Aslamo alaykam Shabana Bashir
You have hatred of the Indian army, is it because of the human rights violation in Kashmir or is it because they are Indians?
I suppose you hate them because of human rights abuse. I also hate those who kill innocent people and torture them.
Have you cared to find out what percentage of human rights abuse is attributed to the Indian Army? Do you know apart from the Indian army, Border Security Force, Rashatria Rifles, Task Force, Special Operations Group and the Kashmiri Police are also involved in this?
I don't know how many Muslims are there in the Indian army, but I know that Task Force, SOG and Kashmir Police consist of Kashmiri Muslims; and at one time the Task Force was the biggest culprit of human rights abuses in Kashmir.
So is it ok to call them dogs because of human rights violations. What would you call those Pakistani army men who committed massive human rights abuses in East Pakistan, against their own people and Muslims? And what would you call those Pakistani army men who still kill and torture Muslims in Swat and various parts of FATA by using F16 and helicopter gun ships?
And what would you call human rights abuses committed by the Pakistani army and secret agencies, though at a lesser scale than the Valley in the Pakistani Administered Kashmir?
Dogs are very loyal to human beings, I am not sure if it is appropriate to give their example to explain despicable behaviour of men whether they are in uniform or in civilian clothes.
My point is that as a civilised person you should not use words like dogs, as hatred breeds more hatred.
Dr Shabir Choudhry
Monday, 14 June 2010
Who has compromised in Gilgit Baltistan?
Who has compromised in Gilgit Baltistan?
Dr Shabir Choudhry 14 June 2010
Legally and constitutionally areas of Gilgit Baltistan are part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, but practically Pakistan has annexed these areas. Irony is Pakistan still present itself as a champion of Kashmiri peoples right of self determination and many people are so gullible that not only they accept this, but also urge others to fall in line or else they will be declared anti Pakistan or pro India.
These areas of Gilgit Baltistan have great strategic importance and it was because of this the British leased Gilgit Agency from the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir; and returned it only two weeks before the end of their Raj in India. This area was so important to them that when the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir refused to give them a lease, they in order to twist his arm, managed unrest in Kashmir which included the incident of 13 July 1931.
Pakistan took over these areas after the British, with help of Gilgit Scouts, managed another unrest which resulted in overthrow of the Maharaja’s appointed Governor Brigadier Gansara Singh. In order to get some kind of legality to their rule, the Pakistani government signed a treaty with their puppet rulers in Azad Kashmir. This treaty is known as the Karachi Agreement.
The government of Pakistan issued Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance last year and have made these areas a province of Pakistan without declaring it as such. In 1971 war they lost East Pakistan which was about 57 thousand square miles; and they have recovered some of that loss by annexing Gilgit Baltistan which is about 28 thousand square miles.
Gilgit Baltistan has population of just over two million. They weren’t many who opposed this Ordinance, as they expected it to bring about a system of government better than what they had experienced previously. Apart from that they were promised enormous economic rewards which have not been delivered yet.
One man – Shafqat Inquilabi had commitment to his ideology, and he loved his nation; and didn’t want it to become part of Pakistan. He thought it was humiliating that Gilgit Baltistan is annexed by an Ordinance. He decided to stand up and be counted that at least there was someone who openly opposed it. After discussing the matter with his colleagues, especially leadership of Kashmir National Party, he decided to challenge this Ordinance. In hope of getting justice and that from Pakistani rulers and Pakistani judiciary, he challenged the Ordinance in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
In my last article on the subject titled, Gilgit Baltistan and Shafqat Inquilabi, I wrote some details of what the Pakistani secret agencies did to Shafqat Inquilabi for challenging Pakistani government over the issue of Gilgit Baltistan. This article was carried by dozens of publications and I got many emails on the subject. Some people have expressed support, and a few have suggested that propaganda has been unleashed against Shafqat Inquilabi that he has ‘compromised’ and that was why Kashmiri nationalists were not supporting him.
This allegation is ridiculous. All colonial powers want to prolong their rule in their colony and for that purpose they give rewards to those who are willing to sell their souls for material and political gains. Pakistani rulers are no exception to this rule. They have also established their rule with help of local collaborators which directly support their rule and some act as their ‘B team’; and impose themselves as ‘nationalists’. The role of these fake nationalists is to create divisions and make allegations against those who genuinely oppose the colonial rule.
About four years ago I heard Shafqat Inquilabi had compromised his position, and he was no longer a ‘nationalist’. When Pakistan annexed these areas, many ‘nationalists’ decided to remain quiet, or tried to get some rewards; but Shafqat Inquilabi was prominent among those who strongly opposed this Ordinance. Furthermore it was Shafqat Inquilabi who filed a case in the Supreme Court of Pakistan; and consequently suffered for his daring action; and yet propaganda against him is that he has ‘compromised’.
It doesn’t require rocket science to reach this conclusion that those who are spreading this propaganda are either agents of those whose interest Shafqat Inquilabi has challenged or they have personal disliking of the man or they feel threatened by his political activities, as they feel area for them to manoeuvre is getting marginalised.
Who else has compromised?
Both factions of APHC are Valley centric, their Kashmir or interest does not go beyond boundaries of the Valley, hence silence over what Pakistan does to people of Jammu and Kashmir on the other side of LOC. One could say same is the case with Yasin Malik, Shabir Shah and Sajjad Lone. He has become more pro division since becoming son in law of Amanullah Khan.
I had an interesting email regarding the issue of compromise, and it surely gives a different perspective on the matter. Without making any changes, I am producing most of this email for benefit of my readers. It reads:
‘I am very much surprised as to why Indian government does not talk about rights of people of Gilgit Baltistan? And why even the elected leadership (Omar Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti) in Kashmir never raise enough concern over Pakistan's pact for GB year 2009?
Does it mean that India has given up its claim on the territory or does not consider GB part of Kashmir? Then why Indian Government Official Map still shows GB as part of 1947 Kashmir political map?
Also its true for GB people as well, they don’t seek any political input from Indian Administered Kashmir or even Indian government. It seems that, unlike what we hear officially from APHC, Indian or Pakistani Government is not what is actually happening on the ground. The only thing which is true on the ground and what is portrayed in news is the huge army presence in civilian areas of Kashmir Valley, which is the cause of death and other human right violations. It is portrayed as if only Valley is having consistent agitations and issues with Army and Indian Government. Rest part of Kashmir like AJK, GB, Ladhak, Jammu all seems to be contended, by and large, with what ever they have got.
It is agreed that all regions of Kashmir political entity don't protest as vehemently as Kashmir-Valley Specific. The reasons may be they are driven by religion or Pakistani agency or foreign money sources, but yes, Kashmir Valley really make a louder and consistent case than any other sub-division of Kashmir State.
What will it take to make a unified voice from all regions of Kashmir State, unanimously that we want liberation? And when will that happen? Can only Kashmir Valley stone throws and agitations and human sacrifices is enough for Kashmir resolution? Aren't the political leaders guilty of misery of common men, whom they have forced in this quagmire of never ending mess?
What is the way forward? I think the way forward is to realise that we have a problem, and then to have a compromise solution. Compromise solution is to give the Kashmir state (the whole) political freedom guaranteed by United Nations, China, India and Pakistan. In return, Free Kashmir will guarantee, equal and fair treatment of all neighbours and will not give leverage to one neighbour at the cost of the other. This will include political and business opportunities as well’.
This long quotation has many important points and readers can draw their own conclusions. But it shows that people know who is doing what in name of Kashmir; and what needs to be done to end the misery of the suffering people.
However it would be pertinent to say that, at least, one political figure from the Valley has expressed his support for Shafqat Inquilabi and the cause he is promoting. That person is Hilal Ahmed War, who has expressed his full solidarity with the people of Gilgit Baltistan and openly said that these areas are part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Hilal Ahmed War says Pakistan has no right to annex these areas.
Role of China in this matter
It would be interesting for the readers to know that China also had great input in Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance. Chinese interest in this strategically important region is well known and they have more than 12,000 army personal carrying out various projects. China has helped Pakistan enormously and all the major projects have been completed with the Chinese help, guidance and money.
China and Pakistan have signed some more major projects related to this region which include construction of Diamer Basha Dam and other dams. Apart from the skilled labour, China has agreed to completely finance the $8.5 billion project, which was previously
put at 6.5 billion. When the World Bank refused to help Pakistan, the Chinese agreed to take full responsibility for the project, but they were not willing to invest this huge amount of money in a territory legal status of which was uncertain.
