Friday, 31 December 2010

Rise of China, Revival of Militancy in Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan, by Senge H. Sering

Rise of China, Revival of Militancy in Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan
Senge H. Sering Gilgit Baltistan National Congress
For over four decades, Pakistan has used Gilgit-Baltistan, the part of Jammu & Kashmir under her occupation, as a hide out, training camp and launching pad for the militants to infiltrate in Indian Kashmir and Afghanistan. Famous among the terror groups which have found refuge in Gilgit-Baltistan are Lashkar-e-Taiba, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Jesh-e-Mohammad and Harkatul Mujahideen. According to the local media, Pakistani citizens settled in villages like Sikarkoi and Baseen provide sanctuaries to the militants. Local politicians including Saifur Rehman and Shabbir Wali of Pakistan Muslim League, Raziuddin and Wazir Beg of Pakistan Peoples’ Party and Sunni scholar, Qazi Nisar, accuse Pakistani agencies of arming and protecting the militants and giving them a free hand in the region. In recent months, locals have spotted vehicles belonging to Pakistani agencies transporting militants into Kunar, Wakhan and Badakhshan provinces of Afghanistan via the Ghizer district. Further, Taliban and Al-Qaida have also increased their activities in Chitral and attack and abduct the residents. The situation is alarming for the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, since Chitral borders Ghizer district.

On occasions, the natives of Gilgit-Baltistan have demonstrated their opposition to militant activities in their region. For instance, the residents of Skardo rose against the presence of militants in Baltistan in July of 1999 and forced their withdrawal. On August 23rd of 2010, the Deputy Speaker of Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly warned Pakistani security forces of another rebellion if the militants fail to curtain their activities in the region. Recently on September 3rd of 2010, natives confronted the pro-Taliban elements in Ghizer district and forced them to close their hide outs.

The impact of the presence of the terrorists in Gilgit-Baltistan is far reaching as they interfere in local political and socio-economic affairs and intend to alter cultural and religious identity of the region. Those among the natives who oppose their activities have faced death and involuntary disappearances. On the other side, death becomes destiny of those too who join the Taliban to fight the allied forces. Militants mainly target orphans and children belonging to the poverty stricken families and induct them in the Madrassahs, where they are brainwashed to abandon moderate form of Sufi Islam and adopt extremist Salafism. Further, the trend to dispatch youth to religious Madrassahs in both Saudi Arabia and Iran also continues. In both cases, the youth learn to employ Islam as a political tool to expand frontiers and forcefully convert the infidels to the path of Allah. The region is fast moving towards anarchy as those few who transmit the message of non-violence and inter-religious tolerance have lost patronage. On October 26th of 2010, a Sufi religious center and five centuries old library was torched by the extremists to deprive the youth of literature on moderate Islam. Such practices are also common in Indian Kashmir where local Sufis have suffered from Pakistan-sponsored Salafi movement. The end goal of the terrorists is to force the non-political and peace loving Sufis of both Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan to join their club.

The natives accuse Pakistani agencies of employing the terrorists to provoke sectarianism and target killing, and damaging social fabric. Locals also blame the militants of planting bombs and spreading fear. On November 17, 2010 a bomb was diffused in Skardo before it could cause damage to a Shia religious center. Such tactics keep the locals divided and weak and allow Pakistan to prolong occupation of Gilgit-Baltistan and rule the region like a colony. The people of Gilgit-Baltistan ask Pakistani occupying forces and illegal settlers to withdraw from the region and return control over the land and the resources to the real owners; a demand that also resonate with the United Nations’ resolutions of 1948 and 1949. The fact that Pakistan supports the terrorists in Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan is a clear indication that the country will continue to pursue the legacy of the Arab dynasties like the Umayyad and Abbasids, and will remain instrumental in using Islam to shield her expansionism.

Like in Gilgit-Baltistan, militants have found refuge in Indian Kashmir among the religious fanatics. The militants vow to create an Islamic Republic of Kashmir, which would be synonymous to creating another Pakistan and providing a platform to the international terror network. It would be a challenging task to obtain recognition for such a country as the international community has her hands full combating terrorism elsewhere. Given the fact that this country would be surrounded by three nuclear powers and two of them would be her allies, one doubts if the western world could afford to help create the Islamic safe heaven. Pakistan supports the creation of an independent Kashmir, which would safeguard her strategic interests. As such, the fate of that country would not be very different from Afghanistan when it was under the Islamic rule of the Taliban.

Such a republic would most likely be governed by banned militant outfits, which show pride in calling themselves allies of Alqaida and the Taliban. The torch-bearers of Kashmir’s independence like Lashkar-e-Taiba believe that acquiring control over Kashmir is not the end goal but a stepping stone to spread rule of Allah in the entire world. The dream of the militant groups like Harkatul Mujahideen to hoist Islamic flag in Delhi or transforming the Central Asian Republics into domain of submission only portrays their desire of establishing a Muslim Emirate. The situation forces one to believe that the extremist movements and terrorism in South Asia will continue to receive patronage even after Kashmir is awarded to Pakistan or allowed to emerge as an independent country. In my opinion, an independent Kashmir under the rule of the Islamists will strengthen terrorism at international level as Kashmir would become a permanent base for the militants.
I also believe that an independent Kashmir suits China’s interests, and could be used as a lynchpin by the Asian giant to form a nexus with Pakistan, the Middle East and Afghanistan. China would also like Pakistan to annex Gilgit-Baltistan and extend her military control over this strategically located region of Jammu & Kashmir. Already thousands of Chinese personnel are stationed in Gilgit-Baltistan, involving in the construction of strategic infrastructure. Realizing China’s interest, the representatives of Jamat-e-Islami of Pakistan visited Beijing in 2008 and signed an agreement with their communist counterpart to receive support for a pro-Pakistani Islamist regime in Afghanistan. At the same time, China agreed to extend patronage to the Kashmiri militants. As quid pro quo, Jamat-e-Islami denounced support to the separatists of Xinjiang and accepted China’s sovereignty over the province. One should not see the sequence of events as coincidental where China extended support to the banned militant outfits of Pakistan and used veto power in the Security Council to protect their existence; and where China extended support to the Islamists of Kashmir like the Hurriyat Conference and invited its leadership to Beijing for dialogue; and where China continues to support Maoist terrorism and helps them form an alliance with the Kashmiri militants. China is aware of the fact that the Maoists and Kashmiri militants can be used to weaken strategic and military interests of her adversaries. The alliance that is in the offing, involving China, Pakistan and Middle Eastern countries, could therefore strengthen extremism in Asia. It is also feared that change in power equation in the Middle East with China’s involvement will actually complicate Arab-Israeli relations. China’s growing support for the Arab countries and Iran has alarmed Israel and the situation will increase political tension at global level.

Terrorism and extremism can be eliminated if the regimes providing financial support and sanctuaries to such movements are made answerable. Countries like Pakistan and China have a greater responsibility to shun support to the terrorists like Lashkar-e-Taiba. China claims to oppose the three evils of extremism, terrorism and separatism. However, her support to Maoist movement in India and militancy in Kashmir proves her claims as hollow. International community must realize that the money spent on Pakistan to fight terrorism is actually re-channeled to create a B-team of Taliban which would be used to confront the secular government of Afghanistan once the allied forces are withdrawn. If the international community is serious about eliminating terrorism then instead of wasting time in attacking militant sanctuaries along the Durand Line, they should eliminate the terror hubs in the heartland of Pakistan especially in rural Punjab, which provides the bulk of the cadre to the terrorists. Punjab is also home to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, which according to the home minister of Pakistan, Mr. Rehman Malik, has become the lead organization of Al-Qaida in Pakistan.

At the same time, Arabization and Persianization of Islam must be discouraged if Islam has to prove its worth as a universal religion. Instead of employing Islam as a tool to expand frontiers and strategic interests, Pakistani leadership could promote the art of co-existence of communities professing different faiths, political ideologies, cultures and languages. Muslims of South Asia must discard the legacy of the Umayyad and Abbasids, which employ Islam to conquer lands, destroy ancient and rich civilizations and replace them with barbaric customs. These steps would help revive Sufism and ensure religious and ethnic diversity in Jammu & Kashmir. Kashmir issue needs to be resolved by allowing diverse ethnic and religious groups of the state to carry dialogue among themselves as well as with the Indian government.

Last but not the least, Pakistani terrorists, security forces and illegal citizens must withdraw from her occupied parts of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan so religious fanaticism and militancy could be curtailed. War against extremism is not just a war to protect the western civilization. It is the war of all those who believe in racial tolerance, linguistic and cultural diversity, plural democracy, and peaceful co-existence of humans.

Wednesday, 29 December 2010

Kashmir Study Tour report submitted to KNP, Abbas Butt

Kashmir Study Tour report submitted to KNP, Abbas Butt

Wednesday, 29 December 2010 06:34 Abbas Butt

After great effort, commitment and dedication Dr Shabir Choudhry has submitted his long report to KNP Supreme Council. This project, Study Tour of Gilgit Baltistan and Pakistani Administered Kashmir, was initiated by Kashmir National Party; and delegation visited the region in October this year.

Abbas Butt said, Kashmir National Party is the first Kashmiri Party to give so much attention to the plight of people of Gilgit Baltistan; and as a political Party visited the region to express our solidarity with the oppressed and deprived people of this region. We wanted to demonstrate that we cared for the welfare of these people and wanted to consolidate our relationship with them.

KNP Chairman said, Dr Shabir Choudhry has completed his long report consisting of more than 250 pages within 7 weeks; and presented to the Supreme Council of the KNP, which will decide what to do with it and how should it be made public.

He said, ‘On behalf of the KNP and other members of the delegation I want to congratulate Dr Shabir Choudhry for producing such a detailed report which explains geo political situation of the region. He worked extremely hard, at times working up to 18 hours a day to complete the report. This shows dedication and sincerity of Dr Shabir Choudhry to the cause of Jammu and Kashmir; and especially to cause of people of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan’.

Abbas Butt said, ‘The report consists of interviews, observations, survey and our experience during the journey and during our 18 days visit. It was a fact finding mission. I and other members of the delegation learnt many new things. I sincerely hope that this report will be appreciated by all those who have some interest in the region, and are concerned about welfare and rights of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. I also hope that the report will advance the cause of the people of Jammu and Kashmiri; and help people to understand complexities and contradictions associated with the Kashmir dispute.’

Abbas Butt

Chairman Kashmir National Party

‘We will fight against the enemy which has its big boot on our neck’

‘We will fight against the enemy which has its big boot on our neck’
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 29, 2010 in Kashmir,
During our Study Tour of Gilgit Baltistan and PAK, we met many people including,
Baba Jaan from Hunza who came to meet us. We were grateful to him for finding
some time for us and travelling from there to our hotel. He is a young and energetic
man, and Chairman of Progressive Youth Front.
He was very angry about the role of the Pakistani agencies and what they do to
innocent local people. He told us that, ‘Pakistani secret agencies raid at night time and
harass and intimidate people. At times they take young men with them and torture
them in secret places. Some of these people are either remain in their torture centres,
killed and buried without knowledge of their love ones, or thrown in remote places
after breaking their limbs.’
He further said, ‘We are not in a position to fight back with bullets. There are more
than 150 people facing sedition charges. These people are dragged in these cases for
12-13 years, their life becomes hell, their family life and business, if any, is destroyed
and the entire family suffers enormously’.
He said, ‘Young and angry men who don’t want to be part of Pakistan or who oppose
the Pakistani rule and exploitation are picked up and charged for using unreasonable
words for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. They are tortured for this crime of
speaking against the oppressive rule of Pakistan; and at times their body muscles are
crushed and damage their kidneys.’
He further said, ‘These people face this treatment for mere speaking or complaining
against unreasonable and unjust rule of Pakistan, just imagine what would happen to
them, if these people had committed some crime against the army or used a gun or
violence against them.’
He said, ‘Months of August and September have been bad for us. During these
months there have been massive arrests and human rights abuses. I agree if some
people commit some crime they should be punished in accordance with law, but
houses must not be raided without warrants and innocent people should not be
arrested and punished.’
He gave us one example, where ‘Sadiq Ali was arrested by ISI in 2008. He was kept
in hot water and tortured for many days; and when he died they brought him to the
local police station and ordered the police to declare that this man was brought in for
questioning and he died natural death’.
He said, ‘Pakistani agencies print and distribute controversial literature to spread
hatred among different religious and political groups. They work hard to keep people
divided that they cannot unite and work against Pakistani rule here. They also want to
ensure that there is a big gulf between people of Gilgit Baltistan and people of Azad
Kashmir and people of Jammu and Kashmir on the other side of the LOC.’
He said, ‘Pakistani sponsored Wahabi/ Sunni militants attacked our villages in 1988
and killed hundreds of innocent people. A commission under Justice Usman Ali was
set up to investigate these incidents. The Commission completed its report, but it has
never been published. We demand the publication of Justice Usman Ali Commission
report that facts are known.’
Baba Jaan categorically said, ‘Kashmir dispute is not religious in nature. It was
created by imperial powers to keep the South Asia and this region boiling that they
could advance their interests by fanning the flames. The role of Pakistani rulers is that
of a watchman of these imperial powers.’
He said, ‘Kashmir dispute was not complicated, but it was made complicated by use
of religion and jihadi forces. It was because of these jihad warriors that India had an
opportunity to move in to Kashmir in 1947; and in 1988 in name of azadi another
round jihad was started and provided India with an excuse to kill and crush people.’
He said, ‘We are part of the Kashmir dispute, but all regions are occupied and we all
have to struggle against those who occupy us. India is an occupier on that side and
people are struggling against them. We have no problem from India on this side, so
our struggle cannot be and should not be against India. Our struggle should be against
the country which has its big boot on our neck. We don’t want any lessons from
anyone that we support this or that struggle, or adopt this ideology or that ideology;
our first priority is to remove that big boot from neck that we can breathe.
Baba Jaan further said, ‘We can have unity and coordination and support each other,
but it is unrealistic to expect someone from Srinagar or Muzaffarabad to come here
and fight on my behalf. Similarly we cannot go there and fight on their behalf. Those
people or groups who promote this strategy that we should all liberate Kashmir
occupied by India first are practically advancing Pakistani plan of diverting attention
away from problems we face here and making the struggle more difficult.’
He said, ‘If we become independent then we can support the struggle in other parts,
but how can we support others when we are ourselves occupied and oppressed? We
have enough natural resources that we can feed both India and Pakistan’.
Those who were listening to views of Baba Jaan appreciated his stance and
courageous statement; and agreed that first priority of people of Gilgit Baltistan is to
remove that big boot from their necks which is suffocating them. People of this region
have their own problems and they cannot be expected to ignore these urgent matters
and put all their eggs in basket of the Valley provided by the ISI.
We were told of the Chinese presence in various parts of Hunza. Chinese are taking
out uranium and mibranium (from Chupursan), which is used in the missile
technology. There is a lot of local resentment against the Chinese presence; and in
order to appease the local people China offered to supply them free electricity of 20
megawatt. At present authorities only provide 2 megawatt which is far less then the
local requirement.
Although due to severe shortage of electricity, people suffer in every day life, but they
rejected this offer of China, as they didn’t want to compromise national interest and
future of this region for sake of electricity.
Local people also demanded that they should be linked with Azad Kashmir via Astore
and Neelam Valley. People of this area used to trade with people of Muzaffarabad via
this route before Pakistan took over and discouraged use of this road. Still this road
could be used by jeeps, but with little effort from the Azad Kashmir government and
Gilgit Baltistan they can build a road that people of these two regions can trade and
interact with each other.
If this road is built then it will help people of two regions to strengthen their social,
cultural, political and commercial ties; and imperialists in Islamabad would not like
that, and they would not allow their puppets in Muzaffarabad and in Gilgit to
construct this road. However some students and civilians with help of some experts
are working on a feasibility report and see how they can raise funds to build this road.
Also local people demanded that old route to Ladakh should be opened that people
can interact with each and trade with each other. If for some reason India and Pakistan
cannot agree on that route, Pakistan cannot make any excuse regarding Neelam –
Astore Road. If Pakistan is sincere about welfare and interest of people of Jammu and
Kashmir, including people of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan then they should
practically demonstrate that.
Writer is Head Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst
and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir
View my blog and web:

Sunday, 26 December 2010

Militants Regrouping In Pakistani Kashmir, by Zafar Iqbal

Militants Regrouping In Pakistani Kashmir, by Zafar Iqbal
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 26, 2010 in Kashmir, Pakistan | 0 Comment Edit
Militants Regrouping In Pakistani Kashmir, by Zafar Iqbal

12 November, 2010

Today Kashmir is boiling again. Current unrest started after the killing of a young boy in June has taken at least 112 lives and crippled daily life in Muslim majority parts of Indian held Kashmir. Meanwhile, on the other side of the volatile Himalayan region, Islamic militants have started re-emerging in various cities and towns of Pakistani administrated Kashmir.

The key activists of banned Islamic groups Jaish-e–Muhammad (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) have reportedly been active since last few months. They have been addressing public gatherings and meeting people openly.

Since last few years Pakistan has been battling a fierce war against Taliban and other hard-line Islamic groups. According to official reports, militants have killed over 2,450 army men and thousands of civilians since 2004. Pakistan government has outlawed at least 24 Islamic organizations declaring them a great danger for national security and stability.

Though, political situation in Pakistan administered Kashmir is not as oppressive and alarming as it has been witnessed by independent observers in Indian held Kashmir during last two decades, the public sentiment against Islamabad is not very much different. People in Azad Kashmir have been cautiously witnessing political, administrative and social interventions by the federal government after the catastrophic earthquake in 2005. They have been protesting through local media that Islamabad is intentionally pushing hardcore Islamists to the territory of Kashmir who have reorganized their activities under the garb of earthquake rehabilitators.

The movement of banned outfits has been observed mainly in Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan administered Kashmir. In past, this mountain-clapped city has been sanctuary of different Islamic groups waging war against India in Kashmir. Nevertheless, they had apparently limited their activities or ceased to function openly and aggressively when former Pakistani president Pervez Mushraf put pressure on them after US and Indian intervention.

Recent media reports have indicated that there has been increased Jehadi activity in some of the major cities in Pakistan administered Kashmir.

People are once again witnessing the increased magnitude of public gatherings and processions as they had observed during late ninetees. They are cautiously putting arguments that how Pakistan can afford re-emergence of militant Islam in a highly disputable area which itself is very close to the federal capital posing threat to its own integrity.

A newly found militant outfit- Tahreek Azad e Kashmir( Kashmir Freedom Movement), which has been on the forefront of militant activity in this region, is believed to be a new face of Jammat-ud Dawa (JuD) (the alleged mastermind group behind Mumbai attacks) and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM). Some of the local political groups, mainly pro- independence JKLF have expressed their concern over these new developments. They have warned that such movements could damage the indigenous character of present Kashmir Intifada (as they describe it). If local authorities do not take any action against these militant groups, they will be at large to re-organise and re-launch Jehadi activity against India or Pakistan itself. The Swat saga is not a matter of distant past.

According to reports, the rebirth of pro-militancy organizations has been more remarkable in Neelum valley than other parts of the divided state of the Jammu & Kashmir; the same region which in past have been identified as an incubator of Kashmiri insurgents.

‘Some strangers have hired shops and houses in our area,” says a resident of the Neelum valley, whose name may not be disclosed due to safety reason. People say that radical groups are carrying out their work in pretext of charity job to help the needy, particularly the victims of recent floods.

Neelum valley is the most affected area in Pakistan administered Kashmir hit by devastating floods this year. The Aid agencies have disclosed that recent floods have destroyed above 800 buildings, houses and shops, affecting almost 40,000 people in this area. This calamity ridden region has already paid a heavy price in tense years of post -1989 Kashmir militancy. The proxy war has stopped people’s access to health and education services and ruined socio- economic infrastructure.

Majority of population in the valley is poor and jobless. Several local people have been enrolled by militant organizations to work with them as helpers, another resident has disclosed.

When asked about the identity of those militants, the cautious guide told that mainly they come from Pakistani Northern Pashtun region and Punjab province. “They are not familiar with hilly terrain and local mountainous paths. That’s why they need local support for their mobility to enter into Indian Kashmir,” he said.

