A section of the Muslims, especially Gujjars, have now started supporting the demand for statehood status for Jammu as they have realised that the people of this region have been given a raw deal by the successive ruling leaders, who invariably belonged to the valley. The main reason for this section of society to voice support for trifurcation of the state has been regional discrimination.

But the cry for statehood status for the Jammu region, made on and off for more than five decades, has never assumed the shape of a mass movement.

The demand for the trifurcation of the state was raised as far back as 1947, when Jana Sangh stalwart Balraj Madhok in an article in The Organiser stressed that the trifurcation of the state was necessary and in the interest of the country.

Since then a number of such demands have been raised, including the one by the RSS on June 30, but they have all been outrightly rejected or ignored by the central and state leadership. At best, they have only managed to evince response from certain sections of society.

The stance of the state leaders against the division of J&K remains as rigid and unbending as it was 50 years ago. In 1952, Prime Minister Sheikh Abdullah dismissed an agitation led by Praja Parishad (which later merged with the Jana Sangh) leader Prem Nath Dogra, by declaring, "If you want statehood for Jammu, you can have it with two and a half districts." He meant that statehood could be granted to the Hindu-dominated districts of Jammu, Kathua and half of Udhampur as the other half and the districts of Poonch,Rajouri and Doda, were dominated by Muslims.

The area earmarked by the Jammu Mukti Morcha for the formation of Jammu state

After 1970, the demand for trifurcation made regular rounds in Jammu. The matter was, however, taken up more seriously after the rise of militancy in the Kashmir valley in 1989. It was during this period that the Jammu Mukti Morcha was formed with the sole purpose of securing a statehood status for the Jammu region. Earlier, the People’s Front and the Dogra Maha Sabha had launched the campaign in favour of it.

As in the previous times when the trifurcation demand was raised, there have been strong reactions for and against the move by political and social leaders, academicians and other influential people.

M.M. Khajooria, a former Director General of Police, says that if the state is divided in three states on the pattern as demanded by the RSS and others, it will lead to the division of the state on communal lines. "What guarantee do you have that the Muslim-dominated districts of Poonch, Doda and Rajouri will also support the separate state?" he asks.

He maintains that Muslims in the Jammu region have by and large are not demanding trifurcation of the state. Referring to the demand for a union territory status for Ladakh, he says people in Kargil district do not favour it. "What will you do if the Kargilites oppose it? Will you then allow Kargil to be part of the Kashmir valley?" he asks.

To him the viable alternative is devolution of more powers to the state and for this, he feels, the state-centre relations need to be reviewed.

While supporting the RSS resolution, Dr Hari Om, an eminent historian of Jammu University, says trifurcation of the state "is the need of the hour and it has to be done sooner or later." He says there is need for making enough room for competitive politics in the Kashmir valley so that future elections are not fractured.

He explains that unless Jammu region is made a state, the power scales will continue to tilt in favour of Kashmir. He asserts that the process of purging Kashmir of non-Muslims started from 1947 onwards. Since then non-Muslims have moved out of the valley in small groups, ultimately culminating into the exodus of over 3.50 lakh Hindus in 1990. People in Kashmir, irrespective of their caste and creed, have built houses, purchased land in the Jammu region but not many from Jammu have settled in the Kashmir valley.

Dr Rekha Chowdhary, Head of Political Science Department, Jammu University, however, vehemently opposes the demand for the division of the state on the plea that one division may lead to other divisions. If Jammu gets a statehood status, there can be more demands for further division of the region on communal lines, she says.

Chander Mohan Sharma, vice-president of the state unit of the BJP, ridiculing those who oppose the RSS resolution, says that their criticism is "motivated and ill-conceived". He says that those who oppose the demand for statehood of the Jammu region and Union Territory status for Ladakh want "to sustain their political hegemony over the people of Jammu and Ladakh. They went enslavement of the Jammuites and Ladakhis".

He does not agree with those who fear that if the Kashmir valley is granted statehood, it will hasten the process of the valley’s incorporation with Pakistan. He says that it will instead weaken the base of pro-Pak and pro-Azadi forces and enable the Kashmiri Hindus to return to the valley.

But to PCC vice-president, Mangat Ram Sharma, the very idea of dividing the state into three parts is "preposterous" on the ground that it will negate the very essence of regional unity. He says that divided Jammu and Kashmir will result in division on communal lines.

Sheikh Abdul Rehman, president of the state unit of the BSP, has condemned the RSS resolution on the plea that it will be "dangerous for the country" and will strengthen Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir.

The BSP chief says if there has been any discrimination against the Ladakh region, it has been with the people of Kargil district. "The Buddhists have secured the Leh Hill Development Council, an autonomous body, and there is no need for granting union territory status to the frontier region." Though he agrees that the demand for the division is the result of a discriminatory approach against the people of the Jammu region, he states that there are other "constitutional remedies to remove these imbalances."

