Peace hinges on human rights

NEW DELHI: The Vajpayee government has firmed up one element of a strategy aimed at a political solution to the Kashmir problem. But there are fears that unless progress is made on the human rights front, the Centre will not be able to swing public opinion in the Valley decisively in favour of its peace initiative. Indeed, officials dealing with Kashmir are acutely aware that people have not really rallied around the ceasefire.Though the virtual suspension of `crackdowns'' and checkposts has provided ordinary Kashmiris some respite and given them a stake in the ceasefire, there is concern over recent incidents in which thousands took to the streets in Srinagar to protest against the security forces, and against power cuts. There is anxiety that `the crowd'', once a potent factor in the early days of the insurgency, could again come into play if the Central and state governments do not pay utmost attention to human rights and civic concerns. ``The rights situation has improved but there can be no slackening'''', admitted an official, drawing a distinction between the relatively better performance of the Army and the more cavalier attitude of the state-run Special Operations Group. In interviews with this correspondent over the past two months, several Pak-based militant commanders acknowledged that their movement was weaker today. People no longer came on to the streets as often as they did in the early 1990s. But they expressed confidence that ``Indian atrocities'''' would remedy this problem. Observers in Delhi were worried last week by the protests staged by thousands in Srinagar demanding the bodies of the Lashkar militants killed after their abortive attempt to storm the airport. Unusual, because normally, protests occur only when innocent persons are killed. The death under suspicious circumstances of Bilal Ahmed, a forest department driver, also brought people onto the streets. Despite the police admitting Ahmed had been ``roughed up'''' in custody - a clear euphemism for torture - there has been no outrage at the national level. Even bodies like the National Human Rights Commission - which normally has a `zero-tolerance policy'' for custodial killings - have not made much noise. The fact that the government is divided on the utility of the ceasefire is coming in the way of a broader political strategy to empower Kashmiris and give them a stake in peace. One section hopes to use the ceasefire to split the militants, while the other sees it as the opening shot of a wider `peace offensive''. While human rights should naturally be a concern of the latter, both camps feel punishing erring security forces personnel could undermine morale, especially when the unilateral ceasefire renders them vulnerable. At the same time, however, there is growing recognition within sections of the security forces and intelligence community that the morale of ordinary Kashmiris would prove more decisive in the long run.