J&K Elections 2008
1. Karnah
Karnah has been a NC bastion since 1987, winning all the elections since then.
2. Kupwara
Kupwara, like Karnah has also been a NC bastion. Since 1977, the NC never lost an election here.
3. Lolab
Abdul Haq Khan (PDP) won the seat, marking PDP’s first victory in this constituency. The NC, which won the 1996 and 2002 elections seem to
4. Handwara
Handwara used to be a place where the NC was winning
5. Langate
Langate has always been a NC bastion. Since 1977, it has never lost a single election here.
6. Uri
Uri has also been an NC bastion, though the Congress was able to win in 2002 election, though by a very narrow margin
7. Rafiabad
Rafiabad, except during 1996 elections has always elected the NC, though in 2002 elections in winning margin over the Congress was slender.
8. Sopore
Considered as Syed Ali Geelani’s homeground, the Congress was able to win the elections in 2002, which witnessed less than ten percent polling.
9. Gurez
A new constituency, which voted for the first time in 1996, elected an independent and NC in the last two elections. Gurez has always been known for a high percentage of voter turnout; in the last two elections in 1996 and 2002, the polling was more than 76 percent. This year, though it has come down slightly, yet the voters turn out was over 73 percent.
10. Bandipora
Bandipora used to be a NC bastion. The Awami League of Kukka Parray and Usman Majid replaced the NC in 2002 election.
11. Sonawari
One of Awami League’s few stronghold, Sonawari was known for the support to Kukka Parray.
12. Sangrama
Sangrma used to be a NC stronghold. PDP won this constituency in 2002 for the first time.
13. Baramulla
Like Sangrama, Baramulla also used to be a NC bastion till 2002, when it lost to the PDP.
14. Gulmarg
Like the neighbouring Sangrama and Baramulla, Gulmarg also used to be a NC stronghold until 2002 elections.
15. Pattan
Pattan never used to elect the same party again since 1972. The Congress and NC used to be win each simultaneously.
16. Kangan
Kangan has always been a NC bastion, except during the 1987 elections.
17. Ganderbal
Omar Abdullah (NC) won the seat back from the PDP. A NC bastion since 1977, however saw the PDP taking over in 2002 elections. Omar’s promises on employment and the popular faith in him seem to have made the difference.
18. Hazratbal
Though the NC won the 2002 elections, Hazratbal, which is a separatist stronghold, almost boycotted the elections in 2002, along with the rest of Srinagar constituencies. NC won in 2002, which saw less than 8 percent polling.
19. Zadibal
Zadibal, a separatist bastion, polled less than five percent in 2002. Shahjahan Dar, an independent candidate won the 2002 election.
20. Idgah
Idgah also a separatist bastion, polled less than five percent in 2002, which witnessed the NC winning this seat in Srinagar.
21. Khanyar
Khanyar, like the other constituencies of Srinagar, is also a separatist stronghold. In 2002, it witnessed less than five percent polling.
22. Habbakadal
In Habbakadal, there was less than four percent polling in 2002, which witnessed Raman Mattoo winning this constituency as an independent. Along with Amirakadal, it polled the least in entire J&K during 2002 election.
23 Amirakadal
Amirakadal along with Habbakadal, polled the least in 2002. In 2002, it polled slightly over 3 percent.
24. Sonawar
53. Doda
Abdul Majid (Congress) was successful for the second time in a row. He won the seat in 2002 elections as well.
58. Reasi
Runner up in the last two elections, BJP has finally won the Reasi seat for the first time. Even the 2002 elections, the BJP lost narrowly. For the NC, this constituency has become a far dream, for it has never won here since 1983.
81. Nowshera
Nowshera has been a Congress bastion in the last three elections, winning all of them since 1987
82. Darhal
Mohd Iqbal (independent) won the seat from Puran Singh, another independent who was successful in 2002 elections.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Monday, June 9, 2008
Whose War is it?
Whose War is it?
D. Suba Chandran
Deputy Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi
An interesting debate is taking place inside Pakistan, especially after that huge attack on Marriott Hotel in Islamabad a week before. The debate centers around the following questions: Why is Pakistan being attacked? How did the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has suddenly become a major threat? And why are the Americans pressurizing Pakistan to more, despite the latter being at the receiving end? In short, the question is: Whose war is it?
