“The BJP and the government at the centre have done what they had to do with the Jammu and Kashmir. Our job now is to try and clawback some of what was taken away from us, particularly to restore Jammu & Kashmir to its status as a state rather than a UT.”

Today, Omar Abdullah completes his one year in the seat of power – in the pit of powerlessness. As head of government, what he did or didn’t do is more a function of the new scheme of things than a matter of National Conference’s performance or underperformance. At the moment, let’s grant NC total amnesty from any severe appraisal. But as the leader of a political party – National Conference – that was mandated by the people of Kashmir to keep BJP far from gaining majority in the J&K Assembly, Omar Abdullah is answerable to the people of Kashmir for what he did or didn’t do. This, in terms of the potential politics embedded in the people of Kashmir, of which the first major expression post August, 2019 was placing Omar Abdullah where he is right now. Absolute majority in the J&K Assembly.

By his own admission, and this he articulated in hundred different ways on million different occasion, the elections were not about Bijli Sadak Pani. And they really weren’t. The act of voting in the last elections was an act of expression – organic politics of Kashmir spoke. National Conference was ‘chosen’, by the people of Kashmir, as an instrument to advance that politics. And we all know, as they all know, what that politics is. The actual contes is there, the real victory and defeat is posted there, the real reorganisation can happen only there.

Just some time back ‘speculations’ were infused into the atmosphere that statehood can be restored to J&K if National Conference agreed to join hands with the BJP. Omar Abdullah, responding to that, categorically denied any possibility of NC entering into an alliance with the BJP, even if it meant restoration of statehood for J&K. That was a big statement. That was one small, yet significant, response to the people’s act of politics a year before. Too little, too feeble. Nevertheless, not insignificant.

It meant, NC and BJP represent two parallel tracks of politics, and parallel lines never meet. The test for Omar Abdullah, as the leader of National Conference, is now in walking on that political track. That track goes to people, through people. How many doors did Omar knock this year? Well, here AI cannot keep count. It is all organic, it’s all human. That classical, human, foundational politics is not tied to Business Rules.

In matters governance, one can easily understand what is the scope of work. As long as the current scheme of things is in place, not much. In fact, the power calculus is all too clear. If National Conference is crippled, chances of disappointment within and outside the party can only grow. In that disappointment lies the hope for the central government to weaken National Conference, use smaller Kashmir based parties to make ingress into the electoral space and expect to form government, sooner or later. That is the worn out method. National Conference is aware of this danger. People know it too well. But National Conference doesn’t seem to be doing anything to ward off the disillusionment fast catching up with the people. That is worrying.

While this dangers lurks, Omar Abdullah thoughtfully chose not to choose the path of confrontation. Knowing well that any confrontation with the central government can only lead to adverse consequences, he tried everything to stay safe.

Here is a small example. When Omar says that it is time to clawback, work for the restoration of statehood, he immediately takes recourse to the safety manual. Here is how he does it. He never refers to the politics rooted in people. He invokes a chronology. First they said Delimitation, that is done. Then they said Elections, those are over. The third in this trilogy was Restoration of Statehood; that is not happening. He further refers to the Prime Minister and the Home Minister when they, on the floor of the Parliament, said that the statehood to J&K will be restored in due course of time. So effectively, Omar speaks in passive voice. Given the situation even that is understandable. People who voted him to responsibility a year ago are wise enough to fathom the difficult in this scheme of things.

What people cannot, and mustn’t grant Omar, is the absence of intent to re-operate the organic politics of Kashmir. Where is National Conference on that, year after? Is Omar Abdullah only mindful of saving NC, a party he and his father heads, or is there anything beyond? Do people, who voted for National Conference, a majority of them not having any electoral affiliation with this party, anywhere in the frame? Is Omar Abdullah exhausting his wisdom, articulation and endurance to ensure an uneventful continuation in government for the stipulated time? If that is the case, he has lost it already. No matter how smartly, how carefully, how self-effacingly he tries to prove himself as a suitable boy, he is not. He is not a suitable boy for Delhi. He is not safe at all. His vulnerability is a proven fact of the politics he inherits.

For Delhi, National Conference has a political value in a certain scheme of things. It has no political value per se. This message has been dropped at the door of National Conference menacingly by the current regime. 13^th July is no longer a government holiday. Your martyrs’ day is an aberration in the new history that is now rolled out. December 5^th is also dropped from the list of holidays. It means even Sheikh Sahab is an unwanted name.

Kashmir’ politics is beyond, and outside, the current frame of governance. If he really wants to clawback what has been snatched from his people, he has transcend his favourite reference points. Omar Abdullah can emerge as a leader of substance, not just for Kashmir, but for the entire region, if he walks past his comfort zone, and lives with people, within people. That may appear like a dream, but that is the only reality.

Tailpiece: Many years back Qatar TV came up with a serial titled Omar. It has some brilliant lessons in leadership.

The post Clawback: When, and How?! appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

KS: Well, history and life is full of transitions. In fact, when I started my political career, in this very house where you are, way back in 1949, 20th of June, I remember the date, my father appointed me regent of Jammu and Kashmir. He had to live abroad for a few years. So I was regent from 1949 to 1952. Then came the Constituent Assembly and the new democratic set up; a post of Sadarya Riyasat was created for the first time.

So, I was head of state as a regent, then I was head of state as Sadare Riyasat for 13 years, and then I was head of state as governor. So, I had all these three nomenclatures, although the job was the same. So, that was, as you said, a moment of great transition. The feudal structure was disappearing and a new structure was beginning to emerge. And it was  a very exciting time for me as a young man to be participating in the process of transition. I mean, you could read about a transition, you can see it on film, but to be part of it itself, I think is important.

That is what excites us when we talk to you, that you have been part of that transition and here in this room in your presence, we can feel history doesn’t look like it’s something remote. It looks so intense.

KS: Yes, very much so. My role has been to spearhead the transition from feudalism to democracy. I started off as a Yuvraj, regent, then Sadre Riyasat, then I joined Mrs. Gandhi’s cabinet. So this is a clear cut progression from a feudal system to a fully democratic system.

