Pak Tea House » Democracy, human rights, India, Islam, Islamabad, Kashmir, Uncategorized » Kashmir’s Troubles
Kashmir’s Troubles
While at PTH, we do not indulge in cliched fights over the Kashmir issue, the plight of Kashmiris needs to be mentioned. Below we are reproducing an article from The Economist that we believe does a decent job in highlighting the present state of affairs, as well as the emerging developments in the Indian Administered Kashmir (Admin, PTH).
From The Economist
Dec 29, 2010
A GROUP of special Indian police barged into a white-painted, single-storey house on the crisp morning of October 27th. They let their lathis do the talking. The wooden batons were first rammed through all the windows, furniture and a television. When the grey-haired owners protested, the rods were turned on them. The police broke the husband’s leg and beat his wife’s flesh a sickly purple. Before leaving, the officers added an insult, hurling religious books, including a Koran, to the floor.
Such intrusions are common in Palhallan, a hillside settlement in the north of Indian-run Kashmir. It looks like an idyllic rural spot, where bushels of red chilies hang from the eves of steep-roofed wooden houses and hay wains jostle with shepherds in narrow streets. But the village has been caught up in months of violent protests that have roiled Kashmir. In 2010 an uprising led by youthful Kashmiri separatists left over 110 people dead and thousands injured. Youngsters daub anti-India slogans on walls, yell at Indian police and soldiers to “go home”, and hurl stones.
In turn its residents have taken a beating. A young man lifts his hand to his head, showing a zip-like scar running from the crown of his skull to his neck. It is the result, he says, of a police battering. His lament is typical: “I am an unpolitical person, but they treat me like a terrorist.” Locals say they suffer collective punishment. Enraged officers usually fail to catch stone-lobbers, so lash out instead at families and residents nearby, accusing them, usually unfairly, of collusion.
As a military helicopter buzzes overhead, a resident counts eight people killed and many more hurt in the area in the previous three months. Bitterness deepens with each injury and funeral. “The police,” he says, “they want to start a war.” A return to war, or widespread armed insurgency, is unlikely for the moment. But fury has spread, spurring some young Kashmiris to demand a more violent, more bloody response than mere strikes and stones.
On November 10th three men in Pattan, a small town a few minutes’ drive down the hill from Palhallan, took matters into their own hands. Hidden in the crowd of a bustling market they marched up to a pair of police constables, shot them at close range, snatched their rifles and fled. Both the policemen died. The Kashmiris have aped Palestinian methods, mobbing India’s ill-trained, sometimes panicky, police, by raining stones and broken bricks on them.
The police—more in the habit of using sticks and bamboo shields—have struggled, fighting back with huge quantities of tear-gas (tens of thousands of canisters were fired in 2010) and then bullets. They have reckoned that any protesters who die have themselves to blame. Officials in Delhi bristle at any comparison between the year’s events and Bloody Sunday in Northern Ireland or the unrest in neighbouring Tibet. Kashmiris, they insist, have their own land and state, enjoy religious freedom, are by no means the poorest in India and take part in elections, most notably in 2008.
But there are severe limits to their democracy. Peaceful protests are prevented, jails are crammed with political detainees, detention without charge is common, phones are partially blocked, the press censored and reporters beaten, broadcasters muffled and curfews imposed. Those who complain too fiercely online are locked away. The authorities in Kashmir and Delhi say these measures are temporary. They say that to prevent abuses, the police are now being trained and re-equipped. (Soldiers, for the most part, have been kept away from street clashes.) Omar Abdullah, the chief minister of Kashmir, says that police officers may even be prosecuted for misdeeds. But the repression persists, and risks causing ever greater resentment and instability.
Seen from Delhi the uprising appears manageable. Kashmiris have dropped their guns and shooed away Islamic insurgents who a decade or so ago skulked in the postcard-perfect mountains. The presence of a 350,000-strong Indian security force (some say the number is much higher), amid a population of just 11m, has also kept the armed militants at bay.
It helps India that Pakistan, the eternal trouble-stirrer in Kashmir, is in disarray. And India takes heart from the weakness and fractiousness of local leaders in Srinagar. Many have been bought off with well-paid posts, or jailed, or both. Moderates who attempt to reunite the parts have been locked up or worse (one was shot and paralysed by a mystery assailant). Some of the highest-profile ones, such as the stone-pelters’ elderly icon, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, are kept under house-arrest.
Sticks and stones
Some Kashmiris darkly hint of picking up guns again, but the local leaders have no appetite for large-scale violence, fearful of a return to the carnage of the 1990s when thousands died each year. Instead they encourage low-casualty options such as throwing stones and prolonged stay-at-homes (hartals).
If such gestures have a goal, it is to gain attention. Young Kashmiris expose themselves to Indian bullets, hoping to draw compassionate outsiders—Barack Obama perhaps—to put pressure on India. Yet the strategy has so far achieved little. Outsiders, especially Western democracies once so cocksure and outspoken on human rights, now fret that their power is ebbing eastward. The Kashmiri separatists who suggest that “you people” or “Britain and America” could somehow chide India into a less repressive stance in Kashmir do not appreciate how eager Westerners are to court India as an ally.
The Kashmiris who have died in recent months have at least embarrassed India, which may yet respond by moderating the repression. But the radical separatists, who define azadi, the Kashmiri word for freedom, as outright independence from India—or even, for a shrinking number, incorporation with Pakistan—will not be placated. And nor will India consider letting Kashmir go.
Time appears to be on India’s side. With each passing year it will have more resources to throw north. The local economy, at least until recently, had been chugging along quite well, thanks to horticulture, tourism, funds from central India and heavy spending by the armed forces. A few Kashmiri expats had started returning and investing before the uprising in 2010. Development in itself will not fix Kashmir. But faster economic growth could at least prove a useful balm.
The government has made some political gestures. In September, an all-party delegation of Indian politicians—including even the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party—visited Kashmir. India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, made reassuring comments about addressing grievances there. The government in Delhi also pledged to send a high-ranking team of interlocutors to prepare a series of reports on Kashmir after consulting all sides in the conflict. A three-person team was eventually named in October.
These initiatives have started to persuade some in Kashmir of progress. But the team is made up merely of two academics and a journalist, people who carry no political weight. Nor does it help that they have already fallen into public squabbling. Kashmiris have watched their saga wearily. Some leaders have refused to meet the delegates, dismissing them as a joke.
Conspiracy theorists in Srinagar, the capital of Indian-controlled Kashmir, accuse India’s generals of sabotaging politicians’ peace efforts because the armed forces reap big rewards in the territory. More likely the central government in Delhi, run by the Congress party, is shy of Indian nationalists, who complain whenever concessions are considered for Kashmir. In October, a writer, Arundhati Roy, suggested Kashmiris might have legitimate complaints, and that Pakistan might have a justifiable interest in Kashmir. Hindu nationalists demanded she be tried for sedition.
So Kashmir is left to smoulder, with dire consequences for its citizens. A visit to Srinagar’s psychiatric hospital shows throngs of patients, crowding around its overworked chief consultant. They relate a dismal roll-call of anxiety, stress, depression, alcohol and opiate addictions, child abuse and suicides. As Dr Mushtaq Margoob takes a break to munch a chapati and sip milky tea, he talks of Kashmir as a broken society. Some patients become destructive, he says, describing a mother who watched her son shot dead on the street and who then went on to burn down her own home and that of her neighbours.
The most damaged, he concludes, are the youngest. “We see a collective anger, an aggressive, traumatised generation”, he says. The head of a think-tank talks of 600,000 young, educated, Kashmiri adults who are now jobless, waiting for some sort of guidance. Religious and political leaders fret that their youngest followers, teenagers, excited by the stone-pelters, are increasingly attracted by more radical ideas.
Militancy stirs
Worryingly, the youngsters talk openly of religious antagonism. Some ask why Kashmir’s Muslims do not turn on Hindus (many Hindu pilgrims visit a sacred spot in the state, but have so far been left unmolested) to seek communal revenge for repression. The head of a student movement, a man who has spent most of his adult life in prison and who is now on the run and hiding from police in the backstreets of Srinagar, warns of infuriated youngsters turning to a “battle of extinction” in which “others, not only Kashmiris, will be killed”.
As long as political leaders exist to channel, and moderate, the rage of the stone-pelters and innocent victims, such excited talk might be discounted. Mr Geelani, a frail octogenarian, is one such. He condemns India as “an occupying imperialist power”, but he is largely a moderating influence. He opposes any return to arms. He supports the pelters’ goals, but not their methods. His practical demands, for the repeal of draconian laws, the end of police abuse and talks with the central government, are hardly off the wall.