Pakistan does have a point. Since the War on Terrorism has started, Pakistan has been at the receiving end. From common man in the streets to the Prime Ministers to the President, there have been numerous suicide attacks in the last few years. While Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz were lucky to escape, Benazir Bhutto was unfortunate to succumb. The entire FATA is infested by violence. Killings, destruction, internal displacement, cross border attacks and aerial strikes have become a regular phenomenon, affecting day to day functioning, in every sphere. The human and material loss for Pakistan has been colossal so far. Worse, this is only a beginning.
When the US has been repeatedly asking Pakistan to do more in curbing terrorism, along with an explicit threat, that they have a right to strike targets within Pakistan territory, the Pakistanis will naturally ask: Why is Pakistan being targeted? Whose War is it?
There is an inherent fear within the country, that the US is using Pakistan and will abandon once again, once the American interests are achieved. It did happen earlier. After the Afghan jihad against the Soviet was over, the US packed its bags from there, leaving Pakistan to manage the residue. So the Pakistanis fear, that once Osama is captured or killed, the US will again leave Afghanistan, is leaving Karzai and Taliban to fend for themselves. Presuming such a scenario, they ask themselves: Why should Pakistan antagonize Taliban today?
Pakistan believes that the US is unlikely to be in Afghanistan for ever. The US has failed to convince Pakistan, that this time, its interests are long term and is unlikely to leave Afghanistan. On the other hand, Pakistan is not that naïve, as some writers in Pakistani media have been portraying. When the US came to this region after the Soviet Union entered Afghanistan, Pakistan played a shrewd game during the entire 1980s and 90s. Pakistan. This was a blowback, that Pakistan did not see coming. When it does, Pakistan now tries to shift the blame and tell the US and perhaps the rest, that its not their war. Its time for introspection and not finger pointing are giving up.
D. Suba Chandran
Deputy Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi
An interesting debate is taking place inside Pakistan, especially after that huge attack on Marriott Hotel in Islamabad a week before. The debate centers around the following questions: Why is Pakistan being attacked? How did the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has suddenly become a major threat? And why are the Americans pressurizing Pakistan to more, despite the latter being at the receiving end? In short, the question is: Whose war is it?
Pakistan does have a point. Since the War on Terrorism has started, Pakistan has been at the receiving end. From common man in the streets to the Prime Ministers to the President, there have been numerous suicide attacks in the last few years. While Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz were lucky to escape, Benazir Bhutto was unfortunate to succumb. The entire FATA is infested by violence. Killings, destruction, internal displacement, cross border attacks and aerial strikes have become a regular phenomenon, affecting day to day functioning, in every sphere. The human and material loss for Pakistan has been colossal so far. Worse, this is only a beginning.
When the US has been repeatedly asking Pakistan to do more in curbing terrorism, along with an explicit threat, that they have a right to strike targets within Pakistan territory, the Pakistanis will naturally ask: Why is Pakistan being targeted? Whose War is it?
There is an inherent fear within the country, that the US is using Pakistan and will abandon once again, once the American interests are achieved. It did happen earlier. After the Afghan jihad against the Soviet was over, the US packed its bags from there, leaving Pakistan to manage the residue. So the Pakistanis fear, that once Osama is captured or killed, the US will again leave Afghanistan, is leaving Karzai and Taliban to fend for themselves. Presuming such a scenario, they ask themselves: Why should Pakistan antagonize Taliban today?
Pakistan believes that the US is unlikely to be in Afghanistan for ever. The US has failed to convince Pakistan, that this time, its interests are long term and is unlikely to leave Afghanistan. On the other hand, Pakistan is not that naïve, as some writers in Pakistani media have been portraying. When the US came to this region after the Soviet Union entered Afghanistan, Pakistan played a shrewd game during the entire 1980s and 90s. Pakistan. This was a blowback, that Pakistan did not see coming. When it does, Pakistan now tries to shift the blame and tell the US and perhaps the rest, that its not their war. Its time for introspection and not finger pointing are giving up.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Exit Musharraf; Enter Zardari
Exit Musharraf; Enter Zardari
D. Suba Chandran
Pervez Musharraf is now history. Asif Zardari is likely to become the next President of Pakistan. Unfortunately, Musharraf’s exit has not solved any problems for Pakistan; in fact it has only raised new issues. With the PPP nominating Zardari as the President, the road ahead for him and his party is only full of challenges.