Local people in Neelum Valley are again worried about the presence of these non-Kashmiri bearded faces. They foresee that existence of Islamic combats could cause awful bombardment along the Line of Control (LoC) again.

Following years of tension along the LoC (Defecto border between Indian and Pakistani Kashmir) both armies had halted their hostile operations since Nov 26, 2003, when ceasefire came into effect on the 744-km-long and 34 –km-wide border.

Pakistan and India, however, have again started violating the peace agreement. More than four incidents of firing and shelling have been reported in last month. Civilians say that this unusual firing and border skirmishes have escalated fears among them about durability of peace along the volatile LoC.

“We were forced to leave our homes. We lost businesses and our dear ones in the decade-long tension between Pakistani and Indian troops”, says Fatima Bibi with tearful eyes, a victim of recent cross-border tension between India and Pakistan. Her six years old daughter was shot dead when playing outside her home on 20 October, 2010. Sitting near the grave of her daughter, Bibi says that any more war like situation will make her life hell. “I beg to oppressors, don’t kill our children.”

India blames Pakistan for breaching the ceasefire accord, claiming that such shelling facilitates the infiltration of guerillas into Indian controlled Kashmir. Pakistan denies, although, former President Musharraff confessed in an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel that Pakistan had trained the militants to fight against India.

Regardless of the concerns of sane Kashmiri circles about the genuine achievements of current revolt in Kashmir; the Intifada by and large remained separated from the direct clouts of armed groups. This factor projected the representation of public resistance as an aboriginal configuration; brushing away the previous Indian allegations that Pakistan triggers anti-India violence in Kashmir.

This alleged bolstering and pushing radical elements into Pakistani part of Kashmir by Pakistan will cause profound loss to peaceful struggle of Kashmiri people on the other side of the border which in recent months has gained momentum. This totally civilian upsurge has won unprecedented attention of the independent observers all around the world.

(The writer is a freelance journalist. He can be reached at: )

Kashmir And WikiLeaks, by Tariq Shah

Kashmir And WikiLeaks, by Tariq Shah
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 26, 2010 in Kashmir | 0 Comment Edit
Kashmir And WikiLeaks, by Tariq Shah

26 December, 2010

The weighty truth is causing massive leaks of the shaky lies

Goebbelian hogwash

Joseph Gobbles – the propaganda minister for the Third Reich died a consummate liar and a most seasoned propagandist. His disdain for truth in the affairs of statecraft can be summed up in his own words: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it… It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Since India’s position on Kashmir is merely tissue of flimsy lies, it repeatedly keeps unearthing more of the same- -heaps of lies buried under bigger heaps of lies. Here is a case in point: Now we are told, a “terrorist-stone- pelter nexus has been unearthed.”

A recent post in The Hindu (December 23, 2010) carried a tell-all story under the rubric: “Stop force and stone throwing will stop: Kupwara people.” What else do we need to present here to call the new discovery a sham? The only question that remains to be answered is this: When will New Delhi stop the hogwash and start taking Kashmiris seriously? This bunkum justly deserves to be stoned until erased. Would you agree?

The Home Ministry seems to have confused Farooq Abdullah’s falsehood as truth. Farooq Abdullah’s tirades go something like this. “India is written all over Kashmiris’ hearts. To realize its sinister anti-India designs, Pakistan has mesmerized a few anti-India stone- throwing mobsters, under the direction of some Hurriyat morons.”

India, to her own detriment, is conveniently ignoring one time-tested truism about Abdullah clan’s philosophy, which is both historic and historical: As long as you keep an Abdullah at the helm in Kashmir, Kashmir will remain an ‘integral part’. If you remove an Abdullah, they will put up a tent near the plebiscite camp. The moral of this claptrap: The Indian State continues to be such a loser even after decades of political sophistry by the Abdullahs. This, even though their endgame is in sight.

Delusion nationalized

The new mantra from New Delhi is that summer protests were minor incidents of law and order motivated purely by greed for money to engage in ‘Pakistan- sponsored anti-India campaign.’ These protests- – facilitated by the Hurriyat Conference- – were just an ‘aberration’ in the Happy Valley that is otherwise deeply loyal to India. If it were not for the Pakistani sponsorship and Hurriyat facilitation of dissent, these ‘alienated’ youths- – Sonia Gandhi does not know why they are angry- – would be waving the Indian tri-colour atop their rooftops. Alas! Shakespeare is no more alive. In this respect, he would have said this: “Delusion thy name is India.” Joseph Goebbels must be merry-making in hell for his craft continues to be perfected in the land of Chanakya.

Fair comparison?

Let us quickly rewind back to the momentous events of 1971. Can we say this: if it were not for the sinister Indian sponsorship of their dissent, Bengalis and Mukti Bahini of Bangladesh had no reason to fight the Pakistan Army, since they did not want Azaadi from Pakistan. Conversely, can we say: India bribed Mukti-Bahani to fight for independence? If this is a fair comparison folks- – which it doubtless is- – what is the answer?

It is about time that India musters an ounce or two of moral and political courage to admit that her unpopular rule in Kashmir has engendered complete and irreversible alienation of the surging masses protesting on the streets. In an attempt at ‘manufacturing consent’, it finds itself on the back foot to synthesize a Chanakyan alibi for the mounds of stones aimed at its occupation in Kashmir. Smoke may obscure fire, but it certainly cannot douse it. This entire despicable propaganda has been a combination of denial, deception, and dishonesty. Thus, a flaw in its conception has been matched only by the abysmal failure of its redemption. It has made no dents in Kashmir; it has not impressed the Kashmiri street.

Azaadi an aberration?

If interlocutor Padgaonkers’ recent statement that the people of Poonch and Doda are not seeking Azaadi,

is to be taken at its face value, what does it imply for the valley where his mission of “ball-to- ball commentary” started several weeks ago? The implication is that Kashmiris in the valley are asking for Azaadi. Well, we might as well concede that reality. Why confuse the Indian masses by obfuscating this reality, why talk about development and governance? Where is the need for the “half-in and half- out” double-speak? What profit does it bring to the Indian nation, or what peace does it bring to your conscience? The Goebbelian spin-mastery has not delivered India from the difficult situation it has been facing in the valley, nor will its Machiavellian machination or Chanakyan deception salvage its lost morality to rule Kashmir. India’s ‘duplicity’- – by now world- famous– is no glorious craft; it is a sham, and a shame. You can take it only so far. It can do only so much for you.

Evil Leaks

Truth and falsehood share one characteristic. Both leak, albeit for the two opposite reasons. Truth leaks under its sheer weight, and falsehood leaks due to lack of weight. Gautama Buddha once rhetorically asked: “What is evil?”, and the proceeded to explain: “Killing is evil, lying is evil, slandering is evil, abuse is evil…, and, to cling to false doctrine is evil; [and] Desire and illusion are roots of evil.”

New Delhi has shown its unrelenting desire to deceive the Kashmiri masses to keep them under its occupation. It has killed them in thousands, spread lies about their resistance, and slandered their purely Political Rights Movement by casting it as terrorism. It has incarcerated or silenced the votaries of its freedom, clinging to the ill-conceived desire that Kashmiris will eventually surrender before India’s military might and economic prowess. This is what Gautama Buddha called evil!

The recent ‘disclosure’- – although this is no disclosure to the common Kashmiri- – by WikiLeaks that the United States knew of the Indian States’ systematic use of torture in Kashmir, but chose to remain silent, demonstrates that both nations have lied- – one through perpetrating and concealing repression, and the other by ignoring the repression. Together, the two ‘largest democracies’ have made mockery of sanctity of human rights, and encouraged an entrenched culture of impunity for the Indian security forces.

By subjugating Kashmir through repression or by ignoring it through silence, it has turned out to be “a plague on both your houses.” Both democracies have lost the moral rights to claims of being votaries of human rights, or the champions of democracy. Both have strategically contributed new ‘root causes’ for global terrorism. Both have made life potentially more insecure for their own fellow citizens, and for the rest of us. Thus, both must be held accountable in the eyes of the international community, and in the eyes of their own unsuspecting citizenry.

As for the inhabitants of Kashmir, WikiLeaks are no leaks at all. They have been the victims of the State-sponsored terrorism for several decades under the watchful gaze of the Western powers and their institutions- -with their eyes wide shut.

“e pur si muove”

‘It still moves’- – has gone down as one of history’s most telling rebukes to skeptics and naysayers – - a rebuke that has been ascribed to Galileo Galilee. His heliocentric views (the Earth revolves around the Sun, which itself is stationary) ran into direct conflict with the Church’s geocentric views (the Earth is the center of the universe and other objects orbit around it). He vehemently argued that the planet earth circled around the star Sun, not the reverse.

His truthfulness was enough to earth-shake the zealots of the powerful Church, who took a very serious view of his ‘blasphemous’ views, and gave him a choice between recantation and gallows. What may appear to be Galileo’s ‘stupidity, ignorance, and arrogance’ got the best of him, and he chose to tell the truth, as he saw it. Although he was spared the death sentence, he was sent to cool his heels in prison.

On his way to his prison cell, many heard him muttering: ” e pur si muove’ (but it still moves) – - and thereafter continued forever to wonder: “What would you say of these learned who… have steadfastly refused to cast a glance through the telescope? What shall we make of this? Shall we laugh, or shall we cry? …if they had seen what we see, they would have judged as we judge.” It took the Catholic Church five centuries to exonerate his ‘gross indiscretions’ but they exonerated him nevertheless.

That brings us to Arundhati Roy, the modern day socio-political and literary Galileo, whose ‘indiscretions, ignorance, and arrogance’ have squarely landed her in the political crossfire, and on top of loads of land mines of fuzzy patriotism, at display in the drawing rooms of India’s ultra nationalists that are plagued by an ostrich mindset with regard to Kashmir.

If these blinkered ‘patriots’ had taken care to remove their blinders while looking at Kashmir, they would have judged as Arundhati Roy has judged: “Kashmir has never been an integral part of India.” As luck would have it, each day there is a new Arundhati Roy coming to fore in India. The weighty truth is causing massive leaks of the shaky lies.

