Why forces of occupation attacked KNP, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Why forces of occupation attacked KNP Dr Shabir Choudhry 27 April 2012 Every action has reaction, we are told; and it is a fact as well. I have pro active approach to politics; but at the same time, like others, I also react to events. In other words, one can say my politics is reactionary as well; and this article will show how actions generated different reactions. A few days ago a dedicated member of the JKLF contacted me and enquired about my research on Poonch rebellion. I was very frank with him said because of this smear campaign going on against me for the past four months; I have not been able to pay any attention to this. He laughed and said, but you declared on many internet forums that you would find facts about this and requested people for help and information. I said, yes I did, but I have been busy dealing with some parts of this smear campaign and could not do any new work on this topic. He laughed and said: ‘Choudhry Sahib that is what happens when you declare to do controversial and sensitive things in advance; and people who want to hide those facts would keep you busy in other matters. For the past four months I have seen you either defending one allegation or the other; and your reputation of being a sincere and dedicated soldier of united and independent Jammu and Kashmir has been tarnished.’ He said many other things as well; but it might not be appropriate to give details of that at this stage. However, his interjection not only gave me another perspective; but also provided me with an opportunity to explain why I am under attack and why Kashmir National Party suffered a split. I was first elected Secretary General of JKLF in 1985. This showed that I had my own standing and contribution to the struggle; and the JKLF delegates present in the Convention acknowledged that fact. The JKLF constitution of that time regarded Secretary General as a ‘Chief Executive’ of the party and the President, although a party head, had less executive powers. At that time JKLF in Azad Kashmir and Pakistan was in infancy; and there was no JKLF on the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir. Afzal Jatalvi and I provided leadership to the JKLF during very difficult time, as we had to deal with matters with which we had no connection – kidnapping and killing of an Indian diplomat, which was done by Kashmir Liberation Army. To make matters worse for us Amanullah Khan was also arrested in 1985 and then deported to Pakistan in 1987. Anyhow, in order to continue with my research for PhD, I decided not to contest for any post in the convention of 1992. The elections produced results which Amanullah Khan did not like; and on advice of some people in Britain he disbanded the elected body of JKLF after three months of its election. It was an unconstitutional act; and there was a strong reaction against this. The JKLF was once again split in to two groups. Choudhry Qurban Hussain (now Lord Qurban Hussain) and Choudhry Sabir Hussain arranged a meeting of both groups and an agreement was reached to unite the JKLF. I don’t know on whose advice and without hearing the concerned people this agreement was rejected and Azmat Khan and Abid Hashmi were expelled from the JKLF. I challenged that decision, as it was totally unconstitutional and said to Amanullah Khan that JKLF is not your fiefdom that you take decisions as you like; and if you cannot give democratic rights to the JKLF members how can you give rights to the ordinary people. For this courageous and principled stand, Mohammed Younis and I was expelled from the JKLF, and we started working as a separate group; and I had to accept the post of Secretary General again in order to face new challenges. Anyhow, when our group of the JKLF was firmly established, I decided to leave my post. As Azmat Khan suffered a defeat in the previous election for the post Secretary General, it was decided that he should be given a chance to take over responsibilities of the Secretary General. However, senior people (kitchen cabinet) of the JKLF met in Hounslow and decided to correct the power imbalance in the posts of Secretary General and the President in favour of the President, because they thought Azmat Khan was politically too immature to digest powers of the Secretary General. That apart, my and Abbas Butt’s interaction with different Think Tanks, diplomats, NGOs and experts of the region, helped us to formulate policies that were more practical and appropriate to the Kashmiri struggle for independence; but they were clearly at variance with the JKLF headed by Amanullah Khan. By that time we believed there was no military solution to the Kashmir dispute; and that we need to promote democratic, secular and peaceful struggle to win support of other ethnic minorities of Jammu and Kashmir, people of India and the world at large. Also we strongly advocated a peace process involving all three parties to the dispute. Moreover, we thought we must struggle on the Pakistani side of the LOC. In other words those who are occupied by India, they should struggle there according to their requirements; and those who are occupied by Pakistan they should struggle on this side of the LOC. We firmly believed that it was wrong to put all eggs in the basket of the Valley of Kashmir and make that focus of all the attention; which proved to be detrimental to our national struggle as the international community thought it was only the Valley that was disputed because there was no real struggle or unrest in the remaining parts of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. We actively promoted the above policies; and activities of Kashmir National Party were noticed; and certain quarters felt uneasy because of what we did and what we promoted logically and effectively. Because of our concerted campaign and of course of other like minded people, Gilgit Baltistan emerged on the political radar and it became apparent that it was not part of Pakistan, but constitutional part of former State of Jammu and Kashmir. KNP leaders, as a political