GKTV: How do you make sense of that now? Because in that transition, we had nation states emerging from colonial background. And then we had transnational institutions like UN also coming up, drawing those rules for human rights, global governance. But now, all of it seems to be falling apart; If it comes to such a pass that global leaders tell each other that you evacuate such and such city……

KS: It’s absolutely astounding. I lived through the Second World War. I was at school but I lived through it. I remember it well. And after that we thought that with the creation of nation states everybody would be peaceful. Not so at all. Throughout the world there have been transitions and turmoil. But this time it is more dramatic than ever before. I mean, you have the Ukraine-Russia war going on, which is quite an extraordinary thing because they are the same religion, the same race, more or less the same language, and yet they are fighting. And thousands of Russians, thousands of Ukrainians have been killed.

Ukrainian cities have been blown up one by one. So, it’s been a terrible attrition and it is still going on. West Asia, what they used to call the Middle East. First of all, the Hamas massacre. I mean, the Hamas people did a very foolish act by attacking Israelis. But the response has been much more than commensurate. As many as 50,000 Palestinians have been killed, men, women, and children. So, that is a terrible thing that is happening. And now Israel has attacked Iran and Iran is hitting back. Both are saying evacuate Tel Aviv or evacuate Tehran and the war is continuing. It is absolutely astounding even for me who has lived through a lot of changes.

I remember the breakup of Yugoslavia. General Tito was a friend of mine. That balkanization of that was a very violent thing. But that was limited to a certain part of Europe.

GKTV: You invoked this breakup of the Yugoslavia. You were in the company of great leaders, your own mentor, your own role model, as you say, is Nehru; who brought you into this democracy. Do you think, right now, there is an absence of global leaders of such stature who could manage the weight of the situation?

Well, I think so. Because you know, I remember when the Non-Aligned Movement was there. I remember meeting Jawaharlal, the main person, meeting President Nasser of Egypt, President Sukarno of Indonesia, Archbishop Makarios from Cyprus. I mean, these and all the people who were there. Each one was a giant in his own field. Now we have leaders, but I’m not sure whether they have that intellectual capacity that the earlier leaders had. They are much more political in the sense that, you know, they’re not interested in ideology and history, they’re just looking at their own thing. So we are in a very dangerous situation.

GKTV: You are a scholar in your own right, who has read faiths, who has read history, politics, everything. What do you attribute it to? This absence of standards now, absence of values, absence of great political…

I think what has happened is that, as you stressed, at one stage we thought we were moving towards the global society. I remember at the end of the last century, I was going around the world preaching the benefits of globalization. I thought that, look, the European Union was a unique phenomenon. I mean, different religions, different currencies, different languages, they all gelled into one. I said if that could be the model, then SAARC could be a model, ASEAN could be a model. You could first of all move on to regional groupings and then come together. Unfortunately, that has not happened. In the 21st century, there’s been a violent backlash against globalization. I mean, Trump quite clearly says I don’t accept globalization. I want America first. So what has happened? The militant nationalism has caused this turmoil.

GKTV: Do you attribute this to the failure of the liberal secular leadership more than the rise of the conservative right? 

Well, yes, liberalization, I’m afraid, has now taken a backseat. There was a very strong period when everything was being liberalized. You know, old taboos were being shed, whether they were sexual taboos or whether they were behavioral taboos. Everything was being shed. We were moving into a much more open society. That is now closing in again, which I think is a great tragedy.

GKTV: You have a background in philosophy and mysticism, I just want to understand your own opinion on this. Because in this entire crisis, which is happening for decades now, one term is again and again being invoked, that is Islamophobia. What is your understanding of Islam as a faith?

One of the areas I’ve been active in is the Interfaith Movement, which is an international movement which strives to bring together people of different religious faiths in a creative dialogue. Not to decide which one is better, but to try and understand. As far as I’ve been able to understand, every religion ultimately preaches brotherhood.

If you interpret religion in liberal terms, you get one answer. But if you interpret religion in fundamentalist terms, you get a different answer. I think the thing with Islam is that Islam is losing that Sufi touch, which I think was the greatest achievement of Islam. I think perhaps after the Prophet Muhammad (SAW), Maulana Jalaluddin Rumi would be the person I would really respect because they brought the best out of love and understanding and peace. And the fundamentalist structures of Islam are being put up and they have led to a number of violent incidents around the world which has fed into this Islamophobia.

GKTV: As you put it, all faiths actually teach brotherhood and harmony and it depends on how do you understand and how do you apply religion in your lives. Islam besides being a religion is a lived experience. Do you think that somewhere the construct of Islamophobia, whatever it is, became a handy tool for military-industrial complex and those who are actually interested in war, to make it as a dominant image of the Muslim society?

Quite possible. You see, but remember that India was also partitioned on the basis of religion. Don’t forget that. Whether we like it or not, religion was the basis of the partition of India. So that was a traumatic event, the partition. As you know, lakhs of people died and it was a terrible thing. But that came through a certain commitment to a Muslim homeland which left more Muslims in India than in Pakistan, by the way. So that has also gone into our psyche. We cannot forget that, because one of the arguments is that as a result of Islam, our country was partitioned. So that is at the back of everybody’s mind. Even so, we’ve got to move towards better relations between the various religions, otherwise it will destroy our society again.

GKTV: Do you need to say that psychologically people have not reconciled with what actually happened during the partition and if it happened in the name of the religion, so it still rings in their minds.

You see, what also has happened at the same time is, don’t forget that India was ruled for 700 years by the Muslims. Now, there were great achievements, for example, the Mughals, the great forts, the great buildings that they have done. It is a marvel, the gardens in Kashmir, Shalimar, the great beautiful pond in Verinag. But, there were also unhappy incidents, there were also killings, there were also forcible conversions. So, 700 years of Muslim history is now being reinterpreted. There is a narrative now that it doesn’t start from 1947, it starts from Babur and the people who, the freebooters and all, Ghazni and Ghori and all, who were looters and they were freebooters, not like the Mughals who settled. So, that is all now being brought out. I am trying to explain the Hindu psyche. The Hindu psyche when they learn about all these earlier events, that is why it is being manipulated in this way.

