VP ADDRESSES UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR

Vice President’s address at the convocation of University of Kashmir
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18:16 IST
The Vice President of India Shri M. Hamid Ansari has said that a clear distinction is to be made between assimilation and integration. The former implies the blending or fusing of minority groups or cultures into the dominant society or culture. Delivering convocation address at the University of Kashmir in Srinagar (J&K) today, he said that it is usually reflective of the desire of the dominant group on grounds of cultural nationalism and is resented and resisted by minority ones. Integration, on the other hand, implies the movement of minority groups and the underprivileged sections of a society, without erasing their identity, into the mainstream of the society to give them full access to the opportunities, rights and services available to the members of the mainstream. It is always a two-way street and thus goes hand in hand with social solidarity.

He said that accommodation of diversity has been consciously incorporated as a distinctive feature of the Indian state. It implies that a standardized image of an Indian cannot be constructed; if presented, it is partial, incomplete, misleading. Despite this accommodative framework, there have been acts of omission and commission impacting on identity and integration issues. Perceptions have evolved nationally and globally and highlight areas that remain to be addressed. Democratic politics and economic liberalisation has also strengthened regionalist trends. Linguistic reorganization has ceased to be the culmination of the process of expression of identities. Linguistically homogenous states have been subdivided over grievances of development. New demands for statehood continue to be made on grounds of ethnicity, culture or regional grievances. The imperative of better governance adds a sense of urgency to these.

The Vice President said that the youth of Jammu & Kashmir, like in the rest of the country, want to fulfil their potential, lead lives with dignity and honour and contribute to their communities and the nation. The Government is committed to enable this and thus herald a new future for the people of Jammu & Kashmir.

Following is the text of the Vice President’s Convocation address:

“B’ naam-e-khuda-vand jaan aafarin

Hakim-e-sukhan dar zubaan aafarin

It is difficult to come to Kashmir and not be reminded of an admiring visitor’s description penned many centuries back:

‘Kashmir is a garden of eternal spring. Its pleasant meads and enchanting cascades are beyond all description. There are running streams and fountains beyond all count. Wherever the eye reaches, there are verdure and running water.’

Time does not dent the beauty of nature. Time does allow humans to enhance the benefits they derive from it. Time, regrettably, does not stand still. We never step into the same river twice; nor can we use a time machine to re-live a gone by era. This university campus, and its endeavour in different branches of knowledge, suggests a desire to move with time. It would undoubtedly please the spirit of saints and rishis who inhabited this land in yesteryears and imparted so much of wisdom and spiritual solace to the people.

I am happy to participate in today’s ceremony. Convocations are to academic life what festivals are to social life; they signify rites of passage, the passing of seasons, a celebration of achievement and benediction for facing the harsh world beyond the somewhat sheltered academic environment. The motto of the University –

– From Darkness to Light – exemplifies the transition that graduating students undergo.

Convocations are also occasions to draw lessons from the experience of life. I too may be permitted to do so. Let me begin by recalling a couplet addressed to students of my own alma mater a long time back by a poet very well known to you:

Auron ka hai payam aur, mera payaam aur hai

Ishq ke dard mand ka tarz-e-kalaam aur hai
My message today pertains to the world of tomorrow. We live in an era of rapid change. A quarter of a century back an eminent historian wrote on the need to prepare for the twenty first century; he offered the prognosis that instead of a ‘new world order’ we confront ‘a troubled and fractured planet whose problems deserve the serious attention of politicians and public alike.’ The man and woman in the street, he added, know that their world is changing; they demand political responses in addition to technological ones.

I venture to suggest that these matters are of critical relevance to a society like ours. India is engrossed in challenges of development and political empowerment. It is one-sixth of the world in terms of population and is a microcosm of the diversities that characterise our world. It has been rightly called ‘the largest multicultural society in the world.’ The accommodation of diversity has been an Indian trait down the ages, made possible by an innate capacity for synthesis.

How do we use this asset in the future?

In what manner can we harness it for accommodating the competing demands of identity, autonomy and integration in a world that is perennially shrinking and inter-dependent?

How would this translate into institutions and practices?

How would it impact on the daily lives of citizens? What may be the pitfalls that need to be avoided?

What, in concrete terms, should be expectations of youth from society?

A healthy society faces these, and related questions, and responds to them meaningfully.

