Archive of South Asia Citizens Wire | feeds from sacw.net | @sacw
Home > National Interest vs People’s Interest : A space for social movements and (...) > Kashmir: ’Democracy’ Through Repression and Intimidation

Kashmir: ’Democracy’ Through Repression and Intimidation

by Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal, 26 October 2008

print version of this article print version

Kashmir Times, 26 October 2008

A simple logic tells us what is undemocratic cannot be justified in the name of pursuit of an exercise that is touted to be democratic. If road to democratic processes is to be littered by undemocratic and repressive means, then going by the Aristotelian principle of Law of Excluded Middle, what is deemed democratic may also be not democratic. So how does the democratic process of electioneering get strengthened by series of repressive measures in Kashmir in a bid to ensure that voting takes place ’peacefully’? Elections are being held in Jammu and Kashmir on schedule presumably on grounds that it is important to ensure the continuum of a democratic process. In run up to that process, the official organs of the government perpetuate an orgy of bloodshed and arrests on the streets, at least in the most alienated part of the state. It is deemed that the alienated people, who have seen several elections in the past and despite that feel the need to come out on the streets to raise the political slogan of azadi from the Indian occupation, can be won over by elections. And to ensure this goal, separatist leaders who have given a call for boycott are being picked up and put behind bars. Both the peaceful protests and the call for boycott are officially presumed to be anti-national acts. Where timely elections are deemed to be of greater sanctity than the basic principle of democracy underlying the polls, it becomes important for New Delhi to resort to not just repressive measures but also the ugly business of branding and demonising everything that is characterised by dissent.

Whatever the government, run by a handful of individuals in power, does is nationalistic and whosoever raises the voice of dissent qualifies to be a natural anti-national, and not just anti-national but also a sabotteur of peace and democracy. The use of most undemocratic means can thus be justified and legitimised in pursuit of the elections that are deemed to be the most democratic exercise. The separatists are being arrested in the Valley on grounds that call for poll boycott is an assertion of intimidation, even though as yet there are no indication of any intimidation, physical or psychological. Strangely, the brutality with which protests against polls or against these arrests is not considered to be intimidating. Equally strange that though the elections are meant to be an exercise for the people to exercise and assert or choose their representatives, they are not even given the choice of whether they should vote or not vote. Coercion and rigging, particularly in the Valley, have been the hall mark of several elections in the last few decades. In a land where dissent is not listened to but simply crushed, the people seem to lose all rights but the right to vote, often forced upon them at gunpoint. The essence of the vote, however, is diluted by the gun and military might that ensures a projection of mass participation in the elections.

Eventually, everything boils down to the question of not just what each action symbolises but how one can patent and market it. The Centre which manages to easily use media as a tool to dwarf, or even black out, certain events mostly in the name of serving so-called national interests, knows how to be a good marketing manager. In modern day world, products are sold not because of their quality but their packaging and their advertising campaign. The government at the Centre knows this job too well. While the act of repression pales into oblivion, the electioneering jargonry is punctuated by rhetoric of reining in the ’anti-nationals’ sabotaging the democratic process of elections. The darker side of the story that masses in the State, particularly the Valley, are alienated and consider the elections as a farce never gets projected. But who gets to know because what is advertised and sold throughout the country is a Kashmir packaged in ’normalcy with people thriving for democracy’. Low voter turn outs, artificially projected voter statistics is all that becomes the eternal truth.

Some people in Kashmir ultimately, despite their different political aspirations, do reach the polling booths either due to coercive tactics or driven purely by their day to day needs and problems of development, health, education and jobs. In that backdrop, at least there may have been some essence of democracy associated with elections in Kashmir. However, on Friday, as 52 persons protesting against elections were severely injured in Srinagar, an equal number in the same city faced the brutalities of the security forces for raising a development issue - of a massive garbage dump threatening to be a potential health hazarad in their neighbourhood. If there is no space for such voices either, what are the elections really about? Where the State operates with an occupationist mindset, election or no election, there is nothing democratic about anything unless there is a bid to genuinely address the alienation and the wishes and aspirations of the people. Can we force democracy down the throats of people through undemocratic means?