Tuesday 28 December 2021

Pakistan’s misfortune, by Pervez Hoodbhoy

 

Pakistan’s misfortune
By Pervez Hoodbhoy

RECEP Erdogan, president of Turkey, says his faith in Islam stops him from raising bank interest rates. His hard-line position sent the lira tumbling from one low to another; in the past three months it has lost half its value. In spite of a partial recovery, Turks are still saddled with an inflation rate so high that supermarket employees are barely able to keep up with changing labels. But Erdogan has not budged: “As a Muslim, I will continue doing what our religion tells us. This is the command.”

Command? Dear Mr President, surely as one who aspires to be a Muslim hero you have read the Quran. Therein stands the clear injunction: “Allah has permitted trade and has forbidden interest/usury” (2:275). “Forbidden” here does not mean negotiating what is low or middle or high — forbidden means zero, exactly zero. Haram is haram. This is why all early Muslim scholars rejected interest.

Many scholars still do today, particularly Arabs and Pakistanis. In 2014, the top ulema of Pakistan belonging to the Fiqhi Majlis said that even the so-called Sharia-compliant Islamic banking merely renames interest as profit and, as such, is deception. All banking, they concluded, is haram. Historically, banking was absent in Muslim countries until the 18th century because nothing except zero interest can be allowed.

The Ottoman rulers of Turkey were, however, not ideologues. As pragmatists who ran an empire, they broke the ban on banking because they well knew that no banking meant no trading. This Western innovation had to be adopted come what may. But, to be safe, they first looked around for muftis who could justify European banking — and found some. One can endlessly debate whether these justifications are genuine or manufactured.

But in Erdogan’s Turkey, state and religion have been joined together; ideology has trumped pragmatism. Still, puzzles remain: how come an interest rate of six per cent is somehow un-Islamic but a 4pc rate is okay? What about 5pc? Erdogan is untroubled by such questions because he is an Ertugrul-like figure in his own imagination, convinced of his absolute wisdom. He recently lashed out at Turkish businessmen who are unimpressed by his faith-driven economic policies. After chairing a cabinet meeting on the falling lira, he accused them of “scheming to topple the government” and said their hopes would be in vain.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Imran Khan addressing a joint press conference on 14th February, 2020.

Erdogan is just one example where ideology — whether religious or secular — gives the driving seat to emotion and the back seat to reason. Turkey is in trouble, but the United States is in still deeper waters. Even in the post-Trump era many elected officials — both in the Senate and Congress — are ideologically charged, radical, right-wing crackpots who deny climate change and conflate gun-control with a communist takeover. Some lawmakers tacitly or openly supported the Capitol’s takeover by a mob. Will dysfunctional America get back on the rails? The world is watching.

Pakistan’s misfortune is to have the soul brother of Erdogan in power today. Forget the falling rupee — it will surely make some small recoveries soon and, for a while, everyone will be satisfied again. Much more serious is that our schools are producing hordes of ignorant, bigoted, hyper-religious Sialkot-type lynchers who are totally skill-deficient. This will get far worse when the ideologically motivated Single National Curriculum (SNC), the brainchild of PM Imran Khan — becomes fully operational.

The SNC conjoins regular schools with madressahs. Across the country, regular schools are being dragged down and turned into seminaries. The pre-SNC situation was bad enough with abysmally low achievement levels in reading, writing and reasoning. SNC, by making the rote-learning system still stronger, will deal the death blow. On the one hand children will memorise vastly greater amounts of religious materials. On the other hand, only a single official textbook is specified for each subject. A student memorising selected parts of that book can get full marks.

On a global level, Pakistani children presently stand at the bottom of achievement levels. Inferior to their counterparts in Iran, India and Bangladesh, they are almost always absent from competitions like the international science and mathematics Olympiads. When they do compete, they perform poorly. The solitary exception is invariably an O-A level or IB student linked to a foreign examination system.

This under-achievement kills the possibility of Pakistan doing well in science and technology even into the 22nd century. Lacking scientists, engineers, and technicians of quality, Pakistan has reached a dead end. CPEC’s billions failed to ignite industrial, engineering, scientific, or business activity. The country has no space programme, no biotech labs turning out new products, and no significant indigenous hi-tech industry in any domain. Last year, Pakistan’s software exports — a measure of brain power — stood at barely $2 billion (India’s were $148bn).

On the academic front, Pakistani professors churn out thousands of so-called research papers every year but these are mostly worthless. Today, the Pakistan Academy of Science is stuffed with persons having fake credentials; its office-bearers have the highest national honours but they stand exposed by international organisations as cheaters and plagiarists. The continuing revelations of one such organisation, Retraction Watch, are like water off a duck’s back. None in the PAS so much as bat an eyelid at the exposés — fraud and bluster has become a way of life.

These grim problems can be overcome if there is a desire to be ruthlessly honest. But when aggressive self-righteous zealots grab the reins of power, the chances decrease. Such dogmatists make reform impossible by asserting that they — and they alone — know the truth. Their moral absolutes lead to strong emotions, diminished reasoning capacity and dysfunction in governance.

Buoyed up by Pakistan’s victory in Afghanistan, on many occasions PM Khan — who greatly admires Erdogan — has gleefully lauded the Taliban as a liberating force. He has lauded the Pakistani madrassahs that produced the Taliban and showered funds upon them. Now he wants our regular schools to emulate Taliban-style education — hence SNC. By official notification dated Dec 21, co-education in Punjab’s schools will be phased out. In fulfilling PM Khan’s ideological fantasies, Pakistan will pay a terrible price.

(The writer is an Islamabad-based physicist and writer.)

Monday 27 December 2021

Gwadar is boiling, is the CPEC the reason? Dr Shabir Choudhry. 26 December 2021


Gwadar is boiling, is the CPEC the reason?

Dr Shabir Choudhry. 26 December 2021

Gwadar has witnessed unprecedent protests. Many analysts claim that these protests are because of the serious problems created by the China Pakistan Economic Corridor. China, who has invested billions of dollars in the CPEC, are worried about this political and social unrest.

However, some people are worried because the Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan has publicly stated that he will pay attention to this matter and resolve problems of the people. In the past whenever he said he would take notice of a matter of public concern, he made a mess of it and added to their problems.