The process of social cohesion proceeds from small groups to larger ones; each step enlarges the common agenda and reveals points of convergence and divergence; each divergence necessitates a choice: rejection or adjustment in the wider framework. In this manner rights and duties, as also adjustment and accommodation become integral to social life. The process also reveals a desire to distinguish between what is shared and what is held close to the chest. The latter generates the impulse for self-management or autonomy, to the exclusion of those who participate in managing the realm of what is shared. It thus becomes an essential characteristic of identity and reflects on patterns of governance. When transferred to the sphere of public life, it takes the shape of several autonomies – horizontal, vertical, political, fiscal and cultural - that may be sought. In this sense, autonomy ceases to be an exceptional principle in a democracy and, instead, becomes one of its essential ingredients functioning, in the words of one scholar, as ‘autonomies in perpetual dialogue among themselves, linked by respective responsibilities to retain the autonomous places in a dialogic universe’.

It needs to be admitted straight away that the question of identity, integration and social cohesion is complex and necessitates conscious and continuous efforts at calibration of challenges and responses. It requires identification and justification of areas of autonomy and integration.

Two other terms, deprivation and alienation, are contextually relevant in relation to groups. The former signifies persons who find themselves disadvantaged or lacking for reasons beyond their control; the latter denotes estrangement, social isolation and powerlessness. Both impact on social cohesion.

A clear distinction is to be made between assimilation and integration. The former implies the blending or fusing of minority groups or cultures into the dominant society or culture. It is usually reflective of the desire of the dominant group on grounds of cultural nationalism and is resented and resisted by minority ones. Integration, on the other hand, implies the movement of minority groups and the underprivileged sections of a society, without erasing their identity, into the mainstream of the society to give them full access to the opportunities, rights and services available to the members of the mainstream. It is always a two-way street and thus goes hand in hand with social solidarity.

The debate on identity, autonomy and integration was part of the Indian discourse in the Freedom Movement and in the formative period of the Constitution. In the words of a distinguished academic, ‘the Indian Constitution was well ahead of its time not only in recognizing diversities but also in providing for representation of the collectivities in the formal democratic structures.’ The special provisions for guarantees or affirmative action in six broad categories – caste, class, backwardness, religion, region, sex and language – is evidence of this approach for securing justice and ensuring cultural autonomy in a composite culture within a framework of a quasi-federal structure driven by an overriding imperative of maintaining territorial integrity.

Closer scrutiny shows that the multiple identities so recognized are amplified in our Constitution for legal and operative purposes and total as many as thirteen - identities grounded in religion; identities grounded in language; caste identities; tribal identities; community identities, such as in the case of the Anglo-Indian community; class identities, such as in the case of the socially and educationally backward classes; racial identities, notably prohibiting discrimination on grounds of race and permitting notification of specific races or groups within races to be deemed to be Scheduled Castes; gender identities; identities grounded in region, place of birth or residence, especially in the context of prohibition of discrimination and provisions contained in Part XXI of the Constitution; identities based on age, such as those provisions relating to children and the aged; minority identities, whether based on religion, language, script or culture; identities grounded in descent, especially in the context of non-discrimination on grounds of descent; and identities based on occupation, such as agricultural or industrial workers, defence personnel or civil servants etc.

Accommodation of diversity has thus been consciously incorporated as a distinctive feature of the Indian state. It implies that a standardized image of an Indian cannot be constructed; if presented, it is partial, incomplete, misleading. Despite this accommodative framework, there have been acts of omission and commission impacting on identity and integration issues.

Perceptions have evolved nationally and globally and highlight areas that remain to be addressed. Democratic politics and economic liberalisation has also strengthened regionalist trends. Linguistic reorganization has ceased to be the culmination of the process of expression of identities. Linguistically homogenous states have been subdivided over grievances of development. New demands for statehood continue to be made on grounds of ethnicity, culture or regional grievances. The imperative of better governance adds a sense of urgency to these.



These impulses of identity assertion and recognition confront two contradictory trends at the micro and macro levels. On the one hand, forms of identity assertion at national and state levels combined with existing patterns of political mobilisation have been perceived as thwarting the impulses towards internal integration and consolidation. A modern market economy does not coexist with autarky. On the contrary, societal transformation resulting from economic growth and urbanization has erased or downplayed certain identities while emphasizing new ones. Each of these impacts the political agenda at local, regional and national levels.



At the other end of the spectrum, we are living in a global village where new integrating impulses have gone beyond national boundaries weaving nations into a common fabric of economic and financial architecture, shared membership of multi-lateral institutions and common value systems governing individual and state behaviour. Countervailing forces have also emerged. Thus, globalization has produced a counter trend of resurgence of nationalism and of an emphasis on national and cultural identities. Domestically, one notices certain unhealthy trends towards a homogenising nationalism that flattens diversities, and has little respect for local cultures, value systems and ways of life.

What do these developments mean to common citizens? What indeed is our vision of the interplay between identity and integration in the 21st century?

First, it is clear that living in isolation is not an option. It is nevertheless essential to realize that there are many ways of living together. Integration is necessary and desirable; assimilation is neither desirable nor practical. Throughout our history, we have seen identities being built on a series of inclusions and exclusions reflective of ground realities. The challenge in the future, as in the past, would be to maintain a balance in favour of inclusions.

Second, political management of identities and ethnicities has tended to vary between accommodation, polarization and manipulation. The only workable arrangement for a country of our diversity is accommodation in a constitutional and democratic framework. This necessitates negotiations with the state, and by the state. The politics of polarization and manipulation practices should have no place in our country.

Third, in an evolving polity and a developing economy, institutional dynamism plays an important role in making the conceptual transition from plurality to multiculturalism. The latter ‘is concerned with issues of equality: it asks, whether the different communities living together peacefully, co-exist as equals in the public arena.’ Such an approach would result in ‘a form of citizenship that is marked neither by a universalism generated by complete homogenisation, nor by the particularism of self-denial and closed communities.’ Such a vision of society would be contingent on the citizen body imbibing a new set of values.

Fourth, the youth in the age group of 15-35 years constitutes nearly 40 per cent of the total population of India. It is the same in the case of Jammu and Kashmir. This group represents the most vibrant and dynamic demographic segment and constitutes potentially a most valuable human resource. Youth empowerment would mean effective participation in decision making processes, with requisite knowledge, skills and capabilities. It is premised on attainment of higher educational levels and expertise by our young citizens, in line with their abilities and aptitudes, and access to employment opportunities.

How is it possible?

Two years ago I had, as the Chairman of the Working Group constituted by the Prime Minister on Confidence Building Measures, submitted a set of recommendations which also focussed on the Kashmiri youth. The issue was also addressed in the Report of the Working Group on Economic Development of J&K. The Prime Minister had expressed complete agreement with the view that implementation of the Working Group recommendations was the key to retaining the confidence of the people.

There is no option but to reconstruct the economy of the state ravaged by two decades of militancy. The potential of youth must be utilised to get out of the ‘backwardness trap’ of low economic activity, low employment and low income generation. Better education and health for the youth lead to inclusive growth where the poor continue to grow and benefit from it.

The graduating students today represent a minuscule and fortunate elite among youth having obtained tertiary education. We need to focus on creating adequate facilities for technical and vocational education, for skill up-gradation and improving employability of youth. New opportunities in services sector, including in the IT industry, must be made available to the youth of Jammu & Kashmir.

The youth of Jammu & Kashmir, like in the rest of the country, want to fulfil their potential, lead lives with dignity and honour and contribute to their communities and the nation. The Government is committed to enable this and thus herald a new future for the people of Jammu & Kashmir.

How realistic is such an approach? The answer seems to lie in our experience with other innovative norms that challenged orthodoxy. The processes of devolution of power to Panchayats and Nagar Palikas, the acceptance of the need for transparency in governance, the insistence on fundamental rights and observance of human rights norms, are instances of new perceptions impacting on state practice. Each proclaims a new beginning; none can yet claim perfection; all need to be pursued vigorously. The challenge, as Richard Falk would put it, is for ‘morally sensitive and forward-looking political forces’ to ‘seek unexplored normative potential.’ No segment of public is better qualified to do it than the youth. For them immobility, retreat, or disinterest is not an option.

I felicitate the students graduating today and wish them success in life. They would, I venture to hope, hold aloft the banner of the University and adhere to its motto. As citizens they should remember Edmund Burke’s dictum that ‘the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ To do so meaningfully, they need to heed Allama Iqbal’s advice:

Jab tak na zindagi ke haqaiq pe ho nazar

Tera zajaj ho na sake ga hareef-e-sang.

The focus, above all, has to be on self development:

Taamir-e-khudi kar, asar aahe rasa daikh.

I am grateful to the Chancellor of the University for inviting me to participate in the Convocation today”.

SK/BS

TERROISM IN NORTH EAST INDIA

Terrorism in North East India(Article)


New Delhi, June 9(ANI)Book Review: Assam:Terrorism And The Demographic challenge, by Col. Anil Bhat
Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi. K.W. Publishers. Price Rs. 195/

It has been reported that the notorious United Liberation Front of Assam militant Paresh Baruah has been seen in China looking for arms and to have a respite from the pressure that he was facing in Bangladesh by the Sheikh Hasina government, which was cracking down on anti-India groups.

That Paresh Baruah will feel at ‘home’ in China should not surprise anyone in India. The Chinese have provided shelter to many insurgent groups functioning in northeast India since the sixties.

