The Politics Around Kashmiri Pandit Rehabilitation

June 7, 2016

Srinagar-protest

The valley is seething with anger and distrust again, this time against the proposals of the government which cry of misadventure. An issue which required utmost sensitivity and maturity on the part of the government has taken a volatile turn owing to its ineptness in handling it. At the request of the centre, the PDP government in alliance with BJP has proposed setting up of a separate colony for the Kashmiri Pandit migrants in Kashmir. The mass exodus of Kashmiri Pandits has and will remain a blot on the history of Kashmir no matter how contentious the who’s and why’s of it remain.

However there are a few things that need to be understood regarding this crisis at hand. First of all, the image that is being manufactured and projected all across the nation through mainstream media that Kashmiri Muslims are against the coming back of their Pandit counterparts, backing these stories with the video footages of the protests taking place in the valley is sheer twisting of truth. The people in the valley, and here I say people because it comprises of the Kashmiri Muslims as well as the Kashmiri Pandits residing in the valley, are not against the rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits. Rather, people in the valley have expressed their happiness over the return of their Pandit brethren. What the people are against though is the idea of setting up of a ‘separate’ colony for the kashmiri pandits. The backlash and resistance by the people in the valley should therefore be read along these lines.

When has ghettoisation helped any community or society is a question that the government needs to ask itself. History bears testimony as to how ghettoisation breeds hatred and never love, fear and never trust. Today, as the refugee integration is a major concern for Germany, the German municipal authorities have aimed to disperse refugees housing and shelters across neighbourhoods in order to prevent formation of ghettoes. I quote this as an example of the kind of maturity that is expected of a government, to integrate people across race, religion and other identities.

What the government is citing is security concerns for the Pandit community. True, the security of the Pandits should be a priority, but how can separate colony be a solution? Instead of working at building trust between both the communities, the chief minister comes up with statements like, “we can’t leave pigeons for cats”. Hail sensitivity! If the minority community is being invited with statements like these, no matter how much their Muslim brethren make efforts to foster trust in them, it won’t work.

On the part of the people back in the valley, though the popular aspiration being that of welcoming the Kashmiri Pandits, however, more sensitivity needs to be shown as a responsible majority. The lines between protesting against rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits in a separate colony and integrated rehabilitation shouldn’t blur. Moreover, the rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits should not only be on material lines as is being understood by the present government, it has to be social and psychological too. Mere providing land would not work until and unless they feel integrated as a community.

Here the Kashmiri Muslims have a bigger role to play. As the majority, it is their responsibility to make the minorities feel secure. Any action on the part of the majority community that instils fear in the minds of the minority would be failure of the society as a whole and the traditional harmony that Kashmir has always been known of. Coming back of Kashmiri Pandits would not change the demography of the state as is being raised by certain sections because they have always been a part of it. Right now this whole discourse has been given a communal colour by the right wing political group in consonance with the current government, thereby shifting the entire energy into an issue of Pandit vs. Muslims. Let us not fall into this trap. Let us prove these polarising forces wrong. Let us shift our energy towards building a harmonious Kashmir, the way it used to be.

Let the Kashmiri Pandits depose their confidence in their Muslim counterparts in the valley, and let the Kashmiri Muslims on their part see this as an opportunity to revive their age old culture of harmony and diversity back. And let some sense prevail in the current government which instead of implementing the polarising agendas of right wing group and proposing ghettoisation in the name of rehabilitation should do something substantial and genuine for the Kashmiri migrants and help them rehabilitate in the valley.

By Faiza Nasir

(Faiza Nasir is pursuing masters in political science from University of Hyderabad, a resident of Jammu and Kashmir. She can be reached at faiza.nasir@rediffmail.com)

www.countercurrents.org

A minister’s loose remark has reopened one of the darkest chapters of Jammu’s history

June 6, 2016

tragedy-kashmir

Seldom discussed or even remembered, thousands of Muslims were massacred in the region in 1947.

Earlier this week, Jammu and Kashmir forest minister Lal Singh threatened a delegation of Gujjars comprising Hindu and Muslim farmers, when he said: “O Gujron, 1947 pulligaya hai tuse ge (O Gujjars! Have you forgotten 1947? Why have you come here?)”. His remark was taken as a reference to the massacre of thousands of Muslims in the Jammu region in the riots during Partition.

After the farmers filed a complaint against Lal Singh for using a communal slur, the Bharatiya Janata Party leader apologised and issued a clarification. Claiming to have been misunderstood, Singh said that he had actually told the farmers that “the temperature in Jammu that day was 47 degrees Celsius owing to reckless felling of trees, and that this would not be tolerated anymore”.

Instead of complaining about Lal Singh, the Gujjars should have thanked the BJP leader for seemingly becoming the first politician to openly admit to the communal carnage in Jammu in 1947, an acknowledgment of a truth that had been buried for nearly seven decades now.

While Lal Singh’s explanation is debatable, the incident serves as a reminder of one of the darkest chapters of the state’s history, one that is seldom discussed or even remembered.

While Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs were all affected by the violence in 1947, written and oral evidence indicates that Muslims bore the brunt. However, pitting the suffering of one community against the other should not be the focus. The crux of the matter is the systematic erasure of evidence and denials that followed the violence, and the state’s alleged complicity. There was silence on the issue for the last seven decades – until Lal Singh’s utterance earlier this week.

My engagement with the 1947 violence in Jammu stems from my close family ties with survivors and witnesses of the massacre. With no documentary evidence available, oral accounts remain the only way to try and recreate what happened.

Alarming numbers

Violence against Muslims in Jammu pre-dates the princely state’s accession to India. Muslims comprised 61% of the population in the Jammu province of the Dogra state. But in the Hindu majority districts of Jammu, Udhampur, Reasi and Kathua, they only made up 38% and had become increasingly vulnerable in the build-up to Partition.