The massive protests in Gwadar which unnerved Islamabad and Beijing were led by Jamat e Islami. It was a kind of victory for the protestors because after 28 days of large protests, Imran Khan’s government, despite strict media control, woke up and decided to listen to demands of tens of thousands of men and women protestors.

Threat of extremism in Gwadar and Balochistan

Whereas it is pleasing to note that the local people of Gwadar may get some benefits or some rights as a result of this four weeks long protest, however, it must also be noted that it is also a victory for Jamat e Islami and its leadership. This ‘victory’ for Jamat e Islami is in a way a victory for the religious and extremist politics, which will surely provide impetus to religious and extremist groups in Pakistan, and especially in Gwadar and Balochistan.

It is difficult not to see a clear right-wing manifestation in the protest, especially when young local women with full ‘hijabi attire’, with only eyes visible, were illustrating strong religious ingredients in the struggle under the banner of Jamat e Islami.

This Protest or sit in of tens of thousands of local people was against ‘illegal trawling, a growing drugs trade and the lack of basic facilities like health and education’. Famous slogans were “Give Gwadar its Rights” and “Haq Ya Shahdat”, meaning rights or Martyrdom.

1

This peaceful movement received a big boost when tens of thousands of women and children joined the protest. The protesting men, women, old and young called off their month-long sit-in after many rounds of talks. The pact was signed by Abdul Qudus Bizenjo, Chief Minister of Balochistan and Provincial General Secretary of Jamaat Islami (JI), Maulana Hidayat-ur- Rehman, who was previously added to the Fourth Schedule.

Although Maulana Hidayat Ur Rehman is a local Baloch, his association with the Jamat e Islami, and his status, General Secretary of the religious party in Gwadar, raises many questions and casts doubts on this movement and its ultimate goals.

The history of Jamat e Islami is not that great, because the Pakistani establishment has used the Party many times to advance its agenda at home and abroad. Sadly, the Party leaders don’t express any remorse on what they have done to advance the agenda of the army establishment, rather they take pride that they have served the army to propagandise their domestic and foreign agenda.

In view of the thinking people of Pakistan, especially the liberals who believe that the Jamat e Islami cannot be trusted, as they could be, once again, advancing the agenda of the establishment.

By winning this ‘victory’, and by taking the centre stage in this movement, the Jamat e Islami and their local leaders have established their credentials, as pro people. They have also demonstrated their courage and ability to challenge the might of the State and secret agencies.

Fear is that they can use newly acquired status, and power to promote extremism, and their brand of Islam. This will surely result in sectarian politics which will ultimately divide the people of Balochistan and Gwadar.

There are reports which suggest that Balochistan can be a fertile ground for religious and sectarian politics. The religious or sectarian politics could be used by the Pakistani army and secret agencies to further divide and destroy the Baloch struggle.

Faiz M. Baluch, editor of Balochwarna News, told ‘The Week’, that in Balochistan the “Pakistan army first used military power. Then it used

2

disappearances and killings, and now it is the systematic use of religious parties and groups to create religious and sectarian strife and gain power.” 1

3

It is in the interest of China and Pakistan to crush and subjugate the Baloch people; and both countries (China and Pakistan) work as a team to discredit and harm the Balochi struggle, and use of religion could be just another strategy.

The Iranian government is also not happy with the Pakistani army using the religious card to advance and protect their internal and external interests. The Indian government is also immensely concerned about use of religion in Balochistan and in other parts of Pakistan, as that can have serious ramifications for India, where religious strife is damaging social fabrics of the society, not to mention religiously motivated violence and terrorism.

The Pakistani establishment has a great experience in nurturing Islamist groups and use them as proxies to advance their agenda. There is no reason why they should not do what they have been doing since 1947. It is only logical that they divide the people of Balochistan on political, tribal, regional and religious lines and establish their rule forcefully.

It must be highlighted that Balochistan is very important to both Pakistan

and China because of its strategic position, natural resources and the CPEC which ends in Gwadar, and provides China access to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean. It is natural that both will collude and do everything possible to control this region.

It must be pointed out that Gwadar is in Pakistan’s impoverished province of Balochistan, which is a sparsely populated, mountainous, desert region bordering Afghanistan and Iran. China has been involved in the development of the Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea as part of a $60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor under Beijing’s Belt and Road infrastructure project.

Despite the lofty claims of Pakistan, the local residents of Gwadar have long complained that Chinese presence and investment in the area has done very little, if any, to improve their lives, particularly with regards to water scarcity and jobs. Reality is that they face more problems since the inauguration of the CPEC, as they encounter more restriction and fewer rights; and to make matters worse, the Chinese projects have:

‘Robbed them of their primary source of livelihood, fishing, as giant fishing trawlers have come in through the Arabian Sea, resulting in the closure of a majority of fish processing factories.’

The fishermen were protesting against granting fishing rights to trawlers of China and ‘Sindh within the limits of the sea touching Gwadar city’. It must be pointed out that the local people strongly feel that they are deprived of their livelihoods as more than two million people are directly linked with the fishing business in Gwadar.

4

The residents of the city also demanded access to clean water, power supply, and a right of movement by removing check-posts which restrict movement of the local people, and create enormous problems for the local people, as they cannot freely move around in their own hometown.

Pakistani narrative

The Pakistani government narrative is that the protesters were not against the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, or against the presence of the Chinese and Pakistani settlers in Gwadar.

This discourse is part of Pakistani propaganda and is designed to obscure facts. This point will be discussed later on.

Anyhow, under some pressure, the Prime Minister of Pakistan Imran Khan, in his tweet said he had taken notice of the very legitimate demands of the hardworking fishermen of Gwadar. “Will be taking strong action against illegal fishing by trawlers & (and) will also speak to CM Balochistan.”

In response to this, the Chief Minister of Balochistan,Abdul Qudoos Bizenjo, emphasised that the demands of Gwadar movement were based on human rights, and were part of the incumbent government’s policies. However, he stressed that it was not the responsibility of the Provincial government to provide power supply, as it was the domain of the

federal government, and PM Imran Khan had promised to accept all legitimate demands.’

He further said,

“The provincial government is implementing actions on the demands of the protestors coming under its constitutional realm.”