First major challenge is political instability that has already started. Nawaz Sharif’s PML has decided to walk out of the coalition and decide to stay as opposition. Sharif’s nomination of former Chief Justice - Saeed Zaman Siddiqui, as his party’s candidate for the post of President clearly highlights, that PML-N is completely out of the coalition. Though Zardari has apologized for the rift between the two parties and has requested to withdraw PML-N’s candidate, Sharif has not responded to it positively so far.
Though Zardari has enough numbers in the Parliament to be elected as the President, the rift between the two parties is likely to cause problems at national and provincial levels. Given the challenges Pakistan is facing – political, economic and security, it is important that the leading democratic parties work together. More importantly, numbers in Punjab provincial assembly is likely to pose a major issue. PML-N will need the support of PPP or the PML-Q to govern. Besides, the PPP government at the national level and PML-N government at provincial level, with Zardari as the President are likely to increase the tensions. With the President likely to retain the article 58-2(b), which gives Zardari the power to dismiss the national and provincial assemblies, political stability in Pakistan will be the first major challenge.
Second major challenge is likely to arise from restoring the judiciary and making it independent. While the PML-N has walked out of the coalition, as the PPP has refused to honour the agreements on restoring the judiciary. Zardari fears, restoring Iftikhar Chaudhary as the Chief Justice will restore the latter questioning the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated by Musharraf, which gave indemnity to Zardari. Besides, the lawyers have also been threatening to re-launch the movement on this issue.
Third major challenge is the ongoing violence in FATA and its spill over into the settled districts of NWFP and beyond. The military is concerned on the growing violence; suicide attacks are wrecking havoc on its personnel and installations. On the other hand, the elected representatives in the NWFP – belonging to the ANP and JUI-F prefer a political statement. A ceasefire has been already announced starting from end August. Given the fact the political ‘peace’ deals of the past have failed, ongoing operations or its failure is likely to test the civil-military relations within.
Finally, there is a huge American pressure to “do more” in terms of Pakistan’s contribution towards Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). The US is upset with the ISI not sharing the information and fears an element within Pakistan’s intelligence agencies are supporting the Taliban.
Will the PPP government and Zardari as President rise to the challenge? The answer has to wait, as the coming months are crucial in getting Pakistan back into democratic mode or slipping into anarchy.
D. Suba Chandran
Pervez Musharraf is now history. Asif Zardari is likely to become the next President of Pakistan. Unfortunately, Musharraf’s exit has not solved any problems for Pakistan; in fact it has only raised new issues. With the PPP nominating Zardari as the President, the road ahead for him and his party is only full of challenges.
First major challenge is political instability that has already started. Nawaz Sharif’s PML has decided to walk out of the coalition and decide to stay as opposition. Sharif’s nomination of former Chief Justice - Saeed Zaman Siddiqui, as his party’s candidate for the post of President clearly highlights, that PML-N is completely out of the coalition. Though Zardari has apologized for the rift between the two parties and has requested to withdraw PML-N’s candidate, Sharif has not responded to it positively so far.
Though Zardari has enough numbers in the Parliament to be elected as the President, the rift between the two parties is likely to cause problems at national and provincial levels. Given the challenges Pakistan is facing – political, economic and security, it is important that the leading democratic parties work together. More importantly, numbers in Punjab provincial assembly is likely to pose a major issue. PML-N will need the support of PPP or the PML-Q to govern. Besides, the PPP government at the national level and PML-N government at provincial level, with Zardari as the President are likely to increase the tensions. With the President likely to retain the article 58-2(b), which gives Zardari the power to dismiss the national and provincial assemblies, political stability in Pakistan will be the first major challenge.
Second major challenge is likely to arise from restoring the judiciary and making it independent. While the PML-N has walked out of the coalition, as the PPP has refused to honour the agreements on restoring the judiciary. Zardari fears, restoring Iftikhar Chaudhary as the Chief Justice will restore the latter questioning the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated by Musharraf, which gave indemnity to Zardari. Besides, the lawyers have also been threatening to re-launch the movement on this issue.
