This is a little lengthy post by a Nancy Kaul, a Kashmiri Pandit.
India under siege – from within
Islamic terrorism and terrorists, separatists and secessionists, and soft-peddling politicians are outdoing each other to prove that they share the same mind set and agenda in Jammu and Kashmir. Besides these, there is another equally committed partner in the quest for disengaging the state of J&K from India; the ultimate political objective for which Islam has been waging Islamic terrorism or jihad in the state.
The truth is that this partner is neither willing to accept facts nor recognize the ground reality but is making an all-out effort to trample the Indian constitution under their feet. This ‘partner’ to whom I am referring to are intellectuals, politicians, journalists and the ‘secular’ liberals who are aiding and abetting the separatists and secessionists to move inch by inch towards Balkanizing the Indian nation.
The Muslims of Kashmir Valley have always been portraying themselves as being the sole inhabitants not only of the Valley but in the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is almost as if the Hindus of the Kashmir valley who were forcibly thrown out of their homes never existed and as if the Hindus of Jammu and the Buddhists of Laddakh also do not exist. Such is the stranglehold of the Muslims in the state that they have succeeded in propagating the myth that the only people who live in the state of J&K are Muslims. This is the success of Islamic terrorism and its methods.
This has been the premise the whole day today, in this seminar while referring to the state of J&K. It is as if the whole issue is only about the valley and only about Muslims. Every speaker has made out his case as if there is no Jammu and Laddakh and there are no Hindus and Buddhists. The whole seminar is valley-centric.
What about the Kashmiri Pandits? The people who know more than anybody else about the impact and consequences of the terror unleashed on them in the Kashmir Valley. And what about the people of Ladakh and Jammu?
Does the Indian constitution guarantee freedom of life and speech only to terrorists, separatists and politicians who take oath of office in its name and then proceed to do everything to erode the very sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country of which the state of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part?
In the name of democracy and dialogue, it is only this view point that is being placed forward and propagated in seminar circuits and this seminar too is no different. Panun Kashmir suspects that these debates have a design and a pattern to them and this is easily discerned from this seminar too. The seminar, organized by CSDS in NewDelhi was called, ” Multi Party Dialogue on the Political Future of Jammu and Kashmir”.
Initially the organizers ( Madhu Kishwar), gave the impression that all regions of Jammu and Kashmir had been invited to participate in the seminar and also that all the participants (read speakers) would get to place their view point. The organizers made out that the views expressed at the seminar would not be confined to the views of either the separatists or Valley politicians.
However, on the day of the seminar held at Nehru Memorial in Teen Murti, the venue was witness to a vicious campaign for de-linking Jammu and Kashmir from India. This was the only theme; it was neither a seminar nor a dialogue and certainly it was not represented by all regions or religions.
In the chair was Ram Jethmalani, the senior advocate who many a times himself led the attack against the Indian nation. Mr Jethmalani was bravado personified when he made common cause with the terrorist Yaseen Malik and actually looked pleased with himself as speaker after speaker hit out at the edifice of constitutional polity and the territorial integrity of India.
Mohammed Shafi Uri of the National Conference took the first dig while suggesting that the Pandora’s Box o of autonomy was the only solution and said that in 1953 the Kashmiris were betrayed by the Indian union.
The stage set to their advantage, separatist and hurriyat leader Abdul Gani Bhat wanted the army and all security forces withdrawn from the valley. The man wanted ‘self governance’ in Kashmir, and also made the prepostrous suggestion that the state of Jammu and Kashmir should be a buffer zone between India and Pakistan instead of being a state within the Indian Union. He went on to announce that he would now like to sit with National Conference and PDP to chalk out a new strategy to achieve this.
Interestingly, only two days before this, Dr Farooq Adullah had said in Srinagar that the Muslims of the state were proud to be Muslims and proud to be the majority populace.Hour after hour the speeches continued even as PDP’s Muzzafar Beg wanted Article 1 of the Indian constitution amended apart from going on and on about how only self rule was the only solution.All the speakers spoke in tandem and in a well orchestrated manner. The only casulaty that day was the sovereignty and terroritial integrity of the country.
Kashmir - Nature's gift
Mehbooba Mufti and her loud and aggressive ways need no new mention; last year the nation saw and heard her hysterical anti Amaranth campaign and political rhetoric. She too said she wanted to see Kashmir closer to Muzzafarabad and not wilt in the presence of India but bloom in proximity to Islamabad.After spiting and spewing venom, Mehbooba said that the final solution will have the rubber stamp of Syed Ali Shah Gilani(the rabid separatist and vehement campaigner for Jammu and Kashmir as a Pakistani entity on the basis of religion).