But Mr Geelani’s influence is waning, along with his health. It is doubtful that anyone among a handful of potential successors could command as much local respect. The alternative could be more troubling. Some observers fear that as India succeeds in neutering Kashmir’s nationalist politicians, religious groups will flourish.
A Wahhabi welfare organisation, al Hadith, which almost certainly benefits from generous Saudi funds, is quietly emerging as a powerful welfare, religious and cultural force. As others bicker, it has gone about building community centres, mosques, primary and secondary schools and clinics. It is seeking permission to set up a university. Its genial leaders deny being extremists, pointing to their love of education and computers; they say that in the planned university, women and non-Muslims will be enrolled too.
As for claims that the group, which says it has 1.5m members, is spreading conservative values in a territory long known for its Muslims’ religious tolerance, one leader concedes only a “little, little component of cultural shifting”. A few more women are wearing burqas, or staying at home, than did in the past. More Arab-style mosques are springing up.
The non-Muslim minority in Kashmir is much less sanguine, seeing al Hadith as a proxy for Saudi interests and a powerful example of the spreading “pan-Islamisation” of Kashmir. They fret that ties may exist to Wahhabis elsewhere, including terrorists, and warn that a powerful new force is rising in the territory, filling a vacuum created by India. Just now their concerns seem overblown. But the government in Delhi would be wrong to think of Kashmir as yesterday’s problem.
Filed under: Democracy, human rights, India, Islam, Islamabad, Kashmir, Uncategorized · Tags: India, Indian, Kashmir, Pakistan, police, srinagar, The Economist
88 Responses to "Kashmir’s Troubles"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- AKB
said DAMN THESE LIBERAL MULLAHS!!
.
Dharun Ravi Sen... - AKB said @ ahem
I have never seen a bigger idiot than y...
- RajTOO
said Tajender,
you copy and paste machine, do you even... - tajender
said rajtoo like anyother brhmnst u have nothing except... - RajTOO said Tajender is a pure Paki. Just because he copies an...
- ahem
said to rex
Monotheism is inherently totalitarian an... - ahem said tajender reveals himself as a tamilian muslim....
- RajTOO said Rex Minor wrote:
And I was under the...
- Rex Minor said PS
sorry for the wrong spells! I must not miss th...
- Rex Minor said And who should have thought that PTH article on "u...
Do you hear Gandhi squirming in from his smadhi yet.
Parvez wrote: Good, now at least half of Indian population is in various stages of rebellion and radicalization.
It is one thing for Pakistanis to hoodwink the people in the West, that they are Indians, but there is no need to mix up Indians and Pakistanis here. We are amongst us. Pakistanis are not Indians!
There was a lot of TALK in June July when the latest agitation for freedom was at its peak
It was being said that these LAKHS of youngsters of 20 plus age group are Battle hardened because they have seen enough violence for 20 years from 1990 onwards and they will get freedom from India
What Pakistanis FORGOT was India’s NEW generation ( 20 to 35 age group )which is First of all runs into a few Hundred MILLION
and are fiercely patriotic and passionate .
India’s new generation is not only the engine of economic growth (which is above 8.5 %) but ALSO wants India to emerge as a BIG Military power
The Last struggle also FIZZLED out and the NEW generation was also SOFTENED like their previous generations
And yes The Bulk of 7 LAKH soldiers in Kashmir are YOUNG INDIANS
@Gorki, Ranjit
Whatever you are suggesting has already been on offer for quiete a while. Kashmiris enjoy the same constitutional liberties, in fact more if you consider article 370, as rest of the Indians. They are by no means the poorest state in India, they receive more than their share of resource allocation than many other poor Indian states like Bihar. Before 2010, the Indian army was in the barracks and they had already enjoyed 4 years of relative peace and tranquil – and situation was improving every year. There were no custodial killings and ham handed force then. After all that, I don’t believe in dancing before the seperatists to please them to stay in India.
The normalization process was interrupted by a section of seperatists amongst Kashmiris who whipped up isolated cases which were later proven to be false and took advantage of the infamous propensity of Kashmiris to start demonstrations at the drop of a hat. It is not unreasonable to ask seperatists to focus on the lowly task of trying to improve their lot rather than perpetually living in a spirit of revolution.
When some Kashmiri seperatists say they want “Azaadi”, then they should be able to exactly specify what do they mean by azaadi, why do they want it, how do they plan to get it and what are their plans post-azaadi. It is not unreasonable for us to ask these questions to people like K, Nerdypanda and the likes who never think beyond the abstract notion of azaadi and their imagined grevieances against Indian army.
As for the argument of Kashmir statehood being infeasible, I find the argument compelling and there is not even a remote resemblance of Kosovo with Kashmir that you cited.
1) Kosovo was a result of a civil war, disintegration of Yugoslavia and cessation of all constitutional rights or structure for a particular ethic group. None of that is the case in Kashmir. India is in one piece and equal constitutional rights have been offered to Kashmiris.
2) Kosovo’s creation was supported by military force by NATO. However, the leading lights of Kashmiri insurgency like Hafiz Saeed (LeT), Maulana Masood Azar (JeM), Ilyas Kashmiri, Omar Sheikh etc are sworn enemies of West. The west considers te Kashmiri seperatism as terrorist movement. In fact, I don’t know if US maintains any formal contacts with Hurriyat or meets them often like the Pakistanis do in their embassies in India.
3) Kosovo is not surrounded by three nuclear powers and worlds first, second and seventh largest armies.
4) Even after seperation, Kosovo is recongized by only 72 countries. No formal UN resolution has been passed recognizing its independence since China and Russia will veto it. It is heavily dependent on external aid and is formally known as a UN administered territory. That is definitely not what the azaadi guys would he aiming for.
You also repudiate the fact that countries stay together based on shared history, sense of identity and common cultural heritage. Shared past has a critical role to play in defining national outlook. You cite the case of Bangladesh incorrectly to prove otherwise. To remind you, Bangladesh broke away becuase they were denied basic contitutional rights. Mujib-ur-rehman was prevented from becoming the Prime minister despite getting majority. Like I already said, Kashmiris are in fact more privileged than the rest of India when you talk of constitutional rights. Everything else being as it should be, there should be no problem in asking what makes the case for Kashmiri independence so acute now when they have been part of India since times immemorial.
You also criticize the Indian army for its alleged excesses. I have already pointed out that if we were oblivious to the suffering of civilian population, then we could have used much more heavy weapons and air power. China did it in Tinnanmen square, Pakistan did it in Baluchistan and continues to do it in NWFP. For people who shout against the Indian army excesses from the rooftops, they should know that it is niether a formal or informal policy of the Indian army to sanction excesses. Most of the excesses are committed due to mental strains on the soldies who are living in a state of continual warfare. The effect that this has on soldiers on the ground is medically well researched and documented- judgements getting impaired, psychological breakdowns etc. No army is immune to it – not the US Army, Red Army, PLA etc. You should take the notion of clean war out of your head – or cite an example to prove otherwise. That is not to justify the excesses that may happen – but to focus on the larger objective of why the Indian army is fighting in Kashmir. The armed forces have strict rules of engagement and proper investigate procdures are in place whenever excesses happens. We can take strength from the fact that the Indian army, whatever the critics say, remains a great institution that we can be proud of.
I am not saying that Dr. Gorki Sahab rambles a lot. That characterization of the the lovable Sardar Ji could be saved for an other occasion when the subject is not as emotional as the big K. But I must say that his love potion No. 5 have all the remedies for what ails the Indian Union. Only if these stubborn non-congenial Kashmiri Muslims would drink a little and learn how to become Indian!
Dear Aadi:
I want to hear from K before I reply in detail but want to make a quick comment here.
How India handles Kashmiris (or any other group of dissatisfied citizens) will decide the character of the Indian state. India cannot and must not do what China does in Tibet or Pakistan does in Baluchistan (or God forbid did in BD) because unlike them we are not and do not want an authoritarian system or an overt\ covert military dictatorship. Such systems are well suited for Empires but Empires are inherently weak; they crumble in times of internal disorder or external defeats like the Soviets did.
India’s greatest strength has been that we are a democracy; and unlike Empires, democracies are founded on the principle of ‘Consent of the Governed’. While almost everything you say may well be true, the fact remains that the only way we are going to have a long term solution to the Kashmir imbroglio both internally and externally is when the average Kashmiri buys into the vision of the Indian Republic and categorically reject the TNT.
I have a lot of respect for the Indian Army.