GKTV: There is a way of understanding history in a very scholarly way and making a sense of the nuance underlined in any historical phenomenon. But, do you think that nowadays, for some political ends, we have turned history into hysteria? 

Unfortunately, that is happening. Because, you know, history is there whether you like it or not. Certain events have taken place. You can interpret them one way or the other. But, we have got to move on. I mean, if you get stuck in history, then that paralyzes our faculties, our compassion, our understanding and bogs us down in a very negative psychology. So, what we have to do now – say okay; this is what happened, fair enough. Because, partition ho gaya, so ho gaya, ab aage chalo.

GKTV: What would you suggest as someone who has been a part of politics right through that if India or the subcontinent or the world at large, have to heal these wounds, what should be that stroke of leadership and what should be the narrative, so that we have a beautiful world?

I think the sort of narrative that Jawaharlal Nehru had laid down. It has to be a liberal narrative. But, as I said, unfortunately, that liberal narrative is being overtaken now by a right-wing narrative, which rejects all possibilities of rapprochement, of understanding. So, those of us who are still involved in the interfaith movement should become more active, that’s all I can say.

GKTV: With this I come to  your association or the impact of this personality called Nehru on you. He is getting shuffled out of the Indian frame. One, what sense at an intellectual level you make, second, how do you feel personally when this thing happens?

I feel very pained because he was my mentor, my guru in a way, for 13 years, from 49 to 64. For 15 years he was guiding me and quite apart from my own personal thing, Nehru played a major role in the freedom movement, after freedom. You can’t cut him out now. It’s very unfortunate and very unfair that an attempt is being made to denigrate Nehru. Sardar Patel and Nehru were the two people who held this nation together after partition.

Not just Nehru, even Gandhi is being now questioned; something we could not have imagined some years back.

I think it’s very unfortunate.

GKTV: You have the memories of Nehru. Are there any memories of any interaction with Sardar Patel?

Yes, yes, very much so.

GKTV: Can you share that with us?

Sardar Patel, I knew very well. He happened to come. I had this trouble with my hip. I was in a wheelchair. When Gandhi ji came, I was also in the wheelchair when I met him. So, Sardar came home to Jammu. And he said, why is this boy on a wheelchair? My father said, we have been doing this for six months. He said, Maharaja sahib, arrange for him to be sent to America right now. Otherwise, he will be on a wheelchair all his life. So, thanks to him, I was sent to America, where I was there in hospital for one year. But after my operation was over, I was able to walk again. I was able to play some tennis, I was able to play some golf. So, I owe a great debt to Sardar Patel. And then, in the end, when I became regent, he invited me to stay as his guest in the Dehradun. He was also very kind to me.

GKTV: How do you describe the two – Nehru and Patel?

Well, let’s put it this way. One was the left wing of the Congress, the other was the right wing of the Congress. They were both in the Congress. They were within the parameters of the Congress and Gandhiji. But within that, as you know, in every great party, there is one wing or the other wing. So, Jawaharlal ji was leader of the more liberal wing. And Sardar was a great organization man. He had full control over the organization. So, their roles were different.

But it’s no use projecting one and getting down the other. With Jawaharlal Nehru, India became a global power. He was known throughout the world. He was respected.

GKTV: How would you compare Nehru and Modi?

Very interesting comparison. Very interesting comparison. Both of them won three elections. Both of them – very, very popular figures. Both overshadow their parties.  Nobody knows, nobody bothers who is the President of the BJP because he ( Modi) is the boss. Same thing with Jawaharlal Nehru. So, they had a lot in common. The difference, of course, is in ideology. One, again, was left wing, the other was right wing.

GKTV: Do you have any memories of Gandhi meeting your father?

Well, I was sitting through the conversation. I must admit, I wasn’t able to follow it. He spoke in a low, low voice and Gujarati accent. I didn’t understand. But what I understand is that what he said to my father was – talk to your people. Find out what they want. More or less, I think that’s what Gandhi said.

GKTV: You father arrested Nehru, how do you feel about it now?

Very upset. Even at the time, I was very upset. Although Ramchandra Kak came in and proudly announced to my father, hum nai bandh kar diya ji usko. Maine kaha, gaye. The moment I said, that is the end of this state and of this administration.

GKTV: And what was the response of your father to it?

Nothing. He didn’t say anything. But the point is that it shows how out of touch we were with the vast historic trends that were emerging. You see, the difficulty or tragedy of my father was. he was a very intelligent man, he was a very progressive ruler for the first 25 years. He was, you know, he ended begar, he started women’s education. The only thing is, he was not really aware of the historical trend. What were the rising forces? Congress. What dis we do? We put the leader in jail. Then British, who were the only ones who could have done something, he disliked them because he was a patriot. And Sheikh Abdullah, the unparalleled leader at that time of the Kashmiri people, was in jail.

GKTV: Coming to now, the current times. Congress was a force, Congress was an ecosystem. But now it has been reduced to some seats. It was only in last elections, parliament elections, that they got a significant number of seats. What would you suggest to the present Congress leadership, if this party has to be revived, if all those values have to be reclaimed?

Well, I don’t know whether I should suggest anything to them because they don’t seem to want my opinion. After my parliament term finished in 2018, In 2019 they dropped me from the Working Committee. I don’t want to say anything about Karra. He’s okay, fine, as a local leader. But you know, after that, I’ve also withdrawn, they’ve also not bothered about it. So why should I give them any advice?

GKTV: But the liberal democratic space…

That is very important. You must keep that alive. You know, we must prevent it from totally disappearing.

GKTV: Hand on your heart, what was your intuitive response when August 5, 2019 happened? What was you first response to that announcement?

It was a very interesting response. Of course, there was some regret. In any case my father’s state had disappeared. It wasn’t there any longer. However, there were some positive elements; for example lacs of disenfranchised people who came from Sialkot, they were not allowed to vote. They could vote for me ( if I contested for) parliament. But they couldn’t vote for assembly. They couldn’t get a job. Because they were not State Subjects. So they got enfranchised. The thing about women, that if you marry a non-Kashmiri you lose your property; that was also unfair.

