---

ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN KASHMIR

In Kashmir even before the present turmoil, civil society was already weak due to political uncertainty and lack of democratic space. People demonstrating even for the sake of lack in civic amenities were killed and dubbed as anti-Indians. When the armed uprising started in 1989, there were mass demonstrations in solidarity with the armed uprising and in favour of right of self-determination. To crush the popular sentiment the Government of India used violence and bloodshed. The armed uprising further paralysed the civil society forcing people to take individual options than collective options. Due to the internal and external terror lot of fear, distrust and suspicion is generated amongst the people. Some of the activists of Coalition of Civil Society after repeated interaction with the Indian civil society, which visited Kashmir to monitor the human rights situation and through its support, the civil society in Kashmir has got rejuvenated. The support comes after the realization that Kashmir imbroglio has caused visible violations of the human rights of Kashmiris and invisible violations of those of Indians. Moreover, it is being widely understood that Kashmir is the cause of militarization and nuclearisation of South Asia, which is advancing to the flashpoint and draining the economy of India as well as Pakistan.

            The Kashmir civil society got organized to build institutions, which could work as watchdogs in the trouble-torn state. This also happened in Palestine during Intifada in 1987. Salim Tarimi of PLO, justifying the need for such institutions, was right when he said, “When Palestinian state arrives, it will not arrive in vacuum. It will already have an infrastructure of political and civil institutions to support it”. In Kashmir we have history of politicians letting down the aspirations of people. Whenever they are struggling for the right of self-determination of the Kashmiri people or are in opposition, they stand for human rights, civil liberties and democracy. But when they grab power they stifle the dissent, curtail civil liberties and incarcerate the political opponents to appease the Federal Government. Even after 1947 the leaders of National Conference, which was spearheading the independence struggle of Kashmir from the feudal king and was widely supported by the masses became despotic. The history of politicians here is to consolidate their power by appeasing the Federal Government. It can be said with certainty that the present politicians/leaders championing the cause of Kashmiri struggle in the name of human rights and political rights cannot be different, once they come into power in whatever political dispensation. We have a history of people fighting monsters become monsters themselves. The political rights and human rights cannot be protected without a strong and vibrant civil society. This global concept is gaining momentum and it is believed that 21^st century will be the people’s century. Reinforcement of civil society is necessary, and the culture of intolerance is to be replaced by culture of dialogue, reconciliation and understanding for ensuring peace and democracy. The civil society has to evolve a long-term strategy. It is the civil society, which has to strive and force a peaceful solution to Kashmir imbroglio.

In India, civil society is getting stronger because of growing democratic space. The issues of militarization, globalization, nuclearisation, fundamentalism, terrorism, communalism and other issues, which effect people directly, are being agitated by the civil society. Even in military-ruled Pakistan, civil society is gaining strength despite the derailment of democracy there. We witness how people-to-people contact or “Track-II diplomacy” has become effective between India and Pakistan. The people’s initiatives are dispelling the traditional distress and animosity, which have held the two neighbouring countries hostage. These steps have to a large extent generated opinion in the support of enduring peace and resolution of political difference. The governments of both the countries will not be able to ignore the public opinion, which is the only weapon of the civil society. The way civil society is marching ahead in the newly established democracies in the third world countries, it is emerging as a countervailing power viz. a viz. government policy making and influences governments directly or indirectly to end abuse of power, create awareness among the people and mould public opinion.