By silencing saner voices or by postponing a peaceful settlement of the dispute, Kashmir may continue to remain a geographical appendage to India but it will never become its integral part. This self-evident political, historical and geographical fact cannot be obliterated by the confusing jargon of scholars, the misplaced emotions of ultra nationalists, the dishonest discourse of journalists, verbal jugglery of the Abdullah’s or Muftis, fuzzy patriotism of the saffron zealots, or the day-dreaming of the status quo strategists.

M.K Gandhi On His Conviction For Sedition, by Mahatma Gandhi

M.K Gandhi On His Conviction For Sedition, by Mahatma Gandhi
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 26, 2010 in India | 0 Comment Edit
M.K Gandhi On His Conviction For Sedition, by Mahatma Gandhi

M.K Gandhi On His Conviction For Sedition: A selection from Gandhi’s closing statement to the judge on March 23, 1922.

I owe it perhaps to the Indian public and to the public in England to placate which this prosecution is mainly taken up that I should explain why from a stanch loyalist and cooperator I have become an uncompromising disaffectionist and non-cooperator. To the court too I should say why I plead guilty to the charge of promoting disaffection toward the government established by law in India.

My public life began in 1893 in South Africa in troubled weather. My first contact with British authority in that country was not of a happy character. I discovered that as a man and as an Indian I had no rights. More correctly, I discovered that I had no rights as a man because I was an

But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of Indians was an excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically and mainly good. I gave the government my voluntary and hearty cooperation, criticizing it freely where I felt it was faulty but never wishing its destruction.


I came reluctantly to the conclusion that the British connection had made India more helpless than she ever was before, politically and economically. A disarmed India has no power of resistance against any aggressor if she wanted to engage in an armed conflict with him. So much is this the case that some of our best men consider that India must take generations before she can achieve the Dominion status. She has become so poor that she has little power of resisting famines. Before the British advent, India spun and wove in her millions of cottages just the supplement she needed for adding to her meager agricultural resources. This cottage industry, so vital for India’s existence, has been ruined by incredibly heartless and inhuman processes as described by English witnesses. Little do town dwellers know how the semi-starved masses of India are slowly sinking to lifelessness. Little do they know that their miserable comfort represents the brokerage they get for the work they do for the foreign exploiter, that the profits and the brokerage get sucked from the masses. Little do they realize that the government established by law in British India is carried on for the exploitation of the
masses. No sophistry, no jugglery in figures can explain away the evidence that the skeletons in many villages present to the naked eye.

I have no doubt whatsoever that both England and the town dwellers of India will have to answer, if there is a God above, for this crime against humanity, which is perhaps unequaled in history. The law itself in this country has been used to serve the foreign exploiter. My unbiased examination of the Punjab Martial Law cases has led me to believe that ninety-five per cent of the convictions were wholly bad. My experience of political cases in India leads me to the conclusion that in nine out of every ten the condemned men were totally innocent. Their crime consisted in the love of their country. In ninety-nine cases out of a hundred justice has been denied to Indians as against Europeans in the courts of India.This is not an exaggerated picture. It is the experience of almost every Indian who has had anything to do with such cases. In my opinion the administration of the law is thus prostituted consciously or unconsciously for the benefit of the exploiter.

The greatest misfortune is that Englishmen and their Indian associates in the administration of the country do not know that they are engaged in the crime I have attempted to describe. I am satisfied that many Englishmen and Indian officials honestly believe that they are administering one of the best systems devised in the world and that India is making steady though slow progress. They do not know that a subtle but effective system of terrorism and an organized display of force on the one hand, and the deprivation of all powers of retaliation or self-defense on the other, have emasculated the people and induced in them the habit of simulation. This awful habit has added to the ignorance and the self-deception of the administrators. Section 124-A, under which I am happily charged, is perhaps the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizens. Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law. If one has an affection(sic) for a person or system, one should be free to give the fullest expression to his disaffection, so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite to violence. But the section under which Mr.Banker [a colleague in non-violence] and I are charged is one under which mere promotion of disaffection is a crime. I have studied some of the cases tried under it, and I know that some of the most loved of India’s patriots have been convicted under it. I consider it a privilege, therefore, to be charged under that section. I have endeavored to give in their briefest outline the reasons for my disaffection. I have no personal ill will against any single administrator, much less can I have any disaffection toward the King’s person. But I hold it to be a virtue to be disaffected toward a government which in its totality has done more harm to India than any previous system. India is less manly under the British rule than
she ever was before. Holding such a belief, I consider it to be a sin to have affection for the system. And it has been a precious privilege for me to be able to write what I have in the various articles tendered in evidence against me.

In fact, I believe that I have tendered a service to India and England by showing in non-cooperation the way out of the unnatural state in which both are living. In my humble opinion, non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good. But in the past, non-cooperation has been deliberately expressed in violence to the evildoer. I am endeavoring to show to my countrymen that violent non-cooperation only multiplies evil and that as evil can only be sustained by violence, withdrawal of support for evil requires complete abstention from violence. Non-violence implies voluntary submission to the penalty of non-cooperation with evil. I am here, therefore, to invite and submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can be inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen. The only course open to you, the judge, is either to resign your post, and thus dissociate yourself from evil if you feel that the
law you are called upon to administer is an evil and that in reality I am innocent, or to inflict upon me the severest penalty if you believe that the system and the law you are assisting to administer are good for the people of this country and that my activity is therefore injurious to the public weal

A selection from Gandhi’s closing statement to the judge on March 23, 1922.

Wednesday, 22 December 2010

Morarji had told US he would act if Pak exploded a nuke bomb

Morarji had told US he would act if Pak exploded a nuke bomb
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 22, 2010 in India, Pakistan | 0 Comment Edit
Morarji had told US he would act if Pak exploded a nuke bomb
PTI, Dec 22, 2010, 11.28am IST

WASHINGTON: Refusing to enter into any formal agreement with Pakistan on non-use and non-development of nuclear weapons, the then Prime Minister Morarji Desai had told the US in 1979 that if Islamabad exploded a nuclear bomb, he would act to “smash it,” a declassified US memo shows.

The conversation that transpired between Desai and the then US ambassador to India Robert F Goheen in a one-on-one meeting in June 1979 have been made public as part of a series of declassified documents yesterday.

The meeting with Desai that lasted for about 55 minutes was held at the instance of Goheen who was following the direction of the National Security Council of White House to meet the Prime Minister on an “informal, exploratory and non-committal” basis.

Starting with the premise that Washington wanted to work with New Delhi to “deflect” the Pakistani nuclear threat, Goheen could get across the idea that “India is an essential part of any solution”.

Desai, however, was not interested in the idea of a joint agreement on the non-use and non-development of weapons, the cable said.

Arguing that he had already made a pledge to that effect, Desai said that if Pakistan did the same “the two pledges would be as good as a joint agreement”.

He rejected Goheen’s suggestion that a formal agreement would be more effective and dismissed altogether the nuclear weapons free zone concept.

Responding to Goheen’s query about a prospective Indian reaction to a Pakistani weapons test, the prime minister was belligerent: “If he discovered that Pakistan was ready to test a bomb or if it exploded one, he would act at (once) ‘to smash it,” the cable said.

Desai said he had recently assured Pakistan Foreign Secretary Shahnawaz that India had only good intentions towards Pakistan and wished to do nothing to cause it difficulties, but also that “if Pakistan tries any tricks we will smash you,” the cable says.

“I gather that he went on to remind Shahnawaz of 1965 and 1971 in order to emphasise India’s readiness to react forcibly when sufficiently provoked,” Goheen wrote in his secret cable giving details of his meeting with Morarji Desai.

Pakistan finally went nuclear in 1998 after India’s second nuclear test in Pokharan.

Goheen wrote Desai said India will not accept the idea of a joint non-development, non-use agreement with Pakistan.

He said he had already made a unilateral pledge, if Pakistan did likewise the two pledges would be as good as a joint statement.

“When I said that governments change, and more formal agreements may have greater influence on future governments than unilateral pledges, he laughed, said that was not necessarily the case and added ‘look at you and Tarapur’.

“He could not bind a future government in any case, but hoped the course he had laid down would have influence, US Ambassador Goheen wrote.

Another declassified secret memo, about a June 29, 1979 meeting of National Intelligence Officer presided over by the then CIA Deputy Director Frank Carlucci said “Indians would be strongly motivated to prevent acquisition by the Pakistanis of a nuclear capability by military force”.

According to another declassified document of July 1979, with the Pakistani nuclear programme moving forward, NIO John Despres believed that India was likely to move more quickly in producing an “acceptable nuclear weapon,” although it would take “at least two years”.

If diplomacy did not check the Pakistani nuclear programme, India was likely to “improve its unilateral military options” to take preventive action, but “pre-emptive air strikes” would not be on the table unless the production of a Pakistani bomb was imminent or Pakistan had acquired “an invulnerable capability to stockpile” fissile materials, it said.

Read more: Morarji had told US he would act if Pak exploded a nuke bomb – The Times of India

Pakistan’s nuke arsenal bigger than India’s

Pakistan’s nuke arsenal bigger than India’s
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 22, 2010 in India, Pakistan | 0 Comment Edit
Pakistan’s nuke arsenal bigger than India’s
Rajat Pandit, TNN, Jun 3, 2010, 04.17am IST

Tags:SIPRI|Pakistan|Nuke Arsenal|India|China

Swedish report reveals Pak’s nuke plans
NEW DELHI: After racing ahead of India in ballistic and cruise missiles, with covert help from China and North Korea, Pakistan seems to be surging ahead on the nuclear front too.

A series of recent estimates by international nuclear watchdogs and reputed thinktanks hold that Pakistan has a total of 70 to 90 warheads compared to India’s 60 to 80. China, in comparison, has around 240 warheads.

Even as global fears about the possibility of jihadis gaining access to Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, enriched uranium or technical know-how continue, its deadly inventory is only going to expand in the coming years.

Pakistan, after all, is supplementing its ongoing enriched uranium-based nuke programme with a weapons-grade plutonium one. Its two new heavy-water reactors being built at Khushab nuclear facility, with China’s help, are clearly geared towards producing weapons-grade plutonium, as reported by TOI earlier.

