Mamidipudi Pattabhiram
There is widespread relief and satisfaction
over the diplomatic success that India achieved in the face of heavy odds when
Pakistan withdrew its controversial resolution on human rights violation issue
in Jammu and Kashmir at the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva.
Although it was a known fact that it was Pakistan that was aiding and abetting
militancy in Kashmir in diverse ways, it tried to internationalise the issue by
talking of the so-called violation of human rights in the State. For full six
weeks Pakistan carried on intensive activity to get the resolution adopted
which if done would have given it tremendous political mileage and put India
in a very awkward position. India was finally in a position to drive home the
fact that it was Pakistan that was to blame and there was no question of
finding fault with India for the present deplorable state of affairs in the
strife-torn State of Kashmir. India has every reason to believe that Islamabad
as the unconcealed sponsor of the armed struggle in Kashmir will use any negotiations
or any forum to further its stated objective of grabbing that State. It is
precisely in pursuit of this goal it has been providing material help and even
training to insurgents occasionally covering up its tracks if the internal
community came close to questioning the extent of its involvement.
For New Delhi the loss of Kashmir is bound
to be catastrophic not merely militarily but in its repercussions in the rest
of the country. No regime can survive the loss of Kashmir. But Pakistan fails
to understand that a few thousand guerillas can by no stretch of imagination
pin down a large Army and cause loss of face to India nor can it ever hope to
defeat India militarily. New Delhi is within its rights to insist that Kashmir
is an integral part of India and there is not much sense in the kind of global
concern that Pakistan is setting in motion for Kashmir. Even as it is true
that it is difficult to militarily defeat India in Kashmir a stalemate entails
significant losses in a political sense. Not only does it sap the energies of
the Army but it also damages India’s international standing. The only option
that is left to the Centre is to start the political process even if it means
negotiations with the insurgent groups. The sooner it opens the dialogue the better, for the Centre needs to be
seen to be committed to peace and not apathetic to it.
The Pakistan debacle in Geneva is an
indication that the diplomatic and political scenarios are beginning to favour
India and full advantage has to be taken of this new development. India can
usefully build on these gains which have accrued from the focussed and
concerted efforts that were made at the Human rights Commission session.
Further, India’s case having been elaborated to the world community the Centre
should act quickly to diversify the nature of the responses in the valley.
There is no doubt that the openness - a number of foreign diplomats had
visited the Valley - of the Government had helped the diplomatic effort and
attempts to restore the political process will also strengthen the position in
the State. It is necessary not to lose the momentum of events. If the
Government has a plan of follow-up action, it must be put into effect without
delay. It had also to be seen to what extent and in what form bilateral talks
with Pakistan could take place on the Kashmir issue. The Prime Minister is
well qualified to handle such an effort and if he does not grasp the opportunity
it may not recur for a long time.
A significant event that cannot go unnoticed
in the national context is the steady accretions to the ruling Congress (I) in
the last three months which have enabled the Prime Minister Mr. P.V. Narasimha
Rao, to gain an absolute majority in the Lok Sabha. This is going to ensure
stability to the Centre which will make it possible for the Prime Minister to
go about his task with greater ease and confidence. The no-confidence
motion against the Narasimha Rao Government was defeated although there has
been some criticism that this was the end result of defections. Floor crossing
is no new phenomenon in Indian politics and therefore there is no point in
harping on it. Whatever might have been the motivations, those who joined
the Congress (I) have indirectly helped in vesting stability to the
Government. Politics is a difficult game and since it deals with power there
are occasions when the leaders will have to adopt all kinds of means to
strengthen their position. The Congress (I) is not the only party that has
benefited by floor crossing and its worth should have to be Judged by its
performance.
There is no doubt that the Prime Minister is
now in a position to dictate terms to his adversaries and the Opposition parties
which have been opposing the policies and programmes of the Government, will
have to work harder to convince the people if the Congress (I) should be
dislodged froril power. This is not going to b.e an easy task either and to
that extent it must be said that Mr. Narasirnha Rao has played his cards
admirably well. In the elections that were held to the State Assemblies of
Rajasthan. Himachal Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh the Congress (I)’s
record has been fairly convincing. It won power in Himachal Pradesh and Madhya
Pradesh with a good majority and to that extent its standing in the national
policy has acquired a boost. Of course it was never thought it would make the
grade in Uttar Pradesh although its performance was worse than what it was in
the previous election. Yet the fact that the Bharatiya Janata party was ousted
in U.P. and Madhya Pradesh is proof enough that it suffered a set back because
of its involvement in the Babri Masjid demolition. The Ayodhya debacle has
cost the BJP its position as a political factor in the two populous States and
it would take a long time before it can regain its supremacy. In Himachal
Pradesh the Congress (i) did unexpectedly well while its performance in
Rajasthan was not too bad. The internecine quarrels in the Congress (I) were
held to be responsible for the Congress defeat in Rajasthan and if only the
party was more united it would have defeated the BJP which had just managed
to stage a comeback. One could imagine the fate of the Congress (I) at the
Centre if the party had lost in Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh.
Mr. Narasimha Rao is
thus lucky and the Congress victory is now attributed to his leadership.
Whether this is true or not the fact remains that the Prime Minister has
acquired a new status which is reflected in the way in which he has for
instance, handled the party crisis in Karnataka. The Chief Minister, Mr.
Veerappa Moily, has been able to survive a virulent bout of dissidence thanks
to the decision taken by the Prime Minister not to disturb him. With barely
nine months for the next elections to the State Assembly the ruling party is in
no mood to change the Chief Minister. The leadership at one point seemed fairly
set against Mr. Moily’s continuation because of his style of functioning.