In his book, The Pakistanis, Ian Stephens notes that the violence in Jammu began in August 1947 and continued for about eleven weeks. Stephens claims that five lakh people were killed and two lakh went missing, with many women being abducted.

The exact death toll varies across sources. Christopher Snedden’s controversial book, Kashmir: The Unwritten History, suggests that no less than two lakh Muslim men, women and children were killed, while the number of women abducted is estimated to be 27,000.

In Kashmir Conflict and the Muslims of Jammu, Zafar Choudhary uses documents from the International Committee of the Red Cross to narrate how 256 Muslim women were abducted from Ustad Mohalla in Jammu, before eventually being sent to their male kin in Pakistan. The number of abductions is said to be much higher, but many cases went unreported because of the conservative social setup.

More than a thousand women could not be traced despite many efforts to locate them. Prominent Muslim Conference leader Choudhary Ghulam Abbas’s daughter was also allegedly abducted by Hindu right-wingers in 1947. She was found in Punjab five years later. Rapes and abductions were used as tools for collective punishment given the proximity of Jammu Muslims to the Muslim Conference. Incidentally, Abbas was a Muslim Gujjar, the same community that was allegedly threatened by BJP’s Lal Singh.

The large-scale displacement of Muslims caused significant demographic changes in the Jammu region. The community went from a majority of 61% to a minority of 30%. The censuses conducted after 1947 reveal the existence of “uninhabited villages” – villages whose residents left or were killed in 1947.

Weakened narrative

Perhaps the main reason for attempts to erase any proof of the Jammu violence is that it questions the narrative that Jammu and Kashmir’s accession to India was necessitated by the invasion of Pakhtoon tribes in 1947. While it is indisputable that Pakhtoons invaded Jammu and Kashmir in October 1947, it was not how the conflict started. Jawaharlal Nehru’s biographer, Sarvepalli Gopal, acknowledges that the Jammu violence was the starting point of the trouble in the princely state. However, the Indian government has consistently claimed that all the violence started on October 22, 1947.

But there are a number of press reports, some dated as early as September that year, which speak about the violence in Jammu. This clearly shows that the Jammu violence preceded the tribal invasion. Christopher Snedden cites many of these reports at length in his book. According to a New York Times report mentioned by Snedden, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru informed Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel about the events in Jammu and also sent a 19-point report prepared by Nehru’s close aide Dwarkanath Kachru. The most important elements of the report were that the National Conference had decided to accede to the Indian Union and how Sheikh Abdullah deemed the “killings in the state” as “un-Islamic and un-Hindu”.

Since there was no violence in the Valley till then, it is clear that the National Conference leader was referring to the massacre in Jammu. The report further stated that Maharaja Hari Singh had lost control over the administrative and governmental machinery. So this means that three weeks before the Pakhtoons arrived in Kashmir, the government of India had reliable information that the Maharaja had little control over his princely domain.

The Pakhtoon invasion narrative serves two purposes – legitimising Jammu and Kashmir’s accession to India, and demolishing the premise for any sort of indigenous mobilisation in the state. It completely ignores the uprising of Muslims in Poonch in September 1947, as well as the violence in Jammu. These events have been glossed over in all accounts of the Kashmir dispute. The Pakhtoon invasion narrative highlights the external threat while completely denying the indigenous revolt against the authority of the Maharaja.

By allegedly threatening Jammu Muslims with 1947-like violence, Lal Singh has ended up weakening the Indian narrative that the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir began with the tribal invasion.

State complicity

Another reason for the erasure of the Jammu massacres from memory is the evidence of state complicity in the events. While the arrival of a large number of Sikhs and Hindus from West Punjab led to a communal frenzy in Jammu, the Maharaja’s administration played a key role in the massacres.

Various sources refer to the Maharaja’s growing proximity to the Hindu right-wing. In an interview with Khalid Bashir Ahmad, who has conducted extensive research on the 1947 Jammu violence, prominent human rights activist Balraj Puri, a witness to the violence, testifies to the close relations between Maharaja Hai Singh and the Hindu Right. MG Golwalkar, the ideological father of Lal Singh’s party, is said to have been a private guest of the Maharaja. Rajguru Sant Dev, a key functionary of the Maharaja’s regime, is said to have been the main link between the Maharaja and Hindu right-wing outfits. This was also the period when Rajguru had come to occupy enormous influence in the administration, sidelining the secular elements.

Furthermore, Muslims soldiers in Jammu, Mirpur and Poonch were disarmed, something which was not done with their colleagues of other religions. Ian Stephens claims that Maharaja Hari Singh not only encouraged the violence, but also opened fire on a group of Gujjar Muslims.

The erasure of the events from public memory is evident from the Gujjars’ response to Singh’s alleged threat: “We don’t know what happened in 1947. Please tell us”. It’s a case of a community being terrorised to such an extent that it forgets its own history.

But this also explains the failure of Kashmiri Muslim leadership – both separatist and mainstream – to accommodate survivors of the Jammu violence. Far from accommodating them, the leadership hasn’t even acknowledged the events that took place. Sheikh Abdullah understood the complicity of the state but he chose to remain silent. No proper inquiry was ordered on the role of Maharaja Hari Singh and his Prime Minister, Mehr Chand Mahajan. Abdullah maintained that the survivors wanted to go to Pakistan, and the only justice that could be done to them was providing safe passage.

Personal tragedy

With a leader of the stature of Sheikh Abdullah having set such a precedent, no future government or civil society outfit took up the cause of the survivors of the 1947 massacres. As Khalid Bashir Ahmad writes, “The victims of the Jammu carnages still wait, some in body and the rest in soul, for justice which has alluded them all these decades”.

