Kashmir conflict-India should act now?

[anoop_mig25]

hi friends what do u think is section 370 of Indian-constitution.IS it hindrance for jod-creations in J&K. why does n`t any big indian companies invest in J&K after if youths gets job more youth would be doing something rather then sitting idle.Any big companies requires land in its name so that in future it can sell/lease to others . is article 370 hurdle. why don`t amend it so that company with some local members in its board can invest in J&k . this would lead to the overall development of J&K

 

[ejazr]

@anoop

Article 370 is not the main problem for the growth of the economy. The problem is the need for peace and security and the removal of security forces. A peaceful atmosphere is needed first and foremost. For example, until the recent protest Kashmir valley was to have its best tourist season in two decades.

Jammu also comes under similar article 370 and has no problems in stepping up a well managed regional economy.

 

[ejazr]

Revival of human rights issue in Kashmir

By Balraj Puri

Prime Minister's visit to Kashmir on June 7 and 8 just coincided with when the mood of the people changed from happy to anger, of course inadvertently. People were celebrating with pleasure and pride the success of the Kashmiri boy Shah Faisel in topping the list of successful candidates in the Indian Administration Service for the first time. The separatist could neither join these celebrations nor oppose them. This mood gave way to that of anger over killing of three persons at Machil in Kupwara district in North Kashmir by the army alleged to be infiltrators, who were later found to be local innocent civilians.

The incident was followed by the protest throughout the Valley and reopened many old wounds which similar incidents had caused in the past. Protestors raised slogans against Indian army and demanded its withdrawal and enquiry by international agencies into all cases of fake encounters in the past. Even mainstream parties joined in. As an offshoot of Machil incident, an 18 year old was killed in Srinagar who, according to the police, was part of the stone pelting demonstrations and was killed by a pelting stone. Locals say he was killed by a teargas shell while he was playing cricket.

Chief Minister's political advisor Mubarak Gul pleaded helplessness of the State government and directly held security forces responsible for killing innocent persons. The State Congress Chief Saif-ud-Din Soz urged the centre to withdraw the policy under which awards and cash are given to the army personnel who kill militants. This policy, he said, was a major cause of fake encounters. People's Democratic Party has reiterated its demand for withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Power Act which gives immunity to the forces to commit human rights violations.

The issue of human rights in Kashmir has been revived at the national and international levels. Many activists have raised the issue and media has taken cognizance of it Times of India devoted a full page for articles on the subject. Amnesty International expressed serious concern over the killing of three youth in Machil and demanded a probe though independent and impartial bodies into all extra judicial killings in Kashmir. It urged Indian government to allow the UN Special Rapporteur on Extra judicial summary execution to visit the state to make an on the spot study of cases of fake encounters in the State.

By now there is welcome realization on the part of the State and Central governments that nothing damages national interest more than human rights violations. It was the policy of the administration in early nineties in crushing the militancy, without bothering about killing of innocent in the process, which turned it into mass insurgency. I may cite only one witness to prove my point.

A Pakistani diplomat, who met me, by chance, in Geneva, told me how excesses by the State were helping the cause of his government. He said, "When Mirwaiz Farooq was killed, we soon realized our miscalculation as the initial popular reaction was anti-Pakistan. But when his funeral procession reached in the narrow lanes of his ancestral house in Rajouri Kadal in Srinagar, it was fired upon by the Indian security forces which, according to official figures, killed 67 persons, including women, old and children. This turned anti-Pakistan sentiment to anti-India. I wish we could give highest award to these who was responsible for the firing." Many lessons have certainly been learnt since then by the security forces and the government. In the case of Machil killings, the State government has registered a case against army officers. Three persons, including a trooper, are already arrested on the charge of allegedly kidnapping three boys from Nadihal in Baramulla district who were later killed by the army in a fake encounter. Army has suspended a major while the commanding officer of 4 Rajput Regiment, responsible for the fake encounter has been removed from the command but asked not to leave Kashmir. Police has begin probe into killing of 19 "militants" during "infiltration" attempt on the LoC from March 23 to May 8 this year.

