Jammu and Kashmir: News and Discussion

[ejazr]

'Some people have an interest in not solving Kashmir issue'

'Just days ago, Ram Jethmalani , BJP MP and lawyer, called his party's reaction to statements by the Kashmir interlocutors "childish and idiotic". He speaks from bitter experience, having headed a Kashmir committee during the NDA regime. They were quite close to a resolution on Kashmir, he told Mohua Chatterjee and Dhananjay Mahapatra . Excerpts:

You always seem to be in the midst of controversy. Do they follow you or do you jump right in?
I speak the truth and I give very honest opinions on current issues. I also submit to party discipline and sometimes maintain silence, provided I know that at the appropriate level the party has taken a particular decision and stand.

Did you violate the party stand by defending the Kashmir interlocutors?
I have not been told about the party's stand. I do not think the party has a stand on what the interlocutors should say. As far as taking permission from BJP on this issue is concerned, I do not think it is necessary. I am not bound by what the party spokesperson says.

You headed the earlier Kashmir Committee, but nothing tangible came of it?
I personally thought we had practically reached a solution. We had a written agreement with the Hurriyat leaders on five important issues, knowing fully well that they were talking to us with the full knowledge and consent of Pakistan. The main points are —violence and terror were to be totally outlawed; the solution must be acceptable to all parties and sections, which means it included people of Ladakh and Jammu.

Extremist positions like scrapping of Article 370 of the Constitution and the demand for secession were to be abandoned by both sides, displaced Pandits have to be rehabilitated with full honour and dignity and that the new dispensation will be a democracy of equal rights, which meant it would be a secular state which was an expression of repudiation of Yasin Malik's aim of achieving what he calls Nizam-e-Mustafa.

Why didn't it work?
Because we received no encouragement. There are people in this country who have an interest in not solving the problem. They are a pervasive phenomenon and it is not an unfair statement to say that Pakistan is full of them.

Did the BJP-led NDA government not support you?
None. It was not interested in the Kashmir Committee taking the credit. And there was sabotage from Congress.

Does the same problem persist for the present interlocutors?
See the criticism now. The attitude should have been if they succeed well and good, congratulate them; if they don't, sympathize with them. I have serious misgivings that they will succeed. That's why I am praying for them. What harm are they doing? But there is a ray of hope.

Who do you think was the major road block to a solution when you led the previous Kashmir committee?
Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a self-confessed agent of Pakistan, a fact which he makes no effort to conceal. We negotiated with the moderates and they ignored this man. Dileep Padgaonkar will tell you about a meeting that took place in his presence where moderates told Geelani that "we had all taken money from Pakistan; we have stopped, but you continue to take it."

Did you place the solution you'd worked out before the government?
An emissary of President Musharraf, brought a draft settlement to me. I was so impressed with its wisdom and content that I sought permission to make a few changes and fine tune it. These changes were communicated and they were approved. But no one in the country responded.

You've been a lawyer for more than half-a-century.What do you think of the state of affairs in the judiciary today?
It is worse and getting more so. There is a general decline of character. I am convinced that governments in power want corrupt judges. I cannot account for this phenomenon.

Why the decline?
I can only surmise with this example. The influence of Mahatma Gandhi on our character was like amagnet and all the iron filings around him turned into small magnets. People like Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Lal Bahadur Shastri to some extent had the same quality. But once they ceased to exist, those iron filings again become iron filings. It is unfortunate that we no longer produce role models. We have come to this disgraceful condition that Rahul Gandhi is projected as the future PM. Will someone tell me with evidence what his qualifications are?

If, as you say, the judiciary is in a dark phase, why?
That is because, today there is hardly a judge who can be considered a jurist.

With your sort of views you must find it constraining to be in a political party?
You belong to a political party because you have less disagreement with it in comparison to the others. Congress is corrupt and responsible for the poverty. I believe the BJP is certainly more honest. That is not to suggest that it is faultless.

 

[S.A.T.A]

Given the recent statements which have been attributed to certain key Kashmir interlocutors its clear BJP's opposition to them was neither 'childish nor idiotic'...........Ram Jethmalani should by now why he is has fallen out with most party's top leadership.being childish and idiotic is almost second nature to Mr Jethmalani.What the BJP was saying that if the UPA wanted to appoint a team that was going to talk to the separatists it must consist of people with better political credibility and who are acceptable to all cutting across party lines........

 

[ajtr]

Given the recent statements which have been attributed to certain key Kashmir interlocutors its clear BJP's opposition to them was neither 'childish nor idiotic'...........Ram Jethmalani should by now why he is has fallen out with most party's top leadership.being childish and idiotic is almost second nature to Mr Jethmalani.What the BJP was saying that if the UPA wanted to appoint a team that was going to talk to the separatists it must consist of people with better political credibility and who are acceptable to all cutting across party lines........

Ram jethmalani was always childish .jethmalani family is like opputunist who like to be with both side of the power equations...like Abdullahs and muftis.

 

[RAM]

Kashmir militants to submit peace plan to interlocutors

NEW DELHI: Militants in Jammu and Kashmir have expressed their willingness to present a "peace plan" during their meeting with the group of interlocutors appointed by the Centre, a move seen as "something important" by Dilip Padgaonkar, who led the three-member team.

Giving details about their meetings with those from militant groups, Padgaonkar said, "The first time we met guys from terrorist organisations. They said would you mind coming again once. We need to talk to you. So we went a second time."

"And the second time, during an hour and a half, something quite surprising took place which was one of those guys who acted as spokesperson of one of these organisations said to us that they would like to submit to us also a peace plan," he said in an interview to a TV channel. The person asked the group whether they would be prepared to wait for few days because they too wanted their voice to be heard.

"They believed that they have a roadmap etc. So we said we have come to listen to you. We are quite prepared. As and when you prepare your point of view, let us know and we will examine that as well. I see this as something important because this is when the idea came that you need to talk to people. That was the message given to us," he said.

