poser to Karunanidhi :
Why not a referendum on Kashmir-Eelam?
[By : Lucien Rajakarunanayake]
Tamil
'Eelam' is for Tamil Nadu politicians what the full moon is for hungry wolves.,
is what the lead editorial in The Hindu of April 23, said on the attempts by
Karunanidhi and Tamil Nadu politicians attempts to arm-twist New Delhi on his
proposal for a UN backed referendum on Eelam in Sri Lankan territory. It said
that: All their howling is indicative, not of any yearning for a distant, dreamy
Eelam, but of the baser urges of the politics of the here-and-now. Former Tamil
Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi, who heads the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, a
prominent constituent of the United Progressive Alliance government at the
Centre, gave a call last week for the creation of a separate nation for Tamils
in Sri Lanka, on the lines of Montenegro, South Sudan, East Timor and Kosovo.
It added with a note of caution that: Far from forcing the Sri
Lankan government into reaching a settlement on devolution of powers to the
minority Tamils, Mr. Karunanidhi appears to have further aided the
politicisation of this sensitive issue in Tamil Nadu.
Acknowledging how the parties of Tamil Nadu contributed in no
small measure to the shaping of India's stand on the recent resolution against
Sri Lanka at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, The Hindu stated
that, to suggest that the U.N. conduct a referendum for the division of Sri
Lanka on ethnic lines can only have the effect of prompting the Mahinda
Rajapaksa government to resist all international efforts to speed up the peace
and reconciliation process.
In any case, Kosovo or Montenegro, South Sudan or East Timor is
not comparable to Sri Lanka. But then Mr. Karunanidhi was only looking for
instances of new nations formed on the basis of referendums or external
intervention, and not seeking to make a cogent case for the resolution of Tamil
grievances in Sri Lanka. In 2000, the model of political division he cited was
that of Czechoslovakia, which split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. In Mr.
Karunanidhi's words, this was separation without bloodshed, a peaceful
resolution of a conflict in a country with sharp divisions, The Hindu said.
But what is so easily forgotten is what happened elsewhere after
this so-called separation without bloodshed. The division of Czechoslovakia is
just one example of the crisis in the Balkans. The tragedies of
Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia and the massacre at Srebrenica are still fresh in
the memory of many who have even a mere nodding acquaintance with the breakup of
the former Yugoslavia on ethnic lines. Even the Dayton Accords have not yet
healed the wounds of the crisis as seen in the recent commemoration of the 16th
anniversary of Srebrenica. If anyone if to be fooled by the independent
statehood of Kosovo, which is still not recognized by Serbia, there is enough
already happening between Sudan and South Sudan, to have much more than mere
doubts about the success of UN backed , encouraged or supported referenda to
divide nations and countries.
Jammu & Kashmir
Rather than look at far away Czechoslovakia, or think of
Montenegro, South Sudan, East Timor and Kosovo for the promotion of Eelam, it is
better if Karunanidhi and those who think alike, would look closer home in
India, where the UN mandated plebiscite is yet to be held from 1948 to decide on
the actual status of Jammu and Kashmir. From the time of Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru to this day India has rejected any attempt to genuinely resolve
the Jammu Kashmir issue, by not creating the necessary conditions to hold the UN
mandated plebiscite - the vote by which the people of a political unit determine
autonomy or affiliation with another country.
There is now a debate in India whether the plebiscite is an
issue of not. Yet, commentator Amaresh Misra wrote in October 2011 In August,
2011, that the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) of Kashmir brought out a
report, after three years of painstaking investigations that revealed shockingly
the existence of 38 sites of unmarked graves in North Kashmir. Estimates vary,
but more than 2,500 unidentified bodies were unearthed during the exercise. The
SHRC has asked for DNA profiling to identify these bodies and determine whether
they are dead militants or dead, ordinary Kashmiris.
The Kashmiri Association of Parents of Displaced Persons (APDP)
has been agitating for several years about locating more than 10,000 missing
persons. These people could have been targets of militants, or of the Indian
army, or both. It is suspected that many more unmarked graves exist in other
areas of Kashmir. The SHRC has requested the State government to conduct a
thorough enquiry in the matter.