Third major challenge is the ongoing violence in FATA and its spill over into the settled districts of NWFP and beyond. The military is concerned on the growing violence; suicide attacks are wrecking havoc on its personnel and installations. On the other hand, the elected representatives in the NWFP – belonging to the ANP and JUI-F prefer a political statement. A ceasefire has been already announced starting from end August. Given the fact the political ‘peace’ deals of the past have failed, ongoing operations or its failure is likely to test the civil-military relations within.
Finally, there is a huge American pressure to “do more” in terms of Pakistan’s contribution towards Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). The US is upset with the ISI not sharing the information and fears an element within Pakistan’s intelligence agencies are supporting the Taliban.
Will the PPP government and Zardari as President rise to the challenge? The answer has to wait, as the coming months are crucial in getting Pakistan back into democratic mode or slipping into anarchy.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Peace Deals, Bad Politics
Peace Deals, Bad Politics
D. Suba Chandran
What is happening in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Agencies (FATA) of Pakistan? Three related events are taking place, complicating the entire scenario in this region, with five major actors in play, with different objectives and strategies.
The three events are: deadlock and the eventual break up of peace deals between the government of Pakistan and local Taliban; increasing attempts by local Taliban to impose their writ, in terms of establishing Shariah, destroying girls schools and imposing a ban on music; and attacks by US led forces inside Pakistan. Each of them needs to be analysed in detail.
Ever since the civilian governments have been established in Islamabad and Peshawar at national and provincial levels, the PPP and ANP led governments made an effort to negotiate with the local Taliban. A series of peace deals were concluded separately in Swat, Waziristan, Bajaur and other agencies. The main content of these deals focused around local Taliban not using Pakistan’s territory for cross border terrorism and not challenging the write of State inside the tribal regions. On the other hand, these deals expected, that the State would release the prisoners. This is not the first time, there have been deals between the State and the Taliban elements; there were at least three major deals since 2004. All of them failed, because the local Taliban never kept its part of the deal.
Second, local Taliban continue its efforts to establish its influence in the tribal regions. Numerous girls schools have been destroyed in FATA and many number of music shops were attacked and materials burnt. What is important is, this effort of local Taliban is not limited to the tribal regions alone. Slowly, they have been spreading to the settled districts of the NWFP as well.
Third, since Pakistan has failed to stop cross border terrorism, the US led forces in Afghanistan has been regularly carrying out attacks from across the Durand Line. The recent attack on a security post in Mohamand Agency, manned by para military forces was an example of this. This particular attack raised a controversy, as it killed many Pakistani para-military soldiers, besides some locals. Worse, following the above attack, Karzai, the President of Pakistan openly issued a warning, threatening Pakistan of hot pursuit.
The problem in all the above is due to the five actors who are involved: Pakistan, al Qaeda and Taliban, “Pakistani Taliban”, Afghanistan and US led forces. Pakistan is less keen on Taliban and al Qaeda carrying out a bloody conflict in Afghanistan. It is more keen on preventing the local Taliban from carrying out such attacks within Pakistan’s territory. Al Qaeda and Taliban are more keen targeting Afghan and US led security forces; if Pakistan government initiate any effort to curb their activities, they would retaliate even against their former supporters. Local Taliban, on the one hand are supporting al Qadea and Taliban in Afghanistan and on the other hand are attempting to establish their writ in the Tribal regions and adjoining territories. The US security forces and Afghanistan wants to eliminate the threat from Taliba and al Qaeda, so that there could be peace. Given the differences within the above five actors, conflict and violence across the Durand Line is likely to continue.
D. Suba Chandran
What is happening in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Agencies (FATA) of Pakistan? Three related events are taking place, complicating the entire scenario in this region, with five major actors in play, with different objectives and strategies.
The three events are: deadlock and the eventual break up of peace deals between the government of Pakistan and local Taliban; increasing attempts by local Taliban to impose their writ, in terms of establishing Shariah, destroying girls schools and imposing a ban on music; and attacks by US led forces inside Pakistan. Each of them needs to be analysed in detail.
Ever since the civilian governments have been established in Islamabad and Peshawar at national and provincial levels, the PPP and ANP led governments made an effort to negotiate with the local Taliban. A series of peace deals were concluded separately in Swat, Waziristan, Bajaur and other agencies. The main content of these deals focused around local Taliban not using Pakistan’s territory for cross border terrorism and not challenging the write of State inside the tribal regions. On the other hand, these deals expected, that the State would release the prisoners. This is not the first time, there have been deals between the State and the Taliban elements; there were at least three major deals since 2004. All of them failed, because the local Taliban never kept its part of the deal.