In its latest annual world military expenditure report released on Wednesday, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said Pakistan’s weapons-grade plutonium production would jump seven-fold with the two new reactors at Khushab nearing completion.

“Our conservative estimates are that Pakistan has 60 warheads and could produce 100 nuclear weapons at short notice,” said SIPRI, adding that Islamabad had earmarked its US-supplied F-16 fighters, Ghaznavi and Shaheen missiles as its nuke delivery systems.

India’s nuclear weapons programme, in turn, has largely been plutonium-based, basically centred around the Pu-239 produced in research reactors like Cirus and Dhruva at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre.

Nuclear arsenals of India, Pakistan, and even China, pale in comparison to the gigantic ones of the two former Cold War foes, US and Russia. SIPRI estimates there are a whopping 22,600 active, inactive and stored nuclear warheads around the globe, enough to destroy it several times over.

While Russia has 12,000 warheads, 4,630 of them “deployed” ones, US has 9,600, which includes 2,468 of them operational. The two have, however, recently decided to slash their inventories by nearly one-third.

France comes third with 300, followed by UK with 225. Israel, which like India and Pakistan is not a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, completes the list of the eight countries with nuclear weapons, with an arsenal of 80 warheads. Then, there is also North Korea, which has produced “enough plutonium for a small number of warheads”, SIPRI said.

All these figures are not exact because countries keep their nuclear weapons programmes in thick cloaks of secrecy, which is only now being lifted by countries like US and UK.

India has been concerned about Pakistan’s drive to bolster its nuclear arsenal over the past few years. While India has a clear and declared `no-first use’ nuclear weapons doctrine, Pakistan has kept it vague to use as a tool to offset India’s conventional military superiority.

Moreover, there is continuing controversy in India over whether the country has a credible thermonuclear or hydrogen bomb, given that a few experts contend the 45-kiloton thermonuclear device tested under the Pokhran-II tests in 1998 was “a fizzle”.

The armed forces also remain quite worried about the lack of SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles) and ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) in their armoury, which are needed for a credible deterrent and for robust second-strike capabilities against both Pakistan and China.

At present, only the short-range Prithvi missile (150-350km) and the 700km range Agni-I have been fully operationalized till now. Agni-II (over 2,000km) and Agni-III (3,500km) are still in the process of being inducted by the Strategic Forces Command. India’s most ambitious strategic missile Agni-V, with a 5,000km range, in turn, will be tested for the first time only by early-2011 or so.

Nuclear Warheads (Source: SIPRI)

Russia: 12,000
US: 9,600
France: 300
UK: 225
China: 240
Pakistan: 70-90
Israel: 80
India: 60-80

Read more: Pakistan’s nuke arsenal bigger than India’s – The Times of India

Monday, 20 December 2010

Daily Times EDITORIAL explaining ISI and CIA conflict - An unfriendly act

Daily Times EDITORIAL explaining ISI and CIA conflict - An unfriendly act

Pakistan is in the midst of yet another controversy. Jonathan Banks, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) chief in Pakistan, had to flee the country last week after reportedly receiving serious threats to his life. An application against the CIA chief was submitted by a resident of North Waziristan, Karim Khan, to the Secretariat Police Station in Islamabad whereby Mr Khan has alleged that his son and brother were killed in a drone strike and since Mr Banks oversees the drone attacks, he should be held responsible for their deaths. It is now being reported that because of the police’s hesitation to take action against Mr Banks, he was able to leave the country. What remains a mystery though is who could have leaked the name of the CIA chief to the drone victims’ family. According to the New York Times, “The American officials said they strongly suspected that operatives of Pakistan’s powerful spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence [ISI], had a hand in revealing the CIA officer’s identity — possibly in retaliation for a civil lawsuit filed in Brooklyn last month implicating the ISI chief [Lieutenant-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha] in the Mumbai terrorist attacks of November 2008.”

Blowing the cover of the CIA chief and his subsequent departure from Pakistan is not a small matter. The Americans will not take it kindly and this would be seen as an unfriendly act by the US’s frontline ally in the war against terror if the ISI did out Mr Banks’ name. Even though the ISI has vehemently denied this allegation by calling it “a slur” that “can create differences between the two organisations [the ISI and CIA]”, it is not unnatural that the finger of suspicion is pointing towards Pakistan’s top spy agency. Mr Banks was reportedly here on a business visa, meaning thereby that he was operating undercover. To find out his identity is no mean task and could not have been done without the help of our intelligence agencies, who are the only ones to have access to such sensitive information. If indeed the ISI exposed the CIA chief in retaliation for the lawsuit filed against the ISI chief in the US, it could have grave repercussions for our country. Complaints against the ISI have been lodged in Pakistani courts over the years yet that has never bothered the spy agency before. It is unclear what prompted the ISI to indulge in this seemingly tit-for-tat move against the Americans. The US is not very happy with Pakistan’s double game vis-à-vis the Taliban in the first place; outing the CIA chief under such circumstances is akin to provocation of a serious nature. There is already immense pressure on Pakistan to launch a military offensive in North Waziristan to take out the Taliban safe havens. Drone attacks have also increased in recent months and the message from the US is loud and clear: if you are not willing to take action against the Taliban, we will.

After the CIA chief debacle, the US might be forced to take some even more drastic action. Given our military establishment’s track record, the possibility of the ISI’s role in this incident cannot be overlooked. If this is true, did the ISI not realise the implications of angering the Americans to an extent that could lead to a stand-off between the superpower and Pakistan? If the ISI is indeed responsible for blowing Mr Banks’ cover, we could be in for a lot of trouble in coming days.\12\20\story_20-12-2010_pg3_1

Sunday, 19 December 2010

Understanding reached on stapled visa issue, says Indian envoy

Understanding reached on stapled visa issue, says Indian envoy
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 19, 2010 in India, Kashmir | 0 Comment Edit
Understanding reached on stapled visa issue, says Indian envoy
Press Trust Of India
Beijing, December 19, 2010

India and China have agreed to “appropriately resolve” the issue of stapled visas to the residents of Jammu and Kashmir with an understanding that officials will continue to meet on the issue, Indian envoy to China S Jaishankar said on Sunday, following Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to New
The issue of issuance of stapled visas to residents of Jammu and Kashmir, which has raised concerns of sovereignty and integrity of India, figured prominently during the bilateral talks between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Wen.
Speaking at a prime time show on the state-run CCTV Beijing, Jaishankar said stapled visas was one of issues that “caught a lot of attention” during the visit of Wen.
“This (stapled visas) caused a lot public resentment in India. Here again it was candidly discussed, (during the talks between Wen and Singh).
“There was an understanding that officials will meet and this would be appropriately resolved. Few months from now if I am sitting with you I might give you more positive outlook on this issue,” he said, adding the issue raised concerns over the sovereignty and integrity of India.
The differences over the unsettled border issues also figured high in the Wen-Singh talks.
“Border is complicated issue. It is a border of 3500 km (Chinese official media says only 2000 km omitting about 1600 km on the Jammu and Kashmir front) most of it is unsettled. So it is complicated negotiations” being conducted by the Special Representatives of both the countries, he said.
The two sides held the 14th round of border talks before Wen’s visit to India.
“The most important development so far is that borders remained peaceful and tranquil and that we have agreements in 1993, 1996 and 2005 to ensure nothing goes wrong at the borders. With 3500 km long borders anything can go wrong,” he said.
So far “we actually worked guiding principles and political parameters on how to settle the border. So we have a framework in which we are actually moving to settle the border,” he said.
“This comes down to practicalities on the ground,” he said stressing that patience is required.
Jaishankar sounded upbeat about achieving the $ 100 billion trade target set for 2015 and was positive on the Premier’s promise that China will be “more open” to prime Indian products like IT, pharmaceuticals and agro products.
“Let me make a prediction. We will reach the goal much faster than 2015. I think to reach it what we need to see is much more balanced trade picture,” he said.
He insisted that the positive outcome of the visit was the assurance to address longstanding Indian concerns of market access to Chinese markets.
“We heard directly from the Prime Minister himself that China would be more open in all these areas,” he said.

Let this not happen with Baluchistan

Let this not happen with Baluchistan
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 19, 2010 in Pakistan | 0 Comment Edit
Let this not happen with Baluchistan

We always create conspiracy theories about any suffered incident.. We blame India and Bengali leadership responsible for the separation of East Pakistan but never blame ourselves..we always do this for hiding route causes and our faults.
The route cause of separation of East Pakistan is exploitation of Bengalis..There are some major Facts:
•Urdu was imposed over their Bengali language, they always opposed it..
•They were deprived of Govt Jobs.
•Bureaucracy was imposed on them from West Pakistan Even Governors of East Pakistan were exported from West Pakistan.
•Majority of Military and civil bureaucracy was from west Pakistan.
•They were economically exploited, a large ratio of income from East Pakistan was being spent in west Pakistan.
•What was the role of AL-Shams and Al-Badar?
•why Mujeeb was not allowed to establish his Government ,beside the fact he was having majority?
•whenever u r exploiting the People , obviously you are giving a good chance to the Forces against your how can we blame only India?
•I am sorry to say,the role of Our Army was same as we see now in Baluchistan.
The circumstances are same as during separation of East Pakistan and now in Baluchistan, our Govts of different times always have been giving bonuses and rarities to tribal Chiefs ,they did nothing for poor Baluchistan. More than 80 percent population of the largest and richest province is deprived of their basic needs. I visited several times, you can even find people who even don’t know what electricity is…They travel for miles to get few glasses of drinking water which is always impure and causes diseases..

Are we not repeating blunders of our Past ????

Sarmad Aziz,
NSF Lahore.

Officials dismiss China's Kashmir border claims

Officials dismiss China's Kashmir border claims
Indian officials on Sunday were dismissive of Chinese claims that their position on the length of the disputed border with India – which China has recently described as 2,000 km and not 3,488 km as India does – remained consistent and unchanged.

Chinese analysts on Sunday refuted media reports which said China had recently disregarded a 1,500 km stretch of the border, between Jammu and Kashmir in India and Xinjiang and Tibet in China, in its references of the disputed border, suggesting new Chinese claims over Kashmir.

