[Reader-list] Self determination in Kashmir-reply to Vishal

[Partha Dasgupta]

Hi Rahul,

What you've said in the past few posts makes admirable sense. For a solution
to work, ALL the stakeholders have to be involved, else the left out party
will remain in a state of denial against the agreement.

And I certainly agree that there's been more than enough death and
suffering, which needs to be stopped.

Look forward to your detailed mail.

Rgds, Partha
...............

On 9/18/07, Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Zainab,
> The reason why I mentioned Pakistan is that I was
> trying to delineate the stakeholders in the valley.
> I don't hold the view that all resistance to
> occupation in Kashmir is Pakistan sponsored.I agree
> that there is state sponsored terrorism.
> I have no comment on stunts like apology.Thats why I
> did not take part in that debate.It does not matter to
> me who apologized to whom or not;and it does not
> matter to the people who get killed and raped.
> Now your third point.Please find my reply inline.
> I don't mean to get into a
> > philosophical discussion but in my point of view,
> > how
> > non-pragmatic is it to dream and aspire for the
> > ideal?
> > If all of us were to be pragmatic and afraid to
> > aspire
> > for the ideal and to dream, would not this world be
> > a
> > very average/substandard place to live in?
>
> Don't you think you are being reductionist here?Any
> idea of pragmatism or romanticism does not exist in a
> vacuum.One doesn't become a romantic just for the heck
> of it.At least I don't.Please,lets not be highfalutin
> about it.Its a matter of people getting killed.If your
> romanticism gives the world one more poet like Agha
> Shahid Ali,whom i greatly admire by the way,and my
> pragmatism gives me a new generation that can grow up
> in a non-police state;which would you prefer?
> Lets talk in terms of whats plausible;achievable in
> the short term;isn't 60 years time enough?
>
> regards
> Rahul
>
> --- Zainab Bawa <zainabbawa at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Rahul,
> >
> > One of the problems in our imagination of 'the
> > situation' in Kashmir is that we attribute all
> > violence to Pakistan which is really not the whole
> > picture. The Indian government carries out
> > state-sponsored terrorism in the Valley. I think it
> > is
> > important to consider this when we discussion 'the
> > situation' in Kashmir and 'solutions' to 'the
> > problem'. Just as some people want Yasin Malik to
> > apologize in public for the wrongs he has done, I
> > would want the Indian government to openly accept
> > and
> > apologize for the historical wrongs and the violence
> > it has perpetrated in the Valley. Without this
> > acceptance, the thought of any 'solution' is
> > incomplete and problematic in my line of thinking.
> >
> > You may choose to disagree with me on this.
> >
> > The other thing which has been on my mind ever since
> > my first visit to Kashmir in 2002 is what is
> > 'pragmatic' or what is 'idealistic' and who defines
> > these lines for Kashmir? I don't mean to get into a
> > philosophical discussion but in my point of view,
> > how
> > non-pragmatic is it to dream and aspire for the
> > ideal?
> > If all of us were to be pragmatic and afraid to
> > aspire
> > for the ideal and to dream, would not this world be
> > a
> > very average/substandard place to live in? I would
> > be
> > very unhappy living in a world like this!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Zainab
> >
> > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:30:01 +0530, "Vishal Rawlley"
> > <vishal.rawlley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Dear Rahul,
> > >
> > > After you posted your problems with
> > self-determination in Kashmir, I had
> > > replied to you (pasted below). I had asked you a
> > question: we now know the
> > > problems you have pointed out, but we want to know
> > your proposed solution,
> > > can you post your answer please. Thank you.
> > >
> > >>>
> > > In response to Rahul I had said:
> > >
> > > Very well said. You have a right to your own
> > opinions and have provided
> > > good
> > > reasoning for it too. However, it does not
> > necessarily mean that everyone
> > > has to agree with you. Other people have a right
> > to
> > their own viewpoints