The Jammu violence is not only a political tragedy, but a social and personal tragedy too. Those Jammu Muslims who migrated to Kashmir could never be absorbed in the social milieu of the Valley. A survivor I knew personally would always say, “My family did not get a burial because of the carnage and we had to flee”.

When this man died earlier this year, he found it difficult to find a burial space because a refugee from Jammu couldn’t be accommodated in Kashmir’s graveyards, most of which are controlled by tight-knit clans. His body managed to find space in a local graveyard, on humanitarian grounds, but he wasn’t allowed an epitaph as he didn’t belong to the clan. Even after living and working in the Valley for over 60 years, he was treated as a refugee and taken back to 1947.

The least that is owed to the survivors of this tragedy is an acknowledgment of the catastrophe they endured, and a dignified place in society. Sadly, the only acknowledgment has come in the form of a threat.

By Arshi Javaid

(Arshi Javaid is a doctoral candidate at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi.)

scroll.in

Kashmir: Killings, Curfew And The Myth Of Normalcy

April 21, 2016

india-kills

As the authorities lifted curfew in Kupwara and Handwara towns after days of demonstrations and subsequent killings, it seems that normalcy has returned to valley. But such arguments whose premises are laid on an ultra-myopic sense are themselves subjected to debate. What we mean by normalcy when the context is Kashmir specific.

Have Kashmir faced Handwara like situation for the first time. Have killing been done in Kashmir for the first time. It is not like that Kashmir saw it in zainakote it saw it in pulwaom, in Palhalan, in Sopore, in Veijbour, in Shopain in Chouhdhur, in Varmul, in Islambad, Bandpore, Kulgoam, Badgoam in every part of it and every bit of it, in the interiors and exteriors…everywhere. One can hardly find an area in Kashmir where blood is not spilled. The same spree was followed by the same myths of normalcy and everything was presumed to be normal devoid of identifying the brunt it was building.

The word normalcy and its obnoxious, abhorrent, disgust and continuous mortification in Kashmir is quite visible. Can things be normal when the barrel of gun is always pointing at you? Can things be normal when every Kashmiri is gazed as a suspect? Can things be normal when every phone call is tracked and traced? Can things be normal when even social media is subjected to scrutiny?

After the days of killings and curfew – and the subsequent restrictions laid by the occupational institutions – people seem to have finally moved on with their daily works and thus depicting normalcy. The mayhem of death was not an audient drama, but a reality of Kashmir which we have been facing since 90s or even before that.

Over the past three decades, especially during the 90s, Kashmir has been a witness to so many massacres. Then came 2008. There was a massive civilian uprising against the Indian occupation. Initially the authorities fired upon the peaceful demonstrations to silence the protesters. More than 60 civilians were killed. When India state saw things running out of their control, they imposed strict curfew. Things repeated in 2009 and 2010 (in 2010, 126 civilians were killed by Indian army and paramilitary forces).

So, such a situation of killings and curfew only reveal a persistent cycle of miseries that Kashmir seems to have got used to. The incidents of this kind are always followed by curfews and detention or house arrest of the resistance leaders. So in nutshell nothing – literally nothing; neither the attitude of the Indian state nor the counter strategies of the Kashmir’s resistance leadership – has really changed. Indian forces keep on killing our youth; the shameless Indian mainstream media keeps of defending their rapist and murderer forces. And on the other hand Kashmir’s pro-freedom leadership keep on issuing the statement of condemnation to further nurture their victimhood.

By Aadil Farooq

(Aadil Farooq is a research student at JNU. He can be reached at aadilshah321@gmail.com)

www.countercurrents.org

After PM Modi’s Visit: Saudi Arabia Supports Kashmir ‘Self Determination’

April 15, 2016

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Saudi Arabia has failed to mitigate its position on Kashmir at the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation meet.

The OIC contact group of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, Niger and Azerbaijan included Kashmir in its agenda for the 13th summit in Turkey this week, expressing concern about the “human rights violations and abuse of the basic rights of the Kashmiris.” And supporting the Kashmiris right to self determination.

PM Modi’s visit to Riyadh and the joint statement was projected as a major coup by the Indian establishment. More so as the visit had coincided with what observers had perceived as a cooling off between Riyadh and Islamabad because of the latter’s ties with Iran, and its refusal to sink all its eggs in the Saudi strategic basket. The Indian Prime Minister had received a warm welcome, and the visit had been pitched as a major breakthrough by the Ministry of External Affairs and the media.

However, the OIC contact group meeting has indicated that not much has changed on the ground, with Saudi Arabia bringing up the issue of Kashmir even before the ink has dried on its agreement with India. The joint statement issued by PM Modi and Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz al Saud on April 3, a little over ten days ago, stated, “The two leaders expressed strong condemnation of the phenomenon of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, irrespective of who the perpetrators were and of their motivations.”

The statement had been interpreted here to say that while, of course there was no dramatic shift in policy, Saudi Arabia had recognised the Indian position to differentiate between human rights violations and Pakistan sponsored terrorism per se. Saudi Arabia seems to have delivered a straight blow to this. “The contact group had been constantly conveying the OIC’s concerns to the international community regarding the flagrant human rights violations and abuse of the basic rights of the Kashmiris,” the Pakistan foreign ministry quoted Saudi Arabian secretary general of the OIC contact group, Abdullah Al-Alim, as saying.

“He regretted some attempts to equate the Kashmiri struggle with terrorism, and emphasised that Kashmiris were solely striving to achieve their inalienable right in accordance with relevant UN resolutions.” The OIC has followed Pakistan’s lead on Kashmir much to India’s chagrin. Diplomatic efforts to cut into this ‘solidarity’ on Kashmir by India have come a cropper with government responses over the years varying between a high sensitivity to a ‘ignore OIC” mode. However, given the welcome and the content of the joint statement on terrorism there was optimism in New Delhi that the Prime Ministers visit would impact on the Saudi position on Kashmir. As sources said that while a dramatic volte face was not expected, a more diplomatic approach on Kashmir from Saudi Arabia was seen as a possibility. More so after Pakistan went to the OIC last November on the issue of Kashmir yet again.