Hu Shisheng, a strategic analyst at the China Institutes for Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), told The Hindu it had always been China's position that the length of the border was 2,000 km. It did not include the disputed western section and Indian claims on the entire region of Kashmir, including Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). China's position was that the region is disputed and for India and Pakistan to settle, and hence could not be considered as part of the dispute with India.

“The so-called “4000 km” border length is calculated by the Indian side, which includes the curved Aksai Chin and Pakistan-administered Kashmir,” he said. “According to your map, Pakistan is not bordering with China, which is not accepted by both Pakistan and China.” China's position had been consistent since its 1963 treaty with Pakistan, holding that it would remap its border after India and Pakistan settled the Kashmir dispute, with whichever side eventually holds the territory.

But Indian officials say even though China had never accepted India's 3,488 km characterisation, it was only since late 2009 that references to a 2,000 km length began appearing in the Chinese official media.

“The 2000 km reference is of much more recent vintage,” a senior Indian official told The Hindu.

As for China's position that the western sections were for India to settle with Pakistan, officials said that only as recently as the 1990s, China was prepared to discuss the western section and exchange maps. The exchange was eventually refused by both sides. Chinese claims on the western section then surprised Indian officials by including regions in Kashmir beyond Aksai Chin, which China currently occupies, though there is no record of the maps.

Widening claims

Officials said the 2,000 km reference could signal a widening of China's claims as part of an ongoing negotiating strategy.

References began to appear in the Chinese media not long after the conclusion of the 13th round of border talks. The 14th round was held in Beijing last month. In 2009, the Indian officials also voiced objections to China issuing stapled visas to Indian citizens of Jammu and Kashmir, saying the move questioned Indian sovereignty.

“But China is right in saying it has been consistent in never accepting India's characterisation of 4,000 km,” said Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor of Chinese studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. “China has never recognised any dispute in the Aksai Chin area.” The 2,000 km, he noted, mainly referred to the disputed eastern section in Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims as “southern Tibet.”

“The question that needs to be asked is how China classifies the length of the border with Pakistan,” added Zorawar Daulet Singh of the Centre for Policy Alternatives in New Delhi, who co-authored a book on the border dispute. “If the 2,000 km length means entire Jammu and Kashmir is with Pakistan, or is treated as a sovereign state, in either case it is an outcome that is adverse to India.”

But Chinese analysts played down claims that China was changing its stance. “For China, Kashmir is a dispute between India and Pakistan, and this is a position that is unchanged,” said Rong Ying, vice president of the China Institute of International Studies. “What is important is the two sides continue talking, and when the time comes, they can agree on the length of the border.”

The value of a nuclear Iran

The value of a nuclear Iran
By Chan Akya

Ever since the UN Security Council imposed new sanctions on Iran last week after the country refused to stop enriching uranium, concerns have mounted over the possibility of a nuclear-type conflict in the Middle East involving the United States, Israel, Iran and perhaps a host of Arab countries including Saudi Arabia.

Whilst the descent towards war may well prove inevitable over the course of 2011, this article explores the strategic necessities of the other side of the equation; namely the question of just how

bad a nuclear-armed Iran would be in what is considered the most volatile neighborhood in the world.

By far the most interesting leak that surfaced from the US cable disclosures is the repeated insistence of the Saudi king exhorting the United States to withdraw from Iraq by taking a detour through Iran. As Reuters reported on the WikiLeaks story on November 29:
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly exhorted the United States to "cut off the head of the snake" by launching military strikes to destroy Iran's nuclear program, according to leaked U.S. diplomatic cables.

A copy of the cable dated April 20, 2008, was published in the New York Times web site on Sunday after being released by the whistleblowing web site WikiLeaks. The classified communication between the US Embassy in Riyadh and Washington showed the Saudis feared Shi'ite Iran's rising influence in the region, particularly in neighboring Iraq.

The United States has repeatedly said that the military option is on the table, but at the same time US military chiefs have made clear they view it as a last resort, fearing it could ignite wider conflict in the Middle East.

The April 2008 cable detailed a meeting between General David Petraeus, the top US military commander in the Middle East, and then US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, and King Abdullah and other Saudi princes.

At the meeting, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir "recalled the King's frequent exhortations to the US to attack Iran and so put an end to its nuclear weapons program," the cable said.

"He told you to cut off the head of the snake," Jubeir was reported to have said.

The sentiment broaches some obvious questions in the minds of anyone who is not beholden to the Saudi establishment or part of the George W Bush - Dick Cheney oil coterie.

Firstly, what is the snake that King Abdullah refers to?

There are multiple possibilities about the nature of the snake. One possibility is that the king referred to the Persians, or more likely the Shi'ite masses as the snake; with Iran as its head. While this view would certainly confirm with the Saudi/Wahhabi orthodoxy in respect of Islam and its evolution over the past 1,000 years, it doesn't make much for common ground with the United States. Americans are (presumably) neutral with respect to the different denominations of Islam, in the sense that they are already at war in two predominantly Sunni areas (northern Iraq and Afghanistan) and are embroiled in wars across Shi'ite regions in the southern part of Iraq, as well as the Reagan-era animosity towards Shi'ite Iran.

The snakes in the sands
There is something deliciously self-serving about Saudi exhortations for the US to act on Iran to prevent the rise of a new power in the Middle East, especially if the US were to step back and ask a tougher question about the role of "other snakes".

In case that is too obtuse, what I am referring to is the "snake" of religious terrorism, and in particular the problem of disaffected youth in predominantly Sunni kingdoms such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait et al; as well as those in anarchies such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is not entirely clear that the natural enemy of such youth is necessarily the Americans; more likely, it is the established order of the Middle East, where the wealth of nations is controlled by a bunch of aging monarchies.

This snake of religious terrorism is the one that bit the US on 9/11. Most of the hijackers on September 11, 2001, were of Saudi origin and despite nominally falling under the leadership of Osama bin Laden it stands to reason that they were mainly disenchanted due to the stifling anti-democracy of Saudi Arabia and the inherent hypocrisy of Wahhabism in a country that spent most of its time kowtowing to the Americans.

Fearing the tactical nightmare of dealing with hundreds if not thousands of these disaffected youth, America and Europe chose to make the strategic blunder of supporting the crumbling monarchies as long as they attacked their own youth. This was a stupid bargain, to put it mildly.

A sustainable situation would be to engender wider regime change in the Middle East by booting out the creaking and corrupt monarchies, to be replaced progressively with Islamic leaders capable of taking a development-oriented approach to their countries. To ensure this new generation of Middle East leaders do not get overly tempted by the possibilities of attacking America or Israel, it would be necessary to have a "natural" check in the region - namely Iran.

As a nominally democratic state with a strong theological association with Shi'ite philosophy, Iran's potential to disrupt the stale status quo in the Middle East has been well known since 1979. The US along with various Sunni kingdoms egged on Saddam Hussein in his murderous war against Iran, in itself a war of survival for the minority Sunni community of Iraq against the plural majority Shi'ite population.

The atrocities that Saddam and his henchmen visited upon the Shi'ite population in southern Iraq are well known. Iran also suffered hundreds of thousands in casualties among its civilian population; atrocities committed by the Sunni regime of Iraq for which no means of accounting was even attempted by either the Europeans or the Americans; those so-called paragons of human rights.

Australia gets it right
Contrast the Saudi stance with that of Australia, a consistent ally of the United States and the United Kingdom for the past 60 years. As Reuters reported on December 13:
Australia is at odds with its major security ally the United States over Iran, saying it is not a "rogue state" and its nuclear weapons program is for deterrence, not attack, according to US cables released by WikiLeaks. The documents, published in the Sydney Morning Herald on Monday, also reveal that Australia's top security organization believes Tehran sees a "grand bargain" with the United States as its best way to ensure national security.

But the Office of National Assessments (ONA) shared Washington's fears that Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons could lead to conventional or nuclear war, noting a conflict between Israel and Iran was the greatest challenge to Middle East stability.

The ONA was also concerned that nuclear proliferation in the Middle East may drive Southeast Asian nations to pursue their own nuclear capabilities. "It's a mistake to think of Iran as a 'rogue state'," then ONA chief Peter Varghese told the United States in a briefing, according to the 2008 US diplomatic cables from Canberra. The cables said the ONA sought a balanced view of Tehran as a sophisticated diplomatic player rather than one liable to behave impulsively or irrationally.
The Australians are correct in their assessment, even if it was only made because of their fears that a nuclear conflagration in the Middle East would spark a rush towards nuclear weapons by Indonesia (the world's largest Muslim country and a close enough neighbor to worry Australian policymakers). Whatever their motives, the Australians may have hit the nail on the head - namely, that the West should take a balanced approach to this problem.

What about Israel?
Any argument in support of Iran, though, automatically falls at the door of the hysterical pronouncements of the Iranian leadership from Israel. There is little doubt in the minds of most right-thinking Jews and Americans that given half a chance, Iran would quite literally proceed to "wipe Israel off the map" as the president of Iran proudly claimed last year.

This is a serious worry in terms of the West or anyone else engaging Iran, primarily because there doesn't appear to be any motivation within the Iranian leadership to change attitudes towards Israel nor is there any apparent popular pressure in the country to do so. If anything, the proverbial "man on the street" is as inimical to the interests of Israel as the half-crazy leadership of Iran.

That said, there have to be other considerations too. Firstly, it is unlikely that Iran actually has the ability and, distinctly, the willingness to withstand a Jewish state counter-attack (let alone American) should it ever contemplate an attack on Israel. With over 200 nuclear bombs at its command (some estimates even say 400), Israel is no pushover when it comes to retaliation.

Secondly, one has to sit back and examine what exactly the Iranians can claim to gain by the endeavor of pursuing this goal - precious nothing. Compare that to the direct benefit of addressing their key problem, namely a decline in the production and export of oil that Iran faces on a daily basis. Other authors - including my Asia Times Online colleague Spengler - have mentioned the dire straits of the Iranian economy with its over-reliance on falling oil exports.

Putting fear and greed together, the answer to engaging Iran is surely the expansion of Iranian influence over Shi'ite oil-producing areas around the Persian Gulf. A critical examination of this aspect could well be the key to resolving both the Middle East conundrum and containing the further spread of Wahhabi terrorism globally.

