“The Integral Part” And Its Consequences

Wahid Ur Rehman

The Government of India has always maintained its position and stand on Kashmir as an “Integral Part”. The term was originally coined in response to international clamor on the issue of Kashmir as a bone of contention between India & Pakistan. The term Integral Part was coined by the Parliament of India, to announce to the international community that Kashmir was an integral part of the country, making it an internal issue not an international one, and thus any kind of interference therein would be seen as a breach of the sovereignty of India.

Now, however, the term and its use have mutated so that it is used domestically itself as a claim to the land of Kashmir, thus creating a phrase that Kashmiris view as a challenge to their rights upon their own lands. Today, every leader speaking about Kashmir begins with the pronouncement that Kashmir is an Integral part of India. Why, a Kashmiri might ask, or indeed any Indian might wonder, is it necessary to make such a redundant seeming proclamation? The term is never used for the other 28 presumably equally integral states of the country. Laying claim in such a fashion reveals entitlement where there is none, and in fact, is exacerbating the strained relations that the nation already has with Kashmir. Not only does this indiscriminate use of the term fail to heal the wounds and fail to rebuild the trust deficit, it in fact acts as an ever-expanding divider between Kashmir and New Delhi. As soon as leaders in Delhi say that Kashmir is an ‘integral part’ of India, they reveal the doubt that shrouds their relationship with Delhi; as soon as they use this phrase never use for other regions of the country, they expose the complicated and confused domestic issues that Delhi is unable to resolve.

‘Integral Part’, Explained: It is a geography-specific term and does not take into account the human aspect, the emotions of those living in the region. The moment someone uses the term he pushes Kashmiris up against a wall and acts as an irritator for the common masses. Even separatists use the term to illustrate it as indicative of India’s greed towards land, and the people in valley feel blindsided.

History, as seen through news and the media, is a witness to the negative consequences of this phrase. The day the words ‘integral part’ are used within the country about Kashmir, invariably the next day is presented with reactionary statement from separatists to counter it and provoke people. The question to ponder here whether it is the term ‘integral part’ in and of itself or the unnecessary use of the term that provides the springboard for the separatists to launch off from. Could the term, if used for the purpose it was originally intended to serve, be redeemed and thus retained in our national vocabulary? Since its coinage, even before it could be marketed by politicians for its international use, the term was co-opted by separatists and used as a platform. This fact, added to what the term has now become in its domestic avatar, makes it nothing but salt to the wounds of Kashmir. We should blame the users of this term for its complete corruption. However, rather than leave it by the wayside as nothing but an obsolete by product of the Indian political game, it should be used where in fact needed, in international dialogue.

The tragedy is that term ‘integral part’ refers to the principal stand of GOI on Kashmir and also non-intervention to the sovereignty of the country, and yet rarely appears in international conversations. I recently heard a conversation involving the Foreign Minister & Foreign Secretary of India where they were ready to discuss every issue with Pakistan including Kashmir, and had completely left out any mention of the position of ‘integral part’. In another separate statement the foreign officers said that India was ready to talk with China about Kashmir visa row, and other issues. Once again the term ‘integral part’ did not make even a guest appearance. How unfortunate then that in the one place where this word should actually be used, it was slipping into oblivion. Forgetting what it was actually meant for; it is like diluting the country’s principal stand on the Kashmir Issue. In spite of this the term continues to be used today to talk with our own people at domestic and intra-state levels, either by those who are oblivious to its negative impact, or by those who use it to manipulate and the dialogue, and favor vested interests, in the guise of national interests. It seems that our Prime Minister and other so-called leaders are as eager to begin speeches at home with the grand statement that Kashmir is an ‘integral part’ of India, as they are quick to forget it when they reach the United Nations General Assembly or any such international forum.

Pakistan and Integral Part: Countering India’s position on Integral part, Pakistan has floated the theory of ‘jugular vein’ on Kashmir. The term is evocative and emotional rather than being about anything material such as land, thus appealing to the sentiments of the people in Kashmir. It is in fact the same phrase that Muslims believe is used in the Quran where Allah says to man that He is closer to him than his own jugular vein. It is a phrase that signifies that there is a real bond, an inseparable connection, a loving relationship there, not just a grab for land or resources. The moment any leader in Pakistan proclaims, Kashmir – “Pakistan Ki Shah Ragh Hai” – he gets an over whelming welcome from the people in the region. Even the separatists have marketed the term asless about land and more caring about the people living on the land. Diplomatically, this approach is much smarter, and hence has yielded better results for Pakistan.

What needs to be done in the future to prevent further damage, while  maintaining the prestige of India’s stand on Kashmir is the following:

• To ensure that the term is marketed and used at the right fora i.e., to communicate to the international community and not the intra-national community.
• To stand up and say that Kashmir is as good and as much a part of the country as the other 28 states of India.
• To avoid inter-party allegations within the country around the use of the phrase ‘Integral Part’
• To believe in practical actions rather in statements.
• To address the people and avoid addressing land, thus recognizing that the people of Kashmir are integral to India, not simply the land.
• To nurture people of Kashmir and finally yield a truly ‘integral part’ by this cultivation.

Suggestion

Is it possible, that whenever we talk about Kashmir, we make sure to address the people of Kashmir and not make it a geography–specific? Can we make the people feel as though they are being advocated for, and as though they belong? Can we believe that we want to live in a country where Kashmiris are a part of India, because it adds to the wonderful diversity of India, and because our constitution guarantees unity in the diversity of this country? And can we forget lip-service to Kashmir as an ‘integral part’ within the country and start believing in Kashmiris as an ‘Integral People’ of India. One can easily Google this term “Kashmir as an Integral Part of India” and find out how people from separatist to so-called activist enjoyed this term and gained unnecessary importance.

Wahid Ur Rehman is a Srinagar Based Journalist and writes this with students of Conflict Studies in Srinagar. He can be contacted at parawahid@gmail.com

 

Related articles

• Conflict of Kashmir (socyberty.com)
• Problem in Kashmir: Not unique, Mr. Chidambaram – Cplash, The … (cplash.com)