[Reader-list] Kashmiri scessionist movement has pan Islamic roots

[Lalit Ambardar]

Dear Inder,
 
 I am glad that you unlike many others on this forum who continue to wear wool over their eyes & refuse to acknowledge that the Kashmiri secessionist movement is indeed pan Islamism driven & that Kashmiri Hindu Pandits were indeed subjected to a systematic ethnic cleansing in the valley, have at least dared to respond to the ‘post’ even if not in outright agreement.
 
It is appreciable that you at least admit that Kashmiri Hindu Pandits ‘had to leave’ because there was a ‘genuine threat’ to their ‘life’ & ‘dignity’ in the wake of the killing of ‘many innocent’ Kashmiri Hindu Pandits. Just to add to that, it wasn’t mere ‘killings’ but the brutality with which the killings were executed as per a systematically worked out diabolic plan to unleash ethnic cleansing in Kashmir that forced the hapless community to abandon their homes & hearths. This ‘Jagmohan’ factor used by the separatists & their propagandists/sympathisers alike to hide their shame only belittles your concern which I would want to believe is genuine.
 
First thing first- I think it is utterly outrageous to even insinuate that Kashmiri Hindu Pandits are ‘fond’ of speaking about their exodus whenever there is an opportunity. You would agree that as the first victims of jihadi terror since its advent on Indian soil, Kashmiri Pandits can not be deprived of their basic right  to ‘speak’ about their brutal  ‘exodus’ however uncomforting it may sound to the self acclaimed secular liberals.
 Dear, why should you mind even that? After all, you did not mind giving that self-glorified performance to boost the moral of the Kashmiri Muslim ‘stone pelters’ & their sympathisers who had the audacity to rant ‘azadi’/’ ‘nizame Mustafa’ slogans in Kashmir at Jantar Mantra recently. It is unfair on your part to be constantly critical of Kashmiri Pandits rendered refugees in their own country. 
 
As for your comments on the other members on this forum, I am sure they would respond to you appropriately. But personally, I would prefer to avoid any discussion on the statements, even if  provocative in nature, by the members of the minorities who chose to stay back for what ever reasons & I would request not to rake up the issue lest you jeopardise their security.
 
Please do not forget that there is a standing fatwa from the patriarch of ‘azadi- bara- e- Islam’ on Kashmiri Hindu Pandits that they can only return if they are ready to join ‘their’ freedom ‘struggle’. The honourable parliamentarians’ visit to his home might suggest the helplessness of Indian democracy but I will be more concerned about what these parliamentarians speak about the visit on their return. I do concede that the sagging status of the Moolvi moonlighting as a separatist leader as well as the former terror commander who unabashedly continues to take credit for having founded the ‘gun culture’ in the valley will get a boost & so the war for the post of Emir of Kashmir will only intensify & the agony of Kashmiris only gets prolonged.  
 
I can only say that but for the blunders committed by the successive Govts. Kashmir would not have been an issue at all. It is the continued appeasement & the policy to promote dynasties that has prevented integration of Kashmir with the main stream India. The role played by the so called civil society is even worse –its continued pampering of the secessionists has only 
facilitated the growth of rabid pan -Islamic mindset in the valley. Today, ordinary Kashmiri Muslims are being held hostage by none other than their own who are out there in the streets creating mayhem at the behest of proponents of Azadi- bara- e- Islam.
 
Yes, you are right, Kashmiri Hindu Pandits are facing crisis. It is not so simple to be living with the ignominy of being refugees in your own country. You may prefer to ignore it but Kashmiri Hindu Pandits are perusing a political agenda to return to the valley of their ancestors where their safety & dignity are guaranteed under one Indian secular constitution only. ‘Two flags’ & ‘two constitutions’ have failed to stop persecution of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits that began with the arrival of militant Islam in the medieval times in Kashmir.
 