The State Chief Minister said that there was a question mark on all infiltration claims by the army. He got a positive response from the Union Defence Minister A K Antony who promised enquiry into all such cases and cooperation with the state police. The Prime Minister, during his stay in Srinagar, gave an assurance that his government would act to ensure that security forces respect the rights of civilians while tackling terrorism. "We will act to remove any deficiency in the implementation of these instructions," he said.

No doubt this is the first time some prompt action has been taken by the state and central governments against alleged faked encounter. Much would, however, depend on the results of the enquiry.

Meanwhile an observation of the new Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission Justice K G Balakrishna deserves attention. He has recommended to the government extension of the apex human rights body's jurisdiction "in full rigour to the State of Jammu and Kashmir." Use of force alone cannot bring solution to all its problems, he added. He has suo moto issued notice to the army to explain killing of two persons in Keller in Shopian alleged to be militants. The ban on jurisdiction of the Commission to the State is clearly a misuse of Article 370 in the name of protecting the autonomy of the State. The votaries of autonomy should rethink on the question whether rights of the people are more important or the powers of the government.

The NHRC, for instance, requires that all district authorities in other State should report to it any case of custodial death. Why is the J&K State exempt from this requirement? Much also needs to be done to bring the J&K State Human Rights Commission at par with other states. It has no investigation machinery of its own and its reports are sent to district authorities for enquiry.

It was on account of the vitiated atmosphere that Prime Minister's generous financial aid and other popular welfare measures announced by him at Srinagar did not have the full impact that would otherwise have been the case.

 

[Ray]

Received on Email:

Special powers for armed forces
We need clarity, not emotions
by Lt-Gen Vijay Oberoi (retd)

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, better known as AFSPA, has been brought out of wraps at various opportune times – opportune for those who have either something to gain, i.e. the insurgents in Jammu and Kashmir, political parties always ready to fish in troubled waters, with an eye on electoral gains or those who are regular establishment-baiters, who have made it a habit to take the plunge headlong in any controversy with the belief that if it is against an organ of the government, it needed to be opposed!

Many have called AFSPA a draconian law and have vehemently supported its repeal, but having read quite a few of their views and watched them pontificating on TV, I am convinced that most lack even a rudimentary, let alone in-depth knowledge on the subject. This Act has been in force for over five decades because it was essential for the conduct of smooth counter-insurgency operations by the army. It will continue to be needed as long as the army is employed on counter-insurgency/ terrorism tasks.

The Act was promulgated on September 11, 1958. The rationale for bringing the Act on the statute book needs to be appreciated. When the army was first employed on counter-insurgency tasks in Nagaland in the 1950s, two aspects came to the fore immediately. First, unlike in the case of maintenance of law and order, when the army is called out in 'aid to the civil authority', where time is available to employ the police before committing the army, operations against insurgents are entirely of a different genre, as the insurgents do not give any time for such niceties.

The insurgents we are fighting today are heavily armed, they act speedily, commit heinous crimes and disappear. Unless the army counters such actions with speed and not wait for orders from higher civil or military authorities, nothing would be achieved.

Secondly, the soldiers and officers of the army had to be protected from prosecution for consequential action taken against insurgents in good faith as part of their operations. Here too, the Act does contain the important caveat that the army personnel can be prosecuted with the Centre's sanction, if their actions warrant it. There is, therefore, no blanket immunity from the laws of the land.

Over the years, some army personnel have indeed been prosecuted where a prima facie case existed. However, it is also true that due to the exceptional care which all army commanders take when their troops are employed against insurgents, such cases are few and far between.

After the initial employment in Nagaland, the employment of the army on counter-insurgency tasks continued increasing, till it was progressively employed in all the north-eastern states for such tasks. Along with such employment, AFSPA was also invoked in all affected states.

When insurgency erupted in Srinagar in 1990, the Act was extended to the Valley. Later, as the activities of the insurgents spread, first to the Poonch-Rajauri area, then to Doda and Bhadarwah and finally to the whole state, the entire state was brought under the Act's purview in stages. It can thus be seen that AFSPA was invoked progressively only when the situation required the deployment of the army.

The army is designed and structured for fighting external enemies of the nation. Consequently, they are not given any police powers. However, when the nation wants the army to conduct counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist operations, then they must be given the legal authority to conduct their operations without the impediment of getting clearances from the higher authorities.

If this is not done, they would be unable to function efficiently and defeat the insurgents and terrorists at their own game. It is for this reason that the Act gives four powers to army personnel. These are for 'enter and search', 'arrest without warrant', 'destroy arms dumps or other fortifications' and 'fire or use force after due warning where possible'. Once again, there is a safeguard in the Act, which stipulates that the arrested person(s) will be handed over speedily to the nearest police station.

The law stipulates that AFSPA can be imposed only after the area in question is declared a 'disturbed area' by the state government concerned. When this writer was the Director-General Military Operations (DGMO) and the army was asked to deploy in the Doda-Bhadarwah area, we requested for the invocation of the Act. The state government was reluctant to do so on account of political considerations, but we did not commence operations till the Act was invoked.

Clearly, the Army has no desire to get embroiled in counter-insurgency tasks. It is not the army's job. However, despite over 50 years of insurgency in our country, the state police as well as the central police forces (CPOs) have not been made capable of tackling insurgency. Consequently, in each case the army was inducted to carry out counter insurgency/ terrorist operations. If the national leadership tasks the army for conducting such non-military operations, then it is incumbent on the leadership to provide the legal wherewithal to all army personnel employed on such tasks.

It is only then that the operations will be conducted in the usual efficient manner of the army and would be result-oriented. They also must be legally protected. It is because these two aspects have been catered for that the army has been neutralising the insurgents and terrorists, so that normalcy is restored and the political leaders and officials can restart governing.

The writer is a former Vice-Chief of the Indian Army

 

[Ray]

Received on E Mail

Let's not defame the armed forces
Kanchan Gupta

It's now considered fashionable and politically correct to berate the security forces and accuse them of violating human rights. The Delhi commentariat, whose ill-informed members are often indistinguishable from jholawallahs with a certain fondness for candles, having run out of abuse to heap on Hindus and organisations that speak up for Hindu rights, has now decided to pour its bile on our men in khaki. Real and imagined instances of alleged 'encounter killings' are being recalled, professional human rights activists are being interviewed, separatist leaders are being flown down to Delhi and panel discussions are being organised with the sole purpose of painting the security forces in the bleakest of colours. It would seem suddenly the Army has become a four-letter dirty word and there's no crime that jawans cannot be held guilty of having committed.

Last Sunday I was invited to a popular television show in which participants were supposed to discuss whether the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act of 1958 — subsequently amended in 1972 — requires amendments to make the security forces operating under this law accountable for their actions. We need not go into the specifics of who said what — much of it was predictable: The politician from Jammu & Kashmir described the law as "draconian"; the Kashmiri separatist accused the 'Indian' Army of "killing Kashmiri children"; the human rights activist said the colour khaki makes boys (she meant militants) see red and hence should be banned; and, the person representing Delhi's exalted commentariat pompously demanded that "the law must go". Two retired Generals of the Army and a Brigadier valiantly fought back. As usual, I was in a minority of one.

The point to note was that none of the critics of the Army and the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act had a clue about the specifics of the law, nor did anyone offer to validate sweeping allegations of rights violations. Instead, what we heard were bizarre figures being cited and implausible charges being levelled. To be fair, the host repeatedly made it clear that the purpose of the show was not to attack or belittle the Army, but to debate the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. But that served little purpose because the critics were either not interested in this particular issue or they were keen to push their own agenda. In the process, nothing of substance could be discussed and debated.

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, I ventured to suggest, was not meant to place the Army or the security forces above the law of the land but to empower them to function effectively while dealing with situations that have defied resolution through normal means — intervention by civilian authorities, action by the police and call for calm by the political class. The Army cannot be expected to function in a vacuum and requires to be given autonomy of decision and action, I argued, hence the need for the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act.

