Re-thinking Kashmir

OK that play about the growing corpse was not Waiting for Godot, it was Ionesco`s Amedee. A better description of it :

``A middle-aged husband and wife are shown in a situation which is clearly not taken from real life. They have not left their flat for years. The wife earns her living by operating some sort of telephone switchboard; the husband is writing a play, but has never got beyond the first few lines. In the bedroom is a corpse. It has been there for many years. It may be the corpse of the wife`s lover whom the husband killed when he found them together, but this is by no means certain; it may also have been a burglar, or a stray visitor. But the oddest thing about it is that it keeps growing larger and larger; it is suffering from `geometric progression, the incurable disease of the dead`. And in the course of the play it grows so large that eventually an enormous foot bursts from the bedroom into the living-room, threatening to drive Amédée and his wife out of their home. All this is wildly fantastic, yet it is not altogether unfamiliar, for it is not unlike situations most of us have experienced at one time or another in dreams and nightmares.``

dividing kashmir along the lines of religion will be disastrous. the only muslim majority state of india, kashmir, has seen a mass ethnic cleansing of kashmiri pandits from the valley. militants specifically target hindu religious festivals like amarnath yatra and holy shrines like vaishno devi are on their hit list. i think those who are trying to go around the basic communal nature of violence in the valley are doing just for being politically correct.

the indian state should not yeild to this kind of fanatical ideology. it will not only be a defeat for the secularism that we stand for, it will send a message that the hindus and muslims cannot live with each other. so what are we going to do with muslims in UP,Bihar etc.. will a ``popular movement`` in UP which drives out the muslims from there to the valley be aceptable to people who are advocating the division?

dost-mittar #51
There will always be Kashmiri Muslims in the Indian portion of J& Kashmir, whatever India does, whether a slow process or fast process. Since there will always be Kashmiri Muslims living in Indian J&Kashmir, the communal solution will apply only to the Valley and not to any other part of Kashmir, just like happened at Partition. What good will it do India?

And if Kashmiri Muslims will always live in Indian J& Kashmir, what is the rationale of giving up on any part of it? If Kashmiri Muslims will always live in the valley, why should the Valley Muslims be given a foot in Indian Kashmir after getting their own state - what does India get out if it except yet another revisionist jihadic state on its borders ?

And who is going to enforce the payments of compensation to nonMuslims and who will keep the peace - a US-led international army? Does India really want other countries to set up military base in its strategic locations?

We can finesse it all we want and hide the reality under euphenisms, the basic reality remains obvious - drive out the Hindus and Sikhs, kill a lot of people, declare an Islamic state then look to expand your Islamic frontiers - this is the accepted standard procedure on the subcontinent. We need to take a stand and fight it today, because we have to fight it tomorrow as well and in all the coming years as well.

Re: stuka # 29, dost-mittar # 51

I think your idea is flawed. What would autonomy / handover achieve? Make the goons in charge! They would implement their laws and no one can question them. This is exactly what the goons want their fiefdom.

Stuka you mentioned that Indians are happy with status-quo. I think the ground realities have changed since you left India. A new more confident and somewhat jingoistic India has emerged quite unwilling to compromise. Indians are eager to find a solution to the Kashmir problem but on our terms. This is a sentiment I have noticed through out my travels through the length and breath of this country.


Regards,

Faruk

To resolve the Kashmir issue, as far as my point of view is concerned as a general Pakistani observing this violating situation for decades, Pakistani government needs to look into the issue seriously and wisely.
As for India, Kashmir isnt the only state they are running with the help of military or power, there are tumults and uproars in other bigger states too, but they are facing the situations, resolving them within a system and with a united and agreed manner.
Whereas Pakistan, kinda have been facing and still facing same kinda of situation (e.g. PUNAM) but in such poor manner. We should realize that there is nothing lying in kashmir for us any more if after more than fifty five years we couldnt get anything by war or dialogue or resolutions. Even UN resolutions arent in favour if someone has read them.
There is a lot to discuss, but in short, we need to be in good terms with our neighbour country, we need to be in harmony and peace in order to face the hardships in terms of trade, poverty, cooperation and most of all the debts and to be on war at borders all the time. We need to take rest now and need to see from where we can start a better future.

dost-mittar #51
There will always be Kashmiri Muslims in the Indian portion of J& Kashmir, whatever India does, whether a slow process or fast process. Since there will always be Kashmiri Muslims living in Indian J&Kashmir, the communal solution will apply only to the Valley and not to any other part of Kashmir, just like happened at Partition. What good will it do India?

And if Kashmiri Muslims will always live in Indian J& Kashmir, what is the rationale of giving up on any part of it? If Kashmiri Muslims will always live in Indian J&K, why should the Valley Muslims be given a foot in Indian Kashmir after getting their own state - what does India get out if it except yet another revisionist jihadic state on its borders ?