You may have your own reasons to be infatuated with the Kashmiri pan-Islamists who want to resurrect medievalism in Kashmir. Just because you think you can’t fight ‘them’ does not imply that you should be joining them. I would like to make it clear that my love for India & the 
tri- colour is unconditional. I am proud of my Hindu identity & it in no way prevents me from regarding all other religious communities as equal stakeholders in this country.
 
 I fail to understand your confidence in your belief that Kashmiri language, heritage, music, poetry are well preserved in the hands of those who consider heritage (other than Islamic), music &  even poetry against the religion that is sought to be ‘the law’ in Kashmir. I am sure you are aware of the historical distortions that are being invented by the vested interests in Kashmir today.
 
I do not agree with your contention that the present conflict is between the Govt. of India & the ‘people of Kashmir’. No, please do not ‘generalise’. Most Kashmiris would find it offensive to be associated with obscurantisms. You would be wasting your time & energy in propagating the separatist propaganda in seeking the Kashmiri Pandits’ return to connect with the ‘Kashmiri Muslims’. Please correct your perceptions. I have genuine grievances against Kashmiri Muslims in general for they failed to protect a miniscule minority in their neighbourhoods, but there is no hatred as such. I have said it earlier if at all the so called Kashmiriyat exists today it is in the hearts of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits far awy from Kashmir in refugee camps & outside. And I also believe, that status quo will not be everlasting in Kashmir. The process of death & destruction initiated by the ‘sons of the soil’ themselves in the name of religion driven separatism will eventually singe the valley (the sparks are beginning to be seen even now) & that is when the hitherto silent because of  fear & religious blackmail, Kashmiri Muslim masses will be out in the streets to chase the separatists to POK where they actually deserve to be, in the lap of their Pakistani masters. Don’t forget, Kashmiris have done it earlier, when they spurned the two nation theory author-Mr. Jinnah’s moves to seduce them.
Rgds
LA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:08:27 +0530
> From: indersalim at gmail.com
> To: reader-list at sarai.net
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Kashmiri scessionist movement has pan Islamic roots
> 
> Dear Lalit
> I have written it earlier also
> but i repeat, not for you also but many KP brothers who are fond of
> speaking about exodus as and when there is any opportunity.
> 
> well, recently i met a KP friend who was quite upset with Aditya Raj
> Kaul who remained mum during a TV discussion ( some Times channel ) on
> exodus of KPs from valley in 90. It was some Sikh representative,
> Mr.Jagat Singh ( perhaps ) who said that KPs left the valley on their
> own. which was music to Bilal Lone, the other conversant in the room.
> May be Mr. Aditya Raj Koul ji can clarify it in detail. The discussion
> was about the recent threat to Sikh community by some elements who
> wanted them leave the valley. I see little TV myself...so dont know
> the exact thing...
> 
> On the other hand, i maintain the fact that KPs had to leave the
> valley in 1990 because there was a genuine threat to life and dignity,
> given the fact that many innocent KPs were killed. Jagmohan indeed
> provided curfew relaxation to those who wanted to leave, but he is not
> the core player of KP exodus. However, the contradiction remain that
> GOI was knowing it all from word go, and remained silent spectators to
> worsening situation... it is still mystery to me... ( in other words i
> see GOI as a direct cause of KP exodus, not only historically but in
> 1990 as well )
> 
> It is the same Aditya who said Geelani hoon hia hia, atJantar Mantar
> recently, ( Down with Geelaii dog ) which i found utterly
> unparliamentary since i have never heard SAS Geelani saying such
> things openly to KPs ( this i am saying after i have deep problems
> with his only religious political card for Kashmir conflict ) It is
> the same SAS Geelani who is refusing indian Home Minister to meet. I
> wrote earlier also that Chidambaram would go to Kashmir and knock his
> door for a meeting for peace...Where does RIK people stand,
> politically...
> 
> But Geelani sahib is not the only one who represents Kashmir conflict
> at the core. there are others, and there are people in general who
> represent themselves now... see how SAS Geelani's call for hartal was
> rejected recently..... it is not easy for GOI to cut a deal with
> Huriyat even... so where do KPs hard core anti KM politics stand....
> 