Those who speak about the continued bias against the Jammu and Ladakh regions refer to the Gajandragadkar Commission Report of 1968 and point out that the successive state governments failed to implement its recommendations. In support of their contention, they explain that the commission had recommended that if the Chief Minister was from the valley, the Deputy Chief Minister should be from Jammu and there should be an equal number of cabinet ministers from the two regions and one from Ladakh. At present, out of 14 cabinet ministers, only three are from Jammu and there is no one from Ladakh.

The Jammu Mukti Morcha chief, Prof Virender Gupta, says that accords and treaties with the Centre, which include those that came up in 1975 and 1986, were signed only with Kashmiri leaders. Jammuites have only 10 per cent representation in the civil secretariat.

Between 1996 and 2001, the NC regime recruited over 1.53 lakh youth in different government departments and public sector undertakings. Out of this, not more than 20,000 youth from the Jammu region found jobs in government offices. Out of the 80,000 unemployed registered, about 50,000 belong to the Jammu region. Gupta says, "The percentage of unemployed in the Jammu region is 60.63 as compared to 35.26 in the Kashmir valley."

On the basis of the area (Jammu occupies 26293 sq km, while Kashmir covers 15948 sq km), Jammu should have 52 Assembly segments. But it has 37 segments against 46 in the Kashmir valley, thereby nullifying any chance of ruling leadership to emerge from the Jammu region. According to him, the division will remove regional imbalances, and allow fair share of central funds for the Jammu region.

The ruling National Conference does not seem to be impressed by such contentions. The party leadership does not want to deviate from the stand taken by the state’s first Prime Minister, Sheikh Abdullah, who told the constituent Assembly on November 5, 1951: "The future political set-up which you decide upon for Jammu and Kashmir must also take into consideration the existence of sub-regional groups in our state. Although culturally diverse, history has forged an uncommon unity between them; they are all pulsating with the same hopes and aspirations, sharing in each other’s joys and sorrows. While guaranteeing this basic unity of the state, our constitution must afford the fullest possibilities to each of groups to grow without detriment to the integral unity of state...."

Bodh Raj Bali, Provincial president of the National Conference, treats the RSS resolution as a signal to danger. To him division of the state will undermine the security of not only the state but of the country as well. He says the state constitution does not favour trifurcation but unity among the people of the three regions.

Bali, who is in favour of a united Jammu and Kashmir, says that this very unity among the people of three regions had weakened Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir.

He is supported by several leaders of Sikh organisations. S.S. Wazir, president of the state unit of the Gurdwara Prabhandak Board, has said that the Sikhs "are ready for any sacrifice" to scuttle the move for dividing Jammu and Kashmir into three parts. He alleges that those who are demanding trifurcation of the state are helping the ISI.

A majority of the Kashmiri Pandits, however, have evinced more interest in the VHP resolution, demanding quadrification of the state with a provision for a homeland for the valley’s Hindus.

The leader of Panun Kashmir, Dr Ajay Chrungoo, says that the RSS resolution "falls short of recognising the Panun Kashmir demand for the quadrification of the state with the creation of a union territory north and east of the Jehlum river in the valley where the displaced people could be rehabilitated." To him the RSS resolution is "a step forward as it accepts the basic principle of internal reorganisation as a means of finding a solution to the crisis in the state." "The division of the state," he says, the most effective way of stopping the spillover of Islamic fundamentalist violence to other parts of the state."

As far as the Muslim population in the Jammu region is concerned there is a gradual but discernible change in its outlook. It is no longer prepared to accept the valley-based leadership. Ch Mohd Anwar and other leaders of the Gujjar Front say that Muslim leadership in the valley "has almost disowned us."

The Gujjar Front leaders demand the division of the state as they feel that with their 10 lakh population they haven’t the requisite representation in the state Assembly and the council of ministers.

The champions of trifurcation have kept their chin up even though the Union Home Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, L.K. Advani, has stated that the question of division of the state "does not arise". Professor Gupta and others who support the division of the state optimistically say, "It will materialise, sooner or later, because it is the only way to stop the march of militants from the valley to the Jammu region and create a situation in Kashmir in which the majority of people will come openly against the militants."

The president of the Ladakh Buddhist Association, Tsering Semphel, has stated: "Trifurcation of the state is a pre-requisite for the solution of the Kashmir problem." He says cultural, linguistic diversities and topographical and ethnic dissimilarities provide no room for a united state and the unity demonstrated during all these years has been skin deep only and has sown the seeds of regional passions.

Those who are opposed to the division of the state say that other constitutional remedies should be introduced to remove regional imbalances. This, they say, can be done by setting up three regional councils, providing a fair share of government jobs to people from Jammu and Ladakh, equal distribution of development funds, and increase of the Assembly seats in the Jammu region.

Dr Hari Om and Professor Gupta say they are not in favour of the regional councils mooted by the National Conference." They explain that the NC plan has divided the state in eight parts and that too on communal lines

Even if the NDA government is not prepared to accept the RSS demand for the trifurcation of the state, the issue will be exploited fully during the next Assembly poll. After the poll, one expects silence on the matter with just a few political groups trying to rake up the issue for sustaining their existence.