Pakistan started all wars with India, Najam Sethi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twz37Ld5ZG4&feature=share
Sunday, 7 October 2012
Saturday, 6 October 2012
Krishna and Zardari speak on Kashmir, Dr Shabir Choudhry
Krishna and Zardari speak on Kashmir, Dr Shabir Choudhry
02 October 2012
Pakistan’s President Zardari and India’s Minister External Affairs Krishna spoke about Kashmir in the 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Many Kashmiris and Pakistanis will claim that Pakistan has, once again, raised the Kashmir dispute in the UN. It must be pointed out that the Kashmir dispute was taken to the Security Council by India under Article 35 on 1 January 1948. Although both institutions are part of the United Nations both have different roles; and many regard the General Assembly as a debating forum where world leaders come and speak on various topics, just like at the Speakers Corner in Hyde Park, London.
Also the occasion provides the leaders an opportunity to meet and discuss issues of interest with leaders of other countries. Of course it is seen as a good opportunity to meet different American leaders and officials. So comments of President Zardari (India avoids mentioning of the Kashmir dispute at any international forum, and Krishna’s comments were in response to what Zardari had said) cannot be regarded as ‘raising the Kashmir dispute’ in the UN.
Pakistani leaders in the past even avoided mentioning Kashmir in the General Assembly; however, it was unavoidable this time because the UN theme for the occasion was “Adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations by peaceful means”. Anyhow, we people of Jammu and Kashmir claim that the Kashmir dispute is not a territorial in nature; and that it concerns our unfettered right of self determination. However, President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari in his speech said:
‘Our principled position on territorial disputes remains a bedrock of our foreign policy.
We will continue to support the right of the people of Jammu & Kashmir to peacefully choose their destiny in accordance with the UN Security Council's long-standing resolutions on this matter.’
People of Jammu and Kashmir can evaluate this statement and see if the President of Republic of Pakistan has advanced the cause of Kashmir by calling it a ‘territorial dispute’; or back stabbed it. Dr Nazir Gilani was the first Kashmir to express his opinion on this topic and credit must be given to him for this, he said:
‘However, it is untrue that Kashmir is a ‘territorial dispute’ and it is also untrue that it “remains a bedrock of our (Pakistan’s) foreign policy” since 19-23 June 1997 India Pakistan talks held at Islamabad. The talks on outstanding issues of concern, were held “in an integrated manner”. At this meeting Kashmir as a ‘core issue’ slipped from its traditional grace and became as one of the eight outstanding issues. It was decided that Peace and Security including CBMs (confidence building measures) and Jammu and Kashmir, will be dealt at the level of Foreign Secretaries who will co-ordinate and monitor the progress of work of all the working groups’.
Those who keep close eye on Kashmir dispute know that various governments of Pakistan have gradually shifted their stand on Kashmir, and have virtually made it a territorial dispute. However, despite so many shifts, Pakistani officials don’t forget to reiterate that they have a ‘principled stand’ on Kashmir. We know Pakistani stand on Kashmir is ‘principled’ to the extent that, like India, they also want to get Jammu and Kashmir and benefit from its resources and strategic location. And if they cannot get the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir they will be satisfied to ‘legalise’ their control over the Kashmiri territory they have; and they have taken certain steps in this regard. We people of Jammu and Kashmir must critically look at the intentions of New Delhi and Islamabad and should not be swayed by their statements.
Indian Minister External Affairs, SM Krishna, in his reply said: "An unwarranted reference has been made to Jammu and Kashmir from this podium. Our principled position on the issue has been consistent and is well known - the people of Jammu and Kashmir have chosen and reaffirmed their destiny repeatedly through India's well established democratic processes. We wish to make it abundantly clear that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India."
Mr Krishna acknowledged that he did not ‘expect that President Zardari would make a reference to Kashmir’; and once, for whatever reason, President Zardari talked of Kashmir, India had to reiterate their official stand, legally wrong as it is. He said, ‘nothing more needs to be read to the statements on the issue either from him or Zardari’.
What that means is that both governments have agreed on a road map on Kashmir, and understanding was that both governments would avoid talking about it at the international fora, and ‘resolve’ it bilaterally. In a reply to a question, Mr Krishna was quick to say: "We will continue our dialogue with Pakistan and the road map has been drawn and we will try to stick to the road map and let us see how it goes."
Mr Krishna needs to be reminded that a much bigger and popular leader than him, Prime Minister of India, Pundit Nehru in a report to the All-India Congress Committee, (6 July 1951, The Statesman, New Delhi,) said: “People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their future.”
Apart from that, while talking to the Indian Parliament on 31 March 1955, Prime Minister Nehru said: “Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir.”
Both Krishna and Zardari need to be reminded that in view of genuine sons of Jammu and Kashmir State, the Kashmir dispute is not a territorial; as it concerns our unfettered right to self determination. To us, the entire State is disputed and no part of it is legally part of any country, so there is no question of it being ‘integral part’ of India or ‘jugular vein’ of Pakistan. You will be doing a disservice to people of Jammu and Kashmir and to peace and stability of the entire region, if you ignore wishes of the people Jammu and Kashmir and impose some decision on us.
Writer is a political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
02 October 2012
Pakistan’s President Zardari and India’s Minister External Affairs Krishna spoke about Kashmir in the 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Many Kashmiris and Pakistanis will claim that Pakistan has, once again, raised the Kashmir dispute in the UN. It must be pointed out that the Kashmir dispute was taken to the Security Council by India under Article 35 on 1 January 1948. Although both institutions are part of the United Nations both have different roles; and many regard the General Assembly as a debating forum where world leaders come and speak on various topics, just like at the Speakers Corner in Hyde Park, London.
Also the occasion provides the leaders an opportunity to meet and discuss issues of interest with leaders of other countries. Of course it is seen as a good opportunity to meet different American leaders and officials. So comments of President Zardari (India avoids mentioning of the Kashmir dispute at any international forum, and Krishna’s comments were in response to what Zardari had said) cannot be regarded as ‘raising the Kashmir dispute’ in the UN.
Pakistani leaders in the past even avoided mentioning Kashmir in the General Assembly; however, it was unavoidable this time because the UN theme for the occasion was “Adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations by peaceful means”. Anyhow, we people of Jammu and Kashmir claim that the Kashmir dispute is not a territorial in nature; and that it concerns our unfettered right of self determination. However, President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari in his speech said:
‘Our principled position on territorial disputes remains a bedrock of our foreign policy.
We will continue to support the right of the people of Jammu & Kashmir to peacefully choose their destiny in accordance with the UN Security Council's long-standing resolutions on this matter.’
People of Jammu and Kashmir can evaluate this statement and see if the President of Republic of Pakistan has advanced the cause of Kashmir by calling it a ‘territorial dispute’; or back stabbed it. Dr Nazir Gilani was the first Kashmir to express his opinion on this topic and credit must be given to him for this, he said:
‘However, it is untrue that Kashmir is a ‘territorial dispute’ and it is also untrue that it “remains a bedrock of our (Pakistan’s) foreign policy” since 19-23 June 1997 India Pakistan talks held at Islamabad. The talks on outstanding issues of concern, were held “in an integrated manner”. At this meeting Kashmir as a ‘core issue’ slipped from its traditional grace and became as one of the eight outstanding issues. It was decided that Peace and Security including CBMs (confidence building measures) and Jammu and Kashmir, will be dealt at the level of Foreign Secretaries who will co-ordinate and monitor the progress of work of all the working groups’.
