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

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear Pawan (and all)

With respect to the points which you have raised, which deserve discussion
across larger communities and certainly in the so-called 'peace process'
which is being continued, I wish to say the following things here.

Firstly, I have never stated that the fight and quest for justice must be
stopped. The biggest mistake any one of us, can ever make, is suffering
injustice without fighting to overcome it and get justice for ourselves.
Therefore, your fight does deserve a mention, provided it is actually
fighting for justice.

Now, coming to the point you have raised regarding exodus of Pandits since
the last 1000 years ago. It is certainly right that forced exodus in any
kind of situations are not right, and if there is anything we can learn from
history, it's that dignity is the most important requirement for any
individual, and every person, even a living creature, has a right to life
with dignity on this earth and this world. However, that dignity does not
come from trampling over the rights of others, but instead comes from
helping others to also live their lives with dignity, and also giving due
recognition to their right.

But from the kind of logic which has been used in support of the Kashmiri
Pandits, I particularly have the notion that such logic has done more harm
than good for the community. I have never said that justice should not be
sought for at all. As I stated in my earlier post to this list, I said that
while justice for all the incidents of the past must be sought, the Pandits,
in a conciliatory measure, can waive away the death sentence, provided those
who committed the violence during the 90's are willing to surrender, lay
down arms, are willing to talk, are willing to fight cases against them, and
most importantly, accept sentences imposed upon them as punishment if they
are found to be guilty. I am not asking anybody to be an 'Angulimala' at
all.

The logic used by Aditya on the other hand, makes it seem that retributive
justice is the way to go according to the Pandits themselves. Even in the
name of justice being offered, in the form of punishments given through the
law, it seems that the Pandits only want death sentence to be offered to
them. From the documentaries I have seen and the way relatives of victims
have behaved in public, it's a fact that the loss of a person brings so much
grief to the family, that he/she is only concerned with getting justice, in
order to get back the dignity to their life, which is what their need is.
They are not much interested with the political games and policies being
toyed around with in the name of the incidents, which led to the loss of
their loved and dear ones, whether be it in riots or pressurizing Pakistan
after the Mumbai attacks.

The way things have been written, a sense of anger which should be directed
at the Indian nation state for not giving proper justice, has been turned
into an anger against a community, which has painted as 'the enemy' of the
Indian nation state. Instead of realizing that being 'nationalistic' and
following 'nationalistic ideals like secularism' has not helped in achieving
your goals of justice, and thereby realizing that instead of nationalism,
problems should be solved from a human angle as well (all politics and
socialism and things like that come from the human angle, for they wouldn't
exist without humans), you have gone on to give articles which give the
perception that Kashmiri Muslims are pro-Pakistani, all separatists are
Pakistan's chamchas, that their community is one of killers and so on. And
then in the same breath, when the comment comes that the high voting
percentages in the Valley are indicative of support to the Indian nation
state, I don't know what to make of all this. After all, how can
pro-Pakistani people suddenly turn their stand to support India when they
all along have been fighting, in your words, for a terrorist movement (in
the garb of 'azadi')?

Yes, the fact is that police cases were not registered for the crimes
committed. Yes, the Indian nation state didn't come to the rescue of the
Pandits when they were suffering, so also along with those Muslims and
people of other communities who were loyal to India. Yes, the Indian nation
state didn't make a concerted effort to provide justice to all those who
suffered. And more importantly, the Indian nation state hasn't tried to
build bridges between the Pandits and the Kashmiri Muslims by providing them
chances to interact with each other, and understand each other's positions.

But then, history always has a context. And that context must be understood
as well. Why did Muslims in the valley ask for an azadi at all, if they were
so 'happy' with the Indian democracy? Because of the political games being
played with the J & K Govt, by the central govt at Delhi, in the name of
protecting 'national interests', we had to come up to such a situation in
the first place, which culminated in the rigged elections of 1987-88. And
yes, violence was wrong, but it happened because of such cases occuring
repeatedly in the name of protecting 'Kashmir'.

Let me ask all here a simple question. At the time of independence,
Hydrebad, Junagadh and Jammu  & Kashmir were incorporated into India, after
these three states didn't initially accept their inclusion into the Indian
Union. If Junagadh could have a plebiscite to ascertain whether the people
there wanted to go with Pakistan or with India, why can't Kashmir and Jammu
also have the same? I am not sure about Hydrebad as well, but that argument
does go along for there as well.

Therefore, for you, it's a view that you were cheated by the Indian Union
which forgot to see that you are nationalistic and secular. For me, they
cheated you because they are cheaters any way. They use nationalism and
secularism only to further their own ends, and to spread their own bigotry
among the public. Wasn't secularism there anyway before it was introduced in
the Indian preamble? And there have been more riots after this inclusion of
the word 'secular' in the Indian preamble of the constitution, than were
they before this word was included, since the inception of republic in
India.

Hence, I dont' say you shouldn't ask for justice. But it's my humble
request, to at least see now the reason that being ardent followers of
nationalism and secularism is not what gets you justice. And hence please
realize that the Indian nation state has failed you (as it repeatedly does
every day all of us, in some way or the other). And more importantly, taking
that into mind, also realize that others are humans, as much as you are, and
have some compassion among you.

Not all Kashmiri Muslims are killers. Not all of them were terrorists or
supported that agitation. May be not all of them want azadi. But what all of
them do want, is the same as what all of you want, which is a right to life
of dignity.

Fight for your cause. Go ahead in that case. But please stop believing that
nationalism is the solution to all your problems, or even the problem of
Kashmir. It has never been, and will never be the solution to India's
problems. It will only compound the problems of the past, and will further
bring many more among us. And secondly, not all of them are enemies, so
please start talking with them. Please interact with them. They did make
mistakes in supporting those who killed you or just remained aloof at that
time (which is a greater mistake), but times change, and one has to go ahead
with life, and if one has to do so, why not be happy and live it?

It's not simple as I have said it. But yes, while seeking justice, is it
really impossible for Pandits to strat talking to Kashmiri Muslims? Is it
impossible to believe that they are human beings first, as much as the
Pandits, or any of us are? Is it impossible to believe that views and
beliefs contrary to those held by majority can also exist in a society? Or
is it impossible to accept the expression of those views in public?

Or is it that for now on, Kashmiri Muslims and Kashmiri Pandits are the
enemies of each other for once and for all times?

Regarding Panun Kashmir, I would just say one thing. I have only heard
Pandits make this claim. First of all, I believe that we outside Kashmir
have no right to decide what is good for them and what is not. Hence, any
choice of Panun Kashmir, or any 'azad' state, must be introduced only after
seeking consent from the people there, either through referendum or
plebiscite, or whatever you and others may wish to call. Just giving a macro
based statement that many people support it is not going to work in a
democratic polity like India.

But yes, if Kashmir in an 'azad' state is going to resemble today's India or
today's Pakistan, God forbid that any 'azadi' ever takes place. Otherwise,
there would be creation of yet another disastrous nation state which would
be totally disastrous for the people there.

Regards

Rakesh