[Reader-list] Temples Of Mirpur

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear all

I am putting forth one simple point which was told to me by Aashish Gupta,
one of the members of this forum (he doesn't post, but he reads certainly
all articles and being my friend, I discuss a lot with him on such issues.
Plus of course, he was involved for some time with the 'Right to Food'
campaign). These are his views, as per my memory, and I restate them below.

"

If the Army or any paramilitary forces indulge in any kind of rape or
molestation, it is despicable. And since the authorities in Kashmir have
refused to touch the paramilitary forces or the armed forces in such
incidents, over a period of time, the local people there have come to
understand that simple protests against rapes will not help, and therefore
have come up to the strategic solution of fighting for azadi side-by-side
with the demand of punishment against those who rape. In their view, the
demand for azadi may force the administration to touch the soldiers who
commit such excesses and punish them. Therefore, it's a strategic move for
them, with a view to ensure justice. The fact that things have had to come
up to this point therefore, is the responsibility of the Indian state. If it
would have taken action earlier, things would not have come to such a passe.


In the case of the Hizbul Mujahideen attack, just because people don't
venture out on the streets to protest against the Hizbul, doesn't mean that
they support it. This is a very wrong view. Just because some gundas come in
our locality and collect 'haftas', and we don't protest them, would not mean
we support their activity. It simply means we fear them. Similarly, there is
a strong possibility that Kashmiris fear the Hizbul and hence don't protest
against them.

Some members of this forum have forgotten that any attack by the Hizbul also
shows the lack of preparation from the Indian state to protect its' citizens
(since Kashmiris are Indian citizens also because India lays claim to the
whole state of Jammu & Kashmir). Therefore, when the Hizbul Mujahideen is
able to carry out attacks in Kashmir or elsewhere, it's a failure of the
Indian state to protect its' citizens, and it's a bigger failure if
investigations are not carried out properly in such cases.

What's more, in the case of the Hizbul, the Hizbul is a 'banned'
organization, banned by the state. The Indian state has declared Hizbul as
an 'illegitimate' or illegal organization thereby, and therefore, any
atrocity committed by it has to be looked into by the state, which takes
upon itself the responsibility of protecting Indian citizens. On the other
hand, the Indian state is a legitimate or legal entity, and therefore when
an arm of the state (such as the bureaucracy, the Indian army, the
paramilitary forces, or any other arm), indulges in perpetration of
violation of human rights in any form (be it rape, violence or any other
way), nobody is going to take action in that case if the state justifies it.

Therefore, the protests of Kashmiris against the armed forces is justified
on the grounds that they are forcing the state to stop this violence and
violation of human rights, although using the weapon of 'azadi', so that
possibly such violence can stop over a period of time and things improve in
the Valley. And the state is thereby being asked to change its' functioning.


Hence, when the Hizbul attacks a house and rapes a woman or commits any
crime, it's condemnable but more so, it's also a failure of the Indian state
as well, and therefore both deserve to be condemned in such a case, because
the Indian state fails from discharging its responsibilities towards its'
citizens. And if the state doesn't feel that Kashmiris are Indian citizens,
why not give independence to Kashmir?

"

Regards

Rakesh