Enumerating his success, Abdul Qudoos Bizenjo, proudly said:

Licenses of all liquor stores had been suspended.
The concerned departments had been directed to resolve the water issues in Gwadar.
And funds had been issued to the relevant departments.

The Chief Minister further said the provincial government is willing to work with the Federal Government to formulate a joint mechanism to act against illegal trawling. "We will soon present a detailed report to PM Imran Khan on the developments," he mentioned.

He assured the people that his government will ensue:
1. The prohibition of illegal fish trawling,
2. Ending unnecessary Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR) check posts,
3. Resumption of border trade,
4. Andendingthetokensysteminlightoftheprotestor'sdemands.

Analyses of the statement.

As far as the statement is concerned it is encouraging. However, practically not much will happen. The Provincial government will not do anything as their hands are tied with various agreements with China, Federal Government and the Pakistani establishment.

5

The Chief Minister was very careful with the selection of his words. In point one, he said, ‘prohibition of illegal fish trawling’. Since the Chinese trawlers which fish in the sea near Gwadar do so with permission and understanding of the Pakistani government and under the Chinese pressure, how they will stop them. The Chinese trawlers take away tonnes of fish daily, practically depriving the local fisherman to catch any fish for their families.

These stringent measures and lack of fundamental rights, and their inability to earn sufficient for their families may ultimately force many local people to migrate to other regions where they can live in peace.

Critics may argue that there are no districts within restive Balochistan, where the Baloch people can live in peace, and earn sufficient money to feed their families. In other words, options for the local Baloch people are very limited.

In point two the Chief Minister said, ‘ending unnecessary Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR) check posts.’ Who will decide if the check posts and Frontier Crimes Regulations are unnecessary? Surely not the suffering local people. This decision will be made by the secret agencies of Pakistan, Chinese agencies, and the Pakistani administration in Gwadar.

Do I need to point out that in view of the Pakistani and the Chinese secret agencies, and the local Pakistani administration, more stringent measures need to be adopted to keep the local people out and to safeguard the Chinese and the Pakistanis who have settled here at the expense of the local people?

Similarly, in point three and four, the local people will have no say in decision making. The Pakistani administration established here to rule, and the Chinese experts settled here will call the shots, and the local people are only there to suffer and hold protests.

If the local people make too much noise or instigate some kind of resistance or disobedience, they could also face serious trouble. They can be abducted and imprisoned, or in the worst-case scenario, killed in a fake encounter. Their name will be added to the growing list of the missing persons; and their loved ones will spend the rest of their lives protesting, and trying to find out where their husband, son, brother or other relatives have gone.

A Baloch narrative.

Baloch leaders fighting the Pakistani state and their oppression and looting in Balochistan, including Gwadar are not prepared to trust the Pakistani establishment, as they have been ‘betrayed’ by the Pakistani state many times.

While speaking to me, a Baloch political and human rights activist, Munir Mengal said:

‘People who are peacefully protesting in Gwadar want access to clean drinking water. They want a right to life. They have lived in this area for centuries, and their livelihood is fishing. With the help of China, they are deprived to fish and survive. Very soon they will have only one option, migrate from this area and leave this town for the Chinese and Punjabi settlers.’ 2

6

Baloch nationalists believe that Balochistan was occupied by Pakistan by violating an agreement. Munir Mengal, President of Baloch Voice Association, said:

‘Pakistani establishment is systematically killing Baloch nationalists, which can be called slow motion genocide of the Baloch people. All those who strive for fundamental rights and seek justice are kidnapped and they become missing persons. Sadly, the list of the missing people is getting longer and longer, and authorities have no concern for the suffering families.’ 3

Holland based Think Tank, European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS) in its newsletter published on 24 December 2021, pointed out that ‘the main demands of the of the Movement included ban on illegal trawling the Arabian Sea, including massive Chinese fishing operations there which the protesters said had rendered the local fishermen and others jobless, access to the coastal areas near the Gwadar seaport, and reopening of the Iranian border, which is a major commercial and trading centre for the local population.’ 4

Position of Courts

Issue of the ‘missing persons’ is a very serious one. In the past, even the Supreme court Chief Justice Iftikhar Choudhry could not enforce writ of the state or impose the Pakistani laws. The secret agencies were called to the Court, but they did not present the missing persons.

The Islamabad High Court Chief Justice, Athar Min Allah, a very reputable and honest Judge, has now taken up the issue of the ‘missing persons’. The Islamabad High Court directed the Additional Attorney General to take up the missing persons’ cases with the federal cabinet and inform the court about the government’s policy in this regard.

A reputable Pakistani English daily newspaper, ‘Dawn’ stated that the Court has categorically asserted that the issue of the missing person is a test case for the state, which should clarify its position in this matter. The case under consideration relates to missing journalist Mudassar Naaru.

7

The court also emphasised the ‘inability or unwillingness of the Commission for Inquiry of Enforced Disappearances (CIED) with regard to doing something concrete about this problem. According to the court, there are thousands of families whose loved ones have gone missing, but no one bothers.’ 5

Chief Justice Athar Minallah, while hearing the petition ‘seeking safe recovery of ‘missing’ journalist Mudassir Mehmood Naaru, observed enforced disappearances gave the impression that the state was behind such a heinous crime.’ 6

During the hearing, the Chief Justice, made a reference to the ‘abduction of Assistant Director of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) Sajid Gondal, remarked that a young man had illegally been taken into custody and was forced to give the statement that he had gone “to the Northern Areas on his own.” 7

According to Daily Dawn, counsel for the family of the missing journalist, Imaan Zainab Hazir-Mazari, contemplated why ‘officials of the spy agency should not be held responsible for the enforced disappearance of any citizen from their respective jurisdiction’.

Conclusion

The CPEC, as I have claimed time and again, in my books on the CPEC and in my speeches that this over ambitious mega project will prove to be disastrous for Pakistan, because the Pakistani economy does not have the capacity; and the Pakistani people do not have ability or even desire to make this work.

Not many people believed in what I and many other wise Pakistanis said and predicted. All those who criticised the CPEC or opposed it were castigated as anti - Pakistan and Indian agents.

However, in 2019, I was contacted by a Pakistani diplomat to discuss some contents of my books on the CPEC. He said what you wrote in 2016, proved to be correct and he wanted to know about my sources.

