Union Home Minister Amit Shah told the Rajya Sabha on November 20 that normalcy was restored in Jammu and Kashmir. He claimed that none was killed in police firing since August 4; government offices and courts were fully functioning; 36,192 cases were heard and orders were delivered in 500 cases; and although 5,161 were arrested, only 609 were still under detention.
Minister of State Kishan Reddy added that Farooq Abdullah, Member of Parliament from National Conference, could not attend this Parliament session since 바카라œhe was among persons that authorities had to detain in the national interest바카라.
Two days later, former BJP foreign minister Yashwant Sinha refuted the 바카라œNormalcy바카라 claim while on a four-day visit to the Valley with his colleagues to make an independent assessment on the financial losses incurred by farmers, industrialists and citizens after the abrogation of Article 370 on August 4.
In September this year, Sinha and his team were stopped at Srinagar Airport. This time he was allowed to enter Srinagar and speak to Farooq Abdullah on telephone but was not permitted to meet any of the detained leaders.
Why should there be such a divergence between the perceptions of the present BJP-led government in New Delhi and a former senior member of the first BJP cabinet under Prime Minister Vajpayee? The answer lies in the dissimilar approaches towards human rights that one witnesses among right-wing groups all over the world.
Vajpayee would not have found it necessary to detain pro-Indian Kashmiri leaders, who were, till recently, part of the government at various levels.
History teaches us that 바카라œMajoritarianism바카라, exclusion of minorities from governance and that individual interests should be subordinate to the States바카라™ policies were the unexpected off-shoots of the concepts of 바카라œsovereign nation바카라 and 바카라œnationalism바카라. The notion of 바카라œsovereign nation바카라 was born after the 1648 바카라œPeace of Westphalia바카라 which ended the 바카라œThirty Years바카라™ War바카라.
The Westphalian concept was further helped with the development of nationalism in Europe from 1848 when several movements simultaneously sprang up against foreign domination. This was also called 바카라œThe 1848 Revolution바카라, giving birth to new nation-states like Romania, Montenegro and Bulgaria.
Unfortunately, this also led to a militant brand of nationalism based on narrow racial, religious, ethnic and linguistic concepts as mass majoritarian movements which wanted to exclude minorities. While a revolution helped nationalism, it also resulted in clashes.
Oxford professor Margaret Macmillan in her illuminating book 바카라œParis 1919: six months that changed the world바카라 quotes how the Polish nationalism-Catholicism collided with Bolshevik revolution in 1919-1920 resulting in unexpected problems for minorities.
The 1919 Paris peace talks, which tried to redraw the World Map after the First World War, resulted in 30 million Europeans left in other states as ethnic minorities, 바카라œan object of suspicion at home and of desire from their co-nationals abroad바카라. The 바카라œVersailles Treaty바카라 (1919) gave German majority areas like West Prussia, Western Posen, Upper Silesia and the Free city of Danzig to Poland. The 1921 바카라œTreaty of Riga바카라 between Poland and Russia saw huge minorities like Ukranians, Jews and Byelorussians within a new Poland.
Mass Majoritarian nationalist movements started in Italy in 1922 when Benito Mussolini copied Giuseppe M. Garibaldi바카라™s unsuccessful 바카라œRed Shirts바카라 March in 1860 for unifying Italy. Mussolini marched with 바카라œBlack Shirts바카라 to capture the power and establish a fascist rule. He also claimed that he could unify Italy which neither Mazzini nor Garibaldi could achieve.
Mussolini, and later Hitler, practiced the 바카라œIron Law of Oligarchy바카라 expounded by Robert Michels, German born-Italian sociologist, who believed that true power should be concentrated only among the elite and that State policies should over-ride individual liberty. Most of the extreme right-wing groups all over the world believe that human rights have no priority over what the State decides.
On the other hand, atrocities during and after the Second World War led to the drafting of UN Charter on June 26, 1945 to declare that the fundamental objective of the United Nations was 바카라œto save succeeding generations from the scourge of war" and "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women".
What we see in Kashmir is the clash between these two schools of thought.
(The writer is a former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat. Views expressed are personal.)
