Jottings - Slice of life - 319 ( a tumultuous political week in India - Abrogation of article 370 - Modi's masterstroke, and the sad story of the appointment of the interim president of the INC)

Jottings - Slice of life - 319 ( a tumultuous political week in India - Abrogation of article 370 - Modi's masterstroke, and the sad story of the appointment of the interim president of the INC)

It has been a momentous week in Indian politics. The Modi government, fulfilling one of its primal election promises, have acted decisively within months of being reelected. The beautiful valley of Kasmir is once again the theater of a massive political experiment. A state has now become a Union territory. Without much dialogue or consultation with the opposition party, and within few opening hours of deliberation in the legislative assembly, the ruling party - the BJP, on the 5th of August 2019 introduced a bill abrogating the special status accorded to the beautiful valley and making a part of India albeit with reduced status. The provisions under Article 370 -promulgated under the most fortuituous conditions in those crucial early years of India Independence - is no more valid, and with it goes seventy years if vacillation on whether Kasmir is indeed part of India or not. It was a masterstroke of political maneuvering by the BJP, that left the national and international community aghast at the swiftness of the decision, and not surprisingly, a little worried about consequences and repercussions of such an act on the people of the valley, and more so, on the spirit and essence of democracy itself. The other embarrassing development towards the end of the week was the spineless appointment of Sonia Gandhi, once again, as the interim president of the Congress party. Unable to elect or find anyone else from the party cadre to assume the mantle. While it is common knowledge that there are many in the Congress party, whose intellectual and political acumen far surpasses that of the Gandhi family, It is a matter of shame, that this sycophantic party cannot look beyond the accidental lineage of the Gandhi name to lead them. In the next few paragraphs, I pen my thoughts on both these events.

Lets briefly condense more than seventy years of history for context. When the British left India in 1947, they left behind not just two geographical entities - India and Pakistan, but more than 500 principalities, ruled by kings and premiers, across the nation. Between 1947 - 1948, under the able leadership of Sardar Vallabhai Patel and the brilliant V P Menon, most regions, after many delicate and subtle persuasions, acceded to the Indian Union. But a few principalities were reluctant. For example, the princely state of Hyderabad and Travancore, whose kings and dewans had notions of leading an independent existence, and didn't feel the need to join India or Pakistan. It was the genius of V P Menon and Patel (aided by some good fortune at appropriate times) that they were able to convince and push the tide of settlement amicably. Lord Mountbatten played his part as the last Governer general by interceding on Indian's government's behalf, and especially as a friend of Nehru, to emphasize the necessity of joining the union. Be that as it may, by 1948, almost all the states had joined the Indian Union unconditionally, except Jammu and Kashmir. That beautiful valley nestled at the intersection of India and Pakistan had a Muslim population that far exceeded the Hindus. The Maharaja, who ruled the state - Raja Hari Singh - was a Hindu, part of the Rajput Dogra family. Also one must forget, the Kasmir is a strategic vantage point for international diplomacy as well. Russia and Afghanistan were close to it, and trade ways could be controlled by access to Kashmir. More important than all of this was Jawaharlal Nehru's deep affinity to Kasmir. Bring a Kashmiri Pandit himself, he was keen that this priceless land should be part of India, though he was equally clear, that such affiliation should take into proper consideration that aspirations of the majority Muslim population. Given this multifaceted and complex context, the accession of Kashmir was held in balance. The polarization of Kasmir began much before India's independence. Since the 1920s there was growing dissatisfaction among the Muslims that they were not equally represented in Kashmir's administration. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, a school teacher, and great orator rose within the ranks of the Muslim population, formed the National conference, and attracted a vast number of Muslims towards a common cause of equal representation and rights. The national conference also aligned itself with the Indian National Congress. Abdullah was imprisoned for sedition many times, and during the crucial period during the talks of accession, Abdullah was in prison, and his release was one of the demands by India. It was clear that Hari Singh and his prime minister Ramchandra Kak wanted complete independence, and Abdullah preferred to be part of India, whose Prime minister - Nehru was more inclusive of all faiths than Raja Hari Singh. After months of intense discussions back and forth, enforced by Mountbatten, Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru's personal visits to the valley to sway the tide, Kasmirwas not yet ready to align itself to either India or for that matter to Pakistan. And then in October, the mysterious raids from across the Pakistani border began in full swing. What started off a few desultory skirmishes soon transformed into fullscale looting, raping and communal disruption. Pakistan denied any ties to these groups of raiders, but it was undeniable that Pakistan provided invisible support for these marauders to destabilize the valley. Raja Hari Singh, considering the gravity of the deteriorating law and order in his state, and with nowhere to turn appealed to India for cover. Indian responded with might and stalled further intrusions, but by the beginning of 1948, no decisive end was in sight. India made the mistake of taking the matter of Kashmir to the United Nations. A move that would forever change the complexion of the matter from a national to an international one. It is also equally unfortunate that having taken the matter to an international forum, India couldn't represent its case better. Sir Zafrullah Khan from Pakistan, a superb orator, and a lawyer stole the show and was convincing in his argument that the situation in Kasmir was caused by the pangs of divided India, and given the religious demographics of the territory, it cannot be part of India. With Kashmir still undecided, and the representative of Kashmirs wanting autonomy with limited provisions of the constitution of India applicable to it, Article 370 with provisions 35 were promulgated by presidential order in 1950, the same day the Indian constitution was forged - 26th of January. Article 370 was meant to be a temporary provision until the allegiance of the valley could be decided once for all. Nearly fifty amendments have been made since 1956, and now in 2019, the article stands repealed.

