Video Widget

« »
Pakistan India Islamabad Shah Mehmood Qureshi S. M. Krishna Kashmir لیبل والی اشاعتیں دکھا رہا ہے۔ سبھی اشاعتیں دکھائیں
Pakistan India Islamabad Shah Mehmood Qureshi S. M. Krishna Kashmir لیبل والی اشاعتیں دکھا رہا ہے۔ سبھی اشاعتیں دکھائیں

پیر، 19 جولائی، 2010

Indian state justifies the murder civilians in Kashmir

Stone Pelting An Inevitable Affair In Kashmir

By Inshah Malik

The so-called 'terrorist feelings' of the young in Kashmir are fueled by the Pakistani intelligence agencies like ISI and Lashkar-e-Tayeba (LeT), this is how the Indian state justifies the murder of the 18 civilians in Kashmir since Jan 2010. Among these 18 civilians, 11 were children brutally eliminated by the 'unruly mobs' of CRPF personnel. The rationale behind using this expression for CRPF, which is believed to be a disciplined mechanism, is that it is devoid of the skills to deal with civilians. It is the state police that must do the job of stopping the protests. EN Rammoham, former IG of Kashmir spoke in an interview to DNA newspaper (Sunday, July 4) about the ethics of CRPF and has condemned the state police for not being efficient enough to tackle an angry mob. He also justified that CRPF should never be believed to act like police, precisely because they are never trained to use 'lathis', they are armed forces who are well equipped in fighting an armed insurgency and not angry people. Even after the solemn confessions of the CRPF authorities it has been actively employed to tackle protests. The mainstream media has often referred to the protests that occurred to condemn the civilian killings in Kashmir as 'unruly mobs'.

The media at the centre has played in a direction to safeguard the State interests and allowed the one sided frenzy to go on air for hours and added fuel to the fire. The jingoistic nationalism forces most intelligent minds in India to uphold Kashmir as 'atoot ang' the integral part with or without its people. This emotion is so vehemently expressed in all debates and forums that it forces one to look back at the British colonial mentality which once sold Kashmir as a whole to Dogras. The obsession of holding on to Kashmir even on the basis of military might is fueling the people's sentiment to feel repressed and colonized. The only sign of relief for them is to look back in history to the better off times and dream about them. One wonders if on one side India has been over the years repeating Kashmir to be its crown then why differential treatment among its people as a whole.

In a recent Bharat Bandh 'protest' staged against the hike in price initiated by the opposition political parties in India, 78 buses were burnt by the angry protesters and 24 drivers were injured in Mumbai alone but no CRPF was sent to control the 'unruly mobs' in Mumbai. Even in the worst of the Kashmir protests never has such large scale destruction of public property been carried out by the local people in a single day. Does labeling Kashmir a 'disturbed area' also give extra powers to the state to even subjugate anger with military might in Kashmir? Is Kashmir a stage where all kind of military might should be tested and flaunted? The answer is 'No' India has to stop somewhere,

The Freedom movement that has endured in Kashmir for almost sixty years has changed gears over time from non-violence to violence and then again to nonviolence in 2008. When the democratic voice of the people is crushed with bullets, their only resort is to throw stones. It has to be seen if CRPF was deployed to foil Bharat band and slogans answered with bullets wonder how many Indians wouldn't pick up stones in self defense or attack. Not many.

The sentiment to regain the sovereignty that Kashmir enjoyed before 1947 is not new to its people and such sentiment cannot be labeled as 'terrorism'. With time it has moved as crusts and troughs for people. During the course of time people have moved on into the tracks of development. There are good numbers of traders, bureaucrats who have not withstood this sentiment and excelled well and have shown interest in the Indian sponsored 'demon-crazy' in Kashmir. What happens later is where the emphasis needs to be made. If people of Kashmir moved on with almost 60% votes for National conference government headed by Omar Abdullah, there prime concerns were employment, good roads, electricity but none of this happened. This was the time people should have asked for demilitarization as well but instead of going ahead with development; the killing spree of Military has crippled people's aspirations. They are back to the stage of 1990's freedom aspiring sentiment where the central government doesn't seek a single opportunity to criminalize the people of Kashmir. One must ask, if people are to be criminalized then what is India here for? 'Water resources'? This from any conscious thinking brain is a deep rooted colonization.