This fetched a volley of furious reactions: The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act gives the Army and security forces the licence to kill; it militates against the spirit of democracy; its provisions fly in the face of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Kashmiri separatist thought he was being profound when he said, "The right to life is inalienable, it cannot be violated," and then went on to allege that "thousands are being killed by the Indian Army". For a moment I was tempted to point out that having repudiated his allegiance to the Republic of India he had also forfeited the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. But I desisted from doing so because it would be meaningless trying to engage him in a debate on the provisions of the very Constitution which separatists like him find sufficiently repelling to want to secede from the Union of India.

I had taken with me some notes, which proved to be of no use when the discussion drifted into irrelevant issues and bogus allegations. But some of the details, culled from data sheets hosted on the South Asia Terrorism Portal, need to be placed on record, if only to nail the lies of those who seek to defame the Army and other security forces drafted for counter-insurgency operations. These essentially deal with fatalities suffered by our men in uniform.

For instance, 5,962 security forces personnel have been killed by terrorists in Jammu & Kashmir between 1988 and July 5, 2010. This year alone 45 security forces personnel have died in the State fighting militants. There are other insurgencies being fought by the security forces. Since 1992, as many as 939 officers and jawans have lost their lives in Manipur; 783 in Assam; 81 in Meghalaya and 22 in Mizoram. There's more: 1,226 security forces personnel have died fighting Maoists between 2005 and 2010; this year, till July 5, we have lost 204 men in uniform to Maoist bullets.

Don't these lives count for anything? Do men who don khaki automatically surrender their right to life guaranteed by the Constitution? Are young men and women who join paramilitary forces and the Army no more than cannon fodder? And, more importantly, what about their human rights? Their right to dignity? Are these meant to be scoffed at? To be spat upon? To be violated with impunity?

The parents of a young Army Captain who went down fighting terrorists in Kashmir Valley earlier this year recounted during the show how their son was not felled by the militants' bullets, but by a bullet fired from a nearby house. His mother, wiping her tears, said in a firm voice: "I have no more sons. If I had any, I would have sent them to join the Army. Since I have none, I am willing to offer my services." The Kashmiri separatist slyly retorted, "We have heard thousands of such stories."

There are two points that merit mention. First, contrary to propaganda, despite the so-called 'sweeping provisions' of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the security forces virtually operate in terrorist and insurgent-infested areas with both arms tied behind their backs. Or else the fatalities would not have been so high. That's commonsense. Second, nobody, least of all the Army, condones wilful violation of human rights. But allegations cannot be deemed to be actionable unless proven to be true. Since 1990, the security forces have faced 1,511 cases of human rights abuse. These were investigated by various agencies, including the National Human Rights Commission, and 1,473 were found to be false. In the remaining cases where culpability was established, 104 men have been punished.

A last point. There's nothing called a pretty war fought with roses and daisies. Collateral damage is inevitable in counter-insurgency and anti-terrorist operations. It's an asymmetrical war being fought out there by men who have dedicated their lives to the service of the nation; we must get real and learn to live with the consequences. Stuff happens.

 

[anoop_mig25]

@anoop

Article 370 is not the main problem for the growth of the economy. The problem is the need for peace and security and the removal of security forces. A peaceful atmosphere is needed first and foremost. For example, until the recent protest Kashmir valley was to have its best tourist season in two decades.

Jammu also comes under similar article 370 and has no problems in stepping up a well managed regional economy.

ejar sir as u know most of youths throwing stones at security forces are unemployed youth so if GOI as well as state government could increase employment opportunist then this youth get`s jod and they would automatically would be drifted away from separatist. plus i do n`t think tourism alone can absorb all in it and so it requries other industry to grow specially those catering to mass employment.

security force can only be removed when government is sure that cross border terrorism won`t occur and i don`t see at happening.plus if youth are drifted away from terrorist than there is greater chance that more terrorist attacks would occur so security force would be required again

article 370 forbids any Indian to buy land in J&K so an indian businessmen with capitals can n`t invest in state OF J&K because as i said in my earlier post any businessmen would require land in its name/or its company so that in future it can sell/lease to others if its business doesn`t succeed .

plus i do not think bussiness men of Kashmir has any large capital to invest.even if they had they are not willing it invest either due to reason of security or they are pro-independent and waiting for kashmir to became independent

 

[youngindian]

Kashmir: Errors point to panipat Syndrome.