However armies are best suited to deal with external threats; especially so when they are all volunteer armies of democracies. Internal ‘peace keeping’ missions are always demoralizing for them in the long run. Even the Indian army Chief has been unusually candid and went on the record stating that the Indian Army has done all it could to bring about a peaceful atmosphere and now it is up to the politicians.
This is another lesson from Punjab; the militancy was inflamed most due to first the short and swift army action and later on the ‘Ray-Ribiero Raj’ when political activity was suspended under President’s rule. It was finally defeated when the elected Govt. took charge of fighting the militancy. The battle in Punjab still went on for so long because it was a very dirty battle; if it had less human rights abuses, it would have been shorter. War anologies are suited for war; against ‘others’. Democracies do not make ‘war’ on their own people; they are governed.
And thank you PMA Sahib for the acknowledgement; feel free to jump in if you have a better solution for the India Union in Kashmir now (or had for Pakistan BD in 1971 or in Baluchistan in 2011……)
Regards.
How many here find the similarity with Holy Prophet punishing the Bannu Quraiza tribe for alleged collaboration with Quraish and Suuni Wahabi of Valley collaborating with enemy across the border and endangering National security?
Gorki Ji: During the Zia era we had one popular joke in Pakistan. Ayatollah Khomeini asked God if Iranian people would become good Muslims. God replied, “Not in your lifetime”. Then Zia went to God with the same question for his people. God replied, “Not in my lifetime”. So Gorki Ji I don’t know when and how those pesky Kashmiri Muslims will become Indian. Sixty years on, they haven’t become one yet. May be with some more bribes, carrots and sticks, or Gorki Love Potion No. 5 they will become Indian one day and stop pelting Indian soldiers. Who knows. Stranger things have happened before. But if I am correctly understanding yours and your fellow Indian Nationalists’ argument, it is not that Kashmiri Muslims mind being screwed by the Indians everyday. It is the way they are being screwed by the Indians that they don’t like.
“Who knows. Stranger things have happened before…..”
Dear PMA Sahib:
You have to stop asking me such questions that have made for prime time answers otherwise people will think that it is all a setup and you and I are working in league.
You talked of stranger things happening before.
Let me share with you two news stories for today’s newspapers. It can’t get any fresh than that!
The first story is about another separatist group in Assam that is ‘coming home’ due to exactly the policies practiced there that I am advocating long term (and are now beginning to be practiced) in Kashmir as well.
The second news story is in two parts, (points 2 and 3). Since it speaks for itself, I will not comment on it.
Please enjoy :
1. (Reuters) – United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), the top militant group fighting in the country’s remote northeast for almost three decades has dropped its demand for independence in talks with New Delhi, softening its stand in an insurgency that has killed thousands of people. The ULFA is one of the deadliest separatist groups in the northeast, and progress in resolving the insurgency, which has been a drain on resources, would boost New Delhi in a region rich in oil and tea. Arabinda Rajkhowa, also known as Rajib Rajkonwar, chairman of ULFA, said on Sunday his group was for the first time willing to talk to the government without condition.
2. New Delhi, Aug.5 (ANI): While the ongoing protests and unabated violence has projected Srinagar as ‘a city of stone-pelters’ and violent protestors, some intellectuals in Kashmir believe that all parties-the separatist as well as the mainstream-need to come together and allow peace to prevail.Daughter of the late Abdul Ghani Lone, and chief of the Peoples Conference, Ms. Shabnam Lone has made an appeal for all groups to come together.
In an interview to Power Politics, Ms. Lone, who is today a well-known Supreme Court lawyer, said that she has always believed that “Kashmir is for all Kashmiris and none should be discriminated here on the grounds of caste, creed and religion.”
3. Exonerating the Indian forces of long-held allegations of assassinating prominent Hurriyat leaders- Mirwaiz Maulvi Muhammad Farooq, Abdul Gani Lone and JKLF ideologue Prof. Abdul Ahad Wani, leader of the Hurriyat Conference’s moderate faction Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat admitted for the first time today, that the killings were actually ‘an insider’s job’.
Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat, who was the chairman of the Hurriyat Conference when it was split into the hardline and moderate factions, categorically stated at a seminar on Sunday that the security forces had played no role in the killings of Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq, Abdul Gani Lone as well as Prof. Abdul Ahad Wani.
“Lone sahib, Mirwaiz Farooq and Prof. Wani were not killed by the army or the police. They were targeted by our own people. The story is a long one, but we have to tell the truth,” he asserted, stopping short of naming any terrorist group which killed them or delving into the circumstances under which the murders took place.
Asked to identify the killers, Bhat said, “What is the need to identify them…. They are already identified.”
Regards.
Gorki
I really appreciate the manner in which you think and reason. Honestly, it is very rarely I come across an Indian who wants to know.
What is Azadi for a Kashmiri? It has different hues and colors, but at the very basic core of it, it is a state that doesn’t have to be under the influence/control/occupation of Delhi. To begin with your question has the answer: when 120 children do not get shot dead, that in itself makes lives better. How many times has the police used live ammo on protestors in Mumbai or Bengal? The army hasn’t even been called to tackle the Maoists in India, because India sees them as their people! But, in Kashmir, to instill confidence in people, India brings in the army and RAF, for flag marches. How does that instill confidence in a population? It is a very small example, but can an an army instill confidence? Don’t you think that the absence of this heavily armed occupation would make our lives better to begin with. Death is the end of life and each Kashmiri is ensured death at the hands of the Indian Army. Their mere absence would make us feel safer, contrary to what India wants Indians to believe. If I am not scared of moving out of my home without an identity card, that would make my day to day life better. This is why the absence of Indian state in Kashmir would make my life better. I have not touched any ideological or historical reasons, because I do not think one should always rely on those to justify a present demand.
Ranjit
1987 elections saw Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Syed Salahudin, Abdul Gani Lone, Abdul Gani Bhat, and other contest and win elections. Farooq and Rajiv did not want that. The elections were rigged and all these people ran for their lives. They won but lost. And that made them the present separatists in Kashmir. Syed Salahudin became the Supreme Commander of United Jihad Council – a guy who though elections and electoral empowernment exists and believed in it. India made sure his belief was broken. As was the trust of millions of Kashmiris – forever. How does a Kashmiri trust India afterwards? An India that jailed the tallest Kashmiri leader Sheikh Abdullah for 22 years? How? They were our representatives, but if they didn’t behave like toilet papers for India, they were shunned. What democracy is that?
Yes, there should have been. India had 1947 to 1987 to do that. 5 decades. It didn’t do that – a fact put to paper by I K Gujral who then visited Kashmir and noted that only one factory worth its salt existed in Kashmir. Handicraft and Horticulture, our largest industries (and not Tourism) existed much before India stepped in and have continued to grow.
Aadi
You are right. You got to pay 0.7 Million armed men in Kashmir. They money does take the shape of help to the state.
And not being poor has nothing to do with India. We have been better off much before India came in. So, thanks but no thanks.
I know people can be ill informed and not know things. But, you beat everyone hands down! Here are your four years before 2010. I do presume you to be an Indian who sees the killings of Kashmiris to be a sign of relative peace and tranquility.
2008 AI Caged Kashmir scares me Gujrat in Kashmir For 1
2007 Peace of grave Fake encounter epidemic
2006 I can kill everybody And a family cries Kill a Kashmiri
The imagined grievances, have been imagined up by Amnesty International too! Our imagination must be pretty amazing!
And the likes you refer to are the 6 million Kashmiris. We, seriously, do not worry about the likes of you, and haven’t for the past 6 decades, won’t for the next 10 decades, if need be.
And to end, a glimpse of India Shinning since 1993!
And, I almost forgot to say this….
Sorry to disappoint you but I would like to point out that unlike Ayatollah Khomeini and General Zia, the Indian PM does not consult with God about policy matters; unlike Iran and Pakistan, the sovereignty in India lies with the people of India…
Thanks for the joke though.
Funny
Regards.
Few days ago , Ex Presidente Jernail Musharraf Sahib was accusing indian involvement in Baluchistan’s freedom struggle . Countless Baluchis have made ultimate sacrifice in this Holy war of freedom . As per Pakistan’s ex ruler and Army chief Gen Musharraf ,no insurgency can survive without extrenal support and then he and other Pakistani want us to believe that Kashamiri Wahabis case is different than that of Bannu Quraiza tribe. Allah and Sunna of Holy Prophet is on the side of Indians. India started booming the same time unholy enemies collaborated to hurt them . India is blessed to be new Medina of 21st century.