Those who keep close eye on Kashmir dispute know that various governments of Pakistan have gradually shifted their stand on Kashmir, and have virtually made it a territorial dispute. However, despite so many shifts, Pakistani officials don’t forget to reiterate that they have a ‘principled stand’ on Kashmir. We know Pakistani stand on Kashmir is ‘principled’ to the extent that, like India, they also want to get Jammu and Kashmir and benefit from its resources and strategic location. And if they cannot get the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir they will be satisfied to ‘legalise’ their control over the Kashmiri territory they have; and they have taken certain steps in this regard. We people of Jammu and Kashmir must critically look at the intentions of New Delhi and Islamabad and should not be swayed by their statements.
Indian Minister External Affairs, SM Krishna, in his reply said: "An unwarranted reference has been made to Jammu and Kashmir from this podium. Our principled position on the issue has been consistent and is well known - the people of Jammu and Kashmir have chosen and reaffirmed their destiny repeatedly through India's well established democratic processes. We wish to make it abundantly clear that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India."
Mr Krishna acknowledged that he did not ‘expect that President Zardari would make a reference to Kashmir’; and once, for whatever reason, President Zardari talked of Kashmir, India had to reiterate their official stand, legally wrong as it is. He said, ‘nothing more needs to be read to the statements on the issue either from him or Zardari’.
What that means is that both governments have agreed on a road map on Kashmir, and understanding was that both governments would avoid talking about it at the international fora, and ‘resolve’ it bilaterally. In a reply to a question, Mr Krishna was quick to say: "We will continue our dialogue with Pakistan and the road map has been drawn and we will try to stick to the road map and let us see how it goes."
Mr Krishna needs to be reminded that a much bigger and popular leader than him, Prime Minister of India, Pundit Nehru in a report to the All-India Congress Committee, (6 July 1951, The Statesman, New Delhi,) said: “People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their future.”
Apart from that, while talking to the Indian Parliament on 31 March 1955, Prime Minister Nehru said: “Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir.”
Both Krishna and Zardari need to be reminded that in view of genuine sons of Jammu and Kashmir State, the Kashmir dispute is not a territorial; as it concerns our unfettered right to self determination. To us, the entire State is disputed and no part of it is legally part of any country, so there is no question of it being ‘integral part’ of India or ‘jugular vein’ of Pakistan. You will be doing a disservice to people of Jammu and Kashmir and to peace and stability of the entire region, if you ignore wishes of the people Jammu and Kashmir and impose some decision on us.
Writer is a political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
In Kashmir, Rahul Gandhi Talks Business, But Disappoints Students
By BETWA SHARMA
Farooq Khan/European Pressphoto Agency
Omar Abdullah, Chief Minister of Indian Kashmir, Rahul Gandhi, Congress General Secretary and Union minister for New and Renewable Energy Farooq Abdullah pose for a photograph after laying the foundation stone for a tunnel connecting Ladkh with Kashmir.
Rifat Mohidin, a journalism student, was disappointed after her first interaction with Rahul Gandhi, Congress Party’s general secretary, at Kashmir University on Friday. Ms. Mohidin, 19, wanted to ask Mr. Gandhi about providing security to Kashmiris when they traveled to other parts of India.
“But I was not allowed to ask any of my questions,” she said. “I went there with a lot of hope, but my hopes were shattered.” (Read Ms. Mohidin’s full opinion of the discussion here.)
Mr. Gandhi’s two-day visit to Kashmir this week reiterated his message made during a visit in September 2011: he said he wanted to understand the pain of violence-stricken Kashmiris, as well as connect the Kashmiri youth with economic opportunities.
Shreen Hamdani, a 21-year-old journalism student, said that the interaction was only an hour long because it started late, and teachers stopped students from asking any political questions.
“When people came out, they said it was a waste of time,” she said. “But once Rahul himself said instability was the cause of lack of investment here — I wish they had allowed the interaction to be more natural like that.” (Read Ms. Hamdani’s full opinion here.)
Much of Mr. Gandhi’s rhetoric these past two days has emotional underpinnings. On Thursday, the 42-year-old politician, accompanied by Omar Abdullah, Jammu and Kashmir’s chief minister, laid the foundation of the Z-Morh Bridge between Kashmir and Ladakh. In his address to Kashmiris, the heir apparent of the Congress Party reminded them that his family also hailed from the valley.
Observers said he struck a shrewd chord by presenting himself as youth leader instead of a politician. Many people in Kashmir blame the Congress Party for denying the region autonomy after India’s independence, when Mr. Gandhi’s grandfather, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, was leading the country.
“There has been too much political manipulation over the years by Congress,” said Gul Mohammed Wani, who teaches political science at Kashmir University. “It would be good if Rahul said that ‘our record in the past has not been good but I’m here for the youth and to listen to their concerns.’ ”
For Friday’s session with students, Mr. Gandhi invited Ratan Tata, Tata Group’s chairman; Kumar Mangalam Birla, Aditya Birla Group’s chairman; Rajiv Bajaj, managing director of Bajaj Auto, and Deepak Parekh, HDFC chairman.
Students said these industrialists talked about offering internships in their companies as well as training programs on the college campus, but they did not mention any concrete plans to invest in the valley.
Some local business experts, however, said they thought the session was a futile exercise.
Nisar Ali, a prominent economist and director of J&K Bank, said that such promises had been made before but not fulfilled. Mr. Ali explained that big improvements would come not by recruiting a handful of Kashmiri youths in other states but through investing in Kashmir, especially in the manufacturing of consumer goods.
“The youths don’t have to be motivated. They are already so eager to take up any opportunity because there is so little here,” he said. “But investment will not happen unless the government can solve the huge power crisis we have here.”
While appealing for peace during violent protests in 2010, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh promised that his government would help Kashmiri youths find jobs in both the public and private sector. In March of this year, P. Chidambaram, then the home minister, created Udaan, a Web site that aims to connect Kashmir’s unemployed youth with corporations.
Currently, the number of unemployed youth in Jammu and Kashmir state is estimated to be 700,000, with 370,000 in the valley alone, which has a population of 7.2 million.
Kashmir students on Friday seemed divided between those who were willing to give Mr. Gandhi a chance, like Ms. Hamdani and Ms. Mohidin, and those who opposed his presence on campus.
In the morning, about 100 students held a small protest near the campus library, at a distance from the convention center. “Rahul, go back!” the crowd shouted. The protesters said that the presence of heavy security prevented any larger demonstrations.
But near 12:30 pm, the students moved closer the convention center where the session was being held. A college student, who said he did not want to be identified to avoid any attention from the government, said the group was shouting slogans praising Osama bin Laden and the Taliban chief Mullah Muhammad Omar.
“By the time they reached the convocation hall, Rahul had left from the back,” the student said. “But I think Rahul may have heard the slogans because it was very loud.” The protestors also booed their classmates who attended the discussion.
Protesting students said they thought Mr. Gandhi’s visit was a sham because the university authorities handpicked the student audience, after carrying out background checks on their political leanings. “They doctored the questions, they coached students, they did not allow students with beards to go in, they controlled everything,” said Ahmed, a student protester who requested that his full name not be used to avoid being identified by government authorities.
Ahmed said he and other protesters were concerned that India’s central government was furthering its agenda of Kashmir’s integration under the guise of economic opportunities. “We are not against Ratan Tata, Aditya Birla or anyone so the university can invite them,” he said. “We are not antidevelopment, but why is the university bringing in Indian politicians again and again?”
Students said they were also angry that Kashmir’s University Students Union, or K.U.S.U., was banned from campus by university authorities, but political party-backed student groups, including the Congress Party’s National Students Union of India, or N.S.U.I., were allowed to operate.
“Allowing Rahul Gandhi and N.S.U.I. in the campus while the ban of K.U.S.U. continues is absolutely pathetic and smacks of obnoxious prejudice,” read a press release issued by Kashmir union.
By BETWA SHARMA
Farooq Khan/European Pressphoto Agency
Omar Abdullah, Chief Minister of Indian Kashmir, Rahul Gandhi, Congress General Secretary and Union minister for New and Renewable Energy Farooq Abdullah pose for a photograph after laying the foundation stone for a tunnel connecting Ladkh with Kashmir.