party arranged a Study Tour and visited Gilgit Baltistan, interviewed people and compiled a detailed report. They also conducted a survey in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan to ascertain views of the people on the current situation and on the future status of Jammu and Kashmir. The survey was launched in the British House of Lords with help of Baroness Emma Nicholson; and the full report of KNP Study Tour was released in a form of book in Geneva during session of the UN Human Rights Council. Also KNP was the first party to reveal presence of the Chinese Army in Gilgit Baltistan; and explained the hidden agenda of both Pakistan and China. Later on KNP provided photographic evidence to support all this. KNP also provided Urdu translation of this report and provided literature on various aspects of the Kashmiri struggle; and exposed some myths related to our struggle and independence. Furthermore, we exposed many people who were working as proxies and used the name of struggle to promote their personal, political and economic agenda. Those who wanted to make the Valley of Kashmir focus of attention and keep attention away from areas under Pakistan wanted all of us the hold Black Day on 27 October, a day when the Indian army landed in Kashmir on the request of the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. KNP, however, took lead in this matter and proved with evidence the real agenda of those who managed the Tribal Invasion and unprovoked attack on independence and sovereignty of our mother land on 22 October 1947; and asserted that the Black Day should be held on 22 October. Furthermore, KNP published materials related to the tribal attack, which was launched by violating the Standstill Agreement. We also gave details of atrocities committed by the tribesmen on innocent citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. While all this was appreciated by all members of the KNP at every level, and by other freedom loving people who were kept in dark because of murder of history, especially on the Pakistani side of the divide; those groups and powers that were exposed and hurt because of our work got anxious and decided to strike back. Perhaps to make matters worse for myself and the KNP I declared that I wanted to provide facts about the Poonch rebellion which was brutally crushed by the Pakistani authorities in mid 1950s. Of course my purpose was to give true account of the events and assert that we people of Jammu and Kashmir are occupied on both sides of the divide; and that all armies are trained to kill when ordered to do so. The powers and groups that were uncomfortable by all this quickly hatched a conspiracy to counter our work; and a malicious campaign to tarnish my work, honesty, sincerity and dedication to the cause of united and independent Jammu and Kashmir was initiated. Proxies of these anti Kashmir groups propagated, as if in the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir problem was Dr Shabir Choudhry. In order to control what we planned to do and discredit what we did in the past, they first tried to persuade us that KNP should merge with JKLF headed by Yasin Malik and Amanullah Khan. They knew once we become part of the JKLF they would be able to control our activities; and discredit over struggle from platform of the KNP. In the meeting of KNP Supreme Council it was decided that we should not join the JKLF because of clear differences over ideology and strategies. Despite this decision, Masoom Ansari decided to resign from the KNP to join the JKLF; and sent his resignation to Abbas Butt, Party Chairman, and sent a copy to me. When this smear campaign against me was in full swing, some senior members tried to pressurise Abbas Butt to take some action against me. Abbas Butt knew that KNP policies are not formulated by one individual, and one individual could not be held responsible for any policy, because the KNP policies are discussed in meetings and after reaching consensus they are adopted; so there was no need to take any action against me. Some members from Birmingham requested Abbas Butt for a meeting, which was held on 25 March 2012. In that meeting Mohammed Nazam Bhatti and Mumtaz Mirza told Abbas Butt that they were leaving the KNP to join the JKLF headed by Yasin Malik and Amanullah Khan. Both sides decided to part like friends; and gentlemen’s promise was that no one will issue any statements. Later on some quarters with Machiavellian mind advised them not to join the JKLF as they won’t be able to teach lesson to Dr Shabir Choudhry and harm the KNP. They were urged to stay in the KNP and take action against Dr Shabir Choudhry, illegal and unconstitutional as it was. Those who planned this move knew that Abbas Butt, who had been, by and large, neutral in these matters would be forced to step in to clarify the legal situation that action taken by Mohammed Nazam Bhatti was totally unconstitutional. When Abbas Butt did that, Mohammed Nazam Bhatti also ‘expelled’ Abbas Butt from the KNP as well. Many people with understanding of parties and procedures regarding expulsion of members; and especially the Central Leaders and the Chairman are laughing at this, as they know a foot soldier cannot expel the army chief. However, it would be interesting for the KNP members and the JKLF members to know that in 1985, Mohammed Nazam Bhatti, as a President of JKLF Birmingham branch, expelled Amanullah Khan who was the Chairman of the JKLF. Anyone can understand that a branch President cannot expel a Chairman; but Mohammed Nazam Bhatti has his own rules. This time he expelled another Chairman of a Party- Abbas Butt. The joke is that the man who extended his resignation because he wanted to join the JKLF, I don’t know under what pressure or under what incentive accepted to become ‘Chairman’ of breakaway group of KNP. However, I want to conclude that people representing tribalism, extremism, violence, hatred and forces of occupation can only create temporary hurdles and create confusion; but they cannot hold back our struggle and hide facts. 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

Tribal Invasion and Kashmir, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Tribal Invasion and Kashmir, Dr Shabir Choudhry 23 April 2012 Tribal attack on Kashmir was a major event in contemporary history of Jammu and Kashmir with far reaching consequences. The Tribal Attack not only ended Kashmir’s sovereignty, but it also resulted in division of the State between India and Pakistan; and to date, it remains divided and families are forcibly separated since 1947. Another sad part of this tragedy is that the brutal attack was launched in holy name of ‘jihad’ and liberation of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The fact, however, is that those who planned this ferocious and unprovoked attack wanted to capture Kashmir; and majority of those who joined the attack did not do it because of any religious duty but for the purpose of looting. It is unfortunate that because of very strong propaganda of the Pakistani ruling elite who planned this attack; and then justified it in name of Islam, still majority of people believe that the tribal attack was arranged to liberate people of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, they claim Kashmir was part of Pakistan and illegally occupied by India; therefore, this attack was necessary and justified. Before we discuss this, it is important that we explain the legal position of Jammu and Kashmir. The British Raj in India consisted of two units, namely British India and Princely India; whereas the former was directly ruled, the latter enjoyed semi autonomous status. The Rulers of the Princely States were allies of the British and under different treaties they accepted the British Paramountcy. Many Muslims of Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir are manipulated that because Pakistan was created in name of religion; and because Jammu and Kashmir was a majority Muslim State, therefore, it should have become part of Pakistan. That is not true; as Two Nations Theory did not apply to the Princely States, including the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The Two Nations theory, whatever its value after the fall of East Pakistan, and after the separatist trends within the present Pakistan, was only applicable to the British India. The Rulers of Princely States had a choice to accede to either India, accede to Pakistan or negotiate some new terms with India or Pakistan. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a constitutional expert. He knew the Two Nations Theory did not apply to the Princely States; and that is why before the establishment of Pakistan he never asked Kashmir’s inclusion in Pakistan. When people asked him a question about future of Kashmir and other Princely States, he asserted: “Constitutionally and legally, the Indian States will be independent sovereign states on the termination of Paramountcy and they will be free to decide for themselves to adopt any course they like. It is open to them to join the Hindustan Constituent Assembly, the Pakistan Constituent Assembly, or decide to remain independent. In the last case, they enter into such arrangements or relationship with Hindustan or Pakistan as they may choose.” Mohammed Ali Jinnah demonstrated this policy by accepting accession of Junagarrh’s to Pakistan, even though this State had overwhelming non Muslim majority; and if the Two Nations Theory was applicable to the Princely States then this State would have automatically become part of India. Similarly, on question of Hyderabad, Mohammed Ali Jinnah supported Ruler of this State’s right to remain independent, even though this State also had overwhelming non Muslim majority; and if the Two Nations Theory was applicable to the Princely States then Hyderabad also should have automatically joined India. Apart from that Governor General of India Lord Louis Mountbatten in his address to a Special full meeting of the Chamber of Princes on July 25 1947, said: “Now, the Indian Independence Act releases the States from all their obligations to the Crown. The States will have complete freedom- technically and legally they become independent.” The above examples prove without any doubt that the Two Nations Theory was only related to the British India and was not applicable to the Princely States. The Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir had no intention to join either India or Pakistan and lose his power and status. The Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir knew that the British Raj was going to end soon; and after the lapse of paramountcy, he wanted to become an independent Ruler of his State, so he decided to sign Standstill Agreements with India and Pakistan. Whereas, Pakistan signed the Standstill Agreement with the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir, India wanted to discuss this matter further. Those who justify this unprovoked and brutal aggression claim that the tribal attack was arranged to save Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir who were killed because of communal riots. It is interesting to note that the riots took place in Jammu, whereas the tribal attack was launched in the Valley of Kashmir where the Muslims had overwhelming majority; and hundreds of miles away from the trouble spot. The aim of this attack was to punish the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir for not acceding to Pakistan and to capture his summer capital and the political and economic hub. Jammu and Kashmir was important to Pakistan because of its great strategic location, natural resources and security it provided to Pakistan. If the entire Jammu and Kashmir had gone to India, and the Indian forces were deployed on Kashmir’s border with Pakistan, then that would have seriously endangered Pakistan’s main civil and military lines of communication between Rawalpindi and Lahore. If Pakistan was to safeguard this route properly then that would make cities of Lahore, Sialkot and Gujrat vulnerable to the Indian invasion. Apart from that Jammu and Kashmir was important to Pakistan’s economy, especially agriculture. So as far as Pakistani ruling elite were concerned they felt it was absolutely necessary to get Kashmir at all costs. With that in mind the Pakistani leaders and Pakistani officers of the Pakistan army (all senior officers were British at that time) started formulating a policy to capture Kashmir soon after the partition of India. Major General Akbar Khan, who was in charge of this military campaign, went to Murree, the hill station near the Kashmir border two weeks after the partition of India. This is where he met Sardar Ibrahim Khan (who was appointed President of Azad Kashmir by Khawaja Abdul Rahim Commissioner of Rawalpindi), and Mian Iftikhar Khan a leader of Pakistan Muslim League, Lahore; and who was on way to Srinagar to assess the situation there. Major General Akbar Khan, at that time was a serving officer of the Pakistan Army, and was Director of Weapons and equipment at the GHQ. In his book, ‘Raiders in Kashmir’, while referring to the meeting with Mian Iftikhar Khan, he wrote: ‘All he could tell me was that some money could be spent…he said that any action by us to be of an unofficial nature, and no Pakistani troops or officers were to take an active part in it. With this inadequate data in my possession, I spent the next day or so with Sardar Ibrahim and others and returned to Pinidi where I wrote out a plan’. 