Replying to objections raised about the meeting of Radha Kumar, one of the three interlocutors, with people accused of terror, she said, "They do represent, unfortunately, a rather ugly view point in Kashmir but that is important for us to meet them." She said the purpose of her visit to prison was to meet young detainees "stonepelters" and political prisoners. It was during one such visit that she met people charged with terror which transpired into an "interesting meeting", she said.

She said the view of terrorists may be "unpalatable but that we must listen to them." Kumar said, "As far as the dissident groups are concerned especially the Hurriyat groups we do understand their compulsions and we will always be willing to listen to them, their point of view. That is part of our mandate." She said it was very rare to meet the Mirwaiz, Geelani or leaders of that opinion on a first visit. "It (peace process) needs to build up," she said adding that there was not commitment for such meeting in next visit.

On BJP's accusation against them of using the language of separatists, Padgaonkar said if the group was speaking their language, they would not not have been boycotted.

When asked about his statement on factoring in of Pakistan, Padgaonkar said the country has been involved in Jammu and Kashmir since 1947-48 through overt means and covert means of violence and diplomatic discussion.

Former Central Information Commissioner Ansari said resistance from Hurriyat leaders as well as a "major political party" is a hindrance in their access to certain sections of people both in Kashmir as well as in Jammu. Kumar said her comments on changes in the Constitution to accommodate demand of Azadi were "distorted".

"My comments were distorted. What I did say was that the Indian Constitution has proved itself flexible time and again. If the Parliament is convinced that there is some solution, that require any change. That would be up to them to decide," she said.

The academician also stressed for great degree of freedom on ground particularly removal of seize like situation. Padgaonkar said there was great degree of alienation in all section of people particularly young people. "Interlocutors here have come and gone. Promises were made but not kept...We are for an engagement for the dialogue process but until there is any change on the ground the whole exercise is going to be futile," he said.

Read more: Kashmir militants to submit peace plan to interlocutors - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ocutors/articleshow/6845385.cms#ixzz13vlIPfnB​

 

[ejazr]

Imams help to scale down protest in Kashmir Valley

Imams in the Kashmir Valley played a vital role in scaling down protests during the recent unrest.

When the fresh round of protests began in June, virtually every mosque in the valley had turned into a rallying point where young boys would assemble and use public address systems installed for 'Azaan' (call to prayers) to play provocative speeches of militant leaders.

"Initially, it was boys in the age group of 12 to 15 years, who would assemble in the mosque after the night prayers and raise slogans," a senior state intelligence official said.

However, as the civilian killings during the clashes increased, the separatist elements got organised and started calling on youth and elderly to join the protests, he said.

That is when the state machinery decided to rope in the Imams (Muslim prayer leaders) for ensuring that the high-pitch sloganeering from the mosques comes to an end.

A significant number of the prayer leaders agreed that the mosques were being misused for "political purposes" and played an important role in convincing the local elders that the practice should stop.

"We do not agree with what is going on in Kashmir in terms of civilian killings but mosques are sacred places and there is a sanctity which has to be observed even by the Muslims," said an Imam, who identified himself as Nazir Ahmad.

He said most of the boys, who would come to his mosque in the civil lines area of the city for protests, did not join the regular prayers.

"I joined the peaceful protests in my locality many times against the excesses and innocent killings but I am not for using the loudspeakers or for pelting stones," he said.

According to another Imam in the city, locals had urged him to intervene in ensuring that protests were not held in the mosque as "they had suffered at the hands of security forces".

"Every time a protest was taken out from the mosque, it would lead to stone pelting at the main road. The police and CRPF personnel would then smash window panes of every house by the roadside while chasing the youth away," he said.

The persuasive role played by the Imams in the Kashmiri society has been used by the state administration in other fields as well.

In the first experiment of its kind, the Imams were roped in by the Jammu and Kashmir AIDS Control Society in 2006 to eradicate the epidemic from the society.

The results were encouraging as for the first in 2008 all the parameters for prevalence of HIV infection in the valley showed a substantial decline.

The services of the Imams were also used during the recent outbreak of epidemic in Budgam, Doda and Kupwara districts of the valley. The prayer leaders would create awareness during Friday prayer sermons about need for hygiene and necessary steps to be taken to control the spread of the diseases.

 

[ajtr]

Merger and integration of J&K: In the mirror of the Constitution ​

Bhim Singh
27 Oct 2010

The Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir failed to conceal the hidden agenda he conceived during a visit to Pakistan in 2007, though he had lot of time on his side to take up the issue.

Omar Abdullah's utterances on the floor of the Legislative Assembly in Srinagar last month proved counter-productive, though he chose that venue fully conscious that a Legislator enjoys immunity from criminal action for words used inside the House. This immunity is not enjoyed by legislators in SAARC countries, barring Sri Lanka.

The Chief Minister's statement deserves serious attention from those claiming to be 'experts' on J&K affairs. The Chief Minister made several irresponsible and offensive observations in his hate-India speech that day, which challenged the mandate and authority of the Constitution. It invited the wrath of different circles.

To begin with, Omar Abdullah literally shrieked in high decibels that Jammu & Kashmir acceded conditionally to India and was not an integral part of the Union. One part of his speech referred to his intention to revive the 'Anglo-American Dixon Plan,' though he did not name this obnoxious and aborted proposal. Abdullah's reference to the creation of so-called sub-regions of Rajouri-Poonch and Doda districts of Jammu province by granting them regional autonomy deserve careful analysis of his latent intentions, which were originally mooted by his grandfather in 1953.

The proposal was recommended by Justice Owen Dixon in his report to dissect the Muslim-majority districts from Jammu province and establish a so-called Greater Kashmir. Dixon was sent as special UN observer to J&K in 1950, when Pakistan refused to withdraw from the occupied areas of J&K as per UNCIP direction in its resolution dated 13 August 1948. To bail out Pakistan, Dixon recommended the creation of 'Greater Kashmir' to divide the State on communal lines, though the people had opposed this in 1947. This proposal was sponsored by the Anglo-American Bloc.

