Janata Ki Aawaz - A Response to Zurich-on-the-Jhelum

 S. Eswaran, Amitava Dutta, Sujit Sanyal, L. Bahroo, and Nikhil Shah

The Times of India, a leading English newspaper of India ran an editorial Zurich-on-the-Jhelum (1) on August 22nd, 2003. The editorial proposed secession of Kashmir from India and its conversion into a neutral country between India and Pakistan. It drew parallels between Kashmir and Switzerland in terms of neutrality, tourist economy, and role as a stabilizer in a hostile region.  It echoed Kashmiri aspirations of living in peace and frustrations over the ongoing strife. 

This topic was hotly debated on the Bharat Rakshak Forum. The Monitor will present the summary of the same, in a point-counter-point format, in this issue under Janata Ki Aawaz. Every attempt is made to source a view to a particular participant in the discussion. We have taken the liberty of assuming that the members are who they claim to be and no effort is being made to ascertain their true profession and/or identity. We have attempted to minimize redundancy by posting select views. Readers can get in touch with the members by contacting them on the forum. However, we cannot guarantee a response. Sasi Eswaran (SE), Amitava Dutta (AD) and Sujit Sanyal (SS) provided a well-constructed critique of this editorial. Their contributions will be used along with contributions from other members on the forum thread.

Central theme of the proposal 

“But what about the long-suppressed aspirations of the Kashmiris themselves, who, sick and tired of their land being turned into a perpetual battlefield, yearn as never before for peace and prosperity?” - TOI

AD and SS responded to the above mentioned central theme with:

"While we respect the freedom of the press to the fullest, however, this editorial has crossed the line of “journalistic freedom” by pandering to secessionists and encouraging further terrorism.  This is not at all “thinking outside the box”, but a deliberate attempt to resurrect a dangerous idea which has been debated and discarded more than half a century ago.

 

Let us examine the question put forth in the editorial.  What are the aspirations of the Kashmiris? Briefly stated they are the right to life and right to work. All of that is guaranteed by the constitution of India.  It seems that the author is unaware of Article 370.  We do not know of any privilege enjoyed by another state that Kashmir is deprived of, yet the author’s heart still bleeds.  Some times we wonder if these in days, it is fashionable to be outrageous."

SE rebutted the central theme by questioning the underlying assumptions of the editorial as by noting that:

"The main assumption here is that the aspirations of the Kashmiris is long suppressed. A thinly veiled suggestion behind this assumption is that Indian nation is suppressing the aspirations of the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Unsurprisingly, the conclusion reached by the editor is no stronger than the weak assumptions.  

 

The aspirations of people in modern societies can succinctly be stated as the right to life, right to decide, and economic viability.  The right to life is guaranteed by the Indian constitution.  The government of India spends hard earned revenue for the protection of the people and property in Kashmir.  Additionally, the Kashmiri people have been granted protective rights by means of Article 370 of the constitution. 

 

The right to decide is afforded to the Kashmiri people in the form of elections. The high voter turnouts, despite repeated terrorist threats are a clear indication that people embrace this right.  Significantly, this is a core difference between India and people across the line of control, where no elections have ever been conducted."

A poster, Ramana, questioned the motives of the editorial and tried to sum up the attitude (and future) of some of elites of the resurgent India by coining an acronym D.I.E (Deracinated Internationalized Elite). He further questioned the times understanding of fundamentals when comparing Pakistan and Hitler's Germany by noting that: "What TOI doesn't understand is the Terrorist State of Pakistan (TSP) is no Hitler's Germany. The plot is much thicker." The acronym and the comparative question, when read together, tried to give the readers a hint on the motives of the countries supporting Pakistan, which otherwise are full-fledged member of the Global Coalition Against Terrorism.

"Also what makes the Kashmiris so special? Where do they come up with a special nationality? What is Kashimiryat? Good time to discuss this continued alienation of some of the Kashmiris. Hyderabadi Muslims don’t think like these folks. So what gives? The standard dirge is - Kashmiris are an exploited lot- everyone wants our land- no matter how much funds you pump we will always feel alienated for we are special. SO what is special about the Kashmiris."

