11 January 2011 By Zafar Bangash Beyond the clichéd-ridden rhetoric on Kashmir, real
people — men, women and children — are getting killed
and maimed by one of the most ruthless military
machines in the world: India's 1.2 million-strong
army, of whom 700,000 are deployed in Kashmir. Amid
all the talk about India's role as an emerging power —
"India is not emerging, it has emerged", in the
groveling words of US President Barack Obama during
his visit last month — what is conveniently ignored is
that India still has 800 million people living in
absolute poverty. These people earn less than a dollar
a day and sleep on sidewalks, in gutters or in hovels
that are unfit even for animals. Yet, India is
proclaimed as the "emerging" power because it has 300
million people with surplus cash that a fast-declining
West covets. It is also being pumped-up against the
truly rising power, China, much as the US had used
Beijing in the 1970s and 80s against the erstwhile
Soviet Union. While India may be unwilling to fulfill the
US-assigned role, it is India's internal
contradictions — a rigid caste system that is akin to
religiously sanctioned apartheid, and insurgencies
that are raging in at least 28 different states — that
make India unsuitable for such a role. Amid its myriad
problems, there is one trouble spot that refuses to go
away: the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir. It
would be tedious to repeat the tortuous history behind
this sad affair but suffice it to say that it is a
legacy of the manner in which the British partitioned
India in 1947 leaving a number of unsolved problems. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is the most glaring
example of British intrigue and has been a source of
conflict between India and Pakistan leading to three
wars. The state remains divided, India occupying
two-thirds of it while the rest is administered by
Pakistan. For 60 years, the people under Indian
occupation have demanded the right to hold a
referendum to determine their own future. There are
also two UN Security Council resolutions from 1948 and
1949 reaffirming the Kashmiris' right to
self-determination. Initially, India accepted these
but has gradually moved away from these and today
insists that Kashmir is an integral part of India. It
argues that if it were to allow a referendum it would
result in Kashmir's separation, thus undermining
Indian secularism. Thus, the people of Kashmir are
held hostage to validate Indian secularism. There have been numerous uprisings a-gainst the
Indian occupation of Kashmir. The most sustained
uprising began in 1989 and lasted nearly 20 years
causing immense suffering to the people because of a
brutal Indian crackdown. The struggle subsided
somewhat after 9/11 because of American ire against
anyone struggling for independence. Far from using
this as an opportunity to redress the long-festering
grievances of the Kashmiris, the Indian government
took this as a green light to crackdown even harder.
Its trigger-happy troops have indulged in gruesome
acts of murder, rape and kidnappings in Kashmir.
Statistics about Kashmir read like a horror story (see
box on next page), yet India's brutalities go largely
unreported in the Western media because India is seen
as a lucrative market by the West. In the past, India tried to deflect attention
away from its own horrible record by accusing Pakistan
of aiding and abetting the Kashmiri freedom fighters.
There is some truth to this; after all, Pakistan is an
interested party. Kashmir is the unfinished business
of partition but more importantly, it is the question
of the lives of 12 million people. That the rest of
the world, particularly the Muslim world has not paid
adequate attention to the suffering of the Kashmiris
is to their lasting shame. Justice, human rights and
freedom are indivisible; one cannot be concerned about
the plight of the Burmese people while ignoring the
plight of the Kashmiris. Whether India is a democracy
or not is beside the point; democracy is not a license
to indulge in wanton killings and rape. The latest uprising began last June when India's
trigger-happy troops fired on unarmed protesters
killing a 17-year-old student who was merely a
bystander. A tear-gas shell fired from close range hit
him on the head, blowing his brains out. Since then,
Kashmir has been in turmoil again. So far, an
estimated 120 people have been killed, hundreds
arrested and as usual, the heavy-handedness of the
Indian occupation troops that have a carte blanche
under the Public Safety Act (PSA) to indulge in every
illegal act, has continued. Last September, the Indian government sent in a
parliamentary delegation headed by Home Minister
Palaniappan Chidambaram to review the situation and
make recommendations. On September 25, Delhi announced a policy shift
calling for the release of jailed student protesters,
easing security strictures in major cities, reopening
schools and universities, and offering financial
compensation to the families of the more than 100
civilians killed since the recent protests erupted in
June. Chidambaram also said a high-level government
committee would be established to open a dialogue with
political parties, students and civil society groups
in Kashmir. Few people take such pronouncements seriously. When
under pressure, the Indian government has made
soothing noises about dialogue and easing restrictions
only to rescind them and arrest top leaders of the
Kashmir freedom movement. Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the
most senior and elderly leader of the movement has
been in and out of prison. He is currently facing
sedition charges for demanding that the heavily armed
military forces should be withdrawn and a referendum
held in the state. The Kashmir Valley, including its capital city
Srinagar, remains choked under a stifling curfew
enforced with barbed wire and hundreds of thousands of
troops. Shops are frequently shuttered to protest
military brutality and most people struggle to get
medicines and even milk. Most people describe the
situation as "collective punishment." Even the pro-Indian Chief Minister of Kashmir, Omar
Abdullah was forced to say in the legislature on
October 7 that Jammu and Kashmir had never merged with
India and that it was an international dispute. This
was a direct challenge to the parrot-style repetition
from Delhi that Kashmir is its "integral part" and
outsiders must not interfere since it is primarily for
India and Pakistan to resolve. Yet Delhi stubbornly refuses to countenance any
proposal that would lead to its peaceful resolution
while taking into account the wishes of the people.
Abdullah said Kashmir was a dispute between two
neighbours and the explosive situation in the valley
needed a "political solution". What forced Abdullah to make such a statement? The
situation is rapidly spinning out of control and he
realizes that unless he makes some soothing noises to
placate the angry, stone throwing youth, he would soon
become irrelevant. He was forced to distance himself
from military brutality although as the state's chief
minister, he also has a say in how force is used. He
also rubbished the Indian government's claim that
periodic elections have made the issue of referendum
redundant. His emphasis on Kashmir being a "political issue"
that "…cannot be addressed through development,
em-ployment and good governance" was a slap in the
face of India. The political issue Abdullah spoke of
revolves around a principle that cannot be denied to
the Kashmiri people — their right to
self-determination. How alienated and angry the people of Kashmir are
with Indian brutality and how much they wish to have
nothing to do with India can be gauged from one of the
most popular slogans heard in Srinagar these days:
"Nanga, bhooka Hindustan; jaan se pyaara Pakistan:
Naked, starving India; more cherished than our lives
is Pakistan." For upstart Indians this must be the
ultimate insult. They dream of becoming a superpower
and are already claiming the status of a regional
power with vast military forces, the fourth largest
air force and navy in the world but if they cannot
feed 800 million of their own people, then India
deserves rejection and condemnation. A country is
judged not by the number of its jet fighters but by
the number of hungry mouths it can feed. In any case, for the Kashmiris, no amount of
economic development in India and globalization will
bring any solace as long as they remain under the boot
of the unruly Indian army that has made rape a
standard policy of dealing with the Kashmiris. Is it surprising that the Kashmiris do not wish to
have anything to do with such an entity? Comments 💬 التعليقات |