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, for a change, rejected the Dixon Plan outright in 1950. The grandson of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, at the first opportunity, vomited his family's hidden agenda out of frustration, little realizing that half a century has elapsed since the Anglo-American Axis tried to sell this plan through Sheikh Abdullah in 1953. Sheikh Abdullah's support to the Dixon Plan earned the wrath of Mr Nehru, resulting in Abdullah's dismissal and arrest. Omar Abdullah also declared that J&K was not an integral part of India, which would have caused unbearable embarrassment to the National Conference's coalition partner, the Congress.

Several noted columnists, writers and journalists have poured thousands of words in the print media in support of Omar Abdullah's lost-doctrine that J&K is not an integral part of India, and that it had not merged with the Union. Omar has opened a Pandora's Box not only for himself, but also for the Congress which provides crutches for him to stand with. Experts on J&K affairs are aware that the Ruler of the state was the only competent authority to accede to India, which he did on 26 October 1947. The Governor-General of India accepted the Accession the next day, 27 October 1947. The same day the Indian Army landed at Srinagar Airport and launched a counter-offensive against the enemy to drive them out of the Valley.

The 'format' of the Instrument of Accession for all Princely States was exactly the same. All the princes acceded in respect of Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communication at the first stage. After the acceptance of their offers, the States naturally merged with the Union. True, the Maharaja had introduced some conditions at the time of Accession by retaining some municipal powers for himself. On 20 August 1952, the Constituent Assembly under the leadership of Sheikh Abdullah unanimously adopted a resolution piloted by Mr. D.P. Dhar terminating the monarchy in the State. With the abolition of monarchy, all or any conditions attached by the monarch for himself stood discharged, resulting in the constitutional merger of the State the same day. The status of Raj Pramukh (Regent) was switched over to an elected Sadar-e-Riyasat. The Accession was ratified by the Constituent Assembly.

The J&K constitution was launched formally on 26 January 1957. Section 3 unequivocally states that "J&K is integral part and shall remain integral part of India". This provision clearly provides in the First Schedule, item no.15 of Article 1 of the Constitution of India, which includes J&K as one of the States of the Union of India. Yet, ignorant of both constitutional reality and morality, several notables have been defending the Chief Minister's statement that J&K is not integral part of India. Even the Foreign Minister and the Union Home Minister have extended solidarity with this philosophy; such is the abysmal level of the knowledge of constitutional niceties among our political class today.

J&K is as much as integral part of India as the State of Mysore, now renamed Karnataka, or any other state. Yet the Chief Minister seems to be adamant to continue advocacy for his lost cause out of mental frustration. His father is a member of the Council of Ministers in the UPA regime at the Centre, besides being the head of the National Conference. His silence regarding the behaviour of his son and party Chief Minister is intriguing. If Farooq Abdullah does not accept J&K an integral part of India, what right does he have to sit in the Union Cabinet? One wonders how Dr. Farooq Abdullah is still a Cabinet Minister in the Central Government when his son does not believe that the state is integral part of the Union. Mr. Omar Abdullah has himself served as a Minister at the Centre in the government of Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee. One may ask him how he took the oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India. What was he doing for two years in South Block, simply spying for his hidden masters?

Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a leader of the Jamaat, which does not enjoy more than 6% support among Kashmiri Muslims, has been exploiting the failures, corruption and inefficiency of the ruling National Conference and got an opportunity to rouse the masses. Geelani was elected twice as a Legislator in J&K and has since been drawing full pension as MLA. His recent visit to Delhi on the invitation of various undesirable elements, and his hate speech with other anti-nationals has unfortunately generated a kind of communal tension in the capital and other places.

Mr P. Chidambaram may well be the first Union Minister in the country to describe the J&K situation as a 'political dispute' and Accession as 'unique'. This leads one to believe that Mr. Chidambaram is on the same page as Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Omar Abdullah. The three musketeers dispatched from Delhi as interlocutors may gather the fragrance of Kashmir for the power echelons in Delhi. They have started reciting, parrot-like, that the so-called Kashmir dispute is what Geelani has been insisting, and have crossed the limits of decency by harping on a dialogue with Pakistan. So was this their real agenda?

There is a belief that the interlocutors have been sent with full freedom in order to repeat and justify the irresponsible utterances of the Chief Minister. This is being done to prolong his tenure as Chief Minister.

What has happened to the eight point declaration of the Union Home Secretary, which was meant to rescue the Chief Minister and which the latter described as a 'trespass' into his domain? The chief interlocutor surprised his admirers with his statement in Srinagar that the problem or 'dispute' as he called it cannot be resolved without taking Pakistan into confidence. Are the three musketeers building new bridges for an entry in to Pakistan? Shall they represent the Ministry of External Affairs, as well as the Union Home Ministry?

The immediate remedy to restore peace in J&K is to relieve the Chief Minister of his job, which he has miserably failed to perform in accordance with the Constitution. The people are also unhappy at the governance deficit. A short spell of Governor's Rule can help restore peace and rebuild the confidence of the people. Omar Abdullah has lost all credibility and acceptance. Any delay in his exit may prove a security risk. Fresh Assembly elections may be unavoidable to address the aspirations and wishes of the people, who desire freedom from corrupt, inefficient and biased government. That may open the door of democracy for all, including the angry Kashmir leaders.

This message has to go to every J&K citizen and to every citizen of India, that J&K is as much an integral part of India as Delhi, Punjab or Mysore. Had J&K not merged constitutionally, the Indian Parliament could not have interfered in its affairs by introducing Article 370. Moreover, Sheikh Abdullah, the author of the 'Quit Kashmir' movement and principle actor of the abolition of monarchy, himself signed an Accord with Mrs. Indira Gandhi in 1975, accepting the entire constitutional arrangement with the Union.

