Saturday, November 6, 2010
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Did Hurriyat (M) come under pressure before making an announcement in favour of election boycott, comments Hassan Zainagiree.
In fairness to the acting Chairman, Mouana Abas Ansari, the statement reflected the thinking of many of the Executive Council Members. But it was, the approach of Moulana Abbas and his unwanted and contemptuous remarks about Jihad Council that, apart from causing embarrassment to his likes in the conglomerate, provoked youth to unleash their adrenalin and torch his effigy. First time a pro-freedom leaders effigy was burnt in Srinagar-especially at a place considered Mirwaiz Umar’s strong hold. The fury and spontaneity of the demonstrations shows the sensitivity and “zero-tolerance” of the youth on the question of Azadi.
More than a conviction, it was swaying to the ragda tide that Hurayat (M) jumped into the bandwagon of election boycott in last year’s parliamentary elections. Situational compulsions forced them to toe the line of Syed Ali Shah Geelani. On second February 2009, in an interview with BBC Urdu Service, Moulana Abas pulled off the veil and candidly admitted: ‘we were not in favor of election boycott but for unity we supported the boycott’. In a softened way though, Mirwaiz Umar too echoed the same thinking when he advocated for ‘adopting positive approach’. Between the lines it implied the election boycott is not a ‘positive approach’. ‘It is important’, Mirwaiz told a local news gathering agency KNS on 2nd February 2009, ‘for the people of Kashmir to get this issue resolved by adopting positive approach. The hard line stance has always given a government of India a chance to dilute the freedom struggle of Kashmir’.
Does energetic Mirwaiz need to be told it is now Delhi that, driven by military hubris, has stuck itself on the hardline stance. The summer uprising – spontaneous, peaceful, non-violent and historic-has, once for all, taken the rubric of India’s stand on Kashmir. Elections that followed were aimed to neutralize the spill-over effect of the Intifada. True a significant number of people participated in the December’s 2008 assembly elections when Kashmir was virtually converted into a garrisoned town and main opposition leadership imprisoned. But this will not rob you off the essence and the sanctity of the cause you espouse for. And it is here the role of leadership assumes significance.
What a leader is worth for if he ceases to provide guidance to the people? Has he to quarantine himself when people start fighting on what he says is non-issue? If issue is non-issue, why discuss it at three days marathon meeting? And you discuss it to seal your mouth. Because that suits you. Sometimes silence is more rewarding.
Why should elections be a non-issue for us when for Delhi it is a matter of life and death? Delhi plunges in the fray with all its henchmen and resources to strip you off the moral high position and kill you with your own weapon? Pray tell us, if elections are ‘non-issue’, why the most ardent voices of election boycott are put behind the bars or house arrested? Delhi strives everything to make it a Waterloo for us and you look to other way in sardonic smiles! In sweet delusion you love to lull in when earth beneath your feet refuses to hold you up. just for sake of argument, suppose tomorrow people scream in anger that Hurriyat (M) be flogged in public, its headquarters be renamed as donkey’s cabin, or they proclaim Geelani as Usama Bin Ladin, US has put a reward of millions on his head and demand India that he should be handed over to America, would you enjoy all this happening? Bal aksarar hum la yalamoon (majority of people do not know) says the Holy Qur’an. And leaders who claim they “represent” the genuine sentiment of freedom loving people’ have to always lead people in pledging loyalty to the cherished goal of Azadi. It is the goal that matters and criteria of judging the worth of a leader depends on the quantum of sincerity, dedication and stead fastness a leader puts in pursuing that cherished goal. For a genuine cause a leader lives and dies for. Faces imprisonment, kisses gallows, embraces martyrdom. But never lets his people down. Not even when they let him down.
Just as the ragda gravitational pull pushed Hurayat (M) into election boycott mode, the public resentment on its 15th April decision paved the way for its flip-flopping. Only a week after Mirwaiz Umar held a two day long meeting of his conglomerate’s Executive and General Council and then on 23rd April in a press brief termed elections a ‘futile exercise’ and asked people to ‘stay away’ from the ongoing parliamentary elections. he said : ‘It (elections) is an agenda of government of India and the pro-Indian parties which take part in the elections. …..if the issue is resolves then only will elections have any significance’. Flaying Sajad Gani Lone, People Conference leader, on his decision to contest the polls, Mirwaiz said: ‘people who take part in elections are working against the interests of the Kashmir movement’. It is in the place to mention that Mulana Abas Ansari has recently sought to justify Sajad’s decision. In acknowledgement of the role of Jihad Council Mirwaiz said: ‘we cannot take away credit from the resistance forces which brought out the Kashmir issue from cold storage into the global focus’.
Besides street pressure, Mirwaiz had to face a highly vocal group in his conglomerate especially in General Council. He succeeded in negotiating the tough terrain. Hurriyat earlier decision was a sure recipe for its disaster. But the question is how can Mirwaiz reconcile different factions in a conglomerate where there is imminent polarization and two conflicting rather confronting strands within the grouping’s thought and approach.
Tail-Piece:-Mirwaiz has expressed his resolve that Hurriyat (M) ‘will go to places and urge people to refrain from taking part in elections…..The Hurriyat constituents have already started door to door camping and they will continue it’. If this is his heart that scoops out on to the esteemed cleric cum-politician’s tongue (and we do not believe otherwise) the test does lie in his already well – known pro-election boycott vocal group campaigners. It is in four Executive members of his Hurriyat where the ‘buck stops’. ‘Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation’, remarked Fredrick Douglass, ‘are people who want crops without ploughing the ground’.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
"Kashmir without an equal—Kashmir, equal to paradise!" generations of Indian pilgrims have chanted. But the destruction that wasted India did not spare Kashmir. Last week Kashmir, the paradisal valley, smoked with two kinds of hellish fury: war and its blinder brother, massacre.
"Free Kashmir." All through the summer, Kashmir's waddling, toss-purse Hindu Maharaja Sir Hari Singh had twisted & turned between India and Pakistan. When armed tribesmen from Pakistan's northwest invaded last month, Sir Hari at last threw out his be jeweled arms to India.
In Moslem Karachi, Pakistan Governor General Mohamed Ali Jinnah raged at the news. He ordered Pakistan troops, under British Lieut. General D. D. Gracey, into Kashmir. The order was not carried out, for in New Delhi British Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck threatened to withdraw British officers from Pakistan's Army.
The raiders from Pakistan were amazingly well equipped. They used automatic guns, mortars,. 3.7-in. field guns, and even light tanks and flamethrowers. Troops of the Indian Dominion, flown in to hold the Maharaja's capital at Srinagar, the down-at-heel "Venice of the Orient," tried strafing the invaders from Spitfires of the Indian Air Force. But the raiders were through the outlying passes now and inside the lovely Vale of Kashmir itself. They pressed closer on Srinagar, and, on the march, proclaimed Azad Kashmir—Free Kashmir.
"Is Pakistan Too Weak?" Even more ominous were the reports that the blind butchery of neighbor by neighbor had reached Kashmir. Pakistan heard that 50,000 Moslems had been slaughtered by Hindus. British officials said that 100,000 fleeing refugees from Kashmir and nearby Jammu had crowded south into the still reeking Punjab.
Heretofore, British and Europeans had been fairly safe. But they were no longer safe in Kashmir. Mahsud tribesmen burst into a hospital at Baramulla last week, killed a British officer, his wife and two nuns.
Rather late, the Maharaja of Kashmir took measures to prop up his throne. He released from 15-month imprisonment the revered leader of the Kashmir Congress (India) Party, 6 ft. 4 in. tall Sheik Mohamed Abdullah, a Moslem but a follower of India's Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.
The Maharaja made Abdullah his prime minister, promised to be a constitutional ruler in future; then the Maharaja lit out for the relative safety of his other princely state, Jammu. In New Delhi this week Prime Minister Nehru called for a U.N. plebiscite, shouted: "Is the Pakistan Government too weak to prevent armies from marching across its territory to invade another country?"
Sex & Christianity. Britons in Kashmir began to pack. At the Srinagar Club there were tea dancing and dinner jackets as usual, but the residents were signing up for planes and road convoys that would take them south, like Sir Hari Singh. One trouble was the pet dogs, the Lhassa terriers, Afghan hounds and Pomeranians. Transportation was short, and, it turned out, there were more dogs than Britons on the evacuation list.