8

Of course, I was not a fool to disclose my sources, however, we had a lengthy discussion in which I asserted that the new government would exacerbate the economy of Pakistan and Pakistan may never taste the fruit of the CPEC. Also, I said, Pakistan will not be able to pay interest on its borrowing, and will end up handing over some strategic assets to China.

The Pakistani establishment installed a wrong man for the job. A stubborn man with tunnel vision, and ego higher than K2 Mountain, and who was a fast bowler and infamous for playboy lifestyle, with no experience in public life or public administration was appointed as a Chief Executive of a nuclear country with a population of 220 million.

Managing 10 players in a cricket match was one thing and managing affairs of a country like Pakistan was a totally different ball game. He started governing Pakistan as if it was a cricket match.

Despite all the help of the establishment, secret agencies, judiciary, allied political parties the man failed in every field of governance. All his lofty claims and hopes of his followers were shattered. He failed to acknowledge his blunders or see the writing on the wall. He thought that because he is smart, a cricket star, and tells lies with confidence; and he has a big team of IT experts who will continue to disseminate fake news, he will be able to weather the political storm and have his way.

We all know how Imran Khan has messed up the economy and political system of Pakistan, and the future looks very bleak. Pakistan’s per capita GDP has reduced from $1482 US Dollars to $1194. What has happened in Gwadar in November and December is only a start.

Pakistan will not be able to honour promises made to the protesters, which will result in more protests leading to extremism and violence. My fear is that the Jamat e Islami Chief in Gwadar may create a situation in which there could be a direct clash with the authorities, which will provide authorities an opportunity to round up ring leaders and crush the movement.

Call it militancy or insurgency in Balochistan, it is contained to a large extent by the Pakistan army, as they have great experience in dealing with these matters. However, the real danger is that the Movement or struggle in Gwadar and Balochistan may be divided on religious and sectarian lines. If

9

this happens then it will give a new dimension to the struggle in Balochistan.

If matters are not resolved peacefully and to the satisfaction of the local people of Gwadar and Balochistan, then there is danger of more unrest, instability, and violence in the region. The CPEC and the Chinese and ‘Punjabi’ settlements will always be disliked, opposed, and would be perceived as a ‘legitimate’ target for the militants.

If the authorities decided to only rely on their military might, and gave no importance to dialogue and consultation then there is a serious threat that it can escalate and may lead to some foreign intervention with disastrous consequences.

Reference:

  1. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2021/12/18/as-large-scale- protests-break-out-in-pakistan-gwadar-over-cpec-how-should- india-react.html

  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQMYxbb4U-Y

  3. Ibid

  4. https://www.aninews.in/news/world/europe/china-concerned-about- escalating-protests-in-gwadar20211225031830/

  5. https://thenation.org.uk/2021/12/23/ihc-concerned- overmissing-persons-askgovt-to-explain-policy/

  6. Ibid

  7. Ibid

10 

Friday 24 December 2021

Delimitation, how it will affect politics of Jammu and Kashmir? Dr Shabir Choudhry, 24 December 2021

 

Delimitation, how it will affect politics of Jammu and Kashmir?     Dr Shabir Choudhry, 24 December 2021

 

The people of Jammu and Kashmir lost unity and integrity of erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947, when Pakistan attacked the State with intention to occupy it.

 

Apart from Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan occupied some area which is now called Azad Kashmir, meaning an independent Kashmir, although it has no independence apart from the prefix of azad.

 

The other parts of the State remained as one political entity under the control of India. Despite the UN Resolutions demanding Pakistan to vacate the occupied territory so that the future status could be determined, Pakistan did not vacate, and we remain forcibly divided since 1947.

 

Despite special status within the Indian Union, Jammu and Kashmir under India gradually lost its autonomy. In August 2019, India abrogated the Articles 370 and 35 A of the Indian constitution, and separated Ladakh from Jammu and Kashmir. However, both regions were given the status of Union territory.

 

This action of India ended the Statehood of Jammu and Kashmir. There were many protests against this unwise and unwarranted decision, but that did not change anything.

 

It must be pointed out that for several years, there was a demand from Ladakh that their region should be separated from the rest of Jammu and Kashmir.

 

All the signs are there that New Delhi wants to grant statehood back to Jammu and Kashmir, and, as I predicted in 2019, the new status of statehood will be minus Ladakh.

 

Some contacts of mine confided that after the delimitation there will be new elections of the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly, which will reflect new realities of the region.

 

From this, I infer that ‘new realities’ will mean a new power structure, where ‘dominance’ of the Kashmir Valley may be neutralised. There are

 

Delimitation itself is a normal procedure to reflect new changes since the last delimitation. However, sometimes this mechanism is used to gain political gains; and this is a cause of concern for some communities and politicians.

 

Ghulam Nabi Azad, former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir questioned the motives of the Delimitation Commission, and urged them to clarify the criteria for increasing seats for the Jammu Province. While speaking to a big public gathering at Gool in Ramban district on 24 December 2021, he said:

 

Population and area of the constituency is always considered as the main parameters for creating a new Assembly segment. But here in J&K we are unable to understand which criteria has been adopted while increasing seven Assembly seats by the Commission in J&K’. 1

 

The Limitation Commission proposed to increase six seats in Jammu and one in Kashmir; and this proposal, in his opinion, is ‘facing strong opposition from several parties and groups’.

 

However, Ghulam Nabi Azad, agreed with the suggestion of increasing seats in Doda, Kishtwar, Rajouri and Udhampur, as in his view, these are big districts. He questioned the rationale of increasing a seat for a small district like Samba, which already has two constituencies.

 

On the issue of abrogating the statehood, Ghulam Nabi Azad, said, the Jammu and Kashmir:

 

‘Has been pushed about two decades back by the August 5, 2019 decision, when the erstwhile state was disbanded and its special status abrogated. The Government of Delhi wants to continue with the proxy rule in J&K and seems to be least interested in elections. But the Congress Party would continue to exert pressure on the Union Govt to hold assembly elections after winters. 2

 

He also complained about the deteriorating conditions of roads and health facilities, especially in remote hilly areas. He said people feel they are being neglected by the current administration.