The work on the project was scheduled to start in 2009, and under pressure from China the Pakistan government produced that Ordinance. They had no time to think or plan it properly; or even discuss it with their puppets in Azad Kashmir or in Gilgit Baltistan.
This adds a new twist to the tragedy. On one hand there is government of Pakistan with all its might and powerful secret agencies, and of course support of local collaborators, not to mention position of China on the subject of the Ordinance; and on other hand is Shafqat Inquilabi who has challenged that Ordinance.
Of course he has no chance of winning. So far he has stood firmly and has not given in to the pressure of the agencies to withdraw that petition from the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Apart from the Almighty the only supporter he has is newly established nationalist and secular party called Kashmir National Party.
We will continue to support Shafqat Inquilabi, even when we know we will get hurt in this fight, and we will not win it either; but at times, winning is not everything, upholding a principle is more important. Instead of becoming collaborators or agents of those who occupy us, we will rather go down fighting.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 14 June 2010
Legally and constitutionally areas of Gilgit Baltistan are part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, but practically Pakistan has annexed these areas. Irony is Pakistan still present itself as a champion of Kashmiri peoples right of self determination and many people are so gullible that not only they accept this, but also urge others to fall in line or else they will be declared anti Pakistan or pro India.
These areas of Gilgit Baltistan have great strategic importance and it was because of this the British leased Gilgit Agency from the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir; and returned it only two weeks before the end of their Raj in India. This area was so important to them that when the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir refused to give them a lease, they in order to twist his arm, managed unrest in Kashmir which included the incident of 13 July 1931.
Pakistan took over these areas after the British, with help of Gilgit Scouts, managed another unrest which resulted in overthrow of the Maharaja’s appointed Governor Brigadier Gansara Singh. In order to get some kind of legality to their rule, the Pakistani government signed a treaty with their puppet rulers in Azad Kashmir. This treaty is known as the Karachi Agreement.
The government of Pakistan issued Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance last year and have made these areas a province of Pakistan without declaring it as such. In 1971 war they lost East Pakistan which was about 57 thousand square miles; and they have recovered some of that loss by annexing Gilgit Baltistan which is about 28 thousand square miles.
Gilgit Baltistan has population of just over two million. They weren’t many who opposed this Ordinance, as they expected it to bring about a system of government better than what they had experienced previously. Apart from that they were promised enormous economic rewards which have not been delivered yet.
One man – Shafqat Inquilabi had commitment to his ideology, and he loved his nation; and didn’t want it to become part of Pakistan. He thought it was humiliating that Gilgit Baltistan is annexed by an Ordinance. He decided to stand up and be counted that at least there was someone who openly opposed it. After discussing the matter with his colleagues, especially leadership of Kashmir National Party, he decided to challenge this Ordinance. In hope of getting justice and that from Pakistani rulers and Pakistani judiciary, he challenged the Ordinance in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
In my last article on the subject titled, Gilgit Baltistan and Shafqat Inquilabi, I wrote some details of what the Pakistani secret agencies did to Shafqat Inquilabi for challenging Pakistani government over the issue of Gilgit Baltistan. This article was carried by dozens of publications and I got many emails on the subject. Some people have expressed support, and a few have suggested that propaganda has been unleashed against Shafqat Inquilabi that he has ‘compromised’ and that was why Kashmiri nationalists were not supporting him.
This allegation is ridiculous. All colonial powers want to prolong their rule in their colony and for that purpose they give rewards to those who are willing to sell their souls for material and political gains. Pakistani rulers are no exception to this rule. They have also established their rule with help of local collaborators which directly support their rule and some act as their ‘B team’; and impose themselves as ‘nationalists’. The role of these fake nationalists is to create divisions and make allegations against those who genuinely oppose the colonial rule.
About four years ago I heard Shafqat Inquilabi had compromised his position, and he was no longer a ‘nationalist’. When Pakistan annexed these areas, many ‘nationalists’ decided to remain quiet, or tried to get some rewards; but Shafqat Inquilabi was prominent among those who strongly opposed this Ordinance. Furthermore it was Shafqat Inquilabi who filed a case in the Supreme Court of Pakistan; and consequently suffered for his daring action; and yet propaganda against him is that he has ‘compromised’.
It doesn’t require rocket science to reach this conclusion that those who are spreading this propaganda are either agents of those whose interest Shafqat Inquilabi has challenged or they have personal disliking of the man or they feel threatened by his political activities, as they feel area for them to manoeuvre is getting marginalised.
Who else has compromised?
Both factions of APHC are Valley centric, their Kashmir or interest does not go beyond boundaries of the Valley, hence silence over what Pakistan does to people of Jammu and Kashmir on the other side of LOC. One could say same is the case with Yasin Malik, Shabir Shah and Sajjad Lone. He has become more pro division since becoming son in law of Amanullah Khan.
I had an interesting email regarding the issue of compromise, and it surely gives a different perspective on the matter. Without making any changes, I am producing most of this email for benefit of my readers. It reads:
‘I am very much surprised as to why Indian government does not talk about rights of people of Gilgit Baltistan? And why even the elected leadership (Omar Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti) in Kashmir never raise enough concern over Pakistan's pact for GB year 2009?
Does it mean that India has given up its claim on the territory or does not consider GB part of Kashmir? Then why Indian Government Official Map still shows GB as part of 1947 Kashmir political map?
Also its true for GB people as well, they don’t seek any political input from Indian Administered Kashmir or even Indian government. It seems that, unlike what we hear officially from APHC, Indian or Pakistani Government is not what is actually happening on the ground. The only thing which is true on the ground and what is portrayed in news is the huge army presence in civilian areas of Kashmir Valley, which is the cause of death and other human right violations. It is portrayed as if only Valley is having consistent agitations and issues with Army and Indian Government. Rest part of Kashmir like AJK, GB, Ladhak, Jammu all seems to be contended, by and large, with what ever they have got.
It is agreed that all regions of Kashmir political entity don't protest as vehemently as Kashmir-Valley Specific. The reasons may be they are driven by religion or Pakistani agency or foreign money sources, but yes, Kashmir Valley really make a louder and consistent case than any other sub-division of Kashmir State.
What will it take to make a unified voice from all regions of Kashmir State, unanimously that we want liberation? And when will that happen? Can only Kashmir Valley stone throws and agitations and human sacrifices is enough for Kashmir resolution? Aren't the political leaders guilty of misery of common men, whom they have forced in this quagmire of never ending mess?
What is the way forward? I think the way forward is to realise that we have a problem, and then to have a compromise solution. Compromise solution is to give the Kashmir state (the whole) political freedom guaranteed by United Nations, China, India and Pakistan. In return, Free Kashmir will guarantee, equal and fair treatment of all neighbours and will not give leverage to one neighbour at the cost of the other. This will include political and business opportunities as well’.
This long quotation has many important points and readers can draw their own conclusions. But it shows that people know who is doing what in name of Kashmir; and what needs to be done to end the misery of the suffering people.
However it would be pertinent to say that, at least, one political figure from the Valley has expressed his support for Shafqat Inquilabi and the cause he is promoting. That person is Hilal Ahmed War, who has expressed his full solidarity with the people of Gilgit Baltistan and openly said that these areas are part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Hilal Ahmed War says Pakistan has no right to annex these areas.
Role of China in this matter
It would be interesting for the readers to know that China also had great input in Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance. Chinese interest in this strategically important region is well known and they have more than 12,000 army personal carrying out various projects. China has helped Pakistan enormously and all the major projects have been completed with the Chinese help, guidance and money.
China and Pakistan have signed some more major projects related to this region which include construction of Diamer Basha Dam and other dams. Apart from the skilled labour, China has agreed to completely finance the $8.5 billion project, which was previously
put at 6.5 billion. When the World Bank refused to help Pakistan, the Chinese agreed to take full responsibility for the project, but they were not willing to invest this huge amount of money in a territory legal status of which was uncertain.
The work on the project was scheduled to start in 2009, and under pressure from China the Pakistan government produced that Ordinance. They had no time to think or plan it properly; or even discuss it with their puppets in Azad Kashmir or in Gilgit Baltistan.
This adds a new twist to the tragedy. On one hand there is government of Pakistan with all its might and powerful secret agencies, and of course support of local collaborators, not to mention position of China on the subject of the Ordinance; and on other hand is Shafqat Inquilabi who has challenged that Ordinance.
