Kashmir: Killings, Curfew And The Myth Of Normalcy

April 21, 2016


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)


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


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.


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

April 13, 2016


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


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.


Halt in India and Pakistan peace process

April 11, 2016


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


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.

Azadi – from Srinagar to Delhi

March 22, 2016

After the unprecedented action by Delhi Police in Jawaharlal Nehru University last month that resulted in the arrest of its Students Union president Kanhaiya Kumar on charges of sedition, the debate has not been confined to whether the government should have taken the extreme step to quell dissent in such a prestigious academic institution. The discourse is now largely shaped by a slogan that has long dominated the narrative in Kashmir: Azadi. Literally meaning freedom, it has become the new buzzword with those who have mustered the courage to counter the growing intolerance and communalism in India.

Azadi – from Srinagar to Delhi

The student leader clarified that he did not demand Azadi from India, but in India. That is not how people in Kashmir have used this slogan. Kanhaiya Kumar does not realize that it was the Kashmiri context of the slogan that landed him in jail. But the way Kanhaiya used the term Azadi is also not an ordinary outburst. His demand for freedom from discrimination, caste-ism and communalism is something that has been trampled under the jackboot of power and a hysteric notion of nationalism in India. In the nearly two years of the BJP government, hardly any such voice has been heard so loud. Kanhaiya Kumar said his icon was Rohit Vemula – the left oriented youth who was forced to commit suicide in Hyderabad University – and not Afzal Guru. And that is well understood. But looking at how the BJP has monopolized the state and even the thought processes, he also seeksAzadi from the “new India” of Narendra Modi, BJP and RSS.

Although Kanhaiya began a new discourse in Indian politics, and is seen as the new hero of liberal left who could challenge the prowess of Modi (the way Arvind Kejrival emerged from a rights movement), he drew clear lines between liberalism and Kashmir.

A section of Kashmiris was unnecessarily angry at the manner in which Kumar and his supporters distanced themselves from the Kashmir issue. They differentiated between the two Azadis, and rightly so. The Indian left has always stood for restoring greater autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir and the Congress would vow to protect Article 370. But there is no major difference among the mainstream Indian political parties as far as approaching Kashmir is concerned. Afzal Guru’s hanging is a recent example. The Congress picked him from among the long list of those who were on a death row only to appease the Indian voters who had been lured by Modi magic. The Kashmir dispute is itself a legacy of Congress’ wrong doings. It was in power with the National Conference in Kashmir during the 2010 unrest in which 120 civilians were killed, and it defended the actions of the security forces.

The Indian mainstream has always shown double standards when it comes to Kashmir. While Afzal was hanged to “satisfy the collective conscience” of Indian people, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha ordered the release of Rajiv Gandhi killers, and Akali Dal – which is in coalition with BJP in Punjab – has repeatedly advocated clemency for Beant Singh’s killers.

Whether Kanhaiya Kumar will succeed in getting Azadi remains to be seen. He is certainly representing a discontent that has been brewing in India. But it will be unfair to draw parallels between how the slogan is raised in Kashmir and the rest of India. Whatever has happened in Kashmir is the result of systemic disempowerment of a majority community, not in years but in decades.

In the last over 25 years, people’s aspirations have been shaped by the slogan of Azadi, irrespective of what actually would be a solution acceptable to all stakeholders. Kashmir has seen elections and elected governments, phases of peace, employment, and sops that were intended to belie such aspirations. But that has not happened. The incidents in the last few months have shown that the Kashmiri youth is still full of frustration, and their pent up emotions have been given a new way of expression. Thousands of people are attending funerals of militants, although a while ago they had stopped supporting militant violence and had publicly stated that it was not the way to resolve their problems and had only brought destruction.

Interestingly, Kashmir saw an unprecedented strike in protest against the arrest of Kanhaiya Kumar and former Delhi University teacher SAR Geelani. Those who responded to the strike call given by the Kashmiri separatists identified with Kanhaiya and his colleagues because they felt they were being pushed to the wall. In contrast, no significant protests were held in Delhi over Geelani’s arrest, perhaps because he is a Kashmiri. And that shows that the meaning of the slogan of Azadi changes as it moves from Srinagar to New Delhi.