 

Apni Party also rejected the Delimitation Commission’s Report. The Apni Party president Syed Mohammad Altaf Bukhari in a press conference held on 24 December 2021, said, the Party leadership feels that the Delimitation proposal ‘deviates from the procedures as mandated by the constitution of India’. He further said:

“Apni Party has a clear stand on this report that defeats the very idea of a secular India. Both the divisions of Jammu and Kashmir have always complimented each other while such arbitrary edicts are aimed to disturb the harmony in J&K. However, Apni Party will never allow these schemes to succeed.” 3

Many political activists of the Valley feel that the Delimitation Commission wants to upset the existing political structure by disproportionately giving more Assembly seats to Jammu province. Ladakh was separated from the rest of Jammu and Kashmir and made a Union Territory in August 2019, hence seats of this region will not have any representation in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly. Six more seats for Jammu means more power for the Jammu province, hence the resentment and anger in some quarters of the political system in Jammu and Kashmir.

It must be noted that Ghulam Nabi Azad is a Congress leader and belongs to the Jammu Province, and he only had an objection on one extra seat of Samba district. 

 

Reference:

1.      https://periscopetimes.com/delimitation-commission-should-clear-criteria-for-increasing-seats-ghulam-nabi-azad/https:/

2.     Ibid

3.     https://periscopetimes.com/apni-party-rejects-delimitation-commission-report-terms-proposal-disproportionate/


Tuesday 26 October 2021

22 October Tribal Invasion in State of Jammu and Kashmir a darkest day in history of Jammu and Kashmir. Speech of Dr Shabir Choudhry in a webinar organised by United Kashmir Peoples National Party. 24 October 20121.

 

22 October Tribal Invasion in State of Jammu and Kashmir a darkest day in history of Jammu and Kashmir.

Speech of Dr Shabir Choudhry in a webinar organised by United Kashmir Peoples National Party. 24 October 20121.

Mr Chairman, friends and colleagues Salam and good afternoon to all of you.

There are many aspects of the Operation Gulmarg. In my presentation, I shall mainly focus on three points:

  1. Why Pakistan attacked Kashmir?

  2. Why Jammu and Kashmir dispute was referred to the UN

    Security Council

  3. Was Mr Jinnah aware of the Operation Gulmarg?

Mr Chairman

  1. Before we look at why Pakistan attacked Kashmir and partitioned the State of Jammu and Kashmir, we need to briefly see why India was divided on religious lines.

  2. With the help of America and other allies Britain won the Second World war, but lost the Status of a great military power. After the war, America and the Soviet Union emerged as two Superpowers.

  3. Britain was aware of this bitter fact that it was no longer possible to hold on to a huge country like India. Both America and Britain knew in a new era, Soviet Russia was to challenge them. Also, they knew that China and united India could also challenge their interests. In view of this, it was decided that India should be divided on religious lines, and in a way that the new country should serve their interests in the region.

  4. In accordance with their plan, the British India was divided to create Pakistan. The name of Islam was used to motivate people

1

to support the conspiracy of dividing territory, dividing people, promoting hatred, intolerance and extremism.

  1. The new country, Pakistan, has not let them down and energetically served the interests of the West. The first task of Pakistan was to occupy the Kashmir Valley. With the occupation of Kashmir Valley Pakistan would have had control of Ladakh and Gilgit Baltistan, both areas with great strategic importance.

  2. People should note that Britain and America knew the special strategic significance of Gilgit Baltistan, and yet they did not plan any attack to capture that region.

  3. The planners of the

    illegal and imperialist attack would be over within a few days. They almost accomplished the task. They captured Baramulla on 24 October, and they could have taken over Srinagar within a few hours. A Pakistan army officer, Major Agha Humayun Amin, in his book ‘The 1947 - 48 Kashmir War – The war of lost opportunities’,

    wrote:

    ‘There was practically nothing between Muzaffarabad and Srinagar to stop the tribesmen.’ 1

  4. Apart from him, Major General Akbar Khan, the man who masterminded the Operation Gulmarg wrote in his book ‘Raiders in Kashmir’:

    ‘Only 35 miles remained of level road and virtually no resistance. The tribesmen had barely two hours journey left before them lay Srinagar, trembling seemingly at their mercy.’ 2

  5. The raiders failed because they wasted valuable time in looting, plundering, dancing to celebrate their victory, kidnapping women and raping them in Baramulla and in other small towns.

2

Operation Gulmarg wanted to occupy

Srinagar. They were confident that their

10. Those powers which divided India, also wanted to divide the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir. They wanted certain areas of the State to go to Pakistan, and the rest to remain divided so that India and Pakistan continue to fight over these areas.

11. Apart from religion, the Muslim League leaders also talked about democracy, however, within the first week of the establishment of Pakistan, they dismissed an elected government of Dr Khan Saahb in the Frontier Province, now known as KPK. This shows their love for democracy.

12. Their love for Islam can be seen from the following events. In a reply to the telegram of the Maharaja Hari Singh, the Government of Pakistan replied on 15th August 1947, and I quote:

‘Your telegram of the 12th. The Government of Pakistan agrees to have Standstill Agreement with the Government of Jammu and Kashmir for the continuance of the existing arrangements pending settlement of details and formal execution of fresh agreements.’ 3

13. It was a written agreement between the two States. Holy Quran in Surah Bani Israel Ayat 34 says:

And honour your pledge, because the pledge involves responsibility.

14. Under the Standstill Agreement, Pakistan had many responsibilities. However, instead of paying any attention to these responsibilities, rulers of Pakistan started planning to occupy this small, but strategically important State.