Second, local Taliban continue its efforts to establish its influence in the tribal regions. Numerous girls schools have been destroyed in FATA and many number of music shops were attacked and materials burnt. What is important is, this effort of local Taliban is not limited to the tribal regions alone. Slowly, they have been spreading to the settled districts of the NWFP as well.
Third, since Pakistan has failed to stop cross border terrorism, the US led forces in Afghanistan has been regularly carrying out attacks from across the Durand Line. The recent attack on a security post in Mohamand Agency, manned by para military forces was an example of this. This particular attack raised a controversy, as it killed many Pakistani para-military soldiers, besides some locals. Worse, following the above attack, Karzai, the President of Pakistan openly issued a warning, threatening Pakistan of hot pursuit.
The problem in all the above is due to the five actors who are involved: Pakistan, al Qaeda and Taliban, “Pakistani Taliban”, Afghanistan and US led forces. Pakistan is less keen on Taliban and al Qaeda carrying out a bloody conflict in Afghanistan. It is more keen on preventing the local Taliban from carrying out such attacks within Pakistan’s territory. Al Qaeda and Taliban are more keen targeting Afghan and US led security forces; if Pakistan government initiate any effort to curb their activities, they would retaliate even against their former supporters. Local Taliban, on the one hand are supporting al Qadea and Taliban in Afghanistan and on the other hand are attempting to establish their writ in the Tribal regions and adjoining territories. The US security forces and Afghanistan wants to eliminate the threat from Taliba and al Qaeda, so that there could be peace. Given the differences within the above five actors, conflict and violence across the Durand Line is likely to continue.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Musharraf: Has the Count Down Started?
Musharraf: Has the Count Down Started?
D Suba Chandran
Is Musharraf on his way out in Pakistan? Has he become the “relic of the past”, as Asif Ali Zardari, leader of the PPP, commented recently? How much support does this move have within the Army and in the White House? What are the likely implications of an early exit of Musharraf?
Ever since the restoration of judiciary became a political issue, between the coalition partners in Pakistan, serious doubts have been raised on Musharraf continuing as the President. The link between the restoration of judiciary and the continuation of Musharraf is obvious. The restoration of judiciary, as demanded by the PML-N, lawyers and a section within the civil society, means reinstatement of Iftikhar Choudhary as the Chief Justice, besides scrapping down numerous measures taken by Musharraf towards clipping the powers of Pakistan’s judiciary.
The personal animosity between Musharraf and Iftikhar Choudhary is well known. The general expectation within Pakistan has been that, once Iftikhar Choudhary is back as the Chief Justice and the judiciary is restored, the first order of business will be to look into the election of Musharraf as the President. The case on the election of Musharraf as the President, is unlikely to stand legal arguments against him. In all probabilities, if this case is taken by the Supreme Court, it is highly likely, that the verdict will go against Musharraf. In that case, he will not have any other option, other than resigning.
However, the question of Musharraf’s continuation is more political than legal. If the leading political parties of Pakistan, decide to impeach the President, through legal procedures and powers vested in the Parliament, then such a process is likely to succeed, as PPP-PML-N combination have adequate strength.
Will the Parliament initiate such a process? Unlikely. For various reasons. One, the PPP, is not in favour of the impeachment, though the PML-N has been asking for it. PML-N on its own, or along with other parties (minus the PPP), will not be able to mobilize adequate support to impeach Musharraf. So much would depend on PPP’s position on Musharraf. Two, the Parliament, would rather prefer the judiciary to do this job, instead of doing on its own. Three, PPP will also be wary of Army’s reaction to such an effort.
It is here, Pakistan Army assumes importance. For General Kayani, the Chief of Army Staff in Pakistan, long term interests of Pakistan’s military will be based on keeping the balance of the troika – military, President and Parliament. If the Parliament is to impeach the President, then it would affect the power balance of the troika, which will not be in the interest of Pakistan’s military. Hence, the military assumes importance here, on how it sees Musharraf. Is Musharraf a spent force for Pakistan’s military at this juncture? Is Gen Kayani confident and have the support of his Corps Commanders to take such a decision, now?
