Dineshwar Sharma: The ‘Representative’ of Small Things

Why is the Union Government and the media pretending that appointment of Dineshwar Sharma as their “special representative” with the rank of Cabinet Secretary for talks in Kashmir is a ‘game changer’ when the terms of reference focus on “legitimate aspirations” and Prime Minister Narendra Modi rules out the willingness to discuss “autonomy”? Besides, Joint Resistance Leadership comprising SAS Geelani, Mirwaiz Omar Farooq and Yasin Malik rejected talks by pointing out that it is futile to hold talks when the Government remains unwilling to accept the presence of a “dispute”. Even the pro-India party such as National Conference has officially stated that they do not see this initiative of the Central Government leading anywhere. And now comes the news that the Government representative will address issues ranging from “alleged harassment by security forces to civic issues such as inadequate power supply and poor health care facilities”. An anonymous official of Union Ministry of Home Affairs told the Hindustan Times that “since (Dineshwar) Sharma’s job is to initiate and carry forward a dialogue with elected representatives, organizations and concerned citizens, addressing grievances is an important part of the initiative”. The point is, with no one of any clout expressing confidence in Kashmir, Dineshwar Sharma’s appointment is being salvaged to address and redress everyday problems of the people.

On the first day of his five-day visit, nine delegations met Dineshwar Sharma. It's instructive to see who they were. They included: Gujjar-Bakerwal Conference, Student Association (Pattan), Youth Sports Fraternity, Youth Sports Forum (Qamarwari, Srinagar), City FM owner, Peace Forum (Ganderbal), Youth Forum (Kupwara), and Shikara Association. Thus semblance of the progress of dialogue can be sustained because the Union Government and agencies are invested in this process.

So what is it that the RSS-BJP Government capable of achieving with this exercise? And what is this dialogue worth when there is no substance attached to it? Do they believe that by addressing everyday problems of the people, the focus would shift somehow from ‘Azaadi’ or autonomy to jobs and civic improvements? If we go by what the Attorney General told the Supreme Court recently to postpone hearing on Article 35A for six months as the Government had initiated dialogue and hence they do not want it to be jeopardized by the Court ruling, seems like the Government is dangling Article 35A as a carrot before Kashmiris. Fall in line or else Government will go all out to have it repealed.

So the intrinsic shortcomings of his appointment are two-fold. On the one hand, it is an attempt to promote ‘neither Azaadi nor autonomy line’ to Kashmiris in exchange for letting Article 35A remain. Secondly, the Government he represents is dogmatically tied to radical right-wing Hindutva and, therefore, incapable of admitting that the country faces its biggest threat from rampaging Hindutva across the length and breadth of the country, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir which makes blind to appreciate that this vitiates the atmospherics for dialogue. Indeed before Indians condemn Kashmiris for falling prey to radical Islam, they ought to look at their own contribution to spread of Hindutva and inability to stem their rise in the country.

Look also at other recent developments. The NIA led attack targeted primarily Syed Ali Shah Geelani as nine out of 10 persons arrested by NIA happen to belong to his faction and includes his son-in-law. The reason was that he was perceived as the ‘hardest nut’ to break. With the three JRL refusing to talk to the new “representative” within 48 hours, the NIA summoned Yasin Malik in a case which dates back to 2001 and SAS Geelani in a case filed in 2002. That for 15-16 years such cases were not pursued makes it abundantly clear that the Government was desperate to pick on any issue to punish the leaders for refusing to hold talks. Consider also the charge made against Hizbul Mujahideen chief’s son’s arrest by NIA. The case involves the transfer of Rs 4.5 lakhs (Rs 450,000) in eight instalments from 2011-14. Not only did this transfer take place two years before Burhan Wani’s killing in 2016 but the amount in focus is a pittance if it was meant for funding militancy.

Moreover, while the Government pretends to be keen on dialogue its idea of dialogue from “position of strength” makes it incapable of shedding its hard-line approach or attempt to brow-beat news flow. On October 18, 2017, the MHA in letter instructed the J&K state government to stop providing advertisements to local print media for their “anti-national articles” and complained that some publications publish “highly radicalized content glamorising terrorists and anti-national elements”. It is worth noting that RSS-BJP Government has been engaged in glamorising Hindutva extremism and/or playing down their dastardly violent role. So to ask state Government to discontinue advertisements in line with Central Government refusing to give advertisements to Kashmir based media is to force them to come out praising RSS-BJP if not to support their version of dialogue.

The point is that if all these facts were read together with the history of crimes against people in J&K by the Indian Government forces such as massacres, rape, enforced disappearances, killing for reward and promotion, the absolute lack of conviction of the perpetrators who are Government forces, such appointments cannot inspire confidence among anyone in Kashmir. Sadly, far too many in India perceive arm twisting as persuasion and read progress & solution in a charade. The only thing positive to come out from this exercise is that having begun “sustained dialogue”, the terms of dialogue can change and the process invested with real purpose if a new party comes to power. Until then bluff and bluster will rule the roost under the Dovalian strategy.