Today, the National Conference cannot be allowed to question the integration or the mandate of the Constitution. By describing such absurd issues as 'dispute' only to maintain power, the NC leaders must not be allowed to exploit innocent people any more. J&K merged through the Accession with the Union and thus forms an integral part of the nation. Any challenge to its status needs to be dealt with severely in accordance with the law of the land. 27 October is for the people of J&K what 15 August is for the people of the entire country.

The author is Chairman, J&K National Panthers Party and senior advocate, Supreme Court

 

[ajtr]

Hindus, Muslims are separate nations: Geelani​

Syed Ali Shah Geelani of the Jamaat-e Islami of Jammu and Kashmir is a veteran politician and has emerged as a key player in the Kashmir dispute.

Presently, he heads the Tehrik-e Hurriyat-e Jammu Kashmir. He talks about the Kashmir conflict and its possible solution in this 2 part interview with Yoginder Sikand.

In your writings, and in those of other similar Islamist ideologues, the Kashmir conflict is often described as a war between Islam and 'disbelief'. Do you really think it is so? Is it not a political struggle or a nationalist struggle, actually?

The Kashmir dispute is a fall-out of the Partition of India. The Muslim-majority parts of British India became Pakistan, and the Hindu-majority regions became the dominion of India.

There were, at that time, some 575 princely states in India under indirect British rule. Lord Mountbatten gave them the choice of joining either India or Pakistan, and instructed that their choice must be guided by the religious composition of their populace as well as by the borders they might share with either India or Pakistan, as the case might be.


On this basis, almost all the princely states opted for either India or Pakistan.

There were, however, three exceptions to this. Hyderabad, a Hindu-majority state with a Muslim ruler, opted for independence, but India argued against this on the grounds that the state had a Hindu majority, and so ordered police action to incorporate the state into the Indian Dominion.

Junagadh, another Hindu-majority state with a Muslim ruler, opted for Pakistan, but India over-ruled this decision, again on account of the state's Hindu majority, and annexed it.

If India had adopted the same principle in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state with a Hindu ruler, there would have been no conflict over Kashmir.

After all, more than 85 per cent of the population of the state at that time were Muslims; the major rivers in the state flowed into Pakistan; the state shared a border of over 750 kilometres with Pakistan; the only motorable road connecting Kashmir with the outside world throughout the year passed from Srinagar to Rawalpindi; and the majority of the people of the state had cultural and historical ties with the people of Pakistan.

However, over-ruling these factors, which would have made Jammu and Kashmir a natural part of Pakistan, in October 1947 the Indian Army entered the state in the guise of flushing out Pathan tribesmen, who had crossed into Kashmir in the wake of large-scale killings of Muslims in Rajouri and Poonch.

Using this incursion as an excuse, Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, engineered the intrusion of Indian forces. The British scholar Alistair Lamb says that the so-called Instrument of Accession that Hari Singh is said to have signed to join India temporarily was itself fraudulent. He claims that Hari Singh did not even sign it.

Thereafter, India itself took the issue of Kashmir to the United Nations. The UN passed some 18 resolutions related to Kashmir, recognising the status of the state as disputed and calling for a resolution of the conflict based on the will of the people of the state, which the first Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, himself also publicly promised.

Now, all that the people of Jammu and Kashmir are saying is that India should live up to this promise that it made of holding a plebiscite in accordance with the UN resolutions. So, this is the basic issue.
So, aren't you here saying that the conflict is essentially political, and not specifically religious?

For a Muslim, no action that is against Islam is permissible. How can we say that the sacrifices that the Muslims of Kashmir make, the tortures that they suffer, and the martyrdom that they meet have nothing to do with Islam, and that they won't be rewarded by God for this? In this sense, it is a religious issue also.


Islam teaches that Muslims must follow the guidance of Islam in every action of theirs -- not just in prayers but also in matters such as war and peace, trade, international relations and so on, because Islam is a complete way of life.

If a true Muslim participates in any struggle, it is for the sake of Islam. So, how can you say that the Kashmir conflict has nothing to do with religion?

This might be true in theory, but surely many Kashmiris who are involved in the movement for separation from India might be motivated by other factors, including for economic and political reasons, or also due to a commitment to Kashmiri nationalism, as distinct from Islam?

I agree that there may be various reasons why different people may participate in the movement. Yes, there can be many who do not adopt the guidance of Islam in this regard. They might champion secular democracy and irreligiousness. Their sacrifices might be motivated by nationalism or ethnicity, rather than Islam.

They might have no problem with the system of governance in India, their opposition to Indian rule being simply because of the brutalities of Indian occupation. Of course, one cannot say that all Kashmiri Muslims think alike.

But I am speaking from the point of view of a practicing Muslim, who accepts Islam as a complete way of life. For such self-conscious Kashmiri Muslims, it is undoubtedly a religious issue and their sacrifices are for the sake of the faith.
Maulana Maududi, the founder of the Jamaat-e Islami, who is a major source of inspiration for you, opposed the creation of Pakistan. So, then, why is that that you have consistently been advocating Kashmir's union with Pakistan?

You are wrong here. Maulana Maududi was not opposed to the creation of Pakistan and to the 'two-nation' theory. What he was opposed to was the practice of the Muslim League leaders, who were leading the movement for Pakistan.

He told them that while they talked of the 'two-nation' theory and Islam, they were not serious about establishing an Islamic state in Pakistan.

They were not preparing the activists of the League for an Islamic state. Maulana Maududi wanted Pakistan to be an Islamic state, and this was the grounds for his opposition to the Muslim League.

But he, like the League, supported the 'two-nation' theory. In fact, the League did not have any theoretical justification for its 'two-nation' theory until Maulana Maududi provided this through his copious writings.

But do you really see Indian Hindus and Muslims as two separate 'nations'? After all, they share so much in common.

