Militancy in Kashmir
after Burhan Wani
Dr Shabir Choudhry London, 04 July 2017
Muslims of Kashmir need to understand hidden
agenda of Pakistani sponsored militancy.
Before analysing the
current situation in Kashmir; and what future holds for the people of Kashmir,
it is imperative to look at the background of the Kashmiri militancy. Who
started it and what were the objectives of this militancy in which more than
eighty thousand people have lost their lives.
Militancy in Kashmir was not spontaneous or an
accident. It was carefully planned and executed. All military operations and
planned actions have clearly defined objectives. Militancy in Kashmir also had
a clear agenda. Operation Topac gives full details of the Kashmiri militancy
that started in 1988/89. While speaking to his senior generals and ISI
officials, Military ruler of Pakistan, General Zia Ul Haq said:
‘Let there be no mistake, however, that our aim remains quite
clear and firm-the liberation of the Kashmir Valley-our Muslim Kashmiri
brothers cannot be allowed to stay with India for any length of time, now’. 1
I would like to refresh
memory of readers about the objectives of the Operation Topac. In Phase one it was clearly stated that:
·
‘A low-level insurgency against the
regime, so that it is under siege, but does not collapse as we would not yet
want central rule imposed by Delhi’.
·
‘We plant our chosen men in all the key
positions; they will subvert the police forces, financial institutions, the
communication network and other important organizations’.
·
‘We whip up anti-Indian feelings
amongst the students and peasants, preferably on some religious issues, so that
we can enlist their active support for rioting and Anti-Government
demonstrations’.
·
‘Organize
and train subversive elements and armed groups with capabilities, initially to
deal with paramilitary forces located in the valley’.
·
‘The Government of Pakistan should
leave all covert action to Azad Kashmir and ISI and maintain a position in
which ‘plausible denial’ remains feasible’. 2
By reading the Operation Topac and analysing the on - going
militancy, it becomes crystal clear that the planners of militancy wanted to
make Kashmir part of Pakistan; and they did not want to liberate Kashmir in the
sense to make it independent. It also becomes clear that they wanted to divide
former State of Jammu and Kashmir on religious lines; and for that purpose,
promotion of extremism, religious intolerance and hatred was necessary.
If the planners of the Operation Topac had been successful
in their plan, then that would have given justification of creation of Pakistan
- Muslims and non - Muslims cannot live together. Despite my serious
disagreements with Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, I
can give benefit of doubt to them.
Maybe
they sincerely believed that Pakistani government and the ISI were serious and
trustworthy. While accepting funds, guns, bullets and training to fight the
Indian army in the Kashmir Valley, they possibly thought that the leopard has
changed its spots; and that they have changed their heart and mind to support
an independent Jammu and Kashmir.
Many thinking citizens of
Jammu and Kashmir, including some members of the JKLF now believe that the ISI
misled them and betrayed them. Their hidden agenda was:
1.
To take revenge of fall of Dhaka, entangle India in Kashmir; and keep
India bleeding;
2.
For this purpose, use Muslims of Kashmir; and not Pakistani army, as
their lives were more important than the people of Kashmir;
3.
Indian wrath and heavy military response will widen the gulf between New
Delhi and Muslims of Kashmir; and hate India campaign will get a big boost.
4.
Make a political dispute a religious one, and promote intolerance, extremism
and hatred to divide people of Jammu and Kashmir state on religious and ethnic
lines.
The planners of the
militancy wanted to make this struggle a pro Pakistan Movement. When they
realised that majority of the people were going in the direction of independence
they instigated their policy of divide and rule. They stopped help and support
to the JKLF, and set up more than 180 militant groups. They knew that if there
were only a few big and strong militant groups they can resist pressure and
become difficult to control.
Countries like China and
America have only one Commander in Chief, or call him Army Chief; in small
Valley of Kashmir we had more than 180 militant groups, which meant 180
Commanders in Chiefs. It was at that time, many thinking Kashmiris realised
that Pakistan was not sincere with their cause; and that they wanted to divide
people and control every aspect of Kashmiri life. Result of this was a decline
in militancy; and some groups started fighting each other for various reasons.
Masterminds sitting in
Islamabad hurriedly set up two organisations, namely Jihad Council and All
Parties Hurriyet Conference to control the situation in Kashmir. One was to
control political matters and the other to control militancy in accordance with
the agenda of Islamabad.