At the club, the tension unavoidably brought out personality. A somewhat thyroid spinster from Lahore passed around the manuscript of a sex novel she had been working on. One handlebar-mustached old colonel, who had spent 40 seasons in Kashmir, refused to leave. Said he: "Good God, no! I'll just pull my houseboat over another mile or so and forget the trouble." The Hindu pianist who played an Indian version of boogie woogie at the houseboat-cabaret Bluebird had a different solution. He bought a new, heavy, imported Scotch tweed suit with heavy overcoat and tweed cap. Asked if he were not afraid of the approaching Moslem tribesmen, he giggled loudly, exclaimed: "Lord, no! I have become a Christian."
By Madhur Singh Sunday, Aug. 24, 2008
"Azadi!" has been the cry across the stunningly beautiful Kashmir Valley for two weeks now. Shouting the word for "freedom," hundreds of thousands of Kashmiris have been marching to demand liberty from India. Schools and businesses across the region have been closed, as the central government in New Delhi has mobilized thousands of troops into the area to assert its control. So far, at least 23 people have been killed and 500 injured in clashes with Indian security forces. A three-day respite to allow locals to stock on essentials ended on Aug. 22 with a resumption of protests and hundreds of thousands drove or marched on foot through the provincial capital Srinagar shouting anti-India and pro-Pakistan slogans. Some were waving Pakistani flags, as people lining the roadsides offered them refreshments and encouragement. On Aug. 24, two leading separatist leaders were arrested by Indian police on the eve of more demonstrations.
The scenes were painfully reminiscent of the worst days of the insurgency, which has raged for two decades and has witnessed the deaths of as many as 11,000 people as bands of Islamist guerrillas, encouraged by Pakistan, fought Indian troops. That crisis, which at many points brought New Delhi and Islamabad to the brink of war, had seemed to pass as the 21st Century took hold. But the old embers of discontent remained, indeed almost structurally preserved by the very way Kashmir is governed. It is part of a single Indian state called Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), where Jammu is a majority Hindu area which waters down the numbers of Kashmir's majority Muslims. And so, it took just one spark for the old fire to come roaring back.
The Valley had been on edge since June this year over the local government's move to "divert" 100 acres of land to a trust managing a Hindu pilgrimage. Muslim protests led the provincial government to rescind its order. That decision, however, infuriated Hindus, who blocked the highway to Srinagar, which while less than successful as an economic weapon led to the Muslims of the Kashmir Valley exploding in anti-India protest. Kashmiris saw the blockade as a symbol of Hindu India's willful ability to hold Muslim Kashmir in a vise. "The blockade was made out to be much worse than it probably was," says Navneeta Chadha Behera, author of Demystifying Kashmir. "In effect it was like a psychological war. A fear psychosis was created where people panicked about shortage of medicines and milk for children, about truckloads of apples rotting. How much was fact and how much rumor, no one knows."
The depth of Kashmiri anger, however, runs deep. For two decades, Kashmiris have lived in one of the most militarized regions of the world, with 800,000 troops stationed in the 15,520 sq km (5,992 sq mile) Kashmir Valley and operating under laws that give them impunity from prosecution. Charges of extrajudicial killings, rapes, abductions and torture were leveled against them with chilling regularity during the 1990s. The Indian government has consistently denied Kashmiri calls to demilitarize, saying the terror infrastructure across the border in Pakistan has yet to be dismantled. Resentment continues to simmer over the "disappearance" of more than 8,000 Kashmiris during the insurgency. Human rights organizations claim the missing were killed by security forces. Kashmiri demands for greater cross-border travel and trade relations with Pakistan have also seen slow progress due to continuing distrust between the two countries. Meanwhile, Kashmiri aspirations for greater autonomy have also remained largely unrealized. That has been particularly galling because Kashmir acceded to India in the 1947 partition of British India into Pakistan and India based on carefully negotiated terms giving the region the right to self-governance on all issues except foreign relations, communication and defense.
