Feb.12 : Union home minister P. Chidambaram’s readiness to endorse J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah’s suggestion for the return of Indians trapped in PoK is a positive development. Seen in any light, the chief minister’s proposal to grant amnesty to former Kashmiri militants stuck in PoK over the years, and encourage their return and reintegration into society, is a useful one.
Given the ups and downs the state has known for two decades, such an idea should have been formulated long ago. In the light of experience, it was easy to see that bringing the former flame-throwers back into the fold would have had a salutary effect on Kashmir society. Using their ingenuity, some young men, who had crossed over to PoK for arms training in the late Eighties and the early Nineties with one or another militant outfit in the backdrop of an insurgent movement, have been returning. Their narrative is uniformly one of disillusionment with the “jihadi” establishment run by Pakistan in “the other Kashmir”. The articulation of this on a wide scale — were an amnesty scheme available — was certain to have had a positive impact on the younger generation in the Valley, some of whom continue to be wooed by jihadist ideologues. What has prevented a wholesale trudge back of the prodigal is the absence of a suitable amnesty scheme and the consequent fear of long jail terms. Quite apart from young minds in the Valley being influenced by the negative experiences of their brethren who had gone across, accepting people back into society is a “public good” in its own right. It is such thinking that lay behind amnesty schemes in respect of dangerous Chambal dacoits initiated through the aegis of stalwarts like Jayaprakash Narayan in the past. The ending turned out to be good for all concerned, the government included. Taking people back into the system removes a source of festering bitterness. This has been seen to be the case in some states of the Northeast as well. In Kashmir also, there are several people who have committed serious crimes but have emerged as political leaders of the so-called separatist camp. If they can be rehabilitated without the state making a fuss, there is no reason why the rank-and-file insurgent, who made the wrong choice at a given historical moment, should be denied a similar opportunity.J&K Congress leader and Union health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad has raised some issues of procedure. He has noted that a general amnesty can be exploited by PoK jihadist networks to push in terrorists. Such concerns naturally need to be taken into account while formulating schemes for the return of Kashmir Valley people. Appropriate vetting procedures will be required to be put in place. However, it will be shortsighted not to see the wider picture. Clear numbers may not be available about Kashmiris stranded in PoK but keen to return. The scheme to be drawn up for their rehabilitation necessarily has to be pragmatic, elastic, and adequately funded, possibly with Central and state government resources. The main idea is to see such a proposal as a political act with wide social benefits. Successful prosecution of the plan cannot but have a beneficial effect on the wider “Kashmir question”, irrespective of the terms in which it is defined. In any conversation with Pakistan as well as the local separatist leadership, a successful rehabilitation programme of this nature cannot but have a strong impact.