If Punjabis, Tamils and Bengalis can live together peacefully then why can’t Kasmiris? Even if India decides to give them “azadi”, then sooner or later they will be seeking azadi from Pakistanis or Chinese. If they decide to be a part of India, they will be as “azad” as any Gujrati or Marathi.
Dear K
What you say makes painful reading and forces every Indian to introspection I will reply to it later today. Unlike some people comenting above, to me loss of Kashmir would be bad for India not so much because we will lose territory etc. but because by losing people like yourself for the reasons you outline, we will lose a little bit of our soul and our reason to exist as a country…..
I can relate to it because this is how many felt in Punjab in the 80s.
Regards.
Oh Gorki Ji must we talk about all the separatist movements simultaneously taking place all over India. You know I have very poor knowledge of the Sub-continent and its five hundred nations under five thousand gods; or is it fifty thousand. I really don’t know how many so please forgive me. Unlike you, India does not interest me. But thanks anyway.
Dear K,
I wish I could deny all that you wrote as propaganda but having lived in India I know that a many of the things that you (and the article above) say are true.
It is always a tragedy when the state turns its might on its own citizens and doubly so when it is a democracy that has to do so. Indeed the loss of 120 of our own boys at the hands of our own security forces should be a tragedy but not only for Kashmir but for entire India.
What you write about the rigging of elections in 1987 it also true.
Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi led Govts. first discredited the Abdullah Govt. and then by rigging forcing moderate Kashmiri leadership into insurgency.
I remember reading in ‘India Today’ in the 1990s that after those elections, almost the entire slate of the opposition candidates (from whom the elections were stolen) were now the list of separatists!
It is indefensible that Indian citizens should have to suffer so much at the hands of fellow Indians especially in the position of power.
So how can I, an Indian still believe in India after that?
Let me try.
Somebody once wrote tongue in cheek that ‘one must not assume malice where mere incompetence would suffice’. It has never been more true than in the case of the Indian Government and especially so in its handling of popular unrests whether in Punjab or Assam or in Kashmir. What the security forces did last summer in Srinagar has less to do with a genocidal plan and more to do with the fact that the forces themselves were poorly trained; often scared youngsters themselves who used their guns at the first sign of trouble. Belatedly the Govt. has recognized this fact and it was recently reported that five companies are now being trained to use non-lethal crowd control measures specifically against stone throwing kids. It clearly does not absolve our Govt. of all that happened but it is a small step in the right direction. Similarly the Congress party and India of 2011 are quite different from the hubris days of 1986-87 when they toppled elected Govts. At will. Although the damage done in those days will take a generation to undo at least this lesson seems to have been learnt.
Even more important than that is the fact that the ruling families that run the regional parties are getting the message that power does not come from New Delhi but from the people of the state and the people demand good governance; mere slogans are not enough. Elections in Bihar and Delhi etc. attest to this fact.
This fact may not mean much right now in Kashmir that is currently bottled down by the overbearing presence of the many central security forces but once the situation improves that footprint is bound to get smaller and smaller as the local Kashmiri forces assume more policing responsibilities.
Hopefully in time this national trend will become visible in Kashmir as well.
While I agree with you mostly I also have a small quibble with you when you write that:
“Honestly, it is very rarely I come across an Indian who wants to know…”
Unfortunately it is the nature of things that the ‘Indians’ you and other Kashmiris come in contact in real life are either the untrained and often poorly led Indian troops who are responsible for doing the kind of things that you mention or the unthinking and ill informed people on the net who know little about the reality on the ground yet spout hyper patriotic slogans that seem to imply that they would rather keep Kashmir and throw the Kashmiris out.
If this is all you see or hear day in day out it would be easy for you to assume that this is all what India is about. However for the sake of our country I want to assure you that this is not the entire picture.
First of all while many Kashmiris complain about ‘India’ as if it is a giant monolith of a billion people bent on dominating Kashmir and its culture, they don’t realize that there is no such thing. That which they call India is a group of Tamils, Keralites, Harayanivis, Punjabis and others who value our own ‘local freedom’ just as much as the Kashmiris. Because of that there is a lot of goodwill and empathy among the ordinary Indians not only for people in their own community and state but others elsewhere.
Take the case of Delhi and the Gujarat riots; two of the biggest blots on the Republic of India. Both the events were highly traumatizing for the two minorities at the receiving end yet many saw these riots for what they were, pogroms carried by lumpen elements of two political parties; the congress and the BJP respectively and not by the ‘Hindus’. The reason for this is that the loudest voices that condemned these grotesque events were other Hindus in the oppositions, the media, the social workers and the other stake holders is the overall civil society. These voices were raised from other ‘Indians’ the Bengalis, the Biharis, the Delhites and such!
That is all there is that makes up ‘India’.
Moreover the same ‘others’; the Punjabis, the Tamils, the Haryanavis, and the Keralaites etc. have had their own run ins with the same ‘India’ that you complain about and have at one time or the other have had their own pet grouses. For example we too have had our elections stolen at times, we too have sometimes protested, even attacked public property, been shot at and worse. Yet with trial and error we have learn that:
a) India is still a work in progress and there are times that the way it works is a far cry from the way it is supposed to work; it is our work to make it so.
b) Because we are a democracy, power is ephemeral and cannot be taken for granted by anyone; thus those who strut around confidently today may well end up on a dust heap tomorrow.
The same Congressmen who in their hubris dismissed lawfully elected state governments a decade or two ago dare not step on too many toes for who knows who will be needed when to form a coalition.
This last is very empowering even for small states.
In time, if we do not burn our bridges irrevocably with Kashmir, you too will realize that it is possible to be a part of this noisy and boisterous democracy at a Union level and yet be left alone at a local level to pursue our own destiny largely free of interference.
Since the events of the past decade and especially the last summer are still fresh in your mind, I do not expect a quick change of heart so soon.
The best I can hope is that you will not give up on us, and at the very least will keep your mind open and judge India not on its past mistakes but on its future attempts to make up.
Time is a big healer, given the right circumstances, in time hearts of ordinary Indians can some times reach out to others in a way that a state cannot.
Let me share with you a story from another ‘separatist’ struggle from another state and another time.
In 1984 a large number of Sikh young men were radicalized after the anti Sikh riots and many of them were swayed by emotions and became militants to avenge those killings. A human rights organization made up mostly of Hindus published a white paper titled ‘Who are the Guilty’ which named various Congress leaders who had led gangs of criminals against ordinary Sikhs. In this list the name of Lalit Maken, a congress MP (and son in law of SD Sharma) figured prominently. He was later on gunned down along with his wife by Sikh militants one of whom was later identified as a youngster named R. S. Gill (Kukki). Who had escaped to the US but was later extradited to India and spent 17 years in jail for the crime. He was no ordinary criminal but a brilliant student and the son of a Padam Bhushan winner scientist and Vice Chancellor of the famous PAU, Sardar Khem Singh Gill. When Maken was killed he had a daughter, Avantika, aged 5 years at the time. Years later when Kukki applied for a parole his family approached Avantika, now a 22 year girl for help. She not only agreed but also went to the jail to meet her parent’s alleged killer.
According to newspaper reports:
“It was an unusual meeting. A girl who was just five years old when her parents were murdered was meeting the man convicted for the murder. At the end of the one-hour meeting, they hugged each other and she said: ‘‘I hope we can be good friends for life for one thing common between the two of us is the tragedy.’’ Gill had applied for state pardon but his case had been postponed for want of ‘‘some more documents.’’ Avantika was against a pardon until today’s meeting. ‘‘My cousin Ajay Maken had asked me to pardon Gill for that would help us garner more votes. I didn’t want to play politics on my parents’ death. But after meeting Ranjit, I realized the two of us need to work together for a better society,’’ she said.
Today though Gill’s troubles are not over and he is still hounded by the law he is a peace activist and speaks publicly about reconciliation and forgiveness….
Though the above is an extraordinary story and not all Indians are like Ranjit and Avantika, please do keep in mind that the ‘India’ that you feel oppressed by are not all the same. Among the very same ‘Indians’ and the ‘Kashmiris’ are millions of ordinary people like Avantika and Ranjit who are waiting to forget and to forgive given the right circumstances.
Indians like me can only partner with intellectuals like your self so that the future of our people is better than our past…….
Regards.
Gorki:
Before I comment in detail, let me clarify that by India, I and most Kashmiris mean the state and not its people. If it was the people, then you would not have seen a peaceful Amarnath Yatra. A Yatra which went on smoothly and was supported by separatists, even though there was unrest all around. People helped the Yatris, ignoring the loud sounds of Bharat Mata Ki Jai, most of the times an attempt at show of power.
