the consequences of such a decision. If the political parties and the self styled Kashmir experts are insisting that Government of India should approve even a decision to release an individual, they are not only undermining the office of Chief Minister but also showing contempt towards the people who voted him to power. Ironically, the record turnout in elections is being sold at international level as a major change in Kashmir.
What is disturbing is the knee jerk reaction of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Rajnath Singh, who seem to have come under the pressure of the opposition. It would have been graceful on part of Modi and Singh to endorse this decision since they are in coalition and are supposed to have trust and faith in the Chief Minister. For Congress it is just an issue in parliament. They easily forget that when they came to power in 2002 with PDP, the first job they did was to release leaders such as Syed Ali Geelani who had been incarcerated by the Farooq Abdullah government. In order to ensure that Kashmir returns to sustained peace, it is imperative for a government to take such steps to make the atmosphere conducive.
Media and Kashmir:
It is now an admitted fact that the media and the political parties in India have refused to understand Kashmir and the dynamics of its politics. On every issue, the media, particularly the TV channels, get their swords out. In this case they even went to the extent of tagging Mufti Sayeed as a pro-Pakistan CM, which eventually would help him to build his image in his Kashmir constituency, where people had resented PDP’s alliance with BJP. If a government, whether in the centre or a state, has to seek approval of media anchors for taking a decision to release an individual, then there is no need for having a government elected by the people. Media’s role, with a few exceptions, has been shady in Kashmir. Going by their discourse, it always gives a feeling that Jammu and Kashmir is a state very distant from Delhi. Without realizing the ground realities and understanding the nuances of a situation, they bring the politicians to the “court room” without giving a chance to other side to put a point of view.
The double standards of the media can be gauged by the fact that in Afzal Guru’s case, it was to uphold the Supreme Court decision, though his case had raised many questions at the trial stage. But in case of Masarat Alam, whose detention for four years has been on almost same dossiers, the Supreme Court ruling is not the subject matter of the debate. So far 27 cases have been slapped on him and it is incomprehensible to see that charges that he was responsible for killing of 120 youth in 2010, when the bullets were pierced into their bodies by Jammu and Kashmir Police and Central Reserve Police Force. Among them not a single policeman was booked for either trampling an eight year old Sameer of Batmaloo to death or a 35 year old young man from downtown being silenced with a volley of bullets.
A problem of mindset:
Here I am reminded of a friend who served as a minister in the UPA government headed by Manmohan Singh. On an issue involving bureaucratic wrangles, I told him that it was the mindset prevailing in Delhi since 1947 that holds back good things. He corrected me: “It is not the mindset but the set mind. Mindset is subject to change but the set mind can never be changed”.
It was true with the establishment that has always been looking at Kashmir with suspicion – even its Chief Minister – but now it has infected the media as well as the civil society. Whatever is happening vis a vis Kashmir, it looks like waging a war. Without acknowledging people’s urge for a change, those who matter in Delhi push them to the wall. The repeated reiteration that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India does not hold much water, as by conduct they explicitly show that this state is alien to them and they want to rule it from Delhi. They should understand that this attitude has cost so much in 67 years and that is why there is complete alienation, in spite of the huge election turnout. Let Jammu and Kashmir chalk out its own destiny if at all you believe India is the largest democracy and the governments and political parties believe in democratic values. One Masarat Alam should not been seen as a threat. If you see it like that, then many more will be born.
Elected Chief Minister:
When people in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly the Valley, came out for the vote in December 2014 assembly elections, it was projected by the same media as a rebuff to separatists and people reposing faith in democracy. As a consequence, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed was elected as Chief Minister with the support of BJP. Since he enjoys the mandate of the people, he is ought to take decisions in the interest of the state and the people, as is the case with any other state or Chief Minister. But here the practice that has been on for the last 67 years is that the office of Chief Minister has been “subservient” to Delhi. If Mufti has acted as Chief Minister, he did so in accordance with his powers as Home Minister. Releasing Masarat Alam is a subject that comes under his domain as Home Minister. If he took a decision to release him and other political prisoners languishing in jails for many years, it should have been welcomed. Because he knows the urgency as well as the consequences of such a decision. If the political parties and the self styled Kashmir experts are insisting that Government of India should approve even a decision to release an individual, they are not only undermining the office of Chief Minister but also showing contempt towards the people who voted him to power. Ironically, the record turnout in elections is being sold at international level as a major change in Kashmir.
What is disturbing is the knee jerk reaction of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Rajnath Singh, who seem to have come under the pressure of the opposition. It would have been graceful on part of Modi and Singh to endorse this decision since they are in coalition and are supposed to have trust and faith in the Chief Minister. For Congress it is just an issue in parliament. They easily forget that when they came to power in 2002 with PDP, the first job they did was to release leaders such as Syed Ali Geelani who had been incarcerated by the Farooq Abdullah government. In order to ensure that Kashmir returns to sustained peace, it is imperative for a government to take such steps to make the atmosphere conducive.
Media and Kashmir:
It is now an admitted fact that the media and the political parties in India have refused to understand Kashmir and the dynamics of its politics. On every issue, the media, particularly the TV channels, get their swords out. In this case they even went to the extent of tagging Mufti Sayeed as a pro-Pakistan CM, which eventually would help him to build his image in his Kashmir constituency, where people had resented PDP’s alliance with BJP. If a government, whether in the centre or a state, has to seek approval of media anchors for taking a decision to release an individual, then there is no need for having a government elected by the people. Media’s role, with a few exceptions, has been shady in Kashmir. Going by their discourse, it always gives a feeling that Jammu and Kashmir is a state very distant from Delhi. Without realizing the ground realities and understanding the nuances of a situation, they bring the politicians to the “court room” without giving a chance to other side to put a point of view.
The double standards of the media can be gauged by the fact that in Afzal Guru’s case, it was to uphold the Supreme Court decision, though his case had raised many questions at the trial stage. But in case of Masarat Alam, whose detention for four years has been on almost same dossiers, the Supreme Court ruling is not the subject matter of the debate. So far 27 cases have been slapped on him and it is incomprehensible to see that charges that he was responsible for killing of 120 youth in 2010, when the bullets were pierced into their bodies by Jammu and Kashmir Police and Central Reserve Police Force. Among them not a single policeman was booked for either trampling an eight year old Sameer of Batmaloo to death or a 35 year old young man from downtown being silenced with a volley of bullets.
A problem of mindset:
Here I am reminded of a friend who served as a minister in the UPA government headed by Manmohan Singh. On an issue involving bureaucratic wrangles, I told him that it was the mindset prevailing in Delhi since 1947 that holds back good things. He corrected me: “It is not the mindset but the set mind. Mindset is subject to change but the set mind can never be changed”.
It was true with the establishment that has always been looking at Kashmir with suspicion – even its Chief Minister – but now it has infected the media as well as the civil society. Whatever is happening vis a vis Kashmir, it looks like waging a war. Without acknowledging people’s urge for a change, those who matter in Delhi push them to the wall. The repeated reiteration that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India does not hold much water, as by conduct they explicitly show that this state is alien to them and they want to rule it from Delhi. They should understand that this attitude has cost so much in 67 years and that is why there is complete alienation, in spite of the huge election turnout. Let Jammu and Kashmir chalk out its own destiny if at all you believe India is the largest democracy and the governments and political parties believe in democratic values. One Masarat Alam should not been seen as a threat. If you see it like that, then many more will be born.