> > > based their own reasoning. Try not to impose your
> > views. If you are
> > > convinced that your views are superior than
> > others,
> > then its their loss
> > > that
> > > they do not get your viewpoint. When the day comes
> > to decide the best
> > > viewpoint you shall undoubtedly win. Meanwhile
> > keep
> > refining your
> > > arguments.
> > > Do not waste you energy in arguing with those who
> > won't listen.
> > >
> > > Many successive Indian governments have tried the
> > policy that you are
> > > propounding. Somehow it has not been working. So
> > now
> > what to do? What is
> > > the
> > > correct solution? Can you put it down step by
> > step,
> > just like you put down
> > > all the problems point by point?
> > >
> > > Now Shuddha and some others proposed their
> > solution,
> > which was: withdrawal
> > > of armed forces form both Kashmirs - under Indian
> > and under Pakistani
> > > occupation. That should give the Kashmiris the
> > space
> > to decide - after
> > > considering all the problems that you mentioned -
> > whether they want to be
> > > independent or be with either country (entirely or
> > partly, as in partly
> > > autonomous).
> > >
> > > I do not know this if solution of theirs will
> > work,
> > what do you think?
> > > Maybe
> > > this way Kashmiris will take very long to decide
> > and
> > they might kill each
> > > other some more before they arrive at a plan. But
> > at
> > least they will not
> > > be
> > > able to blame anyone but themselves. This seems
> > better than wasting our
> > > money and manpower in keeping Kashmir with us
> > forcefully.
> > >
> > > Do you have a better plan? Tell us please.
> > >
> > > -Vishal
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/16/07, Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi All,
> > >> I do not see the email shveta replied to in the
> > >> list,strangely.So I am reposting this.This is my
> > >> response to Vishal and it has my argument as to
> > why
> > >> the nation may resort to censorship in some
> > cases-to
> > >> be specific,why it would censor something that
> > >> promotes self determination in Kashmir.
> > >> Here goes again.If it was already posted to the
> > >> list,my apologies.
> > >>
> > >> Hi Vishal,
> > >> That was a great post.I mean the original one.I
> > find
> > >> my faculties of expression inadequate to connect
> > to
> > >> passionate people in general and ladies in
> > >> particular;so I had taken a break.In the spirit
> > of
> > >> "hawa aane de..yaar",I am tempted to post again.
> > >> Now,many people think that A united and
> > independent
> > >> Kashmir for all Kashmiris is the only just
> > solution
> > to
> > >> this 60 year old dispute.
> > >> This is a very  appreciable sentiment, but I dont
> > >> think that is gonna happen.It may be just too,
> > but
> > who
> > >> are the stakeholders in such type of a
> > >> solution.?Honesty of individuals is not required
> > here.
> > >> What I or you think should happen, would not
> > affect
> > >> reality one bit.
> > >> Nations dont work on such canonical moral
> > >> principles.For getting anywhere near to the
> > solution
> > >> of Kashmir, it is very necessary to get to grip
> > with
> > >> realities.Neither India nor Pakistan will benefit
> > from
> > >> an independent Kashmir. Neither will Kashmir
> > itself.As
> > >> for UN,the resolutions are not mandatory and UN
> > >> reiterates a policy of non interference and
> > >> bilateralism.Neither can any side (India
> > \pak)bomb
> > the
> > >> other party to come to a solution. Nor can any
> > country
> > >> bleed the other to a point of submission by
> > terrorism
> > >> etc.
> > >> Lets examine India`s stakes in Kashmir.For India
> > >> a) it will have a bad effect on insurgencies in
> > the
> > >> North East,
> > >> b)Ladakh is a strategic location wrt China, and
> > India
> > >> would not be comfortable with that going in a
> > >> different country.
> > >> c) Distrust of Pakistan( or its dictators) to not
> > to
> > >> try to usurp any further territory.
> > >> d) Majority of Indians do not regard Kashmir as a
> > >> disputed territory and if any party is perceived
> > to
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Got a little couch potato?
> Check out fun summer activities for kids.
>
> http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>