Rifat Mohidin, a journalism student, was disappointed after her first interaction with Rahul Gandhi, Congress Party’s general secretary, at Kashmir University on Friday. Ms. Mohidin, 19, wanted to ask Mr. Gandhi about providing security to Kashmiris when they traveled to other parts of India.
“But I was not allowed to ask any of my questions,” she said. “I went there with a lot of hope, but my hopes were shattered.” (Read Ms. Mohidin’s full opinion of the discussion here.)
Mr. Gandhi’s two-day visit to Kashmir this week reiterated his message made during a visit in September 2011: he said he wanted to understand the pain of violence-stricken Kashmiris, as well as connect the Kashmiri youth with economic opportunities.
Shreen Hamdani, a 21-year-old journalism student, said that the interaction was only an hour long because it started late, and teachers stopped students from asking any political questions.
“When people came out, they said it was a waste of time,” she said. “But once Rahul himself said instability was the cause of lack of investment here — I wish they had allowed the interaction to be more natural like that.” (Read Ms. Hamdani’s full opinion here.)
Much of Mr. Gandhi’s rhetoric these past two days has emotional underpinnings. On Thursday, the 42-year-old politician, accompanied by Omar Abdullah, Jammu and Kashmir’s chief minister, laid the foundation of the Z-Morh Bridge between Kashmir and Ladakh. In his address to Kashmiris, the heir apparent of the Congress Party reminded them that his family also hailed from the valley.
Observers said he struck a shrewd chord by presenting himself as youth leader instead of a politician. Many people in Kashmir blame the Congress Party for denying the region autonomy after India’s independence, when Mr. Gandhi’s grandfather, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, was leading the country.
“There has been too much political manipulation over the years by Congress,” said Gul Mohammed Wani, who teaches political science at Kashmir University. “It would be good if Rahul said that ‘our record in the past has not been good but I’m here for the youth and to listen to their concerns.’ ”
For Friday’s session with students, Mr. Gandhi invited Ratan Tata, Tata Group’s chairman; Kumar Mangalam Birla, Aditya Birla Group’s chairman; Rajiv Bajaj, managing director of Bajaj Auto, and Deepak Parekh, HDFC chairman.
Students said these industrialists talked about offering internships in their companies as well as training programs on the college campus, but they did not mention any concrete plans to invest in the valley.
Some local business experts, however, said they thought the session was a futile exercise.
Nisar Ali, a prominent economist and director of J&K Bank, said that such promises had been made before but not fulfilled. Mr. Ali explained that big improvements would come not by recruiting a handful of Kashmiri youths in other states but through investing in Kashmir, especially in the manufacturing of consumer goods.
“The youths don’t have to be motivated. They are already so eager to take up any opportunity because there is so little here,” he said. “But investment will not happen unless the government can solve the huge power crisis we have here.”
While appealing for peace during violent protests in 2010, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh promised that his government would help Kashmiri youths find jobs in both the public and private sector. In March of this year, P. Chidambaram, then the home minister, created Udaan, a Web site that aims to connect Kashmir’s unemployed youth with corporations.
Currently, the number of unemployed youth in Jammu and Kashmir state is estimated to be 700,000, with 370,000 in the valley alone, which has a population of 7.2 million.
Kashmir students on Friday seemed divided between those who were willing to give Mr. Gandhi a chance, like Ms. Hamdani and Ms. Mohidin, and those who opposed his presence on campus.
In the morning, about 100 students held a small protest near the campus library, at a distance from the convention center. “Rahul, go back!” the crowd shouted. The protesters said that the presence of heavy security prevented any larger demonstrations.
But near 12:30 pm, the students moved closer the convention center where the session was being held. A college student, who said he did not want to be identified to avoid any attention from the government, said the group was shouting slogans praising Osama bin Laden and the Taliban chief Mullah Muhammad Omar.
“By the time they reached the convocation hall, Rahul had left from the back,” the student said. “But I think Rahul may have heard the slogans because it was very loud.” The protestors also booed their classmates who attended the discussion.
Protesting students said they thought Mr. Gandhi’s visit was a sham because the university authorities handpicked the student audience, after carrying out background checks on their political leanings. “They doctored the questions, they coached students, they did not allow students with beards to go in, they controlled everything,” said Ahmed, a student protester who requested that his full name not be used to avoid being identified by government authorities.
Ahmed said he and other protesters were concerned that India’s central government was furthering its agenda of Kashmir’s integration under the guise of economic opportunities. “We are not against Ratan Tata, Aditya Birla or anyone so the university can invite them,” he said. “We are not antidevelopment, but why is the university bringing in Indian politicians again and again?”
Students said they were also angry that Kashmir’s University Students Union, or K.U.S.U., was banned from campus by university authorities, but political party-backed student groups, including the Congress Party’s National Students Union of India, or N.S.U.I., were allowed to operate.
“Allowing Rahul Gandhi and N.S.U.I. in the campus while the ban of K.U.S.U. continues is absolutely pathetic and smacks of obnoxious prejudice,” read a press release issued by Kashmir union.
Wednesday, 3 October 2012
Kashmir dispute and role of neighbours
Kashmir dispute and role of neighbours
Text of speech of Dr Shabir Choudhry delivered in a seminar arranged by Kashmir National Party in Watford on 29 July 2012.
Mr Chairman, friends and colleagues Aslamo alaikam
I congratulate the KNP leadership for arranging this seminar in holy month of Ramadan, when traditionally most Kashmiris take a break from political activities because of fasting. This shows the commitment of the KNP leaders and workers to the cause of united and independent Jammu and Kashmir.
Topic of the seminar is interesting, and surely it needs more than ten minutes to properly explain roles of our neighbours. There is an old saying that one can choose friends, but cannot choose neighbours. We are lucky to have a beautiful country which is situated in strategically very important region; but we are unfortunate to have bad neighbours.
Beauty of our country, its resources and its strategic location could have been our great strength if we were independent; but these three factors have proved to be our worst enemies, because our neighbours have imperial designs and they want to occupy us and exploit our resources.
Jammu and Kashmir is a landlocked State. Our neighbours are India, Pakistan, China and Afghanistan. We are surrounded by three nuclear states and we live in very unstable and volatile region. The unresolved Kashmir dispute is very serious threat to peace, security and stability of the entire region.
Out of these four neighbours Afghanistan government has not provided us any trouble since their rule was ended by the Sikhs in 19th century; however, some people from there joined the attack on Jammu and Kashmir arranged and supported by Pakistan in October 1947.
The other giant neighbour, China has, by and large, remained neutral for many years; however, they captured Aksai Chin in a war with India in 1962. From then onwards they showed more interest in the territory of Jammu and Kashmir; and in 1963 they signed a treaty with Pakistan and in name of border adjustment managed to obtain about 2200 square miles of our territory from Gilgit Baltistan. This gift of Pakistan to China helped Pakistan to win a friendship of China; and it provided China with access to outside world and it also helped China to link this territory with Aksai Chin.
On the international level China supported the Pakistani stand on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, wrong as it was; and they had little regard for the emancipation or wishes of the people who were forcibly divided by India and Pakistan. This support of China for the Pakistani stand on Kashmir had its ups and downs, but China remained a good friend of Pakistan; and helped them with various projects including construction of the Karakorum Highway which links both countries by road.
However, over the past decade China has taken very profound interest in affairs of Gilgit Baltistan, and in name of development projects and exploration have their strong civilian and military presence in this important region. It appears that government of Pakistan and some Kashmiri leaders are trying to cut out some role for China in the Kashmir dispute, which is unfortunate and could prove to be disastrous for Jammu and Kashmir and the region.
Mr Chairman
The third neighbour of Jammu and Kashmir is Pakistan, which had a Standstill Agreement with the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. The government of Pakistan violated the Standstill agreement and managed a tribal invasion of the State of Jammu and Kashmir which resulted in death of thousands of innocent people; and forced the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir to seek help from India, the fourth neighbour of Kashmir.
India provided help after gaining a ‘provisional accession’ from the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir; and the Indian forces landed in Kashmir on 27th October 1947. Both India and Pakistan wanted to make Jammu and Kashmir part of their country; and fought their first war over control of this state. No country could win the war and the war resulted in division of Jammu and Kashmir.
While the war was going on, India approached the UN Security Council for help under Article 35 of the UN Charter. The Security Council passed many Resolutions on Kashmir, some were passed before the UN Commission for India and Pakistan reached the region to investigate the matter, and some were passed afterwards; however, two Resolutions known as UNCIP Resolutions are fundamental to understanding of the Kashmir dispute, as they explain which country had to do what to resolve the Kashmir dispute. The UNCIP Resolution of 13 August 1948 stated and I quote:
(l) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.
(2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting. Unquote
To date Pakistan has not vacated those areas as demanded by the Security Council Resolution; and of course no progress on the proposed UN plebiscite. Later on in mid 1950s, when Pakistan joined SEATO and CENTO military alliances against the Communist bloc, unfortunately Kashmir dispute became part of the ‘Cold war’; and after obtaining the Soviet backing India declared Kashmir to be its ‘integral part’.
India pursued to get Kashmir in name of democracy and on the bases of this provisional accession. Pakistan, on the other hand, tried to get Kashmir in name of religious affinity and brotherhood. India called Kashmir its ‘integral part’ and Pakistan called it ‘Sha Rag’ – meaning jugular vein. Both countries wanted more territory to advance their national and strategic interests; welfare of people of Jammu and Kashmir was not their priority.
There is a long list of blunders that have been committed in name of Kashmir with disastrous results for the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but time does not allow me to give details. During the early years of the dispute India talked about rights of people, but after mid 1950s India put its cards on table and declared Kashmir its ‘integral part’. Pakistan on the other hand continued to fool people of Jammu and Kashmir and people of Pakistan in name of Islam and brotherhood; and pursued their imperial agenda on Kashmir with disastrous consequences for the people of Jammu and Kashmir and which endangered peace and stability of the region.
In other words Pakistani governments disguised their agenda on Kashmir in name of Islam, and continue to do so; and it is unfortunate that many Kashmiris still do not understand their hidden agenda and imperial aims. In view of one Kashmiri nationalist, “India is our open enemy, and Pakistan is our hidden enemy. It is for people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide whether they want to use their time and resources to expose deeds of hidden enemy or the enemy that is already exposed”.
Furthermore, Pakistani governments went out of their way to ensure that Kashmir dispute is seen as a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan; and not as an issue of a nation seeking independence. They curtailed people of Jammu and Kashmir’s right to independence by limiting the choice to become either part of India or Pakistan.
Apart from that, Pakistan government agreed in article 6 of the Simla Agreement of 1972 that India and Pakistan will take the final decision on Kashmir dispute by bilateral talks, hence no role for the people of Jammu and Kashmir in this matter. Sad thing is that the Pakistani officials still fool us and people of Pakistan by giving this impression that the UN and its Resolutions have a role in determining the future of Jammu and Kashmir.
I conclude by urging the people of Jammu and Kashmir to understand policies of all three countries that occupy our territory; and not be fooled in name of religion. Imperialists have no religion. Their policy is to occupy, exploit and make profits; and that is what they are doing. We are occupied, forcibly divided, exploited; but sad thing is that instead of understanding the real situation and formulating appropriate policies to fight this occupation we are fighting each other, hence strengthening the hold of those who occupy us.
Mr Chairman thank you for your patience.
Text of speech of Dr Shabir Choudhry delivered in a seminar arranged by Kashmir National Party in Watford on 29 July 2012.
Mr Chairman, friends and colleagues Aslamo alaikam
I congratulate the KNP leadership for arranging this seminar in holy month of Ramadan, when traditionally most Kashmiris take a break from political activities because of fasting. This shows the commitment of the KNP leaders and workers to the cause of united and independent Jammu and Kashmir.
Topic of the seminar is interesting, and surely it needs more than ten minutes to properly explain roles of our neighbours. There is an old saying that one can choose friends, but cannot choose neighbours. We are lucky to have a beautiful country which is situated in strategically very important region; but we are unfortunate to have bad neighbours.
Beauty of our country, its resources and its strategic location could have been our great strength if we were independent; but these three factors have proved to be our worst enemies, because our neighbours have imperial designs and they want to occupy us and exploit our resources.
Jammu and Kashmir is a landlocked State. Our neighbours are India, Pakistan, China and Afghanistan. We are surrounded by three nuclear states and we live in very unstable and volatile region. The unresolved Kashmir dispute is very serious threat to peace, security and stability of the entire region.
Out of these four neighbours Afghanistan government has not provided us any trouble since their rule was ended by the Sikhs in 19th century; however, some people from there joined the attack on Jammu and Kashmir arranged and supported by Pakistan in October 1947.
The other giant neighbour, China has, by and large, remained neutral for many years; however, they captured Aksai Chin in a war with India in 1962. From then onwards they showed more interest in the territory of Jammu and Kashmir; and in 1963 they signed a treaty with Pakistan and in name of border adjustment managed to obtain about 2200 square miles of our territory from Gilgit Baltistan. This gift of Pakistan to China helped Pakistan to win a friendship of China; and it provided China with access to outside world and it also helped China to link this territory with Aksai Chin.
On the international level China supported the Pakistani stand on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, wrong as it was; and they had little regard for the emancipation or wishes of the people who were forcibly divided by India and Pakistan. This support of China for the Pakistani stand on Kashmir had its ups and downs, but China remained a good friend of Pakistan; and helped them with various projects including construction of the Karakorum Highway which links both countries by road.
However, over the past decade China has taken very profound interest in affairs of Gilgit Baltistan, and in name of development projects and exploration have their strong civilian and military presence in this important region. It appears that government of Pakistan and some Kashmiri leaders are trying to cut out some role for China in the Kashmir dispute, which is unfortunate and could prove to be disastrous for Jammu and Kashmir and the region.
Mr Chairman
The third neighbour of Jammu and Kashmir is Pakistan, which had a Standstill Agreement with the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. The government of Pakistan violated the Standstill agreement and managed a tribal invasion of the State of Jammu and Kashmir which resulted in death of thousands of innocent people; and forced the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir to seek help from India, the fourth neighbour of Kashmir.
India provided help after gaining a ‘provisional accession’ from the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir; and the Indian forces landed in Kashmir on 27th October 1947. Both India and Pakistan wanted to make Jammu and Kashmir part of their country; and fought their first war over control of this state. No country could win the war and the war resulted in division of Jammu and Kashmir.
While the war was going on, India approached the UN Security Council for help under Article 35 of the UN Charter. The Security Council passed many Resolutions on Kashmir, some were passed before the UN Commission for India and Pakistan reached the region to investigate the matter, and some were passed afterwards; however, two Resolutions known as UNCIP Resolutions are fundamental to understanding of the Kashmir dispute, as they explain which country had to do what to resolve the Kashmir dispute. The UNCIP Resolution of 13 August 1948 stated and I quote:
(l) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.
(2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting. Unquote
To date Pakistan has not vacated those areas as demanded by the Security Council Resolution; and of course no progress on the proposed UN plebiscite. Later on in mid 1950s, when Pakistan joined SEATO and CENTO military alliances against the Communist bloc, unfortunately Kashmir dispute became part of the ‘Cold war’; and after obtaining the Soviet backing India declared Kashmir to be its ‘integral part’.