They are totally separate nations. There is no doubt at all about this. Muslims believe in just one God, but Hindus believe in crores of Gods.

But the Prophet Muhammad, in his treaty with the Jews and other non-Muslims of Medina, described the denizens of Medina as members of one nation. The leader of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind and a leading Deobandi scholar, Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, even wrote a book to argue against the League's 'two-nation' theory, stressing a composite Indian nationalism that embraced all the people of India. So, how can the Muslims and Hindus of one country be considered separate 'nations', even by Islamic standards?

Islam lays down that in an Islamic system (nizam) all non-Muslims, including even atheists, will get equality, justice, security of life and property and freedom of faith. Maulana Maududi

In your prison memoirs, Rudad-e Qafas, you write that 'It is as difficult for a Muslim to live in a non-Muslim society as it is for a fish to live in a desert'. But how can this be so? After all, the pioneers of Islam in India and in Kashmir itself, mainly Sufi saints, lived and preached in a society in which Muslims were a very small minority.

I meant to say this in a particular sense. Islam, as I said, is a complete way of life. No other path is acceptable to God. So, in the absence of an Islamic polity, it is difficult for Muslims to lead their lives entirely in accordance with the rules of Islam, which apply to social affairs as much as they do to personal affairs.

For instance, Muslims in Kashmir under Indian rule live in a system where alcohol, interest and immorality are rife, so how can we lead our lives completely in accordance with Islam?

Of course, Muslim minorities are Muslims, too, but their duty must be to work to establish an Islamic dispensation in the lands where they live so that they can lead their lives fully in accordance with Islam and its laws. Missionary work to spread Islam is as much of a duty as is praying and giving alms to the poor.

Now, as for your question about those Sufis who lived and worked in societies where Muslims were in a minority -- they may have been pious people, but we take as our only model the Prophet Muhammad.

But, surely, no one is forced to drink alcohol, deal in interest or act immorally in Kashmir?

True, but these things automatically spread since they are allowed by the present un-Islamic system. So that is why you see the degeneration of our culture and values happening on such a large scale.

You mentioned about preaching Islam being a principal duty of all Muslims. But, surely, for this you need a climate of peace, not of active hostility, as in Kashmir today?

Absolutely. I agree with you entirely. No one can deny this. We need to have good relations with people of other communities. Only then can we communicate the message of Islam to them. But if one side continues to oppress the other and heap injustices and says that this should be considered as 'peace', how can it be accepted?

If, for instance, Narendra Modi says that what happened with the Muslims in Gujarat represents peace, how can anyone accept it? If India stations lakhs of troops in Kashmir and says this is for establishing peace, how can it be, because these troops themselves are disturbing the peace?

You, following other Islamist ideologues, have consistently been advocating what you call an 'Islamic state', seeing this as an indispensable Islamic duty. To your mind, which is the best functioning 'Islamic state' in the world today?

The worldwide Muslim community ummah is today in such a sorry state that there is no Islamic state anywhere in the real sense.

Saudi Arabia is described as an Islamic state, but it is run by a monarchy, and monarchy has no sanction in Islam. If Muslim countries, including those that claim to be 'Islamic', were truly Islamic states they would never have been enslaved to America, as is the case today.

They all support America's policies and adopt its dictates. They are completely, on all accounts, dependent on America. They cannot even defend themselves. They have to rely on America and Europe to do this. They keep their money in American banks.

We say that they should use their wealth to empower themselves and get out of America's clutches and convert themselves into genuine Islamic states.

In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, how do you see the impact of American pressure on Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia, to change their position on Islamist movements?

The events of September 2001 have caused most Muslim states to change their policies and to toe America's line even more closely. You can see this happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The only Muslim country that refuses to cave under American pressure is Iran.

And now America is seeking an excuse to attack Iran, is it not?

Yes. America is trying to stoke Shia-Sunni rivalries in order to undermine Iran. It is trying all other such weapons, dividing the Muslims on the basis of sect, nationality, race and ethnicity against each other so as to weaken them. And the leaders of most Muslim countries are now playing the role of agents of the USA, be it in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Palestine or as is the case with the Saudi monarchs.

See what's happening in Waziristan, the Frontier Province and Baluchistan, in Pakistan. A climate is being deliberately created in those parts of Pakistan to justify American attacks and bombings in the name of flushing out militants.

If Pakistan is now so pro-American, acting against its own people, and if it is not an authentic 'Islamic state', then why have you been advocating Kashmir's union with it?

As I said earlier, the Muslim League claimed that Pakistan was won in the name of Islam, but it did not give its cadre the necessary training to establish an Islamic state there. Because of this, the influence of the army and the country's westernised leadership, Pakistan failed to become an Islamic state. But it was meant to become such a state, which is something that we want.

I admit that there are weaknesses in Pakistan, but these can be addressed. India has a secular system, which we can under no condition accept. Because of the oppression that we have been suffering under Indian rule for the last 60 years, how can we opt for India?

In just a few weeks, in late 1947, Dogra forces and Hindu chauvinists in Jammu killed some five lakh Muslims. In the last 17 years, over one lakh Kashmiri Muslims, mainly innocent civilians, have been killed. So many localities have been burned down, women raped and men rendered missing. After such brutal experiences, only a blind person would opt in favour of India.

Yoginder Sikand did this interview for NewAgeIslam.com. Reproduced with kind permission.

 

[Vinod2070]

What the hell is this filthy traitor going on about! Bloody hypocrite.

He just has to look at the condition in Islamic countries to smell the coffee. The only Islamic countries that are remotely progressive are those that are trying to adapt secular values. The ones that tout being Islamic are the worst despotic and hypocrite regimes. Does he want Kashmiris to live under the Taliban kind of rule? Somalia? Sudan? Nigeria?

He wants limbs to be chopped off for petty crimes? It is he who needs to be chopped to bits for being a filthy traitor.

