NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTION 99
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search Rediff

The Rediff Interview/ C Subramaniam

'If they are not satisfied with autonomy, they may ask for separation'

"Politicians look at ways to improve their own position and strengthen them rather than what will be beneficial to the whole of the state." C Subramaniam, former Union Minister remarked while talking about the resolution on autonomy passed by the Kashmir assembly.

When India won Independence against the backdrop of famine, nobody expected the country to be self-sufficient as far as food is concerned in such a short period. It was the combined effort of C Subramaniam, the politician and Dr M S Swaminathan, the scientist that helped the country achieve what was considered impossible then. Dr Swaminathan always maintained that the green revolution would not have been possible without the cooperation of C Subramaniam, the politician.

In this interview to Shobha Warrier, C Subramaniam calls for a national debate on more autonomy to states. He also accuses politicians for hankering after power.

Farooq Abdullah tabled a resolution for autonomy to Kashmir, and the Kashmir assembly passed it by voice vote. Do you agree with this act of Farooq Abdullah?

My view is, like he says now, autonomy should be discussed. That should have been done first, before passing the resolution. After passing the resolution, what is the point in asking for a debate? Will it water down the demands? So, in my view, he was putting the cart before the horse.

Is it a healthy trend? If other states like Tamil Nadu or Andhra Pradesh or Kerala start passing such resolutions, what will the Centre do?

Yes, it will be a problem. As a matter of fact, we have been talking about giving more autonomy to states, and also reviewing the Constitution on the basis of that. This is a topic, which should be discussed first.

The question is, what do you want to achieve by autonomy? Answering this question is very important. Today, what is needed is the economic regeneration of Kashmir, which has been devastated during the last fifty years due to complex and violent activities, military rule, etc. Therefore, we should first talk economics and not politics.

What is needed for the regeneration of Kashmir is not just power. Power has to be used properly. There are many independent countries, which have power but are suffering from problems like poverty, famine etc. Mere autonomy is not going to produce results.

What exactly should be done in Kashmir by the politicians if they want the state to prosper?

They should first examine the economic problems. For example, tourists are not coming to Kashmir properly. They have to make the tourists come.

But then, tourists will go there only if militancy is crushed.

Yes, that should be taken into account. After autonomy, if they are still fighting, people will not benefit. When they are not satisfied with autonomy, they may ask for separation. Then, that will be the tussle. So, we should first talk, and then come about with some sort of an agreement.

Agreement between..

Among all the parties. Now Abdullah himself says, this should be discussed. I feel a national debate is necessary.

You said they should concentrate on economic development rather than on autonomy. What has to be done for the economic development of Kashmir other than encouraging tourism?

In my view, they should first prepare a plan, a ten-year plan, which could bring about normalcy and prosperity to the Kashmiri people, and then they should try to find out how it could be implemented. They should then discuss, is autonomy necessary for the purpose? Or, more of Indian assistance? Does autonomy means financial autonomy? Does it mean, leave us alone? I feel, assistance from India is absolutely necessary to develop Kashmir, after all that had happened in the last fifty years.

Okay, if we say, all right, carry on with autonomy, what will they do?

Can we afford to say that?

No, we can't. I am saying this as a purpose of argument. Autonomy is not the question. The question is, what can be done to make Kashmir economically better off? Political power has not solved the problem anywhere. It is economic performance which is important. On the other hand, political power has stood in the way of economic development in many places because of the tussle to retain power and then misused for personal gains. So, autonomy for what purpose and what extent have to discussed thoroughly, not just by politicians but also by economists and technocrats who know how to develop a state.

Do you feel Farooq Abdullah went ahead with the autonomy resolution because of political compulsions?

That is what some people say. That Abdullah wants to be popular and therefore, he has passed this resolution. But this is the trouble. Politicians look at ways to improve their own position and strengthen them rather than what will be beneficial to the whole of the state.

Why do you think is the prime minister keeping quiet on this issue?

What do you want him to do? Shout?

Shouldn't he have reacted?

He said, it would be discussed.

Is that a mature way of reacting.

Definitely. There is no use in giving statements and shouting.

The other day, Ram Jethmalani said that the passing of the resolution was a victory for India as Kashmir wanted only autonomy and not separation.

You can give all sorts of interpretations. You can say whatever you want to suit your point of view. My point is, how do you rebuild Kashmir? That should be the crux of the question.

None of the politicians from Kashmir are talking about that.

That is the trouble. Politicians are after power.

They want the pre-1953 status. Is it possible?

They want autonomy, and nothing to do with India. From where will they get help then?

I K Gujral wants the implementation of the 1975 accord between Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Abdullah.

All that will require calm discussions and not any hasty decisions.

Can discussions provide solutions to the problem?

Yes, after all, it is only discussion which can identify the problems, and also find solutions for them. There is no other way out. You can't carry on like this.

Will the clamour for autonomy by states affect India's unity? In the recently concluded MDMK conference also, they talked about more autonomy to states.

No. In my view, as far as India is concerned, it is quite safe. That tendency has died down. For example, in Tamil Nadu, Dravidian parties called for a separate Dakshina Pradesh some time back but it is no longer there. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are the bastions of Indian unity today.

The Rediff Interviews

Tell us what you think of this interview