And a short quote on the policing getting powers in Kashmir: police taking over the security in Kashmir is just putting the wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is a mere attempt at hoodwinking. For me, it matters not who the person holding the AK 47 is. For me, a change would mean not seeing an AK 47. I wrote about the attempt to bring forth the police in 2006 here and to quote:
What happened last summer is not an isolated incident. We have seen this and a lot more in the Sopore, Gawkadal, and scores of other massacres. If they were isolated, and one off incidents, I would accept your reasoning. But, they are not. And, a nation which claims to be a super power, should know how super powers behave with their populations. And the logic of untrained forces, is not palpable. How many times have untrained forces killed people on the streets of Mumbai, Bengal or Delhi – when they were protesting? None. The same forces, arent they?
Also, yes, I do refer to the hyper patriotic Indians on the net, but I do know and have met others, but again a tiny percentage of them, want to indulge in a genuine conversation.
Security foot print alone can not solve Kashmir. We have to look at why what happened, happened. India had 5 decades to win over Kashmir, but through its overt and covert means of suppression, it failed to do so. And, the last summer, doesn’t help improve trust. Congress needs to look beyond family politics in ruling Kashmir. Just because Omar and Rahul are friends, should mean nothing, but sadly it means everything for Delhi – and that mindset will never change.
Thank you for a very engaging conversation but I am no intellectual.
Dear K
Thanks for the above post.
I agree with you that most Kashmiris are tolerant people towards Indians even as they resent the state. The brutalization of so many is painful to note. Elsewhere I read a Kashmiri who wrote that before the 1980s ‘Hum log Churi chalana bhi nahi jante the’ (we did not even know how to use aknife..)
I called you an intelectual because I went on your blog and noted that it has been quoted by even the academics. That makes you more intelectual than some who pass off themselves as one but have nothing worthwhile to show for it.
Like you I am a private citizen and can’t do much other than inform and hope for a better future.
You must keep on writing in your gentle but firm style to highlight all that you feel is worthwhile to write about. That is one and perhaps the best way to improve our society.
Best of Luck and wish you a happy 2011.
I hope our paths may cross some day in real life too.
Regards.
Gorki:
It is us private citizens who have to forge bridges of unity and understanding. Hopefully we can and one day we will.
Look forward to engaging with you more often here or on my blog.
Dear K
It is so refreshing to find you on this blog. Even though on a personal level I respect Dr. Gorki, I have always detested his patronising talk towards Pakistan that he has now extended towards your country Kashmir as well. He calls you as his countryman. What country? What right does India has to occupy Kashmir? Absolutely none. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris and no one else. My own father from 1948 on longed for the land of his youth that he was never able to return to because of Indian occupation. There is a common believe among Indians that if they gave Kashmiris this, or they give Kashmiris that, somehow Kashmiris will accept Indians as their masters, as if Kashmir is for sale. How disrespectful of them. There is no solution to the Kashmir problem except what Kashmiris want. Rest is hogwash that Dr. Gorki wishes to pass on as Indian Nationalism.
PMA
Have we interacted earlier?
I don’t know Gorki, but I feel he wants to engage and if he engages at a level where we accept facts as facts, then that is the way to go!
Indeed economics, decreased security foot print, a better riot control force, are not the solutions, they never can be. For me, even the UN resolutions are a bunch of crazy words put together. I believe even if one Kashmiri body fell to the Indian bullets, and the people of Kashmir on that basis and on that basis alone, demand Azadi – they have the right to do so. On that merit alone.
Now, we all know what has and hasnt happened in Kashmir since Indian forces landed in a then independent country and occupied it. It has just been 2 decades of active fighting by us, we are ready to fight another 10 decades if need be, to achieve our goal. A goal that people then want, not one we the present Kashmiris dream of. I want a Kashmir as the Kashmiris 50 years down the line wants, not how the people in 2010 imagined it to be. A dream it is, but true it will come. And, it isnt since 1947 we are fighting, it started way back before, the day Akbar occupied us in the 1580. So, we have come a long way and we are ready to go a long way and I am sure your father’s land will flourish in the future as it did in the time he was there and the way he remembers it, insha Allah.
K and PMA,
What is your goal? To join a fourth world mullah based Pakistan? To be a tiny land locked nation in the Kashmir valley with no army and no economic base? How on earth does this make any sense?
Fighting without a viable objective is futile and just self-destructive.
And if you do get azaadi, who will rule Kashmir? It will be the same NC and PDP, perhaps with different labels. Maybe the Hurriyat will try its luck. What will actually change for poor Kashmiri people?
Dear PMA Sahib:
I was disappointed by your above post but not surprised.
Reading it, I could really relate to YLH who too is usually attacked by both the Indian and Pakistani hyper nationalists for his views. Similarly, no sooner were the Indian hyper nationalists done with spewing their pre-conceived views about Kashmir that you have decided to air your own from the opposing side of the spectrum.
I have blogged on the PTH for close to two years now and my views regarding India, Pakistan and the World in general are well known and there for all to read.
I would like to know what is it that you find so objectionable in what I write.
You call me patronizing. Perhaps you mistake my empathy for the Pakistani liberals as condescending but can I ask if it a crime to identify with people like YLH, BC, RR, AZW and Tilsim whose views and the courage of convictions I admire?
Must we view everything through a nationalistic prism all the time or do you think ideas can stand on their own regardless of where they origin from?
I understand that you and I have a serious difference of opinion when it comes to nationalism. I am sorry to say that to me nationalism is but a label but for you nationalism means to passionately detest everything and anything Indian.
For example I have no doubt that in your personal life you are a very cultured man (and once or twice you have even come close to admiring individual Indians like Vajra or Hayyer) but as a people you seem to have only a thinly disguised contempt for us who unfortunately happen to be born as Indians.
For you, we are not regular people but crafty ‘Indian Lalas’ or ‘spindly legged’ creatures or worse.
I am sorry that I do not fit in with your crafty Indian stereotype but I can’t help being who I am. Fortunately or unfortunately I am not alone; there are millions like me who do not see nationalism as a zero sum game.
You seem to feel offended that I empathized with ‘K’ and called him my countryman. Let me make an exception this once and talk a little about my own experience to explain why I said that.
I am not oblivious to the suffering of the Kashmiris like him because I have been there myself. Like K writes on his blog, I too have seen victims of ‘Indian’ bullets with my own eyes; I too have heard first hand, the cries of the victims of Delhi riots and I too have lost friends to both the Indian and to the militant bullets. I also have first hand experience of ‘anti-India’ protests and the ‘inside of Indian police stations’ as a result.
I think I have already said more than enough but I hope you get the idea why I can empathize.
If in spite of my personal experiences I do not seem to be a bitter man today and am asking others to help build a better India, there are very good reasons for that.
One immediate and obvious reason is that it is painful to see more Indian kids to bleed to death like those kids in Srinagar last summer or to see more Indians throw away their lives and careers like Ranjit Singh Gill about whom I wrote earlier and who was a brilliant student, only 24 when he became a victim of circumstances.
Another more important reason is that with time, it has dawned on me (like many others) that what we should be striving for is not so much ‘Azadi; for Azadi’s sake but for a genuine freedom; from oppression and fear; from exploitation and uber-nationalism; from injustice.
The examples of the former type are all too clear for us to see; Pakistan broke away from India; got ‘Azadi’ and BD from Pakistan, yet how much better did the lives get for ordinary citizens in each of these nations? How much ‘Azad’ from the Punjabi domination are the Kashmiris of the ‘Azad’ Kashmir?
Your father you say, escaped from the ‘Indian occupation’ but what kind of a freedom did he ‘escape into? A land where even a powerful Governor is not so powerful that he can stand up for the sake of justice for a poor Christian woman without fearing for his life?
You call my version of nationalism ‘hogwash’ but you also admitted that you know but a little about India and couldn’t care less to know more. Isn’t that how people learn to rely on stereotypes?
Let me share a bit about my vision of the Indian nationhood which you will notice is a bit different from the stereotype you have in mind and from the one mentioned above.
It is that in which there is no oppressed or the oppressor, there is one man one vote; the Union of India is made up of peoples in different States who live in complete harmony with each other and with shared values; a faith in our common secular constitution and complete respect for the universal human rights as enshrined in it.
Clearly the current suffocating state of affairs and the human rights violations in Kashmir have to come to an end. So must any talk of a forced integration with India using an kind of Tibet like demographic reengineering often suggested by some dimwits in the Indian press and political circles. Like other states Kashmir should be allowed to have a free and unfettered political activity, including a discussion about the pros and cons of asking for freedom. Then let Kashmiris come up with a truly independently elected leadership that can represent the will of its people in the Indian Union. It is my belief that once that happens, Kashmiris, like the Punjabis will have a hard time thinking what else the ‘Azadi’ would bring to them over and above what they would enjoy and things would settle down.
Even if ‘K’ may not see it that way today, I am heartened to note that he seems to keep an open mind about the wishes of the future generations. That is all an Indian nationalist can ask for. Obviously the rest of India has no right to ask anything more than that of anyone; be it a Punjabi or a Bengali or a Kashmiri.
Because you know so little about India you may not understand the fact that the reason why the ‘Indian State; has had so much trouble so far is because it has failed to live up to this ideals at times.
The reason why India still exists at all is because many people still believe that the original vision can still be realized if we all work towards that end. The reason why you find me a little bit more optimistic than ‘K’ is that while he sees his land under a literal siege; I see mine governed today by the same man who was once charged with sedition for burning the Indian constitution. In other words I seen the change in Punjab that I hope he does too in Kashmir.
Above all what give me hope yet is that in spite of all that the Kashmiris like ‘K’ have gone through, there is enough humanity alive among them that they remain genuinely secular in outlook and refuse to discriminate on the basis of religion or race etc.
Because I care enough for India, I feel that such a people are a rare asset that India can ill afford to loose, In order to remain true to its own ideals India needs to work really hard to earn the respect and confidence of such people….
Regards.
Dear PMA:
I had decided not to write anything here on the Economist report which I had gone through in the magazine earlier. The report was tendentious but not entirely inaccurate, and there was little to be gained by pointing the truth about SAS Geelani whom I have met a few times.
It would do no good to state here that though Geelani has been gifted the leadership by Omar Abdullah this last July he is not accepted by the other Hurriyet. Two years ago during the Amarnath land agitation he tried to take over and was rebuffed, but courtesy Omar he did gain a temporary ascendancy this summer.
Also it does no good to say that it is Geelani who Abdul Ghani Bhatt was hinting at as the killer of other leaders or that Geelani and the HM was a creation of the ISI and took orders from it even over the head of the Musharraf. The first split in the movement came as a result of the revolt against the HM cadres by Kuka Parray when he massacred large numbers in his Sonwari area. Kuka Parray was himself a former member of the Ikhwan ul Musilmeen and the term Ikhwani for a renegade militant took its name from him.
Similarly it would do no good to point that helicopters buzz overhead regularly because they fly to Leh and Kargil over Srinagar and to Gurez and Tangdhar over Palhallan. The Indian state has mismanaged things in Kashmir in the last 28 years and continues to do so. It also mismanaged them from 1953 to 1975.
But I write now because of the following comment,
“It is so refreshing to find you on this blog. Even though on a personal level I respect Dr. Gorki, I have always detested his patronising talk towards Pakistan that he has now extended towards your country Kashmir as well. He calls you as his countryman. What country? What right does India has to occupy Kashmir? Absolutely none. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris and no one else. My own father from 1948 on longed for the land of his youth that he was never able to return to because of Indian occupation. There is a common believe among Indians that if they gave Kashmiris this, or they give Kashmiris that, somehow Kashmiris will accept Indians as their masters, as if Kashmir is for sale. How disrespectful of them. There is no solution to the Kashmir problem except what Kashmiris want. Rest is hogwash that Dr. Gorki wishes to pass on as Indian Nationalism”
Gorki is never patronizing. He always tries to understand the others point of view and incorporate it in a larger humanism. It is sad that that should seem patronizing to you.
Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris if one assumes that the people who live in a geography own it. Punjabis own Punjab and Sindhis own Sindh no doubt, but where does that leave the Gujjars, the Paharis and such like. I am now talking of the valley.
And what do we do about Doda, Poonch and Rajouri where everybody lives together in some sort of harmony most of the time. As for Jammu where the Jammu Muslims and Dogras make do pretty well, so much so that Kashmiri Muslims have built winter residences in large numbers. I have been unable to persuade Jammu Hindus to emulate Kashmiri Muslims and build summer residences in Kashmir. Who owns what?
Your father whom you once mentioned as being from Jammu should have asked for a visa to visit. Visas are regularly given to Pakistanis visiting J&K to meet relations unless they are suspected of visiting for other reasons. If he did not have any relations left that is another matter. Jammu Muslims underwent the same s0rt of fear that the Hindus and Sikhs of Mirpur, Bagh tehsil, and Poonch. The latter entirely migrated to Jammu, as did some non state subject Hindus and Sikhs from the Sialkot side in Punjab. All the Muslims of Jammu did not migrate however and so Jammu, Kathua and Udhampur the primarily Hindu districts continue to have significant Hindu populations.
In so far as the solution of giving Kashmiris what they want is concerned I can only point out that such a policy is not recommended to other ‘nations’ of India or Pakistan and it was no part of the original basis on which India was partitioned.
Dear Gorkiji,
I sincerely believe that you should not dignify PMA by responding to him. After all what does he have to offer in any discussion except, glib but meaningless articulation, a juvenile lack of curiosity about divergent world views and cliched disdainful statements, when he can not substantiate his half baked opinions, with data or logic? I am yet to read anything constructive or positive from him on any topic, and perhaps it’s too late in the day to expect him to change.
I have learned a lot from your posts ( as from other writers and posters on PTH) and hence am offering this unsolicited advise. Sorry If I offend you.
Regards.
Hayyer (January 5, 2011 at 2:25 pm): Like you, at first, I too did not want to comment or join the discussion here. Kashmir is an emotional subject and any internet discussion on it brings out chimps from the woods. Dr. Gorki on the other hand, like yourself, is a decent respectable gentleman and I respect him for that. He calls me ‘hyper nationalist’ while he himself routinely promotes ‘Indian Nationalism’ on this forum, something that Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Kashmiris rejected sixty years ago. He questions ‘what kind of Pakistan’. The hell. I could also say ‘what kind of India’. But how does that help. He wishes to build an Indian Nation while he does not allow us the same. He is very intelligent man but he deliberately does not want to understand Pakistani aspirations. But he really ticked me off this time when he started to put his arm around ~K~ and started his usual ‘Bhai-Bhai’ business. He has done that in the past as well and that, in spite of our personal mutual goodwill, has put him and myself in ideologically opposing camps. Gandhi tried that tactic with Jinnah and it did not work. It is not going to work for Gorkies either. He needs to understand that we are not discussing our own individual lives here. We are talking about the fate of eleven million people and four million if you consider only the Valley. There is nothing personal here. Dr. Gorki will be surprised to know how many Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Christian and Jewish friends and neighbors I have in my personal life. But again, we are not talking about our personal lives here. We are talking about Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir and India. We are talking about two-billion humanity. We need to understand that no peace will ever take hold in the Sub-continent unless and until the Kashmir problem is solved according to the wishes of the Kashmiri people. I know you and I have discussed definition of Kashmir and Kashmiri in the past; we disagree. But that is besides the point. The problem is there and must be solved.
Since this is getting a several way discussion, I would like to wait a bit to reply so as to give ‘K’ a chance to write a post as well.
In the meantime I want to tell Ashu that his post is welcome; it does not offend me; however I respond to PMA Sahib for many reasons. One of them is listed below.
Dear PMA Sahib, it does not surprise me at all that you have Hindu, Sikh, Jew and Buddhist friends. In fact I would have been surprised if it had been otherwise.
That is one of the reasons why I respect you and try to engage with you in a conversation here.
I have clarified my views on nationalism, Indian or otherwise, seveal times before but will clarify some points again but as I said, I will reply a little later.
Regards.
PMA, I think you should include China, then we can have 3 billion in the mix.
3 billion is more impressive figure than 2 billion, and you can then sell it to whoever is listening that Kashmir has to be solved (as per your wishes, and as per selective interpretation of UN resolutions), like you have for the past 60 or so years, and see how that works out for ya….
We are talking about Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir and India. We are talking about two-billion humanity. We need to understand that no peace will ever take hold in the Sub-continent unless and until the Kashmir problem is solved according to the wishes of the Kashmiri people.
And until Pakistan is secularized (or Islamized or whatever its confused people want), and Afghanistan is deTalibanized, and …..
Then there is the issue of whether that peace is even worth having.
I don’t understand why we are looking at non-issues and commenting on peoples abilities and likes and dislikes.