The Army, to a large extent, has kept out of politics since the election in Pakistan. With internal political order still being unstable and external security, especially across the Durand line being delicate, General Kayani, will not be in favour of realignment of troika. Not now. Perhaps, he will do in the future, but not now.
Externally, the US also remains cautious to the developments inside Pakistan. Given the statements made by the leading actors in the Bush administration, it is not clear, whether they have an alternative plan to Musharraf, at this juncture. They may ultimately have in the future, but does not seem to be the case now.
Given the above equations, it appears, Musharraf has a breathing space for the time being. Ultimately, he will have to go, but for now, he has some space to manipulate. Given his ability to take radical decisions when pushed to the corner, one should not be surprised, if he comes up with an alternative. For, that is how he has been surviving recently.
The question is, will go with some pride and dignity, or be kicked out?
D Suba Chandran
Is Musharraf on his way out in Pakistan? Has he become the “relic of the past”, as Asif Ali Zardari, leader of the PPP, commented recently? How much support does this move have within the Army and in the White House? What are the likely implications of an early exit of Musharraf?
Ever since the restoration of judiciary became a political issue, between the coalition partners in Pakistan, serious doubts have been raised on Musharraf continuing as the President. The link between the restoration of judiciary and the continuation of Musharraf is obvious. The restoration of judiciary, as demanded by the PML-N, lawyers and a section within the civil society, means reinstatement of Iftikhar Choudhary as the Chief Justice, besides scrapping down numerous measures taken by Musharraf towards clipping the powers of Pakistan’s judiciary.
The personal animosity between Musharraf and Iftikhar Choudhary is well known. The general expectation within Pakistan has been that, once Iftikhar Choudhary is back as the Chief Justice and the judiciary is restored, the first order of business will be to look into the election of Musharraf as the President. The case on the election of Musharraf as the President, is unlikely to stand legal arguments against him. In all probabilities, if this case is taken by the Supreme Court, it is highly likely, that the verdict will go against Musharraf. In that case, he will not have any other option, other than resigning.
However, the question of Musharraf’s continuation is more political than legal. If the leading political parties of Pakistan, decide to impeach the President, through legal procedures and powers vested in the Parliament, then such a process is likely to succeed, as PPP-PML-N combination have adequate strength.
Will the Parliament initiate such a process? Unlikely. For various reasons. One, the PPP, is not in favour of the impeachment, though the PML-N has been asking for it. PML-N on its own, or along with other parties (minus the PPP), will not be able to mobilize adequate support to impeach Musharraf. So much would depend on PPP’s position on Musharraf. Two, the Parliament, would rather prefer the judiciary to do this job, instead of doing on its own. Three, PPP will also be wary of Army’s reaction to such an effort.
It is here, Pakistan Army assumes importance. For General Kayani, the Chief of Army Staff in Pakistan, long term interests of Pakistan’s military will be based on keeping the balance of the troika – military, President and Parliament. If the Parliament is to impeach the President, then it would affect the power balance of the troika, which will not be in the interest of Pakistan’s military. Hence, the military assumes importance here, on how it sees Musharraf. Is Musharraf a spent force for Pakistan’s military at this juncture? Is Gen Kayani confident and have the support of his Corps Commanders to take such a decision, now?
The Army, to a large extent, has kept out of politics since the election in Pakistan. With internal political order still being unstable and external security, especially across the Durand line being delicate, General Kayani, will not be in favour of realignment of troika. Not now. Perhaps, he will do in the future, but not now.
Externally, the US also remains cautious to the developments inside Pakistan. Given the statements made by the leading actors in the Bush administration, it is not clear, whether they have an alternative plan to Musharraf, at this juncture. They may ultimately have in the future, but does not seem to be the case now.
Given the above equations, it appears, Musharraf has a breathing space for the time being. Ultimately, he will have to go, but for now, he has some space to manipulate. Given his ability to take radical decisions when pushed to the corner, one should not be surprised, if he comes up with an alternative. For, that is how he has been surviving recently.
