Dear Shiv,
There you go again, getting things boringly right as always.
Actually, after writing out most of a reply to this mail, I sat back and
decided against mailing it to the list. It's likely to be too long and too
involved to be fair on the membership of the list. The points are as follows:
The concept behind the Indian democratic state was worked out by people
educated under the Macaulayite system.They used concepts and ideals not very
well understood by those who haven't gone through a similar education.The
notions of civil liberties, the rule of law, and the supremacy of the will of
the people all three collide with each other; but with goodwill and
understanding, they can be balanced.We did not stick to the notions built into
the enabling documents, including the Constitution. The Constitution and the
statutes are presently flouted more than they are observed.At the state level,
another symptom of this failure is the increasing surrender to commercial
elements: bluntly, to instruments of class oppression.
This has led to increasing alienation of the citizens of those states - the
seven in the North East, the two forest states and Kashmir.
Specifically, there are problems in these states with the electoral process,
with the administration of the delicate and awkwardly poised green cover, with
the preservation of local culture, with administrative corruption, with the
rule of law and with civil liberties.
Things are bad enough now to suggest giving these up or bringing about serious
reform.
What is being suggested is to give up the most exposed element, and to
concentrate all our energy on the remaining.Restoring civil liberties, bringing
back the rule of law, putting in a clean administration, preserving local
culture, protecting local natural resources and finally, cleaning up the
electoral process all need to be taken up, one at a time.In order to give
ourselves a hope of achieving these gargantuan tasks, we have to work out what
can be preserved, and what can be discarded.
Hanging on to every inch of 'national' territory, the sacred soil, is likely to
over-extend us so that we are unable to give the core areas the attention they
deserve.In other words, I think we ought to give up Kashmir because we think
it's useful for the rest of India, not because Pakistan wants it,
If you are still interested, I could mail it to you off-line.
bonobashi
--- On Thu, 21/8/08, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [silk] Vir Sanghvi on Kashmir
To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
Date: Thursday, 21 August, 2008, 5:10 PM
On Thursday 21 Aug 2008 4:13:52 pm Bonobashi wrote:
> And if they vote for us, Shiv can buy the beer.
er my dear fellow Macaulayite. Do you really think Indian politicians will
agree to an election/vote/referendum/plebiscite that they are not sure of
winning? Or at least trying to win again after a few years even if they lose
now?
Pakistan will surely rig their side of the elections. And India?
India will make sure it wins.
"Neutral observers" will never be allowed in. Indians have a chip on
their
collective shoulders about the role of the "great powers" and will
not
tolerate anyone. As for other nations - Indians consider every nation on
earth to be a lackey of one or other of the said great powers. (Hello. India
is "non aligned" remember)
The mess after a sham referendum will only mean that India is publcly willing
to play the same game as Pakistan rather than rest on its belief of its own
moral superiority.
I repeat that the game is to make it impossible for Kashmir to secede by
sinking in so much money and effort that all separatism looks like
ingratitude. The distant threat of repealing Article 370 is always held in
abeyance - just like the actual deadly descent of Damocles' sword is always
a
possibility. If Article 370 goes - "Kashmiris" will be about 25
million
Indians from Bihar, Jharkhand, MP, Punjab, Orissa and Kerala.
The "Kashmir problem" started as part of the Pakistan problem. It
will settle
along with the Pakistan problem. As far as I can tell the vast majority of
Indians are willing to sit it out. It is a small minority of sensitive and
educated Indians who think that Kashmiri separatists have a case. Having
fought several wars to keep Pakistan the nation state off Kashmir it is
totally naive to think that a few separatists having yet another orgy of
rioting is going to change anything.
Indians by and large are carrying around this huge chip on their shoulder that
I referred to earlier. Indians - predominantly Hindus have this enormous
grievance that makes them feel that the world has given them a raw deal and
that the world does not give them due importance even after they have been
wronged (in a lo-ong list of historic wrongs). The Kashmir problem a symbol
of one of the ways Indians feel they have been wronged. No viewpoint other
than keeping Kashmir a part of India is going to be tolerated. Arguments
about suffering Kashmiris are a tremendous joke because several hundred
million Indians feel they are suffering too and feel as "deprived" as
any
Kashmiri and the votes of a few million Kashmiris is going to have to be
counted against the votes of several hundred million Indians. The India
politician wil never forget that unles he is suicidal.
It is unique to the politically detached English speaking elite of India to be
unable to see how Indian emotions are used to ensure that Kashmir will go
nowhere in a hurry. A few Arundhati Roys and Vir Sanghvis notwithstanding.
shiv
Connect with friends all over the world. Get Yahoo! India Messenger at
http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/?wm=n/
