Media as multiplier

Using the media as their platform, both the leaders succeeded in getting their concerns highlighted without actually moving towards war.

But such media coverage has spelt both success as well as failure for India. The diplomatic success of the attempt to up the ante by threatening war rested crucially on India compelling the international community to view cross-border terrorism in Kashmir from the Indian angle. However, such internationalisation of the issue also went against India’s stance that Kashmir was an internal issue, or at the most an Indo-Pak dispute.

In other words, the substantial media coverage given to militant operations invariably attracts global attention to the Kashmir issue. By harping a little too much on Pakistan-aided terrorism, our leaders — along with our media — unwittingly fell into the very trap laid by the terrorist. When top politicians visit the bullet-ridden state or issue press statements, when Indian forces claim to have gunned down militants or when militants indulge in violence, militancy in Kashmir commands headlines all over the world.

What would work in our favour is if the media took the effort to appear a little more independent in its assessment of the Kashmir situation.

At least then the message would be conveyed that India is serious about its pursuit of democracy in Kashmir. Traditionally, the Indian media has given very little importance to the stand of ordinary Kashmiri. Also, every individual gunned down in Kashmir by the security forces is viewed as a terrorist, just because the security forces say so.

Perhaps, the importance accorded to the so-called Kashmiri militant would have had little negative impact if the media had not sidelined Kashmiris. Ultimately, coercive diplomacy against Pakistan, which centres on the Kashmir issue, can only work for a limited period.

To win the battle, Kashmiris have to be won over and the media has an important role to play in bringing this about.