So there were some good elements, and then there is some nostalgia, that there was once such a big state… But what has not been appreciated is the demotion to a UT. First they would say it is the crown of India, and now we are even junior to Haryana and Himachal.

GKTV: Your personal dream should be that you should see the restoration of the statehood.

I would like to see it, but I’m not overly sentimental about it. The old state is no longer there, and there is no use pretending that the old state is there.

GKTV: What can be the political journey onwards. it might be a political nostalgia that once upon a time it used to be a great state, but in terms of political rights, human dignity and economic chances..

….those ( things) we must get  back

GKTV: What can be the contours of a political struggle for that, for a party like National Conference or for the people of Jammu. Can the two – Kashmir and Jammu – come together to fight for it?

I don’t think we need to fight. the govt of India has committed that it is going to give back statehood. They committed it to the supreme court. They committed it to the people. I don’t think we need any agitation, we simply need to keep pressing politically.

GKTV: May be fight in that sense, through political instruments, insisting on this.

I don’t think it is a conflictual struggle, it is a quiet, political struggle.

GKTV: As in the last election, and also before that, Jammu voted for one political party and Kashmir for another. Do you think there is any possibility in future that we can have a political party that can reconcile the two aspirations?

For that matter Mufti Sahab tried, but it didn’t work. You see, Jammu, and Kashmir, psychologically and in many other ways are very different. So they will have different political parties. I am afraid, we cannot avoid that. But this time the polirisation was very clear. But as far as statehood is concerned, they are very common.

GKTV: What would you suggest to a person like Omar Abdullah, how he should take the case of statehood to the relevant spaces and create an argument in favour of it.

I think Omar is behaving with great maturity.  I have not met him, he has not come to see me. But from his speeches and all, he is being very moderate and sensible.

GKTV: But some people would argue that it is too much of moderation, because he is not asserting himself. Do you buy that argument?

He is in a very difficult position. The power in the state is bifurcated between the governor and the chief minister (the division of power in the UT of J&K between LG and CM). The result of it is that the administration tends to get paralysed.

GKTV: You worked in a space where Sheikh Sahab worked. He was an adversary when you take it back to pre 1947. How was it like working with him, personally.

Well, he was an adversary to my father. Personally I had no problems working with him. Personally, he was alright with me.  But it was difficult because he was representing certain thought process and I was put in there, in a way, as the last representative of the Dogras. But I had to be very very cautious; it was a very tightrope walk.

GKTV: Yards away we have the residence of  Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah. Do you some times feel like meeting them?

Farooq sai to merai badai acchai taulluqat rahain hain. ( I have had good relations with Farooq). He got me back to Parliament, I owe a debt to him. Bohat Mast Aadmi Hain.

GKTV: Before we wrap up, one man remains – Mufti Muhammed Syed. How do you assess him as a politicians?

He was a shrewd politicians.  India ka Home Minister Rehna Koi Choti Baat Nahi Hai ..( Being the Home Minister of India, is not a small matter.)

GKTV: Thanks Dr Karan Singh for this long and revealing conversation.

I have enjoyed talking with you.

The post ‘Omar behaving with great maturity’, says Dr. Karan Singh in conversation with GKTV appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

On all such occasions, like in the press interaction this week, many issues were raised. As the chief minister of J&K, Omar Abdullah heard it all, and responded well. Even in these grim times, his ability to articulate generates some glow. Truth be told, he picks up questions well, and his answers are honest. He doesn’t evade, doesn’t confuse. He even comments plainly about the core political issues. Certainly there are occasions, and there are issues, where he cannot express himself as he would want to, but that is understandable. After all there are things that are not said, yet heard very well.

These conversations with the society, with the people, must go on. But there is a danger that needs to be spotted well in advance. While the room warms up with these interactions, the elephant in the room should not be missed. The talk on things like reservation, power cuts, jobs, media freedom, ecological concerns, and a basket of such issues is needed. These issues matter to people, and whatever this government can do to resolve these issues, should be done. But identification of such issues, and a government follow up on these, must not take all the light, leaving the space dark where the elephant is majestically seated. Omar’s job as a political leader is far bigger than providing 200 units of free electricity, or expressing sympathy with the youth who are becoming a victim of new reservation policy. These are the times when Omar Abdullah and National Conference can play a role that goes a long way in creating better times not only for the people of Kashmir, or Jammu, but for the populations beyond. If only there is a will, there is an intent, and there is a realisation. The follow up on the ‘smaller’ issues should contribute to the follow up of the core issue.

The divisive mathematics thrust on us in the form of the new reservation policy is not just about reservation policy. The darkness during severe cold gifted to us is not just about the shortage of electricity. The taxation trauma inflicted on us through revenue officials is not just about faults in the revenue department’s functioning. The roads laying a ring of siege around our habitations, and possibly creating a new landscape of population, is not just about crass development. The runaway tourism, opening up virgin destinations for crowds, is not just about brazen disregard towards eco-tourism. The joblessness that is on a rise like never before is not just about the absence of posts in government departments. All this is true, but all this points towards the truth. And in the end it matter where you place the truth – in the first place or the second place.

National Conference was not voted by the people of Kashmir to rule, or to act as a ruling party. National Conference was voted to act as a compass to keep alive the sense of direction. As the pressures from outside and inside mount on Omar Abdullah, a keen watch on how the party conducts itself attains primacy. This focus on the party can be ensured by ensuring focus on the politics. If any issue or a pack of issues, howsoever important, occupies the centre of attention, that signals danger. Small politics is an attractive offer, and there is no dearth of smaller players in Kashmir.

Right now, all hope is buried deep underneath the rock bottom layer. But if this hopelessness is normalised, that is the end of the story. National Conference, at the least, should decline to become a scriptwriter for that story. We, as people, must have a future that we can say is our future. Accepting that we can only be at the receiving end, believing there is no way than to accept what is thrown at us, means an end of a people. This election sent a message that people haven’t disappeared. Omar Abdullah has, on multiple occasions, acknowledged the people’s act of sending across that message. He should stay faithful to that message. In his own solitude, and in the core conversations of the party, he should keep those sounds playing over and over again.