Kashmiri Terrorism a Myth and Indian Democracy a blatant lie

The number of children killed, detained and subjected to army abuse stands witness that it is the force that creates the rebellion. Labeling their freedom struggle as terrorism is the biggest myth that Indian administration could ever devise to hide their shame of being a brute oppressor.

However, a creamy layer of Kashmir's own people who have thrived on the benefits of this extended Indian rule preferred self experience in this stringent conflict. Living became easy till self appropriation was emphasized. In these circumstances, Aasiya residing in the upper town's lavish colony in Bhagemehtab groomed her son up with ideas of freedom and goodness. Confronting the news of killings and disappearances of youth during protests in the recent past, She like many other women would disregard such acts of children saying 'Uneducated parents would let their children go to pelt stones and the boys who indulge in pelting stones are ill mannered and bad'. Little did she know that education, political status and wealth were useless to avoid the wrath of this lawless State?

Aasiya's Kitchen window is carved in this direction and she often spends time watching her son play, she hoots when her son Mohamed hits a six. On 2nd July, 2010, Mohamed, who is a class 11th student in a convent school, like every other day was playing in the locality's only park. She heard a rush and quickly got to the window only to find that her son was chased by a mammoth battalion of CRPF, nervous about his safety she rushed out of her house.

Mohammed was playing when four children ran in his direction saying 'run army is chasing us'. He ran with his bat still in his hand and thought in his mind that India was a democratic country he knows it from school, he should have just stayed and said that 'Sir I am playing'. Thinking this in his mind he got into a neighbor's house and army rushed at them and on gun point asked the house owner to bring the boys out.

'I pleaded, also showed them my bat that I still held and in good English told 'Sir I was just playing' but they did not listen to me' said Mohammed

Aasiya rushed to the spot and told the CRPF personnel that they just lived right here and have always been good people. She cried, yelled and did all she could only to realize a gun pointed and pushed on her chest. The Police van took away her son Mohamed and she fainted after chasing it till some distance.

Mohammed could not grasp a bit of what has happened?

On their way to 'Thania Sadar' Police station, the police van halted midway and asked the boys to get down.

They commanded us to pick up stones and face the camera; I trembled at this but was forced to do so, even while doing this I repeatedly said I did not do anything Sir.

Mohammed with four other boys was hung upside down for almost 5 hours and beaten ruthlessly till he fainted. He could not find a single local police officer but only CRPF personnel's in the police station.

By the evening we were almost 24 boys and the youngest was a nine year old, they mercilessly thrashed him with gun butts and all he was mumbling was Oh God why don't I die? I was repeatedly calling upon my mother in pain.

Mohammed is deeply wounded and shoved in painful memories of past four nights of trauma and abuse. He wants to become a doctor but after facing this brutal treatment at such a tender age of 16 what can he become? This is the question for the readers.

Stones are the weapons of the powerless

There are thousands like Mohammed who have witnessed tyranny in reply to hope. In the politicized milieu even the hope now withers away. The eighty thousand dead, their families their little boys and girls witness oppression. The feeling of losing a father, brother is deeply gloomy and impressive on the tender hearts. The boys and girls who need love and attention have to prove their identity to a foreign occupation. The 'occupation' does truly not know their language or culture. Children born anywhere in the world should not deserve bullets. There expressions are silenced but the graffiti all over the walls in the Kashmir vale including on the animals speaks out for them. GO INDIA GO, Leave Our Kashmir, is what the walls uniformly shout for them. Although their mouths are made shut and their movement crippled and playgrounds sealed under curfew their voices are heard because they are the voices of humanity.

In a solemn confession EN Rammoham who served in Kashmir during the peak of armed struggle in 1993 says, force commits excesses, fires on innocent people, and no action is taken by the commanders of that force. I know a number of cases where a force on patrol is ambushed. Say, three jawans are killed. Now the force looks around for three people -- it could be farmers working in the nearby field -- rounds them up and shoots them. This is plain, cold-blooded murder. But often the force commanders don't take action against perpetrators of such crimes. The militants who fired at them escaped, and you round up four or five civilians and shoot them -- is this way to conduct operations?