And who is going to enforce the payments of compensation to nonMuslims and who will keep the peace - a US-led international army? Does India really want other countries to set up military base in its strategic locations?

We can finesse it all we want and hide the reality under euphenisms, the basic reality remains obvious - drive out the Hindus and Sikhs, kill a lot of people, declare an Islamic state then look to expand your Islamic frontiers - this is the accepted standard procedure on the subcontinent. We need to take a stand and fight it today, because we have to fight it tomorrow as well and in all the coming years as well.

Re: sadna # 49

Kashmir problem a drug that the Pakistani establishment has Pakistani’s high on. It makes them hallucinate and prevents them from seeing what’s obvious to the rest of the world. They have to get off this drug to think about the things you are talking about.

Regards,


Faruk

sadna:
Why do we have to equate Kashmir with the rest of India? There have been agreements, promises, covenants made in kashmir which were not made elsewhere. I actually support stuka`s proposal sans the population transfer. My caveat is that it should be done through negotiations and not through a plebscite, so that any negative repercussions fall on the negotiating politicians and not on indian muslims. I would simply suggest the following:
For a period of ten years the valley should be given maximum autonomy and end of all subsidies. If they want to go after that, let them as long as they are prepared to pay full compensation for all non-muslims forced to flee the valley and provide an access corridor through the valley to ladakh and amarnath.

stuka #47
Kashmiri Muslims live all over India, not only in normal course but also as refugees from the situation in J&K. For example, even near my hometown in the south, there is a mosque right on the beach nearby, which hosts a `Baramulla traders`, apart from the row of other handicrafts shops nearby.

For humanitarian and practical reasons, India will always have a number of Kashmiri Muslims who would have full Indian citizenship rights and right to live in India`s portion of J&K. Jammu and Ladakh would always have Muslims, in other words. That situation would correspond to ``you take the land and kick out the Hindus, we are secular so we keep the Hindus and also the Muslims, yet again``

The point is that an incomplete communal solution is useless, a complete communal solution is impossible.

btw, addressing your earlier point
stuka #11
Why do Hoodbhoy and co not make any films on any of these?

Firearms proliferation in Karachi, bustard hunting by Arabs, preaching of extremism in mosques, state of information technology/out-sourcing, mountain tourism, drug trafficking along the Khyber pass, the state of music, drama and cinema, Edhi foundation activities, military land ownership, military`s business empires, world heritage monuments, Pakistan-based terrorists killing voters and sabotaging elections in both J&K and Afghanistan?

Simply existing in a Muslim majority Islamic state is the sole human right of Muslims - this appears to be the Pakistani state and society`s consensus definition of `human rights`.

Which is that famous play in which a corpse in an adjacent room begins to grow bigger and bigger, filling up the living space of the waiting protagonists, threatening to squeeze them out - a couple who are doing nothing but waiting for someone to arrive. Waiting for Godot? That describes Pakistanis Waiting for Kashmir.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sadna:

`you take the land and kick out the Hindus, we are secular so we keep the Hindus and also the Muslims, yet again`.

That is the one solution that is not acceptable at all.

stuka #various
So in this communal solution, are we going to kick out Kashmiri Muslims from other parts of India too? Or is it going to be like `you take the land and kick out the Hindus, we are secular so we keep the Hindus and also the Muslims, yet again`.

The Pakistan modus operandi is getting so standard - first drive out Hindus, then kill a lot of people, then declare a Islamic state, no loss because enough people are left behind for you to work for the NEXT Islamic state. Good modus operandi, succeeded for Pakistan, succeeded for Bangladesh, now you are suggesting we make it work for J&K. What is the next success story - NEastern districts where Muslim Bangladeshis have settled?

It is much better to force these Islamic states to live in peace.

And if we have to fight them perpetually, then might as well keep fighting in J&K itself without conceding ground. Agreeing to yet another communal solution will not end the conflict, any more than conceding Pakistan ended it. The only thing which will happen by conceding yet another communal solution is that the location of the war would shift to Jammu or Ladakh or Gurdaspur or somewhere in the NE.

#39

Thank you. You make good points, more importantly for the right reasons.

stuka:
``Indian Muslims outside Kashmir have never had a stake in Kashmir. It is unfair to hold them liable for what happens in Kashmir.``

...and because it will be unfair (I agree!), it won`t happen! I thought that you were a realistic guy!
And are you saying that it will be alright for the mob violence to kick out the muslims from Jammu and Ladakh, whether they want it or not? How else will you achieve population transfer?

Waisey, I think it is good for Pervez Hoodbhoy to make such a film. To his credit, he does dare to break out of his country`s view on Kashmir. I don`t think someone in Iindia could do that without inviting a major popular or political backlash.