Saudi Arabia, however, made it clear that it would not be drawn out on Kashmir with the above reference to “some attempts to equate the Kashmiri struggle with terrorism” would be resisted. Self determination for the Kashmiris, thus, remained on top of the agenda with the Ministry of External Affairs and the Prime Ministers Office here now required to review what they had listed as the ‘gains’ of the PMs visit to Riyadh.

An unbiased look at Kashmir conflict

April 13, 2016

kashmir-UN

For the past 18 months, the issue of Kashmir has been taken up with renewed vigour by Pakistan’s foreign policy planners, signalling that the state is repositioning itself on a principled position on the issue. Much of the credit goes to the incumbent rulers.

The recent reassertion of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy formally began with the emphatic mention of Kashmir in Pakistan’s PM’s speech at the 69th Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), held on September 26, 2014. Since then, reverberations of Pakistan’s traditional stance have been echoed by the current regime at all important national events, along with the pronouncement of the four point formula at the 70th Session of UNGA in 2015. Moreover, of late, parliament’s standing committee on foreign affairs has also put forward policy proposals on the issue, which however, appear to be more cosmetic than substantive.

While the renewed interest on Kashmir is encouraging and sends positive signals to Srinagar, it appears more rhetorical than substantive, lacking a concerted policy effort to achieve the desired goals for Kashmir. Given this void, the following are some policy options for Kashmir for the powers that be:

First, the inconsistency of regimes in Islamabad on Kashmir has fractured the national narrative, particularly in the recent past. It has solidified the perception that the policy revolves around three centres in the country: the army, bureaucracy and civilian regimes. As long as this fragmentation in the conception and execution of the policy persists among the state institutions, the desired dividends on Kashmir will hardly be achieved. So there is a need to think together, move together and act together to put in place a holistic policy on the issue.

Second, foreign policy is conventionally an extension of domestic policy, and Pakistan’s case in this context is not an exception. However, it appears that domestic security imperatives are damaging Pakistan’s position on Kashmir. The domestic imperatives need not blur the line between acts of terrorism and the genuine struggle of people to end occupation. Rather, the distinction between the two should be stridently asserted, to keep Pakistan’s legitimate locus-standi intact on the issue.

Then, there is a recent resurgence of uprisings in Srinagar and adjoining areas. The three consecutive years of 2008, 2009 and 2010 are now termed in the contemporary Kashmiri narrative as the 8/9/10 of Kashmir, in which thousands of Kashmiris thronged the streets of Srinagar, demanding the right of self-determination. This peaceful and indigenous resurgence elicited voices from Indian intelligentsia, giving credence in Indian civil society to the people’s right to decide their fate.

The sentiments of resentment and alienation from the Indian union can be gauged by the remarks of Dr Radha Kumar, Director General Delhi Policy Group and a former Indian government’s interlocutor on Jammu and Kashmir, in a speech on November 30, 2015: “India could lose Kashmir in the near future, if serious efforts were not made to resolve the lingering dispute”. Pakistan needs to take the emerging political trends in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) into careful consideration and build on the options accordingly.

Fourth, the role of Pakistan parliament’s 24-member special committee on Kashmir is abysmally poor. The committee was primarily constituted to project the Kashmir cause in the world’s forums but, despite currently having Rs66 million as its annual budget, it appears to be a dysfunctional institution. It is high time that the Kashmir committee be reconstituted and made active by including the concerned people, such as the intelligentsia, Pakistani diaspora living in European countries and stakeholders living in Pakistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir, and chalking out the strategies and measures to project the cause globally, through consistent global campaigns and advocacy and generate plausible discourse on the subject

Another point is that Azad Kashmir currently lies low in Pakistan’s national priorities. This is partly due to the peculiar status of the region, which is not a federating unit of Pakistan. It is high time the state made a decision on how the region can be uplifted, while keeping its status intact. The region has a huge potential for tourism, which could make it prosperous. A prosperous and thriving Azad Kashmir would widen Pakistan’s support base in IHK.

It is also an undeniable fact that Pakistan has significant clout in the freedom camp in Srinagar; it should encourage them to close their ranks and put their house in order, and steer the freedom sentiments in the occupied region.

Pakistan’s robust but inventive regional alignment may also give the country a vantage point in the India-Pakistan equation. Besides strengthening ties with China and Afghanistan, Pakistan, being among the Saarc countries, should particularly focus on its ties with Nepal and Sri Lanka. The recent developments in Nepal’s political landscape provide opportunities for Pakistan to deepen its ties with the country and augment its regional clout.

At present, India and Pakistan are engaged in an eight-point framework, in which Kashmir and terrorism are treated simultaneously. History stands witness that bilateralism did not yield positive outcomes in the India-Pakistan context, and a perpetual stalemate does call for taking the true representatives of the prime party of the dispute – the Kashmiris – on board. However, Pakistan (in the current scenario at least) should not agree to restructure the current arrangement, because India may try to change the framework to advance its narrative on terrorism.

The main architect of India’s Pakistan policy is India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, who has conceived and designed his doctrine, famously known as the Doval Doctrine, based on his defensive-offensive approach towards Pakistan, as he publically outlined in a seminar. India’s moves need to be looked at in this context; they are largely aimed at sapping the will of Pakistan on Kashmir. So Pakistan needs to come out of the policy paradigm that it had framed in response to the Gujrat Doctrine and instead examine the contours and nuances of the Doval Doctrine and come up with overarching policy options.