The chaos has enveloped the Jammu side of the province. Since the government rescinded its diversion of land, the Hindu-dominated area of the state has seen widespread protests, in which at least 10 people have lost their lives. Hundreds of thousands have protested what they say is the special treatment given to the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley. While J&K receives the highest per capita financial assistance from the federal government in New Delhi, they claim, most of those resources are channeled into the Valley. They point out that J&K is the only state with its own constitution and with a special status in the Indian constitution, where outsiders cannot buy land and whose demographic balance — roughly 70% Muslim and 30% Hindu — that is is solicitously protected.
New Delhi thus has two political fronts to deal with, one Muslim and one Hindu. Any concessions it might offer to those protesting in Srinagar will provide fodder to the equally vociferous protesters in Jammu. What's more, the Hindu right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party has taken the issue beyond the state of J&K into the rest of India, and seems set to make it an election issue during the general elections expected at the beginning of next year. Due to the protests, the state elections have been put off until next year.
The problem of separatism is completely different. "The only solution is to get people back on the table to talk," says A.S. Dullat, a former chief of India's external intelligence agency, the R&AW, and a former incharge of Kashmir affairs in the Prime Minister's Office, "But for that they need to wait for passions to cool." With general elections round the corner, the talks are more likely to be an exercise to buy time than to find a meaningful solution. Chadha Behera says the separatists themselves are to blame for the deadlock with New Delhi: "They themselves are not agreed on whether they want freedom or merger with Pakistan." Furthermore, she says, they are inflexible. "They won't give up their personal security but will demand troops be removed from the valley."
While opinion columns in Indian newspapers have, rather remarkedly, for the first time started talking of letting Kashmir have independence, the fact remains that no government facing an election is likely to take any hard decision on Kashmir. For the moment, the situation looks likely to fester.
By Jyoti Thottam Thursday, Sep. 04, 2008
When I left New York City for New Delhi earlier this year, I thought Kashmir would be a "good news" story. The valley had been relatively quiet for years, and in April and May Kashmir was celebrating record numbers of tourists. By August, however, normalcy had been replaced by strife, death, curfews and checkpoints. The immediate cause of the conflict this time was a dispute between Muslims and Hindus over 100 acres (40 hectares) of land near the Amarnath shrine in the Kashmir valley, which Indian authorities had granted to a Hindu pilgrim group. A compromise now gives the group exclusive use, but not permanent title, to the land — which they will use to build temporary shelters during their annual trek — and the protests have subsided. But the prospect of losing any territory has brought back to the surface the decades of unresolved anger Kashmiris have bottled up against the Indian government.
India and Pakistan fought over Kashmir after partition, and a Kashmiri separatist movement has been fighting to eject Indian troops from the region since 1989. The separatists' trump card has always been the threat to join Pakistan, which supported them with guns and guerrillas. India eventually silenced the separatists with force, but Amarnath has reignited their movement. The cries of "Azadi" (Freedom) and the Pakistani flags waving above the crowd of 500,000 people at one particularly fierce protest on Aug. 18 made the point that Kashmiris were once again ready to leave India.
This time, many Indians seem willing to let them go. "Why are we still hanging on to Kashmir if the Kashmiris don't want to have anything to do with us?" wrote columnist Vir Sanghvi in the Hindustan Times. "Is it time the K-word got out of India, and India out of the K-word?" asked political satirist Jug Suraiya in the Times of India. Novelist Arundhati Roy argued that "India needs azadi from Kashmir just as much — if not more — than Kashmir needs azadi from India."
These are words that, in India, one rarely says aloud. Through military force, acts of Parliament and two wars with Pakistan, India has held on tightly to Kashmir, and its attachment has always been a bit romantic. It isn't just the beauty of its lush valleys and jewel-like lakes. Kashmir is a test of the Indian national idea. Insisting that Muslim-majority Kashmir should and can be a part of Hindu-majority India speaks to the notion, admirable but perhaps naive, that a coherent, secular democracy can be fashioned out of dozens of different languages and faiths. To hold on to Kashmir, even by force, was to pledge, implicitly, that the people of Kashmir would be better off as a part of India than as a part of Pakistan.
What does it say about India that people are losing faith, or losing interest, in Kashmir? It is a sign of frustration, first of all, with India's political failure to live up to that promise of unity in diversity. Over the years, the Indian government has poured millions of dollars of aid into Kashmir and spent millions more putting down the separatist insurgency. But it fails to understand that peace isn't just the absence of fighting. It's in the political details: withdrawing the half-million Indian troops who still occupy Kashmir, developing the local economy and, most importantly, accounting for what human-rights groups say are widespread abuses committed against Kashmiri civilians by the military.
The Indian government hasn't addressed these tough issues, leaving Kashmir angry and restive. And so all it took to shatter Kashmir's fragile peace was one blunder — the tone-deaf move this summer to transfer those 100 acres of land near Amarnath. It set off not one but two ferocious protest movements — by Hindu nationalists and by Kashmiri separatists — who have fueled each other's frenzy.
Indians seem to have come to terms with the idea that the separatists really are Kashmiri — not some proxy force sent in from the shadows of Pakistan. But that only makes it easier to see Kashmir as yet another one of India's secessionist struggles, to be subdued and eventually co-opted. Today, the possibility of losing Kashmir to Pakistan seems remote: Pakistan has its own insurgencies to worry about, and if the people of Kashmir ever get their long-promised plebiscite, it's unlikely that they would choose to trade India's occupation for Pakistan's instability.
Of course, it's equally unlikely that any Indian government would actually let go of Kashmir. But if India loses its quixotic attachment to Kashmir, the state could become just like any other place in India where millions of grievances go unheard as a busy nation turns its attention elsewhere. And the romance would end, as romances usually do, in indifference.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
All parties Hurriet (Freedom) Confrence Jammu & Kashmir.
H/O Raj-bagh Srinagar. PH No 9205021300
Dear Mr. David Miliband,
Apropos your article, “War on Terror Was Wrong” published in the Guardian 15 January 2009. I value your ideas.
I appreciate your ideas on the resolution of Kashmir dispute and thank you much for articulating the importance of resolving this dispute for ushering in peace in South-Asia.
The Kashmir Dispute is the oldest unresolved dispute in on the agenda of the United Nations. India and Pakistan have signed an International agreement way back in 1948 under aegis of the United Nations Security guaranteeing exercising of the right to self-determination to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The people of Jammu and Kashmir have been struggling for this right for past sixty one years. About half a million people have sacrificed their lives during past six decades for this cause. Hundreds of martyr’s grave sites bear testimony to the sacrifices made by people. And hundreds of unmarked mass graves tell a woeful tale of the human rights violations committed by occupying Indian forces in our land.
The dispute over Kashmir as you very rightly have identified has imperiled peace in the region and is the cause for India and Pakistan tension.
Appreciating your understanding of importance of the resolutions of Kashmir dispute in accordance with norms of justice and fair play and respect for international law for peace in the region we in All Parties Hurriyat Conference look forward for your playing a pro-active role in this regard.
I once again thank you for your concern 13 million Kashmiris and peace in the region.
Syed Ali Geelani
[KW Note: Syed Ali Shah Geelani is one of the renowned leaders of the Freedom Struggle of Jammu & Kashmir who is active under the umbrella of All Parties Hurriyat (Freedom) Conference. He is one of the few leaders of the Indian occupied Jammu & Kashmir who raised his voice effectively and forcefully against the Indian occupation. He has spent 14 years of his life in prison and has thus become one of the few public leaders to spend so long a period of his life in prison.
He is one of the few persons who strengthened the Freedom Struggle in Kashmir and is, again one of the few persons who have been leading the freedom forces quite admirably. During the past 50 years he has manfully braved persecution and faced tremendous difficulties.
Syed Ali Geelani is a sincere, capable and courageous leader who has been constantly influencing the Kashmiri youth with his sincerity of purpose perseverance and steely determination inspired by his leadership and indomitable fighting spirit which has kept the flame of the struggle for the Kashmiris right of self-determination burning in the hearts of the millions of the freedom-loving people of the State.
David Miliband has been MP for South Shields since June 2001.
He studied Politics, Philosophy and Economics at Corpus Christi College, Oxford. In 1988/9 he won a Kennedy Scholarship to study for a Masters' Degree at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States.
