The line of torment
The Line of Control — whatever the LoC might mean to Indians and Pakistanis, for the overwhelming majority of Kashmiris on both sides of the divide, the LoC runs through their hearts. The line is unacceptable and unpalatable, whether it is called the ceasefire line — a pre1972 Simla Agreement nomenclature, the LoC — the name prescribed in the Simla Accord. Or what Indira Gandhi wanted to make it — international border. In post-Bangladesh scenario, the Indira-led Indian team in Simla had a cringing Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to be dictated to.
The Indian side perceived the upcoming scenario in that light. And the game plan was to convert the ceasefire line to a permanent international border. Bhutto, however, was in no mood to relent beyond a point. Hence the LoC was decided as the new name, a name that Indira and Bhutto can sell to their respective constituencies.
Indira Gandhi made it out to be an agreement whereby the country could permanently retain the part of Kashmir administered by it and Pakistan could retain its part. Multi-lateralisation of the Kashmir issue with UN resolutions following Indian complaints of Pakistani aggression in 1947-48 turned to bilateralisation follow- ing the Simla Accord. Jawaharlal Nehru had drawn much flak for taking the issue to the UN. Once India had pocketed the accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh, there was no need to take the case to the UN, argued his critics.
Post Simla, Indira thought she had helped erase the indecisive Indian dealing in Kashmir, of which her father stood accused. Bhutto, however, had wrested a rider on bilateralisation under UN auspices. So, bilateralisation remained half-baked, leaving the door open for Pakistan to take it beyond subcontinental confines.
Bhutto did play ball for sometime. It is said that Farooq Abdullah, during a tour of Pakistan in 1974, was advised to settle issues with New Delhi. As the patriarch of the Abdullah family followed the advice with the Indira-Sheikh accord, Bhutto started making noises. The discourse in Kashmir has never been affected by what New Delhi proposes or Islamabad disposes. There might be some waxing and waning, but most Kashmiris believe that the LoC is the problem.
Kashmir erupted violently in 1989-90, changing the dynamics of the discourse. After a decade or two of violence, Kashmir turned to peaceful struggle. And this refuses to die down. Kashmir craves for room to breathe freely in the relentless Indo-Pak conflict, and the LoC symbolises the conflict.
The LoC, the changed nomenclature, has hardly had the desired impact. For years following Simla, frequent encounters led to innocent people dying on both sides. With the advent of militancy, pressures of other sorts developed. Movement of men and arms across the LoC grew. Militants in search of sanctuaries and the Indian Army bent upon destroying them put additional strain on the residents in areas close to the LoC. As militancy spread to urban areas, the vale of Kashmir as well as Chenab valley and Pir Panchal in Jammu were also traumatised.
In 2003, with India-Pakistan ceasefire agreement in force, the respite was only partial with emergency provisions like Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) restricting peaceful political activity. These provisions remained in operation though militancy was ebbing. The process had, in fact, started with the JKLF opting for peaceful struggle as early as 1994. Indian civil society activists, like Kuldeep Nayar and Rajinder Sachar, had helped bring about the change of heart in Kashmir. In a recent interaction with me, JKLF chairman Yasin Malik rued the fact that promises made for conflict resolution have not been honoured. Instead, the men in his command taking to peaceful ways are being awarded life sentences. “Noor Muhammad, a resident of Tral, Pulwama district, along with two others are languishing in Tihar jail. The trio was arrested and in the chargesheet it was shown that two guns were recovered from them. For that, they were slapped with lifers eight times so far.” The JKLF recently launched a “jail bharo” to protest against the sentences.
For years Delhi’s confidencebuilding measures have been paraded, LoC trade across the border being one of them. But even that is of little use. Sceptical views emerging in Kashmir might be called myopic and prejudiced. How can answers to the Kashmir problem be found when we have the two countries playing cricket one week, but the very next week the two countries come to blows? A war that hurts none more than the people on both sides of the LoC — the line that torments the soul of Kashmir.
Yaar zinda sohbat baqi (Reunion is subordinate to survival)
The writer is and academic controller and coordinator at the Tahira Khanam’s Paramedical Sciences Institute, Jammu and Kashmir