Kashmiri
nationalists or Muslim nationalists?
Dr Shabir Choudhry 06 October 2013
UNCIP Resolution of 13
August 1948, implicitly give people of Jammu and Kashmir three
options - namely accession to India, accession to Pakistan and an independent
Jammu and Kashmir. The option of an independent Jammu and Kashmir was truncated
on request of Pakistan, and in the next UNCIP Resolution passed on 5 January
1949 people were given a right of accession and not a right of
self-determination, as people were only allowed to either accede to India or
Pakistan. This UCIP Resolution reads:
‘The question of the accession of the State of Jammu and
Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a
free and impartial plebiscite’.
So one can see, our
right to independence was eliminated in the UN and both India and Pakistan
agreed to that. However, fact remains that the people of Jammu and Kashmir were
allowed to either become part of India or part of Pakistan. Then questions
arises why is that those Kashmiris who want to join India are castigated as
‘traitors’ and ‘agents’? And why those Kashmiri who want to join Pakistan are
hailed as patriots.
Many people of Jammu
and Kashmir criticise India and Pakistan for not implementing the UN
Resolutions. The UN Resolutions also demanded that the people of Jammu and
Kashmir must be bestowed their fundamental human rights; and the Kashmiri
governments had to ensure that ‘all human and political rights will be
guaranteed’.
People of Jammu and
Kashmir who want to join India, or those who want to become independent but
genuinely criticise Pakistani policies on Jammu and Kashmir are systematically
victimised and constantly rebuked not only by Pakistani officials and Pakistani
people in general, but they are also castigated by citizens of Jammu and
Kashmir. Is this not a clear violation of the UN Resolutions on Kashmir and
fundamental human rights?
Apart from that
nearly all nationalist Kashmiri parties clearly state in their constitutions
that people of Jammu and Kashmir must be given three choices – a right to join
India, a right to join Pakistan and a right to become independent. Then why is
it that those who feel India is a better choice out of the three choices; or
out of the two choices if the UN Resolution are enforced then why these people
are taunted as ‘traitors’?
Furthermore, why is
that true Kashmiri nationalists who believe that both India and Pakistan are
occupiers; and that those who are occupied by India should struggle there and
those who are occupied by Pakistan should struggle against the Pakistani
occupation are called ‘traitors’ and taunted as unpatriotic?
In the last TV debate
on Speakers Corner aired on 30 September 2013, I asked this question from my
guests, Professor Sajad Raja and Wahid Kashir. They both agreed that some of
the slogans were embedded by forces of occupation to keep us divided and
confused. Professor Sajad Raja asserted that all citizens of the Jammu and
Kashmir State have equal right either to support accession to India, accession
to Pakistan or support an independent Jammu and Kashmir; and all these people
are patriotic.
However, those who
promote unification and independence of Jammu and Kashmir and want to re-establish
Kashmir’s sovereignty and national identity are true Kashmiris. One can,
however, have an adverse opinion about those who are more loyal to Kashmir’s
neighbour than their own motherland. Both of my guests asserted that people of
Jammu and Kashmir have been manipulated by our occupiers, and that it was only
logical and practical that we struggle against the country that occupied us and
people who live on the other side of the LOC should struggle against the
country that occupies them.
After the programme
some people who belong to a party that claims to be a ‘nationalist’, although
many thinking Kashmiris regard them as ‘B team’ of the Pakistani establishment,
expressed their reaction which practically meant continuation of the past
policy: ‘liberate Indian occupied Kashmir and only pay lip service about the
independence of areas occupied by Pakistan’.
With that mind - set
prevailing, I cannot see much hope for the people of Jammu and Kashmir, as despite
all the suffering and traumas they still cannot differentiate between an enemy
and a friend. They still don’t know what they want- independence or ghulami
(slavery) in the name of accession. They are not clear if they want a
democratic and tolerant society or a society where Islamic laws are imposed,
despite differences over what constitutes Sharia.
Many Kashmir
nationalists have misplaced loyalty; and they could even be called a confused
lot. They seem to be more concerned about problems of a Muslim occupier, rather
than the problems we people of Jammu and Kashmir face as the result of forced
division. Most of their energies are utilized against Indian occupation – a non-
Muslim country; and they try to support and defend all the wrongs done by a
Muslim occupier – Pakistan. As the result of this, one can say some Kashmiri
nationalists are not true nationalists; at best, they could be called ‘Muslim
nationalists’.
As long as Kashmiris
are more loyal to their neighbours than to their motherland; and as long as
they remain Muslim nationalists, the State of Jammu and Kashmir will remain
forcibly divided and innocent people will continue to suffer and die on both
sides of the Line of Control.
Writer is a political
analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of
Kashmir.
Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment