[Reader-list] Are Muslims the sole stakeholders of Kashmir?

[Sanjay Khak]

Are Muslims the sole stakeholders of Kashmir?     Nancy Kaul

  Link - http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1036


 Muslims of the Kashmir Valley have long been portraying themselves as the
sole inhabitants not only of the Valley, but of the entire Jammu and Kashmir
State, including Ladakh. It is almost as if the Hindus of the Kashmir Valley
who were forcibly driven out of their homes two decades ago had never
existed, and as if the Hindus of Jammu and Buddhists of Ladakh also do not
exist.



Such is the stranglehold of Muslims in the State that they have succeeded in
propagating the myth that the only people who live and count in the State of
J&K are Muslims, and they are the sole stakeholders of the place, which is
far from the truth.



And now, with the so-called liberal brigade which includes inter alia some
self-styled and internationally-funded individuals, a far more sinister
design is emerging. In fact, it is giving a helping hand to terrorists and
Islamic Jihadis to slowly seep deeper; this is the success of Islamic
terrorism and its methods of which Jammu & Kashmir is facing a frontal
attack.



Much more is the tragedy emerging out of the so-called dialogues, debates,
discussions and Track II’s, etc., where the sole casualty is the ‘integrity’
and ‘sovereignty’ of India.



The fundamental ethos and civilisational moorings of the nation are being
eroded and undermined by harebrained formulas and lunatic solutions. Many a
times the agenda is pre-decided, as are the final reports and resolutions.
The participants by and large, and the organizers of these dubious seminars,
tend to take a line of allowing terrorists and separatists a free rein and
free speech, which starts in venom-spitting against India and compromise on
the vital and strategic issues of integrity and sovereignty, and ends at
ways and means of Balkanizing the nation.



One such seminar organised jointly on Nov. 7, 2009, jointly by the Centre
for the Study of Developing Societies and the Nehru Memorial Museum &
Library, Teen Murti Bhavan, and conducted by CSDS Faculty member, Madhu
Kishwar. It turned to be an ill-disguised platform for blatant India-bashing
by separatists, terrorists and so-called Indian liberals.



The writer was also invited to speak in her capacity as a known Kashmiri
Internally Displaced Person. Yet in her zeal to appease Muslims,
particularly those belonging to the Valley, Ms Kishwar appeared to be miles
ahead in the quest to dismantle the territorial integrity of the country.



The writer was not allowed to read her paper, and in fact suffered the most
humiliating behaviour at the hands of Kishwar and her fellow traveller, the
eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani.



The organizers need to understand that they cannot force the rest of us to
kow-tow to the Sunni Muslim line in Kashmir. Although the seminar (as
suggested by the invitation) was organized by the CSDS and Nehru Memorial
Museum, the official report of the seminar proceedings and some letters of
‘sought support’ in the great endeavour of Muslim appeasement and
Balkanizing India appeared rather inexplicably on a website called *Manushi*,
which is managed by neither of these two bodies. It is possibly owned
personally by Kishwar, who once edited a magazine by that name, though it
has been defunct for some years now, and even the website appears dated.



Facts are blatantly disfigured in Kishwar’s report, which is an open support
to separatists and the so-called autonomy or self-rule envisaging
politicians who are more or less acting in tandem with the separatists.
Kishwar should realize that by doing this, the horrendous behaviour
particularly of Ram Jethmalani, can neither be forgiven nor forgotten, and
she was an equal partner in the crime.



It was she who had invited the writer to the seminar or so-called dialogue.
The viewpoint of neither the separatists nor the secessionists nor others
can be treated as binding or agreeable to me. If hours and hours had been
allotted to the Hurriyat, People’s Democratic Party and such, why could ten
minutes not be given to the speaker with a different perspective?



During the course of long hourly speeches of Gani Bhat of the Hurriyat,
Mohammed Shafi Uri of the National Conference, and Muzzaffar Beg of the PDP,
I neither objected nor interrupted anyone even though I do not subscribe to
either autonomy, self-rule or separatism and devolution of sovereignty.



Yet one may ask why Mehbooba Mufti was invited to speak at length in the
second session when Muzzaffar Beg had already taken more than enough
potshots at the basis of Indian unity – Article 1 of the Constitution.



An important question that has to be answered by the organizers and those
who not only stopped me from reading my paper but also humiliated and
misbehaved with me, is WHY, after I had read just one page of my prepared
speech, Kishwar announced that I can read no further? Why did Ram Jethmalani
behave in a derogatory and humiliating manner? Where was the necessary
dignity of the organizers when he got up and said he will not allow the
paper to be read and will ask me to leave the place?



Jethmalani, Kishwar, and the others who shouted and did not allow the paper
to be read forgot in their appeasement of Muslims of the Valley that I had
been called by them. Why should a learned lawyer misbehave and gag the voice
of a law-abiding citizen who is internally displaced in her own country
because of the violence and terrorism unleashed in the Valley? His conduct
in fact mauled the freedom of speech and in turn Articles 16, 19 and 21
which are guaranteed under the Constitution of India.