Neither the Chair nor Madhu Kishwar reacted to the day-long anti India and separatist tirade; on the contrary they encouraged and prodded the speakers in their anti-India tirade. Ram Jethmalani comically went so far as to say, ” I am 90% Pakistani and only10% Indian.”The ‘dialogue’ was only a series of unchallenged and uncontested monologue of speeches, each speaker only wanting the secession of Jammu and Kashmir from India.
Yet when it was the turn for a contrary view Madhu Kishwar and Ram Jethmalani did not allow the paper to be read till the end.Fist thumping Jethmalani said that he will not allow anything to be said except what was being said. He got up threateningly. Madhu Kishwar wanted the speaker to change her paper and declared that unless changes were made to the paper the Kashmiri Hindu point of view would not be allowed to be aired. ” No, No, I will not allow you to speak . You cannot speak this,” they both declared.
What does a person or a speaker to any conference, intellectual debate or for that matter a multi party dialogue expect? To be able to place his or her opinion and point of view. Nothing more and nothing less. Why did she not stop the Kashmiri Muslims who spoke hour after hour hitting out at the sovereignty of the country?
Kashmir in Winter
I will state unambiguously that all these reports or proposals that where being discussed and endorsed by these people was something that as a matter of fact, neither the Kashmiri Pandits nor the Hindus of Jammu and Buddhists of Laddakh want nor will ever agree to.Why were thay all agitated when the question of the issue of Hindus and Buddhists, Jammu and Laddakh being equal stake holders in the state was raised?
The truth is and remains that whether it is the self rule proposal or the autonomy report or the greater autonomy report or the separatist proposal, they are all aimed at severing the state from the Indian Union.
Why do all debates, conferences, seminars and discussions on J&K feature only the secessionists and separatists and their partners in secessionism in Indian polity? Why are the other stake holders marginaised and even ignored? I can only assume that this is an evil design to balkanize India and talibanize Kashmir and Hindus and Buddhists of J&K have to be kept invisible and voiceless for their diabolic agenda to succeed. Madhu Kishwar’s seminar was no different and served only the anti-India agenda.
Paper presented by Ms. Nancy Kaul at the seminar
I would like to submit for your consideration the prepositions which have been taken up by the speakers in respect of autonomy, self rule and self determination are aimed to de link the State of Jammu and Kashmir from India.There is nothing new that the speakers have said beyond that, which Pakistan and the separatist forces in Jammu and Kashmir State have been saying for the last six decades. It is a well orchestrated campaign.
I am a Kashmiri Pandit, belonging to the community of the Kashmiri Hindus, who have been subjected to genocide, and who have been driven out of their homes and hearths.I am aware, more than anybody else, in this country and outside this country, of the long and relentless campaign of jihad and terrorism that has been going on in the State for it’s disengagement from India.
The exclusion of the state from the constitutional organization of India, underlined by the autonomy proposal; the transfer of power to the separatist forces inside the state and operating in Pakistan, underlined by the self rule proposals; and independence of the State Proposed by the exponents of independence of Jammu and Kashmir, are aimed to cut the state from the Indian Union.
All these formulas draw deeply from the Kashmir Study group report and from which Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf also drew his plan. The broad structure of the proposals he made are:
Demarcation of the Muslim majority regions of the state including those situated to the west of river Chenab from the Hindu majority areas situated mainly to the east of river Chenab.
Dissolution of the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir.
The demilitarization of the State.
Joint management of the State by India and Pakistan.
The demilitarization of the State, which forms the most prominent part of the Musharraf Plan, is aimed at the withdrawal of the Indian security forces from the Muslim majority zones of the state, and their replacement by the militarized separatist forces which have been fighting against India for the last two decades.
Best of Kashmir
At the same time the proposals of autonomy, greater autonomy and self rule are no different. Both want to divide Jammu and Kashmir, in a manner that enables Kashmir and Islamabad to establish control not only over the geopolitical strategic Himalayan region, which is highly rich in green-gold, but also over river Chenab, which has the potential of producing more than 15,000 Mega Watt of electricity every year.
A few words on the self-rule doctrine and what it envisages would be in order.
What does the self-rule formula envisage or suggest?
It suggests abandonment of the universally accepted “notions of sovereignty and national borders”; a “pan-Kashmir” approach; “autonomy from the nation state of India”; “regionalization of power across J&K”; “sharing of sovereignty”; “economic integration that transcends borders”; a drastic change in the Indian Constitution that converts Greater Jammu & Kashmir into “a regional free trade area”; “dual currency system”; roll back of “Article 356” (under which New Delhi has the power to intervene if there is breakdown of constitutional machinery.