Afghanistan: After 14 years, expenditure of $686 billion and loss of 21,914 U.S. personnel killed and wounded

January 5, 2016

General John F. Campbell, commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan, recently held a press conference in which he told reporters that he hoped the president would not reduce the number of U.S. troops there from 9,800 to 5,500 by the end of 2016. “My intent would be to keep them for as long as I can,” he said. What the general didn’t say is what he hoped he’d be able to accomplish by keeping those 4,300 troops that he couldn’t without them. The implication—though he is careful to avoid explicitly saying so—is that his strategy will have a better chance of success if he keeps those troops. Evidence strongly refutes this unstated hope. Yet as is all too often the case, Western media organizations fail to ask General Campbell hard questions.

The facts are that the security situation has continued to deteriorate in Afghanistan whether there were 140,000 U.S. and NATO troops or the current number of approximately 13,000. The Taliban are stronger than at any time since 2001. There is now an Islamic State presence in Afghanistan. The threat posed byAl Qaeda has also risen to a post-2001 high. After the 2014 corrupt national election, the Afghan government remains divided and ineffective; their economy has not recovered from the loss of billions from supporting so many NATO troops.

In his interview, General Campbell said, “If I don’t believe that we can accomplish the train, advise and assist and the (counter-terrorism) missions, then I owe it to the senior leadership to come back and say, ‘Here’s what I need.’ If that’s more people, it’s more people.” Yet I can find no evidence any reporter asked the general what difference it would make to American strategic interests if 4,300 US troops redeployed or stayed.

Part of the reason for this lack of journalistic curiosity lies is because it is self-evident that U.S. Special Operations troops are highly proficient in their craft, and thus 9,800 troops could conduct a greater number of tactically effective missions than 5,500 could. But this is the United States we’re talking about, not some infantry battalion. Actions at the national level have to be concerned with strategic results, not merely whether they’re tactically effective or not. The distinction is not merely academic.

U.S. military and administration officials can—and often do—tout the tactical effectiveness of given actions or deployments. But what is the benefit to the country if we produce the most superior tactical results known to man if the U.S. suffers operational and strategic failure as a result? As graphically demonstrated above, in every important metric the strategies we’ve employed over the past fifteen years in Afghanistan have been abysmal failures: American national security has worsened and insurgent and other violent groups have grown in strategic effectiveness. This is not just my personal opinion. Even the Department of Defenses’ (DoD) own report admits the failure.

Released last month, the DoD’s curiously named “Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan” reported that in the second half of 2015 the Taliban’s resilience:

“demonstrated their resolve to continue fighting. The elevation of Haqqani Network leader Siraj Haqqani as Taliban leader Mullah Mansour’s deputy signals that the Haqqani Network will remain a critical and lethal component of the overall Taliban-led insurgency. The presence of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) – Khorasan Province (IS-KP) primarily in the eastern province of Nangarhar remains a concern for the Taliban, the Afghan government, and the international community.”

The document states U.S. strategic objectives in Afghanistan are “focused on the defeat of Al Qaeda and its associates, protecting U.S. forces, and preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorists to plan attacks against the U.S. homeland and U.S. interests and partners.” Yet clearly after fourteen full years of effort, the expenditure of $686 billion and the loss of 21,914 U.S. personnel killed and wounded, our tactical efforts—all of which have been individually successful—have together failed to attain our most important strategic objectives.

General Campbell is scheduled to testify before Congress early in 2016 on the situation in Afghanistan. It is time for members of both the media and Congress to begin asking the hard questions of America’s most senior military and Administration officials. It’s not enough for these leaders to tout tactical success and the professionalism of our armed service members. At the national level the only thing that counts is strategic success. It’s time we started holding our leaders accountable for their ability to accomplish their assigned missions.