For instance, Muslims in Kashmir under Indian rule live in a system where alcohol, interest and immorality are rife, so how can we lead our lives completely in accordance with Islam?

If Alcohol and interest and "immorality" are such a problem to him, he needs to just check what is happening in his dream country Pakistan. Or Saudi where hypocrisy is rife or Muslims that have immigrated to the West and indulge in everything.

Does he also have problem with the unearned billions being pocketed by a few Arab Shekhs without doing anything?

I admit that there are weaknesses in Pakistan, but these can be addressed. India has a secular system, which we can under no condition accept. Because of the oppression that we have been suffering under Indian rule for the last 60 years, how can we opt for India?

Why do Muslims go to live in secular countries leaving their Islamic heavens in that case? This fool needs to be just sent off to Pakistan or Afghanistan and enjoy the Islamic rule he so desperately wants.

Just get off India. We don't want treacherous filth like him here.

 

[ajtr]

Pandits demand mini India in Kashmir​

Pandits living in migrant camps want a mini India created in Kashmir, so that they could return home.

Ravinder Raina, president of Displaced Welfare Committee of Pandits, told visiting central interlocutors Dileep Padgaonkar and Radha Kumar at Muthi migrant Camp in Jammu, "Kashmiri Pandits would be satisfied with a portion of land [in the Valley]. A land where the constitution of India would be applicable in letter and spirit so that right to life, liberty, freedom of expression, faith, equality and rule of law are ensured."

Raina, who submitted a memorandum to the interlocutors listing demands, said this portion of land should be placed under central administration with a Union territory status till it evolves its own economic and political infrastructure.

"All Kashmiri Pandits, including those who were forced to leave on account of terrorist violence in Kashmir, should be settled on this portion of land on equitable basis," he said.

Around 59,542 pandit families have migrated from Kashmir since the onset of militancy in 1990. Of these, 34,202 families have migrated to Jammu and 21,684 are registered as migrants outside Jammu and Kashmir. Plus, 2,168 Muslim and 1,749 Sikh families have migrated from the Valley.

"We are displaced, homeless and territory-less people in our own country. To save this community, we appeal for survival till we get the portion of our land. Our social, economic and cultural rehabilitation must be ensured," Raina said.

Kashmiri pandits had a detailed discussion with the interlocutors. "They told us they will take up our issues with the Centre. We told them on one side there are pro-Pakistan voices and on the other, people who want independence. We are Indians, where do we figure? We have told them to look into this since we are the real sufferers of militancy," he said.

Meanwhile, Hurriyat hawk Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who has called for a boycott of the interlocutors, said the Centre should read the writing on the wall, shun rigidity and grant "freedom" to the people of Kashmir. "The rulers in Delhi should respect people's aspirations and give them right to self-determination," he said.

 

[maomao]

^^^^ (lol) Geelani the Loser, talks the same language of his masters in ISI, read what writings on the wall moron?

Ladakh, Leh, Jammu, Udhampur, Kathua etc are not even asking for Independence, above all they don't wanna go and merge with Beggar Failed State pakistan. Its only these elite class foreign origin settlers ilk of Geelanis, who are creating this mess in the valley and valley (and adjoining) areas are the only region where they hold their sway.

I have read reports that even in the valley common man is tired of these thugs, bandhs and violence, and have gone against the whims and wished of Geelanis, bukharis, malliks, lones; and are going on with their everyday life instead of what these pakistani agents want.

Its their political masters from across the borders who are directing these leeches to employ young good for nothing youth, to throw stones and create a ruckus. I don't know why GOI has created a big issue and entertaining these Hawala racketeers and pawns of ISI, its high time GOI makes its devious intensions clear in regards to Kashmir and Foreign Policy. The maneuvering with respect to Obama visit may be considered as a reson why GOI is bending over backwards and get a@@ FU^&%$ed, so that the businesses run by their family members may get some concessions and investments. However, the designs are really sinister especially after Sharm-el-Sheeikh and Thimpu incidents, and how pakistanis are so confident that Kashmir dispute will be in their favor due to wretched Obama and weak GOI headed by a dubious corrupt dynasty and utterly weak PM.

 

[mehwish92]

geelani is messed in the head in my opinion. if people like him believe that muslims cannot co-exist with other religions, then why did islam move out of the middle east anyway? he needs to realize that it is extremists like him who give hindu extremists in other parts of india an excuse to gain strength. moreover, his perceptions of islam are incorrect. according to his logic, all us muslims living in the west are doomed to hell until we convert the west into an islamic state. so long as the west is secular, us muslims cannot practice our faith? utter nonsense! if i were an american, and a muslim said this to me, i would tell him/her to go back to his/her country!

geelani's ideology is highly divisive, which is highly uncalled for in this day and age.

his reasons for separating kashmir from india are not valid, and are based on his extremist ideologies (surely engrained into his brain by the beloved ISI).

what COULD be a valid reason is the human rights violations being committed there, which is why the indian gov't needs to be very careful with every move it makes in the valley.

 

[mehwish92]

There is no denying that a separatist sentiment exists in the Kashmir valley, amongst Kashmiri Muslims. But the reason behind this movement today is not what it was in 1947.

In 1947, the reason was religion. At that time Pakistan was a new country. Muslims throughout the subcontinent had high hopes for a Muslim Country in South Asia, and thus had high hopes for (and high expectations from) Pakistan. Some Muslims even within India supported Pakistan at that time. Kashmir was no different. Kashmiris wanted to separate from India because India was Hindu-Majority, and they were Muslim majority. That was a highly charged atmosphere, where Hindus were killing Muslims and Muslims were killing Hindus. So this obviously makes sense.