Why should it be taken for granted that only the likes of Hurriyat, PDP and
separatists have a right to speak? Why are the other equal stakeholders in
the valley not entitled to articulate their viewpoint*? Is asking for the
free flow of the Indian Constitution a crime? *



It is rather unfortunate and in fact demeaning of Kishwar to lie in her
report about the seminar. Where were the representatives from Jammu region
and Ladakh? Where were the Buddhists, Dogras, Sikhs, Christians from the
State? What is the motto behind giving incorrect information to Indians by
her? How could they then not allow even ten minutes to listen to the other
viewpoint?



Why in Kishwar’s Final Report is there no mention of the demand put forward
by Ramesh Manvati of Panun Kashmir?



Is it because Kishwar’s personal agenda also seems to further the cause of
the PDP, and Muslims in particular? In this regard it may be pertinent to
mention that Madhu Kishwar has been enjoying the hospitality of PDP now and
again; in fact she visited Rajouri along with Mufti Mohammed Syed in second
half of December 2009.



In a bid to clothe her pre-fabricated design of furthering the Kashmiri
Muslim agenda she has unashamedly and blatantly given an incorrect picture
to the country.



The factual details are not only missing, but also incorrect:-



For instance, the claim that *Swaraj* was Gandhi’s vision is the biggest
untruth for any self-respecting Indian. It was Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak
who envisaged the vision of *Swaraj* and gave the famous slogan: “Swaraj is
my birthright”. Although this was in the context of the British Raj and not
Indians, yet Kishwar in her appeasement of the PDP termed its self-rule
document which envisages devolution of Indian sovereignty on the same level,
and even called it more creative than even the European Union!



This is both flawed and questionable, as EU is a Union of several countries
and nationalities, while India is one country and nationality. Yet Kishwar
has made the very basics of nation-state existence, geo-political, cultural
and civilisational aspects, and thousands of years of history and existence
redundant in her zeal for Muslim appeasement! There are reams and reams of
kudos to the insane ideas which include having two currencies in the State
and joint management of the State.



Apart from an apology for her shoddy behaviour, Kishwar should explain what
all support she was giving to separatists in the 1990s, as Yasin Malik
himself mentioned at Teen Murti that she supported his ideas in 1994, at a
meeting in his house in Srinagar.



Kishwar and her ilk are no better than the separatists, and for all their
so-called liberal tags, a few foreign jaunts and funds are enough to make
them cut at the very roots of the nation’s territorial integrity and
sovereignty. I pray to Ma Durga to stand by truth and let it prevail and Ma
MahaKali to deliver justice.



*Tailpiece: what is RSS up to?*



As I was concluding this piece, a friend sent me an email of a discussion
organised in Delhi on 19 Jan. 2010 to observe the Kashmir Exodus of 19
January 1990, the day loudspeakers from mosques in the Valley blared open
and grim threats to the Hindus: Pandits get out of the Valley, leave your
women behind.



I had received the email information before – it was a discussion organised
by the Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation, and the main speakers
were listed as the new BJP President Nitin Gadkari, former J&K Governor
Jagmohan, and Ladakh Union Territory Front president Thupstan Chhewang,
among others.



Thus it was with a sense of shock that I realized that my informant was
drawing my attention to the fact that the impugned Madhu Kishwar, Editor,
Manushi, was suddenly listed as one of the main speakers at the functions,
sharing equal honours with the new BJP president!



Now, the provincial Gadkari may or may not be familiar with Kishwar and her
professional history, but the Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation is
an RSS think tank, and someone very powerful in the RSS or the BJP must have
been behind her sudden elevation in a place where she has no business to be
at all.



RSS Sarsanghachalak Shri Mohan Rao Bhagwat has more than once categorically
stated the position of the RSS on Jammu & Kashmir, both in Jammu and in New
Delhi. And if the public positions of the Sarsanghachalak can be upturned in
such a daring fashion in the capital itself (powerful BJP leaders visit
Jammu and say concessions ‘must be given’ to Muslims, without telling the
Nation at large and Hindus in particular why), RSS needs to do a serious
audit about the Hindutva commitment of its cadres and the BJP which seeks
its advice and support.



If a foundation dedicated to Syama Prasad Mookerjee, who is widely believed
to have been martyred for the cause of Jammu & Kashmir’s full and final
integration into India, for one constitution and one flag (*ek nishan, ek
pradhan*), can provide a platform for a fellow traveller of terrorists,
secessionists, separatists and outright criminals,  then what is the RSS’
stand?



The issue is too critical to be brushed under the carpet and demands a
clarification and an answer.


*The author is* *convener, **Daughters of Vitasta*