Shi'ite oil
There is something of a truism in the energy industry that while Sunni states may claim ownership of oil reserves, most oil-producing areas are actually in regions populated exclusively or extensively by Shi'ite groups. For example, The Energy Bulletin published the following table in December 2008, in an article entitled "Shia Islam and oil geopolitics" by James Leigh; the table highlights the predominance of Shi'ite (Shia) populations in the regions with significant oil reserves.

The article highlights a key point:
The Gulf states of Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, have 81.3 million Shia or about 61% of the total Gulf population. Further, if we just take the Shia populations of the five nations of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE holding 58% of world oil reserves, we see Shia make up a total of 62% of their populations. Clearly the Shia have the potential for significant influence over this whole Gulf region through their own nations and also ultimately to the world. Of course they could also wield regional and world influence through their solid representation in OPEC.
A closer look at the exclusively Arab portions of the "oil map" is disturbing to say the least for the average Sunni fanatic. A number of key oil fields in various Arab states adjoining the "Arabian" Gulf (which is of course called the "Persian" Gulf in the rest of the world) are in areas with predominantly Shi'ite populations, the principal ones being Bahrain and Al-Hasa (a region that was under Bahrain during the time of the Ottoman empire).

This then is the core of the Saudi worry about Iran. An expansion of the Shi'ite state could provoke grave unrest within Saudi Arabian borders but also limit the country's ability to suppress dissent from its young and restless, a scenario that must provoke the greatest concern among all the crown princes as they mull the succession from King Abdullah.

Looking ahead
The prospect of a nuclear Iran certainly creates its share of worries, not the least of which is the likely expansion of a theater of war away from the Middle East towards Europe and Asia. The country's attitudes towards Israel are also a matter of deep concern. However, if one assumes that an expansion of the Iranian military in non-conventional weapons is a certainty in an environment where the United States as a declining superpower is unable to intervene militarily, then the next best option - namely to harness this new emerging power - should certainly be examined closely.

The primary advantage of a nuclear Iran and a rising Shi'ite state would be the instability it engenders in today's predominantly Sunni- and Wahhabi-controlled Middle East. That is not a bad thing as both America and Europe have precious little to show for their engagement of Saudi Arabia and neighboring kingdoms in the nine years since 9/11 and the West's attempts to curtail al-Qaeda. Instead, the rise of Iran could well promote the kind of reforms that have thus far been eschewed by Arab kingdoms, and in turn create the conditions for greater stability over the long run.

(Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Saturday, 18 December 2010

India misread Kashmir situation?

India misread Kashmir situation?
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 19, 2010 in India, Kashmir | 0 Comment Edit
India misread Kashmir situation?
NEW DELHI: Just how badly India underestimated the capacity of Pakistan-based jihadi outfits to combine with Kashmiri separatists — while also ignoring the growth of local alienation — comes through in its assessment that the Valley may have turned the corner.

In a February, 2009 cable the US embassy reports that “GOI believes the political and security environment today in Kashmir is such that the state could be poised for a sustained period of reconciliation and prosperity.”

The Indian government believed that “Kashmiris have rejected the agendas of the Pakistani jihadis and Kashmiri separatists, and are now ready to turn the page away from violence and are seeking good governance and normalisation.” The Indians were “particularly elated” by a high turnout, low violence election in J&K.

The assessment ascribed to the government with regard to the new chief minister Omar Abdullah is equally misplaced. The cable said “With Omar Abdullah as chief minister, they have in place a young, forward thinking leader who could move the state out of its two decades of political paralysis.”

The US embassy does point out that “It is not clear, however, that the GOI has the political will to make the kinds of gestures — such as reduction of security forces footprint — that Kashmiris need to gain some confidence in the Indian intentions.”

Even though the Indian assessment is clearly offered immediately after the National Conference-Congress won the election, the view turned out to be rather rosy as Abdullah failed to understand that the separatists-jihadi block was just waiting for him slip — an opening he provided by making himself remote from the popular mood.

Read more: India misread Kashmir situation? – The Times of India

Read more: India misread Kashmir situation? – The Times of India

'Kashmir Valley excesses down but haven't stopped'

'Kashmir Valley excesses down but haven't stopped'

SRINAGAR: While there is no denying International Committee of the Red Cross's leaked report of security forces resorting to torture in Kashmir, the view across the spectrum here is that such excesses have reduced compared to the 1990s. But, even though notorious detention centres like BSF's Papa-2 have closed down, with thousands of people still missing and around 110 deaths this summer, there's still a long way to go towards ensuring all civil liberties.

JKLF leader Yasin Malik, who spent long years in detention, says he's a living testimony of the torture described by the ICRC. Displaying his scars from beatings in the jail, Malik says that while torture of suspects during questioning is still common, it's no longer as widespread as it was in the 1990s.

Interestingly, the ICRC report refers to 2002-05 when the PDP was in power — a period in which many in Kashmir saw then CM Mufti Mohammed Sayeed's "healing touch". "We stopped crackdowns. We stopped indiscriminate picking up of people. In the first meeting of the unified command, we laid down the policy that excesses must stop, torture must stop," says PDP's Mehbooba Mufti.

And yet allegations of maltreatment surface every now and then. People are picked up and later shot as militants. The recent encounter in Srinagar, in which three young men and a cop were killed, is a case in point. The police claim those killed were Jaish militants, but many people, including some in the National Conference, say it was a staged encounter.

Read more: 'Kashmir Valley excesses down but haven't stopped' - The Times of India

Quote of Dr Shabir Choudhry

When people fight against occupation of a foreign country either, on their own, or with help of another country to get independence it is called liberation war. But when people fight against occupation of one occupier and get money, guns and other support from the other occupier of the same country it is called a proxy war, especially when the purpose is to make it part of the country which gives guns.
Dr Shabir Choudhry

Pakistan unleashed unprovoked aggression against people of Jammu and Kashmir, Abbas Butt

Pakistan unleashed unprovoked aggression against people of Jammu and Kashmir, Abbas Butt
Report by Dr Shabir Choudhry 18 December 2010

During the course of KNP Study Tour of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan, Abbas Butt and Asim Mirza met a delegation of lawyers who wanted to discuss the Kashmir dispute with them and exchange views on the current situation of the Kashmiri struggle. They also wanted to discuss some of the local problems which people faced there in every day life.

They said, ‘We want people like you who work hard and then spend their money to promote the cause of Kashmir. Leaders we have here are always after money, status and promotion of personal interests. These leaders are not sincere to the people of Jammu and Kashmir; they seem to be more loyal to Pakistan and advance cause of accession rather than cause of independence of Jammu and Kashmir’.

They said, ‘Most political workers have no source of income other than what they get from the agencies. Of course if agencies provide funds to political workers then they expect some work in return as well; and that work is to protect Pakistani interests in Azad Kashmir. These people have made our nation, a nation of beggars, dacoits and terrorists. There is no peace in the society we are divided on tribal and sectarian lines’.

Abbas Butt explained to them the current situation of the Kashmir dispute and how Kashmiri people are used to protect and promote Pakistani interests and fight Pakistan’s war. He said, ‘Now we understand this slogan of Muslim Conference leaders that they were ‘unpaid’ soldiers of Pakistan. India has a large army in Kashmir and they still find it difficult to control the situation; but Pakistan has plenty of these soldiers who are paid huge rewards and there is no need to keep that large army because their interests are looked after by these soldiers.’

Abbas Butt told the legal position of both India and Pakistan, he said, ‘Pakistan had a Standstill Agreement with the Maharaja, and Pakistan violated that and unleashed unprovoked aggression against people of Jammu and Kashmir. In this aggression thousands of innocent people died, women raped and kidnapped; and it also forced the Maharaja to seek help from India. Indian help came after the provisional accession.’

He further said, ‘In other words before the tribal aggression Kashmir was an independent state which was attacked by Pakistan. It forced the Maharaja to sign Instrument of Accession which was provisionally accepted. What India is doing in Kashmir is wrong, no one can defend that, but fact remains that the Indian army came in Jammu and Kashmir as a result of an agreement; and the Pakistani army and the tribesmen came by violating the Standstill Agreement.’

Abbas Butt said, ‘I don’t care what Pakistani people or their agents say, the fact is that we have never supported Kashmir’s accession to India, we have never supported what India is doing in Kashmir; at the same time we do not agree with what Pakistan is doing in Jammu and Kashmir in name of supporting Kashmiri struggle. I want to make it clear that our struggle is for unification and independence of the entire State, which includes Gilgit Baltistan.’

In a reply to a question regarding a plebiscite and the UN Resolutions Abbas Butt said, ‘Pakistan and pro Pakistan Kashmiris claim that India refused to honour the UN Resolutions. Historic facts do not support this contention. There were three parts to the UN Resolutions (1) a Cease Fire (2) withdrawal of all Pakistani forces, irregular troops, tribesmen and individual Pakistanis who went to Kashmir for the purpose of fighting (3 withdrawal of ‘bulk’ (and not all) of India troops. Stage one was completed by having a cease fire, but Pakistan, to date, has not withdrawn from Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan and started demanding implementation of the third stage – a plebiscite.’

He further said, ‘A lot of people believed in the Pakistani propaganda regarding the UN Resolution and many people who propagate this have not even seen the Resolutions. In any case, these Resolutions do not provide us right to independence, which, on the request of Pakistan, was taken away from us in the second UNCIP Resolution of 5 January 1949.’

One lawyer said, ‘I agree with what you say, but we got to remember that Pakistan is the only country in the world which helps people of Jammu and Kashmir. Moreover Pakistan has suffered because of Kashmir.’

Abbas Butt laughed and said, ‘It is unfortunate to note that even educated people and lawyers like you are influenced by this false propaganda of Pakistan. Pakistan has suffered not because of Kashmir, but because of their wrong policies. Did we ask them to violate Standstill Agreement and attack Jammu and Kashmir, and put us in this difficulty where we suffer this division and humiliation? Similarly if you look at causes of all the wars with India, they were not to liberate Kashmir. Don't tell me Kargil and 1971 wars were for our liberation. Even latest research and books of Pakistani retired generals and Air Chiefs confirm that 1965 war was not to liberate Kashmir. The fact is we have suffered because of Pakistan and their attempts to make Kashmir part of Pakistan.’