Truth seeking, and coming clean on facts, plus justice and
compensation for people killed either by the army or the militants, will boost
Indias credibility. In fact, the unmasking of the issue of unmarked graves is
integral to `Kashmir is an integral part of India logic.
Karunanidhi and others in India who are so-vocal and demanding
action about the plight of Tamils in Sri Lanka, and suggesting a UN backed
referendum for a separate Eelam, need only look north to what is happening in
Jammu- Kashmir, and begin to take the necessary steps to consult the people of J
& K as to what their preference for statehood is whether it is to be part of
India, part of Pakistan, or two parts of either country or even a separate state
of Kashmir-Eelam.?
As the US-based security website GlobalSecuruty.org states: The
concept of partition is anathema to Indians. Kashmir's symbolism to India is as
critical a consideration as any security significance associated with this
fragment of ice and rock threaded by a beautiful valley. India is unwilling to
lose even one additional hectare of this land. New Delhi is also concerned that
Kashmiri autonomy would set a precedent for breakaway movements in other Indian
states (e.g., Punjab or Assam). It will also be interesting to know how India
will in fact react to the promotion of separatism in neighbouring Sri Lanka by
the likes of Karunanidhi and Jayalalitha, when considering the separatist
tendencies that prevail in many parts of the country today.
Looking back at not so distant history, GlobalSecurity.org
states: In 1952 the elected and overwhelmingly Muslim Constituent Assembly of
Jammu and Kashmir, led by the popular Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah, voted in favor
of confirming accession to India. Thereafter, India regarded this vote as an
adequate expression of popular will and demurred on holding a plebiscite. After
1953 Jammu and Kashmir was identified as standing for the secular, pluralistic,
and democratic principles of the Indian polity. Nehru refused to discuss the
subject bilaterally until 1963, when India, under pressure from the United
States and Britain, engaged in six rounds of secret talks with Pakistan on
"Kashmir and other related issues." These negotiations failed, as did other such
efforts later. So much for the promotion of the rights of the truly oppressed
people of Jammu & Kashmir, even with a UN mandate.
It adds that: Kashmir's demographics illustrate the complexity
of the issue. The territory can be divided into three regions -- Jammu, the
Kashmir Valley, and Ladakh -- each of which is dominated by a different ethnic
group. Jammu is inhabited mainly by a Hindu majority, the Kashmir Valley is
settled by a Muslim majority, and a Buddhist majority resides in Ladakh. While
there is an identifiable Kashmiri ethnicity, the three groups are ethnically
distinct, complicating any notion of "Kashmiri nationalism."
Those who talk of a referendum, whether UN backed or India
manipulated on the setting up of an Eelam in Sri Lankan territory, must also
have a proper understanding of the demographics of m Sri Lanka, and not only the
present post-conflict situation in the Northern Province. One cannot forget that
the original call for Eelam, by the LTTE, and its political backers of the TNA
had planned an Eelam that included the North and East, with little concern for
the demographics of the East that would have made such a polity untenable from
the outset.
Karunanidhi can either take Sri Lankas Defence Secretary
Gotabaya Rajapaksas advise and seek to have his unrealized dream of Eelam
established in Tamil Nadu in India, or before he talks of Eelam related
referendum in Sri Lanka, work towards resolving the crisis of Jammu and Kashmir,
with or without UN intervention or nudging.
The Hindu concludes its editorial stating that "for good
reasons, India has a firm position on seeking a solution within a united Sri
Lanka. Political parties in Tamil Nadu should see the sense behind this." One
can only hope the thinking of the leader writer is correct, and whatever
Karunanidhi's life's mission is, that political parties in Tamil Nadu would see
the sense behind such a policy, and stop their full moon wolf howls for Eelam
over here.
-The Ministry
of Defence bears no responsibility for the ideas and opinion expressed by the
numerous contributors to the "Opinion Page" of this web site-
No comments:
Post a Comment