David's first job was in the voluntary sector, working for the National Council for Voluntary Organisations. He was then Research Fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research, and from 1992-94 Secretary of the Commission on Social Justice, set up by the then Leader of the Labour Party, John Smith, to work out new approaches to welfare policy.
From 1994 to 1997 David worked as Head of Policy for Tony Blair, working on the policies that would help Labour into government. He was then Head of the Prime Minister's Policy Unit in Downing Street during Labour's first term in office from 1997 to 2001. He helped found the Centre for European Reform, and has edited two books, Reinventing the Left, and Paying for Inequality.
Foreign Secretary: Currently David Miliband is the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (the Foreign Secretary). He is responsible to Parliament for the work of the FCO. He is supported by two Ministers of State, three Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State, and a Permanent Under-Secretary of State (PUS) who is the Head of the Diplomatic Service.]
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
[Note:This post is in resopnse to
Nundiyo, Hendian Henze Kaam-i Trawto...
Trawto te Prawto Haqe Senz Wath...
Muhammad Saab Mate Mashrawtan...
Asi Ha Nin Dozakhas...Timan Rozi Kath...
"Sheikh Ul Aalam.(R.A)"
This is the age of Global Unity. Whole world is comming together to form a Global Society, which would be free of every kind of Political, Economical or Social Oppression. We aim to achieve Unity. But, as opposed to that when we speak of a Nation based upon a geographical or some mythalogical ideology we are dividing people and enforcing a clash with the rest of the world. History has proved that Nationalism and Patriotism are as lethal to the world peace as is Cynide to a living body.
Nations are not built upon the leathal ideologies of Nationalism but firm foundation of "Truth". And truth, as Rumi says, is like a Sun and there is no need to prove the existence of sun after the sun rises high in the skys.
"Kashmiriyat (Kashmiri-ism) is the ethno-national, social consciousness and cultural values of the Kashmiri people."
What is this and what do you mean by this illogical definition of a mythological concept.
"Ethno-national" I dont know of any nation based on ethinicity. All humman beings have same origin. We are all homo-sapiens. And world is common heritage of all the people living on it.
"Social conciousness and cultural values" Geographical affiliations can never give rise to any kind of social conciousness or some cultural values. Social conciousness and cultural values are outcome of a "process of reflective synthesis" of humman emotions and responsibilities. Geographical associations can only give rise to "Diet" , "Shelter" and "Dress" Conciousness, which is necessary for example you will die of cold if you dont have suitable clothing and shelter if you are living in Kashmir. If Pheran, Kangri and Hokh Siyun are out come of Kashmiriyat then there is no need to carve out an ideology out of it, because it is natural.[Zain ul Aabidin is said to have introduced Kanri and Pheran to Kashmir]
I wonder how illogically and irrelevently has the mythological fabric of kashmiriyat been woven by these Cut-Copy social scientist of Kashmiriyat.
I cant hold myself without qouting Sir Allama Iqbal
I wonder Why are we seeking fresh sources of energy in creation of new loyalities, such as Nationalism and Patriotism which Nietzche described as 'sickness and unreason' and 'the strongest force against culture.'
Today, we are not in need of reviving or saving a mythological and leathal ideology of Kashmiriyat from some kind of Haox Kashmiriyat, but we need to liberate Kashmir from illegitimate Occupation and aggression of a tyrant. India has occupied Kashmir for last 61 years and has perpetrated every kind torture and aggression on the people of Kashmir.
Freedom as Ummar(R.A) said is our birth right. Untill our recognized rights are not delivered to us peacefully, till then the Kashmiris would fight against everyone that comes inbetween them and their freedom.
I believe that taking about Kashmiriyat at this time is in no way a priority for us. There are thousands who are in Jails, thousands who have Dissapeared (Involuntarily), and thousands who have been directly effected by these unfortunate incidences. Our priority is to bring some relief to them. Our priority is bring FREEDOM to every soul.
So, it would be "misleading the people" if we start talking about mythologies and forget the priorities that are before hand.
Our AIM IS FREEDOM.
Let us concentrate on concrete things and forget myths.