The summer agitation of 2008 over the transfer of 99 acre of forest land around the Amarnath cave to SASB to set up temporary shelters and facilities for pilgrims succeeded in pulling off a rare feat. It was one of the very rare times when post-British upper-caste Hindu pride of India was forced to concede to a deal which it could not show off as a victory. In many ways, the lobbyists of the pride, assorted right-wing and centrist social work groups, political parties and business associations had themselves to blame. They had made several tactical errors. Firstly, the deal was channeled through Government of India and the Indian Government of J&K; both perceived so negatively by the people of Kashmir that the channelization was bound to result in hostile public opinion. Secondly, the lobbyists had no legitimate casus belli and this factor became all the more crucial once the confrontation started. Thirdly, their late attempts to reconstitute the stand-off as communal and regional (Muslim Kashmir vs Hindu Jammu) was easily thwarted by the obvious environmental angle of the issue. Finally, their reliance on Kashmiri complacency post Mufti Sayeed’s opiate Healing Touch policy turned out to be hasty and short-lived.
But the lobbyists of upper-class Hindu pride do not take well to arrangements not so completely in their favour that they can’t brandish them like trishuls. They believe India is their country. They believe Kashmir is an integral part of their country. For them, 2008 was a humiliating defeat and they intend to avenge it. So they are at it again; and this time they come better prepared. A lot of homework has been done. Firstly, this time the deal has been channeled through the Supreme Court of India which scores on perception because the judiciary is seen as much more impartial than the government, a common error reinforced in Kashmir by the fact that we have no choice but to take recourse to it in the hope of saving ourselves from the mafia-style government. Secondly, the Supreme Court has supplied the necessary casus belli by taking suo moto cognizance of the deaths of some yatris this summer. This pretext is being used to justify a robust construction program, taking no note of the fact that high-altitude travel is inadvisable for many types of high-risk individuals. Thirdly, the injury to upper-caste Hindu pride has been a persistent undercurrent in the mainstream Indian discourses since 2008 and, crucially, even among Kashmiri Muslims. This will help in reframing the Amarnath construction program as a communal issue and shift focus away from the environmental disaster it is likely to incur, including irreparable damage to the Kolahoi glacier, which feeds Lidder and Sind, two most important sources of water for Kashmir. Finally, the trust on Kashmiri complacency is back, largely due to the calculation that the long protests of 2010 have exhausted Kashmir for now.
The issue was and is a good opportunity for us to understand certain key aspects of the occupation. One, the steady erosion of the concept of ‘common’ land which is owned by the community. Such land used to be quite widespread in Kashmir but now we concede that any land not owned privately automatically becomes government land. Two, the nature and limits of secularism in India and what it entails for us. Three, the limitless and ravenous greed of slavery, which stops at nothing, not even at something which kills the slave!
Views express by the author are personal!