1 The whole plan needed a lot of assistance from the Pakistan army in the form of military plans, weapons, and supply of ammunition, communications, intelligence and able and committed manpower to implement that plan. The plan had to be kept secret not only from the Indians; but also from senior Pakistani army officers of the British origin. Major General Akbar Khan produced a plan to capture Kashmir with the title of: ‘Armed revolt inside Kashmir’. As the name suggests, the Pakistani plan was that it should look like a ‘revolt’ of the people of Jammu and Kashmir against its (non Muslim) Ruler. I know many people claim that it was a Kashmiri ‘revolt’ against a tyrant and non Muslim Ruler; and they give details of their sacrifices or sacrifices of their families. I will not deny the sacrifices made by the people. Also I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, however, as a researcher and a political analyst, I have to see what were the motives of those who planned this brutal and unprovoked attack that resulted in forced division of our motherland; and which was to be the main cause of animosity and wars between India and Pakistan. It would be a good analogy, if we look at the uprisings in Libya and Syria. One can say, people of these countries revolted against the rulers of these countries; and made great sacrifices. Yes, they have made great sacrifices and suffered immensely, but were these ‘revolts’ indigence or local with no help and support from outside? Those who plan revolts of this nature always ensure that the fighting people believe that they are fighting for their own cause; and to advance interest of their nation, tribe or faith. I agree people of the present Azad Kashmir, especially people of Poonch had resentments against the Maharajah; but is it not true that foreign countries always exploit local, regional or tribal grievances and religious sentiments to start a revolt. The man in charge of the campaign wrote: ‘As open interference or aggression by Pakistan was obviously undesirable, it was proposed that our efforts should be concentrated upon strengthening the Kashmiris themselves internally – and at the same time taking steps to prevent of arrival of armed civilians or military assistance from India into Kashmir.’ 2 To stop the Indian help reaching Kashmir he proposed 1,000 men to be stationed near Kathua and 200 men to be stationed near the Srinagar airport. Total army of the Maharajah, at that time, was 9,000 out of which only 2,000 were Muslims; and because of the communal situation in the entire region, he was reluctant to put too much faith to his Muslim units. His remaining 7,000 army was widely scattered, and could not defend the borders; and in view of what the Muslim units subsequently did in various parts of the State, his judgement was not wrong. Apart from Major General Akbar Khan other key protagonists were Mr Khurshid Anwar, Commander of the Muslim League National Guards, Mr Zaman Kiani, Commander of the former Indian National Army, Sardar Shaukat Ayat Khan a senior leader of Muslim League and a Minister in the Punjab government. All these met the Prime Minister of Pakistan in Lahore, in presence of Mr Ghulam Mohammed, Finance Minister and later Governor General of Pakistan and Mian Iftikhar Khan. In this meeting many important decisions with regard to the whole plan were discussed and finalised. 3 He claims that he also took some senior officers, like Brigadier Sher Khan, who was Director Intelligence at that time and based in the GHQ, in to confidence. Also he claims to have had support of Pakistan Air Force through Air commodore Janjua and others who helped them with winter clothing, ammunition and weapons etc. 4 I have always maintained that if there was no tribal attack then it was possible that we people of Jammu and Kashmir could have been still independent. We were attacked by the Tribesmen supported by Pakistani officials; and we lost our sovereignty as a direct result of this brutal and unprovoked aggression. Our suffering, deaths and destruction; and all that what has happened since October 1947, could be linked to that aggression. Even Major General Akbar Khan tends to support this view point that the Maharajah was forced to seek help from India because of this brutal attack. He even agrees that Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of acceding to India; and this is the view point I have asserted with evidence many times. Major General Akbar Khan wrote: ‘But then, suddenly at this stage, the whole situation was radically altered by the entry of Frontier Tribesmen into Kashmir on 23 of October. This event was of such significance that it led to the accession of the State to India within four days.’ 5 When the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir realised that the Pakistani authorities have violated the Standstill Agreement and have managed a tribal attack which has resulted in killing of innocent men, women and children and rapes and kidnapping of women and young girls, he had no option but to seek help from the other neighbour – India. India was eagerly waiting for this invitation to intervene from the beleaguered Maharajah; in fact, in anticipation on 25 the October, they had alerted their Services Chiefs to prepare plans for sending troops in to Jammu and Kashmir. On the same day three senior officers flew to Srinagar to assess the situation and to advise the Maharajah to move to Jammu for safety. Those who planned and launched that disastrous tribal attack, or took part in it, their followers and those who represent forces of extremism, violence and hatred will sharpen their knives and attack me for writing the above. Already for the past four months a concerted and well coordinated smear campaign is going on against me for speaking truth and for exposing those who have made the Kashmiri struggle for independence their business. There is plenty of evidence to prove that both the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir and the most popular Kashmir leader, Sheikh Abdullah were not happy to join India; if anything, they wanted to maintain independence of Kashmir by having cordial relationship with both India and Pakistan. By having the Standstill Agreement with Pakistan, the Maharajah provided a foot hold to them in Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah on his part tried his very best to meet Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan and reach some consensus; but alas, he was insulted and Mohammed Ali Jinnah refused to meet the tallest Kashmiri leader when the latter had secretly travelled to Lahore to meet him. In fact, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said: "I don't need to meet this man, Kashmir is in my pocket' Humiliated and disappointed Sheikh Abdullah returned to Srinagar. Although, he had was bitter and did not want to join Pakistan, but he did not close doors for some future dialogue; and his emissaries were still in Lahore waiting to see senior Pakistani officials to reach some agreement when the tribal aggression was launched. Thinking in some important circles in Pakistan was, why talk to these Kashmiri leaders when we can get Kashmir by force. However, by use of force, within five days they pushed bulk of Kashmir in to the Indian corner, where it remains since that time. It is sad that we people of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir are forcibly divided and oppressed on both sides of the divide. It is also sad that despite our sufferings and sacrifices we cannot see any light at the end of the tunnel; hence no end to our suffering, humiliation and miseries. But it is more disturbing that people who matter in Islamabad have not learnt anything from the past mistakes; and still that mindset prevails that they can get rest of Kashmir by use of gun. All those who speak truth and choose to travel on right path, ultimately suffer at the hands of those who either represent forces of the status quo, have personal or professional envy or they lack the ability to differentiate between good and bad. Whatever the real reason for their hate campaign, they need to understand that by smear campaign and by promotion of hate they cannot promote any cause, let alone winning independence for people of Jammu and Kashmir. Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) said: "Say what is true, although it may be bitter and displeasing to people", so as far as I am concerned, I will continue my jihad of speaking truth, no matter how bitter it is, and exposing those who are using sentiments of simple and innocent people to advance their personal and political agenda. Reference: 1. Major General Akbar Khan, ‘Raiders in Kashmir’, Pak Publishers Limited, Karachi, Pakistan, page 12 2. ibid, page 14 3. ibid, page 17 4. ibid, page 19 5. ibid, page 23 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

