Arpita Anant replies: There is no denying that historically, the state has a claim to a special status. At the time of Independence, the National Conference, which was the torchbearer for integration of the State of Jammu and Kashmir with India, also advocated for a special status i.e. autonomy within the Union of India. Given the circumstances at that juncture, a special status was granted vide Article 370 of the Constitution. It was then elaborated on by the Constitution Application to Jammu and Kashmir Order 1950; and further reiterated in the Delhi Agreement of 1952.

However, due to a combination of domestic and international developments, as Sheikh Abdullah moved away from a commitment to integration with special status, Nehru moved away from the commitment to autonomy. What followed were several years of a perceived ‘erosion of autonomy’. When the National Conference contested elections in 1996, it included the restoration of autonomy in its manifesto. More recently, the People’s Democratic Party too has articulated its own version of autonomy as part of its formula of self-rule.

Given the history, and the fact that the idea of autonomy is central to the political discourse of two important, and what are called ‘mainstream parties’ of the state, it will not be possible to simply amend the Constitution to withdraw the special status at this juncture.

Prashant Kr Singh replies: Recently, China has appeared to be revising its three-decade old policy of formal neutrality on the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan. In 1960s and 70s, China had supported Kashmir’s so-called right to self-determination and armed-rebellion against India. It had even supported Pakistan in its war against India in 1965 and 1971, though this support never crossed verbal limits. However in 1980s, it changed its policy due to combination of factors. It declared that the Kashmir issue was a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan and that they should settle it through peaceful diplomatic methods. Since then, China had followed this policy of formal neutrality on the Kashmir issue, though it continued to intensify its military (including nuclear) cooperation with Pakistan during this period. But now it seems that China wants to revise its policy on Kashmir. In the last few years, China has started issuing loose leaf stapled visas instead of properly stamped ones to the Indian citizens of Jammu and Kashmir.(J&K) Last year, it had denied visa to a General from the Indian Army who was commanding in that region. This implies that China does not recognise India’s sovereignty over J&K. However, China has not made any formal statement to this effect. It has simply conveyed that giving properly stamped visas to the Indian citizens of J&K would amount to Chinese recognition to India's authority on Laddakh which China claims as its own. But China is very subtly asserting disputed status of Kashmir by such actions. It has been observed that in international politics, when a state does not recognize another state’s authority over some territory, it does not issue a proper visa to the residents of that territory. By giving stapled visa to those residents, it registers its protest over the existing status of their citizenship. China has followed the same practice in case of Indian citizens of Arunachal Pradesh which it considers part of its territory.
Posted on April 07, 2011

Priyanka Singh replies: First of all, it is incorrect to assume there are no problems for Pakistan in the PoK (AJK and Gilgit Baltistan). There is simmering unrest in the PoK and a great deal of discontent amongst the people against Pakistan. There are nationalist groups who are demanding independence from Pakistan’s control over the region. Due to Pakistan’s deliberate strategy of not allowing these groups to flourish and denying them the right of expression, the leaders of such groups are forced to flee their homeland and operate from outside PoK, majority of them being based in Europe and US. The region has been kept under closed wraps largely beyond the reach of media attention. After the earthquake of 2005 when international relief poured in PoK, the ground realities including the existence of militant training camps were taken note of by the outside world.

However, the nature of problems which India faces in J&K is quite different from that of PoK. The biggest of all is the cross border militancy in J&K unleashed by Pakistan for more than two decades. Pakistan’s role in promoting terrorism against India lies at the core of the problems which the GOI faces in J&K. Popular sentiments resulting from governance issues have at times been tapped and manipulated by Pakistan to sponsor terrorism in J&K.

Ethnicity and culture rather than religion bears upon the state of affairs in PoK. The demographic composition of the region has been tampered by Pakistan to reduce the majority of shias into a minority. Sectarian clashes between the people have led to violent incidents thus serving Pakistan’s purpose behind divisive politics. This has led to further disaffection in PoK gravely hurting the sensitivities of people on culture and origin.

India provides fair democratic processes in J&K which allow dissidence, debate and discourse. In the absence of basic rights and liberties, the possibility of street protests and demonstrations in PoK are far fetched. The political processes in PoK are farce- designed merely to strengthen Pakistan’s unlawful control on the region.