India pursued to get Kashmir in name of democracy and on the bases of this provisional accession. Pakistan, on the other hand, tried to get Kashmir in name of religious affinity and brotherhood. India called Kashmir its ‘integral part’ and Pakistan called it ‘Sha Rag’ – meaning jugular vein. Both countries wanted more territory to advance their national and strategic interests; welfare of people of Jammu and Kashmir was not their priority.
There is a long list of blunders that have been committed in name of Kashmir with disastrous results for the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but time does not allow me to give details. During the early years of the dispute India talked about rights of people, but after mid 1950s India put its cards on table and declared Kashmir its ‘integral part’. Pakistan on the other hand continued to fool people of Jammu and Kashmir and people of Pakistan in name of Islam and brotherhood; and pursued their imperial agenda on Kashmir with disastrous consequences for the people of Jammu and Kashmir and which endangered peace and stability of the region.
In other words Pakistani governments disguised their agenda on Kashmir in name of Islam, and continue to do so; and it is unfortunate that many Kashmiris still do not understand their hidden agenda and imperial aims. In view of one Kashmiri nationalist, “India is our open enemy, and Pakistan is our hidden enemy. It is for people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide whether they want to use their time and resources to expose deeds of hidden enemy or the enemy that is already exposed”.
Furthermore, Pakistani governments went out of their way to ensure that Kashmir dispute is seen as a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan; and not as an issue of a nation seeking independence. They curtailed people of Jammu and Kashmir’s right to independence by limiting the choice to become either part of India or Pakistan.
Apart from that, Pakistan government agreed in article 6 of the Simla Agreement of 1972 that India and Pakistan will take the final decision on Kashmir dispute by bilateral talks, hence no role for the people of Jammu and Kashmir in this matter. Sad thing is that the Pakistani officials still fool us and people of Pakistan by giving this impression that the UN and its Resolutions have a role in determining the future of Jammu and Kashmir.
I conclude by urging the people of Jammu and Kashmir to understand policies of all three countries that occupy our territory; and not be fooled in name of religion. Imperialists have no religion. Their policy is to occupy, exploit and make profits; and that is what they are doing. We are occupied, forcibly divided, exploited; but sad thing is that instead of understanding the real situation and formulating appropriate policies to fight this occupation we are fighting each other, hence strengthening the hold of those who occupy us.
Mr Chairman thank you for your patience.
Kashmiri struggle and traitors
Kashmiri struggle and traitors
Dr Shabir Choudhry 03 January 2012
Traitor is someone who knowingly and deliberately involves in actions that are detrimental to interests of his/her nation, a tribe or a community. In other words, a traitor commits acts of treason by betraying. This betrayal or treachery does not have to be for the sake of monetary gains, as people do it for different reasons. Some do it for money; others do it for ideological or religious reasons. Some may do it for political gains and social status; and some may do it to take revenge from some perceived injustice to his/her family or tribe or for being let down.
In contemporary history of Jammu and Kashmir Sheikh Abdullah was the first leader to be called a ‘traitor’, fact, however, is that he was a great leader, and pursued pro Kashmir policies, which were not appreciated by rulers of Pakistan. He was a Kashmiri leader and promoted pro Kashmir policies. He did not want Jammu and Kashmir to become either part of Pakistan or India. He wanted Jammu and Kashmir to become independent, detached from India and Pakistan that they can have separate existence and promote their history and culture.
Rulers of Pakistan did not want Jammu and Kashmir to become independent. Despite Standstill Agreement with Kashmir they blocked food supply to Jammu and Kashmir and on 22 October 1947 managed a naked tribal aggression against Kashmir and killed innocent people, raped women and looted citizens of Kashmir.
The forces of Jammu and Kashmir were unable to defend this aggression; and dream of Sheikh Abdullah and the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir to remain independent was shattered. Fearing capture of Srinagar – summer capital and the main city of the State, the Maharaja fled to Jammu – the winter capital and requested India for help. India also wanted Jammu and Kashmir to become part of India; and this naked aggression provided India with an opportunity to gain accession of the State with India.
The Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir had no choice but to accede to India in order to seek military help and save his state and citizens. This accession was provisional in nature and had to be ratified by the people of Jammu and Kashmir; and to date we had no opportunity to express our view on this matter.
Sheikh Abdullah, on this occasion, decided to side with the Maharajah and people of Jammu and Kashmir; and fought those who came to occupy his motherland. He was, no doubt, pro independent and not pro India, but when he was insulted by Mohammed Ali Jinnah fourth time in October 1947, he had made up his mind that he would not support State’s accession to Pakistan. However, the situation imposed on him and on Kashmir by Pakistan’s unprovoked attack, forced Sheikh Abdullah to support this ‘provisional accession’.
The Pakistani rulers failed to capture Kashmir and held Sheikh Abdullah and India responsible for this; and it was at that time they called Sheikh Abdullah a ‘traitor’; and many people under propaganda of Pakistan viewed him in that light. However, the situation changed when the same Sheikh Abdullah showed signs of rebellion and was paving way for an independent Jammu and Kashmir, he was sent to jail by India; and at that time Pakistani government forgetting what they called him in past, promoted Sheikh Abdullah as a ‘Lion of Kashmir’.
The point to be remembered here is that it was our Muslim brothers and neighbouring Pakistan that attacked us on 22 October 1947 once we became independent after lapse of the British Paramountcy on 15 October 1947; and it was the rulers of Pakistan who gave a title of a ‘traitor’ to a towering Kashmiri leader of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, it was this attack that forcibly divided our country, hence our miseries on both sides of the divided line since 1947.
Since that date our so called ‘advocate’ and ‘liberators’ issued many fatwas (edicts) telling us who is a ‘Kashmiri traitor’ and who is a ‘Kashmir patriot’; and while doing this ‘great service’ to the people of Jammu and Kashmir they applied a simple criteria: a Kashmiri who was loyal to Pakistan was a patriot; and those who earnestly opposed accession to Pakistan were declared ‘anti Pakistan’ and ‘traitors’. This policy has not changed since that date.
With passage of time Jammu and Kashmir became hunting ground for secret agencies of both India and Pakistan where people were oppressed and intimidated for holding pro Kashmir views; and some were labelled as ‘traitors’ by respective governments. Many leaders and political activists of Jammu and Kashmir do not openly express their views because of fear that they will be declared ‘anti Pakistan’ and ‘Indian agent’. It is ironic that those who work against interests of Jammu and Kashmir and promote Pakistani interests are not considered traitors; if anything they proudly promote a Pakistani agenda and call themselves ‘patriots’.
In the past this task of labelling ‘traitor’ or ‘agent’ was assigned to the secret agencies; but now this task, by and large, has been taken over by people of Jammu and Kashmir and especially people of Pakistani Administered Kashmir. Leaders and political activists of the Valley can promote pro Pakistan policy or even division of Jammu and Kashmir, and both of these positions are against genuine interests of Jammu and Kashmir, yet they are considered patriots and no one from the Valley call them ‘traitors’.
But if leaders and political activists of Pakistani Administered Kashmir oppose accession to India, oppose accession to Pakistan and promote united and independent Jammu and Kashmir that caters for all its citizens irrespective of their religious or ethnic background they are labelled as ‘traitors’ by Pakistani secret agencies, and by some people with tunnel vision in Pakistani Administered Kashmir and in the Indian Administered Kashmir.
This labelling of each other as a ‘traitor’ and an ‘agent’ has made the task of dividing and governing us easier for India and Pakistan; and weaken our struggle so much that despite so many sacrifices there is no light at the end of tunnel. New Year has started, and many have wished Happy New Year, but I cannot see any happiness coming our way; if anything, I can see more trouble and misery descending on South Asia.