Lastly, besides highlighting human rights violations in IHK, Pakistan should take into account the recent intellectual voices being raised from within India in favour of the Kashmiris’ right to self-determination, and consider how they can be strengthened and amplified.

www.thenews.com.pk

Muslim Kashmiri girl molested by Indian army, protesters shot and killed

April 13, 2016

indian-army-kashmir-women

The Army has expressed regret over the loss of lives in the Handwara firing and has initiated an inquiry into the incident as Jammu& Kashmir chief minister Mehbooba Mufti on Wednesday raised the issue with defence minister Manohar Parrikar.

“Army deeply regrets the unfortunate loss of life.The matter will be investigated and anybody found guilty, will be dealt as per the law,” an Army official said about the incident that has led to anger in the valley.

Chief minister Mehbooba Mufti who met Parrikar said, “The incident is “very unfortunate. I spoke to defence minister. He assured me that a probe will be initiated and the culprits will be punished.”

“The family will be compensated. Such incidents should not happen in the future,” Mehbooba said after meeting Parrikar.

Earlier on Wednesday, the death toll in the incident mounted to three as an injured woman succumbed to her injuries.

Raja Begum (55) of Langate succumbed to injuries at SKIMS Hospital here in the early hours, a police official said.

He said four others injured in the incident were undergoing treatment at various hospitals.

Two youth were killed on Tuesday in firing by the Army on protestors in Handwara town.

Protests erupted in Handwara town of Kupwara district, following allegations that a girl student, on her way home, was molested by soldiers posted in an Army picket in the town, official sources said.

 They said the protestors pelted stones at the Army picket to which the security forces retailed by firing.

Two youth — Iqbal Ahmad and Nayeem Bhat — were killed in the firing.

 Authorities have clamped curfew in Handwara town, following tension after the incident.
Restrictions have also been imposed in six police station areas of Rainawari, Nowhatta, Khanyar, MR Gunj, Safa Kadal and Maisuma in Srinagar city.

When RSS Comes To Srinagar, There’s A Reason To Worry

April 12, 2016

Hundu-extremists

Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) has announced that it will hold a public rally in Srinagar somewhere in the middle of this year. It has already held a full public parade in Jammu on 22nd October 2015 flaunting arms & weapons in full public view. There should be no cringing about it as our own so-called mainstream politicians, acting more as merchants than governors, have brought this fascist organization to our door steps. One political party kissed it in Delhi & the other hugged it in Srinagar. Some depraved Minsters, bereft of any conscience & political sagacity have said that this organization has a right to be in Kashmir. It is, therefore in the fitness of things that we know what RSS stands for, its aims & objectives , its treatment with Indian Muslims & its past connections with State of J&K.

The RSS was founded in 1925 as a social organization with the basic purpose of uniting the Hindu community and to uphold the Indian culture and civilization values more than anything else. Drawing its inspiration from Nazis of Germany & other European right-wing groups, its basic aim has been to establish a Hindu Rashtra – a state where Hindus are the primary & supreme citizens to the exclusion of all others and the purpose of governance is to uphold Hindu principles. –The ‘all other’ non-Hindu citizens, in its reckoning, may live in this Rashtra but only as second class citizens subservient in all manners & respects to Hindus. Today RSS has grown into an extremely powerful militant Hindu nationalist organization with numerous allied organizations (generally referred to as Sangh Parivar), schools, charities, clubs & publications like ‘Panchjyana’ , ‘Organiser’& ‘Dharam Rashtra’ to spread its tentacles & ideological beliefs. It targets young minds & makes them hard-core to propogate its ideology. Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), which seized power in New-Delhi on its own in 2014, is its political wing. When leader of Opposition in Indian Rajya Saba compared RSS to a global terrorist organization, he was not farther from truth. Noted historian Ramchander Guha calls it an organization of hate.

The RSS has a pathologic hatred towards Muslims. According to Golwalker’s book ‘we, or our nationhood defined’ deemed as RSS charter & bible, ‘ Ever since the evil day when Muslims first landed in Hindustan—the Hindu nation has been gallantly fighting on to shake off despoilers”. In consonance with this wicked ideology, RSS has been organizing anti-Muslim riots since its inception. After partition of India into two Domains, it organized riots across India to either kill Muslims or make them to flee. In Jammu it killed or injured half a million Muslims in collaboration with Maharaja Hari Singh’s forces and under the direction & supervision of Mehr Chand Mahajan & Sardar Patel. Before putting the pogrom in motion, it deployed in July 1947 its Provincial Organiser B.R. Agrekar, an expert in military education, to Jammu & Kashmir to inspect and advise Maharaja’s forces & RSS Cadres. In neighboring Punjab it lent a supportive role & helping hands to Maharaja of Patiala & Kapurthala to empty Muslims in their areas. In Alwar, it engineered a massacre of Muslims on an unprecedented scale. Any Muslim who escaped the massacre was later converted into Hinduism under the ‘shuddi’ Programme. The senior parcharak incharge in Alwar at that point of time was none other than former Home Minster of India L.K.Advani. In fact Advani was jailed for three months in connection with RSS’s complicity in Gandhi’s murder. In Hyderabad it infiltrated its armed cadres much before the Army operation (Known as Police action) to organize riots & kill Muslims. Nearly two lac Muslims are believed to have been killed by them in complicity with Indian army, though Sunder Lal report puts the figure at only twenty five thousand after visting only one third of the districts comprising erstwhile Hyderabad. Recently it has also advocated economic bycott of Muslims through its twitter handle @RSS_Org followed by Modi & top BJP leaders. One reason why RSS reveres only Sardar Patel, among many congressman, is that he allowed a free hand to its cadres in Jammu & elsewhere to Kill Muslims at will.