How, and who, watches you from the top may or may not matter in the end. But a common Kashmiri observing you from the ground matters in the end. In the end, people, not empires, survive. There are people in Kashmir, there are people in Indian – it’s a people’s republic.

The post People are watching appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

Manmohan Singh was many things rolled in one. An academic who taught his subject at the highest level. A banker who served as the chairman of RBI. An economist who brought in radical reforms. A prime minister who made a coalition work for 10 long years, and navigated his country in such crucial matters as the Indo-US nuclear deal. Name a sector of governance, economy, politics and diplomacy where he didn’t leave an imprint. Another thing he never spoke about it. His was a person full of substance, never full of himself. He was a human being who wouldn’t scare fellow humans. So all humans of the world, it is time to mourn. That is the reason why someone like Anwar Ibrahim, from a far off land, Malaysia, is so saddened by his demise. If anyone has to take a peek into the person the Singh was, read the condolence message Anwar Ibrahim posted on X. Like him there must be hundreds, nay thousands, of hearts he must have touched.

A superficial knowledge of states and governments tell us that it is the system that matters in the end. No matter who rules, no matter who is in the chair, it is the national interest and the state policy that finally holds the key. But that is not the entire truth. The person at the top informs everything down under. India just observed 100th anniversary of A B Vajpayee. Wasn’t there something in the man that we had a different political atmosphere? He belonged to an ideological politics that was different from Manmohan’s. But he shared the grace and magnanimity in his person with Manmohan Singh. That is why he was, and is, praised by people across party and ideological divides.

Manmohan Singh was gentle and calm, graceful and profound, honest and efficient; the strength of his personality was in his humility. Unfortunately, these traits are no longer in demand. The times have changed. The choices have changed. Now is the time for leaders who can inflict fear in others, who can cast a spell of madness on a rabble, who can raise rhetoric to Himalayan heights, who can bring skies down and turn the earth upside down. Manmohan Singh, by his very disposition brought ease and calm; on the contrary. In the din of today’s politics, who can match the reserves of calm the frail body of Manmohan Singh carried. He had a glacial personality, today’s politics needs volcanic eruption.

Now that the man is no more, we see everyone in India, and beyond, praise him. But it still pains to think of the occasions when the Indian media made deprecating remarks about him, and the political opponents added to the toxicity. A man of great character was subjected to the smallness of politics that India spewed after he was no longer in the seat.

In his maiden budget speech in 1991, Singh quoted Victor Hugo: “No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come.” He had rightly sensed it then. He brought the Indian economy on the global map. That was the time Manmohan Singh was brought into the politics of India. When his political party lost power, the time for some really ghastly ideas came. Victor Hugo’s quote was applicable then, and is applicable now. Unfortunately, it looks like Indian politics and the Indian society are bursting with ideas that change the very image of an ideal man. Manmohan Singh, even Vajpayee, don’t fit that image. The tragic in the times after Manmohan Singh is that Manmohan Singh is no longer an image of an ideal statesman. How could he live more?

The post An Alien Prime Minister! appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

Each year, once we move into the month of December, the announcement about winter vacation from DSEK is the most sought-after news. It looks like a ‘tense’ situation where rumours and fake news fill the social media about the date of vacation. At times we have observed a sort of ‘drama’ surrounding this announcement. This drama has a Director, it has a huge audience, and it has its own script-writers. What more do you need? Laugh again.

If you are done with laughing, there are a couple of points that need to be underlined in this regard.

One, vacation is not a favour government does to schools or to the children. In any routine study plan, a long or a short break is a natural part of the schedule. The change of seasons gives it a pattern. Here in Kashmir, since we have long and harsh winters, schools are closed for a couple of months. In comparison, summer vacations are short because summers are mild in Kashmir. On the contrary, hot zones follow a reverse scheme of things. There is nothing so special, much less dramatic, in making announcements about these vacations. A mystified way in which excitement is built over this announcement is ridiculous, to say the least. A simpler way could be to identify the time slot during which schools should go for vacations, and each school would take a call on this depending on the completion of the school’s academic target. The winters here are not arbitrary. The season follows a schedule. It is God’s own government and He doesn’t need a bureaucratic nod for this. If, for example, it is decided that schools will go for winter vacations in the second week of December and the exact date is left to the schools to decide, what hell will break loose? Why should the Directorate of School Education be so fussy about it? Why should government officials, vertically and horizontally spread, make an issue out of it, as if asking for spotlight.

Two, and more importantly, these breaks have an educational value. If we consider it as suspension of studies, we are catching it from the wrong end. The mind of the government on such matters should be guided by knowledge about human nature, and not be driven by a sense of power-to-take-a-decision. Nature simplifies matters, and therein lies its beauty. Unfortunately, we complicate it and there in lies the obnoxious truth that power is a corrupting influence on a human mind. Please simplify and let the children enjoy the warmth of vacations.

Three, the annual calendar for the schools should not be an administrative affair but an academic exercise where in the needs of the children are taken into account. This obsession with uniformity, where with a single stroke of a pen all gates open or close, is a mental affliction. We have seen how the shifting of exam session last year from November to March exhibited this one-order-one-surrender malaise.

In schools we deal with live things. These are not bricks to be cast in a single mould. We have schools in different geographies with different set of challenges. We have schools with varied infrastructure. We have schools with a huge differential in amenities. We have schools with divergent student profiles. You cannot have a single standard, uniform calendar, identical expectations from all of them. In consultation with schools, prepare general guidelines and set time slots, rather than fixed dates, for various activities and breaks. Beyond that, let the schools be run by those who are meant to run the schools. Teachers and students, flanked by school management from one end and parents from another. But parents need to update themselves about the needs of schools rather than each time pressing the demand-button.

Anyways, winter has set in; God has announced the vacation. Don’t alter the divine scheme of things. Give some respite to your agitated minds that are already consumed by tomes of pending files.

And if you have time, do read Simplicity by Edward de Bono. If you don’t mind, take it as your winter work.

