Right to Self Determination

The Right to Self Determination

(Is Nobody’s Exclusive Right)

                                                                                                                               Lalit K Kaul

A heterogeneous society like the one that existed in the erstwhile J&K state/ now exists in the UT of J&K, is a collage comprising multiple ethnicities, religious affiliations and cultural diversities. For sheer reasons of making livelihoods (the base level) people with different religious, cultural and ethnic backgrounds interact amongst themselves and that binds them in an inalienable relationship transcending all the differences that may exist between them in other dimensions of life. It may be just a need based relationship that may not have any emotional content in it, but a civilized existence demands space for each and every socio ethnic religious group else, it remains devastated.

Political aspirations/affiliations, despite all bonhomie between different sections, need not have a point of conciliation. The test of civilized behaviour lies in acceptance of the existing political difference of opinions.

‘Right to Self Determination’ is fundamentally a political construct (one considered to be subjective) in that a race/community/ethnic group conceptualizes organization of societies on premises/precepts different from the prevalent one. It is quite natural for these constructs to be multifarious in a pluralistic society and, therefore, it ordains that every section of a pluralistic society have the same and equal Right to the principle of ‘Right to Self Determination’. This is the only civilized way because no community/race can claim to have the sole/bigger/unquestioned Right while others don’t. If such a claim is made then it is not only irrational, but also uncivilized. This is so because people with different cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds- in a pluralistic society -   could have precepts not in conciliation with the others (Axiom).

Therefore, in the erstwhile state of J&K, if the Muslims of Kashmir arrogated on to themselves the ‘Right to Self Determination’ the Dogras, the Pandits, the Gujjar-Bakarwals and around other 131 ethnicities in the region naturally acquired the same right; that is, to decide whether to go along with the political aspirations of the Kashmiri Muslims as articulated by their leaders (with questionable following in terms of sheer numbers) or not. Plebiscite or no plebiscite; the right to decide has to be acknowledged and honoured while implementing this principle on the ground, because human beings are different from herds of sheep.

Perhaps the local leadership rooting for ‘Right to Self Determination’ did not appreciate that 1990 was not 1947 and that 2020 is not 1990, and so on. What’s implied herein is that since 1947 there has been remarkable growth in the middle class in all religious-cultural-ethnic groups and politics is governed by middle class aspirations. Where do they find their bread buttered they align along that direction combined with where they perceive possibilities in power sharing unless they are solely motivated by religious affinities.

In Kashmir, for example, the Pandits have as much claim to this right as do others. There can be no scientific rationale to deprive a community their right to live as per their world view because of the numbers. Life and its dynamics are not subjugated to number game. Politics cannot subjugate human minds because creation cannot enslave the creator. Pandits draw their socio-cultural and socio-religious heritage from the hills, the lakes, the rivers and the terrains of Kashmir Valley from where many profound philosophies for understanding the Universe and Man’s relationship to it emerged; the temples that used to be the places of learning, worshipping and socializing as also for debates (between the Acharyas) to unfold the Ultimate Reality. Temples were not just meant for what has come to be classified as Idol worshipping (as a derogatory reference) by those who don’t understand the basics of the Vedic philosophy.

The assertion of their ‘Right to Self Determination’ is exemplified (demonstrated) through their political demand of carving out a Homeland for them to the North & East of River Jhelum; likewise the Dogras and the Gujjar-Bakarwals, etcetera may do, in due time, for their own reasons. The demand of the Pandits is registered worldwide and acknowledged (noticed) by the then Secretary of State Ms. Condila Rice of the USA, in 1991.

The reason why the Kashmiri society was traumatized was that the self proclaimed leadership of the Kashmiri Muslims (as promoted by Pakistan for their own nefarious political designs) refused to accept the pluralistic nature of the society in the erstwhile state of J&K. It refused to think in a civilized way that every individual has equal right to live and that no single religion in a pluralistic society can decide for the political inclinations of the people as a whole in a unilateral way.

History teaches many a lessons; the choice a community/ race/sub-nationality have to make: to learn from it or to perpetually live in it. The kind of response to historical events shapes/decides the destiny of races across the Globe.