> Well, KPs right now facing cultural identity crises at the moment...
> They are rapidly realizing that there will no Kashmiiri seapking boy
> or girl after one or two decades down the line. If there will be
> anybody able to recite Lad Ded or Krishan joo razdan, it will be KM
> from valley...
> 
> so what use to unfurl Tricolour in front of people protesting about
> the recent killings at Jantar Mantar.
> The best thing KPs can do is to reconnect themselves with KM's in the
> valley and restore cultural links... the situation is quite different
> from 1990, things can change if KP love their language, heritage,
> music, poetry... sorry not this Nationalism.. which is of no use in
> deeper sense.... believe me...
> 
> that is the only real thing i feel, if KP begin with anything positive.....
> that way they can dream to return back, even...
> 
> seemingly the conflict is between Govt of India and the people of
> kashmir, so KP ought to give time to the most vital thing... the real
> kashmir is also about its ancient echos, not Hindu religous identity
> alone... that too will be political.. but we need guts
> 
> 
> I know you will point out the fact that KPs too are kashmirs.
> but i want to know how, not only in the present, but after2 or three decades...
> 
> with love
> is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Lalit Ambardar
> <lalitambardar at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > My apologies.There is a minor correction in the subject line ,hence this repeated mail.
> >
> > Rgds all
> >
> > LA
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The issue of ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits at the hands of Kashmiri jihadis is usually ignored.But now,the hesitation to admit  'pan Islamic fervour' being the sole inspiration for the on going Kashmiri scessionist movement seems to be fading away. As the discourse on Kashmir takes a new course, the 'ambuiguity' is being replaced by 'positions'.Here is how VIr Sanghvi takes his position:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times
> >
> > New Delhi, September 18, 2010
> >                                               Our secularism will withstand any opposition
> > I don’t know about you but I feel a deep weariness and a mounting frustration when I see the position of Kashmiri separatists described again and again in the media and in the foreign press in particular.
> > By now, most Indians know the separatist position by heart: the accession of Kashmir in 1947 was dubious, for many years Kashmiri elections were rigged, Kashmir is a Muslim majority state in Hindu India, the army subjects the Valley to a reign of terror etc.
> > Integral to this position is a caricature of how Indians feel about Kashmir. We are, apparently, a Hindu-majority State that is determined to hang on by force to Kashmir.
> > Over the last few years, this frequently articulated position has begun to annoy me not just because it’s untrue but because it describes an India that I do not recognise and ascribe views to Indians that I know we do not hold.
> > In my experience, the attitude of Indians towards Kashmir is not guided by Hindu chauvinism or Indian imperialism. In fact, the overwhelming emotion when it comes to our understanding of Kashmir is one of bewilderment. The vast majority of Indians are bewildered by the Kashmir problem and the demands of Kashmiri militants. Why do the Kashmiris hate us so much? And what is it that they actually want?
> > There is one part of the separatist position that we understand. We recognise that it must be hell to live with a constant military presence in a state where citizens are subject to random police checks and where curfew is a regular occurrence. Most of us are intensely embarrassed by the stories of human rights abuses — some of which must surely be true.
> > But equally, most of us would argue that the military presence is a response to a violent insurrection against the Indian State. Till 1989, Kashmir did not have such a strong military presence. The army went in only after the violence increased, after key leaders were assassinated, after kidnappings became a regular occurrence, and after jihadis thronged to Kashmir from across the border.
> > Violence begets violence. If you declare war on the Indian State, the State is not going to roll over and let you tickle its stomach. It is obliged to fight back and to assert both its authority and the rule of law.
> > Most Indians would love to see the army withdrawn from Kashmir. Indian soldiers have no particular desire to risk their lives in Kashmir. But each time we talk of reducing the army presence or of amending the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), the violence actually seems to increase. There is no evidence that a reduction in the military presence will be greeted by a similar reduction in the level of militant violence.