From Mohammed Asim, Chief Organiser Kashmir National Party

From Mohammed Asim, Chief Organiser Kashmir National Party I don’t want to be involved on the Facebook quarrels, as we will not be able to liberateKASHMIRby arguing each other on the Facebook. If we are sincere with cause of KASHMIR, instead of blaming each other and taking the MICK and making a MOCKERY of each other. We should convince the people of India and Pakistan to make there government understand, rather then spending all large junk of their budget on Defence to keep up against each other, should be spend on the basic need of general Public. Aslam Mirza comments on Liberation Of Balawaristan Jammu Kashmir Ladakh Nazir Gilani Thread Re: Clarification. Aslam Mirza encouraged me to reply for his false statement. I thought he was a grown up adult, but the may he has manipulate our conversation. I can just simply say that none of the words in this statement are mine and is completely false. Four people came to my house along with Aslam Mirza to their condolences, and as usual we were taking about more interesting subject Freedom of Kashmir. First of all it is inappropriate to air people personal conversation on Public forms. The discussion was about a possibility of utilising Dr. Shabir Ch. time better, as he is of ill Health and busy on many fronts. The aim was to relieve Dr. Shabir Ch from some of his responsibilities from KNP, so he can delegate his time more appropriately and efficiently on his research, writing and other crucial responsibilities. Aslam Mirza had created his own fairly tale from the discussion. If you are so much interested in making statements on Quran, then you should ask your relative Masuam Ansari to do the same and confess that he did not resigned from KNP and what sort of conversation he had with the Chairman of KNP on the 28th March about the chairman of your JKLF. Dr. Shabir Ch. is a most valuable member of KNP and his services will be utilised where he can make more contribution.

