Redefining autonomy

The autonomy agenda is back on centrestage largely due to the positive tone of Monday8217;s dialogue between Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah. Notwithstanding the initial negative feelers from both sides, for once, the dialogue was bargained neither by underground leaders, nor under any threat of separation, but by democratically elected leaders, in a spirit of give and take. It is a positive first step in the battle to attain Kashmiriyat. While Abdullah backtracked on the pre-1953 package much to the chagrin of the radical National Conference members, the Prime Minister, by merely agreeing to discuss autonomy, must have ruffled quite a number of feathers of his more strident colleagues. For them, even an invocation of the 1957 position on the issue of autonomy is a total surrender. However, the essence of democracy is dialogue, and the path to it is through bargain.

The dialogue, described officially as a kickstart, is likely to have two desirable consequences: first, it is likely to throw up a window of opportunity to address the long-neglected issue of Kashmiriyat. Autonomy, if implemented even in its present incarnation, is bound to act as a balm. Indeed, it will go a long way in assuaging the feeling of alienation prevalent among the ordinary Kashmiris; second, it is most likely to isolate the native militants who have sprung up in the Valley after the Kargil war. Without their support base among the people, even they are like fish outside water. Additionally, the autonomy dialogue may also be seen as an olive branch by separatists in other parts of the country. For them the message is loud and clear: New Delhi cares and is ready for dialogue. If someone is responsible for reviving the autonomy issue it is Abdullah. He has proved his detractors wrong, not once, but twice. For one, the NC8217;s popularity in the last assembly polls witness the fairly high turnoutrates despite poll boycott calls caught many political pundits by surprise.

Next, even if one were to argue that the political balance had altered in the post-Kargil situation, with Abdullah losing some of his initial elan after three years as incumbent and with some Hurriyat leaders fresh out of jail enjoying an upper hand, the autonomy dialogue is bound to reverse the trend. Abdullah has not only proved his capacity to bounce back from political hibernation. He has displayed remarkable sagacity, indeed, political innovation. He literally coopted the autonomy agenda from his rivals. In this one move, he killed two birds with one stone. First, he proved to the world that the autonomy agenda was not a monopoly of one section of the leadership in the Valley. Second, displaying vision and foresight he redefined azaadi as autonomy, leaving space for bargain and compromise in a true democratic spirit and ensuring the absence of any foreign players. The Hurriyat leadership and other leaders in Jamp;K must enter into further discussions with the Central government taking the autonomy as astarting point. Even if Kashmiris take time to accept the new autonomy package once it is worked out, in the end the trajectory from azaadi to autonomy is a step in the right direction.