The question is, will go with some pride and dignity, or be kicked out?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Cross-LoC Tourism
Cross-LoC Tourism
D. Suba Chandran
During his recent visit to J&K, Jairam Ramesh, Union Minister of State for Commerce announced in March, that trade across the LoC will start in 90 days. In the same month, Ghulam Nabi Azad, the Chief Minister of J&K, during his speech in Poonch, announced that Poonch-Rawlakot road will become a major trade route across the LoC between the two Kashmirs. Almost two months have passed since these two statements. The ground reality today is, despite brave statements from the Union and State governments, is not encouraging.
There are serious legal and political hurdles in achieving any meaningful trade across the LoC. The legal issue include providing some sanctity to the LoC, if the goods have to cross from one part of the Kashmir to the other. Pakistan fears, this will lead to a tacit acceptance of the LoC as a permanent border. Second, even if the trade begins, given the experience elsewhere inside South Asia, the basket of goods, is likely to be small, resulting only in a trickle. Finally, given the current level of understanding, the trade is likely to be only between the two Kashmirs and not beyond.
Given the above limitation on cross-LoC trade, there is an effort to look beyond, in order to improve the cross-LoC interactions. Tourism is one area, which has enormous potential on this issue, where the legal and political aspects can be underplayed. Today, the two bus services across Uri and Poonch, carry divided families on a regular basis, without much compromises on legal and political issues related to travel. In promoting tourism between the two countries also, the same arrangement can be pursued in facilitating travel.
Besides the less legal and political issues associated with, cross-LoC tourism has enormous potential to improve the relations between the two Kashmirs. Historically, ever since the 1947 War, Hindu and Sikh communities have migrated to J&K, leaving their ancestral home, which is now under Pakistan’s administration. This community, now settled all over the Jammu region, is extremely anxious to visit the other side. Unfortunately, since this section does not have a divided member on the other side, they could make use of the two existing bus services, which is limited only to the divided families. While the divided families of Muslim community could visit each other and make use of the bus, Hindu and Sikh communities, who have also been displaced after 1947, have been denied this opportunity. It is only fair, that these two communities also are included in the cross-LoC interactions; tourism across the LoC, provide an opportunity.
Second, people of Ladakh, Kargil, Skardu and Gilgit have also been denied this opportunity to cross the LoC. There are numerous families in this belt, which are also divided. People in this region have been claiming for the opening of Kargil-Skardu road. Cross-LoC tourism, will address the aspirations of people in this region, who geographically are the biggest inside J&K.
Third, cross-LoC tourism will improve the understanding of each other – the good will, fears, sentiments and sensitivities. The current interaction is narrowly based on divided families, where emotions run high, undermining political and security sensitivities of the people and State. Cross-LoC tourism will address larger issues and enable people on both sides to understand better.
Fourth, economically, cross-LoC tourism will boost all the regions. From Poonch to Gilgit, there are numerous places of historical, adventure and religious importance that will attract everyone from all parts of Kashmir. Places of worship belonging to Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Buddhist communities are spread all over J&K and are not limited to one region. In fact, a Buddhist from Ladakh would love to go up to even Swat and beyond; a Pandit would like to visit the Sharada Peeth in Kishan Ganga Valley; and a Muslim would like to visit Hazratbal and Shahadra Sharief. On historical and other significances, Gulmarg, Dal Lake, Ladakh and Jammu would enthral people from the other side, so would be Gilgit, Skardu and Mirpur for people from J&K. Historically, there are numerous places, from ancient era until today that would attract people to visit each other.
Such a movement for religious, adventure and historical reasons is likely to improve the economic activities on both sides tremendously. From having small dhabas to constructing huge hotels, the economic benefits of cross-LoC tourism will have its own dynamics on political issues.
For the above reasons, New Delhi should take up this issue in the forthcoming meeting with Pakistan at the ministerial and foreign secretaries level, in May. Obviously, there are security implications of such a movement. Here, to start with, India could consider the Chinese model, in allowing tourism in Tibet. It encouraged group tourism in the beginning instead of individuals. India and Pakistan can also adopt such a strategy to begin with: group tourism for religious, historical and adventure purposes. Once the confidence level increases, both countries could relax this further and open it for every one. Once this process is set in motion, both countries could even think about attracting international tourists with a joint package. Imagine a trip from Europe or US to New Delhi-Srinagar/Leh-Kargil-Skardu-Gilgit-Islamabad and back!