Zardari’s new political initiative and Ajmair visit, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Zardari’s new political initiative and Ajmair visit Dr Shabir Choudhry 21 April 2012 President of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari is best known for other things, and not for anything that links him with Islam or teachings of Islam. He is not a great admirer of saints or their shrines, as he idolises things that make his life in this world more charming and worth living. However, rumours are that he always takes help from Peers and fortune tellers before formulating his political strategies; and some even claim that he is often surrounded by them in Awan e Sadar and in Bilawal House. Despite the above short introduction, Asif Zardari surprised everyone when he declared he wanted to visit Ajmair Sharif for a pilgrimage. No disrespect to the Saint resting in Ajmair Sharif, but there are many famous and pious Saints resting inside Pakistan; and I don’t know how many of them had a visit from Asif Ali Zardari. Furthermore, question is, if the Pakistani cricket team was playing a cricket match in India, would Asif Ali Zardari still have gone to Ajmair Sharif or would he have activated the ‘cricket diplomacy’? The point I want to make is that he did not go to India only to pay respect to the Saint in Ajmair Sharif; but his main goal was to meet the most powerful man sitting in New Delhi – Chief Executive of India. I don’t believe for a minute, that Asif Ali Zardari got up one morning and decided to go to India for a ‘private visit’ in name of Ajmair pilgrimage. I strongly believe that a lot of work and back channel discussions had taken place; and certain points in principle were agreed before he pronounced his intention to visit India. Asif Ali Zardari’s critics claim he is not an educated man, and not suitable to play the role he is playing. However, he has proved that he is more than a match to those who are educated and have years of experience in politics, in army and in bureaucracy and in government. He has outmanoeuvred everyone; and survived all the attacks on him on his party and the government. Peoples Party government, despite record breaking corruption, disastrous governance, numerous scandals, Supreme Court cases and judgements, acts of violence and terrorism in the country, civil war, external attacks and above all serious stand off with the army establishment have survived; and seems to be winning every battle and that is just because of strong nerve and planning of Asif Ali Zardari. When every one was saying that he had fled the country in December 2011, I predicted in my article written on 11 December 2011, ‘Zardari will return in a style’, which stated: ‘In view of the above, in my opinion, Asif Zardari is out of danger and he will return to Pakistan in a style; and possibly with more power and influence. His return and increased power and influence will weather the political storm; and will help him to plan his second tenure as a President.’ After his return from Dubai, he was more confident and more assertive; and he carefully planned his future strategies. He has established that there is no rival to him in the Pakistani politics; but that alone is insufficient to win battles in future. He has to leave his mark on the international level as well. In the past few years he has shown some understanding of the international affairs; and has already made some impact by improving relations with Iran, China and Russia. But this will not bring him the glory he has in mind; and the situation he knows he might land himself in, in near future, so for this purpose a private visit to Delhi was must. This visit which was apparently made for the purpose of a ‘pilgrimage’ acquired a great political significance and was treated as a summit meeting; and summits are always held after considerable preparation from both sides. Both leaders expressed satisfaction with the talks; and the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said he was willing “to find practical and pragmatic solutions on all issues”. He also expressed his willingness to visit Islamabad; of course, he would only come when substantial progress is made on outstanding issues. He would visit as an invited guest of Pakistan and would not come under the disguise of visiting Sikh holy Shrines situated in Pakistan. Manmohan Singh’s statement that they will find ‘practical and pragmatic solution’ clearly suggests that principles and so called principled and official stands are no more relevant in current situation of bilateral contacts between the two countries. Asif Ali Zardari knew the challenges he faced at home. He knew what happened to Nawaz Sharif when he started his peace initiative with India, while the army command was not fully on board; so before leaving for India he also had a meeting with the Army Chief. It looks that he had a green signal from the power centre of Pakistan, and it suggests that there is a change of heart in senior army circles as well. Manmohan Singh, on the other hand, has his own problems with regard to peace with Pakistan because of the past bitter experience. However, it is a good sign that he had support of former Indian foreign minister and BJP leader Yashwant Sinha, a party known to have an anti-Pakistan image. Some analysts think Manmohan Singh might have some problems from his own party; and they base this view on the fact that Sonia Gandhi was absent from the lunch hosted by the Prime Minister in honour of the Pakistani President. I would not go along with that view. Sonia Gandhi has played her political inning without accepting any official position in the government. She knows her son Rahul Gandhi is still in a process of finding his place in the Indian political system; and it was more important that he was present in the lunch to make his presence felt. In presence of Sonia Gandhi, young Rahul Gandhi would have been overshadowed; and caring and political minded mother had to think of his son’s political future. The lunch provided an opportunity to Rahul Gandhi to get desperately needed limelight, especially after dismal Congress performance in the provincial elections. He not only exchanged views with the political ace of Pakistan; but also built friendly ties with Bilawal Zardari, a man who is under training to play a role in politics of this region. Sonia Gandhi knew both young leaders will have to work together to play a crucial role in determining future of this region. President Zardari never regarded India as enemy of Pakistan. He wanted to shun politics of the past, and start a new era of peace that both countries could face challenges of the 21st century. Political situation at home did not allow him to proceed with his plans; and he had to fight lengthy and bitter fights with different power centres in Pakistan. In my view, because of internal and external factors he now has upper hand. This new attitude was reflected in the statement of General Kayani, when he was speaking to the media during his visit to the Gayari sector in Siachin, he said: “We in the army understand very well that there should be a very good balance between defence and development. You cannot be spending on defence alone and forgetting about development. Ultimately, the security of a country is not only that you secure boundaries and borders but it is when people that live in the country feel happy, their needs are being met. Only in that case will a country be truly safe… And therefore we would like to spend less on defence; definitely…..more focus should be on the welfare of the people.” 1 In my view, that is a remarkable change. In the past, army used to take lion’s share of resources. The above statement clearly indicates a change of heart; and that is a good omen for the peace, stability and prosperity of the region. Perhaps the ruling elite in Pakistan have understood that they could not continue with their past policies; and keep Pakistan as a nation state – a state which should be in peace with itself and its neighbours. President Zardari wants to make most of this change and, at least, reach agreement on certain disputes with India. Perhaps he can resolve disputes of Sir Creek and Siachin Glacier in near future (Siachin is situated in the State of Jammu and Kashmir; and decision on this alone might get some criticism). War over control of Siachin Glacier has consumed more than 8 thousands human lives from both sides and billions of rupees. Wise voices from both sides of the divide wanted some solution to this costly war which could not be won by any side. By resolving this dispute they could have utilized the resources to alleviate poverty, hunger, and provide clean water and medicine to millions of the people; alas, rulers of both countries had other priorities and peace and welfare of the ordinary people was not on top of their priority list. Gayari tragedy that happened on the Pakistani controlled Siachin Glacier, once, again put pressure on rulers of the both countries to resolve this dispute on priority bases. Good thing is that prominent leader and two times Prime Minister of Pakistan, during his visit to the tragedy spot courageously declared that the Siachin dispute must be resolved; and that Pakistan should take lead in this matter. President Zardari also has similar views on this topic and said: “Peaceful coexistence between the two neighbours is very important so that everybody can concentrate on the well-being of the people.” Despite these good intentions road to peace is full of mine fields. There are powerful groups which have ability to derail the peace process. Issues related of Hafiz Saeed and LeT and export of terrorism are also thorny issues and need to be handled with care and sincerity. Of course, there is a big and sentimental issue – a dispute about future status of former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir, which is forcibly divided between India and Pakistan. Not only India and Pakistan don’t know what to do with this dispute; unfortunately people of Jammu and Kashmir are also divided and are not sure what they want, as different regions have different aspirations. The State is multi religious and multi ethnic; and some regions have either majority of one religion or the other, and tolerance level has become very low. To some people it is a religious struggle, to others it is a political struggle. Some people want to join India, others wants to join Pakistan. Perhaps, some people are happy with the status quo, however, if there is an impartial plebiscite held in the entire state the majority will opt for an independent Jammu and Kashmir. This option of united and independent Jammu and Kashmir of the entire State may not suit New Delhi and Islamabad; so they have to come up with a plan that is suitable to both countries and the majority of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. It is not an easy task; perhaps they agree to make some changes to the existing status and then leave it like this for a specified period, and then let the future leaders take the final decision. If President Zardari, who is famous for making deals, can make some deals with New Delhi over some of the disputes discussed above; and provide some relief to the anxious Pakistani people and flood the market with cheap Indian goods, he might pave the way for the next PPP victory, or at least next term for himself. However, I have a further question in my mind. Did President Zardari only go there to have some deal with the New Delhi on the issues discussed above or there was some other agenda as well. I have never met this astute man – a man who plans his strategy well and execute it with care and courage. He is the man with Machiavellian shrewdness, who has ability to plan things for years to come; and fight his corner bravely and cunningly. He knows what storms are gathering inside and around Pakistan. He also knows that situation in Pakistan is unpredictable, and no one knows exactly what will happen next. But he knew that he had a plan for the control of Punjab, either with the existing structure, or by dividing it; and that would have serious repercussions. President Zardari also knows that ruling Pakistan with the present structure is not an easy task; so he envisages some structural changes. I believe one important item on the agenda was the role of India viz a viz Pakistan, if the country is embroiled in some kind of war; or faces a situation similar to that of 1971. 1. Published in The Express Tribune, April 19th, 2012. 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