Of course he has no chance of winning. So far he has stood firmly and has not given in to the pressure of the agencies to withdraw that petition from the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Apart from the Almighty the only supporter he has is newly established nationalist and secular party called Kashmir National Party.
We will continue to support Shafqat Inquilabi, even when we know we will get hurt in this fight, and we will not win it either; but at times, winning is not everything, upholding a principle is more important. Instead of becoming collaborators or agents of those who occupy us, we will rather go down fighting.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Saturday, 12 June 2010
Gilgit Baltistan and Shafqat Inquilabi
Gilgit Baltistan and Shafqat Inquilabi
Dr Shabir Choudhry 12 June 2010
For the first time in the past 63 years, rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir were allowed to visit Gilgit Baltistan, area of the State which has been under direct and oppressive rule of Pakistan.
The State was partitioned after the war between India and Pakistan and puppet rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir signed away vast areas of Gilgit Baltistan to their political bosses in Islamabad; and limited their interest to the area known as Azad Kashmir.
Since 1947 bureaucrats and secret agencies of Pakistan ruled Gilgit Baltistan with an iron fist, and rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir turned blind eye to the plight of these unfortunate people; and enjoyed their rule and sincerely served their Pakistani masters. They continue to serve and flatter Islamabad, even at the cost of interest of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The party (Muslim Conference) that signed that ignominious treaty with Pakistani rulers, in view of some, worse than the Treaty of Amritsar, had no branches or even a single member in the areas of Gilgit Baltistan. One wonders what moral or legal justification they had to sign that treaty and leave the people of 28 thousand Square miles at the mercy of oppressive and imperialist minded bureaucrats of Pakistan.
One wonders with that kind of blunder which made lives of millions of innocent people like a living hell, how do these so called leaders and champions of ‘freedom movement’ could sleep at night?
After signing this agreement, Muslim Conference leaders and rulers of Azad Kashmir almost forgot about the plight of the people of Gilgit Baltistan; and confined their rule and interest to the territory of Azad Kashmir. In early 1990s when the Kashmiri struggle was at its peak and many Kashmir watchers thought India might leave Kashmir on condition that the entire State becomes an independent country.
With that in mind Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir of the time, anticipating a change and having a desire to become a Prime Minister of the entire State of Jammu Kashmir contacted his bosses in Islamabad to allow him to visit Gilgit Baltistan. The boss concerned demanded reason for this; and the Prime Minister who thought he was becoming more important and had more influence because of the changing scenario on Kashmir said in the current situation it is important to visit Gilgit Baltistan to spread our influence.
He was bluntly told to keep away from Gilgit Baltistan, as these areas were responsibility of Islamabad. Moreover, he was the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, and Act 74 clearly explains parameters of his power and influence; so he must not step outside those parameters, if he wanted to continue with his job. The Prime Minister apologised for his mistake and did not dare to ask permission again.
Perhaps the situation has changed, and both the Prime Minister and the President of Azad Kashmir were given permission to visit Gilgit Baltistan and give a donation of one Cror rupees. They went to express solidarity with the people of Gilgit Baltistan who have been uprooted because of Ataa Bad artificial lake. According to one estimate more than one hundred thousand people have been uprooted because of this lake, and people have suffered enormously because of lack of proper facilities.
They were received by Governor Dr Shama Khalid and Chief Minister Syed Mehdi Shah who thanked them for extending their support to the people of Gilgit Baltistan. Why did Pakistan allow Azad Kashmiri rulers to visit Gilgit Baltistan?
Is it because there is a change of policy in Islamabad, or they went there because bosses in Islamabad feel this territory is no longer part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and had become a province of Pakistan without calling it a province?
When there was some ambiguity regarding the legal status of these areas, Islamabad did not allow any ruler of Azad Kashmir to visit Gilgit Baltistan. In September 2009, Pakistan unilaterally and against bilateral and international covenants on Kashmir changed legal status of these areas and practically made them a province of Pakistan.
So, as far as Islamabad was concerned they have allowed the Prime Minister and the President of Azad Kashmir to visit a ‘Pakistani province’. The question is how do people of Jammu and Kashmir State think of this? What reaction, if any, people of Gilgit Baltistan have shown, now that they have experienced a ‘provincial status’ for some time?
What reaction ‘naita jees’ of All Parties Hurriyet Conference, who claim to represent all the Kashmiris have shown; or they are too frightened to speak about Gilgit Baltistan because their political masters in Islamabad could get angry, as the role assigned to them is to limit their activities within the boundary of the Valley.
In any case, naita jees of APHC have myopic view of the struggle and want to see everything with the lenses of religion. Apart from that their struggle is very heavily commercialised and negate politics of ballot and democracy, hence their influence is restricted to some sub districts of the Valley.
People of Azad Kashmir, unlike their rulers, have shown their anger against Pakistani designs on Gilgit Baltistan. But the question is, is that enough? Do they think their job is over and they can sit back and relax?
One man – Shafqat inquilabi, who challenged the Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance imposed by Islamabad on people of Gilgit Baltistan without and kind of consultation has been made example by the secret agencies of Pakistan; and sad thing is, apart from Kashmir National Party no one has come to even support him verbally.
Shafqat Inquilabi challenged this Ordinance in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, hoping to get justice from a Pakistani judiciary, which is perceived to be independent now. Despite many efforts he has not been able to get hearing date yet because the secret agencies believe that they can twist arm of Shafqat Inquilabi to withdraw the case; and this fact speaks volumes about the independence of judiciary, especially when it comes to Gilgit Baltistan.
Shafqat Inquilabi is an engineer by profession, and as a sub contractor was constructing some buildings in Pateka near Muzaffarabad. He had invested about nine lakhs rupees (nine hundred thousands) which he borrowed from some friends including me. To date, Shafqat Inquilabi has stood his ground and refused to give in to the pressure of secret agencies, but not without a big price.
Because of tremendous pressure of the secret agencies, the concerned people have expelled Shafqat Inquilabi from the project. He is out of job and has also lost all the money he had invested in the project. In order to ensure that he is alienated socially, all his friends and relatives were cautioned to keep away from him otherwise they will also suffer economically.
All this is happening in Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a country which was established in name of Islam, but most of things which occur here are against clear teachings of Islam. They claim to provide protection to non Muslims, but in this land of pure even Muslims are not safe, as every day they are killed by jet fighters and helicopter gun ships; and non Muslims are systematically targeted and killed.
What Pakistan is doing is not surprising, as all imperialist and totalitarian governments do this, they curb civil liberties and in name of nationalist interest they kill and imprison innocent people. However sad thing is the attitude of nationalists of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. They have not supported him, even though demand of their nationalism was to unconditionally support him.
One could only think of three reasons:
• They don’t want to support it out of jealousy because it will indirectly mean supporting KNP – a party which helped and supported Shafqat Inqquilabi and continue to do so;
• They don’t want to face wrath of secret agencies; especially when some of the credit could go to Shafqat Inquilabi and KNP;
• Perhaps they are fake nationalists; and in disguise of nationalism are actually promoting and protecting interests of Islamabad.
It is a test of Kashmiri nationalists to come out and support Shafqat Inquilabi’s case; and while doing so also ensure that Shafqat Inquilabi does not become a victim of the secret agencies. If he is made to surrender that will boost the confidence of the secret agencies; and it will make it extremely difficult for others to challenge the might of these agencies.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 12 June 2010
For the first time in the past 63 years, rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir were allowed to visit Gilgit Baltistan, area of the State which has been under direct and oppressive rule of Pakistan.
The State was partitioned after the war between India and Pakistan and puppet rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir signed away vast areas of Gilgit Baltistan to their political bosses in Islamabad; and limited their interest to the area known as Azad Kashmir.
Since 1947 bureaucrats and secret agencies of Pakistan ruled Gilgit Baltistan with an iron fist, and rulers of Pakistani Administered Kashmir turned blind eye to the plight of these unfortunate people; and enjoyed their rule and sincerely served their Pakistani masters. They continue to serve and flatter Islamabad, even at the cost of interest of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The party (Muslim Conference) that signed that ignominious treaty with Pakistani rulers, in view of some, worse than the Treaty of Amritsar, had no branches or even a single member in the areas of Gilgit Baltistan. One wonders what moral or legal justification they had to sign that treaty and leave the people of 28 thousand Square miles at the mercy of oppressive and imperialist minded bureaucrats of Pakistan.
