[Reader-list] see some meaning in Yasin Malik's choice

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear Aditya

Your reply has raised certain questions and points in my mind, which I wish
to express further.

For your kind information, in Wikipedia, there is no such information as
Yasin Malik saying that he read Gandhi's works to become 'non-violent'. I do
agree that there are people like this who initially commit acts of violence,
and then say that they have read something which has made them non-violent.
However, the fact remains that if we go in the history of what happened in
Kashmir since 1990, once insurgency started, it was Yasin Malik who was the
first person to agree to talks with the Indian Union to get 'azadi' for
Kashmir. And this is not the information from Wikipedia. This is something I
have managed to get thanks to an important lecture I attended a few days
ago, organized by PUCL, Tamil Nadu unit.

Second. I have also read that Yasin Malik is infact a double agent of both
the Indian and the Pakistani establishments, and he serves the purpose of
both to embarass each other. Some actions have also been pointed out to this
effect, where he has embarassed both Indian and Pakistani establishments in
different actions. However, the way the statements have been put up is just
casting aspersions on Malik itself. If there are facts pertaining to the
fact that Malik indeed has contacts which he has been using, then they must
be brought out in public. For after all, as law says, to prove any
statement, the proof must be 'proof beyond doubt' to satisfy the case.
Hence, the allegation against Malik that he is a 'stooge' of the Indian
government, remains just that, a mere allegation, with nothing to
substantiate it. As for the cases against Malik, let them be proved in
court. And you could inform me if you can, about the progress in these
cases.

Third. When I talked about Singur, Gujarat and even say tribals, I was
talking about the people who were actually facing the problem, not the NGO's
or others at all. I accept that these people got great support from the
NGO's and others, but the fact remains that in all these cases, these very
people have also suffered a lot, and still they themselves didn't make as
much noise as has been portrayed in media. Infact, each became famous thanks
to incidents and entry of people who were famous. Singur became famous more
so once Trinamool Congress entered the fray agitating for the local people.
Gujarat became famous because of NGO's and English media entering in to
cover the riots live (the local Gujarati media was involved in biased
reporting, that too made it famous). And tribals have not managed to gain
the attention of the media, because important political formations and/or
the upper elites of society have not involved themselves in the struggle of
the tribals.

What I basically wanted to say was that, the Pandits have yes, been fighting
for the cause of justice for the past 19-20 years. And yes, they may not
have received any support from the NGO's or the government. But does that
mean, that you can go on asking for retribution in the name of justice? And
more importantly, if the govt. of India is willing to provide them houses in
the Valley itself, why is it so that Pandits are not willing to return at
all?

Let me clearly state here. There has been a complete breakdown of trust
between the Pandits and the Kashmiri Muslims. The incidents of 1990,
whichever way one looks at it, has resulted in disastrous consequences of
today. On one hand, Kashmiri Pandits have still not been able to return back
to their homeland. On the other, Kashmiri Muslims have been subjected to
living under an 'army state' where all freedoms have been clamped down on,
which is against the very notion of 'democracy'. And for me, both are wrong.


And the solution of Panun Kashmir, which you as a community have
proposed(not all may be, but certainly some have put up this solution), is
not the solution because it won't be backed by the Muslims living in the
Valley, though I am not against putting it up for referendum. Similarly, the
rights of minorities must be protected, and therefore the rights of Pandits
to their homeland must be accepted. Therefore, the important thing is not
only to ask for justice, but also in some sense, forgive people by not at
least asking for death sentences by the Pandits on one hand, and by
surrendering arms and voluntarily facing cases on the part of Kashmiri
Muslims on the other (here I refer to those who took up arms, not those who
didn' t do so).

Secondly, there has to be a dialogue between both the communities to build
trust for each other. That should be the path ahead for the return of
Pandits.

As I see it, I dont' see either of the steps having been taken uptill now.
Can you at least, being one of the speakers for the Kashmiri Pandits (one of
the many speakers, actually) tell whether you made efforts for the same? For
after all, not all Muslims living in your very homeland area can be
'traitors'. And as you yourself accept, they are human beings.

I haven't called you pseudos. What I say is that there's a limit to going
around portraying yourself as a victim, to justify any action of yours.

And finally one more thing. It has been time and again said that democratic
elections in J&K are not the substitute for the dominant feeling of 'azadi',
and the people there, majority of them want 'azadi', with or without
Hurriyat. Since you (and I think many in rest of India) feel that this is
not the case, I think that the Indian Union should better conduct a
referendum in the Valley and make the results public to find out whether
people really want azadi or not. If they want it, then better give it. If
they don't want it, you can burn declare public holidays commemorating the
same occasion, and can also burn my effigies. I have no problems for that
effect.

The reason why I ask for the referendum is this. If I am true, I know I will
always win no matter how much someone conspires against me. Then why not let
the truth win once again, if you believe (and so many in rest of India
believe) that your side is true. Go ahead, and do it.

And while I have no pain at all with Kashmiri Pandits raising their voice
against the Indian Govt, what I have pain with is that the Pandits feel that
only they are democratic, whereas the 'azadi struggle' is undemocratic.
Infact, Kashmiris are now being painted by the brush of terrorism and being
Pakistanis, whereby it is being stated that Kashmiris want to be Pakistanis.
The fact is that as numerous surveys and interviews of common people bring
out, they want to be independent of both India and Pakistanis. And more
importantly, even in an azad Kashmir, I believe that Pandits deserve to have
a place there. And therefore, I am not in favor of any independent state
till any resolution of the place of Pandits in this new state and the local
society is found.

Regards

Rakesh