Dubai meeting- other side of the story, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Dubai meeting- other side of the story
Dr Shabir Choudhry 18 April 2012

Dr Nazir Gilani needs to get out of this illusion that he is a brain box of the Kashmiri politics; and that he has monopoly over wisdom and use of pen, and that only he knows ‘jurisprudence’ of the Kashmir dispute. There are many who are much wiser than him and know better how to make use of the pen. However, they might not have army of fake ID’s at their command to ridicule others.

Like many others in Kashmiri politics I also make a deliberate effort to avoid confrontation with him, as I believe I can make positive contribution without pulling someone’s leg and without belittling anyone. Also matter which he was highlighting in his own name by telling half truths and by taking things out of context also concerned four other individuals and Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front as an organisation, I thought someone will show him a mirror.

For reasons best known to the other four individuals, namely Raja Muzaffar, Barrister Majid Tramboo, Usman Rahim and Farooq Papa, have decided to remain quiet; and as the JKLF is still in more than one group and perhaps not sure what to say on the issue; I decided to tell other side of the story related to the Dubai meeting, which Dr Nazir Gilani has deliberately avoided.

After long time when he deliberately presented statement of JKLF Central Diplomatic Bureau related to the Dubai meeting in a negative way, I asked him to explain: who convened this meeting? What was its agenda? And above all who else participated in the meeting apart from the names he had given out.

He went quiet on this, as he knew that reply to those questions would not only expose him but many other things. However, after two weeks of silence he produced a press cutting of JKLF CDB statement published in Kashmir Times on 28 April 2002. In order to advance his agenda, he took things out of context and said: ‘It is relevant to point out that A.G. Lone was killed within a month on 21 May 2002 on his return to Srinagar’.

Few days after that he wrote a lengthy article titled ‘Time please’ which was published on 16 April in ‘Rising Kashmir’. He is making desperate efforts to implicate the JKLF statement with the callous murder of Abdul Ghani Lone. After reading that, despite my recent health problems, I said to myself that the man needs to be shown a mirror and set historical records straight.

After this introduction now let us analyse the events. Dr Nazir Gilani in his article mentioned above writes: ‘The first serious and transparent move to debate the various aspects of Kashmir situation began with the Dubai Meeting of mid April 2002. Khawaja Abdul Gani Lone, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq (APHC), Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan, chairman National Kashmir Committee of Pakistan, Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai (KAC), Mushtaq Jeelani (KCC) and Syed Nazir Gilani (JKCHR) met in Dubai to discuss the interests of the people of Jammu and Kashmir’.