> > Besides, even if the army were withdrawn and there was no state violence in Kashmir, would the separatists change their stance? Would they say that they now accepted Indian sovereignty? I don’t think so. The army presence is unfortunate. But it is not the core issue.
> > From our perspective, the secessionist sentiment in Kashmir is bewildering because (except for the army presence) the average Kashmiri has the same deal as every other Indian except perhaps that the Indian State spends more money on him. Per capita expenditure on each Kashmiri is vastly greater than Delhi’s per capita expenditure on, say, the average Bihari.
> > Further, Kashmiris have the same democratic rights as other Indians. Even if you accept that elections were rigged in the past, that has not been true for several years. The People’s Democratic Party (PDP)-government was legitimately elected and so is the current National Conference regime. Moreover, Kashmiris have many rights (through Article 370) that Indians who reside in other parts of the country do not have.
> > We accept that because of the circumstances of Kashmir’s accession, there may have been separatist sentiment in the years following 1947. Certainly, we have faced secessionist movements in many parts of India — Tamil Nadu, Nagaland, Punjab, etc — but in every case we have managed to fulfil the aspirations of the people and quell the separatist sentiment. But what is it about Kashmir that despite our best efforts, this generation of Kashmiris, born many years after 1947, continues to demand secession?
> > More mystifying for us is that we don’t know what the Kashmiris want. Who in his right mind would want union with today’s troubled Pakistan? Who wouldn’t prefer India’s success story to the Pakistani saga of national collapse?
> > Nor does Pakistan have any record of treating its non-Punjabi minorities well. Bangladesh seceded after the Pakistani army launched a genocide. The Baluchs were massacred by the same army. And PoK is hardly a shining advertisement for the virtues of Pakistani citizenship.
> > Some Kashmiris say they want independence from both India and Pakistan. But it is staggeringly obvious that an independent state of Kashmir, with no industry to speak of, would last for 15 minutes without subsidies from India or Pakistan. Worse still, such a state would probably be run according to strict Shariat law, denying rights to women and offering safe haven to the world’s jihadis. You would have to be very naive to believe that America or any great power would support the creation of such a state.
> > So, why then are Kashmiris destroying their future in a mad and pointless insurrection? I don’t think most Indians know the answer but we suspect that it might have to do with religion. In today’s secular India, religion is no longer a crucial determinant of political behaviour. We find the notion of a state founded only on religious identity old-fashioned and bizarre.
> > But clearly, religion matters more to the separatists than anything else. The state has three parts, all of which get the same deal from the Centre. But it is only in the Valley, which is nearly all Muslim (after the ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pandits) that secession finds many takers. This single-minded pursuit of an Islamic future sets Kashmiri separatists apart from Indian Muslims who have accepted a secular polity and feel no kinship with their Kashmiri brethren’s political demands.
> > But because Kashmiri secessionism flows from an Islamist ideology, it poses special problems for India. I suspect that many of us are now so fed up that we would be relieved to be rid of the Valley but for our fears for the future of Indian secularism. At some level, we wonder if this would not be a second Partition and we are afraid of what Kashmir’s secession would mean for India’s thriving Muslim minority.
> > Ironically, it is this sentiment based on nothing more than a desire to protect Indian secularism that allows the separatists to tell the world that India is full of chauvinist Hindus who send their armies to attack Kashmiri Muslims. It is an old lie. It is a variation of the same untruth that the Muslim League spread in the run-up to Partition. Indian secularism survived that lie. And no matter how much the Kashmiri separatists may misrepresent our position now, both India and its secularism will triumph again.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > 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/>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> http://indersalim.livejournal.com
> _________________________________________
> 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/>