Front Page
|
|
|
| | ‘Antony had politely disagreed with Omar’ | | | SRINAGAR, Aug 15 : On a two day trip to Jammu and Kashmir late last month, defence minister AK Antony politely disagreed with chief minister Omar Abdullah on his demand for selective withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act from Srinagar, Budgam, Jammu and Kathua districts of the politically sensitive state, but agreed to keep the proposal on high table for continuous review, reports a national newspaper.
Antony significantly, however, asked the Indian Army Commanders and the Central Para-Military Forces heads in the state to reduce troop visibility in the state. While Omar Abdullah went into a sulk after the Anthony snub on the AFSPA withdrawal, the defence minister told him that the decision to withdraw the Act was not his alone but of the UPA leadership given its security and diplomatic ramifications on the country.
Even though reducing troop visibility is a forward movement in this security forces infested state, defence minister Antony or for that matter the UPA needs to do much more than this cosmetic measure.
In his farewell speech as Chinar Corps Commander Lt General Syed Ata Hasnain last June talked about declining cross border infiltration levels in the state and improving law and order situation. Despite the infiltration figures routinely bandied about by the government, the fact is that cross border militancy is at an all-time low and violence levels far less than Naxalite affected states, reported the newspaper..
The credit for low level infiltration and violence is due to a series of factors within the state and across the Line of Control (LoC) and not only because of the security forces. The debate on AfSPA withdrawal may go on but there is a strong need to withdraw security forces in support of maintaining law and order in the state that is again moving very slowly towards the paradise that it once was before the violent 1990s. With over five lakh security personnel deployed in the state, the time has come to dispel the notion of a state under Army occupation, the newspaper added. |
|
|
|
|
Comment on this Story |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|