What to expect from the boys who are still grooming up and developing their intellect and behavior when the so-called 'disciplined military apparatus' wages war on them. Does India expect them not to pick up stones in self defense and in the wake of justice?

Inshah Malik is a PhD scholar at the Tata Institute of social sciences, Mumbai, India. Email: Inshah.malik@tiss.edu


Tags:

ہفتہ، 17 جولائی، 2010

India does not understand the language of peace.

India once again sabotaged the peace talks as always proving that India does not understand the language of peace.


A day after talks with India ended in a deadlock, Islamabad on Friday accused Delhi of having a “selective” approach by focusing mostly on terrorism and said it would be “difficult to move forward” with this attitude. “India’s approach was selective. When they say all issues are on table, they should not be selective,” Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi told reporters here, a day after he held talks with his Indian counterpart S M Krishna.

“If we focus on just one issue (terrorism), it will be difficult for Pakistan to move forward,” Qureshi said, while accusing India of being obsessed with terrorism and excluding other bilateral issues. Qureshi criticised India for being inflexible.

“We are ready to negotiate. We are not in a hurry. When they are ready, we are ready to discuss all issues and show flexibility,” Qureshi said. He added that Jammu and Kashmir was part of the negotiations with India and reiterated charges of human rights violations and the imposition of curfew in parts of the state — an issue that created much acrimony at the joint press conference he held with Krishna Thursday night.

Qureshi said Pakistan was a victim of terror and its cities were repeatedly attacked by terrorists. Foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said there have never been deadlock in politics and dialogues, adding that Indian side was not mentally prepared for dialogues with Pakistan, as the visiting delegations had no mandate to settle the issues.

Talking to media here on Friday after attending a ceremony, in foreign services academy, he said Pakistan always aimed at conclusive and decisive dialogues with India but history of past negotiations with India are witness to the fact that last minute hitch from India derail the talks.

Qureshi also pointed that India was not mentally prepared for dialogues. India aimed to negotiate on selective issues by ignoring Pakistan’s interests and regional complexities adding that Pakistan didn’t aim for dialogues on Sir Creek while ignoring Siachin issue.

Pakistan wants cooperation with neighboring countries to address prevailing challenges of terrorism but Pakistan would not sacrifice its concerns, while getting into negotiations with India. India has also to participate with broaden heart and mind approach in the dialogues, Shah Mehmood Qureshi said.

“I have felt, visiting Indian delegation had no mandate to settle any issue conclusively, as they got dictation on phone continuously from Delhi during negotiations, but I didn’t make any call to my leadership during the meeting with Indian delegation, adding that talks only on modalities makes talks difficult,” Qureshi maintained.

Qureshi criticised India for being inflexible.

“We are ready to negotiate. We are not in a hurry. When they are ready, we are ready to discuss all issues and show flexibility,” Qureshi said. Foreign minister said, India must understand concerns and difficulties of Pakistan and selective Indian approach to settle the issues that India gave preference couldn’t result with success of negotiations between both the countries, as Pakistan couldn’t ignore situation in occupied Kashmir and there has always been a question mark regarding transparency of elections in Indian occupied Kashmir.

He added that Jammu and Kashmir was part of the negotiations with India and reiterated charges of human rights violations and the imposition of curfew in parts of the state — an issue that created much acrimony at the joint press conference he held with Krishna Thursday night.

“I was ready to sit and negotiate with India but it has been beyond understanding, what had happened with the visiting Indian delegation within a night that they adopt a selective approach in their talks and talking only about modalities couldn’t be helpful in addressing any issue,” Qureshi said.

Foreign Minister also said, issues were pre-determined between India and Pakistan and Pakistan didn’t want to waste the progress on dialogues that were going on from last four year, adding that Pakistan has no hostile designs against any of its neighboring state.

He also said that dialogues could only be held with mutual respect and dialogues on equality basis could n’t be linked with terms and conditions.

