Musings on events across the LoC

It is four weeks now that simmering resentment in the Pakistan occupied areas of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir turned violent. The agitation is centred on the 12 legislature seats reserved for refugees from the Indian side of J&K to Pakistan, but there is a host of other issues fomenting the protests. It began in 2023 with the formation of the Joint Awami Action Committee, an amalgam of students and lawyers, traders and transporters, that was set up to project the demands of the people of the territory. There were 38 demands in all, the most prominent of which at that time were those concerning the power tariff, and the cost of food grains. The JAAC wanted the same subsidized price for wheat flour, that was being charged in Gilgit Baltistan. It also wanted power to be charged at the cost of generation within the occupied territory. The Shahbaz Sharif government did take some measures on both these demands which do not seem to have fully met expectations. Talks between the federal government and the JAAC collapsed over two demands. One was the perks and privileges granted to ministers, legislators and bureaucrats. The other demand was the seats reserved for the migrants from Jammu and Kashmir, India. The JAAC argued that Islamabad uses these 12 seats to manufacture and manipulate unrepresentative regional governments. As MB Naqvi wrote in The Diplomat, “the turmoil reflects more than a dispute over a strike or public order. It has revealed deeper tensions over political representation, governance, and the nature of power in a territory where local politics has long been shaped by decisions made beyond its borders.” Among the demands is abolition of the requirement that elected legislators take the oath of allegiance to Pakistan when assuming office. Negotiations broke down over these key issues. The Supreme Court of POJK has ruled the reserved seats were constitutionally guaranteed and could not be abolished without a constitutional amendment. Renewed violence by agitators followed the breakdown of talks and the State responded with counter violence. Both sides are now in full-blown confrontation. An unknown number of people have been killed. The figures put out by YouTubers differ from those admitted by the Pakistani Government. The rhetoric, of both sides, indicates that neither side is ready for compromise. Rawalakote is the centre of the agitation which has spread all the way from Mirpur in the South to Kel in the North. Khwaja Asif, the Pakistani Defence Minister has gone so far as to deny that the protestors are Kashmiris at all. Mainstream discussants in the Pakistani media either ignore the troubles or follow the government line. Leaders of the JAAC have in turn threatened to secede from Pakistan. Government of Pakistan then banned the JAAC declaring it a terrorist organization under the Anti-Terrorism laws and charged its leaders with sedition. Sardar Aman Khan, a leader of the JAAC has called for aid and assistance from the Indian side. He appealed to the people of Rajouri, Poonch, Mendhar and Doda to supply essential items, going so far as to ask New Delhi to allow refugees from POJK. It is a dire situation, and one hardly knows which side is more to blame. We, in India are more than familiar with the power games between the Centre and the States, especially in Jammu and Kashmir. It is but rarely that insurgency results. In Pakistan, however, they do things differently. Given the army’s political control of its government, the scope for political solutions of political issues is limited by the need to satisfy the hubris of the Punjab dominated army. Except briefly in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s first term as Prime Minister, it has always insisted on the country’s politics being run in line with its perceptions. The hybrid system ensures that Pakistan’s domestic and foreign policy is conducted to accord with its dictates. We have seen that approach in Baluchistan, and it is likely to be so in POJK as well. The greater part of the blame, over the 12 seats must therefore lie at the door of the army. Its mailed fist was never concealed in a velvet glove. In January of 2005, responding to Baloch demands over gas pipelines and regional autonomy, General Musharraf threatened thus, “Don’t push us….this time you won’t even know what hit you.” Nawab Akbar Bugti, who used to be an ardent Pakistani was subsequently killed in the artillery and air campaign against the Baloch people. There is some danger of the same medicine being administered in POJK. Not so long ago the people who now oppose the Pakistani army’s political manipulations in POJK were considered its most loyal and supportive cohort. It is an unimaginable folly to alienate them; the result of grossly insensitive political mismanagement. Historically, Kashmiris have known these people as the Khakas and Bambas. The agitators come from a lineage with a history of pertinacious resistance to any external authority that tried to control the routes into the valley. They fought the Mughals, the Pathans and the Sikhs, raiding into Kashmir as well for loot and pillage, retreating into their mountain lairs whenever threatened. They were, and presumably still are, a refractory people, resistant to authority. Antagonizing the most pro-Pakistan population in Jammu and Kashmir was maladroit enough, but the follow through is cruel, not just clumsy. It is possible that a prolonged and violent insurgency is in the offing. Both sides have taken extreme positions, with the Pakistani establishment branding the agitators as India’s agents. From the Indian perspective it is all rather sudden. There had been rumblings and mutterings from across the LoC during the discontent of the past few years, but an insurgency could hardly have been anticipated. It is unlikely that anyone anticipated this reversal of sentiment towards India. It is certainly bizarre. The question is what the Indian response should be? There are, broadly speaking, two choices. The first is to make a fuss internationally, the way Pakistan has done about India, at every opportunity. There is little chance though that anyone, including Human Rights organizations will pay any heed. Internationally, Pakistan is currently on the crest of a popularity wave. The option can be employed, however, as the prelude to and excuse for humanitarian intervention across the LAC, as requested by the agitators. The logistics of supplying food and medicine across may be a challenge but surely not an insurmountable one. The second choice, which a YouTube warrior, ‘Major’ Gaurav Arya suggested in a video, is to remain indifferent. His argument was that these people harboured terrorist camps and had no sympathy for the sufferings and expulsion of Kashmiri Pandits. To do nothing would be a grave mistake, however. Dr. Amjad Mirza another YouTuber, based out of the UK perhaps, has for long, been an active proponent of the Indian position. He is no light weight, being the son of Ayub Mirza who was once offered the Presidency of POJK; his uncle was an aide to General Zia ul Haq – in other words, someone of ardent pro Pakistan stock. Yet his plaintive cries for Indian intervention are yet to strike a chord of sympathy in Delhi. The situation in PoJK is a historic opportunity for New Delhi. It is a gift horse that needs no oral examination. India should provide as much humanitarian assistance as it is able to, even to the extent of taking in refugees, if there are any. It is a chance to make friends and create influence in a traditionally hostile population. A cautious approach, based on fears that the infection may spread to this side of the LAC is misplaced. The insurgency in this part of the State was uncharacteristic and aberrant. If the residents of PoJK are now open to the idea of India as a refuge or even an alternative home, it should be encouraged. Only good can come from it. Humanitarian intervention would also create what may be called a point d’appui, an opportunity for the future, in line with Delhi’s official position that all of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir belongs to India. The opportunity should not be missed. It may not come again. B R Singh is a retired IAS officer who served in the J&K cadre.