One wonders with that kind of blunder which made lives of millions of innocent people like a living hell, how do these so called leaders and champions of ‘freedom movement’ could sleep at night?
After signing this agreement, Muslim Conference leaders and rulers of Azad Kashmir almost forgot about the plight of the people of Gilgit Baltistan; and confined their rule and interest to the territory of Azad Kashmir. In early 1990s when the Kashmiri struggle was at its peak and many Kashmir watchers thought India might leave Kashmir on condition that the entire State becomes an independent country.
With that in mind Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir of the time, anticipating a change and having a desire to become a Prime Minister of the entire State of Jammu Kashmir contacted his bosses in Islamabad to allow him to visit Gilgit Baltistan. The boss concerned demanded reason for this; and the Prime Minister who thought he was becoming more important and had more influence because of the changing scenario on Kashmir said in the current situation it is important to visit Gilgit Baltistan to spread our influence.
He was bluntly told to keep away from Gilgit Baltistan, as these areas were responsibility of Islamabad. Moreover, he was the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, and Act 74 clearly explains parameters of his power and influence; so he must not step outside those parameters, if he wanted to continue with his job. The Prime Minister apologised for his mistake and did not dare to ask permission again.
Perhaps the situation has changed, and both the Prime Minister and the President of Azad Kashmir were given permission to visit Gilgit Baltistan and give a donation of one Cror rupees. They went to express solidarity with the people of Gilgit Baltistan who have been uprooted because of Ataa Bad artificial lake. According to one estimate more than one hundred thousand people have been uprooted because of this lake, and people have suffered enormously because of lack of proper facilities.
They were received by Governor Dr Shama Khalid and Chief Minister Syed Mehdi Shah who thanked them for extending their support to the people of Gilgit Baltistan. Why did Pakistan allow Azad Kashmiri rulers to visit Gilgit Baltistan?
Is it because there is a change of policy in Islamabad, or they went there because bosses in Islamabad feel this territory is no longer part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and had become a province of Pakistan without calling it a province?
When there was some ambiguity regarding the legal status of these areas, Islamabad did not allow any ruler of Azad Kashmir to visit Gilgit Baltistan. In September 2009, Pakistan unilaterally and against bilateral and international covenants on Kashmir changed legal status of these areas and practically made them a province of Pakistan.
So, as far as Islamabad was concerned they have allowed the Prime Minister and the President of Azad Kashmir to visit a ‘Pakistani province’. The question is how do people of Jammu and Kashmir State think of this? What reaction, if any, people of Gilgit Baltistan have shown, now that they have experienced a ‘provincial status’ for some time?
What reaction ‘naita jees’ of All Parties Hurriyet Conference, who claim to represent all the Kashmiris have shown; or they are too frightened to speak about Gilgit Baltistan because their political masters in Islamabad could get angry, as the role assigned to them is to limit their activities within the boundary of the Valley.
In any case, naita jees of APHC have myopic view of the struggle and want to see everything with the lenses of religion. Apart from that their struggle is very heavily commercialised and negate politics of ballot and democracy, hence their influence is restricted to some sub districts of the Valley.
People of Azad Kashmir, unlike their rulers, have shown their anger against Pakistani designs on Gilgit Baltistan. But the question is, is that enough? Do they think their job is over and they can sit back and relax?
One man – Shafqat inquilabi, who challenged the Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance imposed by Islamabad on people of Gilgit Baltistan without and kind of consultation has been made example by the secret agencies of Pakistan; and sad thing is, apart from Kashmir National Party no one has come to even support him verbally.
Shafqat Inquilabi challenged this Ordinance in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, hoping to get justice from a Pakistani judiciary, which is perceived to be independent now. Despite many efforts he has not been able to get hearing date yet because the secret agencies believe that they can twist arm of Shafqat Inquilabi to withdraw the case; and this fact speaks volumes about the independence of judiciary, especially when it comes to Gilgit Baltistan.
Shafqat Inquilabi is an engineer by profession, and as a sub contractor was constructing some buildings in Pateka near Muzaffarabad. He had invested about nine lakhs rupees (nine hundred thousands) which he borrowed from some friends including me. To date, Shafqat Inquilabi has stood his ground and refused to give in to the pressure of secret agencies, but not without a big price.
Because of tremendous pressure of the secret agencies, the concerned people have expelled Shafqat Inquilabi from the project. He is out of job and has also lost all the money he had invested in the project. In order to ensure that he is alienated socially, all his friends and relatives were cautioned to keep away from him otherwise they will also suffer economically.
All this is happening in Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a country which was established in name of Islam, but most of things which occur here are against clear teachings of Islam. They claim to provide protection to non Muslims, but in this land of pure even Muslims are not safe, as every day they are killed by jet fighters and helicopter gun ships; and non Muslims are systematically targeted and killed.
What Pakistan is doing is not surprising, as all imperialist and totalitarian governments do this, they curb civil liberties and in name of nationalist interest they kill and imprison innocent people. However sad thing is the attitude of nationalists of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. They have not supported him, even though demand of their nationalism was to unconditionally support him.
One could only think of three reasons:
• They don’t want to support it out of jealousy because it will indirectly mean supporting KNP – a party which helped and supported Shafqat Inqquilabi and continue to do so;
• They don’t want to face wrath of secret agencies; especially when some of the credit could go to Shafqat Inquilabi and KNP;
• Perhaps they are fake nationalists; and in disguise of nationalism are actually promoting and protecting interests of Islamabad.
It is a test of Kashmiri nationalists to come out and support Shafqat Inquilabi’s case; and while doing so also ensure that Shafqat Inquilabi does not become a victim of the secret agencies. If he is made to surrender that will boost the confidence of the secret agencies; and it will make it extremely difficult for others to challenge the might of these agencies.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Tuesday, 25 May 2010
Across LOC firing
Across LOC firing
Aslamo alaykam colleagues
Shabana Bashir has started very good discussion- an issue of across the LOC firing in which there were some causalities on the Pakistani side of the LOC.
Hawaldar Mudasser Shafiq who was killed in this across the LOC firing incident belongs to my area Panjeri - near my village Nakker Shamali.
His father was an Inspector of ISI. He was the one who visited my father when I made a speech in the UN Rights Commission against the upraising of Mangla Dam, which irritated many in Pakistan and on the Pakistani side of LOC. It also irritated Yasin Malik, and on instructions of ISI Abbas Butt and I was expelled from the JKLF by Yasin Malik for this ‘crime’ of speaking for the rights of Mirpur; and for exposing Pakistani injustice on this side of the LOC.
My 82 yeas old father who suffered from heart ailment was harassed. A senior ISI officer wanted to harass and my father and give him stern warning. But Inspector Shafeeq because of family contacts intervened and persuaded his boss not to go, as he would deal with the matter locally.
Despite that my father was warned to control Shabir, else we will sort him out – his exact words were: Shabir ko bolo banda ban jaaie warna ham ussey khud thheek kar lein gey.
That aside it is a tragic loss and my heart goes to the family of deceased. May Allah grant him a place in Heaven and give sab’r to the family.
Coming back to the issue of the firing, if one reads Pakistani papers or pro Pakistan Kashmiri papers then India started the firing; but if one reads Indian papers it was Pakistani side which started it.
I agree with Shams sahib, whoever started the firing, it is people of the divided State who suffer; and it is because of this we oppose militancy and promote resolution of the Kashmir dispute through a process of dialogue.
However let us analyse this across LOC firing. There is a declared cease fire in the area, then question is why one side will start firing without any reason. Available evidence suggests, whenever Pakistani agencies want to send across armed militants, they always start firing first that the opposite is engaged in this and under the cover of the hostilities armed militants are sent across to the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir to wage a ‘jihad’.
I leave it at that, and readers can draw their own conclusions as to who started it and if this ‘jihad’ is necessary; moreover, if this ‘jihad’ is to ‘liberate’ Kashmir; or there are some other motives behind this?
Aslamo alaykam colleagues
Shabana Bashir has started very good discussion- an issue of across the LOC firing in which there were some causalities on the Pakistani side of the LOC.
Hawaldar Mudasser Shafiq who was killed in this across the LOC firing incident belongs to my area Panjeri - near my village Nakker Shamali.