Each one of us is biased, if we weren’t, we would not be humans. I am pro Kashmir, Gorki pro India, PMA pro Pakistan – but that is why this discourse is taking place. Each one of us will try to prove our point of view. We have to. We should. If we didn’t, we wouldn’t be talking. There would be no scope to read, to learn and to ‘try’ to understand.
I really don’t get into and perhaps don’t understand a comment at a deeper level, I try not to see whether or not there is an agenda behind that. But, since I know my point of view, I ignore what I find not relevant or think would just lead us to non-talk. It is better to take comments on their face value. Because, if we try to discet every word and every sentence, we can easily find evil or good in it, the way we want to. But, let’s stop doing that.
Those who want to engage will do so. Those who just want to throw in a flame bomb will eventually disappear, for they don’t have that much energy in them to begin with.
We all have to agree and disagree, and I think every human means good (till and untill he proves otherwise and some do that in one comment), and we should take it from there.
My blog received comments and mails – people thought it was ISI funded, RAW funded, CIA funded. People threatened me: Indians mostly. I was called a communist, a Wahabi and what not. But, none of that matters and people will always see you in a light they are trained to see. My blog is about truth, just truth – thats why it doesnt go well with anyone. Funniest comment was once by a Kashmiri who said I am doing disservice with my blog and should shut it down (he might have read a post against APHC).
But thats what we have to understand. None of us is above critcism. We are not and should not consider anyone to be above either. I will wrtite against Geelani and Gandhi, if I think their actions have harmed Kashmir – and we all should be able to do that. Let us not be chained in any ‘ideals’, biases yes, but no ideals.
‘K’ has made his point; fair enough.
So now let me come back to PMA Sahib:
He wrote
“But he really ticked me off this time when he started to put his arm around ~K~ and started his usual ‘Bhai-Bhai’ business. He has done that in the past as well and that, in spite of our personal mutual goodwill, has put him and myself in ideologically opposing camps…”
That is a very honest assessment of his position. He hates it when I try to narrow the differences.
I have indeed tried to ‘put my arm around everyone else and tried the ‘Bhai Bhai’ thing. He flatters me when he compares me with Gandhi; I know myself and my shortcomings and know for sure that I do not even begin to compare with that man. I also have very different views than MKG on religion, politics and modern technology and medicine but I do try to emulate him in two ways:
1. I try to be the same in my personal life as in my public stances
2. I try not to see things from a narrow ‘us versus them’ POV but see the whole humanity as a continuum and its achievements as a common legacy for all of us thus justice for all as a final goal.
I am sorry that my putting an arm around either ‘K’ or the Pakistanis here offends you but I can’t help it. Like you, I too have dear friends who are Hindus, Muslims and Christians and I can’t discriminate on the basis of which passport any one holds.
Therefore when a Pakistani comes up to me and says that we are after all one people after all (it happens about once a month on average in my part of the world) unlike you, PMA Sir, I do not walk away from him but try to clasp his one hand in two of mine.
The reason I do it is hidden in your own words below:
“We are talking about Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir and India. We are talking about two-billion humanity….”
How can we hope to leave a peaceful world for our children if we do anything else? For those two billion people you are talking about don’t just wear three labels; Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiri; they are also Punjabi, Bengalis, Baluchis, Pathans, Hindus, Sikhs, Ahmedyas, Pustho, Farsi, Urdu, Mohajir, Bhaiyas and a host of other such things. How will you sort them out if you acknowledge only three labels, swear perpetual hostility among the two dominant groups and ignore the rest?
Regards.
Dear ‘K’
“My blog received comments and mails – people thought it was ISI funded, RAW funded, CIA funded. People threatened me: Indians mostly. I was called a communist, a Wahabi and what not…”
That by itself should be a good self evaluation that you are somewhat objective and indeed doing something right.
“None of us is above critcism. We are not and should not consider anyone to be above either. I will write against Geelani and Gandhi, if I think their actions have harmed Kashmir –“
That is the only being objective and the honest thing to do. How else could it be otherwise?
“ Let us not be chained in any ‘ideals’, biases yes, but no ideals….”
This is the part I did not understand; perhaps you mean something different than what I understood.
Is it not the whole purpose of a dialogue, to be able to let go of our biases and yet stick to universal human ideals and idealism?
Can you elaborate?
Regards.
Gorki Sahab: You have continuously chosen to confuse interpersonal conduct of individuals with the international relations between countries and nations. I speak of the international disputes between neighboring countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kashmir and India and the need to resolve such disputes and establish regional peace. And you sir talk about individuals holding hands on the internet. With one face you promote Indian Nationalism on this site and with other you give lofty lectures about humanism. If you are a true humanist as you profess then why don’t you stress on the need for peace negotiation between Pakistan and India. Honestly sometimes it seems to me that either I am not able to explain myself to you or you sir deliberately play dumb. I do not know which. In our discourse over the years you have many times repeated the ‘walk away’ comment. Yes, when some Indian refuses to acknowledge Pakistan and tells me ‘you did not need to have your own country’ I do walk away from them. Unfortunately, true to your political believes disguised as humanism, you have done the same on the Kashmir issue as well. Listen carefully what ~K~ has to say. You will learn why not everybody wants to be Indian. Regards.
Dear PMA Sahib:
Your last post had so many different issues that the only way to address them for good would be to take them one at a time.
1.“Gorki Sahab: You have continuously chosen to confuse interpersonal conduct of individuals with the international relations between countries and nations. I speak of the international disputes between neighboring countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kashmir and India and the need to resolve such disputes and establish regional peace. And you sir talk about individuals holding hands on the internet..”
Unfortunately in today’s world, the individuals and their interpersonal conduct are shaped by their nations’ perceptions and vice versa. If it was not so then ten independent contractors of the ISI would not have sailed some 500 miles of open sea to land in Mumbai and massacre hundreds of innocents.
From your past comments I understand that you consider me an impractical dreamer and find my idea of building bridges using the internet, trade, people to people interactions mildly amusing. As you know I am not alone. Recently Raza Rumi wrote an article on the PTH arguing the very same approach.
Perhaps arguments from more authoritative sources may convince you to reconsider. Here below I reproduce slightly paraphrased excerpts from an article written by Clay Shirky; a professor at the NYU which appears in the Jan 2011 edition of the Foreign Affairs a publication of the prestigious US Council of foreign relations that just arrived in the mail yesterday. The article is titled ‘The Political Power of Social Media”
“Just as Luther adopted the newly practical printing press, the American revolutionaries synchronized their beliefs using the postal service that Ben Franklin had designed, today’s political movements will use any means possible including the social media to frame their views and coordinate their actions. The more promising way to think about social media is as a long term tool that can strengthen civil society and the public sphere. This is called an ‘environmental view’ and according to this conception positive change in the life of the country follows rather than precede the development of a strong sphere.”
It further goes on to say the following:
“In a famous study of political opinion after the 1948 US presidential election, sociologists Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarfeld discovered that mass media alone do not change people’s minds; instead, there is a two step process. Opinions are first transmitted by the media and then they get echoed by friends, family members and colleagues. It is in the second, social step that opinions are formed. This is the step in which the Internet and the social media can make a difference. As with the printing press, the Internet spreads not just media consumption but media production as well; it allows people to privately and publicly articulate and debate a welter of conflicting views…”
The paper is well reasoned and gives numerous examples to back its assertion. One can easily obtain a copy of this recent publication and read the whole article.
In other words, social media including the internet are powerful tools that if harnessed by committed activists can bring about a change in national and international affairs.
That is exactly the reason why I feel all those who believe in universal human values should build bridges using these ideas, first among themselves and then transnational in order to bring about a larger change because the words and actions of individuals have the power to change national discourse.
Contd….
2. “With one face you promote Indian Nationalism on this site and with other you give lofty lectures about humanism. If you are a true humanist as you profess then why don’t you stress on the need for peace negotiation between Pakistan and India…”
I believe the previous answer partly addresses this issue as well; building bridges and narrowing differences with Pakistani liberals like YLH, RR, and others is an attempt to bring about peace between India and Pakistan.
I suspect however that you are implying that my humanism is a cover to promote Indian nationalism. If so then you underestimate my commitment to humanism and over estimate my commitment to nationalism.
First of all I will repeat something I have said numerous times before. My commitment is not to ‘India’ but to the ‘Republic of India.’ The difference is important; while the first is a narrow nationalism which borders on fascism, (and often promoted by those I call hyper nationalists) the later is a loyalty to the idea; that of India as a civic nation made up of many sub nationalities, bound mainly by a common constitution; a voluntary Union of many different peoples who live in this land.