He claims it was a ‘transparent move to debate the various aspects of Kashmir situation’, yet he is too afraid to tell who organised that meeting? What was its agenda? And above all who else was present? Why is he not speaking the whole truth? The fact is that those who arranged the meeting and paid for its expenses were also present in the meeting to tell them what should be done in name of Kashmir dispute inside the Valley of Kashmir and around the world.

Every citizen of Jammu and Kashmir know that Dr Nazir Gilani’s JKCHR doesn’t have a second member, similar is the case with KAC and KCC. All three organisations can fit in a Toyota saloon; and still there will be some space for another such organisation. So with that kind of power behind them who gave them the right to represent Kashmir?

Dr Nazir Gilani has worked hard over the past few years to establish that Dr Fai, Mirwaiz Umer Fraooq and APHC work for the Pakistani establishment to advance their agenda on Kashmir. The other participant, Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan openly says he works for Pakistan; and that he is ‘unpaid soldier’ of Pakistan. Dr Nazir Gilani, at that time, was also reported to be a senior stalwart of the Pakistani establishment; and he proudly claimed that before he landed in Islamabad his meetings with the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan was scheduled.

So one can safely guess who arranged the meeting and for what purpose. I can agree that people of the Valley have suffered immensely because of the militant struggle; and, from time to time, we all claimed that it is ‘our struggle’, fact however, is that we only suffered, struggle was in control of those who planned it and provided resources for it to ensure that the Kashmir pot keeps on boiling to suit their agenda.

Those who called the Dubai meeting and paid for its expenses, like always, came out with a list of demands – one can call it ‘do more’ list. This very senior officer of the Pakistani establishment after giving his briefing to mainly subservient audience promised them of new rewards and urged them to implement the agenda.

News filtered from the meeting was that Abdul Ghani Lone spoke out against this dictation. He reportedly said, enough is enough, we have lost a generation by following your instructions and we are no where near our destination. Your policies have only added to our problems and miseries; and from now on we will do what we think is in our interest. There was heated exchange of views between him and the big man from Islamabad.

Docile and subservient minds felt very uncomfortable with the courageous stand of Abdul Ghani Lone. They had no guts to oppose the boss, but didn’t want to fall out with Lone Sahib either. They tried to cool down the matter but Lone Sahib stood his ground. His view was that interest of Kashmir is paramount to the Pakistani interest; and the meeting ended with bitter taste in mouths, and some were subdued like frightened rabbits. Some felt that the bold stand might cost Abdul Ghani Lone his life; and he was advised not to go to Srinagar until dust settles down. Abdul Ghani Lone went to the United States and spent some time meeting the Americans and the Kashmiri Diaspora.

The news cutting which Dr Nazir Gilani has produced to implicate the JKLF reads:
‘JKLF joins Geelani in criticising Dubai conclave’. Title of the news clearly shows that before the JKLF statement, a senior Kashmiri leader Ali Shah Geelani also criticised the Dubai meeting; and the JKLF only joined those who criticised that conclave. So, why Dr Nazir Gilani’s gun is pointing towards the JKLF statement? Does he have some personal agenda or an axe to grind; is he advancing someone else’s agenda?

When Abdul Ghani Lone was shot dead in a public meeting held to commemorate death of Mirwaiz Mohlvee Farooq in Srinagar, his politician son, Sajad Lone, openly said that Pakistani ISI has killed his father. There were some who tried to shift blame to India, however, Professor Ghani Bhat another senior leader of APHC last year declared that it was wrong to accuse India for deaths of Mirwaiz Mohlvee Farooq and Abdul Ghani Lone; they were killed by our own people.

So it is clear that the JKLF statement had no impact, what so ever, on life of Abdul Ghnai Lone; however, Kashmir watchers assert that what transpired in the Dubai meeting ultimately sealed the future of Abdul Ghani Lone. Perhaps some of the participants have guilty conscience over this issue; may be they have not, as tens of thousands of other innocent Kashmiris have also lost their lives and no one is prepared to acknowledge culpability over this. Alas, it has become a business for some.

It might be interesting for readers to know that one of the participants of the Dubai meeting was also having secret meetings with the Indians and passing on the information. Pakistani scoops may have formulated wrong policies, especially with regard to Kashmir dispute, but they are not fools. They soon found out the mole and sacked him from his post. The poor guy, out of favour from the Pakistani establishment has been running from pillar to post since that date to get his job back. During his last meeting with them he, once again, begged them for his old job, or any job with reduced perks, but alas, to date, no luck for the poor guy, hence his frustration and anger. May Allah put him on a right path?

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

Story of Mangla dam

Story of Mangla dam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7dSMgmcLm4&feature=related

Thank you Psychopath

Thank you Psychopath

Since psychopath has started a campaign against me with help of his army of fake ID’s and some face book warriors, rating for my webpage – www.k4kashmir.com has dramatically increased. In February 2012, it recorded 132,212 hits, due to hate campaign it went up to 166,083 in March and, today, on 17th April my webpage has recorded 101,987. Apart from that, more and people are supporting me and cursing the psychopath with manufacturing fault. I wish him all the best and pray Allah gives him peace of mind and ability to use his skills in positive way.