Fast forward to 2010. Contrary to what many believe, religion is no longer the main motive behind the separatist movement. It has more to do with the right of self-determination. It has more to do with the belief that India and Pakistan are playing games with them, and they've had enough. After 3 wars in their neighbourhood, several terror attacks, thousands of innocent lives being taken, all Kashmiris want is to live in peace. They don't want Pakistan. They've realized that Pakistan is a failing country, simply using Kashmiris as pawns. Nor do they want India. Not because India is a "Hindu" nation (or because Muslims don't believe in secularism), but because India is seen as an occupier. It is a country that rigs elections, carries out fake encounters, harasses Kashmiri Muslims for no apparent reason, and makes life a living hell.

The new generation of Kashmiri Muslims are just as secular as you and I (for the most part). Thus their problem is not with India's secularism. The problem lies elsewhere. And this is why Geelani is wrong. He is not in tune with what the Kashmiri people want. And this is why the Indian gov;'t and its people should not pay any attention to him. We've sent interlocutors to J&K. Don't waste time talking to Geelani and his party of monkeys. Go talk to the awaam. The common man. Talk to student bodies. Try to alleviate the grievances of the common Kashmiri, who wants nothing more than roti kapda aur makaan. He wants to live a respectful life where he is not forced to live in constant fear.

Whatever solution we work towards, it must eventually lead to removal of army from interiors of Kashmir, more development in Kashmir, better connection of Kashmir to rest of India, and above all, justice.

 

[ajtr]

US professor deported for 'political activism' in Valley​

Even as the J&K government said today that US academic Prof Richard Shapiro was not on its watchlist, it has emerged that the Centre decided to deport him from the Indira Gandhi International Airport on charges of continued "political activism in the state while on a tourist visa".

Sources said the government decided to take action against Shapiro, who held a tourist visa, because of his partner Angana Chatterji's involvement with the International People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir and her association with the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition for Civil Society (JKCCS).

Chatterji was travelling with Shapiro when he was denied entry.

Sources said the professor "was misusing his tourist visa to visit J&K where he was conducting activities not in line with the purpose for which the visa was issued".

On Monday, Shapiro was sent back from New Delhi airport when he was on his way to Kashmir with Chatterji, who is also an anthropology professor and co-convener of the human rights tribunal. Last year, the tribunal had come up with an extensive report on mass graves in Kashmir, saying "2,900 unidentified persons were buried in these graves after being killed by security forces"."We have no information about his (Shapiro's) deportation. He was not on our watchlist," said Senior Superintendent of Police Javid Riyaz. "We didn't deport him. He was deported by the Immigration authorities".

When contacted, the press section of the US embassy in New Delhi declined to comment, saying "we have no information about the issue".

"This is a serious issue. Whether you call it eviction or deportation, you can't separate him (Shapiro) from his family. I am his family," said Chatterji, who is a US citizen of Indian origin. "This puts across an ugly image of India".

Chatterji said Shapiro was stopped after initially being allowed to enter the country. "When we arrived at the airport, they stamped his (Shapiro's) passport for entry permit. But when I went to them, they detained me. Then they called him again and put a cancel stamp on his papers," said Chatterji.

"When I asked them if this was deportation, or if there were any charges against him, they said no. They said that he is not to be allowed in India. They didn't give any reasons," said Chatterji.

When asked why Shapiro had been deported, Foreigners Regional Registration Officer, Delhi, Ajay Chaudhry said he had no knowledge about the same. "I have no idea," he said.

 

[ajtr]

Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps: Report​

London: Hundreds of university students, including foreigners are being trained in militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which have become active again, to wage 'jihad' against India.


After a lull, several militant outfits have now again raised their heads and increased their activities in and around Muzaffarabad, capital of PoK, and pro-Jihad slogans can be seen on the walls of the city, BBC Urdu Service reported.

A 25-year-old engineering student from Lahore, fresh from a training stint in one of camps told BBC from PoK capital Muzzaffarabad, said:"A large number of youths from Pakistani universities and abroad are undergoing training in PoK under supervision of a militant group to wage jihad against India."

The student, who identified himself as a Kashmiri, said he received two-month training in PoK after finishing his engineering course this year.

"Around 20 per cent youths in the training camps are from Kashmir and 10 per cent are from other countries... Majority of those receiving training are from Pakistan's Punjab province," he claimed.He also said that many other students from his university have joined the militant training programme run by a tanzeem (group) located near Lahore, an apparent reference to Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is headquartered at Murdike on the outskirts of the city.

He said a decision to send them to Kashmir will be taken by the Tanzeem's Amir.

"We could be sent to Kashmir or we could be stationed in Pakistan itself for propagating Islam," he said in response to a question.

He claimed that his family approved his association with the jihadi group. However, when contacted his mother was upset over her son's decision.

"My son asked permission for propagating Islam which I gave him. But I was not aware that he associated himself with the jihadi group," she said.

"After returning home, he told me that he has received militant training and wants to join jihad. I was disappointed and i told him you cannot go to Kashmir to fight till I'm alive," she said.

The claims made by the student contradicts Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik who had recently denied reports of existence of militant camps in PoK.

 

[agentperry]

need to have a different approach

the Kashmir problem started soon after Independence, when pathans under the guidance of Pakistan army launched an attack to take over Kashmir and merge it with Pakistan. then king of Kashmir hari singh acceded to India the state of Kashmir and the Pakistan vs Kashmir fight over the territorial control became India vs Pakistan fight. legally Kashmir belongs to India and Pakistan, brilliantly accused India of forcefully taking over Kashmir (though the initiator is Pakistan itself.) now years of input and fueling of hate against the Indian state and government led to the massive protest and uprising in Kashmir. but one thing people miss out is that its only Kashmiri people having problem or we can say that they got provoked by series of unfortunate events. there is no problem in Ladakh and jammu. also one of the problem is that people all around the world while talking about j&k have a muslim state in mind just like west bank and gaza. but in reality only 58% of the state population is muslim. the need of hour is to bring out the reality of state from indian side and make pl feel that india and j&k is not israel and west bank and gaza. also we ned to a bit bold in tackling this thing enough of soft diplomacy and intk image kind of thing no country today think about these things. israel assassinated ppl against it. china dos it. pakistan openly hanged bugti. even US dos it thru proxy agents and agency. we can have geeani shabir mufti and arundhati roy assassinated in secrecy. go to hell ppl opposing india.... im utterly frustated now:angry_10:

