The Daily Fix: Why Modi is still far from going the Vajpayee way on Kashmir

The Big Story: Not quite Vajpayee

More than a month after Kashmir erupted in violence, which has claimed more than 50 lives so far, Prime Minister Narendra Modi broke his silence. Disappointingly, he did not break with the established script on Kashmir. Speaking at the inauguration of the "Azadi 70 Saal – Yaad Karo Qurbani" programme in Madhya Pradesh, he said the Centre would try to find a solution to the Kashmir issue "through development". He expressed pain that youth who should be armed with laptops and cricket bats had stones in their hands instead. He also name-tagged former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and said the Centre would follow his mantra of "insaniyat, jamhuriyat and Kashmiriyat".

The Vajpayee years are now remembered as a golden era in the history of the Kashmir peace process, and it has become customary for governments to invoke the former prime minister when speaking of the conflict-ridden state. But few successive governments have gone the distance that Vajpayee did in his search for a solution to the Kashmir dispute. This government certainly falls short on at least three counts.

First, in the April 2003 address that went down in history as the "Good Friday" speech, Vajpayee spoke of a willingness to solve all problems, "domestic" and "external". In a speech addressed to Kashmiris, he even spoke of extending a "hand of friendship" to Pakistan, tacitly acknowledging the international nature of the problem. The current National Democratic Alliance government has spent its energies on batting Pakistan away, thundering that the Kashmir issue remained an "internal matter".

Second, under the Vajpayee regime, the Centre reached out to separatists, inviting them to the table for talks. It was a bold move, though it ended in tragedy as separatist leaders who talked to government were shot down and militant factions launched attacks in protest. Crucially, the Centre under Vajpayee looked willing to engage with all shades of public opinion in Kashmir. The Modi government, in contrast, has given separatists a wide berth, drawing red lines where none existed. It even called off talks with Pakistan because officials from Islamabad met separatist leaders on the eve of bilateral engagements. Only now, after a month of violence, does the government indicate that it might reach out to leaders of the separatist Hurriyat Conference.

Finally, Vajpayee spoke of airports, railway lines and employment, markers of development that were sorely needed in the strife torn state. But he also recognised the Kashmir dispute as a political problem that needed a political solution. By reducing the protests in the streets of Kashmir to a hunger for economic development, Modi greatly misreads the situation. By refusing to acknowledge that there may be a problem with the political status quo on Kashmir, Modi shows he is yet to attain the political maturity of a Vajpayee on Kashmir.

The Big Scroll: Scroll.in on the day's big story
If the Indian and Pakistani government must both lose a little for Kashmir to win, that's perfectly acceptable, former J&K chief minister Oman Abdullah tells Parvaiz Bukhari.
Parvaiz Bukhari on why the status quo in Kashmir is unacceptable.
Kavita Krishnan compiles reading list on Kashmir.
Rayan Naqash and Ipsita Chakravarty report on how a month of curfew is taking a psychological toll in South Kashmir.

Political pickings

1. Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje admits that gau rakshak shops in her state are making "difficult demands" in terms of resources and money.
2. A total of 97 bills have been passed by Parliament under the Narendra Modi government.
3. The United Democratic Front in Kerala looks shaky after the Kerala Congress (Mani) makes an exit from the alliance.

Punditry

1. In the Hindu, Rohit Dhankar on how the National Education Policy envisages a so-called knowledge-bassed economy made up of obedient production units.
2. In the Indian Express, PS Krishnan on how the Una episode has given rise to a new emphasis on land distribution in order to reclaim Dalit dignity.
3. In the Telegraph, KP Nayar on how the presidential elections in the United States have provided grist for the humour mill.

Giggles

Don't Miss...

Mridula Chari and Supriya Sharma report on the dangers of preventing drought in Maharashtra by digging rivers:

On the face of it, the Jalyukt Latur project appears dynamic and purposeful. But ecologists say the project encapsulates much of what is wrong with Maharashtra’s water conservation programme, which was introduced in 2014 with the aim to make the state drought-free in five years.

For one, the programme disregards decades of experience that shows there isn’t much use desilting streams and rivers in isolation. Water conservation needs to done in conjunction with soil and forest conservation, ecologists say.

In technical jargon, this is called watershed development. A watershed is a unit of area from which water drains into a single channel.