The above history is a quick survey of the tumultuous nature of Kashmiri's history over several decades, and if anything can be culled out of it, it is the fact that it is time that India's relationship with Kashmir be settled once and for all. The BJP is right in that no amount of dialogue can dispense the uncertainty in the valley. The congress party has played the cat on the wall for years with no avail. When article 370 was promulgated in 1950, a different set of circumstances existed. The Indian republic itself was new, and time was needed to decide the wishes of Kashmiri people. The beautiful valley, the apple of India's eye, has for long been reddened by blood. Seventy years later, with India still holding onto the tenuous position of a guardian country with no real powers to change anything, and the modern generation demanding change, certainty, and a firmer dispensation - there is definitely a case for drastic action. And there is no easy way to do this but to act swiftly and decisively. Modi 's approach to such key issues may seem authoritarian to many, but sometimes in the long term interests of the country, a degree of firmness, obstinacy, and calculated brashness are required. Like Abraham Lincoln's ingenious decision to fight the civil war ( against his wishes), only to preserve the United States as one entity and not give into the demands of the south to secede, Modi's decision to claim Kashmir overnight is a bold and courageous decision in the light of history. If not anything else, it sends a very strong message to our neighbors that India cannot be trifled with. Now that the deed is done, and Kashmir is now a Union territory, it remains to be seen, how soon and efficiently can the BJP government stabilize the state and bring it into the mainstream. If the BJP doesn't do a good job of assuaging the fears of the stunned state and put in place a plan for progressive governance, then history will mark this decision as a calamity. We will know how it goes in a few months.

Now coming to the second issue of this essay, the decision to bring Sonia Gandhi back as interim president is nothing short of shocking. The election of the new Congress president will happen when it happens with no time set, which means for the foreseeable future Sonia will hold the reigns. I worry for the Congress party because democracy needs a strong opposition. The INC, the 134-year-old institution is the closest we have with a semblance of opposition to the BJP Juggernaut. After the overwhelming defeat this may, one would have hoped that this ancient institution will resurrect itself with new blood in its veins. That is not to be. After two months of vacillating delays and deliberations within the working committee, the best they could come up with is to recall the 72 years old, ailing, and not a very popular leader to lead. I have nothing against Sonia Gandhi, but what I am against, and appalled about, is this groveling prostration at the feet of a family against all good counsel. I agree with Ramachandra Guha, one of my favorite historians, when he tweeted some time ago “The first Congress nurtured and built India; the second Congress degraded and may even destroy India.” It is unfortunate that the present Gandhi family has no one in the stature of a Nehru or Indira. Rajiv Gandhi himself was not up to the mark but after him, there is none. It is not as if there aren't worthy members in the congress party with decades of experience and intellectual sagacity who cannot step into the shoes. I can at the top of my head rattle out at least five names who could lead the party. But for some mysterious reason, the INC is wedded to the Gandhi family for its leadership. Until this impasse in thinking is broken, there is no salvation for this party.

Writing this essay was more of a personal attempt to consolidate my thoughts on the events of the week. I enjoyed writing it.

God bless...

yours in mortality,

Bala