Is a Hindutva oriented policy viable vis-a-vis Kashmir?
The first term of Prime Minister Modi did not go well for Kashmir.The body count was at an all time high since 2001, with both civilians and soldiers being slaughtered[1].Social media is full of accounts of police and military high-handedness,while on the other hand there is a counter-narrative involving display of hyper-nationalistic sentiment and territorialism of the kind never seen before.That’s why when Amit Shah was appointed as the Home Minister alarm bells were set ringing.The alarm bells are not particularly surprising, as Mr Shah has had a dismal track record vis a vis human rights,owing to his performance as Home Minister of Gujarat and his alleged role in the Godhra riots. Nevertheless,it is for sure that Kashmir and Kashmiris are going to get a taste of a Hindutva oriented policy,something we are going to discuss at length here.
The Kashmir dispute is as old as the nation states of India and Pakistan themselves. Maharaja Hari Singh wanted Jammu and Kashmir to be an independent state,a policy which was unacceptable to the Pakistanis, who sent a body of irregular troops to annex the land. Hari Singh requested Nehru for help which the latter was prepared to send only if the former signed the Instrument of Accession.After a brief war, both parties went to the Security Council for mediation. Pakistan claimed the territory as it had a Muslim majority population, while India showed the Instrument of Accession signed by the Maharaja to prove ownership over the territory.
The Indian Independence Act of 1947 states that British India was to be divided into India,which would have Hindu majority provinces and Pakistan,with its Muslim majority ones.If we solely go by the clauses of the Partition, Kashmir would have gone to Pakistan,as it is a Muslim majority province.But for the Indian leadership,this was deemed unacceptable for two reasons (a)Kashmir’s geo-strategic importance is immeasurable and (b)it would be a tacit admission of Jinnah’s much loathed Two Nation Theory.But how to claim the land?Surely, a mere document is not going to suffice.Both Pakistanis who claim the territory and the Kashmiris who seek autonomy do not see the Instrument as valid.For the BJP/RSS, this is where the philosophy of Hindutva kicks in.
In 1923, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar published his magnum opus, Hindutva. In the book, through excellent use of rhetoric, he explains how Hindus are one nation and the land between the Himalayas and the Indian Ocean is their Punyabhoomi(religious land). Savarkar begins by acknowledging the diversity that exists within the Hindu religion,the various languages,cultures,deities, Gods etc. He even recognizes the Aryan nature of the deities of the Hindu Pantheon. However, he claims that in spite of all these differences,Hindus are fundamentally one because they pledge allegiance to their [2] Pitrubhoomi(Fatherland) and Punyabhoomi(Religious land). Even the Aryans who came from Central Asia,regarded the land of the Sapta Sindhu as their Holy Land.The Vedas were written and composed here,most of the languages have Sanskritic origins and all the places of worship and pilgrimage are located here. This is in stark contrast with Muslims who pray towards Mecca and the Christians who pray towards the Vatican or Jerusalem.Thus, we see that the inherent nature of Hindutva is fundamentally territorial.
BJP/RSS-aligned groups understand that Hindutva allows them to claim Kashmiri territory. It takes less than a cursory glance to establish the fact that Kashmir has had a Hindu past. The word Kashmir itself is derived from a Sanskrit word Kasimira,found in the Nilamata Purana. Another theory says that the word is derived from the word Kashyapa-mira which roughly translates as Sage Kashyapa’s Lake. The place finds multiple references in the Sabha Parva of the Hindu Epic Mahabharata.Right up to 13th Century AD, Kashmir was a hub of Shaivism. Muslim rule began only after Shah Mir established himself as the King. For thousands of years, Kashmir has been fundamentally, a Hindu land. This for the RSS, cements the narrative of a Hindu claim over Kashmir.