Kashmir: Errors point to panipat Syndrome | Deccan Chronicle | 2010-08-22

 

[Tshering22]

There was no point of starting this thread. There's NO such thing as "Kashmir Conflict". A thing so perverse and apologetic exists only in the minds of blood traitors, socialists, leftist-liberal intellectuals like Arundhati Roy and attention-seeking fence sitters who use media to sell of their country for some money and short attention span. Kashmir is an undisputed and inseparable part of India, which is currently been occupied by Islamist radicals along the lines of Taliban sponsored by the re-directing of international aid money from Pakistan's economic program to counter us militarily by their intelligence agency, the notorious ISI.

This is the cold, hard, bitter, heartless truth that every Indian of every walk of society has to understand. When PLA can assert Tibet as its territory which wasn't, how can Pakistanis be allowed to take Kashmir? And this itself should clearly show the lack of interest from Indian government (of any party) about how they don't want to repeal Article 370 so that the problem continues to persist and they can play up people's emotions to get votes. Unless the common Indian wakes up and supports our soldiers fighting against brainwashed Kashmiri and Pakistani terrorists, nothing will happen.

And those who advocate a policy of softness and good neighbourliness here, open your eyes: The country has been struck with worst of floods in its 62 years of existence; and still it manages to create separatism and terrorism in our province. Look at their resolve in getting us down. If we had even a fraction of that resolve, by now the entire issue of terrorism in Kashmir and expelling the separatists from Indian soil would have been over.

 

[Param]

There was no point of starting this thread. There's NO such thing as "Kashmir Conflict". A thing so perverse and apologetic exists only in the minds of blood traitors, socialists, leftist-liberal intellectuals like Arundhati Roy and attention-seeking fence sitters who use media to sell of their country for some money and short attention span. Kashmir is an undisputed and inseparable part of India, which is currently been occupied by Islamist radicals along the lines of Taliban sponsored by the re-directing of international aid money from Pakistan's economic program to counter us militarily by their intelligence agency, the notorious ISI.

This is the cold, hard, bitter, heartless truth that every Indian of every walk of society has to understand. When PLA can assert Tibet as its territory which wasn't, how can Pakistanis be allowed to take Kashmir? And this itself should clearly show the lack of interest from Indian government (of any party) about how they don't want to repeal Article 370 so that the problem continues to persist and they can play up people's emotions to get votes. Unless the common Indian wakes up and supports our soldiers fighting against brainwashed Kashmiri and Pakistani terrorists, nothing will happen.

And those who advocate a policy of softness and good neighbourliness here, open your eyes: The country has been struck with worst of floods in its 62 years of existence; and still it manages to create separatism and terrorism in our province. Look at their resolve in getting us down. If we had even a fraction of that resolve, by now the entire issue of terrorism in Kashmir and expelling the separatists from Indian soil would have been over.

I understand & share the frustration, but its a waste of time & effort explaining this to peaceniks, bleeding hearts, anti-national activists, idiots & morons.They will never understand.

 

[sadhartha]

I think we have to solve this problem with Pakistan to arrange a referendum under the UNO resolutions.

 

[Daredevil]

I think we have to solve this problem with Pakistan to arrange a referendum under the UNO resolutions.

The UN resolutions are defunct as a result of several bilateral accords signed by India and Pakistan (Tashkent and Simla agreement). There is no point in flogging the dead horse.

 

[ajtr]

I think we have to solve this problem with Pakistan to arrange a referendum under the UNO resolutions.

Whoa!!!Pakistan has no locus standi on Kashmir. Infact it is illegally occupying POK and gifted portion to china.I'm wondering how exact pakistani wordings on kashmir are repeated under indian flag????may be Arundhati type or pakistani itself.