His father was an Inspector of ISI. He was the one who visited my father when I made a speech in the UN Rights Commission against the upraising of Mangla Dam, which irritated many in Pakistan and on the Pakistani side of LOC. It also irritated Yasin Malik, and on instructions of ISI Abbas Butt and I was expelled from the JKLF by Yasin Malik for this ‘crime’ of speaking for the rights of Mirpur; and for exposing Pakistani injustice on this side of the LOC.
My 82 yeas old father who suffered from heart ailment was harassed. A senior ISI officer wanted to harass and my father and give him stern warning. But Inspector Shafeeq because of family contacts intervened and persuaded his boss not to go, as he would deal with the matter locally.
Despite that my father was warned to control Shabir, else we will sort him out – his exact words were: Shabir ko bolo banda ban jaaie warna ham ussey khud thheek kar lein gey.
That aside it is a tragic loss and my heart goes to the family of deceased. May Allah grant him a place in Heaven and give sab’r to the family.
Coming back to the issue of the firing, if one reads Pakistani papers or pro Pakistan Kashmiri papers then India started the firing; but if one reads Indian papers it was Pakistani side which started it.
I agree with Shams sahib, whoever started the firing, it is people of the divided State who suffer; and it is because of this we oppose militancy and promote resolution of the Kashmir dispute through a process of dialogue.
However let us analyse this across LOC firing. There is a declared cease fire in the area, then question is why one side will start firing without any reason. Available evidence suggests, whenever Pakistani agencies want to send across armed militants, they always start firing first that the opposite is engaged in this and under the cover of the hostilities armed militants are sent across to the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir to wage a ‘jihad’.
I leave it at that, and readers can draw their own conclusions as to who started it and if this ‘jihad’ is necessary; moreover, if this ‘jihad’ is to ‘liberate’ Kashmir; or there are some other motives behind this?
Saturday, 22 May 2010
Poor Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir
Poor Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir
Dr Shabir Choudhry 22 May 2010
Raja Frooq Haider is a Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, or ‘Pakistani Occupied Kashmir’. This is the post which all members of the Azad Kashmir Assembly and other politicians wish to occupy. But not every one is ‘lucky’ or ‘suitable’ for this post. Before a politician becomes a candidate for the Assembly in this territory declared as Azad, meaning independent, he has to declare he will be loyal to Pakistan.
The powers that be ensure that most ‘suitable’ candidate wins his/her seat. When these ‘suitable’ people become members of the Assembly, out of them the one which is more ‘capable’ of protecting interests of Pakistan is selected as the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir.
Ability, integrity, or experience in politics is not important, as he is generally there as a show piece in the shop of ‘democracy’ because all major decisions are mad by Islamabad or four Pakistanis appointed by them to run this territory. These Pakistani are known as ‘lent officers’ and hold powerful positions of IG Police, Chief Secretary, Finance Secretary and Accountant General.
In case of the other important post – President, he could be anyone, even a serving Pakistani army officer, as was the case with the former Presidents - Major General Anwar Khan or Brigadier Ayat Khan. Both of these men were serving army officers when it was decided by the Pakistani authorities to retire them and ‘reward’ them with the highest post in their colony- Azad Kashmir.
The rule that the retired army officer cannot hold a public office for two years after his retirement was waved by Pakistan, after all, it was their army man who was to hold the highest post in Azad Kashmir; and to make way for the army men laws could be changed, twisted or broken because they are the masters of this region – Pakistan, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan.
The Assembly of Azad Kashmir is ‘so good’ that without a question all the ‘honourable’ members of the Assembly signed on the dotted line and accepted the decision of Islamabad; and both army men ruled this territory in their own style and retired from the post honourably. Who says Azad Kashmir is not azad?
Subservient attitude of the Assembly could be understood from the following example. The Act 74 or Interim Constitution was prepared by Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Minister of Law of Pakistan; and Azad Kashmir Assembly passed that within 45 minutes without questioning anything or changing a comma or a full stop.
Since the last general elections Raja Frooq Haider is the third Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir; and until some weeks ago his future was uncertain; and there was talk of the fourth Prime Minister during the life of the present Parliament. Tremendous pressure was applied on him to resign, but he refused to budge and decided to fight his corner. There was also talk of government of Pakistan using Article 56 of the Act 74, which was prepared by Pakistani government to keep Azad Kashmir under their thumb.
Last time Pakistan used this self assigned power was in 1990 against Mumtaz Rathore who was elected Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir; but was soon out of favour with the Army General known as GCO Murree and Minister of Kashmir Affairs. He was arrested and brought to Pakistan by one police inspector of Pakistan.
But time has changed and government of Pakistan was reluctant to use this power. Despite all the pressure Raja Farooq Haider stood his ground and weathered the storm by agreeing to a compromise over issue of judiciary. But despite this climb down, the powerful people in Islamabad have not totally forgiven him.
A famous Pakistani journalist Rauf Kalasra in his article published in Daily Jang on 16 May 2010 explained how Azad Kashmiri Prime Minister was deliberately humiliated. He notes with sorrow that (translation from Urdu):
‘In a meeting chaired by the Pakistani Prime Minister held in Islamabad to find a solution to judicial crises in Azad Kashmir, Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir was made to sit on the last chair in the row. Raja Farooq Haider has clean record and has no corruption charges of any kind; but Manzoor Wattoo, Minister of Kashmir Affairs was seated next to the Prime Minister of Pakistan with full honour, yet there are many corruption charges against him. Above all this man has made life very difficult for the Kashmiri leader.’
Rauf Kalasra further said:
‘He met Raja Farooq Haider when he was only a member of the Assembly, and found him honest and brave man. He thought if this man became Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir one day, he would not dance on the tune played by Section Officers of Ministry of Kashmir Affairs’.
According to Rauf Kalasra, ‘Farooq Haider loved Pakistan, but he also loved Kashmir. He loved Kashmiri identity, its culture and history; and wanted to preserve it’. He thought, ‘Ministry of Kashmir Affairs ruled Azad Kashmir from Islamabad just like the British ruled India. Farooq Haider’, he thought, ‘would not take dictation from Section Officers of Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and would go to any lengths to defend rights of Kashmiris.
Rauf Kalasra said, ‘Prime Minister of Pakistan wants more powers for himself in Pakistan, but he is not prepared to give more and legitimate powers to Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir. Azad Kashmir Chief Secretary Khalid Sultan and IG Police were removed (by Pakistan). Yousaf Gilani Sahib has appointed his friend and business partner Dr Tariq Khokhar from Multan as IG Police in Azad Kashmir and did not even consult the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, because to him advice of Minister of Kashmir Affairs was more important. He (Gilani) has appointed his own administration in Multan, but is not prepared to let the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir have administration of his choice’.
Rauf Kalasra has explained how Pakistan rulers treat Azad Kashmir and elected Prime Minister of the area. The above transfers were not made to promote good governance, but to control and make the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir helpless and impotent. Raja Farooq Haider was ‘lucky’ at least he was allowed to take the last seat in the row that he could also be present when decision is taken on judicial crises of Azad Kashmir. In the past other Prime Ministers were not given this honour – they were told point blank to follow the orders.
Raja Farooq Haider has appeared on national TV channels of Pakistan to defend interests of Azad Kashmir. He might not be very articulate or eloquent in his presentation, but he was sincere and courageous. He was the first Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir to demand that the Azad Kashmiri people should be allowed to use water of Mangla Dam, which was built and upraised by uprooting lakhs of Kashmiri people twice.
While presenting his case and defending interests of Azad Kahsmiri people, he ensured that he did not upset powerful people in Pakistan, therefore, after every few minutes he had to assure the anchor man and his viewers that he was still loyal to Pakistan.
On 4 May 2010 in a TV programme called ‘Point Blank’ he perhaps thought he had crossed the red line, and soon his tone changed and he said to the Pakistani anchor man: ‘I am more loyal to Pakistan than you are. I am more Pakistani than you are. You are a Pakistani by default, but I am a Pakistani by conviction.’ He said that even though he knew that the constitution of Pakistan did not regard him as a Pakistani.
He also had courage to demand changes to the Act 74. No Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir had done this. Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, while promoting rights and interests of people of Azad Kashmir has to ensure that he does not annoy powerful people in Pakistan, as all Ministers and Assembly Members wait for his down fall that one of them can become Prime Minister. Those who fail to become Prime Minister at least become rich because of the horse trading which ensues as a result of sacking of the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir.