India has been fighting an insurgency in the northeast for nearly five decades. Initially it started in Nagaland with the support of the Baptist Church. Christian Missionaries were active in the what was then known as the Naga Hills and Tuensang Area, and they were telling tribal Nagas that they did not belong to India .

A. Z. Phizo led the first groups of Naga ‘underground’ militants. Initially, the Government of India deployed the Assam Rifles to contain the Naga militants and later sent out regular Army units.

Following the Sino-India War of 1962, the government cracked down on Naga militants. Talks were held with underground Nagas with the help of Reverend Michael Scott and an accord was reached with prominent Naga leaders.

Underground Nagas who decided to give up their quest for ‘independence’ were inducted into the security forces. A separate Naga Regiment was formed, and the underground Nagas were given training at the Kumaon Regimental Centre in Ranikhet. The Naga Regiment has been participating in regular operations of the Indian Army, winning accolades.

The success of the Indian Army in the fight against Pakistan in 1971 alerted the adversaries of the country to fan anti-Indian elements in the northeast. While the initial problem was confined to the border areas of East Pakistan, the trouble extended to the whole of the northeast in the late seventies.

The northeast covers an area of 262,170 square kilometers and includes states of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and Sikkim

The area, as pointed out by Col Anil Bhat in his book ‘Assam, Terrorism And The Demographic Challenge’, has a 4,500 kilometre long international border with five foreign countries - Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma(Mynmar), China and Nepal. India had assumed that the emergence of Bangladesh in 1971 had strengthened security in the area, but the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 1975 and the coming into power of a military ruler (Zia-ur-Rahman) changed the whole situation.

The Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistan and the Chinese extended support to the militant groups in Assam, Nagaland , Manipur and Tripura. A ‘Peoples Liberation Army’ came into being in Manipur, and in Assam, trouble erupted with the influx of people from Bangladesh.

The discontent in Assam over the influx from Bangladesh saw the emergence of the All Assam Students Union and the Assam Agitation. . It also saw the setting up of a militant force in the form of the United Liberation Front of Assam in 1979. Following the signing of the Assam Accord by Rajiv Gandhi in 1985, efforts were made to get the cadres of the ULFA to surrender. It saw the creation of SULFA or Surrendered ULFA. The militant group by then had found patrons across the border and continued to survive and grow.



Manipur saw the emergence of militant groups, having tribal loyalties. The Meiteis, who are against Nagas , formed their own militant groups. They have been receiving arms from forces in China. Addiction to drugs is one of the highest in the country in Manipur.

Mizoram, Tripura and Meghalaya have also been affected by militancy at some time or the other. The Mizo Accord brought peace to the state, and firm action by the local government, has contained militancy. Meghalaya, which has a porous border with Bangladesh, has been at the receiving end of infiltration, the scale of trouble depending on the nature of the Government in Dacca.

Anil Bhat has pointed out how the militancy has survived in the northeast because of the indecisiveness of the Central and State governments. Operation Bajrang was launched in 1990 and when it was almost succeeding, a cease-fire came into being. The ULFA militants fled to Bangladesh and reorganized their forces. Paresh Baruah as been in touch with the ISI ever since.

Similar has been the fate of Operation Rhino launched on September 15 1991. The practice of giving grants to ULFA militants when they surrender has given rise to groups who style themselves as ULFA militants only to surrender and get the grants.

The State governments in Assam have been reluctant to hand over the operations against the ULFA to the Army. When the situation deteriorated, a ‘unified command’ was put in operation.. The action against the ULFA terrorists have always been executed with the security forces fighting with one hand tied behind their back.

It is a fact that people in the northeast have many grievances. The militants are exploiting the grievances. There are human rights groups and elements who press for a ‘peaceful solution’, through dialogue. Pressures from activists like Indira Goswami made the Government of India offer amnesty to terrorists if they agreed to come for talks.

As pointed out in the monograph it has been ‘all dialogues-no peace’.

Col Anil Bhat functioned for nearly a decade as the spokesperson for the Security Forces in the northeast and in the Capital and has been a witness to the unfinished national agenda in the northeast. The present monograph he has authored for the Centre for Land Warfare Studies has held a mirror to the situation in the northeast.

Dr Manmohan Singh, who is a Member of Parliament from Assam, has indicated that the Centre is keen to ensure that problems faced by India’s ‘Land of the Rising Sun’. The new Government has declared its determination to take firm action against the terrorists operating in the area.

People in the north- east have high hopes terrorism would soon face a ’sun-set’ there. By I. Ramamohan Rao