Article 249 (under which the Parliament exercises legislative jurisdiction over the state); withdrawal of the “All India Service Act, 1951″ and all other Central Acts from the state and also jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India and election commission of india; change in the nomenclatures from Chief Minister to Wazir-e-Azam and from Governor to Sadar-e-Riayast”; “establishment of “regional council of Greater Jammu & Kashmir” comprising representatives from India, Pakistan and both parts of the state; and division of Jammu and Kashmir province into “sub-regions” and establishment of “sub-regional councils”.
The self-rule formula further suggests: I quote “Self-rule is aimed at providing the central element for a comprehensive architecture to be devised for the final and strategic settlement of the Kashmir issue. Self-rule will not be a mid-point into a journey or a tactical or evasive prescription. Instead, self-rule must also form the basis of relationship between the people of Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Pakistan” unquote.
It is hardly necessary to reflect on the implications of the self-rule formula as everything is self-explanatory.Suffice it to say that the self-rule formula, if accepted and implemented, would automatically mean a step short of independence from India and once it happens, it will not be difficult for the separatists to achieve their 62-year-old agenda.
I am surprised that the speakers have presumed that the Jammu and Kashmir State is only populated by the Muslims. The truth is that the Jammu and Kashmir State also has a 40% non Muslim population of Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists.I want to make it clear, that none of these people – Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists approve of any proposals which underline the secessionism of the state from India.
A demolished house of a Kashmiri pandit in Srinagar
I wonder, how the people here who have spoken before me, have tried to create an impression that the lone stake holder in the Jammu and Kashmir state is Muslim population of the Valley.I would like to understand, as to why do all debates just end up with the secessionists or separatists or their supporters in politicians, who out do each other in their rhetoric of azaadi.Is Jammu And Kashmir State only valley and its Muslims? What about Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ladhakis and Dogras?
Does our constitution grant us the freedom to take the proprietary of land and declare it free or part of another country at our whim or violence?The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir in section 3 says that the State is the integral part of India and section 147 prohibits any amendment. So all the politicians of Jammu and Kashmir, who say that their State is different, need to understand this first.
Pandit Nehru in the Lok Sabha (in response to a pointed question by Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee in February 1964) was quoted – “Article 370 will get eroded in due course and vanish ultimately….”.
Mohammadalli Karim Chagla, in the Rajya Sabha was quoted – “The Prime Minister the other day spoke of the gradual erosion of Article 370. I hope that this erosion is accelerated and I also hope that very soon that article will disappear from the constitution. After all it is transitional and temporary. I think transitional period has been long enough!”
The Hindus, the Sikhs and the Buddhists are the important stake holders in the State. They have rejected the autonomy, self rule as well as the independence of the State. They have fought against the forces which have been trying to disengage Jammu and Kashmir State from India.Also, independence from India does not have the support of nearly 2 Million Muslims who are living in Jammu Province and several others like the Gujjars, Paharis, bakarwals etc.
Here, I want to make a reference to the transfer of power from the British to India and Pakistan in 1947, that the partition was not and did not apply to princely States, nor was the right of self determination recognized as the basis of accession of the States.The right of self determination was strongly opposed by both the British and the Muslim League. I also want to state for the information of all the participants here, that the British categorically denied the right of any State to assume Independence, the then Indian National Congress also categorically refused to recognize the Independence of these States
Massacre by terrorists
Courtesy - FACTINDIA
Therefore, is it a joint move of Pakistan and the separatist forces in the Jammu and Kashmir to initiate the process of Balkanization of India now?I would like to submit for your consideration, that the Autonomy of the State and self rule will lead to further communalization of the civil society in the State and the displacement of the 4 Million Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists of the State who are living in Jammu and Ladakh now.
I and my community are already in the State of exile in our country and suffering in all dimensions including political, cultural, and economical.I and my community want to live in dignity and honour in the moorings of Burzohama civilization which we are inheritors off and want to live in the State with the free flow of Indian constitution as envisaged by Panun Kashmir.
We have a right to this as we are equal and legitimate stake holders in the valley of Kashmir and in turn Jammu and Kashmir and victims of terrorism first and foremost.No solution to Kashmir or for that matter to the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be allowed or arrived at unless our return to the Valley is achieved at on our terms. The only solution possible is the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir State.
Terrorism and secessionism being practiced in the valley has led to ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Hindu and their habitat. What is being asked for now is the exclusion of Jammu and Kashmir from the secular political fabric of the Indian State and further Islamization which is unacceptable to the Kashmiri Pandits in any form.