This brings us to the moot point of this article ~ how long will it be possible for either side to hold on to the present stalemate. As far as reports that are somehow trickling out of the Valley and the muzzled press it would seem that the general Kashmiri (except perhaps those in Jammu and Ladakh) are determined to show their dissent by adopting a noncooperative attitude, almost Gandhian in nature, with schools, colleges, courts and offices in the Valley running much below their normal routine. Roads, shops and business houses also do not show much signs of life even though some of the restrictions have been gradually lifted. Internment and preventive detention of leaders who have staunchly stood for integration with rest of India, often at grave personal risks, have also not helped matters.

Threats, implicit or express, from those who oppose return to normalcy have also played in the minds of the ordinary citizens. However, the Kashmiris in general have long lived with such threats and restrictions but carried on their daily lives with stoic endurance. The near total passivity after 5 August, therefore, would point to a seem to a bewildered citizenry, which does not augur well for early reconciliation. A lukewarm response from the rest of the country, except the main Opposition and the Left, has also disillusioned them to some extent. The Government, on the other hand, is understandably unwilling or hesitant to lift the remaining restrictions in the Valley including the internet and free press lest the situation go out of hand and the uneasy calm explodes. But pursuit of routine and peaceful daily life by ordinary people has been affected across the Valley for more than two months.

It is perhaps time for the Government to rethink its strategy and try to bring back some semblance of normalcy vis-a-vis its interaction with the people in the Valley, between the people themselves and between Kashmir and rest of the country. It would be absurd to think of instant solutions as the recent wounds may have percolated very deep into the Kashmiri mindset and may take long long time to heal. First, the restrictions imposed on free movement of political leaders and other opinion makers who scan the Net in their homes, hotels and resorts must be withdrawn. It is a serious point to ponder as to under what legal provisions the fundamental right to liberty, freedom of movement and free speech guaranteed under Articles 19-21 of the Constitution have been suspended in the Valley.

There has so far been no declaration of internal emergency in Kashmir under Part XVIII of the Constitution. Ironically the predecessors of the present ruling party had been one of the most vocal critics of Indira Gandhi’s emergency. History has a disconcerting tendency of repeating itself in one form or other. Except for imposition of restrictions under Section 144 of Cr. PC, no declaration of such emergency has yet been made in the Valley. One wonders under which provisions have restrictions on the press and the electronic media been imposed or the political leaders detained? If it is a so-called undeclared emergency, why has the matter not been taken up urgently by the Supreme court despite being approached by various press representatives as well as the Press Council of India and some political parties and individual citizens. The Supreme Court has reportedly permitted individual leaders to visit Kashmir on condition that they will not participate or engage in political activities.

If removal of Article 307 has enabled the Kashmiri to have equal freedom as guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, why should he be deprived of his right to political freedom being enjoyed by his brethren across the country. There can be debates on the legal validity of abrogation of Art 370 and 35A and the Supreme Court is scheduled to adjudicate on the matter shortly. But there can be no question that long and sustained suspension of Fundamental Rights by executive order without a declaration of emergency is fraught with serious consequences for the future of our democracy and application of the age old concept of Rule of Law. For reviving the political process, the immediate release of the detained or interned leaders and dialogue with them is an essential prerequisite.

It is of course possible that they may in unison decry the abrogation and demand return to the status quo ante as on the 4th. of August, 2019. But that has to be faced at one stage or other as Kashmir cannot forever be run under the shadow of the army or the Central forces. Once it is possible to start a dialogue, that in itself could be a small but significant step towards restoration of normalcy. Even at this stage it may be possible to consider some readjustments like immediate return to Statehood which had already been promised in the long run and reconsideration of total abrogation of Article 370. In fact the effects of Article 370 had been diluted so many times since 1954 through subsequent modifications to the original Presidential Order that it only carried a symbolical value.

For example out of 97 items in the Union List the Centre could as of 4 . August 2019 legislate on 94 items. This is in sharp contrast to the original three items of defence, foreign relations and communications. Of much practical import is the content of Article 35A which enabled the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir to define the ‘permanent residents’ of the State and conferred special rights and privileges to such permanent residents in matters of employment in the State Government, acquisition of immovable property in the State, settlement in the State and right of scholarship and other forms of State aid to the exclusion of others. Originally intended to protect the unique religio social ethos loosely termed as Kashmiriyat it has in effect contributed to the continued segregation of Kashmir.

It has also been a little paradoxical while no such legal restrictions are imposed on the Kashmiri to settle anywhere in India and pursue his/her chosen vocation, the same is denied to citizens from other parts of country. It is also discriminatory in terms of gender as in case of a male Kashmiri the permanent resident status is for life, but in case of Kashmiri women the same is conditional to their marriage to a permanent resident only. In this age of internet and fast movement such restrictions are only carryovers from the past. It is also very unlikely that once such restrictions are removed people from other parts of the country will rush to settle in Kashmir or line up to marry Kashmiri girls, as very crudely remarked by a leader of the ruling party who themselves are so antagonistic to love jihad or inter-faith marriage.

But on a more serious level, it is conceivable that removal of these restrictions may make it easier for the flow of capital to the troubled Valley and in the long term provide for more vocational opportunities and broader economic development. It is also important that the central government bring forth legislation to provide for attractive tax concessions to manufacturing industries set up in Kashmir as already provided for in the North-East. Thus one starting point for any discussions with leaders in the Valley may be partial restoration of Article 370, keeping in mind its sentimental appeal as also the restoration of Statehood. But the restoration of Article 35A may not only provide for greater synergy with the rest of the country but also faster economic development if the central government is really keen to pursue such a course.

Ultimately, it devolves on the State legislature if and when it is re-elected and reconstituted as well as the people of the State to decide if they would like to see a new dawn or go down into the barrel of everlasting violence and distrust. Of even greater significance is to consider how to win back the trust and confidence of the people of the Valley. It cannot be passive adherence to the status quo that had been followed all these years. And it definitely cannot be through muscular action drawing kudos from the rest of the country. One has to be patient and honest through a process of trial and error. It is a daunting challenge, one that needs to be taken up in the interest of the integrity of India.

(Concluded)

(The writer, a retired Principal Secretary, West Bengal, may be reached at ssci@rediffmail.com)