[Reader-list] Kashmir - the elephant in the room

[Jamie Dow]

 Interesting piece. One snippet intrigued me:
"few outside the region are even aware that India still has half a
million troops in Kashmir, making it one of the most heavily militarised
corners of the planet."

Is this true? 500,000 troops in Kashmir, just on the Indian side?
If so, it's a huge financial drain for India (and presumably also for
Pakistan).
Can anyone provide any confirmation (or otherwise) of this assertion?

Jamie
____________________________________________
Jamie Dow Research Fellow IDEA CETL Tel: +44 113 343 7887 Email:
J.Dow at leeds.ac.uk Web:
http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/Staff/JD/index.html	

-----Original Message-----
From: reader-list-bounces at sarai.net
[mailto:reader-list-bounces at sarai.net] On Behalf Of Wali Arifi
Sent: 23 January 2009 09:03
To: Sarai
Subject: [Reader-list] Kashmir - the elephant in the room

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5566533.ece

 January 22, 2009
 World Agenda: Kashmir - the elephant in the room In our latest daily
column, the Times' Delhi bureau chief says India must not ignore Kashmir
when searching for explanations for extremism  Jeremy Page

Arrogant, ham-handed, startling, impertinent - these are the sort of
words used here, with reason, to describe David Miliband's comments on
the Mumbai attacks last week.

There is another word, though, that applies equally well: correct.

Of course it was impolitic to contradict Manmohan Singh, the Prime
Minister, by saying that Britain does not believe the Pakistani state
directed the Mumbai attacks.

As for suggesting that the root cause of such attacks is Kashmir, surely
the FCO recalls India's outrage in 1997 when Robin Cook suggested
mediating on that issue?

For the current Foreign Secretary of the former colonial ruler to make
both these points publicly, while on Indian soil, was either
deliberately provocative or incredibly naive.

Mr Miliband also managed to cause offence with his tone and body
language - a schoolboy error in dealing with a notoriously sensitive
partner.

The fact remains, however: he was spot on.

Indian officials admit in private that there is no evidence yet of a
direct link between Mumbai and the Pakistani state, even if they are
sure that it played a role.

More significantly, most regional experts agree with Mr Miliband that
"resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in
the region one of their main calls to arms".

For too long, Kashmir has been the "elephant in the room" in the
international discourse on security in South Asia - and a stain on the
copybook of the world's largest democracy.

In 1948-9, the United Nations passed resolutions calling for a
plebiscite in Kashmir on whether it should join India or Pakistan.

Ever since, India has refused to comply and blocked international
efforts to resolve the issue, over which it has fought two of its three
wars with Pakistan.

Now that both have nuclear weapons, Kashmir is a legitimate concern for
the whole world, yet foreigners who bring it up are invariably shouted
down.

India's media rarely challenges government policy there, while the
foreign media has been understandably focused on Pakistan and
Afghanistan since 9/11.

As a result, few outside the region are even aware that India still has
half a million troops in Kashmir, making it one of the most heavily
militarised corners of the planet.

Or that by official estimates, more than 47,000 people have been killed
there since an uprising against Indian rule began in 1989 (rights groups
put the toll nearer 70,000).

Or that that Kashmir's four million Muslims routinely suffer arbitrary
arrest, torture and extra-judicial execution by security forces,
according to most rights groups.

Last year alone, at least 42 people were killed by security forces in
protests against Indian rule. By comparison, 22 people were killed in
the anti-China riots in Tibet in 2008.

Kashmir's problems do not justify the Mumbai attacks.

But in trying to prevent more attacks in India and elsewhere, it is
ludicrous to continue to ignore Indian policy in the region. The fact is
that Kashmir is the primary motivation for most terrorists in India and
Pakistan. It is also why Pakistan's spies maintain links with such
people.

The real reason India is so upset is that Mr Miliband's words reflect
the thinking of President Obama, who plans to appoint a special envoy on
South Asia.

The idea is for this envoy to take a more holistic approach to the
region, including Kashmir, to address the concerns of all the major
stakeholders.

It is a good idea and Mr Obama and his allies should continue to promote
it, however loudly India complains.
_________________________________________
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/>