Political Economy of Land Occupation

Marie Antoinette offered cake to starving people and an equally self-absorbed Indian State offers higher rent to people demanding an end to occupation of their land. The analogy may not be entirely apt, but it is to draw attention to the supreme arrogance of India's rulers. Recall that a high voltage campaign was mounted demanding 'demilitarization' by political parties, covertly or overtly, pro-Indian. The demand for demilitarization was, of course, first mooted  by Pakistan's military dictator, being part of his much touted four point formula for resolution of the dispute over J&K.
However, he proposed a phased withdrawl by Indian armed forces. By the time formula traveled to this side of Line of Control, demilitarization which meant phased military pullout, was turned by political parties in J&K to mean relocation of troops or the replacement of army with para military forces. With this stage was set for Indian state to dilute it even further. Rent increase is evidence of this.
Publicly Indian state pretended it was heeding the voices of its acolytes in Indian occupied J&K when it setup a committee headed by India's defense secretary to look into the demand, because it would otherwise have reduced the credibility of these formations and been politically counter-productive for the Indian state. However, as is the norm for the Indian state barring tokenism it is reluctant to do anything substantive. In anycase any honest observer of politics in J&K knows that the nature of armed forces deployment i.e. their presence among people made it abundantly clear that they are here for a long haul  in order to ensure that people do not dare articulate their aspirations. The incongruity of a huge presence of armed forces occupying large tracts of land  even as the number of militants, said to be operating has officially come down to 350, lends strength to this. In this sense the new rents announced by India's Ministry of Defense ranging from 2.1 to 5 times is a way to buy peace, nay the silence of the people, for some more time. After all  you can not  browbeat someone all the time. Occasionally the carrot has to be dangled to keep them quiet. Which is all very well except that the untenable nature of  this approach cannot be wished away. Indian armed forces are in no mood to vacate occupation of land. They are sending a message through this announcement that they are here for a long haul. No matter what the official claim the fact is that the Indian state knows that people are not with them. 
But there is something else too which ought to be kept in mind. This new rent may even be a precursor of occupation of more land. For instance, until recently the Ministry of Home Affairs set a standard of 75 acres of land per battalion for central para military forces. Now the MHA has asked these forces to acquire 150 acres of land per bn. This is being done under the argument that this will enable better housing facility for the jawans and also allow these forces to set up schools and hospitals for the family of the jawans as well as local population. Latter is part and parcel of WHAM i.e. winning hearts and minds of people', an integral constituent of counter-insurgency doctrine. Requirement for army cannot be very different and land required by the army may even be higher per battalion. 
It is worth noting that total land holding of the armed forces in India is approximately 2.1 mn acres. Recently the Indian Planning Commission of India had wanted army to part with 2 lakh acres of  "surplus" land lying with with 62 cantonments. This request was turned down and instead the army asked for an additional 2 lakh acres! The point is that neither  are armed forces willing to part with land they occupy nor is their appetite for more land going to decline. 
Having said this there is a need to look at certain hidden facts which lurks behind the rent hike. The previous levels from which rent has been increased was pathetically low. So two or five times increase must be tempered by this fact. For instance Class I category of irrigated land the rent was previously Rs 1125 per kanal per year, which now has been increased to Rs 3381 per kanal. For double cropped irrigated land the rent was Rs 1688 per kanal and has been increased to Rs 4087. For orchards the rent earlier was Rs 1575 and has been increased to Rs 10,000 per kanal. Give that the base was low claims of five times increase are misplaced. 
For another the rent increase does not take into account the loss suffered by those whose land is thus alienated. To get an idea one has to consider some other figures. One kanal of apple orchard is officially said to have 12 trees although upto 18 is not uncommon.    (...to be concluded)