RSS has a military institution of its own known as Bhonsala Military School situated at Nasik, Mahrashtra. It was founded by B.S Monjee, the president of Hindu Mahasaba and later handed over to V. D. Sarvarkar in 1937. The school has branches in Nagpur & Pune and one such school for female cadres at Nashik is in pipe-line. Run by Central Hindu Military education Society, a subsidiary of RSS, its day to day affairs are managed by top retired army officers of the rank of colonels & Majors. Besides training RSS cadres in military arts, the academy acts as a feeder institute for entry into Indian military services. It explains why Indian military is becoming increasingly communal and intolerant towards minorities. Some of the military officers having attended this school have been found involved in terrorist activities like Lieutenant Colonel Shrikant Purohit in Malegaon blast. It is another thing that another accused in Samjuta Expresss blast, Swami Aseemanad has confessed that he had the full approval & backing of Mohan Bagwat, Current head of RSS in his terrorist acts directed against Muslims. To hide its embarrassment & escape criminal action, RSS has pleaded that his confession was obtained under duress. Now why should Police, mostly Hindus, apply force on a Swami, apparently a God-man, to extract his confession, is beyond any comprehension?

Not content with its activities at home, RSS has spread its tentacles in the international arena as well. It has weaved alliances with ‘Bodu Bala Sena’ of Sri Lanka & Sanatan Dharma Swayamsevak Sangh & 969 movement headed by Ashin Wirathu in Mynamar which has close relations with the military Junta there. Influenced by RSS ideology, all these outfits continuously instigate attacks against Muslims in their respective Countries and have Publicly vowed to cleanse Muslims of their areas. So far they have killed thousands of Muslims, raped their women, burned hundreds of mosques and destroyed large number of Muslim properties and businesses. In-fact Mynmar has evicted lakhs of Rohingya Muslims who are living in sub-human conditions in various parts of South-east Asia. Incidentally Brahmin Hindus claim Lord Budha as incarnation of Lord Vishnu and therefore find fanatic Buddists as natural allies against Muslims. ( The International New York Times -October 16, 2014). To expand its ideological outreach, RSS has plans to involve more Countries like Fiji, Thailand, Nepal, Philphines and Cambodia in its nefarious designs. So next time you hear of communal clashes in these Countries , don’t be surprised as evil forces of RSS have already charted out a plan of action for their cohorts in these countries.

www.countercurrents.org

Halt in India and Pakistan peace process

April 11, 2016

KashmirWatch

Pakistani High Commissioner in New Delhi Abdul Basit said that according to him the peace process between India and Pakistan at present stands suspended. Basit added: “There shouldn’t be any doubt that Pakistan wants to have a normal & peaceful relationship with India. We all are aware of those who seek to create unrest in Pakistan and destabilize it are bound to fail as the people of Pakistan are united to effectively counter anti-Pakistan subversive activities.”

India wants to send an investigation team to investigate the Pathankot blast in India may be as a mere formality and might be pressing White House to ‘arrange’ an Indian probe similar to JIT in Pakistan. Four months after the terror attacks in Pathankot, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) had said that its team might visit Pakistan to probe the attack. Indian side said the Pakistan Joint Investigation Team (JIT) welcomed the idea that an NIA would like to visit Pakistan and ‘carry forward’ the probe.

Pathankot Attack

Basit, however, remained evasive on whether a team from the NIA would be allowed to visit Pakistan to probe the Pathankot attacks which took place earlier this year. In March, Pakistan’s Joint Investigative Team was in India to probe the attack, after which reports suggested that NIA could go to the neighbouring for its investigation. Speaking to the media, the envoy said, “Personally I feel that this whole investigation isn’t about reciprocity, but about extending co-operation to get to the bottom on this.” Obviously, this not about ‘give and take’ policy, very tactfully practised in cricket matches in offering 50s and 100s to batboys, in investigations. “Therefore, a fair and just resolution is a must and attempts to put it on backburner from our perspective will be counterproductive,” he said.

The JIT team which was in India in March, to probe the Pathankot attacks was given a detailed presentation on the probe and was taken to the scene of the attacks in Pathankot. The team was also handed some documents which included the DNA report of the four terrorists and also given access to witnesses. New Delhi had claimed that the attack on the airbase was ‘masterminded’ by Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Maulana Masood Azhar.

For domestic reasons, India is eager to brand every Pakistani and Kashmiri as a terrorist. Recently, China had vetoed the UN sanctions committee’s attempt to designate Azhar as terrorist, maintaining that the case “did not meet the requirements” of the Security Council. This had come after India had taken up at a “fairly high level” with China the issue of Beijing blocking its bid to have JeM chief and Pathankot attack mastermind Masood Azhar as designated terrorist by the UN. Basit said that he agreed with the Chinese on the Masood Azhar issue.

On India’s request for consular access to Kulbhushan Yadav, the alleged spy arrested by Islamabad, Basit said, “The request is under consideration, but can’t say when they would be given consular access.” Basit announced in the media conference that the 19th SAARC Summit would be held in Islamabad. “We sincerely hope the summit, building on the past achievements, would help create more synergies and win-win situations,” he added. The official further said ,”It is the Jammu and Kashmir dispute that is the root cause of mutual distrust (Indo-Pak) and other bilateral issues.” There cannot be any real progress in the strained bilateral relations unless the Kashmir issue is resolved in favor of Kashmiris seeking full sovereignty that was lost in 1947.

India knows too well once the Kashmir issue is resolved there would be peace not just between the two nuclear neighbors in South Asia, but in the entire region. However, New Delhi is still hesitant to take the call because it is scared of its own military establishment and core media lords who hate Pakistan and Islam. They fear once relationship between India and Pakistan really improves, Indian Muslims would feel relieved and relaxed from the tensions they have been undergoing because of Hindu chauvinism and Hindutva fanaticism.