Seeds of extremism, communalism, hatred and violence sowed to destroy and unstable enemies of Pakistan have torn the Pakistani society apart. Extremism, communalism and violence which was, at one time, exported in holy name of Jihad has made Pakistan a battleground for competing interests and militant groups, each calling the other ‘Kaffir’ and in some cases enemy of Islam and Pakistan.
We Kashmiris protest that Pakistan has stabbed our struggle for independence and have been instrumental in division of our homeland that has brought misery and oppression on both sides of the divide. But what can you expect from Pakistani rulers and establishment? Those who have destroyed Jinnah’s Pakistan; and those who kill, oppress and torture their own people cannot be expected to be nice to us.
In a country where political culture is such that President, Prime Minister, Home Minister and the Army Chief are accused of being ‘traitors’ and ‘agents’ of other countries and working against integrity and sovereignty of the State; and where every leader is perceived as corrupt and working against national interests what can you expect from them? This political culture has filtered down to various parts of divided Jammu and Kashmir; and people of Jammu and Kashmir have made task of secret agencies of India and Pakistan easier because now we call each other ‘traitor’ and ‘agent’ of one country or the other.
This trend of labelling each other with titles of a ‘traitor’ and an ‘agent’ has further divided and weakened the people of Jammu and Kashmir; and people who are divided are easy to control and oppress. If we are to make progress and achieve our most cherished goal of independence then we have to carefully analyse the situation and see what went wrong. We are occupied by more than one country. True, militarily we cannot fight them all, but we must not be promoting agenda of those who occupy us; and say that one is an occupier and the other is not.
We must remember that Jammu and Kashmir is a multi religious and multi ethnic State; and the Kashmir dispute is not religious in nature. Kashmiri people on the Pakistani side of the divide cannot practically and logically fight to liberate the people on the other side of the divide; and they cannot come to liberate us or people of Gilgit Baltistan. Whether we like it or not, the struggle has to be done by the local people where they are occupied; and without fear of being called a ‘traitor’.
We can only be traitors if we are working to divide the State of Jammu and Kashmir, either in name of religion or some ideology. Our prime responsibility is to promote a Kashmiri interest; and if that clashes with the perceived national interest of those who occupy us then that should not be our problem. If we defend a Kashmiri interest and promote united and independent Jammu and Kashmir then we are Kashmiri patriots and not agents of any country; and those who view us like that could well be agents of those who occupy us.
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
View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 03 January 2012
Traitor is someone who knowingly and deliberately involves in actions that are detrimental to interests of his/her nation, a tribe or a community. In other words, a traitor commits acts of treason by betraying. This betrayal or treachery does not have to be for the sake of monetary gains, as people do it for different reasons. Some do it for money; others do it for ideological or religious reasons. Some may do it for political gains and social status; and some may do it to take revenge from some perceived injustice to his/her family or tribe or for being let down.
In contemporary history of Jammu and Kashmir Sheikh Abdullah was the first leader to be called a ‘traitor’, fact, however, is that he was a great leader, and pursued pro Kashmir policies, which were not appreciated by rulers of Pakistan. He was a Kashmiri leader and promoted pro Kashmir policies. He did not want Jammu and Kashmir to become either part of Pakistan or India. He wanted Jammu and Kashmir to become independent, detached from India and Pakistan that they can have separate existence and promote their history and culture.
Rulers of Pakistan did not want Jammu and Kashmir to become independent. Despite Standstill Agreement with Kashmir they blocked food supply to Jammu and Kashmir and on 22 October 1947 managed a naked tribal aggression against Kashmir and killed innocent people, raped women and looted citizens of Kashmir.
The forces of Jammu and Kashmir were unable to defend this aggression; and dream of Sheikh Abdullah and the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir to remain independent was shattered. Fearing capture of Srinagar – summer capital and the main city of the State, the Maharaja fled to Jammu – the winter capital and requested India for help. India also wanted Jammu and Kashmir to become part of India; and this naked aggression provided India with an opportunity to gain accession of the State with India.
The Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir had no choice but to accede to India in order to seek military help and save his state and citizens. This accession was provisional in nature and had to be ratified by the people of Jammu and Kashmir; and to date we had no opportunity to express our view on this matter.
Sheikh Abdullah, on this occasion, decided to side with the Maharajah and people of Jammu and Kashmir; and fought those who came to occupy his motherland. He was, no doubt, pro independent and not pro India, but when he was insulted by Mohammed Ali Jinnah fourth time in October 1947, he had made up his mind that he would not support State’s accession to Pakistan. However, the situation imposed on him and on Kashmir by Pakistan’s unprovoked attack, forced Sheikh Abdullah to support this ‘provisional accession’.
The Pakistani rulers failed to capture Kashmir and held Sheikh Abdullah and India responsible for this; and it was at that time they called Sheikh Abdullah a ‘traitor’; and many people under propaganda of Pakistan viewed him in that light. However, the situation changed when the same Sheikh Abdullah showed signs of rebellion and was paving way for an independent Jammu and Kashmir, he was sent to jail by India; and at that time Pakistani government forgetting what they called him in past, promoted Sheikh Abdullah as a ‘Lion of Kashmir’.
The point to be remembered here is that it was our Muslim brothers and neighbouring Pakistan that attacked us on 22 October 1947 once we became independent after lapse of the British Paramountcy on 15 October 1947; and it was the rulers of Pakistan who gave a title of a ‘traitor’ to a towering Kashmiri leader of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, it was this attack that forcibly divided our country, hence our miseries on both sides of the divided line since 1947.
Since that date our so called ‘advocate’ and ‘liberators’ issued many fatwas (edicts) telling us who is a ‘Kashmiri traitor’ and who is a ‘Kashmir patriot’; and while doing this ‘great service’ to the people of Jammu and Kashmir they applied a simple criteria: a Kashmiri who was loyal to Pakistan was a patriot; and those who earnestly opposed accession to Pakistan were declared ‘anti Pakistan’ and ‘traitors’. This policy has not changed since that date.
With passage of time Jammu and Kashmir became hunting ground for secret agencies of both India and Pakistan where people were oppressed and intimidated for holding pro Kashmir views; and some were labelled as ‘traitors’ by respective governments. Many leaders and political activists of Jammu and Kashmir do not openly express their views because of fear that they will be declared ‘anti Pakistan’ and ‘Indian agent’. It is ironic that those who work against interests of Jammu and Kashmir and promote Pakistani interests are not considered traitors; if anything they proudly promote a Pakistani agenda and call themselves ‘patriots’.
In the past this task of labelling ‘traitor’ or ‘agent’ was assigned to the secret agencies; but now this task, by and large, has been taken over by people of Jammu and Kashmir and especially people of Pakistani Administered Kashmir. Leaders and political activists of the Valley can promote pro Pakistan policy or even division of Jammu and Kashmir, and both of these positions are against genuine interests of Jammu and Kashmir, yet they are considered patriots and no one from the Valley call them ‘traitors’.
But if leaders and political activists of Pakistani Administered Kashmir oppose accession to India, oppose accession to Pakistan and promote united and independent Jammu and Kashmir that caters for all its citizens irrespective of their religious or ethnic background they are labelled as ‘traitors’ by Pakistani secret agencies, and by some people with tunnel vision in Pakistani Administered Kashmir and in the Indian Administered Kashmir.
This labelling of each other as a ‘traitor’ and an ‘agent’ has made the task of dividing and governing us easier for India and Pakistan; and weaken our struggle so much that despite so many sacrifices there is no light at the end of tunnel. New Year has started, and many have wished Happy New Year, but I cannot see any happiness coming our way; if anything, I can see more trouble and misery descending on South Asia.