With the dissidents buckling under pressure at the last moment and after
giving M. Jagannath Mishra who had gone there as the trouble shooter a torrid
time, the Congress (I) has been saved the ignominy of a split though the
acrimony may well spill out in the open some time later during the ensuring
electioneering. Karnataka is crucial to the Congress (I) and the emergence of
strong centres of opposition to the ruling party in the State and the possibility of their uniting before the elections have begun to worry the
Congress High Command. Mr. Moily has survived by default and yet it must be
said that the Prime Minister was in a position to assert his authority only
because of his newly acquired strength at the Centre. One would like to see how
politics shapes in Andhra Pradesh which is also going to the polls before December
31. Mr. K. Vijayabhaskara Reddi has a daunting task before him and he can
hardly forget the fact that it was during his previous tenure as the Chief Minister
that the Congress (I) was badly mauled making way for the Telugu Desam under
Mr. N.T. Rama Rao to ascend the gaddi. Mr. Rama Rao is working hard to unseat
the Congress (I) even as the Prime Minister is trying his best to ensure that
his party will return with a clear majority. Of course the party in power is
always on the defensive during the elections and the entire nation will watch
with great interest the goings on in Andhra Pradesh.
Although elections are
not due in Tamil Nadu in the near future there is a great deal of speculation
on the future of the AAIDMK and the Congress (I) which fought the previous
elections as an alliance. The two parties are not close now and they have
parted ways. The Congress (I) is a non entity in the State and it is freely
stated that it can never win the elections if it goes alone. The big question
now is whether the alliance will be revived in the near future. The Congress
(I) leaders of the State do not want to have any truck with the AAIDMK whose
leader Ms. Jayalalitha has become a red rag for them. But the Congress (I) high
command does not have a closed mind on the issue and the coming weeks would
show great deal of strength from the party MPs from the south and, therefore,
he cannot afford to weaken his efforts to build up the party in this region by
taking appropriate political steps.
State politics apart
yet another important development in the national scene is the return of about
60,000 refugees who had settled in Tripura back to Bangladesh. For over seven
years they have been camping in the north eastern State and for humanitarian
reasons the Indian government has been providing all the facilities for them to
stay in Tripura. The refugees are tribals known as Chakmas and they have all
been hounded out of the Chittagong Hill Tracts by new Muslim settlers. The
efforts of New Delhi to convince Bangladesh that they are their problem and it
should make it possible for them to trek back were in vain. The Buddhist
Chakmas presented a charter of demands before they could return to their
native soil. The most important of them was that their land and homesteads
should be returned to them and that all the army and other security forces
should be withdrawn from the CHT. After a great deal of diplomatic moves on the
part of the Indian Government, Dhaka has finally agreed to create the necessity
conditions for their return. What looked like an impossibility has now become a
reality and already 500 families have left the transit camps in Tripura. This
tiny State was also facing a law and order problem because of the presence of
so many foreigners, who had no stake in this country. Bangladesh had exhibited
statesmanship of a high order in taking them back and it is to be
expected that the 60,000 refugees will
go back in the next six months. It must be stated that the problem was the
creation of the Bangladesh Government itself. The tribals would have lived
peacefully if Dhaka had not disturbed them by withdrawing
whatever special protection they enjoyed under the British policy of local
autonomy before Independence. This they felt was destroying their religious
and ethnic identity. About 100,000 Chakmas lost their land to the Kaptail dam
project and got nothing in return.
And the decision to go
back to their homes therefore hinged on how Bangladesh settled the question of land
titles. And as vital issues of national importance are coming to the fore it is somewhat
unfortunate that the government has taken a decision to curtail the Budget
session of Parliament by at least three weeks. Perhaps the Government believes
that the central Budget having been presented the main task is over. The budget
itself has widely been acclaimed although critics are not wanting who have said
that the very huge
deficit that is left uncovered is not going to do good to the country. This
might even lead to greater inflation which inevitably pushes up the prices of
all essential commodities. After all the common man judges the Budget by the
impact it has on his daily living condition. Budget as an instrument of change
has long ceased to be valid. The Government had announced upward revision of
prices of petrol, cooking gas, rice, wheat and other commodities much before
the presentation of the budget and to claim the budget as a soft one is like adding insult
to injury. In fact the Government should not have bypassed the Lok Sabha and
this has certainly tended to devalue the Lower House. The recess announced is
going to shorten its duration although it is said that this had been done to enable
the newly created Standing Committees to function during this period. But it
must be understood that the Standing Committees are no substitute to
Parliament which has a much wider role. The question hour, the call attention
motions, the zero hour are all features that cannot be easily ignored. It is
not wise to abridge the sessions and the government must think of ways and
means to restore the working days to the original level. After all Parliament
is the highest forum which keeps the executive in check.
No doubt there are
other ways of strengthening the foundations of democracy. In the process of
modernisation the bureaucracy too has a significant part to play. In this
great and delicate task it needs to develop a new vigour and a new outlook. The
real tragedy of the Indian situation seems to lie not so much in a poverty of ideas as in the absence of
a will to translate them into living realities. If there is ‘a vigorous
Parliament it is possible’ to bring to sharp focus the social and political
events in the country. Public opinion on various issues could be activated to
the extent needed and this itself
is a gain in the functioning of Indian
democracy. The political parties too should concentrate on an appropriate
parliamentary strategy which will strengthen the democratic institutions. Any
reduction in either the importance of Parliament as a vibrant institution or
in its working time will only weaken the democratic structure.