15. Apart from what Major General Akbar Khan wrote about the Pakistani plan to liberate Kashmir, another Pakistani army officer, Major Agha Humayun Amin, in his book ‘The 1947 -48 Kashmir War – The war of lost opportunities’, writes:

16. ‘The Muslim League high command had asked Mian Iftikhar Ud Din, Minister for Refugees to prepare a plan aimed at

3

ensuring that the Muslim majority State of Kashmir should join Pakistan. Brigadier Akbar Khan then serving in the Pakistan GHQ wrote an appreciation of ‘Armed Revolt Inside Kashmir’ on Mian Iftikhar Ud Din’s request. It appears that Mr Jinnah had tasked Liaquat to handle the Kashmir business.’ 4

17. Brigadier Akbar Khan, at that time was posted as Director of Weapons and Equipment at GHQ of Pakistan. In his ‘appreciation’, ' Armed Revolt inside Kashmir’, he highlighted the strategic, military and economic importance of Jammu and Kashmir. To him, if Jammu and Kashmir became part of India then India could:

18. ‘Establish such stations anywhere within a few miles of the 180 miles long vital road and rail route between Lahore and Pindi. In the event of war these stations would be a dangerous threat to our most important civil and military lines of communication. If we were to protect this route properly, it would take a major portion of our army to do so and we would thereby dangerously weaken our front at Lahore. If we were to concentrate our strength at the front, we would give India the chance to cut off Lahore, Sialkot, Gujrat and even Jhelum from our military base at the Pindi’. 5

19. Major General Akbar Khan further wrote that even in peacetime the situation could not be acceptable because Pakistan:

Would be permanently exposed to a threat of such magnitude that our independence would never be a reality’. 6

20. After giving details of economic importance of Jammu and Kashmir and how Pakistan heavily relies on this, he concluded: ‘Kashmir’s accession is not simply a matter of desirability but absolute necessity for our separate existence’. 7

21. People of Jammu and Kashmir and people of India need to know that Pakistan is fighting Pakistan’s war in Kashmir. They want to protect, and project outdated Two Nations ideology in

4

Kashmir. They want to promote extremism, religious hatred and intolerance in the name of religion to prove that Muslims and non Muslims cannot live together.

22. To finalise the Operation Gulmarg, a secret meeting was held in Lahore in early September 1947. This meeting was presided by the Prime Minister of Pakistan, and attended by Brigadier Akbar Khan, Mian Ifitikhar Ud Din, Sardar Shaukat Ayat, the Finance Minister Ghulam Mohammed who later became Governor General of Pakistan.

23. In the meeting, all the details were finalised, and logistics were worked out. Shaukat Ayat was appointed overall in charge of this operation. Ghulam Mohammed was to provide all the necessary funds. Col Azam Khanzada of the Ordnance Corps was to take care of arms and ammunition. He even agreed to secretly divert arms to Kashmir; and report that the ‘faulty’ equipment ‘would be shown as dumped in the sea’.

24. Brigadier Akbar Khan also persuaded Brigadier Sher Khan at the GHQ who was Director Intelligence. He was to provide all the necessary information needed for the success of the operation. Apart from that, some former Indian National Army officers were given different tasks for the success of the operation. Furthermore, Air Commodore Mr Janjua agreed to provide essential help in transporting weapons, ammunition, winter clothing and tents etc by using the Pakistani air force. 8

25. Brigadier Akbar Khan, in line with instructions of the political leaders of Pakistan, emphasised in his Plan that presence and involvement of the Pakistan government must not be visible. The entire matter should be presented as a local uprising of Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir against ‘cruel Hindu despot’.

26. Those Muslim citizens of Jammu and Kashmir who are still fooled by the Pakistani propaganda that Pakistan cares and love people of Jammu and Kashmir should, after 74 years, open their

5

eyes. Pakistan planned an invasion of Kashmir, in the name of jihad, to protect Pakistani military, strategic and economic interests; and welfare of the people of Jammu and Kashmir was not their concern.

27. The Indian army reached Srinagar on the morning of 27 October 1947, and pushed the invaders back from Srinagar. When the planners of the invasion realised that they cannot capture Srinagar; they activated plan B, that was to instruct Major Brown to take over Gilgit Baltistan and arrest Governor Brigadier Gansara Singh who reached there to take charge of these areas, after the British lease of the Gilgit Agency was terminated.

Did Jinnah know about the invasion?

28. As pointed out earlier, Mountbatten and the British had a big role in ensuring that strategically important areas of Jammu and Kashmir go to Pakistan. How the rest of Jammu and Kashmir is divided, did not matter to them, as long as this division continued to fester like a cancer wound; and embitter relations between India and Pakistan. They also ensured that the dispute was internationalised by taking it to the United Nations.

29. Many experts believe that Barrister Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan knew what his government was doing in Kashmir. He had delegated powers to other people to accomplish the mission. He wanted to hide himself behind a fake smoke screen that if things go wrong, then he could intervene and try to resolve the matter.

30. Alan Campbell – Johnson, who was Mountbatten’s Press Attaché in India between 1947 till June 1948, had first-hand information of a lot of things which happened during that time in India. In his book, ‘Mission With Mountbatten’, he revealed important information.

31. Ian Stephen in his editorial in ‘The Statesman’ ‘denounced the injection of India troops in Kashmir’. Mountbatten did not like that

6

he summoned him for a meeting. When he arrived, Mountbatten said:

“You can’t build a nation on tricks. Jinnah at Abbottabad”, he continued, “had been expecting to ride in triumph into Kashmir.” 9

32. It must be pointed out that Abbottabad is a beautiful city where in the village of Kakool, the Pakistan’s Military Academy is based, and is close to Muzaffarabad. As a matter of interest, this is where Osama Bin Laden was enjoying his life, not too far from the Military Academy. The tribesmen also used this route to conquer Kashmir.

33. Jinnah talked of democracy, but there was no democracy in his Muslim League, and of course, no democracy in Jinnah’s Pakistan. As long as he was healthy, what he said was a law and no one dared to question his authority.

34. Alan Campbell Johnson notes that Mountbatten told Jinnah: ‘The prospect of the tribesmen entering Srinagar was now remote. This led Jinnah to make his first general proposal, which was that both sides should withdraw at once and simultaneously. When Mountbatten asked him how the tribesmen could be induced to remove themselves, his reply was, “If you do this I will call the whole thing off.” 10

35. Mountbatten and Lord Ismay, his Chief of Staff, flew to Lahore on 1 November 1947. They had separate meetings with Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan, and Liaquat Ali, Prime Minister of Pakistan. Pandit Nehru was also supposed to travel with them, but due to his ‘illness’, he stayed in Delhi.

36. When during the conversation Mountbatten said that the Tribesmen and the invasion was planned and supported by Pakistan, Jinnah refused to have any knowledge of this. However, when proposals to resolve the Jammu and Kashmir were discussed, Mr Jinnah acknowledged his control over the invaders.