India, irrespective of the political colors it promotes, except green which it considers the exclusive color of Pakistan, hates the scenario emerging when Muslims in India and Pakistan would have the opportunity to meet regularly – and without fear. Most Hindus who support the demolition of historic Babri Mosque on fake pretexts as defenders of hindutva arrogance and crimes against humanity,  do not wish Muslims well. they hate islamic world, including Saudi Arabia for giving Muslims semblance of respect. They, in order to overcome their inferiority complex,  find fault with Islam and Muslim world. .

India also cannot digest the fact that resolution of Kashmir issue would make its nuclear arsenal redundant and eventually would lead to dismantling of nukes it possesses. That is unnecessary concern because dismantling of Indian nukes would take place only when all big nations, including USA, Russia and Israel, that have highest number of WMD, both legitimate and illegal, first abandon their nuke arsenals.

That scenario may not happen easily and so soon as no big nation is interested in denuclearization and disarmament while arms or nuke reduction treaties are not genuine.

Echoes of Unjustifiable Indian Captur of Kashmir!

March 31, 2016

The views expressed by Indian female Professor on the Social over Indian Capture of Kashmir has started a new discussion in the Indian media. This started from the arrest of Union Leader Kanhiya Kumar of Jawahr Laal Nehru University for supporting Afzal Guru and commemorating his hanging. This spread to the 40 universities of the India. Including Kanhiya Kumar many Indian students consider Afzal Guru as innocent and his involvement in attacks over Indian Parliament in 2001 as fabricated and propaganda of Indian govt. Kanhia Kumar has repeated the same stance that Indian media represents in its analysis articles or Talk Shows that Afzal Guru was sentenced to death without completing the legal requirements and providing solid evidence. He was hanged in the dark of the night without giving his legal heirs last opportunity to see him. His dead body was also buried within the jail premises as well.

‘We Hit Him,’ Proud Lawyers Said To Police After Attacking Kanhaiya Kumar

The situation might not have been worsened so much on the arrest of Kanhiya Kumar but as Hindu extremists, BJP and Shiev Sina took it as a problem of their ego that a Hindu student dared to support Afzal Guru. Due to such reaction of Extremist Hindu govt. student unions within the whole India started protests against the arrest of Kanhiya Kumar and support for freedom of Kashmir from India was observed as well. On the one hand Hindu extremist govt. tried to crush the protest of students through force while on the other hand attempted to fuel the extremist Hindus by alleging Kanhiya Kumar for hoisting Pakistni flag and burning the Indian flag so that extremist Hindus attack him during his trial in the court. When students of Jawahar Laal Nehru University got these reports they also arrived in the court premises where a huge number of media persons was present as well.

The member of BJP govt. O.P. Sharma veiled himself as lawyers along with other Hindu extremists and reached in the court and started beating the students. Media persons covering this scuffle were also beaten as well by Hindu extremists. Police present on the spot did not stop the fake lawyers beating students but those students who dared to resist were apprehended for violating the peace in the court premises. Hindu extremists did not stop here but announced as well that whoever will kill the Kanhiya Kumar alleged for supporting freedom of Kashmir he would be granted 1.1 million rupees. Posters have been pasted in the various parts of the New Delhi. Another member of BJP has announced 0.5 million rupees for the one who will cut the tongue of Kanhiya Kumar. When journalists asked that leader of BJP for cutting the tongue, said leader replied that as Kanhiya Kumar has disrespected Modi thus it is necessary to cut his tongue.

New Delhi,Now a new video has surfaced from the JNU campus in which a professor of the university said that Kashmir is not a part of India

On the manhandling of University students by extremists Hindus and Police, Professors of the universities have got violent as well. They have announced to take out rallies and protest against he arrest and allegations over Kanhiya Kumar as well. In connection with this protest, Professor Niveditiya Menon of Jawahar Laal Nehru University famous as scholar not only in India but internationally as well has termed Indian capture of Kashmir as illegal in a big protest rally of the students. She had made it clear to the audience with arguments that India had promised in the UNO that Indian forces will withdraw from Kashmir after restoration of peace in the result of withdrawal of Paksitani tribal forces and Kahsmiris would be given the right to decide their fate and if Kashmiris decide to be the part of Pakistan, their decision would be accepted as well. Now the situation is that India is prolonging her capture of Kashmir through her forces and not ready to give the promised right of Kashmiris to decide their own fate through referendum. She termed Indian capture as injustice to Kashmiri people. She gave the example of Juna Garh whose Raja (ruler) was Muslim but majority of the population were Hindus therefore India captured Juna Garh but India is not ready to accept the same principal in case of Kashmir and entered her forces into the Kashmir. She said that Indian states like Manipur, Nagaland, Chatisgarh etc. are being kept under the control through use of violent force while people of these states are not ready to live with India. People of these states consider Indian forces as occupying forces. She also told the students that whenever famous Western newspapers etc. like Newsweek or Time publish the map of Indian they show Kashmir as a disputed land not the part of India but such editions are not allowed for selling within India.

New Delhi,Now a new video has surfaced from the JNU campus in which a professor of the university said that Kashmir is not a part of India

In this way international community does not see India as a democracy but a Hindu extremist state for which Indians are equally responsible. They are also responsible for the violations and tortures on the people of Nagaland, Manipur and Chatisgarh like states. Because Indian govt. exploits the votes given by Indians as a mandate for torture and murders of these people. This video of the said professor have become very famous over the social media. It is not possible for India to get this video removed from these sites. After watching this video many Hindu analysts are of the view that although this started from the arrest of Kanhiya Kumar but this is the first time in the history of India that someone has given such a clear message with strong arguments that unjustified Indian capture of Kashmir and other states is deteriorating soft image of Indian internationally that India is not a democratic country but an imperialist and Hindu extremist state which can be only restored by giving the people of these states their basic right of freedom…

Truth by Kbaig

KASHMIR: INDIA’S WATER TERRORISM CONTINUES

March 22, 2016

Daily Pakistan Observer, English Daily From Islamabad , Lahore, Karachi , Peshawar & Kashmir

EVERY year, World Water Day is celebrated on March 22 on global level, focusing attention on the water crisis as well as the solutions to address it. An international day to celebrate freshwater was recommended at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The United Nations General Assembly responded by designating March 22, 1993 as the first World Water Day.