I hope Raja Farooq Haider will stand firm and assert his position. Interest of people of Azad Kashmir must be his priority. Azad Kashmir produces far more electricity than we need, and yet we face long hours of load shedding. There are many other serious problems which people of Azad Kashmir face; and it is his prime responsibility to protect their interests.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 22 May 2010
Raja Frooq Haider is a Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, or ‘Pakistani Occupied Kashmir’. This is the post which all members of the Azad Kashmir Assembly and other politicians wish to occupy. But not every one is ‘lucky’ or ‘suitable’ for this post. Before a politician becomes a candidate for the Assembly in this territory declared as Azad, meaning independent, he has to declare he will be loyal to Pakistan.
The powers that be ensure that most ‘suitable’ candidate wins his/her seat. When these ‘suitable’ people become members of the Assembly, out of them the one which is more ‘capable’ of protecting interests of Pakistan is selected as the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir.
Ability, integrity, or experience in politics is not important, as he is generally there as a show piece in the shop of ‘democracy’ because all major decisions are mad by Islamabad or four Pakistanis appointed by them to run this territory. These Pakistani are known as ‘lent officers’ and hold powerful positions of IG Police, Chief Secretary, Finance Secretary and Accountant General.
In case of the other important post – President, he could be anyone, even a serving Pakistani army officer, as was the case with the former Presidents - Major General Anwar Khan or Brigadier Ayat Khan. Both of these men were serving army officers when it was decided by the Pakistani authorities to retire them and ‘reward’ them with the highest post in their colony- Azad Kashmir.
The rule that the retired army officer cannot hold a public office for two years after his retirement was waved by Pakistan, after all, it was their army man who was to hold the highest post in Azad Kashmir; and to make way for the army men laws could be changed, twisted or broken because they are the masters of this region – Pakistan, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan.
The Assembly of Azad Kashmir is ‘so good’ that without a question all the ‘honourable’ members of the Assembly signed on the dotted line and accepted the decision of Islamabad; and both army men ruled this territory in their own style and retired from the post honourably. Who says Azad Kashmir is not azad?
Subservient attitude of the Assembly could be understood from the following example. The Act 74 or Interim Constitution was prepared by Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Minister of Law of Pakistan; and Azad Kashmir Assembly passed that within 45 minutes without questioning anything or changing a comma or a full stop.
Since the last general elections Raja Frooq Haider is the third Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir; and until some weeks ago his future was uncertain; and there was talk of the fourth Prime Minister during the life of the present Parliament. Tremendous pressure was applied on him to resign, but he refused to budge and decided to fight his corner. There was also talk of government of Pakistan using Article 56 of the Act 74, which was prepared by Pakistani government to keep Azad Kashmir under their thumb.
Last time Pakistan used this self assigned power was in 1990 against Mumtaz Rathore who was elected Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir; but was soon out of favour with the Army General known as GCO Murree and Minister of Kashmir Affairs. He was arrested and brought to Pakistan by one police inspector of Pakistan.
But time has changed and government of Pakistan was reluctant to use this power. Despite all the pressure Raja Farooq Haider stood his ground and weathered the storm by agreeing to a compromise over issue of judiciary. But despite this climb down, the powerful people in Islamabad have not totally forgiven him.
A famous Pakistani journalist Rauf Kalasra in his article published in Daily Jang on 16 May 2010 explained how Azad Kashmiri Prime Minister was deliberately humiliated. He notes with sorrow that (translation from Urdu):
‘In a meeting chaired by the Pakistani Prime Minister held in Islamabad to find a solution to judicial crises in Azad Kashmir, Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir was made to sit on the last chair in the row. Raja Farooq Haider has clean record and has no corruption charges of any kind; but Manzoor Wattoo, Minister of Kashmir Affairs was seated next to the Prime Minister of Pakistan with full honour, yet there are many corruption charges against him. Above all this man has made life very difficult for the Kashmiri leader.’
Rauf Kalasra further said:
‘He met Raja Farooq Haider when he was only a member of the Assembly, and found him honest and brave man. He thought if this man became Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir one day, he would not dance on the tune played by Section Officers of Ministry of Kashmir Affairs’.
According to Rauf Kalasra, ‘Farooq Haider loved Pakistan, but he also loved Kashmir. He loved Kashmiri identity, its culture and history; and wanted to preserve it’. He thought, ‘Ministry of Kashmir Affairs ruled Azad Kashmir from Islamabad just like the British ruled India. Farooq Haider’, he thought, ‘would not take dictation from Section Officers of Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and would go to any lengths to defend rights of Kashmiris.
Rauf Kalasra said, ‘Prime Minister of Pakistan wants more powers for himself in Pakistan, but he is not prepared to give more and legitimate powers to Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir. Azad Kashmir Chief Secretary Khalid Sultan and IG Police were removed (by Pakistan). Yousaf Gilani Sahib has appointed his friend and business partner Dr Tariq Khokhar from Multan as IG Police in Azad Kashmir and did not even consult the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, because to him advice of Minister of Kashmir Affairs was more important. He (Gilani) has appointed his own administration in Multan, but is not prepared to let the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir have administration of his choice’.
Rauf Kalasra has explained how Pakistan rulers treat Azad Kashmir and elected Prime Minister of the area. The above transfers were not made to promote good governance, but to control and make the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir helpless and impotent. Raja Farooq Haider was ‘lucky’ at least he was allowed to take the last seat in the row that he could also be present when decision is taken on judicial crises of Azad Kashmir. In the past other Prime Ministers were not given this honour – they were told point blank to follow the orders.
Raja Farooq Haider has appeared on national TV channels of Pakistan to defend interests of Azad Kashmir. He might not be very articulate or eloquent in his presentation, but he was sincere and courageous. He was the first Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir to demand that the Azad Kashmiri people should be allowed to use water of Mangla Dam, which was built and upraised by uprooting lakhs of Kashmiri people twice.
While presenting his case and defending interests of Azad Kahsmiri people, he ensured that he did not upset powerful people in Pakistan, therefore, after every few minutes he had to assure the anchor man and his viewers that he was still loyal to Pakistan.
On 4 May 2010 in a TV programme called ‘Point Blank’ he perhaps thought he had crossed the red line, and soon his tone changed and he said to the Pakistani anchor man: ‘I am more loyal to Pakistan than you are. I am more Pakistani than you are. You are a Pakistani by default, but I am a Pakistani by conviction.’ He said that even though he knew that the constitution of Pakistan did not regard him as a Pakistani.
He also had courage to demand changes to the Act 74. No Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir had done this. Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, while promoting rights and interests of people of Azad Kashmir has to ensure that he does not annoy powerful people in Pakistan, as all Ministers and Assembly Members wait for his down fall that one of them can become Prime Minister. Those who fail to become Prime Minister at least become rich because of the horse trading which ensues as a result of sacking of the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir.
I hope Raja Farooq Haider will stand firm and assert his position. Interest of people of Azad Kashmir must be his priority. Azad Kashmir produces far more electricity than we need, and yet we face long hours of load shedding. There are many other serious problems which people of Azad Kashmir face; and it is his prime responsibility to protect their interests.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Thursday, 20 May 2010
Harassment of political workers must stop in Pakistani Administered Kashmir
Harassment of political workers must stop in Pakistani Administered Kashmir
Dr Shabir Choudhry 20 May 2010
Pakistani secret agencies are systematically harassing political activists in areas of the State of Jammu and Kashmir under their control. ‘This policy of hounding and victimising political activists must stop now that there is a democratic government in Islamabad’, said Dr Shabir Choudhry, a senior leader of Kashmir National Party.
‘What good is democracy if secret agencies are still out of control and they continue to arrest, harass and intimidate citizens’, asked Dr Shabir Choudhry? He said, ‘Prime responsibility of every government is to protect life, liberty, property and dignity of the people; and not to allow its secret agencies to target citizens who differ with policies of the government.’
Dr Shabir Choudhry said Shafqat Inquilabi who hails from Gilgit Baltistan has been harassed by the agencies of Pakistan ever since he challenged the Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance in Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Last month on 27 April, he was kept in detention for 24 hours without any charges and later on expelled from his native area of Gilgit Baltistan. Shafqat Inquilabi ‘feels he was victimised for his writ petition in Pakistan’s Supreme Court, challenging the ‘autonomy package’ announced last year’. He thinks, ‘his life is at risk, clandestine agencies of Pakistan’s security apparatus have been harassing him with the aim of forcing him to withdraw his writ petition from Pakistan’s Supreme Court’.