The post Winter is Vacation appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

God in any case knows all, sees all; who are we relaying these pictures and videos to! When light falls on a worshipper it doesn’t illuminate, it fades. But this is not something specifically true for Omar and his team. We see almost all people doing it these days. A selfie with Ka’ba is becoming a profile picture of our journey to Mecca. Well, commenting on individuals is not a nice thing to do. It is not desired and it has a moral side to it. One can never peep into someone’s heart. What is between an individual and his God is only between the individual and his God. Others should shut their mouth. I shut my own.

But here the pictures weren’t about an individual, they were nothing less than party postcards. Given the political background, it carries a certain message. It’s akin to drawing on the religious sensibilities of the people back home. National Conference has carried this contradiction in brazen ways, though they might presume it as their mastery over a craft. One the one hand, the National Conference takes pride in it being a secular party that made a Muslim majority state, J&K, join a Hindu majority country, India, at a time when the whole sub-continent was divided on the basis of religious identity. The party still boasts of it being pluralistic in its application of power by carrying along all faiths and regions of the J&K in the government. At a time when Indian politics is completely polarised along religious lines, the National Conference repeatedly talks about the secular recovery of India, and then a place in it for a Muslim majority like J&K. If that is the essential character of the National Conference, the pictures viraled from Mecca don’t fit in the frame. That is one.

Two, this time rightwing politics is on the throne. It looks like not just a dust-up on the surface but even underneath the rightwing drills are lifting the earth upside down. The answer to this situation is not to create another communal symbolism. We don’t need to tell the community that we are a party that is embedded in you. What we need is to rise above this strain of politics and work for the principals that are applicable in the larger frame of humanity. We can be rooted in our faith, tied to our community, yet do a politics that transcends parochialism. That is two, but the third one is more important when it comes to National Conference.

And that is the political character of this party. In a changed situation where the elections reflected a clear division along religious and regional lines, National Conference needs to revisit its history, and determine what is the political character, and political limits, of this party. When it comes to talking to Delhi or the people outside Kashmir, this party always underlines its ‘secular’ character. It even, at different points of our political journey, wanted to convince the Muslims of Kashmir of the ‘virtues of secularism’. After all that is the only way it could explain its decision to join the Union of India. Where has that landed the Kashmiri Muslims as a political collective is something this party needs to seriously debate over. The pictures sent from Mecca may do little to compensate the damage that National Conference did to the Kashmiri Muslim community, as a political collective, by robbing it of its democratic value. On this, someone like Omar Abdullah needs to think seriously. An even more profound thinking is needed to apply the lessons in a changed situation.

One wouldn’t expect it from a person like Omar Abdullah to play such photo-op that can easily be labelled as theatrics. Besides, it has a political undertone and that is not what the Muslims of Kashmir need in the name of political identity. Our problems are rooted in real difficulties and it needs an approach that is equally rooted in reality. We cannot, and should not consolidate our community in the name of a superficial sense-of-identity, but the deeper appreciation of the content-of-community.

Tailpiece: Jinnah and the current politics in India cannot sit together. That is like fire and fire. But may be National Conference for a while, in the changed circumstance, can. Jinnah was spotted in his car by a group of Muslims standing by the road side. They started raising slogans, and one of them chanted, Maulana Jinnah. The man accused of communal politics drove back the car, and addressing the pack of people sternly dropped a message: “ Mr. Jinnah, I am plain Mr. Jinnah.” In a politics that was driven by community anxieties, he didn’t want to take any advantage from Muslim symbolism.

Any lessons for today’s politicians?

The post Omar on Umrah: Optics in the Desert appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

In the room–conference hall– there were well-meaning people, all accomplished in their respective fields, and watching them face to face with people’s representatives, holding a candid conversation on the state of affairs related to the handling of private schools in J&K, was soothing to the eyes.

A celebration of sorts

To begin with, if there was one solid piece of education for all in the room, it was the value we can experience in the live interaction between the people’s representatives and the people who they represent. This interaction was something to be celebrated. And we all know why, at the moment, it is a celebration with a capital C.

And that puts an extra burden on both, people and the people’s representatives. And that is to be truthful to each other. There might have been times for ‘privileges’ and ‘concessions,’ but that is certainly not there anymore. We should now develop the habit of building an argument and working in a normative, not to be confused with regulatory, atmosphere. The regulatory requirements are a small part of that normative framework; may be there are glaring contrasts between the two, at times. This normative framework is more about societal expectations and the very essence of the thing called education. On either side we should identify the relevant questions and collaboratively find answers to them. Without each other, we will only be harming each other. It is in that spirit that I look at schools and the functions they render.

Regulation, a faulty idea

As an independent observer, I may agree with the things people associate with private schools, or I may disagree. But in the larger scheme of things, our approach to private schools is inadequate and mostly faulty. The idea of ‘strict control’ smacks of intoxication of power, whosever enjoys it, and at whatever level it is enjoyed in the bureaucracy. What is being projected as ‘Regulatory Requirement” and what are the actual requirements of a school to impart education-there is a huge mismatch. There is also a mismatch between the societal requirements of education and the way government may want us to run a school. A dialogue can happen only if people are allowed to talk, and those in the government have the will to listen. The regulatory framework should evolve from that dialogue, and not be imposed from the top with a humiliating disapproval of the larger societal mind.

Organic, Autonomous, and Authentic

When I was lining up my idea on this, my daughter, student of a private school, was singing this line with herself: ‘Today a Reader, Tomorrow a Leader.’ If that is what education should aim at, we need to reconfigure our approach towards schools. Leaders are not born in an atmosphere of control, in an atmosphere of disrespect and limitations. Leaders are born in an organic, autonomous, and authentic space. Schools should be treated like that. The government and those who run the private schools should work collaboratively to ensure that schools become organic, autonomous, and authentic spaces. By reducing this lofty ideal of education to things like NoCs, fee fixation, and a strict adherence to the govt announcements on when to go for summer and winter vacation, we make a mockery of everything. One would love to see our schools as organic, autonomous and authentic spaces where teachers are respected and rewarded as they should be, where each service is adequately compensated, in monetary terms, and where those who run these schools are respected for their enterprising spirit.