D. Suba Chandran
During his recent visit to J&K, Jairam Ramesh, Union Minister of State for Commerce announced in March, that trade across the LoC will start in 90 days. In the same month, Ghulam Nabi Azad, the Chief Minister of J&K, during his speech in Poonch, announced that Poonch-Rawlakot road will become a major trade route across the LoC between the two Kashmirs. Almost two months have passed since these two statements. The ground reality today is, despite brave statements from the Union and State governments, is not encouraging.
There are serious legal and political hurdles in achieving any meaningful trade across the LoC. The legal issue include providing some sanctity to the LoC, if the goods have to cross from one part of the Kashmir to the other. Pakistan fears, this will lead to a tacit acceptance of the LoC as a permanent border. Second, even if the trade begins, given the experience elsewhere inside South Asia, the basket of goods, is likely to be small, resulting only in a trickle. Finally, given the current level of understanding, the trade is likely to be only between the two Kashmirs and not beyond.
Given the above limitation on cross-LoC trade, there is an effort to look beyond, in order to improve the cross-LoC interactions. Tourism is one area, which has enormous potential on this issue, where the legal and political aspects can be underplayed. Today, the two bus services across Uri and Poonch, carry divided families on a regular basis, without much compromises on legal and political issues related to travel. In promoting tourism between the two countries also, the same arrangement can be pursued in facilitating travel.
Besides the less legal and political issues associated with, cross-LoC tourism has enormous potential to improve the relations between the two Kashmirs. Historically, ever since the 1947 War, Hindu and Sikh communities have migrated to J&K, leaving their ancestral home, which is now under Pakistan’s administration. This community, now settled all over the Jammu region, is extremely anxious to visit the other side. Unfortunately, since this section does not have a divided member on the other side, they could make use of the two existing bus services, which is limited only to the divided families. While the divided families of Muslim community could visit each other and make use of the bus, Hindu and Sikh communities, who have also been displaced after 1947, have been denied this opportunity. It is only fair, that these two communities also are included in the cross-LoC interactions; tourism across the LoC, provide an opportunity.
Second, people of Ladakh, Kargil, Skardu and Gilgit have also been denied this opportunity to cross the LoC. There are numerous families in this belt, which are also divided. People in this region have been claiming for the opening of Kargil-Skardu road. Cross-LoC tourism, will address the aspirations of people in this region, who geographically are the biggest inside J&K.
Third, cross-LoC tourism will improve the understanding of each other – the good will, fears, sentiments and sensitivities. The current interaction is narrowly based on divided families, where emotions run high, undermining political and security sensitivities of the people and State. Cross-LoC tourism will address larger issues and enable people on both sides to understand better.
Fourth, economically, cross-LoC tourism will boost all the regions. From Poonch to Gilgit, there are numerous places of historical, adventure and religious importance that will attract everyone from all parts of Kashmir. Places of worship belonging to Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Buddhist communities are spread all over J&K and are not limited to one region. In fact, a Buddhist from Ladakh would love to go up to even Swat and beyond; a Pandit would like to visit the Sharada Peeth in Kishan Ganga Valley; and a Muslim would like to visit Hazratbal and Shahadra Sharief. On historical and other significances, Gulmarg, Dal Lake, Ladakh and Jammu would enthral people from the other side, so would be Gilgit, Skardu and Mirpur for people from J&K. Historically, there are numerous places, from ancient era until today that would attract people to visit each other.
Such a movement for religious, adventure and historical reasons is likely to improve the economic activities on both sides tremendously. From having small dhabas to constructing huge hotels, the economic benefits of cross-LoC tourism will have its own dynamics on political issues.
For the above reasons, New Delhi should take up this issue in the forthcoming meeting with Pakistan at the ministerial and foreign secretaries level, in May. Obviously, there are security implications of such a movement. Here, to start with, India could consider the Chinese model, in allowing tourism in Tibet. It encouraged group tourism in the beginning instead of individuals. India and Pakistan can also adopt such a strategy to begin with: group tourism for religious, historical and adventure purposes. Once the confidence level increases, both countries could relax this further and open it for every one. Once this process is set in motion, both countries could even think about attracting international tourists with a joint package. Imagine a trip from Europe or US to New Delhi-Srinagar/Leh-Kargil-Skardu-Gilgit-Islamabad and back!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)