|
Vohra
IN, Jethmalani (get) OUT
Romeet
K WATT
New
Delhi has eventually appointed the long-awaited
interlocutor to commence parleys with the elected representatives of
the J&K state legislative assembly and the separatist bandwagon,
including All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC). N N Vohra, former
Home Secretary is the Centre’s choice. The other names that were
initially doing rounds were that of K C Pant, former negotiator; A S
Daulat, former chief of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW);
Wajahat Habibullah; and Union Law Minister, Arun Jaitley.
There
was also a lot of speculation that New Delhi might appoint two
different interlocutors: One, for initiating talks with elected
representatives, who are already a part of the national mainstream;
the other for separatists, who represent the other shades of the
public opinion. Some think-tanks within the government were of the
view that any negotiations with separatists, separated from parleys
with the elected representative of the legislature would be, in the
long run beneficial for New Delhi.
Arun
Jaitley was tipped to be appointed as chief negotiator for talks
with the elected representatives, given his vast expertise in the
nitty-gritty of legal and constitutional matters, nevertheless, it
is reliably learnt that some senior BJP leaders were disparaged to
the idea of BJP directly involving themselves in the peace process,
which could, given the complexity of the subject matter, put BJP in
a spot of bother with Sangh Parivar outfits, especially Vishwa Hindu
Parishad, who are central to the victory of the party in the
forthcoming assembly elections in some states.
In
the first place, BJP on the whole was not very keen on initiating
the peace process at this stage and wanted some more time to put
more pressure on the separatist bandwagon, and further weaken their
position before holding any talks. On the other hand, given the
promise on the issue of holding dialogue by none other than the
Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee himself from ramparts of Red
Fort during his Independence Day speech, BJP had very little choice
but to give in to the insistence of Chief Minister Mufti Sayeed, to
start the peace process and, appointed N N Vohra for the purpose.
A
seasoned bureaucrat, 66-year-old Vohra has served as Principal
Secretary to the then Prime Minister I K Gujaral and in his capacity
as Defence Secretary, has headed a committee that investigated the
politician-criminal nexus in 1995. A
fine administrator, Vohra has dealt with the Kashmir problem in
his capacity as home secretary, and is not new to the
convolutions of the Kashmir issue.
His
other high profile assignment was in the capacity of the chairman of
the committee on the internal security that was set as a follow up
of the report of the Subramaniyam Committee on the conditions that
led to Kargil war. He has also been in the past a firm advocate of
“stringent laws to
meet the challenge posed by rising militancy.”
Speaking
at a seminar in January 2000 Vohra said that TADA had failed to
effectively address the situation and those who talk of human rights
should realise the ground reality by assessing the situation in
Jammu and Kashmir where terrorists have killed thousands of people
"and our existing legal system has failed to combat terrorism
there".
PDP
led coalition has welcomed the fresh initiative, with the Chief
Minister Mufti Sayeed describing the developments as “very good
news.” It is
pertinent to recall that the Common Minimum Programme (CMP) of the
PDP-Congress outlined that the state government would request
Government of India to initiate and hold wide ranging consultations
and dialogue, without conditions with the elected representatives
and other sections to evolve a “broad based consensus on
restoration of peace.”
This
fresh initiative gives a new lease of life to PDP, whose own
domestic constituency within Kashmir, had begun feeling
disillusioned with their own party for its failure to persuade New
Delhi to commence talks.
The
focus now shifts onto what in diplomatic parlance is called,
“brief” or “the terms of reference,” for the proposed talks,
which would be set by New Delhi, or more specifically the North
Block for its new interlocutor, N N Vohra, before they are
officially underway. One of the reasons, K C Pant, former
interlocutor on Kashmir was not able to break ice with the
separatists was
for the reason that his ‘brief was limited,’ which did not make
available to him much leeway to take the initiative to any logical
conclusion.
APHC,
one of the main separatist groups with which Vohra is likely to hold
discussions has been, as was expected too guarded in their opinion
on the developments, something which is on the expected lines.
However, it is reliably learnt that APHC has agreed in principle to
commence negotiations with the designated interlocutor.
The
initial official reaction of APHC that is available with the author
said that the amalgam hoped that a dialogue process would be set in
motion to find a ‘permanent and lasting solution’ to the Kashmir
issue as per the wishes of the people of the state, which is in line
with the official stand of the party, except that there is no
involvement of Islamabad in the whole process, a definite climb-down
on part of APHC.
It
would be relatable to point that APHC, Pakistan Chapter has termed
the appointment of a fresh negotiator by New Delhi as a futile
exercise, and has said that any fruitful negotiations on the Kashmir
issue would require the involvement of all three parties: New Delhi,
Islamabad, and the people of Kashmir (typical Pakistani Parrot
Speak).
The
past experiences on various peace initiatives on Kashmir have not
yielded desired result, which makes one see the fresh initiative
with an element of scepticism. One wonders what happened
to earlier interlocutors like K C Pant, Arun Jaitley and Ram
Jethmalani? Did they achieve any element of success in unshackling
the dreadlocks of the larger Kashmir issue or not? If so, why has
the government not officially made public the outcome of these past
initiatives?
The
people of India also deserve to know the ‘terms of reference’ or
else ‘brief’ for the proposed talks. Enough of tamasha in
the name of Kashmir. Let us for God’s sake have one coherent
policy on Kashmir. Is somebody at North Block listening?
Home | 