He further said, ‘Arab countries support people of Palestine in their struggle, but they don’t demand that Palestine should become part of Egypt, Syria and other country. Why Pakistani support has to be conditional. For argument sake, if people of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan say to India that we want to become part of India, could you help us, more than likely, India would help them, so how would you take that’.

After hearing this, one lawyer said, ‘Pakistan army and Pakistani elite don’t want to liberate Kashmir; they need Kashmir issue that they can justify their existence and keep a large army. It is because of the Kashmir dispute they deprived people democracy and run the country like a police state.’

Writer is Head Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir

View my blog and

Quote of Dr Shabir Choudhry

Problem with Kashmir issue is that some people of Jammu and Kashmir are
more loyal to neighbours (India, Pakistan). They should remember neighbour
is a neighbour. He has his own interests which can differ with interests of
our motherland.

Dr Shabir Choudhry

Friday, 17 December 2010

Quote of Dr Shabir Choudhry

History tells us that all imperial powers ensure that occupied people remain divided on tribal, religious, linguistic, regional and ethnic lines; and rulers of Islamabad must be given credit for success of their policies. People are occupied, intimidated and exploited, yet a large section of the society holds each other responsible for their problems without realising that occupying power with help of local collaborators keep people divided and enslaved.

Dr Shabir Choudhry

Quote of Dr Shabir Choudhry

Those nations which wanted independence they got it after some sacrifices; and a nation which wanted accession with a neighbour has got forced division, humiliation, slavery, killings, rapes of innocent women etcetera, and the tragedy continues because of the wrong policy. Dr Shabir Choudhry

BNF Condemns Pakistan Army and ISI is kidnapping and Killing indigenous people of Gilgit Baltistan

BNF Condemns Pakistan Army and ISI is kidnapping and Killing indigenous people of Gilgit Baltistan
Posted by K4Kashmir on December 17, 2010 in Kashmir, Pakistan | 0 Comment Edit
Gilgit Baltistan
date 17 December 2010 15:14
subject BNF Condemns Pakistan Army and ISI is kidnapping and Killing indigenous people of Gilgit Baltistan
Signed by
hide details 15:14 (1 hour ago)
Pakistan Army and ISI is kidnapping and Killing indigenous people of Gilgit Baltistan

Mirza Wajahat Hassan Khan left for Dubai unaccompanied on 28th October 2010, for a family business venture. He being a sugar patient with a broken knee and hypoglycemia patient, usually takes along his wife and sons but as his son Captain Danyal Hassan was to be struck off from army service on 5th November 2010, and his wife had domestic compulsions, so he went alone. He was to come back on 1st November 2010, i.e. the independence day of Gilgit Baltistan, so as to participate in the ensuing political activities in Gilgit and Kashmir. He did not returned on the given date and on 2nd November 2010, probe by the family members revealed the information that he checked out from Palm hotel Dubai and was dropped at the airport by the hotel transport. On inquiring, it was authentically revealed from the PIA (Pakistan International Airlines) computer records that he was being offloaded from the flight and was probably taken into custody either by Dubai immigration or ISI in connivance with Dubai Intelligence on a concocted charge. On 3rd November 2010, Mirza Nadir Hassan Khan along with Danyal Hassan Khan went to the UAE Embassy to check the whereabouts of Wajahat Hassan Khan and were informed by the UAE ambassador, that he boarded the PIA plane and disappeared in Pakistan. Consequently, Mirza Wajahat Hassan called up on the night of 3rd November 2010, and said or was made to say that he was alright and would take 2 to 3 more days in connection with the business. On the used telephone number, one Mr. Abdul Aziz Afghani was responding, only as and when, he deemed it fit to talk. He said that Mirza Wajahat Hassan is absolutely alright and is in good health and has checked out on 9th November 2010, from a Hotel in Dubai and has gone along with his Kashmiri friends and will be back home in 2 to 3 days before the Eid.
On 13th November 2010, in the evening Mirza Wajahat Hassan gave a ring that he is about to board the PIA flight 212. Mirza Wajahat Hassan Khan arrived in the international arrivals and was authentically seen. He undertook all the procedural formalities at the airport terminal and when after having an eye contact with his son Danyal Hassan, he was about to come out but was stopped. Mirza Wajahat Hassan then gave a ring to his son and brother and said that the Intelligence Bureau people want to record his statement about his Dubai episode and they should go home as he will come back within a couple of hours after meeting the formalities. Nadir Hassan and Danyal Hassan refused and insisted him on meeting him. He briefly came out and said that he was kidnapped in Dubai .

When he was being taken away by the four to five ISI people in plain clothes in a white corolla car with a white number plate, on 13th Nov. 2010 under the supervision of present there Lt. Colonel Shoaib of 63 FF, who now serves in counter intelligence department of the ISI Islamabad.

Further probes were made and the dependents were advised that because of the Eid and Sunday holidays they should wait, so that the case is smoothly resolved without any fuss. The family has no contacts whatsoever with him and doesn’t know anything about his whereabouts and well being. It is worth mentioning that Mirza Wajahat Hassan Khan has in the past undergone imprisonments many a times in Gilgit jail, Adiala jail Rawalpindi and various police stations of Gilgit only for speaking about rights of Gilgit Baltistan . The family has no trust, ray of hope and sympathy from the GHQ of Pakistan Army and its ISI. They do not trust the legal procedures of the State of Pakistan and consider the presence of the government of Pakistan in Gilgit Baltistan as illegal, immoral, cruel and undesirable.

a. On 20th November 2010, the ISI people assured the family to remain patient and wait till Monday i.e. 22nd November 2010.

b. On 22nd November 2010, the ISI higher ups informed the family that they should wait till 10:00 hrs on 25th November 2010. They were cautioned that if the family members initiate an action then there will be no looking back and the events can lead to unknown and uncontrollable limits.

c. He was released by ISI on 2nd December 2010 without producing him in any court, which has been the practice in Pakistan according to its legal procedure.

In view of the above, all the freedom and justice loving people, organizations and governments of the World and their commonly internationally constituted concerned organizations are requested to take prompt and strong measures to straighten the situation. They are requested to vigorously force the GHQ and its ISI to behave and stop their cunning, unchecked and immoral activities. All the family members of Mirza Hassan Khan’s family strongly feel that it is now high time that they must be safeguarded and protected under the umbrella of the United Nations and the Human Rights organizations of the World.

To kidnap an innocent person and prominent nationalist leader of Gilgit Baltistan from Dubai without any legal instrument is clear violation of international law committed by Dubai Authority and Pakistan Army (ISI is the subordinate organization of Pakistan Army).

NOTE: This should be noted that the kidnapping, killing, terrorist trainings and terrorist attacks anywhere is carried out by General Pasha the head of ISI under the special orders of GHQ (headed by General Kiyani) without the knowledge of the so-called democratic government of Zardari.

General Kiyani and Genral Pasha of ISI have shown their criminal attitude against a highly respected nationalist person and chairman of APNA, which represents both PoK and Pakistan occupied Gilgit Baltistan. Before this ISI had also kidnapped Mr. Bilal Qazalbash a School teacher from Gilgit in 2005. The case of kidnapping was registered in Lahore High Court against ISI with full names, Military Nos, residential and home address. After 9 months of kidnapping Bilal was framed in Arms smuggling and punished by the so-called Pakistani court. One can imagine how a person can smuggle while he was in ISI torture cell. But this is Pakistan where anything is possible, which has successfully managed to use US money and weapons to promote Talibaan and Al-Qaida against US interest.

Mr.Abdul Hamid Khan Chairman Balawaristan National Front has strongly condemned the kidnapping of All parties National Alliance (APNA) Chairman Wajahat Hassan by Pakistan ISI Mr. Wajahat Hassan hails from a Pakistan occupied Gilgit Baltistan and was actively opposing and exposing Pakistan’s occupation and demanding the independence of Gilgit Baltistan. He remains steadfast in his opposition to Pakistani occupation and strong critic to its policies of plundering resources of the region and denying people from their fundamental freedoms and rights since 1947. He also opposed the so-called Gilgit Baltistan empowerment and self-rule presidential ordinance which is an attempt not to change the disputed status of Gilgit Baltistan but annex this region under the garb of this ordinance. He is also chairman of APAN which is comprising nationalist parties of Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. APNA became leading voice of Pakistan controlled Areas of former state Jammu and Kashmir, and generated a substantial resistance to Islamabad’s policies of illegal annexation of region; exploitation of resources and denial of rights in both parts POK and OGB.

The kidnapping of Wajahat Hassan by Pakistan notorious intelligence agency ISI- known for its infamous character for decades in controlling Pakistani politics and victimising political opponents, supporting proxy insurgencies in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Indian Punjab; killings of hundreds of Balochis and thousands of enforced disappearances of Baloch, and mastermind of Taliban and other extremist groups, kept him under illegal detention more than a month and tortured him to silence the voice of oppressed people of Gilgit Baltistan and POK. It is widely believed that kidnapping of Mr. Wajahat Hassan in Dubai was collective operation of ISI and Dubai authorities.

Mr. Abdul Hamid khan lashed out to the role infamous agency ISI’s continued oppression, harass and torture of nationalist activists and leaders of Gilgit Baltistan for decades to silence their voices. There are more than 100 people who are facing sedition charges for demanding their basic rights and fundamental freedoms while Pakistan government using extra-Constitutional measures and other tactic to silence these voices. Mr. Khan appealed to the UN human Rights Council, Amnesty International, European Union and US to press Pakistani authorities to stop human rights violations in Gilgit Baltistan and stop ISI’s oppressive activities there. He also appealed international bodies to press Pakistani authorities to bring to the perpetrator to the justice. Mr. Khan said that Pakistani oppressive tactic cannot stop people of Gilgit Baltistan from their struggle to free their homeland and people from the illegal occupation of Pakistan

Abdul Hamid Khan
Balawaristan National Front (BNF)
Head Office: Majini Mahla, Gilgit, Balawaristan (Pakistan & China Occupied Gilgit Baltistan)
Ph: 0032 22311750