Build a realistic understanding

If that has to be achieved, the government must simplify the processes, make the systems efficient, and build a realistic understanding around the concepts like Free Education, Charitable Trust and Not-for-Proft. In absence of that, our understanding of education and the private schools will always revolve around things like fee, with a ring of populism around it. Our fixation with the bathtub endangers the life of the baby in it, as we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Danger of control

More we make it difficult to run a private school, we will see well meaning people, those who really work selflessly, leave this space. More we make it difficult, we will see enterprising people divert their energies and resources towards some other activity. And all this will only result in either our students leaving Kashmir to get quality education or remaining content with a downgraded form of education that will only waste their lives. Let’s pause and dispassionately think about it. A complaint here and there, about a private school here and there, should not guide our understanding about how to deal with private schools. It needs a visionary grasp of what education means, and an actual understanding of how institutions are run. You cannot squeeze such a vast territory within the noose of regulation. The government shouldn’t look at the private schools just through the prism of regulations, and the private schools also shouldn’t look back through the same prism. Make this discussion wider and focus on where the focus should be – education of our children. Future, in a word.

The post Talking Education with People’s Representatives appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

Across the Line, Moulvi Muhammad Ahmed Shah passed away. He was the son of the iconic figure of Kashmir’s socio-religio-political landscape, Maulana M. Yousuf Shah. An old man by all counts, nevertheless, a bereavement for his family and friends. Second condolence.

The two, Devandar Rana and Muhammed Ahmed were separated by many unbridgeable markers – of faith, of geography, of politics. Yet something happened in their death that connects them: the message that beyond the identity markers there is a greater universe called mankind. Human relationships shouldn’t be subservient to political differences, to identity markers, to ideological chasms, to historical narratives, and to strategic hate.

Omar Abdullah and Devandar Rana were at the moment in adversarial camps. But the way Omar expressed his grief on this occasion can only be called graceful and humane. Umar Farooq and Farooq Abdullah are placed in rival camps, so to say. Just some years back, we firmly framed them in a binary: Unionist-Separatist, Electoral-Boycotist, or Accessionist-Sessionists or Resistance-Loyalists. In that binary we effaced the human touch that holds a society. Farooq Abdullah visiting Molvi Umar Farooq and offering condolences, can be seen as loosening of that binary. Other political leaders like Mehbooba Mufti and Altaf Bukhari also visited – good. Our habit to see everything through a ‘political’ prism has disabled us in many ways to locate ordinary human acts in the framework of ordinary human acts. Politics of Perversion.

For any human society to sustain as a human society the societal grace –Lehaz– is inviolable. But sometimes violent disruptions rip it apart. Kashmiri-Muslim society has experienced that ripping apart. Amongst us are people who still wouldn’t hesitate calling all this hypocrisy, opportunism and lack of commitment to some fixed ideal. That being a given, if we have to restore ourselves as a collective, regain that societal depth, it is crucial to consciously work for the restoration of this societal grace. It is embedded in the age-old tradition of feeling for other, and expressing it in manifest forms. It is inbuilt in all prophetic traditions, and our moral worth is measured on this scale only.

We had now lost it for long. Unfortunately. But ours is not the only society that passed this phase of disruption. All human societies, small or big, have gone through these convulsions. The biggest such disruption was the partition of sub-continent into India and Pakistan. The violence at that scale defies mental grasp; how could a neighbour kill a neighbour, how the chastity of families living for centuries together was violated by each other? All because that fundamental connect joining humans in a society into one pulsating piece of life was snapped. What followed was placing the blame in other’s compound. It probably helped in warding off the guilt that could only drill into your interiors for generations.

Thank God, our society, in all these turbulent times, didn’t derange to those limits. Nevertheless, we had our own share of seizures. There are events where the loss of human in us was total and brazen. We also used the shield of blame. shifting the culpability. What was actually done by us, we explained to others as being a consequence of some grand happening. What was manifestly done by us we insisted was done by ‘unknown’ and ‘agencies’. We distributed the human suffering along many denominators: community identity, political affiliation, and ideological leaning.

Then something bigger than all these differences put cumulatively hit us from without. Suddenly we realised that the differences were self-inflicted. The first serious act to transcend those differences was the way Kashmiris voted in the assembly elections. But that can be seen as tactical. What makes the two condolence messages important is that it can grow into an organic and lasting act. Something that can help us regain the grace that qualifies us as a human society.

Something else also happened during these days. And that too fits in the same frame. It was the obituary session in the J&K Assembly. Both Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Atal Bihari Vajpayee were remembered. No matter who says what about whom, if we see a human in each other, we will heal the wounds that are bleeding for decades now. Our challenge is to overcome this madness that insists on declaring someone as enemy and then justify the violence that follows. We are all humans, from one extreme to another, from one end to another, from one interest to another. Difference, if conducted well, can add to the richness of human relationships. Our misfortune is that we turn difference into the only defining marker.

May the two, Devandar Rana and Muhammed Ahmed, rest in peace. And may we all live in peace.

The post Two condolences, one message appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

With the reversal of the decision, it apparently looks like a closure to the problem. But that is not the case. It is time that the government and civil society join heads and hands to deepen the debate on such matters. Certain practices are a given in a certain cultural, geographical, and climatic context. These practices are not ordinarily affected by changes in political power.

If tomorrow someone else is in the government, the timings for sunrise and sundown will remain unchanged in Kashmir. Now someone may say, what has that to do with the topic under discussion? It means that activities, official or unofficial, tied to these timings remain the same. It means that if you change those timings, you are either mounting an offensive against nature or serving humiliation to people. If none of the two is correct, you are surely ridiculing your sense of discernment. When the exam session was changed to March two years back, we knew what it was. They who did it also knew what it was. They probably knew it more than us. Humiliation was officially documented in this case.

It is that document of humiliation the present government needs to study with more rigour, with an extra tinge of pain and share with people what and how of this document. Give the credit where it is due, is true. Omar Abdullah, Sakina Itoo, the public spirited individuals and organisations that stirred this issue – all deserve praise. But it is not the end of the road. What leads to patently wrong decisions in the officialdom of Kashmir, and how such decisions are brazenly thrust on people, is a matter that will need a serious follow up.