7

37. Mountbatten proposed the following steps to be taken before the plebiscite:

Withdrawal of all tribesmen; Withdrawal of all other fighters;

• •

38. This proposal meant, plebiscite to be held while the army was there, and under the administration of Sheikh Abdullah government. Mr Jinnah could not have agreed to that, because he and other leaders of Pakistan believed that with the Indian troops present, a plebiscite under the administration of Sheikh Abdullah will surely go against Pakistan. He, therefore, presented his own proposal:

  • An immediate cease - fire;

  • A mutual withdrawal of all 'alien' troops;

  • A plebiscite under joint control and supervision of two

    Governors General. 11

39. At this stage, Mountbatten asked how the tribesmen would

withdraw. Mr Jinnah reportedly said:

“I will call the whole thing off.” Mountbatten made the following note of the meeting:

40. “When I asked him how the tribesmen were to be called off, he said that all he had to do was to give them an order to come out and to warn them that if they did not comply, he would send large forces along their lines of communication. In fact, if I was prepared to fly to Srinagar with him, he would guarantee that the business would be settled within 24 hours. I expressed mild astonishment at the degree of control that he appeared to exercise over the raiders.” 12

41. Collins and Lapierre, authors of ‘Freedom At Midnight’ noted: ‘Seething with anger, Jinnah defied the British

Followed by a plebiscite under the UN auspices to determine the future status of Jammu and Kashmir;

8

commanders of his army by sending Pakistani units disguised as irregulars to stiffen the demoralised raiders.’ 13

42. Colonel Iskander Mirza, who later on became, Major General, Defence Secretary and President of Pakistan, on 25 October 1947, he met George Cunningham, Governor of the Frontier Province of Pakistan, and told him that the Prime Minister Liaquat Ali wanted to visit him to update him on ‘underground history of the present Kashmir campaign against Kashmir,’ but could not do this due to heart attack he suffered. He extended apology on behalf of Liaquat Ali Khan. During this meeting he revealed to Cunningham that Mr Jinnah was briefed on this about fifteen days ago. However, he declined to hear anymore by saying that “Don’t tell me anything about it. My conscience must be clear.” 14

43. His statement confirms Mr Jinnah was briefed on or around 10 October 1947, as to what Pakistan planned to do in Kashmir. I believe that it is not true. He said this only to ease the sentiments of George Cunningham that because of the urgency even Mr Jinnah was not properly briefed and that he (Cunningham) should not feel being left out. Reality is both Jinnah and Cunningham were aware of what was going on. Cunningham was an experienced man, and as a Governor of this important Province knew what was going on. Mr Jinnah wanted to keep ‘his conscience clear’ by pretending that he was not on board. Mr Cunningham on the hand, while talking to Colonel Iskander Mirza, confirmed by saying that “I am shutting one of my eyes.” 15.

44. Let us assume that Mr Jinnah only found out on 10 October 1947, as to what his Prime Minister, Finance Minister, some army officers and other senior Ministers were doing behind his back. As a good human being, as a lawyer, and as a Governor General of Pakistan what was his responsibility?

45. Was it not his responsibility to ensure that the Standstill Agreement with the Maharaja of Kashmir was not violated?

9

46. Was it not his responsibility to ensure that his army officers, his Prime Minister, and other Ministers must not support any adventure which could result in killing of innocent people, raping, and kidnapping of women, looting, and plundering people and destroying property of the people?

47. Above all, was it not his responsibility to ensure that there was no war between India and Pakistan? Perhaps, for Mr Jinnah the most important issue was to keep his conscience ‘clear’, by closing his eyes and pretending that nothing was happening in Kashmir, and the hands of his army, Prime Minister and other Ministers were clean.

48. A Pakistani writer, Humayun Mirza notes Mr Jinnah’s frustration like this:

‘Jinnah was watching these events with growing impatience and agitation. He sent for Iskander Mirza and declared:
“Why don’t you march in?”

Iskander Mirza replied, “Your Excellency, we are not organised on the ground. Further, we only have ammunition to last us a fortnight. We can’t possibly go to war at this time. 16

49. In view of this precarious situation, one can understand why Mountbatten urged both Liaquat Ali Khan and Nehru to approach the UN Security Council. Continuation of a full-scale war between the two countries would have resulted in a defeat of Pakistan, hence a loss of strategic areas of Gilgit Baltistan.

50. On 24 October 1947, Major General Douglas Gracey, acting Commander in Chief, informed Lt General Rob Lockhart, the Indian Army Chief, as to what was happening in Pakistan regardingcapturingKashmir. LtGeneralLockhartpassedonthis information to Mountbatten and Field Marshal Auchinleck. This information was immediately passed on to Nehru and Patel, and other senior people in India.

51. In other words, everyone with some importance in India and Pakistan knew what was happening. Even many officers with

10

ranks of Majors and Colonels knew it, Pakistani Ministers and politicians knew it, tribal leaders, religious leaders and Kashmiri collaborators knew it. But we are urged to believe that Barrister and Governor General of Pakistan, a shrewd man, who had complete control of the Muslim League, the Cabinet, the Ministers and other politicians was not aware of this.

52. During his trip to Lahore, Mountbatten also had a meeting with General Gracey, who was Commander in Chief of the Pakistan Army. He, as a Governor General of an independent India, wanted to ascertain military strength and preparedness of the Pakistani army. In his Top Secret Report he wrote:

53. ......General Gracey shrugged his shoulders and said, "Pakistan has not got a hope. The air force can hardly take the air.... The army, such as it is, is quite efficient, but it is half the size of the army of India and has no proper backing. The Pakistan army would run out of ammunition very quickly indeed in the event of a large scale engagement.....In fact in any war between the two Dominions, Pakistan would be completely defeated militarily in a fairly short space of time, although the Muslim soldiers would fight gallantly and to the death"...

54. Mountbatten further wrote that, ‘I urged him to make it abundantly clear that in the event of a war, Pakistan would be finished, however gallantly they fought, in a very few weeks unless they had adequate stocks of ammunition and some war factories, which could not occur for several years..... General Gracey promised to send this (report) off as soon as he got back and fully realised that the more the government of Pakistan visualised the hopelessness of fighting India, the more likely it was that they would avoid war.' 17

55. One can see why Mountbatten and the British wanted to ensure that the Jammu and Kashmir dispute was internationalised. If the matters were left alone between the two countries, the danger was that bigger and stronger India may defeat Pakistan and take over the entire Jammu and Kashmir

11

which was not in the interest of the British national and strategic interests.

