Understanding the J&K Dispute: Government of India and People of J&K

At the second level J&K dispute refers to the relations between the Indian administered regions of J&K and the Government of India. The J&K territory east of the Line of Control (LOC) is formally a part of the Indian Union and west of the LOC is a part of Pakistan. Escaping popular attention and media limelight, the people of J&K have demanded redressal for their numerous grievances against the political leadership of the State and Government of India (GOI).

The Maharaja of J&K had signed the Instrument of Accession with the GOI on the condition that all major issues of governance would be administered by the State authorities. This special State-Center relationship was legally provided for by the Indian Constituent Assembly through Article 370 in October 1949. Article 370 ensured a special status and internal autonomy for J&K with jurisdiction of the Central government confined to the three areas agreed in the IOA, namely defense, foreign affairs and communications. In July 1952 Sheikh Abdullah, the popular leader of National Conference in J&K, signed the Delhi Agreement with the Government of India providing for the autonomy of the State within India and of regions within the State.
Later demands for greater autonomy made the Central Government despise the leadership of Sheik Abdullah in J&K. In August 1953 Abdullah was replaced by Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed as the former was delaying the confirmation of the accession of J&K to India. In 1956 J&K approved of the state constitution and this was followed by a series of Presidential and constitutional Orders diluting the autonomy of the state and extending central authority to J&K. The Indira-Sheikh Accord of 1975 was the final nail in the coffin of autonomous rule in J&K.�
The deprivation of political autonomy and stationing of Indian military forces in J&K has been opposed by the people of J&K since the mid 1950s. Frequent rigging of State Assembly and National Parliament Elections, gross violation of human rights, indiscriminate shootings by Indian Armed Forces, deprivation of cultural and religious autonomy and the Special Armed Forces Act empowering the Army personnel are some of the most common grievances of the people of J&K. The story of how the 1987 election rigging turned Muhammad Yusuf Shah into Syed Salahuddin is cited as a proof of New Delhi’s intransigent policies towards J&K. As recently as February 2009, there have been widespread protests against the killing of three innocent young men by the Indian Army personnel without any apparent provocation. The very existence of armed forces has become a cause of insecurity for the local population. A Memorandum encompassing the people’s demand for justice was communicated to Chief Minister Omar Abdullah earlier this year. The Memorandum referred to issues of disappearances, torture, detention and torture centers, prisoner’s rights, rights of former militants, landmines and transparency in governance. Instances of undeclared curfew and civilian shootings are common in the State. The Human Rights Watch had released a Report in 2008 on how the Armed Forces Special Powers Act was employed in J&K as an instrument of abuse and oppression by the GOI.
The HAJY Group – an acronym representing the first letters of the names of four Kashmiri youth Hamid Sheikh, Ashfaq Wani, Javed Mir and Yasin Malik -  marked the beginning of Kashmiri armed struggle against the domination of the Indian authorities. The HAJY Group later emerged as the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Force (JKLF) and continues to demand for greater autonomy. Taking advantage of the unrest in the State, Pakistan sponsored groups like Harkat-ul-Mujahidden complicated the demands for autonomy by indulging in acts of violence. Nevertheless, Pakistan cannot be held solely responsible for the violence and anti-India sentiment in the State. The desperation of the Kashmir youth coupled with the complete disregard of the Kashmiri demands by the Government of India is primarily responsible for the current state of affairs in the State. In 1993 the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) was launched as an umbrella organization of social, political and religious groups in J&K demanding the right of self-determination for the people of the State. The definition of self-determination and measures for achieving it are highly diverse among the various constituents of the APHC, but the group is an expression of the dominant sentiment in the State.
In the words of Sumantra Bose , “The urge to azaadi (freedom) and Khudmuktari (self-rule) has a long and distinguished historical lineage associated with the politics of National Conference in the 1940s, Plebiscite Front between mid 1950s –mid 1970s, People’s League in the 1980s and the JKLF in the 1990s. The forms of struggle have varied over time, but in one form or another, this tenacious urge has defined politics in Kashmir for the past six decades.”
JKLF leader Yasin Malik rightly echoed the subtle dimensions of the J&K dispute when he stated that “Kashmir must not be seen as a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan, but as an issue involving the lives and aspirations of the Kashmiri people”. Thus Kashmir is as much a dispute between the people of J&K and the Government of India as it is between India and Pakistan.