He further questioned the unique status given to Kashmiris by the editor.  Anaath Das added to the discussion by noting that:

"The recent conference with Fai can be viewed as the commencement of a new open season in J & K, but with different tactics. There is a real motivation on the other side to gain the ideological and diplomatic high ground (as opposed to a more intense focus on terror). The really disturbing thing is that the Terrorist State of Pakistan (TSP) seems to be on board with the Independence/ Kashmiriyat concept. To honest Abduls, it is sold as a halfway house to dar-ul-pak. RAPEs (Rich Anglophone Pakistani Elites) are probably in it for the usual benefits. But the Kashmiriyat people are seriously pursuing new alliances among mainstream Indian polity. For outsiders, this project represents something of a mix between “enhanced leverage” in the near term and “alternative futures” in the long term. We should also be on the look out for any news being made by the non-GoI Indian attendees. Shri. Swamy may or may not live up to his reputation this time around "

The editorial motive

A poster, Mudy, attributed the motive of the editorial to the ratings game by stating that:

"TOI is desperate to hold maximum readership after news about Oz agency is trying for 21% stake in Hindustan Times. These type of controversial article will do that job." Another poster Sridhar concurred "ToI and editorials? I thought they had forsaken such outdated positions as that of an editor. They have not had an editor for some time, so how can they have editorials? They publish what they think gets them the highest readership or price as the case may be. "

AnantD suggested that:

"Ever since TOI started putting pictures of Bimbos on their photo gallery and rating them by most viewed, I knew something had changed in this paper and they were in it to increase readership, WHATEVER IT TOOK. What has pictures of semi-nude foreigners got to do with news? This editorial is along the same lines. It definitely makes a lot of Indians pick up the paper and read. Comparing Switzerland to Kashmir is just ludicrous since Switzerland never had to put up with a TSP (Terrorist State of Pakistan). I think TOI has lost it, I rarely read it anymore. I think they are just getting desperate with a loss of readership to the likes of SIFY and Rediff. They need a shakeup there to bring it back. "

Arindam while quoted Barkha Dutt

"If you look at the way the BBC and CNN covered the Iraq war, you'll realize that though the BBC is government funded, it was by far more independent in its reporting than CNN, which pandered to jingoism." - Barkha Dutt"

Arindam went on to indicate that his opinion was that:

"One of the things that is happening is that, for the first time the JNU jholawallah-types are being challenged, when they print openly treasonous stuff. To continue their activities and hide their relationships to their paymasters, these guys are now beginning to characterize all criticisms against them, as jingoist or produced by the "lowly" nationalists. Expect the Press Council and the "intellectuals" from fourth-rate schools, use every opportunity to denigrate the "nationalists" and "justify" sedition. For example, here's Barkha Dutt, criticizing CNN for jingoism - now, I'm not necessarily a fan of CNN, but the attack tactics used here are the same as are being used against pretty much anybody who supports India and Indians. The attack tactics are pretty widespread - you'll see the same on reaction to "Vaidyanathan's" great article on Sulekha; same reaction to nitin's note to Akhila - being pro-India is "nationalist" - used as a pejorative term, in their opinions.

Comparisons with Switzerland & neutrality

“Switzerland, a small country in the very crucible of Europe, has survived two world wars with its neutrality intact. Even rapacious predators like Stalin and Hitler did not dare challenge this status.” - TOI

"The purported “neutrality” of Switzerland has been in question in the recent years. Investigative arms of the Wiesenthal foundation and other print and broadcast journalists have unearthed collusions of Swiss Banks with the Nazi Germany. These unholy alliances were generally considered gray areas because of “black complicity with the Third Reich and white resistance to the Nazi regime”. So the assertion of neutrality is really blunted, if not rendered invalid. But that is not the main thrust of the editorial. The main thrust is to earn brownie points by dissecting one’s motherland. Furthermore, it is interesting that the author seeks to use Switzerland as a model for Kashmir.  This model is regressive as Kashmiri women have exercised their voting rights even decades before their Swiss counterparts who got their suffrage only in the nineteen seventies" responded ES to the comparison used in the editorial.

A poster, Amitav, shared his feedback to ToI on the forum. The key differences between the states that would border Kashmir and the ones that surround Switzerland were obvious:

"You wrote that France, Germany and Italy have a history of hostilities and Switzerland acts as a buffer; therefore, Kashmir should become a buffer. This is ignorance beneath contempt. France, Germany and Italy are nations with histories and therefore they have differences, and sometimes, unfortunately, hostilities. Pakistan is not a nation, merely a state, in search of an identity. The only identity it has managed to imagine so far is that of being anti-India. You have started to resemble that."

AD & SS noted that comparison with Switzerland was not new:

"Suggesting the dismemberment of Kashmir from India is an exercise in absurdity.  Instead of transforming into Switzerland it would most likely transform into Lebanon or even worse. Kashmir would degenerate quickly into a cesspool of terrorism and further degrade the lives of the Kashmiris.    In fact, such comparisons are not only derogatory and insulting; it is like rubbing salt on raw wounds.  The proposal of turning Kashmir into Switzerland isn’t even original.  It was enunciated by Sheikh Abdullah, in 1951 at the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, “We have to consider the alternative of making ourselves an Eastern Switzerland, of keeping aloof from both States but having friendly relations with them.”

Amitava further quoted Sheikh Abdullah's speech during the same "I would like to remind you that from August 15 to October 22, 1947 our State was independent and the result was that our weakness was exploited by the neighbor with invasion. What is the guarantee that in future too we may not be victims of a singular aggression?" and questioned "And who is this neighbor he was referring to 52 years ago?"

ES concurred with AD and SS with an interesting analogy:

"As a digression, it was reported that the Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw was once proposed by a beautiful actress so that their progeny will be as brilliant as Shaw and as gorgeous as the actress. Shaw, in characteristic wit, retorted what if the progeny happened to have Shaw's beauty and actress' brains. The point about turning Kashmir into a neutral Switzerland has some semblance to this jovial anecdote. What if Kashmir, instead of turning out to be a Switzerland, transformed itself into a Lebanon (another supposed model of neutrality)?

Poster Narayanan recalled the history of Lebanon to remind readers/members what the alternative could be if the independent Kashmir went the Lebanon way:

"The Islamist and the "RightWingChristians" reduced Lebanon to a complete killing ground, with major offensives raging across Beirut. The Islamists surrounded East Beirut which was Christian-dominated, and pulverized it, shooting civilians, of course, at random.

Then the Israelis came in. Their F-16s pulverized apartment buildings, cars, anything that moved in West Beirut. Then the Christians surrounded West Beirut and got into high-gear killing mode. .... Eventually, Syria sent thousands of troops into Lebanon to bring some sort of order (mainly by shooting anyone who even looked like they carried a gun). ...

Several iterations of "Lebanese Governments" were established, and each time the President, Prime Minister etc. got assassinated within days. Eventually, "peace" came to Lebanon. According to National Geographic, the law is very simple. ANYONE with connections to ANY militia gets arrested and executed.

Lebanon, as I recall, was the original Testing Ground of Car-Bombs. Great opportunities for "reconstruction contracts" all round. Mediterranean Beachfront property available at rock-bottom prices, terrorists thrown in free. What a wonderful pastoral future for the next experiment in generating a "neutral" Switzerland of The Islamist-infested East"!!!! "

ES summarized the comparison:

Some aspects of the comparison to Lebanon are apt and better suited the fantasy of the Swiss model. In 1946, after French soldiers left Lebanon various stakeholders wanted to make Lebanon a neutral ground very much along the lines of Switzerland. Shortly after it was realized that Lebanon's neutrality and non-confrontational status would not be respected by internal or external forces.  This resulted in a terrible carnage that ended Lebanon's position as the Middle Eastern entrepot and financial hub and the destruction of the only Arab democracy. Interestingly, the factors that contributed to the Lebanese carnage are ripe in Kashmir. The internal divisive forces (All Party Hurriyat Council with its two dozen members each of which has a particular agenda), threat of external intervention from across the boarder, fundamentalists with grand political ambitions, etc., all have uncanny resemblance with their Lebanese counterparts."

Linking dismemberment of India with economic prosperity

“If tiny Switzerland can be more than viable in defence and economic terms, why not Kashmir as a safe-haven for international finance and diplomatic and corporate dealings? Indeed, as a tourist attraction and as a symbol of local aspirations, Kashmir’s mighty Himalayas can easily dwarf the Swiss Alps. Perhaps, Zurich-on-the-Jhelum might not be such an outlandish idea when all is said and dreamed.” - TOI

A poster ArunK countered the rising tempers on the forum very calmly by suggesting that it was possible that TOI did not have a sinister agenda behind this "Opinion”, suggesting that this might be the work of a clue-less candlewallah like Kuldeep Nayyar.  He went on to note that:

 

Having said that, I also agree with KGoan that the reaction will be watched carefully at "other places". Although I am convinced that a mild to no reaction will make no difference to our foreign policy or Kashmir policy, an over the top reaction will help greatly in reinforcing an already set opinion. Therefore, an over the top reaction will definitely help.

Finally, I have to say this. If our Kashmir policy can be derailed by one editorial in a newspaper, then it was very hollow in the first place and we probably need to change proactively. On the other hand, if it is solid -- like it is now -- no amount of "Opinions" like this one can make a dent."

But poster muddur highlighted the other key concern 

"No one is talking about an editorial capable of making a dent in the GOI foreign policy. But we are talking about the dents caused on the Indian psyche.

First of all this ToI editor hasn't read the history or he doesn't seem to remember it clearly. He should be made to understand that whenever the foreign invaders were able to breach India's first line of defense at the borders in the west, India and Indians were plundered, looted and destroyed. How can he talk about letting Kashmir go, yet again to the foreign invaders? The terrorist tactics of nuke blackmailing India is perhaps becoming successful, slowly. "

AD & SS briefly presented economic history of the region to drive the point home:

"From late 60’s to early 80’s, Kashmir was a top tourist destination in the world.  Kashmir was peaceful and Kashmiris were prosperous people. You were likely to bump into tourists from Japan or Germany.  Likewise, pilgrims, be it to temples or masjids, met with fellow pilgrims from all corners.

 

Additionally, we find particularly disturbing is that the editorial is slanted towards the propaganda of a hostile neighboring country and conveniently ignores the genocide that is being perpetrated on the Kashmiri Pandits.  Tens of thousands of Kashmiris, mostly Hindu Pandits, now live as refugees in their own land.  We wonder if the author is aware of this as he omits any mention of them.  It is amazing that the author turns a blind eye well documented ethnic cleansing.  “Zurich on the Jhelum” would only help guarantee a monolithic society sans the Pandits. "

Arindam wondered if the editorial was in violation of article 51A (c) of the Constitution of India by presenting the article:

"This is Article 51A, which lays out the counterpoint of the Fundamental Rights, namely the Fundamental Responsibilities of Indians. Here is the article in its entirety:

Article 51A. Fundamental Duties – It shall be the duty of every citizen of India

 (a) To abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem;

(b) To cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom;

(c) To uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;

(d) To defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;

(e) To promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women;

(f) To value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;

(g) To protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures;

(h) To develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;

(i) To safeguard public property and to abjure violence; (j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavor and achievement."

The discussion ended with a consensus to counter this and other similar proposals and educate the fellow Indians on the realities and unintended consequences resulting from the implementation of these strategies.

Editor’s Comments: 

After reviewing the original article by the Times of India and reading the spirited commentary by the participants, we would like to state that the proposal has several short comings in addition to those pointed out by the participants.  The author speaks of Kashmir only in the vaguest manner, instead choosing to gush about Switzerland and makes passing references to the Kashmiri people and omits the last 50 years of history.  It does not discuss the details of the “Zurich Proposal” but quickly seeks comfort in fantastic conclusions about neutrality and economic prosperity.  We are further disturbed about the simplistic and fantasy like nature of the proposal misleading the general public tired of ongoing strife. 

References

(1) http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=141302