56. The role and attitude of Mr Liaquat Ali Khan towards the Kashmir dispute and his dealings with India has been perplexing to many. On one hand the Pakistan government claimed that it had no role in sending the tribesmen into Kashmir and that they had no control over them; on the other hand, Mr Liaquat Ali Khan, as a Prime Minister of Pakistan, in a meeting with Mountbatten clearly said that:

57. 'It was fully within his powers to agree to issuing a statement calling upon the tribesmen to withdraw straight away... If he did so, however, without being able to make one concrete offer in return his appeal would be taken no notice of....That he would not mind in what manner the approach (by the Indian government) to UNO was made. He would even agree that it should be in the form of an accusation by India that Pakistan was assisting the raiders. He agreed with His Excellency (Mountbatten) that the first thing the UNO Commission probably would do be to ask Pakistan to use their influence to withdraw the raiders and stop further influxes. In these circumstances, his own position would be so immensely strengthened that he would be able to issue the appeal without impunity.' 18

58. It is amazing to note that the Prime Minister of Pakistan accepted that he had tremendous influence over the tribesmen fighting in Kashmir, and that he was willing to call them back. Furthermore, he agreed that India while approaching the United Nations could accuse Pakistan for 'assisting the raiders’ and that would strengthen his own position. Pakistani friends and those Kashmiris who believe that Pakistan is their "Messiah" could draw their own conclusions.

59. The Tribal invasion, as far as people of Jammu and Kashmir are concerned, was a major event in the modern history of Jammu and Kashmir. In unprovoked and unilateral violation of

12

the Standstill Agreement, the Pakistani Government decided to teach the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir a lesson; and snatch Jammu and Kashmir by military might.

60. It was not only catastrophic because it resulted in the death of tens of thousands of innocent people, rapes and kidnapping of women and girls; but it also changed the course of our history. This unprovoked aggression had the following impact:

1. It changed our destination.
2. It changed secular ethos of Jammu and Kashmir.
3. It deprived us of our independence.
4. It divided our beloved motherland.
5. It divided families and people of Jammu and Kashmir.
6. It killed innocent men and women.
7. It dishonoured women and girls of Jammu and Kashmir.
8. It plundered and looted the resources of Jammu and Kashmir.

9. It is the main cause of our present miseries and troubles on both sides of the forced division.
10. Name of Islam was used to advance imperial agenda of Pakistan, and to kill innocent people in name of religion. 11. In one sentence, it is the cause of all of our problems we face today.

Conclusion

61. I want to assert that Pakistan created this dispute by violating the Standstill Agreement, and by attacking Kashmir with intention to occupy Kashmir.

62. Mr Jinnah was a shrewd politician and a brilliant lawyer. He wanted to punish the Maharaja for not heeding to his whims. He refused to allow Mr Jinnah to visit Srinagar. He was angry that the Maharaja did not accede to Pakistan.

63. Also, he wanted to take revenge from Mountbatten and Nehru. In his view, both Nehru and Mountbatten were working as a team to outmanoeuvre Mr Jinnah. By snatching Kashmir from Mountbatten and Nehru he wanted to settle the score with them.

13

He believed that they deliberately deprived Pakistan certain Muslim areas of the British India by a well-planned conspiracy.

64. He wanted to capture Kashmir, and prove that he was better than both Mountbatten and Nehru. However, as a lawyer, he wanted to have many frontmen to accomplish the task, and provide exculpation.

65. In conclusion Mr Chairman, I assert that Pakistan entered Jammu and Kashmir:
o By violating a written agreement Standstill Agreement;
o Against the wish of the Ruler;

o With intention to occupy the State by force;
o Attackers were allowed to kill, torture, kidnap, loot and

plunder.

  1. India entered Jammu and Kashmir:

    • On request of the Ruler;

    • After a written agreement;

    • With intention to safeguard life, liberty, property and honour

      of citizens;

    • To drive out the invaders.

  2. In view of the above irrefutable facts, the International

Community regarded Pakistan:

  • an aggressor,

  • That is why Pakistan was asked to vacate all the areas;

68. India’s presence in Jammu and Kashmir was perceived as a ‘legal one’. That is why India was permitted to keep troops for the purpose of law and order, and to save people from any future adventure from Pakistan or from any other country.

69. In other words, the world community, represented by the UN, wanted India to be responsible for law and order, and defence of Jammu and Kashmir.

70. India could be opposed, criticised and even condemned for not maintaining law and order, and for protecting life, property,

14

liberty and honour of the people; however, that does not make India’s presence in Jammu and Kashmir illegal. End

Reference:

  1. MajorAghaHumayunAmin,inhisbook‘The1947-48KashmirWarThe

    war of lost opportunities’,

  2. RaidersinKashmir,page37

  3. LLakhanpal,‘EssentialDocumentsandNotesonKashmirDispute’,page45

  4. Major Agha Humayun Amin, ‘The 1947 - 48 Kashmir War The war of lost

    opportunities’, page 3

  5. RaidersinKashmir,page9

  6. Ibid,page10

  7. Ibid,page10

  8. Ibid,page19

  9. AlanCampbellJohnson,‘MissionWithMountbatten’Page225

10.Ibid, page 229
11.Kashmir A Disputed Legacy, Alastair Lamb, page 166 12. The Pursuit of Kashmir, Zaib un Nisa Aziz

https://herald.dawn.com/news/1153341?fbclid=IwAR2jjTdttIhSh8b4P8Hai613CWrM 0_zHbZFkuXZ6SdtvzF6gFj0_CcLMC2s

13.Freedom At Midnight, Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, Page 412 14.Humayun Mirza, ‘From Plassey to Pakistan’, page 157 15.Ibid, page 157

16.Ibid, page 158
17.Top Secret Report sent by Mountbatten, quoted in 'Mountbatten and

Independent India', by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, page 293/4 18.Top Secret Report of a meeting between Mountbatten, Nehru, Sardar Patel, Baldev Singh, Mr Gopalaswami Ayyangar, Liaquat Ali Khan and Ghulam

Mohammed, held on 8 December 1947.

15