Seeds of extremism, communalism, hatred and violence sowed to destroy and unstable enemies of Pakistan have torn the Pakistani society apart. Extremism, communalism and violence which was, at one time, exported in holy name of Jihad has made Pakistan a battleground for competing interests and militant groups, each calling the other ‘Kaffir’ and in some cases enemy of Islam and Pakistan.
We Kashmiris protest that Pakistan has stabbed our struggle for independence and have been instrumental in division of our homeland that has brought misery and oppression on both sides of the divide. But what can you expect from Pakistani rulers and establishment? Those who have destroyed Jinnah’s Pakistan; and those who kill, oppress and torture their own people cannot be expected to be nice to us.
In a country where political culture is such that President, Prime Minister, Home Minister and the Army Chief are accused of being ‘traitors’ and ‘agents’ of other countries and working against integrity and sovereignty of the State; and where every leader is perceived as corrupt and working against national interests what can you expect from them? This political culture has filtered down to various parts of divided Jammu and Kashmir; and people of Jammu and Kashmir have made task of secret agencies of India and Pakistan easier because now we call each other ‘traitor’ and ‘agent’ of one country or the other.
This trend of labelling each other with titles of a ‘traitor’ and an ‘agent’ has further divided and weakened the people of Jammu and Kashmir; and people who are divided are easy to control and oppress. If we are to make progress and achieve our most cherished goal of independence then we have to carefully analyse the situation and see what went wrong. We are occupied by more than one country. True, militarily we cannot fight them all, but we must not be promoting agenda of those who occupy us; and say that one is an occupier and the other is not.
We must remember that Jammu and Kashmir is a multi religious and multi ethnic State; and the Kashmir dispute is not religious in nature. Kashmiri people on the Pakistani side of the divide cannot practically and logically fight to liberate the people on the other side of the divide; and they cannot come to liberate us or people of Gilgit Baltistan. Whether we like it or not, the struggle has to be done by the local people where they are occupied; and without fear of being called a ‘traitor’.
We can only be traitors if we are working to divide the State of Jammu and Kashmir, either in name of religion or some ideology. Our prime responsibility is to promote a Kashmiri interest; and if that clashes with the perceived national interest of those who occupy us then that should not be our problem. If we defend a Kashmiri interest and promote united and independent Jammu and Kashmir then we are Kashmiri patriots and not agents of any country; and those who view us like that could well be agents of those who occupy us.
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
View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
Are Muslims safe in Pakistan and Gilgit Baltistan?
Are Muslims safe in Pakistan and Gilgit Baltistan?
Dr Shabir Choudhry 20 August 2012
Despite what is happening to Muslims in Pakistan, many people still regard Islamic Republic of Pakistan as a ‘Fort of Islam’. When this ‘Fort of Islam’ was established in 1947 after division of the British India on religious lines, it resulted in death of around one million of innocent people and many millions were uprooted, as there was no planned transfer of people from one country to another. The ‘fort of Islam’ – Pakistan was supposed to provide protection, self – respect, economic prosperity and dignity to its citizens.
Over the years the land of pure has become ‘purer’ by either driving out non - Muslims or killing them. Some groups in name of Islam kill innocent people; and when they could not find more non-Muslims to kill in their locality they, in order to ‘purify Islam’ turn their guns towards Muslims belonging to other sects in Pakistan.
Pakistan is not the only country where Muslims are under attack; they are under attack in many other countries as well. In Pakistan, because of wrong policies of respective governments, Pakistanis – Muslims and non - Muslims have been under attack for decades; and policies of injustice and oppression culminated in death of millions in East Pakistan and loss of East Pakistan where majority of Muslims lived.
Sad thing is that the ruling elite of Pakistan chose not to learn anything from their blunders, and they continued with their wrong policies. Result of this is that Pakistan, a country established in name of Islam and for the betterment of Muslims, has to use its air force to kill Muslims; and no one feels safe there. In areas where the Pakistani government cannot kill some Muslims who were established, nurtured, trained and armed by them, they have allowed America to use drones to kill those Muslims.
Pakistani Hindus are also victims in Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and they have been at the receiving end since the creation of country. After loss of East Pakistan, a large number of Hindus became part of Bangladesh; and those who had to live in Bhutto’s Pakistan had to endure suffering. It is unfortunate that these Hindus see no future in Pakistan where they are not safe and are not regarded as Pakistanis, and many of them decided to leave Pakistan and start a new life India, perhaps with new problems.
I was discussing the situation of Pakistan in London with some like - minded people. One Pakistani said perhaps Hindus have a choice to leave Pakistan and go to India, but where do Muslims go, as they are also not safe in Pakistan. Another participant said these Hindus will also face problems in India, as secret agencies of India will suspect them of being ISI agents; and the local people might not be that welcoming either.
It is disturbing to note that many people in Pakistan, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan either stay quiet on these events or hold others responsible for all the ills of Pakistan and sectarian killings. Other countries also have interest in Pakistan and in this region; partly it is in response to policies the Pakistani government have been espousing for many decades with disastrous consequences for Pakistan and other countries.
Although Islam preaches peace unity and tolerance, but we need to acknowledge that it is a war within Islam. It is a war of one sect of Islam against the other. They are fighting for domination of their sects and for total elimination of the other. These sects are supported by many countries including Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The result of this sectarian war is total chaos in Pakistan, where no one feels safe and the entire society is influenced by sectarian sentiments
On the recent sectarian killings, Pakistan’s popular English daily ‘Dawn’ said: ‘The Mansehra attack had a particularly disturbing aspect to it, with passengers made to show their identity papers and those suspected of being Shia, on the basis of their names or tribal affiliations, being picked out and killed. Like other recent sectarian killings in Balochistan, Kohistan and Orakzai, the approach used resembled ethnic cleansing in its chilling focus on identifying and killing innocent citizens simply because of their membership to a particular community….The state needs to demonstrate what it is doing to combat this threat. If not, Pakistan may as well give up any pretence of being a state for anyone other than its majority religious community’.
Many Kashmiri ‘nationalist’ are programmed to attack India for human rights violations, and they tend to remain quiet when human rights abuses take place in Pakistani occupied areas of Jammu and Kashmir. However, Raja Basharat Khan, President of Kashmir National Party (KNP) Birmingham Branch, strongly ‘condemned the brutal murder of 19 innocent people in Gilgit Baltistan in the name of religion and appealed to all political forces in Pakistan Occupied Gilgit Baltistan region to speak with one voice without any reservation to condemn the Pakistan sponsored religious militant groups involved in fanning sectarianism and killing of innocent people in Gilgit Baltistan’.
He further said: ‘Despite claims of some banned religious outfits who publicly take the responsibility for these horrific crimes against humanity in occupied Gilgit Baltistan, no action has been taken against these terror groups which prove that the Pakistani authorities are giving them a freehand. KNP, along with other Kashmiri organisations and political parties, have constantly been protesting on these crimes against humanity and have been demanding that the Pakistan government must take stern action against the perpetrators but no steps have been taken so far by the Pakistan government to stop the violence which is pushing Gilgit Baltistan towards a civil war’.
Manzoor Parwana, a nationalist citizen of Jammu and Kashmir State hailing from Gilgit Baltistan, and who is Chairman of Gilgit Baltistan United Movement issued a strong statement against this tragic and targeted killing. He said, ‘this is a gift of Pakistan to people of Gilgit Baltistan on Eid. You can take back your Eid greetings and give us our sons who were killed because they were sons of Gilgit Baltistan.
Manzoor Parwana further said, ‘We people of Gilgit Baltistan will not take any more abuse from the forces of occupation and those who promote sectarian killings. We will have to fight back to protect our rights’. He also, ‘demanded the UN to send a peace mission in this disputed territory to stop the genocide of the indigenous people of the region’.
As a tradition has it, we Muslims, instead of acknowledging our mistakes, negligence, inefficiency and lack of planning, try to find conspiracy in everything; and accuse Hindus, Jews and America for our failures. This mind - set has to change if we want to resolve our problems and make some positive contribution to the world society.
