Whose insaniyat weighed heavier? Manmohan's or Vajpayee's?

Within the domain of insaniyat


Across the political spectrum in Kashmir, Vajpayee’s ‘Insaniyat’ weighed heavy. In comparison, Manmohan Singh’s gentle demeanor was misconstrued as weakness. AG Noorani’s ‘Mark the Saffaron’ [GK-Op.ed dated Jan: 29, 2015] should dispel widely held impression.  Analysts might have to revisit their take of ‘K’ dispute historical march over virtually a decade. A decade where much propagated ‘Insaniyat’ of Vajpayee made way for Manmohan Singh by a queer incidence of history. Queer, as Sonia Gandhi wanted to exercise power behind the veil, pinning the failures if any on Manmohan Singh. 

He was politically crucified and assigned the sobriquet of docile, lame duck Prime Minister, in spite of providing India an opening on civil nuclear deal.  Modi though is hogging the limelight of conclusion of deliberations initiated by Manmohan regime. Manmohan, vis-à-vis resolution of ‘K’ dispute almost clinched an out of box deal with Musharraf. It might not have found total favour in Kashmir with its entailed limitations.

It was nevertheless an effort far ahead of propagated ‘Insaniyat’ of Vajpayee, which was unsubstantiated—much ado about nothing. Yet, banking on this decade old hallow slogan, ‘Insaniyat’ is being made a plank for justifying a coalition, which is far from being a natural corollary of fractured mandate. It could rather be branded as un-natural outfall in a situation, where other options could have sounded more convincing that the one, which is in the process of being exhibited as the sole option.


Ibn Khaldun–the initiator of critical history was for maximizing pros and minimizing cons of the past. And re-shape the future. Power hungry PDP prone to act on Delhi diktat is maximizing cons of past and minimizing pros. Barring the final announcement, stage managed parleys and much propagated structured dialogue, the die is already cast, with PDP bent upon joining BJP bandwagon. It is neither a recent decision, nor deliberated and calibrated with Kashmir in focus. As Noorani notes, and many in Kashmir agree, PDP was swearing by Vajpayee’s ‘Insaniyat’ much before the numbers game on Dec: the 23rd became apparent. Vajpayee’s unsubstantiated ‘Insaniyat’ hardly made a note in the test of times, any substantial result being a far cry. Yet, it was a part of election campaign rhetoric, pointer to what followed.   Coalition in offing is the proof, if one is needed.

 1953 Ek Vidhan, Ek Nishan plank is being recast in 2015, Ek Pradhan having been actualized in 1965 by Sixth Amendment, as JK PM was recast as CM. GM Sadiq was ready to serve with a demoted status. Subservience to Delhi diktat touched the pinnacle on April, the 10th 1965 the day Sixth Amendment was enacted in a legislature put in place by a highly dubious electoral process. Indira Gandhi had it done, as she was prone to outdo Sangh Parivar in their own game of making a merger of temporary accession. 

Not that her father, much acclaimed statesman—Jawaharlal Nehru was different. He was instrumental in making Article 370 an empty shell without firepower. Not much is left of JK separate Vidhan [the constitution] with Article 370 bulldozed, and Article 356 introduced widening the prerogatives of Indian State to intervene, as and when needed. As related by AG Noorani in his recent and many other notes, Nehru’s public acceptance of UN resolved plebiscite did not hold in his private take. Like others of imperialist hue and mindset, he believed that a square meal was enough for ones trapped in the web of times. And a day would dawn, implied Nehru, when the trapped would register the ground facts, acquiescence becoming the norm. That did not happen, and shows no signs of happening, despite all-out efforts of collaborators—overt and covert.      

Exchange of notes between Vajpayee/Advani duo with Manmohan over a time period of back channel parleys, as related by Noorani, are quite revealing. Parleys, the duo took exception to almost clinched an Indo-Pak deal with a part of resistance formations in loop. Related exchanges expose the hollowness of Vajpayee’s ‘Insaniyat’ with stress on establishment line. The line implies dictating a deal solely on Indian terms, without accounting for the interests that other stakeholders in the dispute might have. Manmohan-Musharraf deal might not have materialized, it didn’t as Musharraf over-stepped exercise of power. And a part of resistance formation continued to resist, what they considered a half-baked measure. Whatever the merit and de-merit of Manmohan’s effort, it is worth a salute. In comparison, much hyped ‘Insaniyat’ was in fact a reversal of what ‘Insaniyat’ implies.  Manmohan did have a drawback, he did not have a PR with a bagful of emotive slogans to propagate his deed, a la Sangh Parivar operatives  

Modi backed Mufti’s take by veiled references to Vajpayee’s ‘Insaniyat’ laced with his ‘Vikas’. Months have passed with Modi in command, ‘Insaniyat’ in exhibition in length and breadth of India is already giving saner elements shivers. ‘Insaniyat’ could not realize even a fraction of much needed 44, 000 crores for flood victims, ‘Vikas’ vis-à-vis JK is far cry. 

It would be worthwhile to see how much over and above the funds laid down by center-state break-up guided by Articles 268 to 279 and worked out by Finance Commission, Modi pays to Mufti to justify an un-justifiable coalition?

Yaar Zinda, Sohbat Baqi [Reunion is subordinate to survival]