“If we focus on just one issue (terrorism), it will be difficult for Pakistan to move forward,” Qureshi said, while accusing India of being obsessed with terrorism and excluding other bilateral issues.

Tags:

India-Pakistan Talks Flounder




Pakistan's Shah Mehmood Qureshi and India's S.M. Krishna held talks in an effort to revive the peace process that was broken off after the 2008 assault on the Indian financial capital Mumbai.

But neither minister set a date for future talks or announced any concrete measures that might ease tensions. Both were grim-faced and somber at a news conference after the meeting and had little interaction.

India has blamed Pakistan-based militants for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. And on Wednesday, Indian Home Secretary, G.K. Pillai, accused Pakistan's main spy agency of orchestrating the assault.

India has been pushing Pakistan to take action against the perpetrators of the attack as a pre-condition for re-launching the peace process between the two nuclear-armed rivals.

One political commentator says no one really hoped for any breakthrough and it would be a slow process where the two sides will continue meeting and talking.

[Saeed Naqv, Political Analyst]:
"New Delhi is proceeding very cautiously. They are saying look, start with terror, bit-by-bit, if something is resolved then one can proceed. So, we are going to see a great deal of running fast to stand still."

Security remains India's top concern in talks with Pakistan after Mumbai. But Pakistan wants discussions on other issues, including its core dispute with India over the Himalayan region of Kashmir.

Both ministers agreed that the countries would continue talks, acknowledging the decades of distrust between them.


Tags:

Pak Indo Talks: Indian Delaying Tactics

We are ready to engage,we are ready to negotiate any time,anywhere and we are not in a hurry. We will wait till they are ready.
( Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi)


By Sajjad Shaukat


Although Foreign ministers of Pakistan and India ended their dialogue with a positive note on July 15 this year as both the countries termed their talks ‘useful’ and vowed that the talks would pave the way for serious, comprehensive and sustainable dialogue between the two countries, yet the same failed without producing tangible results. In this context, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi remarked on July 16 that India was not mentally ready for talks, as it wanted to discuss only selective issues.

During their joint press briefing no breakthrough announcement was made, but both Shah Mehmood Qureshi and his Indian counterpart SM Krishna claimed that they had discussed all outstanding issues. Qureshi said that he would visit India in the near future to continue the dialogue process.

To a question regarding Indian involvement in Balochistan, Krishna indicated that the issue had been mentioned in the Sharmel Sheikh declaration.

Qureshi stated that during the meeting, he had also mentioned reports that Brahamdagh Bugti had obtained an Indian passport.

Krishna stated that there had been an increase in infiltration across the Line of Control (LoC) particularly in 2008 and 2009. Qureshi reacted by saying that “infiltration is not the policy of Pakistan or any intelligence agency in Pakistan”.

Although Krishna pointed out, “I agreed we have cordial and frank exchange of views on all issues between the two countries. Effective action against terrorism is required,” and “India is committed to being a sincere partner in our effort to establish peaceful and progressive relationship between India and Pakistan,” yet he has used these words in language of diplomacy. But it is due to Indian intransigence that no progress has been made in these talks. In fact, India has been using delaying tactics in connection with the Pak-India dialogue.

In 2004, India and Pakistan started process to normalize their relations after half a decade of confrontation over the occupied Kashmir. The renewed normalization process, described officially as ‘composite dialogue,’ which included Kashmir as the key issue to be resolved incrementally by top officials of both the countries. But in 2008, New Delhi suspended the process of ‘composite dialogue’ under the pretext of Mumbai terror attacks which were in fact, arranged by the Indian secret agency RAW. Meanwhile, Indian rulers blackmailed Islamabad that they would not resume the talks unless Islamabad takes actions against the culprits of Mumbai catastrophe.

A similar process in 1997-1998 had resulted in the February 1999 signing of Lahore Declaration which had mentioned Kashmiri settlement as a key to South Asian peace. However, the ensuing conflict over Kargil brought India and Pakistan back to the confrontational path. The Kargil crisis provided New Delhi with another pretext to delay the solution of various Pak-Indian disputes through negotiations. In 2002, India again postponed the process of dialogue owing to the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament.