Each year, this very day highlights a specific aspect of freshwater. In 2015, World Water Day has the theme “Water and Sustainable Development.”

Although Pakistan also celebrates World Water Day, yet its case is different from other countries, as India has stared water terrorism against Pakistan.

It is notable that since the 9/11 tragedy, international community has been taking war against terrorism seriously, while there are also other forms of bloodless wars, being waged in the world and the same are like terrorism. Political experts opine that modern terrorism has many meanings like violent acts, economic terrorism etc., but its main aim is to achieve political, economic and social ends. Judging in these terms, India’s water terrorism against Pakistan is of special consideration.

In March, 2011, speaking in diplomatic language, Indus Water Commissioner of India G. Ranganathan denied that India’s decision to build dams on rivers led to water shortage in Pakistan. He also rejected Islamabad’s concerns at water theft by New Delhi or violation of the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, assuring his counterpart, Syed Jamaat Ali Shah that all issues relating to water would be resolved through dialogue. However, ground realties are quite different from what Ranganathan maintained.

Besides other permanent issues and, especially the dispute of Kashmir which has always been used by India to malign and pressurize Pakistan, water of rivers has become a matter of life and death for every Pakistani, as New Delhi has been employing it as a tool of terrorism to blackmail Pakistan.

In this regard, Indian decision to construct two hydro-electric projects on River Neelam which is called Krishanganga is a new violation of the Indus Basin Water Treaty. The World Bank, itself, is the mediator and signatory for the treaty. After the partition, owing to war-like situation, New Delhi deliberately stopped the flow of Pakistan’s rivers which originate from the Indian-held Kashmir. Even at that time, Indian rulers had used water as a tool of aggression against Pakistan. However, due to Indian illogical stand, Islamabad sought the help of international arbitration. The Indus Basin Treaty allocates waters of three western rivers of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab to Pakistan, while India has rights over eastern rivers of Ravi, Sutlej and Beas.

Since the settlement of the dispute, India has always violated the treaty intermittently to create economic crisis in Pakistan. In 1984, India began construction of the Wullar Barrage on river Jhelum in the occupied Kashmir. In the past, the issue of Wullar Barrage has also been discussed in various rounds of talks, being held under composite dialogue process between the two rivals, but Indian intransigence has continued. In the mid-1990s India started another violation by constructing the Baglihar dam on the Chenab river. In 2005, Pakistan had again sought the World Bank’s help to stop construction of the Baglihar dam. Although WB allowed India to go ahead with the project after a few modifications, yet it did not permit the interruption of the agreed quota of water flow to Pakistan.

In 2008, India suddenly reduced water flow of the Chenab river to give a greater setback to our autumnal crops. Islamabad on September 17, 2008 threatened to seek the World Bank’s intervention on the plea that New Delhi had not responded to its repeated complaints on the issue appropriately. But, India did nothing to address the problem.

However, New Delhi has been using water as an instrument to pressurize Islamabad with a view to getting leverage in the Pak-India dialogue especially regarding Indian-held Kashmir where a new phase of protests against the Indian illegitimate occupation has accelerated. In this respect, the then Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi had said on February 8, 2010 that Pakistan’s case on Kashmir and water was based on truth, and the government would fight it with full strength.

Indian diplomacy of water terrorism could also be judged from some other development. Online reports suggest that New Delhi has secretly offered technical assistance to the Afghan government in order to construct a dam over Kabul River which is a main water contributor to Indus River.

In fact, India wants to keep its control on Kashmir which is located in the Indus River basin area, and which contributes to the flow of all the major rivers, entering Pakistan. It is determined to bring about political, economic and social problems of grave nature in Pakistan.

In this context, China Daily News Group wrote in 2005: “Another added complication is that in building a dam upstream of Pakistan, India will possess the ability to flood or starve Pakistan at will. This ability was witnessed in July of 2004 when India, without warning, released water into the Chenab river, flooding large portions of Pakistan. The history of conflict between these two nations makes it possible for New Delhi to use nature as a real weapon against Islamabad.”

According to an estimate, unlike India, Pakistan is highly dependent on agriculture, which in turn is dependent on water. Of the 79.6 million hectares of land that makeup Pakistan, 20 million are available for agriculture. Of those 20 million hectares, 16 million are dependent on irrigation. So, almost 80% of Pakistan’s agriculture is dependent on irrigation.

It is noteworthy that many of Pakistan’s industries are agro-based such as the textiles industry. Besides, 80% of Pakistan’s food needs are fulfilled domestically. Thus an interruption of water supply would have broad-ranging effects. For example, when the country suffered a drought from 1998 to 2001, there were violent riots in Karachi.

It is mentionable that half of Pakistan’s energy comes from hydroelectricity, and at present, our country has been facing a severe crisis of loadshedding which is the result of power-shortage in the country. During the recent past summers, people in a number of cities like Karachi, Lahore, Multan, Faisalabad etc. lodged violent protests against the loadshedding, culminating into loss of property and life.

It is of particular attention that Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Water and Power Khawaja Asif warned on February 10, 2015 that although the electricity shortage in the country would be overcome within two to three years, the scarcity of water is another issue looming in the country.