The agencies of Pakistan have created serious problems for Shafqat Inquilabi and his relatives; and they continue to phone and harass his relatives and friends. Agencies have also started harassing his friends and business partner. They have created very serious problems for his work and business to cripple him financially.
In Pakistan and Pakistani Administered Kashmir it is common to ‘arrange an accident’ to eliminate or silence political opponents and undesirable political activists. It is feared that one day Shafqat Inquilabi might also experience this type of ‘accident’.
Dr Shabir Choudhry said if anything happens to Shafqat Inquilabi then government of Pakistan will be responsible for this. He appealed human rights organisations and all those who believe in liberal and democratic society to raise voice against this intimidation and oppression. END
Phone: 0044 (0)208 597 4782
Email: drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 20 May 2010
Pakistani secret agencies are systematically harassing political activists in areas of the State of Jammu and Kashmir under their control. ‘This policy of hounding and victimising political activists must stop now that there is a democratic government in Islamabad’, said Dr Shabir Choudhry, a senior leader of Kashmir National Party.
‘What good is democracy if secret agencies are still out of control and they continue to arrest, harass and intimidate citizens’, asked Dr Shabir Choudhry? He said, ‘Prime responsibility of every government is to protect life, liberty, property and dignity of the people; and not to allow its secret agencies to target citizens who differ with policies of the government.’
Dr Shabir Choudhry said Shafqat Inquilabi who hails from Gilgit Baltistan has been harassed by the agencies of Pakistan ever since he challenged the Gilgit Baltistan Ordinance in Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Last month on 27 April, he was kept in detention for 24 hours without any charges and later on expelled from his native area of Gilgit Baltistan. Shafqat Inquilabi ‘feels he was victimised for his writ petition in Pakistan’s Supreme Court, challenging the ‘autonomy package’ announced last year’. He thinks, ‘his life is at risk, clandestine agencies of Pakistan’s security apparatus have been harassing him with the aim of forcing him to withdraw his writ petition from Pakistan’s Supreme Court’.
The agencies of Pakistan have created serious problems for Shafqat Inquilabi and his relatives; and they continue to phone and harass his relatives and friends. Agencies have also started harassing his friends and business partner. They have created very serious problems for his work and business to cripple him financially.
In Pakistan and Pakistani Administered Kashmir it is common to ‘arrange an accident’ to eliminate or silence political opponents and undesirable political activists. It is feared that one day Shafqat Inquilabi might also experience this type of ‘accident’.
Dr Shabir Choudhry said if anything happens to Shafqat Inquilabi then government of Pakistan will be responsible for this. He appealed human rights organisations and all those who believe in liberal and democratic society to raise voice against this intimidation and oppression. END
Phone: 0044 (0)208 597 4782
Email: drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
Monday, 17 May 2010
Some clarifications regarding Kashmir dispute
Some clarifications regarding Kashmir dispute
Dr Shabir Choudhry 17 May 2010
In order to justify the Tribal Invasion, which to many experts is the root cause of problems of people of Jammu and Kashmir, some pro Pakistan writers and agents of the Pakistani establishment claim that the Tribal Invasion was the result of mass killings of Muslims in Jammu. According to these claims they went there to help Muslims. Let us analyse that in light of historic evidence.
No doubt Muslims were killed in tens of thousands in Jammu province, but the Tribal Invasion had no link with that mass killing. Those who managed the Tribal Invasion tried to link it with the Jammu Massacre after the planned invasion proved disastrous.
Apart from the Valley and some other parts of the State, the whole of Sub Continent was suffering from communal violence at that time. Tens of thousands of non Muslim migrants entered Jammu from Sialkot and other parts of Pakistan and aggravated the situation there. The Muslims in Jammu were targeted and killed. This started in the third week of August 1947.
The Tribal Invasion started on 22 October 1947. If those who planned the Tribal Invasion sincerely wanted to help Muslims of Jammu, why did they remain quiet for nearly two months? Why didn’t they send Tribesmen and other armed men towards Jammu from Sialkot which is about 28 miles from there; or from the side of Bhimber – Kot Jaimel? Instead they sent the Tribesmen via Muzaaffarbad which has vast Muslim majority and had no direct link with Jammu.
Between third week of August 1947 and second week of October the government of Pakistan remained quiet as they didn’t want to annoy the Maharaja. Plight of Jammu Muslims was not their big concern, as territory of Kashmir was much closer to their hearts.
Until second week of October the government of Pakistan assumed that the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir would join Pakistan. When the Maharaja indicated that he wanted to remain independent the government of Pakistan decided to punish him and dethrone him.
It was because of this they sent the Tribesmen to Muzaffarabad even though there was no communal violence there; and Muslims were in majority there. They knew the road to Kashmiri capitol went through Muzaffarabad. They almost succeeded in their plan to get Kashmir; but the Tribesmen let them down who wasted three valuable days in killing, looting and raping in Baramula.
Jammu massacres were tragic and shameful in which Muslims were hunted and killed, and this must be condemned; but it would be historically wrong to link the Tribal Invasion with that. The Tribal Invasion was an attempt of Pakistan to conquer Kashmir and to punish the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir for disobeying the whims of the Pakistani rulers.
Was Kashmir given to Pakistan?
Some Pakistanis and pro Pakistan Kashmiris claim that Kashmir was given to Pakistan in 1947, and India with its superior force invaded Kashmir. All this is wrong. No one gave Kashmir to Pakistan. No one had this right to give Kashmir to Pakistan.
It was a desire of Pakistani rulers that Kashmir should become part of Pakistan. We have many desires and not all of them come true. My desire is to have an oil well in my village, but this is only a desire and it won’t come true; even if it did, Pakistani rulers will take over and expel me from there and take all the benefits as they did with Mangla Dam.
After 15 August 1947 the State of Jammu and Kashmir was independent. It had bilateral agreement with Pakistan, known as Standstill Agreement; and Kashmir was in a process to finalise a similar agreement with India.
Pakistan in clear breach of this Agreement stopped all the essential items like food, petrol etc going to Kashmir in the second week of October; and on 22 October Pakistan sent its armed officers and Tribesmen to conquer Kashmir. It resulted in killings of thousands of innocent people and rapes of our mothers and daughters.
The Maharaja of Kashmir was not expecting this breach of agreement and panicked. He asked help from India. India urged the Maharaja to sign an Instrument of Accession which was signed and accepted as ‘provisional’.
To us, the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir is disputed. However, the arrival of the Indian army in Kashmir, no matter how much we dislike it and condemn it because of human rights abuses, was a result of an agreement between the ruler of Kashmir and India. But the Pakistan army and the tribesmen moved in to the Kashmir territory without any agreement; and they continue to remain there.
Right of self determination or right of accession
Many people, either innocently or by design, try to confuse the Right of self determination with right of accession. The UN gave people of Jammu and Kashmir a right of self determination in its Resolution of 13 August 1948, which on request of Pakistan, was changed to right of accession to either India or Pakistan in the next resolution passed on 5th January 1949.
When people demand implementation of the UN resolutions, assuming that they will get right of self determination, in actual fact, they demand the right of accession which was given to them in the UN Resolution of 5th January 1949. Pakistani policy makers laugh at our innocence and urge us Kashmiris to keep on demanding this, as it goes in favour of Pakistan.
This controversy has been going on for decades now, as to who is responsible for non implementation of the UN Resolutions. Pakistani propaganda in this regard has been very effective, and a lot of Pakistanis and Kashmiris believe it was India who created obstacles in implementation of the UN Resolutions. Historic facts, however, do not support this contention.
In short, the UNCIP resolution of 13 August 1948 had three parts to it, namely a cease - fire, withdrawal of Pakistani troops and irregulars present inside the State. Once the UN was satisfied that the Pakistan has withdrawn, India had to withdraw a ‘bulk’ of her forces from the State. The third stage was a plebiscite.
First stage was completed with the cease fire on 1st January 1949. In the second stage, Pakistan had to withdraw her regular and irregular forces from Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan, followed by a withdrawal of ‘bulk’ of the Indian forces. Only after completion of the second stage as explained in the UN Resolution, the third stage could be started?
To date Pakistan has not vacated these areas as demanded by the UN Resolution; but cleverly stated that India is not abiding by the Resolutions. Many Pakistanis and Kashmiris argue that even if Pakistan had vacated these areas India still would not have held the plebiscite. Here we are dealing with facts and not assumptions. It is difficult to give a definitive reply to this hypothetical situation - we cannot say with certainty that India would have held plebiscite or not.
Apart from that some religious extremists and agents of Pakistan try to confuse people by saying that because of the Two Nations Theory Kashmir should have become part of Pakistan. This is not true. The British Raj in India consisted of two units: British India and the Princely India. British India was directly ruled by the British through the Governor General, and the Princes were ruled indirectly by treaties.
The Two Nations Theory was applicable to the British India and not to the Princely States. There is ample evidence to prove this point, even Mohammed Ali Jinnah agreed with this. The Instrument of Accession was designed for the Princely States. Vast majority of the Princely States either willingly or by pressure joined India and some joined Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir was among those States which did not join either India or Pakistan, hence became independent.
Some agents of the Pakistani establishment, while defaming me accuse me that I am ‘satisfied’ with the ‘accession’ to India. This is nothing else but a white lie, which these agents and foot soldiers of agencies use in order to hide their nefarious designs on Kashmir.
All my written work and speeches are available on my blog and on blogs of many other people; and all of that is compiled and regularly published. I challenge all the critics to find one speech of mine or one article which gives slightest inclination that I am satisfied with the ‘accession’ with India. I have always called the ‘accession’ as ‘provisional’ and promoted unification and independence of the entire State. Anyone who is satisfied with the accession does not fight for unification and independence of the entire State; and I have done that throughout my life.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 17 May 2010
In order to justify the Tribal Invasion, which to many experts is the root cause of problems of people of Jammu and Kashmir, some pro Pakistan writers and agents of the Pakistani establishment claim that the Tribal Invasion was the result of mass killings of Muslims in Jammu. According to these claims they went there to help Muslims. Let us analyse that in light of historic evidence.
No doubt Muslims were killed in tens of thousands in Jammu province, but the Tribal Invasion had no link with that mass killing. Those who managed the Tribal Invasion tried to link it with the Jammu Massacre after the planned invasion proved disastrous.
Apart from the Valley and some other parts of the State, the whole of Sub Continent was suffering from communal violence at that time. Tens of thousands of non Muslim migrants entered Jammu from Sialkot and other parts of Pakistan and aggravated the situation there. The Muslims in Jammu were targeted and killed. This started in the third week of August 1947.
The Tribal Invasion started on 22 October 1947. If those who planned the Tribal Invasion sincerely wanted to help Muslims of Jammu, why did they remain quiet for nearly two months? Why didn’t they send Tribesmen and other armed men towards Jammu from Sialkot which is about 28 miles from there; or from the side of Bhimber – Kot Jaimel? Instead they sent the Tribesmen via Muzaaffarbad which has vast Muslim majority and had no direct link with Jammu.
Between third week of August 1947 and second week of October the government of Pakistan remained quiet as they didn’t want to annoy the Maharaja. Plight of Jammu Muslims was not their big concern, as territory of Kashmir was much closer to their hearts.
Until second week of October the government of Pakistan assumed that the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir would join Pakistan. When the Maharaja indicated that he wanted to remain independent the government of Pakistan decided to punish him and dethrone him.
It was because of this they sent the Tribesmen to Muzaffarabad even though there was no communal violence there; and Muslims were in majority there. They knew the road to Kashmiri capitol went through Muzaffarabad. They almost succeeded in their plan to get Kashmir; but the Tribesmen let them down who wasted three valuable days in killing, looting and raping in Baramula.
Jammu massacres were tragic and shameful in which Muslims were hunted and killed, and this must be condemned; but it would be historically wrong to link the Tribal Invasion with that. The Tribal Invasion was an attempt of Pakistan to conquer Kashmir and to punish the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir for disobeying the whims of the Pakistani rulers.
Was Kashmir given to Pakistan?
Some Pakistanis and pro Pakistan Kashmiris claim that Kashmir was given to Pakistan in 1947, and India with its superior force invaded Kashmir. All this is wrong. No one gave Kashmir to Pakistan. No one had this right to give Kashmir to Pakistan.
It was a desire of Pakistani rulers that Kashmir should become part of Pakistan. We have many desires and not all of them come true. My desire is to have an oil well in my village, but this is only a desire and it won’t come true; even if it did, Pakistani rulers will take over and expel me from there and take all the benefits as they did with Mangla Dam.
After 15 August 1947 the State of Jammu and Kashmir was independent. It had bilateral agreement with Pakistan, known as Standstill Agreement; and Kashmir was in a process to finalise a similar agreement with India.
Pakistan in clear breach of this Agreement stopped all the essential items like food, petrol etc going to Kashmir in the second week of October; and on 22 October Pakistan sent its armed officers and Tribesmen to conquer Kashmir. It resulted in killings of thousands of innocent people and rapes of our mothers and daughters.
The Maharaja of Kashmir was not expecting this breach of agreement and panicked. He asked help from India. India urged the Maharaja to sign an Instrument of Accession which was signed and accepted as ‘provisional’.
To us, the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir is disputed. However, the arrival of the Indian army in Kashmir, no matter how much we dislike it and condemn it because of human rights abuses, was a result of an agreement between the ruler of Kashmir and India. But the Pakistan army and the tribesmen moved in to the Kashmir territory without any agreement; and they continue to remain there.
Right of self determination or right of accession
Many people, either innocently or by design, try to confuse the Right of self determination with right of accession. The UN gave people of Jammu and Kashmir a right of self determination in its Resolution of 13 August 1948, which on request of Pakistan, was changed to right of accession to either India or Pakistan in the next resolution passed on 5th January 1949.
When people demand implementation of the UN resolutions, assuming that they will get right of self determination, in actual fact, they demand the right of accession which was given to them in the UN Resolution of 5th January 1949. Pakistani policy makers laugh at our innocence and urge us Kashmiris to keep on demanding this, as it goes in favour of Pakistan.
This controversy has been going on for decades now, as to who is responsible for non implementation of the UN Resolutions. Pakistani propaganda in this regard has been very effective, and a lot of Pakistanis and Kashmiris believe it was India who created obstacles in implementation of the UN Resolutions. Historic facts, however, do not support this contention.
In short, the UNCIP resolution of 13 August 1948 had three parts to it, namely a cease - fire, withdrawal of Pakistani troops and irregulars present inside the State. Once the UN was satisfied that the Pakistan has withdrawn, India had to withdraw a ‘bulk’ of her forces from the State. The third stage was a plebiscite.
First stage was completed with the cease fire on 1st January 1949. In the second stage, Pakistan had to withdraw her regular and irregular forces from Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan, followed by a withdrawal of ‘bulk’ of the Indian forces. Only after completion of the second stage as explained in the UN Resolution, the third stage could be started?
To date Pakistan has not vacated these areas as demanded by the UN Resolution; but cleverly stated that India is not abiding by the Resolutions. Many Pakistanis and Kashmiris argue that even if Pakistan had vacated these areas India still would not have held the plebiscite. Here we are dealing with facts and not assumptions. It is difficult to give a definitive reply to this hypothetical situation - we cannot say with certainty that India would have held plebiscite or not.
Apart from that some religious extremists and agents of Pakistan try to confuse people by saying that because of the Two Nations Theory Kashmir should have become part of Pakistan. This is not true. The British Raj in India consisted of two units: British India and the Princely India. British India was directly ruled by the British through the Governor General, and the Princes were ruled indirectly by treaties.
The Two Nations Theory was applicable to the British India and not to the Princely States. There is ample evidence to prove this point, even Mohammed Ali Jinnah agreed with this. The Instrument of Accession was designed for the Princely States. Vast majority of the Princely States either willingly or by pressure joined India and some joined Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir was among those States which did not join either India or Pakistan, hence became independent.
Some agents of the Pakistani establishment, while defaming me accuse me that I am ‘satisfied’ with the ‘accession’ to India. This is nothing else but a white lie, which these agents and foot soldiers of agencies use in order to hide their nefarious designs on Kashmir.
All my written work and speeches are available on my blog and on blogs of many other people; and all of that is compiled and regularly published. I challenge all the critics to find one speech of mine or one article which gives slightest inclination that I am satisfied with the ‘accession’ with India. I have always called the ‘accession’ as ‘provisional’ and promoted unification and independence of the entire State. Anyone who is satisfied with the accession does not fight for unification and independence of the entire State; and I have done that throughout my life.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
To view other articles see my blog: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)