SECESSION OR FEDERALISM – WHAT IS THE ANSWER?

There are many citizens living in Kashmir in India, Quebec in Canada, Flanders in Belgium, Scotland in the United Kingdom and Catalonia in Spain do not consider themselves merely part of a region but an independent nation that has no state of its own. Delusion…..you may call it, but they hope to live and die for this elusive goal. Greater self-rule is the central objective of the so-called nationalist political movements. Whether they are organized political parties as characteristically found in European regions or disorganized gangs as seen in Kashmir their theme of secession is a common thread that links them all. The possibility of secession has been part of their politics for years. Yet while secession is mentioned as one option for the future, mainstream parties perceive it as a Utopian formula rather than a viable alternative. This results partly from a genuine allegiance to the existing states by many of these regions' residents, but also from the fear of the unknown and a surprising lack of information about the economic costs of remaining part of these states and the potential economic uncertainties of independence.

While Scotland as an independent country, taking into account all its resources, would be among the twenty wealthiest countries on earth - according to analysis by the Financial Times, ahead of countries such as Italy, France, the UK and Japan can you imagine a flood ravaged Kashmir without the Government of India helping it out?   With independence the secessionists feel they can make their wealth work much better for the people living here……..but where is that wealth. That wealth lies in the bond they share with the greater nation and not in isolation.

Crimea, another flashpoint, is an autonomous region of Ukraine located south of the Ukrainian mainland on the Crimean Peninsula, voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia. The United States, the European Union (EU), the Ukraine government and representatives of Crimean Tatars condemned the referendum, saying it violated Ukraine's constitution and international law. A United Nations General Assembly resolution was subsequently passed that declared the Crimean referendum invalid and the incorporation of Crimea into Russia illegal. As was expected Ukraine declared Crimea a territory temporarily occupied by Russia.

Veneto is one of Italy's richest regions. Many of its residents however, believe the Italian government is inefficiently using its wealth on the poorer southern parts of the country, and that an independent Venice would be better off without having to carry the burden of much of the rest of Italy.

Another region close to a flashpoint is Belgium's Dutch-speaking part of Flanders. With a unique identity quite distinct from the southern French-speaking region of Wallonia, the Flemish nationalist movement has seen a surge in recent years. Linguistic division and the socio-economic imbalance between the two regions have only underscored their differences, especially cultural and economic, over the last few years.

Kurdistan comprises parts of northern Iraq, north-western Iran, eastern Turkey and eastern Syria. It is home to the Kurdish-speaking people, who have long agitated for a homeland of their own. Kurdistan has commonly been described as the "world's most populous stateless nation".

Closer to home we have problems in both China and Pakistan.  Apart from the decades-long unrest in Tibet, which has been under Chinese control since the 1950s, China is also facing persistent unrest in the restive province of Xinjiang, the traditional home of the Uyghurs, an ethnic Muslim minority. Separatists seeking the independence of Xinjiang from China want to govern themselves and call the region "East Turkestan".

Baloch nationalism is a movement that claims the Baloch people, an ethno-linguistic group mainly found in Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan are a distinct nation. The movement propagates the view that Muslims are not a nation (the opposite of the concept behind the creation of Pakistan) and that ethnic loyalty must surpass religious loyalty, though this view has been challenged by both the 1971 independence of East Pakistan and the discrimination many Muhajir people have historically faced within Pakistan.

Current conventional wisdom in the European Union and the United States sees the issue of secession as something outdated or even dangerous. Mainstream politicians, diplomats and academics tend to present it as a senseless option at a moment in history where the focus is building a united Europe and a free-trade world. The thought of the wars in the former Yugoslavia and its ultimate Balkanization makes many fear such an option. However, I do not deny that the situation in Catalonia, Flanders or Scotland is not comparable - these stateless nations are well-established democratic societies that respect human rights and free-market economies within the European Union. Thus, Catalans, Flemish or Scots cannot ignore that full political independence remains a serious option for them. Their desire for secession needs to be objectively analyzed and the costs and benefits properly weighed. But when you compare their prosperity with the stark poverty of Kashmir, you realize how senseless and foolish their battle cry is.

While it is common to hear a Kashmiri refer to us as ‘you Indians’, as if he or she is from Mars, many Catalans too do not consider themselves Spanish but exclusively Catalan. Such feelings raise eyebrows in other parts of Spain, Europe and elsewhere, but are widely accepted as legitimate within Catalonia. The French speaking Quebecers find it extremely difficult to blend with the English speaking rest of Canada, but if language decided nationhood then we in India would have had a thousand nations within our boundaries. 

The key goal of Catalonia's main political party, Convergència i Unió (CiU), which has governed the region for more than twenty years, is to gain higher levels of self-government. It defines itself as Catalan nationalist (or Catalanist) and frequently refers to the Catalans' right to political self-determination. With this party's support, the Catalan Parliament declared some time ago that it would not renounce this right. Yet it does not seek full independence from Spain.  Scotland similarly now has 45% of its citizens voting for an independent Scotland so that they have more rights to use their resources to provide a better life to their people - control over their tax system to attract more employers to invest in Scotland, creating more and better local jobs. This means more opportunities for young people, closer to home, keeping families together. Better pensions, improved child care facilities, better schools and hospitals were all promised by the proponents of secession, but if things do not exist already can they not be achieved staying within the union? What is the actual answer to these problems – is it federalism or is it secession? 

There are broadly three main arguments for the independence of Catalonia. The first is that since the Catalan cultural and language is neither understood nor accepted in Spain (and so neither protected nor fostered), the second is that a well-defined political entity such as Catalonia should be mature enough to govern itself with its own voice in the European Union or the United Nations in order to address the problems specific to it. Finally, there is the belief that Catalonia would be better off economically by seceding. In particular, proponents of the last argument refer to the fact that Catalonia pays much more into Spain's central treasury than it gets back and thus there exists a fiscal imbalance.  Scots too feel that with their vast oil reserves they will be a far more prosperous nation if they break away. The nuclear arsenal stationed in Scotland makes them militarily impregnable.

The economic arguments are contested particularly in poor states like Kashmir. Without the Indian Army they will be nonexistent within hours of secession.  Moreover, economics is forcing countries to come together and not break up any further and globalization and the European Union have brought about the blurring of borders. But only a few seem willing to undertake a serious economic assessment of an eventual secession, as this has become a "politically incorrect" issue in British, Canadian, Indian and Spanish politics.

           

An independent Kashmir is neither morally legitimate nor historically justified, and with little hesitation I can say the same thing about Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec. As a part of the respective unions they can remain influential but alone they run the risk of becoming irrelevant. Once in 1947 we have lost the chance of becoming a great nation, because of some religious fundamentalists and some over ambitious politicians. We cannot afford to allow either to raise their ugly heads ever in future. So when we Indians say that Kashmir is an integral part of India, we are not over zealously beating our chest, we are stating the obvious. For the agents of terror and the stone pelting mob it is time to introspect – would they have lived to see this day had the gallant Indian Army not been there to save them from floods, incursions and terror?