How much satisfaction will one get by owning a flat or an apartment house in such places protected by thousands of boots on the ground is beyond measure.
These are euphoric times. Article 370 and Art 35A have been removed in one go and apparently the territory is more strongly integrated with New Delhi today through transforming it into a union territory than even the degree of integration of a state with the Centre. It is not without reason that a vast majority of Indians are euphoric.
Very purposeful ideas have started floating around about the benefits that will follow for Kashmiri people and for the mainland people out of this recreated unity. Some of these which have received publicity are that Kashmiri women will now be available for marriage, land will be available for purchase and development will finally dawn upon the valley. These are laudable ideas indeed depending upon the type of cultural baggage or the weight of wallet that one carries, one does not wish to comment upon the first one at the moment, but the other two worry me a bit.
Different views of development have been expressed by people, and very thoughtful ones, at different stages of history. One of the very early intellectuals in India’s labour movement, Sashipada Banerjee, who was the editor of probably the first Indian labour journal, Bharat Sramajibi (published from then Calcutta), was ecstatic in describing what he saw in the second half of nineteenth century as the beautiful city of Manchester on the banks ofIrwell covered with long chimneys spewing smoke all over the city. He felt sad that Bengali zamindars were not taking a little more interest in investing in the urban industry and creating similar cities.
We may find a great struggle ahead of us to liberate ourselves from the effects of the past sins of development but we realize the urgent need for redefining the idea since we realise that it is a double edged sword.
John Locke, the fountain-head of liberalism advocated two centuries earlier than Sashipada, that children should be put to work at the age of three and is said to have written to his friend expressing deep satisfaction that every child of the age of four was productively employed in mills and factories in England. No mean achievement indeed.
Fast forward to the middle of the nineteenth century, The Times (London) editorial said that , “There is no one to blame for this (the misery of the unemployed); it is the result of Nature’s simplest laws.”
However, without prejudice or criticism of past generations, we have to admit that we are living in an altogether different age and confronting issues unanticipated in past centuries. After President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society experiment we may be hesitant to hope for complete removal of poverty, yet we would be reluctant to accept it as Nature’s (or God’s) wrath. Quite similar is the present age’s attitude to child labour or cities clustered with smoke emitting chimneys. We may find a great struggle ahead of us to liberate ourselves from the effects of the past sins of development but we realize the urgent need for redefining the idea since we realise that it is a double edged sword.
No amount of laws and policies so far have been able to halt the forward march of this brand of ‘development’ in mainland India.
When I hear the brandishing of ‘development’ idea over Kashmir, I wonder which edge of development will run through Kashmir? Nowhere in urban India are the poor allowed to hold on to their ancestral land or a pond or a tank. Urban India is getting taller and drier everyday, dwarfing and dismembering the defenceless. Lakes and rivers are losing their natural colour or smell. Fish are disappearing. The air is getting thicker than we can take in through our nostrils. The greatness of forests is fast being cut to pieces through mechanical saws. No amount of laws and policies so far have been able to halt the forward march of this brand of ‘development’ in mainland India. The transformation of Darjeeling or of Shimla during the past half century does not give us confidence either. Eco-sensitive development has so far been more an agenda for conferences than a ground reality.
Is it this the kind of development in the valley that our next generations are going to witness in the years to come? No doubt the beautiful valley with long agricultural and spice fields, scenic river banks, hills with thinly covered forests overhanging narrow streams are extremely attractive for real estate construction. How much satisfaction will one get by owning a flat or an apartment house in such places protected by thousands of boots on the ground is beyond measure. And, in India of today, there are not a few people who can afford to entertain such ambitions.
Unity is good, but uniformity is not.
Thus, the apprehension is whether development and investment will fill the valley with modern-day chimneys, whether the demand for broader road connectivity will make rows of Chinars and Willows disappear, whether the multiplicity of transport vehicles will recreate the air of a Delhi or a Kolkata for the valley people to breath, whether effluents will kill the fresh greenish water flowing down the Jhelum, whether the trouts will stop floating through the waters of Lidder going nowhere, whether the quaint Pahalgam downtown will give way to multi-storied shopping malls.
Unity is good, but uniformity is not. That our people in the hills and valleys have been enjoying certain special rights is not for them only; it also does a lot of good to everybody.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Samantha Keen Researcher Strengthening National Climate Policy Implementation (SNAPFI) project University of Cape Town South Africa
Read More +
PREV