Pakistani government and
the secret agencies have, to a large extent, achieved their objectives,
explained above. People of Jammu and Kashmir are deeply divided on religious
and ethnic lines. Kashmiri Pundits were forcibly expelled from their homes.
Muslims and non- Muslims of Jammu province and Ladakh are not part of this
militant and Islamic struggle, if anything, they oppose it. Within the Valley
of Kashmir there are certain ethnic and religious groups who are not part of
this militancy.
The Indian policy makers
and the men in uniform also had their role in dividing people of Jammu and
Kashmir. Their out of proportion harsh response, oppression, killings, torture,
custodial deaths and imprisonment also strengthened anti India sentiments. In
other words, directly or indirectly, India is also responsible advancing the
Pakistani agenda and alienating the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Some experts
feel that a low-level militancy suits both New Delhi and Islamabad.
My colleagues and I
separated from Amanullah Khan led JKLF in 1993; and started working
independently. We soon realised that we were all led in the wrong direction by
secret agencies and their foot soldiers. By 1993-4, we came to this conclusion
that there was no military solution to the Kashmir dispute. We said the
struggle must be peaceful and all stakeholders should resolve the dispute by a
process of negotiations. At that time, people claimed that around thirty
thousand people had died; and we said it is up to us to sit down now to talk or
wait until the death toll reaches 50,000. We were accused as anti-Movement and
anti-Pakistan, anti-Islam and pro India. Sadly, now the figure of deaths is
more than 80,000 and more and more people are labelled as anti-Movement and pro
India.
Islamabad had no shortage
of Jihadi warriors, who needed no salary and were willing to embrace martyrdom,
hence the introduction of ‘Guest Militants’ in Kashmir. Although this policy
was working for Islamabad, but it had its disadvantages. The presence of guest
jihadis gave India a propaganda stick that it was not a local struggle; and
that Pakistan sent militants from across the Line of Control.
It is because of this
policy of Pakistan to control and lead the Kashmiri struggle since 1947, the
world community regard it as India and Pakistan problems, which has to be
resolved by Islamabad and New Delhi. Despite all the sufferings, rapes,
custodial deaths, imprisonment, killings we people of Jammu and Kashmir State
are not even perceived as a party to the dispute.
The planners of militancy
and ‘God Fathers’ of this Kashmiri struggle wanted to give a new dimension to
it. They wanted to try something new, which can help them to make it a local
struggle, but still controlled by them. Use of internet and social media and
recruitment of educated Kashmiri youth helped them to present a new face of
militancy. In this regard, Indian policy of managing the conflict rather than
resolving it should also be given some credit. People realised that India is
not interested in any kind of resolution; and in frustration people adopted new
strategies, hence new phase of instability and chaos.
Emergence of Burhan Wani on
militant and social and political scene; and his subsequent tragic death should
be seen in that perspective. His sudden arise overshadowed role of some people
in the ‘struggle’. He could have been arrested and presented live on TV. It
appears some people wanted his dead body. Alive Burhan Wani did not fit in
their scheme of things. After his death, why people were not allowed to take
part in his funeral? Why the authorities had to use weapons and heavy
handedness to stop people paying their last respect to the deceased?
I do not support Burhan
Wani’s strategy or his political ideology, but that does not mean he deserved
to be killed. He also had a right to life. Those who want to support Burhan
Wani need to understand that they are supporting a gun culture, which has
resulted in chaos and death and destruction of tens of thousands of innocent
people. If we support gun and militancy, it means we support more deaths, more
bloodshed, more orphans and more widows.
It must also be noted that
supporting Burhan Wani means, supporting Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan. It
can also mean a division of Jammu and Kashmir on religious line. Whereas, I
pray for all those who have suffered in this militant struggle, I urge people
to abandon extremism, violence and militancy as it will kill more people, and
divide communities. I urge people to continue their peaceful struggle for
unification and independence of Jammu and Kashmir State. I urge people to
strive for a democratic society with a slogan: State belongs to all of us, and
religion is an individual matter.
Writer is a political analyst, TV anchor and
author of many books and booklets. Also he is Chairman South Asia Watch and
Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs. Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
Reference
1. Anyone can do a google search
for Operation Topac and read full details.
2. Ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment