Srinagar, Aug 6 (IANS) Even when Jammu and Kashmir’s Maharaja Hari Singh acceded all parts of his domain to India, the tribal invasion, sponsored, aided, and assisted by Pakistan, divided the erstwhile state into two parts, and the forcibly occupied areas of the state like Muzaffarabad, Gilgit, and Baltistan came to be known as parts of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).
The division of the state by force through Pakistan-sponsored tribal invasion created not only two politically and constitutionally diametrically opposed parts of J&K, but also created what is called the “Kashmir problem”, which essentially is related to the forcible occupation of parts of the princely state of J&K that acceded to India, but was in part occupied by Pakistan and continues to be so.
J&K acceded to secular, democratic, and egalitarian India while the forcibly occupied parts of the erstwhile princely state came under the power of the government of Pakistan, which, in reality, meant that the military ruled the territory of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
A stooge Prime Minister headed PoK for name’s sake, but since 1947 every so-called Prime Minister of PoK had to take his orders from the army that had control over both the federal and occupied territories like mainland PoK and Gilgit Baltistan.
Democratic governments came to power in J&K right from 1947, while the military of Pakistan decided the Prime Ministership, read Residency, of PoK.
Prime Ministers came to head the Pakistan-occupied parts of J&K, but in reality they did not command power over either the bureaucracy or the day-to-day governance. The gap between J&K and PoK is not a matter of geography or demography, but a reflection of the systemic difference in governance in which one is participatory and reform-oriented and the other extractive and centralised.
J&K has progressed democratically, getting more than its share of central assistance even when local and non-centric parties headed J&K for most of the time since 1947.
Regional and centric forces worked together to strengthen democracy and ensure that the benefits of development reach the common man irrespective of religion.
The contrast became highly uncomfortable for Pakistan. To retard or stop the pace of development in J&K and to keep the people of PoK under a tight leash, Pakistan started sponsoring terrorism in J&K. It is now widely clear that starting terrorism in J&K was an unavoidable compulsion for Pakistan if it wanted to keep the people’s anger and frustration under control in PoK.
The developmental contrast had become highly disturbing for Pakistan, and unable to give the benefits of democracy to the people in PoK, Pakistan stoked violence in J&K. Whenever genuine democratic aspirations came to disturb the federal command over PoK, the Pakistan Army and its so-called political masters told people of PoK to beware; Kashmir was burning.
Fire, anger, despondency and frustration were simmering in PoK as Pakistan pushed more mercenaries and weapons to fruitlessly ensure that J&K also remained plagued by public discontent and violence.
The fire was started by Pakistan and its sponsored terrorists in J&K, but it was silently engulfing PoK. Despite the worst terrorist violence, J&K not only remained an integral part of India, but also exhibited its anger against those frustrated by the people’s progress on this side of the line of control (LoC).
The denial of rights of property to daughters, decentralisation of authority, and devolution of democracy to the grassroots level were achieved by the abrogation of Article 370.
Women, denied property rights, became masters of their destiny and power was devolved to the grassroots level through the Panchayati Raj institutions.
Investment, restricted to some privileged families in J&K, has become a level playing field for all investors of the country.
Monopolies on property, education, government jobs, and official privileges have been done away with, and J&K has become a truly self-governed model for the political players with competition and challenges to which these parties had been immune before the abrogation of Article 370.
Democracy has become more deeply rooted and participative with district development councils in 2020 and a legislative assembly in 2024. All central schemes like the Ayushman Bharat and dozens of other people-friendly schemes became applicable to J&K.
The little-known fact is that the Central government has walked the extra mile in J&K with regard to the Ayushman Bharat scheme. While every other states/Union Territories have restrictions of income for getting the benefits under the flagship health programme, J&K has no such restrictions for getting the benefits under the scheme.
–IANS
sq/vd