Nevertheless, Indian leaders forgot that there is no chance for the success of Pak-India talks in wake of a threatening policy, coercive diplomacy and arm-twisting tactics. This is a lesson particularly for India to learn from its experience of dealing with Pakistan during the last six decades. For example in 2001-02 and 2008, India failed to secure Pakistani compliance to its illegitimate demands even though half a million battle-ready Indian troops marched up to the international boundary with Pakistan.

It is of particular attention that despite various crises which were availed by New Delhi in order to suspend the process of dialogue, previous Pak-India negotiations could not produce any result due to Indian delaying tactics. In this regard, Indian diplomats have always tried to make the longstanding issues difficult, intricate and complex, challenging Pakistani stand so that no settlement could be made regarding any issue, especially the Indian-held Kashmir. As a matter of fact, history of Pak-India dialogue clearly shows that India is not serious and sincere in resolving any issue including the key dispute of Kashmir. Hence, New Delhi has always used one or the other justification so as to delay the peace process. In the context, slow peace process in the Sub-continent is also because of Indian obduracy.

It is notable that Indian delaying tactics and adamant stand in connection with Pak-India parleys are not without some sinister designs. In this connection, India is determined to keep its hold on Kashmir which is considered by it as integrated part of the Indian union. India wants to continue state terrorism on the innocent Kashmiris who are waging a ‘war of liberation’ for their legitimate rights. New Delhi also wants to blackmail Pakistan by stopping the flow of rivers’ water towards Pakistan as major rivers of our country take origin from the occupied Kashmir. In this regard, India has constructed various dams so as to starve Pakistan owing to severe consequences of shortage of water. Nevertheless, by controlling the Kashmiri territories, New Delhi intends to get leverage over Islamabad by resolving the dispute in accordance with its own will.

One of the major reasons of Indian delaying tactics is that India desires to destabilse Pakistan. Notably, for the last six years, Pakistan’s various regions have been facing suicide attacks by the militants who entered the country from Afghanistan where tentacles of terrorism exist. In this respect, India has set up secret training centres in Afghanistan where its military personnel in collaboration with RAW have been imparting training to the youngsters. Regarding various terror-events, ISPR Spokesman, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, Interior Minister Rehman Malik and other TV commentators have indicated Indian involvement behind the attacks�saying that terrorists “are the enemies of the state” and “are mercenaries who receive arms from Afghanistan to destabilize the country.”

With the tactical support of some foreign powers, New Delhi has been trying to weaken Pakistan which is the only nuclear country in the Islamic world. For this purpose, particularly, India is supporting insurgency in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and separatism in Balochistan.
Nonetheless, Indian delaying tactics regarding Pak-India dialogue are part of a conspiracy against Pakistan. In such a situation, it is false hope as some political experts think that unlike 1997-98, the present attempt to settle Kashmir within the framework of the new dialogue including other issues may have a greater chance of success.

The fact is that India resumed the present peace process under international pressure, especially of the United States. In this context, Indian political party, BJP has already pointed out that the Congress-led government re-initiated the ongoing Pak-India dialogue under American duress. Besides, by fulfilling the formality, Indian rulers also want to show to the western countries that India is willing to settle all the outstanding disputes with Pakistan.

However, the recent meeting between Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and his Indian counterpart S M Krishna is the fourth in a series of high level parleys undertaken by the two countries this year to reduce the trust deficit between both the countries and to put the derailed peace process back on track. Yet like the past, such meetings would not produce any breakthrough or positive result owing to Indian delaying tactics.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations. Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com


Tags:

Who is responsible for Kargil War?