 

[Ray]

The UN referendum as per the UN can take place only when Pakistan takes its Army out of Kashmir.

 

[ejazr]

nside Story, with presenter Nick Clark, discusses with Radha Kumar, a trustee at the Delhi Policy Group, Prem Shankar Jha, the author of Kashmir 1947: The origins of a dispute, and Rahul Roy-Chaudhury, a senior fellow for South Asia at The International Institute for Strategic Studies.

This episode of Inside Story aired from Wednesday, September 15, 2010.

 

[sesha_maruthi27]

An ingenious example of speech and politics occurred recently in the

United Nations Assembly that made the world community smile.



A representative from India began: 'Before beginning my speech I want

to tell you something about Rishi Kashyap of Kashmir , after whom

Kashmir is named. When he struck a rock and it brought forth water, he

thought, 'What a good opportunity to have a bath.'



He removed his clothes, put them aside on the rock and entered the water.



When he got out and wanted to dress, his clothes had vanished. A

Pakistani had stolen them.'



The Pakistani representative jumped up furiously and shouted, 'What

are you talking about? The Pakistanis weren't there then.'



The Indian representative smiled and said, 'And now that we have made

that clear, I will begin my speech.



'And they say Kashmir belongs to them"

 

[arya]

f we dont act now then first we loss kashmir then arunchal pardesh then gorkaland then punjab and......

 

[Tshering22]

^^ Nothing will be lost. No political party would dare to go to such low levels of appeasement. A few Arundhatis might howl and bark that's it. Army will go berserk considering the number of troops we lost over Kashmir and take command if UPA gives in. Even Sonia Gandhi the alien knows that such a move would doom her and all her fellow mates. Kashmir shall stay ours and we might even increase military powers there if situation is needed.

Today India is in such position of influence and power that barring a suicidal Pakistan, no world power can say anything about the forbidden "K-word".

 

[mayfair]

We've heard the noises before, when Khalistan was believed to be all but lost and its independence a matter of time. In fact Khalistan passports and currency was in circulation in certain communities living in the west. Khalistan was supposed to incorporate Himachal and Haryana and its borders were supposed to have been on the gates of Delhi.

We were told it was a matter of time before Tamil Nadu separated from India and joined with their brethren across the Palk strait to create the Periya Eezham.

We were told that North East of India would soon be absorbed by China, Myanmar and Bangladesh and there was nothing we could do about it.

That these events did not happen is so far so good. However, we must never let our guard down. There are too many out there- within and without who'll take comfort and pleasure in our downfall.

 

[captonjohn]

If the framework of the constitution of India does not allow freedom of speech, then India is no better than China. The Chinese also say that demanding independence (e.g Xinjiang, Tibet) is against the law. Grow up!
Freedom of speech means no taboo.

Tell me what do you mean by freedom of speech? Freedom of speech doesn't mean that anybody can favor and spread hated thoughts to separate any part from India. If yes then why pakistan and china is objecting this? India is much better then these countries because at least you can here express almost all thoughts, you can criticize government actions or even sometime condemn any action. You won't get that much freedom of speech anywhere in the world NOT even in USA too. There are some limits and everybody can express their thoughts in a certain limit. Tell me if anybody abuse you & your family daily on the basis of freedom of speech? You would definitely punish him still Indian government hasn't punished Arundhati Roy and Gillani who deserve to be jailed.

 

[Ray]

Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by yuebaili Click here to enlarge
If the framework of the constitution of India does not allow freedom of speech, then India is no better than China. The Chinese also say that demanding independence (e.g Xinjiang, Tibet) is against the law. Grow up!
Freedom of speech means no taboo.

One must understand the difference between 'freedom of speech' and 'sedition'.

In the US threatening the President of the United States is a class D felony under United States Code Title 18, Section 871. It consists of knowingly and willfully mailing or otherwise making "any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States".

Now, by your reckoning, I presume the US has gagged its citizens or those in the US and there is thus No Freedom of Speech?

I do hope you understand what is Sedition.