During my last visit to Gilgit I urged the youngsters to exercise restraint who were angry about the State sponsored oppression and sectarian violence, especially deliberate and well planned victimization of the Shia community. I said to them if you resort to violence it would provide an excuse to the authorities to crush your struggle. However, the question is for how long they will swallow every bitter pill coming their way. For how long they will continue to suffer and remain quiet.
Authorities in Islamabad need to understand that Gilgit Baltistan is not a Pakistani territory; and there are other countries which have keen interest in it. This region is not only full of natural resources; but it also has a great strategic significance. It would be foolish to fan sentiments of hatred and continue with old policies of oppression and sectarian cleansing, as it needs only one spark to ignite the fire, and there would be many there to ensure that it continues to burn.
There is a saying that ‘those who do not plan their lives, others plan it for them’. It is obvious that when others plan it, they plan it according to their needs and intersects. A message for Pakistani government is that if you don’t put your house in order and make some planning for a better future, others will have to step in to put things in order and plan things; and they would do that according to their requirements and interests.
Writer is a political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.
Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
Dr Shabir Choudhry 20 August 2012
Despite what is happening to Muslims in Pakistan, many people still regard Islamic Republic of Pakistan as a ‘Fort of Islam’. When this ‘Fort of Islam’ was established in 1947 after division of the British India on religious lines, it resulted in death of around one million of innocent people and many millions were uprooted, as there was no planned transfer of people from one country to another. The ‘fort of Islam’ – Pakistan was supposed to provide protection, self – respect, economic prosperity and dignity to its citizens.
Over the years the land of pure has become ‘purer’ by either driving out non - Muslims or killing them. Some groups in name of Islam kill innocent people; and when they could not find more non-Muslims to kill in their locality they, in order to ‘purify Islam’ turn their guns towards Muslims belonging to other sects in Pakistan.
Pakistan is not the only country where Muslims are under attack; they are under attack in many other countries as well. In Pakistan, because of wrong policies of respective governments, Pakistanis – Muslims and non - Muslims have been under attack for decades; and policies of injustice and oppression culminated in death of millions in East Pakistan and loss of East Pakistan where majority of Muslims lived.
Sad thing is that the ruling elite of Pakistan chose not to learn anything from their blunders, and they continued with their wrong policies. Result of this is that Pakistan, a country established in name of Islam and for the betterment of Muslims, has to use its air force to kill Muslims; and no one feels safe there. In areas where the Pakistani government cannot kill some Muslims who were established, nurtured, trained and armed by them, they have allowed America to use drones to kill those Muslims.
Pakistani Hindus are also victims in Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and they have been at the receiving end since the creation of country. After loss of East Pakistan, a large number of Hindus became part of Bangladesh; and those who had to live in Bhutto’s Pakistan had to endure suffering. It is unfortunate that these Hindus see no future in Pakistan where they are not safe and are not regarded as Pakistanis, and many of them decided to leave Pakistan and start a new life India, perhaps with new problems.
I was discussing the situation of Pakistan in London with some like - minded people. One Pakistani said perhaps Hindus have a choice to leave Pakistan and go to India, but where do Muslims go, as they are also not safe in Pakistan. Another participant said these Hindus will also face problems in India, as secret agencies of India will suspect them of being ISI agents; and the local people might not be that welcoming either.
It is disturbing to note that many people in Pakistan, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan either stay quiet on these events or hold others responsible for all the ills of Pakistan and sectarian killings. Other countries also have interest in Pakistan and in this region; partly it is in response to policies the Pakistani government have been espousing for many decades with disastrous consequences for Pakistan and other countries.
Although Islam preaches peace unity and tolerance, but we need to acknowledge that it is a war within Islam. It is a war of one sect of Islam against the other. They are fighting for domination of their sects and for total elimination of the other. These sects are supported by many countries including Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The result of this sectarian war is total chaos in Pakistan, where no one feels safe and the entire society is influenced by sectarian sentiments
On the recent sectarian killings, Pakistan’s popular English daily ‘Dawn’ said: ‘The Mansehra attack had a particularly disturbing aspect to it, with passengers made to show their identity papers and those suspected of being Shia, on the basis of their names or tribal affiliations, being picked out and killed. Like other recent sectarian killings in Balochistan, Kohistan and Orakzai, the approach used resembled ethnic cleansing in its chilling focus on identifying and killing innocent citizens simply because of their membership to a particular community….The state needs to demonstrate what it is doing to combat this threat. If not, Pakistan may as well give up any pretence of being a state for anyone other than its majority religious community’.
Many Kashmiri ‘nationalist’ are programmed to attack India for human rights violations, and they tend to remain quiet when human rights abuses take place in Pakistani occupied areas of Jammu and Kashmir. However, Raja Basharat Khan, President of Kashmir National Party (KNP) Birmingham Branch, strongly ‘condemned the brutal murder of 19 innocent people in Gilgit Baltistan in the name of religion and appealed to all political forces in Pakistan Occupied Gilgit Baltistan region to speak with one voice without any reservation to condemn the Pakistan sponsored religious militant groups involved in fanning sectarianism and killing of innocent people in Gilgit Baltistan’.
He further said: ‘Despite claims of some banned religious outfits who publicly take the responsibility for these horrific crimes against humanity in occupied Gilgit Baltistan, no action has been taken against these terror groups which prove that the Pakistani authorities are giving them a freehand. KNP, along with other Kashmiri organisations and political parties, have constantly been protesting on these crimes against humanity and have been demanding that the Pakistan government must take stern action against the perpetrators but no steps have been taken so far by the Pakistan government to stop the violence which is pushing Gilgit Baltistan towards a civil war’.
Manzoor Parwana, a nationalist citizen of Jammu and Kashmir State hailing from Gilgit Baltistan, and who is Chairman of Gilgit Baltistan United Movement issued a strong statement against this tragic and targeted killing. He said, ‘this is a gift of Pakistan to people of Gilgit Baltistan on Eid. You can take back your Eid greetings and give us our sons who were killed because they were sons of Gilgit Baltistan.
Manzoor Parwana further said, ‘We people of Gilgit Baltistan will not take any more abuse from the forces of occupation and those who promote sectarian killings. We will have to fight back to protect our rights’. He also, ‘demanded the UN to send a peace mission in this disputed territory to stop the genocide of the indigenous people of the region’.
As a tradition has it, we Muslims, instead of acknowledging our mistakes, negligence, inefficiency and lack of planning, try to find conspiracy in everything; and accuse Hindus, Jews and America for our failures. This mind - set has to change if we want to resolve our problems and make some positive contribution to the world society.
During my last visit to Gilgit I urged the youngsters to exercise restraint who were angry about the State sponsored oppression and sectarian violence, especially deliberate and well planned victimization of the Shia community. I said to them if you resort to violence it would provide an excuse to the authorities to crush your struggle. However, the question is for how long they will swallow every bitter pill coming their way. For how long they will continue to suffer and remain quiet.
Authorities in Islamabad need to understand that Gilgit Baltistan is not a Pakistani territory; and there are other countries which have keen interest in it. This region is not only full of natural resources; but it also has a great strategic significance. It would be foolish to fan sentiments of hatred and continue with old policies of oppression and sectarian cleansing, as it needs only one spark to ignite the fire, and there would be many there to ensure that it continues to burn.
There is a saying that ‘those who do not plan their lives, others plan it for them’. It is obvious that when others plan it, they plan it according to their needs and intersects. A message for Pakistani government is that if you don’t put your house in order and make some planning for a better future, others will have to step in to put things in order and plan things; and they would do that according to their requirements and interests.
Writer is a political analyst and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs.
Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
View: www.drshabirchoudhry.blogspot.com www.k4kashmir.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)