Ikram Ullah Khan

It is May 28, 1998 Pakistan has tested it nuclear device in reply to Indians nuclear device test. It was a time when entire nation was celebrating this historical movement. It was a perception among Pakistani populace that now they are in equal position to India. With this overt nuclear capability no one will courage to attack on them, every one is secure enough and they can put their all efforts to make a prosper Pakistan. Foreign investors will also come in safe & secure Pakistan because the curse of terrorism wasn’t arose at that time only a visible threat of conventional war between Indo-Pak always roaming around there. But now any type of war between two nuclear states was out of question. Both countries due to the presence of nuclear deterrence will not initiate any step that can lead toward conventional war and then no one can rule out the use of nuclear weapons and these weapons will bring ruin nothing else. So in a way these nuclear weapons become a guarantee for peace because in their presence either side can’t afford to fight any war.

Both side realized this new altered situation and both sides political leadership announced they will enhance the peaceful cooperation between both countries. This was Indian Prime Minister who visited Pakistan went to Monument of Pakistan (Minar-e-Pakistan) and accepted Pakistan an independent sovereign state in February 1999. Both Prime Ministers also signed a Memorandum of Understanding it known as Lahore MoU. It brought a sign of prestige for Pakistani nation that now Indians are forced to do these kind of initiative on equal basis because of ours nuclear capability.

This situation remained no longer as good as I mentioned above, soon the controversial episode of Kargil War occurred and all the dreams of equality vanished. I will not go to this detail that who was vanquisher of this war but it is understood Pakistani army chief General Musharraf has a plan long before to the day of mobilization of Pakistan army in the garb of Jihadists. It was a planed small level operation by Pakistan army in disputed territory. Initially Pakistan surprised Indians when they came back after winter season and founded now Kargil is no more under their control. For restoration of Indian control at the outset they even tried to settle down this matter with bilateral talk. Conceivably it wasn’t feasible and also interdicting the accomplishment of Pakistani objective to internationalize Kashmir Dispute. In response Indians unpredictably started massive military assault over small number of Pakistani troops with the cooperation of Indian Air Force, even utilizing Miraj 2000 it is even capable for the delivery of nuclear weapon but Indians tried to kept all its war efforts in certain limits and remained in the specific limits lay down by LoC. It was difficult to sustain for involved Pakistani troops in front of Indians IAF without air cover by PAF. It appeared to me as that it was the military leadership who didn’t calculate this aspect that what they will do if Indians start massive response to this. In any worse case scenario when it will remain no more secret then how they will recuperate the lost trust of their fellows for a reciprocal response. Because then the few number of people will not be able to fight war, it will be a war between two nations. Anyhow it was necessary to bring it to an end, this end was coming but nation was oblivious over this issue.

I will say in implicit manner that high official of other Pakistani forces also remained unacquainted over Kargil Operation till the time it was exposed by other means. When Kargil War started then the situation was that nobody was onboard even at higher level and even when its end was near the situation was not very different. A democratic Prime Minister was ruling over Pakistan but the situation was that his Information Minister Syed Mushaid Husain has no information even before a crucial meeting with at that time President of USA Mr. Bill Clinton on July 4, 1999.

Is the Nawaz Sharif not to be blamed equally for it?. He went to America and after a meeting with Clinton he was agreed upon the withdrawal of Pakistani forces from Kargil sector. While a country’s nation and its forces have the right perception that with the presence of nuclear weapons it our inalienable right to negotiate every issue on equal basis. What sort of equality it was? Indians even wasn’t there nor were they ready to participate. Nawaz ordered his forces to evict the Kargil sector in such a hurry that he couldn’t arrange a fair arrangement of cease fire. It cause a severe sense of defeat among forces while they were ready to fight till their last breath and Pakistani nation was also disappointed over this political defeat.

But still this issue is controversial none of Pakistani ruler tried to find out that what has happened? What sort of hurry was there for withdrawal of Pakistani forces and why a national plan was missing and only individual was in process according their own desire?.

There is a need to establish such a system that whenever there is meeting between top Pakistani officials it should be formulated in written order. It should be available as imperial evidence in any future Kargil like issue’s investigation. Because they are reasonable to reply the nation and also they are not gather to discuss any personal issues these will be related to nation. They should not feel any shame for the establishment of this system. For it still no one is ready to accept his fault while the both key players are still ready to serve the nation once again.

The writer is associated with the Strategic & Nuclear studies department of the NDU, Islamabad. Email: ikramb63@gmail.com

Tags: