The changing narrative in the valley CENJOWS 16 May 18

The changing narrative in the valley CENJOWS 16 May 18

A few recent events in the valley need to be assessed in totality to draw relevant deductions. Firstly, since the nineties, when terrorists including locals who had joined terror groups, began implementing their own brand of justice by killing Kashmiri’s against whom they had a grudge, such incidents have been rare. It was this wanton killing which drove a wedge leading to alienation of terrorists from the masses and resulted in security forces regaining the initiative. Its re-emergence in recent times is possibly aimed at creating fear within the common Kashmiri and obtaining forcible support, however is also leading to alienation.

Secondly, stone pelting has been in vogue for decades, but rarely have local school children and tourists been targeted. It was aimed at security forces, who initially maintained restraint, no longer. Incidents of strong counters by security forces are on the rise, adding to alienation of the local population and its exploitation by anti-national elements. Incidents of targeting innocents and tourists is possibly linked to a larger design of isolating the valley from the nation. Those who criticized the recent incidents, including the separatists, have done so solely for media attention.

Stone pelting which had reduced post demonetization as also following NIA and ED raids on hawala transactions is back again. The gusto with which the NIA and ED commenced their investigation appears to have fizzled out and fund flows are back on track. Terror groups have stopped raiding banks for funds. With no shortfall of funds, money to support stone throwing and increased violence has re-emerged. Only those caught in the sting operation, conducted by a news channel, remain behind bars, the others are back in the valley. The reasons for the lack of push by the NIA and ED remains a mystery.

Thirdly, interference in security force operations is also increasing, with locals prepared and ready with stones. Response by the security agencies has been equally strong, leading to casualties. In rare cases, security forces have called off the operation, aware that the same militants would be trapped soon, after all he who picks the gun, dies by it.

Fourthly, most of the terrorists being eliminated in towns and villages are local militants, who though have picked the gun, yet remain insecure, hence operate close to their home base, banking on assistance from stone pelters in case they are trapped. Most are ill-trained and ill-equipped. Thus, while numbers joining militancy are on the rise, so is the level of elimination. Figures declared till Apr state 33 civilians, 28 security personnel and 72 terrorists have been killed this year. The fact that information flows to security forces on the presence of militants is indicative of animosity between them and the local populace.

As per a report in the Kashmir Reader last week, Syed Geelani commented that a ‘few black sheep’ are working as informers of armed forces and they are responsible for increased encounters. He went on to add, ‘They, for petty gains are providing inputs to the forces.’ He made these comments while addressing the funeral gathering of slain assistant professor Mohamed Rafi over the telephone.

Fifthly, local terrorists knowing that they are ill-trained and have a bleak chance of survival yet hesitate to surrender. This is because of either being dubbed a coward locally or fear of future harassment. It could also be because an eliminated terrorist is glorified, while a surrendered is insulted. Therefore, despite all calls by the DGP J and K and senior army officials, surrenders have not occurred at desired rates. Possibly by moving surrendered militants away from their home districts, would there be more.

With the above resulting in mounting casualties on all sides, Mehbooba had requested the government to declare a ‘ceasefire’ from the commencement of Ramzan, later this month, till the conclusion of the Amarnath Yatra, in August. Her intention was to break the cycle of violence and re-establish confidence. Her claim that this request is from all political parties in the state was wrong as its alliance partner, the BJP, disagreed.

The army chief in an interview to a national daily almost at the same time stated that while he is ‘ready to suspend’ military operations to avoid civilian casualties, ‘but who would guarantee that there won’t be fire against our men or at our vehicles. Who will guarantee that policemen, political workers and our men returning home on leave are not attacked or killed’. Further, stone pelting would continue, which again is hazardous and would be retaliated to, hence recommencing the cycle of violence.

Historically the Hizbul Mujahideen had proposed a ceasefire in Jul 2000 but withdrew it when India refused to accept Pak as a third party in talks for resolving Kashmir. The ‘Non-initiation of Combat Operations (NICO)’ declared by Vajpayee in Nov 2000 was effective for a limited duration but had no tangible result. It lasted 58 days and during it blasts occurred at Srinagar airport, Doordarshan studio, police and security posts. During this period, militants killed over 170 civilians. It provided militants time to regroup and had to be called off when they began pressurizing locals.

The present call by Mehbooba appears to be ill-timed. By removing cases against known stone pelters she has given them a free hand, leading to enhanced casualties. The streak of violence continues across the region. While security forces may restrict their operations only based on hard intelligence, however, militant groups and stone throwers would never adhere to it. On the contrary, it would enable them to enhance recruitment, training and attacks on isolated posts and individuals. Thus logically, the defence minister, projecting the army’s viewpoint rejected the call.

The army chief’s statement on ‘Azadi’ being only a dream, did invite criticism, yet is the reality. Never, irrespective of levels of violence, could a part of the state ever be permitted to break away. The initial Pak plan was to tie down the Indian army, not seek a breakaway, as they remain aware that it is nigh impossible. They have never permitted it in their troubled western provinces and are aware of the Indian army might. Yet, they play these cards, seeking to befool the local populace, who unless they understand the game, would remain puppets of Pak and their proxies in India.

The balance of power has clearly shifted into the hands of security forces. Local militants remain under pressure and are constantly on the move. Pak based militants remain in hiding, rarely being encountered. Direct attacks on security forces are limited and rare. As the army chief stated number of kills do not count as the cycle of violence would continue.

As the changing narrative proves, while local alienation may exist, control and domination by security forces is complete. Despite any action by security forces, stone pelting would continue as the youth have been made to believe that they could succeed in their demands for ‘Azadi’. Declaring a unilateral NICO may change this narrative, hence has been rightly rejected.

Nirmal Singh: Breaking rules and locking horns with army in J and K The Quint 17 May 18

In the latest incident of responsible politicians breaking norms and rules while constructing residential accommodation in areas designated as security risks is the present speaker of the state assembly and earlier deputy CM of J and K, Nirmal Singh. His house, presently under construction is on a plot 530M from the security wall of the Nagrota ammunition dump. The land was purchased in 2014. Nirmal claims that he and the present Dy CM, Kavinder Gupta purchased the land through a company they had established in 2000.

This construction prompted the Corps Commander to directly write to the Speaker, Nirmal Singh, on the issue because the local administration was not responding to the army’s repeated requests to stop construction work, considering his appointment. The Corps Commander wrote that the house is ‘illegal’ and ‘has implications on the security of a major ammunition storage facility as well as safety of all personnel living in close vicinity of the ammunition depot’.

Nirmal Singh in response claimed that the action of the army was ‘politically motivated’. He went on to add, ‘I have no legal binding that I cannot do the construction. What the army is claiming, it is their view and not binding on me’. He went on to accuse the army, ‘They (army) don’t let people even construct a toilet. People are harassed. Why don’t they get a stay, they can’t do it? There shouldn’t have been an ammunition depot in this place.’

In Aug 2017, the same Nirmal Singh praised the army for its functioning and retaliating to Pak ceasefire violations. In Feb this year he stated, ‘Army as an institution is making sacrifices for the country.’ On being appointed speaker, he stated that he would work to serve the nation and the state. How is accusing the army of being political and refusing to obey orders issued by the local authority serving the interests of the nation and the state?

The violations as listed by the army in the letter were, ‘the construction is in violation of the Works of defence act 1903, as also government of India, ministry of defence notification dated 26 Sep 2002. Further, as per the notification issued by DC, Jammu on 7th Aug construction activity within 1000 yards of the ammunition depot has been prohibited’.

An ammunition depot is always a high-risk area as it has explosives of multiple varieties stored in sheds based on its content. Distances are maintained between sheds to prevent sympathetic detonation between different forms of explosives and reduce damage in case of an accident. Though well protected, ammunition depots remain choice targets for anti-national elements. The explosion at the ammunition depot at Khundru, located close to Anantnag, in 2007, though accidental, had multiple terror groups claiming responsibility, which was rebuked by the authorities.

The ministry of defence had issued guidelines to prevent collateral civilian casualties in 2002. Based on these guidelines depots began interacting with state government representatives to notify a 1000m area around the depot as no-construction zones. These guidelines exist with all state governments and have been in many cases implemented. These are not aimed at securing the area for further construction or for harassment of local population, but for their own security, in case of any accident.

This distance has been violated over the years compelling the government to have local DC’s issue notices preventing any new construction within 1000 M of ammunition depots. Details of those who have constructed prior to issue of guidelines have been noted and state governments asked to maintain these records to cater for compensation in case of accidents. Fresh construction is banned.

Nagrota is based in a region which has witnessed regular terrorist strikes. Hence this depot would always be a prime target. As construction activity increases around the depot, it reduces area open for surveillance and monitoring by security forces. If the top political authorities of the state are the first to break rules, others would follow, only enhancing security risks.

Nirmal’s claims and defence of his actions are baseless and without understanding the reasons behind the army’s actions. Considering his political experience, it is surprising that he claims army action is politically motivated and illegal, after all, the letter was sent in Mar, when he was the deputy CM of the state. Since his violations were clearly listed, it would have taken him no time to clear the veracity of the army’s claims and even study the notification of the DM. His statement indicates his stubbornness, immaturity and unwillingness to follow the law of the land, which he himself has vowed to protect.

The army is clearly apolitical, which the nation is aware of and hence there is no reason for it to adopt any political stance. Further, it is his political party (BJP) which is in power at the centre and in the state coalition. There is no opposition which could have influenced the army to act, except the circumstances of his breaking rules and regulations. It was forced to approach him directly, when local authorities, fearful of his appointment as Dy CM, refused to convey the message. Instead of seeking to cooperate, he has adopted an offensive approach and challenged the army to obtain a stay order.

Legally, the army can obtain a stay order as it is on the right side of the law, not him, and if it does so, then it would embarrass him and his own party further. Stay orders have been obtained against illegal construction in Kolkata and other places and these cases are still being challenged in courts. The Adarsh building in Mumbai is a prime example. Most respondents have lost cases as they have bypassed rules. The same would be the case with him. Further battling the case all the way to the supreme court would tarnish his image, not that of the army.

It is for maintaining the dignity of his office and his standing in the BJP that he must offer an immediate unconditional apology to the army and stop construction. It is also for the head of the party in the state, Ram Madhav, to force Nirmal to act in a dignified manner, rather than adopting an accusatory approach, which would compel the army to seek a stay order and embarrass the party and himself. The earlier he responds, the better it would be for his dented image.