 

[Rage]

How Pakistan supports insurgency in Kashmir and what one educated Kashmiri thinks about it

Watch this very important video:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11699863

 

[ejazr]

Shabbir Shah wants troops out of Pak-held Kashmir too

Asking visiting US President Barack Obama to mediate between India and Pakistan for resolution of the Kashmir issue, separatist leader and chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party (JKDFP) Shabir Shah said here on Thursday that both countries should withdraw their troops from the entire area of Kashmir, including Gilgit and Baltistan as of August 15, 1947, in order to hold a referendum.

"When we talk of withdrawal of troops from Kashmir, we mean that the same exercise should be done in areas of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan. And when we talk of Pakistan, we mean areas of Gilgit and Baltistan as well, which also formed part of undivided Jammu and Kashmir," Shah told mediapersons.

Even in case of a referendum, Shah said, "we want it to be held in all the five regions of the state, including areas of Kashmir held by Pakistan, so as to ascertain the wishes of people of the entire undivided state". He added that the JKDFP was opposed to any disintegration of the state.

Incidentally, Pakistan has already ceded a part of the Gilgit-Baltistan region to China where the later is constructing the Karakoram highway.

Saying that his party had never opposed dialogue, Shah said all that they wanted was that talks be held between India and Pakistan and that these be result-oriented. "We had been talking in the past also, but what was their outcome?" he asked.

He also urged the government to create an atmosphere for talks, asking how this could happen when hundreds of innocent Kashmiri youths were languishing in jails.

On the Centre's interlocutors for Kashmir, Shah said Dileep Padgaonkar was his good friend and he expected him to find a solution to the Kashmir issue. At the same time, he said, the team needed a politician.

 

[Rage]

You've seen Muzzafarbad in the video. Now, I want to show you what Srinagar, in Indian 'occupied' Kashmir, looks like, that is when it is not burning.

This is despite all the &hit that has happened in the last few years.

And finally, 'tis the Sheikh ul Alam airport in Srinagar:

 

[ajtr]

J&K separatists not betting on Obama​

SRINAGAR: Kashmir separatists are not expecting any miraculous initiative on Kashmir during US president Barack Obama's India visit even though some of them have called for a strict strike for three days to highlight the crisis. Most of them, however, feel that he would talk about Kashmir in his meeting with the hosts.

"We understand that US will neither mediate nor would get involved in the conflict. We are not expecting any dramatic announcements or initiatives," Mirwaiz Umer Farooq told ET. "We are not seeking any direct American involvement either. We only want US to facilitate bringing India and Pakistan closer so that they resolve the issue."

Mirwaiz, who was recently conferred doctorate, was a few years back one of Time magazine's 25 'young achievers' of Asia. This led to reportage that the young cleric was perhaps the lone acceptable face to the West from amongst Kashmir's separatists.

"We are basically seeking a sort of assistance, an indirect US involvement in bringing India and Pakistan closer because there is a lot of trust deficit between the two parties," he said. His Hurriyat is busy in a signature campaign demanding US to appoint "a special rapporteur for south Asia specifically on Kashmir".

The cleric, who is busy fighting a battle with the state government for getting resuming his Friday prayers in Kashmir's grand mosque, the family's main seat of influence for a few centuries, says that settling Kashmir is part of US requirement to manage Afghanistan and Pakistan.

He talked about various reference to Kashmir by Obama during his campaigning. Even though US Af-Pak envoy Richard Holbrook lacks a mandate on Kashmir, Mirwaiz believes he is working a lot without making it public. "We know it for sure that US is in the picture," Mirwaiz said.

Admitting that US has its own interests in the region especially in India that has emerged as an economic and military power, Mirwaiz said America's Kashmir policy has not changed. "What we are going to see is a strong diplomatic, may be a covert initiative by America to push India and Pakistan towards a settlement on Kashmir," he said.

Mirwaiz believes that New Delhi should not shun its sensitivity towards involving third parties is managing the problems she faces. "When they have any economic problem they rush to IMF and World Bank but when it comes to political disputes it becomes sensitive in seeking third party assistance," he said, adding "Kashmir is a dispute recognised world over and it has to get solved with assistance from third parties."

Syed Ali Shah Geelani , the inflexible separatist who is spearheading the agitation since June, was denied a visa to undergo an operation in the US for cancer. But he also thinks that Obama's visit could help highlight the issue.

While the world will focus on India in view of the visit, people here have a chance to portray Kashmir issue as dangerous as Palestine. "We want to maintain and highlight that Kashmir dispute is as serious as the Palestine issue," he said while asking people to ensure a strict curfew for three days starting Saturday.

"We want to tell him (Obama) that he should move away from traditional stand that India and Pakistan should talk and we will facilitate that but he should openly say that promises of UN resolution should be implemented by New Delhi in letter and spirit," Geelani told a TV channel.

The security grid, in the meanwhile, is on tenterhooks to ensure Kashmir remains incident free for the next three days. Massive deployments have been made and all the security agencies are on high alert. A massacre of 35 Sikhs during Bill Clinton's visit in 2000 continues to haunt the security grid in Kashmir. Part of the city was under curfew on Friday to prevent possible demonstrations.

 

[ajtr]

You've seen Muzzafarbad in the video. Now, I want to show you what Srinagar, in Indian 'occupied' Kashmir, looks like, that is when it is not burning.

This is despite all the &hit that has happened in the last few years.

I would be more interested to know about the people who owns costly properties in kashmir and across india (delhi and bangalore for example).