So what does RSS’s narrative of the Kashmir dispute entail? Firstly, it seeks to use the Hindutva platform to lay down a definitive claim over Kashmir, something that is deeper than a mere document indicating Accession by a Maharaja. Secondly, it seeks to trash the claim that the uprising in Kashmir is the product of Kashmiri nationalism.The RSS has pointed out multiple times that demand for Azaadi in Kashmir comes only from Muslims. Hindus and Buddhists living in Jammu and Ladakh have not raised any such demands.[3] This, for the RSS is proof that the purpose behind the protests is not an the establishment of an independent Kashmiri nation-state, but a creation of a fundamentalist Islamic polity: Dar-ul-Islam,something which the Pakistani ISI has been aching to do for a long time.And finally,the RSS seeks to point out the barbarity that guides the separatist movement in Kashmir in order to invalidate their demands. This task is the simplest, as the fate of the Kashmiri Hindu refugees living in despicable conditions speaks for itself.
So what does the RSS want to do with regard to Kashmir? The answer is simple: Abolish Article 35 A. The article prohibits people who are not ethnic Kashmiris or citizens of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from buying property and settling there. This law has been in place since the days of Maharaja Hari Singh and was designed specifically to preserve the demographic purity of Kashmir.This article prevents Kashmir from integrating into the Hindu Rashtra. Removing it will allow people from other states to settle there and perhaps in the future, turn J&K into a Hindu majority state.
All this sounds great in theory, with India being able to claim Kashmir for itself. But it won’t solve our problems in the least. Firstly,a nation isn’t just territory. A nation comprises of people with a common history of joys and sorrows,victories and losses,achievements and failures. The Kashmiris on the other hand have been a marginalized lot,being at the receiving end of many gross injustices.The recent incident of a Kashmiri man being tied to a bonnet and used as a human shield by an Army Major was celebrated across the social media as an act of courage and heroism.The Major also received a commendation from the Chief of Army Staff. The Kashmiris who saw the video and the subsequent celebrations obviously couldn’t identify with their Indian brethren as the person on the receiving end was one of their own.It does not help to know that the man used as a human shield was not even a stone pelter, as proved by a subsequent investigation by the police.[4]
Secondly,if we start claiming land which had a Hindu/Indic/Dharmic past, we will have to claim all of South Asia itself. What is Afghanistan today, used to be Gandhara. The ancient Indic civilization of Mehrgarh is located in modern day Baluchistan.The land of Sapta Sindhu ,as mentioned in the Rig Veda is today located in Sindh Province,Pakistan. So is the RSS prepared to claim all that land and bring it under a “Hindu” rule? Is it prepared to cut off all diplomatic and economic relations with Pakistan and Bangladesh if they do not comply?
Finally,any government that is seen as fundamentally Hindu, is bound to generate resistance within the Kashmiri Muslims. The reason behind this is that the Sikh and Dogra rule did not leave much fond memories in their minds. Sikhs under Maharaja Ranjeet Singh closed Jamia Masjid and allowed prayers only on Fridays. The Dogra rule of Hari Singh was wrought with human rights violations and an indefensible inequality of wealth. The complete disregard for the socio-economic conditions of the Muslim population prompted the then Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Sir Albion Banerjee to remark [5]-
“ Jammu and Kashmir state is labouring under many disadvantages, with a large Mohammedan population absolutely illiterate, labouring under poverty and very low economic conditions of living in the villages, and practically governed like dumb driven cattle. There is no touch between the government and the people, no suitable opportunity for representing grievances… The administration has at present no or little sympathy with people’s wants and grievances…..”
In conclusion, we can say that Mr Shah and his Hindutva project in Kashmir might solidify India’s claim over the territory of Kashmir. However,claim over territory itself does not guarantee the acceptance of the locals.We need a lifetime of Confidence Building Measures,cultural interactions and most importantly, respectful dialogue with the Kashmiri people. I shall end this article with a quote from Chanakya’s (Kautilya’s) Arthashastra where he explains to the King how to secure a territory recently annexed to the Kingdom —
Whoever acts against the will of the people
will become unreliable. The King should adopt the same mode of
life, the same dress, language, and customs as those of the people.
He should follow the people in their faith with which they celebrate
their national, religious and congregational festivals or amusements.
Sources:
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurgency_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir
[2] Hindutva: Who is a Hindu (1923)
[3] https://www.organiser.org/Encyc/2019/10/22/The-Sangh-Connection.html
[5] Kashmir, Kashmiris and Kashmiriyat by Syed Bismillah Geelani