I promote this idea because it is inclusive; and does not negate anyone else. Moreover it is not in any way antagonistic to the idea of a Pakistan. If anything, it is the only idea that is compatible with the peaceful co-existence within India’s own borders and within those of its neighbors. In support of my argument let me introduce another paper written not by any Sub-continental nationalist but by an impartial academic from Harvard.
This below is what the paper titled: ‘competing nationalisms: secessionist movements and the state’ published in 1996 in the Harvard International Review had to say in this regard:
“SOUTH ASIA IS HOME to several world religions, over 30 major languages, a thousand dialects, and innumerable castes and subcastes. During the colonial era, princes held nominal rule over more than 580 separate states in India, while a number of other provinces were directly governed by the British. Although only two movements for national independence have succeeded since the departure of the British in 1947–those of Pakistan and Bangladesh–South Asia has experienced countless separatist movements based on religious, linguistic, or ethnic lines, including campaigns for Dravidastan, Assam, Nagaland, Gurkhaland, Kashmir, Khalistan, Pashtunistan, Baluchistan, Sind-hudesh, and Tamil Eelam. With such diverse national movements continuing to challenge state lines, South Asia faces the question: should the territorial integrity and sovereignty of existing states be maintained, regardless of the history and legitimacy of their origins, or should the state’s various ethnic groups or “nationalities” be allowed the right of self-determination and secession?”
It first discusses the issues of identity as follows:
“The paradox behind these and other nationalist movements is that perceptions of nationhood often change or overlap, or result in the creation of states quite different from those envisioned by the ideology that inspired the original…” AND
“It is important to recall that the relations among Punjabi Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus were cooperative and cordial under the British Raj. Indeed, Punjabis of all three religious persuasions constituted the bulk and the backbone of the British Indian Army. They fought shoulder-to-shoulder in two world wars. Even during the mass slaughter and migration of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in Punjab that accompanied the partition of the province in 1947, members of these three religious communities in the British Indian Army remained disciplined. Since partition, however, Indo-Pakistani wars have resembled a civil war among the Punjabis: the Indian armed forces are 30 percent Hindu and Sikh Punjabi while Pakistan’s forces are 80 percent Muslim Punjabi. From one racial, linguistic, and cultural ethnic group, Punjabis have become three separate communities. These examples suggest that religion is more divisive than racial, cultural, and linguistic ties in South Asia. But past cooperation and goodwill among Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in Bengal, Kashmir, and Punjab show that such positive ties may be restored given the right attitudes and political conditions…..”
AND
“All of the states of South Asia constitute political conglomerations of several ethnic nations, many of which are demanding separate independent states. India faces the independence movements of Muslim Kashmiris, Sikh Punjabis, and Hindu Assamese; Sri Lanka faces an insurgency from Hindu Tamils; and Pakistan has had similar demands by groups including Sindhis Baluchis and Muhajirs (immigrants). With so many complex lines of religion, culture, and language in South Asia, allowing communities to secede would lead to a number of grave consequences. Regardless of the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the separatist demands, granting them could exacerbate existing tensions and unravel regional security….”
AND
“In Pakistan, which has experienced a separation movement in Sindh, democratization and decentralization may not resolve the problem of power sharing among the Sindhis, Muhajirs, Pashtuns, and Punjabis, four of the largest ethnic communities in the province. Democratization and greater regional control may instead lead to greater economic and political power for the Muhajirs and Punjabis resident in Sindh. On the other hand, an independent Sindhi state may exacerbate the problem of Urdu-speaking Muslims from India, as in the case of the Bihari Muslims from East Pakistan…..”
It then answers the question posed above as follows:
“The recognition of new states in South Asia may lead to consequences even more disastrous than the status quo, just as the recognition of new states in Europe led to the complete disintegration of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. First, recognition would generate new problems arising from new boundaries and new minorities. Second, the recognition of some states could cause a chain reaction elsewhere, leading to the disintegration of both India and Pakistan, and to a lesser extent, Sri Lanka. Third, the level of inter-ethnic bloodshed and refugee flows would generate a humanitarian nightmare in South Asia surpassing that of Europe in the early 1990s”
It deals quite extensively with the Kashmir issue, and I must add what it says about it will not necessarily make a Pakistani hyper-nationalist happy. Anyway you can read it.
Contd…
“In our discourse over the years you have many times repeated the ‘walk away’ comment. Yes, when some Indian refuses to acknowledge Pakistan and tells me ‘you did not need to have your own country’ I do walk away from them. Unfortunately, true to your political believes disguised as humanism, you have done the same on the Kashmir issue as well….”
Dear PMA Sahib:
Indeed I have mentioned this one comment of yours a few times because it left me stunned then and even now negates everything that I believe in.
I may have misunderstood you so far in which case I stand corrected, but as I recall, it seems that you have mentioned several times (in different words) that you find it distasteful if any Indian even implies that Indians and Pakistanis are the same people after all.
To me it does not necessarily mean that the person is showing disrespect for your country or is necessarily saying that Pakistan should not exist. Similar people can indeed live in two nations; remember Churchill’s glib remark about the Americans and British as two peoples separated by a common language or more serious examples of the USA and Canada, or Australia and New Zealand etc.
Please do seriously consider the previously reproduced paragraph specifically discussing the Punjabi Hindus, Sikhs and the Muslims from the Harvard paper.
If it is your position that you ONLY object to those who deny the existence or the rational behind Pakistan then you have a point, and I indeed stand corrected. I don’t know many Indians who imply that but if I come across one I will (as always) stand shoulder to shoulder with you against any Indian hyper nationalist who says any such hateful thing.
Conversely, I would like to hear you state at least once that ‘though many Indians and Pakistanis; especially the Punjabis and the Mohajirs etc. may live in two different countries, they indeed share a commonality (of language, music, literature, customs, culture, ethnicity etc.) that makes them closer to each other than to any other people on the planet.
I must reiterate here that unlike many people here on the PTH, I write not to inflame or to score any debating points but to explain, to understand and if possible, to ultimately make friends.
Therefore if you indeed agree with the last statement, I am willing to loose this particular debating point to you to gain a friend….
Regards.
chutzpah – pakistanis fighting for human rights.
do the kashmiris know that the most liberal party in pakistan’s history actually helped pass a law in the pakistani assembly, which made it illegal for ahmediyas to call themselves muslim.
even if you wish to side with your sunni brethren on the ahmediya issue, are you aware of the suffering being visited upon the balochis and other non-punjabi/sunni ethnicities in pakistan? have the indians ever used their air force to bombard you, pakistanis have over balochistan. look it up.
even if you guys do become independent, pakistani punjabi will never let you remain free, and once they take you over, they will siphon off your resources like leeches ; not to mention, slowly compel you to commit cultural suicide.
my people and other non-punjabi pakistanis are fu$%^d, save yourselves, while you still can….don’t you guys read the news?
Starting from politically inexperienced, disgruntled leadership, who had no faith in the values of secularism to an extremely shrewd and politically, diplomatically astute leadership of the recent past, Pakistan has tried to play the Kashmir card to its advantage. Unfortunately, the sentiments of simple folks of Kashmir have been blatantly misappropriated by vested interests sitting across the border as also those within the state.
………
I have with me some staggering figures which would give you an insight into the reality as to how much has been done to appease the disillusioned Kashmiri brethren. Between 1990 and 2002, a grant assistance of 35,571 crores was given to the state of J&K by the centre. In the following years, the assistance from the centre doubled. As the years passed the amount of grant kept swelling in volume. In subsequent years, almost half the state expenditure was substituted by the centre. These astounding amounts of grants speak for themselves as to how much financial aid the state of J&K had been getting all these years. This is the extent of pampering that has been going on for decades and that too at the cost of neglect of other states.
…..
In a recent debate on one of the television channels I heard some disgruntled Kashmiri youth complaining about the lack of opportunities available to them. They complained of the Delhi government not having done enough for them. But, my dear friends, I would like to ask them, ‘Have you ever seen poverty?’ With so much of aid flowing into Kashmir, there is abundance of abundance! I would like to ask them, have they ever visited the villages of Bihar and U.P. or Orissa or that of Maharashtra? No farmer commits suicide in Kashmir because he is drowned neck deep in loans which he is unable to repay. No poor businessman there slits the throat of his sleeping wife and children because he doesn’t have enough to feed them. It is easy to complain but have they ever reflected upon as to what they have given to the society? With all those agitations and bandhs they have only made it difficult for the government to deliver whatever it would have wanted to!…..
(excerpts from my novel – ‘The K Word’)
Alka Kumar