As a people, why Kashmiris feel like shelterless fire victims when the cover of a civilian government is not there for one reason or the other? Why bureaucracy behaves like an unrestrained monarch and why it is not held responsible for the damage it does to a people? In the case under discussion who is to compensate for the loss of time and mental agony caused to our students? If political representatives can be subjected to ruthless criticism, even shamed in public spaces, why not the officials who generate wrong inputs, peddle wrong information, and are a party to completely erroneous decisions? Where is that thing called accountability in this case? If people can be awarded posthumously, why can’t they be questioned post-taking a wrong decision; even if they have retired?

Someone may read naivety in all this. After all, a bureaucracy works within a system, and that system is bigger than the bureaucracy in totality. When a system has its season, that alone suffices as a reason. And bureaucracy does whatever it does in the service of that reason. But isn’t that a convenient and crafty excuse? In this particular case, was the bureaucracy faced with a situation of no-option, or did it simply enjoy power at the expense of students – our children? Bring it all to the public domain, and make it a part of democratic churning. If Omar Abdullah has now decided to raise an interface between the government and civil society, let the matters come up, one by one, and be followed up. In one of his meetings, when Omar Abdullah talked about the “shield” and very firmly called it “temporary,” let the underlining sense be widened to other areas.

It is not to paint bureaucracy, particularly its apex level, as diabolic. The bureaucracy is finally composed of people, and Kashmir has seen some of the finest people in these offices. The point is how this institution of governance is made responsible and answerable to people. And how their decisions are subjected to public scrutiny. It is about striking a wider dialogue involving all organs–public representatives, civil society, and bureaucracy. It is about retaining sanity.

When the November session was changed to March, sanity was lost. A wider dialogue to regain that sanity is a wonderful idea.

Tailpiece: Now that our children will enjoy their winter vacations and utilise the time to prepare for the next grade, it is time for their parents to tell them the story. Once upon a time, November was dragged to March. Times changed and November got its slot back. Time changes.

The post Sessions, Seasons and Reasons appeared first on Greater Kashmir.

First, it is neither the opening nor the closing of such heart wrenching events. We have had many before, and the bad news is that we will have many hence. As long as the reasons for discord, and the architecture of justification are there, blood will flow. The killing of these seven innocents is not an event but a phenomenon. Gagangeer is not a spot, but a pointer to geopolitics. Today it happened at Gaganger, yesterday at some other place, and tomorrow at some entirely different place. The world has turned into one huge colosseum where the powerful players feed poor slaves to the beast of strategy.

Two, Peace is not thrust. Peace is not a masculine, jingoistic war cry. Clean human relationships engender peace. An ideology founded on the negation of other, a politics fed on historical events, and a power insistent on a centralised, personalised display comprises too huge a clutter.

Third, a world where pictures of decimated human dwellings only end up in increasing the social media traffic, Gagangeer is what – not even a nothing. A world where you can invade Ukraine, where you can bomb hospitals, where mutilated bodies of children are crushed under tonnes of concrete, who do you think you can move by talking about Gagangeer! We have come to a stage where all moral anchors have yielded their place, and power, all naked, is in a wild rage.

Finally, our hearts are dead; even our reason is nearing its end. Leave aside feelings, a thing we now have lost, the willingness to fathom it is also gone. Who kills whom, why, and to what end; in this pleasure of analysis, we have lost the human touch. We have chosen to be dead, why should anyone’s death disturb us.

In this Great Game of Great Powers, a greater tragedy has struck the world we now live in. We have lost compassion, and with that the minimal requirements of understanding what suits us as humans and what doesn’t. We have lost our humanity. As if killing a human being is like discarding a toy. What can be more tragic?  We have ourselves turned into killer toys-drones.

We have lost something else also. We see humans as Kashmiris and non-Kashmiris. We see them as Muslims and non-Muslims. We see them as Hindus and non-Hindus. We see Hamas but we don’t see the children dead under loads of debris. We see Netanyahu, not the ordinary Jew who carries a human heart and bleeds like a human body. We see Iran and the drones it makes. We forget there are people living there. We see Hezbollah, not the lives in Lebanon. We see historical battlefields, forgetting that our neighbourhoods are littered with human bodies. We see Promised Lands, refuse to acknowledge the dispossessed. We want to conquer space, least mindful of what we have made of this earth. We dig earth to make a cause of some lost history, and in the process we dig graves to dump human populations.

Empires, militaries, industrial complexes, big businesses, fantastic ideologies– with such colossal madness how can a human heart survive? And why should some seven lives matter when we have invested too much in our respective madnesses? After all there are greater aims to achieve, far greater ends to meet. Religion, ideology, nation, strategy, business – we have gods here and gods there, and each one to be propitiated with human blood.

The lives lost in this ghastly incident comprise a telling reminder that when some higher purpose, a lofty goal, a bigger strategic end, are mixed into some collective ambition– global, regional, national, ideological, political- human life suddenly sounds like something dispensable. In this scheme of things, what disturbs a nation, a state, the institutions within a state, or the political leadership in a country is not the loss of lives, but on which side of the line it happens. The pain, the protest, the anger- it’s all in reference to that Line of Interest. Otherwise. we are all the same. We are all killers.

If we kill in the name of any religion, we are the killers of that religion also. If we commit such a crime motivated by some ideology, let that ideology rot in the depths of ignominy. If we serve some national interest, one can only pray that those who promote it as a national interest are driven to hell. If some strategic end is tied to such ghastly crimes, may those strategies and those ends fail.

To conclude, just a thought, particular to us living in Kashmir. Our condition for the last 5 years is so changed that all those themes and sensibilities prior to that August have disappeared. Those days some of us would defend such acts as an outcome of an ‘ugly control’, some would just invoke ‘unknown gunmen’ and turn the gaze away. Some would seethe in anger and burn in their pain. But now it looks like we are in a state of numbness. We are pained, but we don’t know what that pain feels like. We condemn the killing of innocents, but we don’t know what that means in our situation. We feel for the families who lost their dear ones, but we don’t know what that feeling is like to those families. Imagine what has been done to us.

What dark times !

The post Condemned to Bleed appeared first on Greater Kashmir.