Re-thinking Kashmir

#99 by rsridhar on July 7, 2004 8:25pm PT
I saw Lakshya recently- and came out as a very ``sober``, ``matter of fact`` depiction of a small story about the lives of Indian soldiers who were caught in this stupid Kargil war. This question- Why are they doing this?- was clearly raised by the characters without jingoism. It clearly showed the Indian resolve of upholding to their democratic and secular way of life at all costs and that they would do anything to protect it from these fascist and Jehadist dictators. The end result of this tragedy was clear for all of us to see- I hope to see such a sober expose of Kargil from the Pakistani side. Why do not we have a film on the wives and kids of those soldiers of Pakistan Rifles who could not even get a decent burial from their family members because their very identity was denied by the PAki government??

#102 by Urstruly

As I said, whine all you want, for that`s all you can do.

Yay, Urstruly!!
Guns are also human beings!!!

You still have to admit that the government in India is predominantly hindu. Hey I`ve done my research. India is also a country with one major religon even though it claims to be secular. My point in my last few post was that plebiscite that is free and fair to all is the only feasable solution. I`m not biased for one side or the other. Kashmir needs independence, whcih it deserves like anyother country. Just like India needed independence from the British. Just like the US needed independence from the British.

With 77% majority of Muslims in Indian Oppressed Kashmir, Muslims can even change the constitution because that is well over 2/3rd of the population. No wonder Indians need 700,000 guns to stiffle their voice.

aslam644:
I have watched numerous reports on TV from both sides of Kashmir. While people on the Indian side speak urdu in a distinct kashmiri accent, those in POK speak with a thick potohari accent. No one in POK seems to speak kashmiri dialect. Also, there were a large number of hindus and sikhs in that part of kashmir, who have all somehow disappeared. This is what I meant by changing the demographics.

While there are no hard statistics, here is an excerpt from a human rights sight:

``Main languages in Pakistani occupied territories of Kashmir are Urdu, Pahari, Hindko, Shina, Balti and Broshali. The sparsely inhabited northern and western region of Ladakh and beyond is home to Buddhist Mongoloid peoples speaking Balti and Ladakhi. The religious composition of the State`s population is 77% Muslim, 20% Hindus and 3% Buddhists, Sikhs and Christians. The populations of Pakistani occupied territories of Kashmir (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan) are 100% Muslim.``
[url: http://www.kashmir-hr.net/mainfile.php/geography/15/]

rsridhar:
``You are an idiot to suggest that India should hold a referendum on Kashmir.``

Thanks for the accolade. But you might have looked at my original post before bestowing the exalted title on me. Here is what I said (post#51):
``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,``

#74 by rahulmal on July 7, 2004 1:56am PT
Listen, I am not talkng about Kashmir as a territorial dispute- I am talking about the ``core`` issues behind this which pertains to keeping the question of TNT open for the IM.
I am stating the fact that IM by their very act of NOT migrating to the fabled land have de-facto rejected TNT- with a few exceptions especially those sponsored by the Drug money from the ISI.
TNT is not an issue that can be opened before the IM now in circa 2004 and that is why Kashmir is irrelevant. TNT was only a historical issue confronting a generation of IM way back in the dark ages of 1947- and those who were for the TNT acted politically in its favour and also migrated to their fabled land which we now know as the land of Jehadis.
So, this question of whether IM accept the raising of TNT by these Pakis in 2004 is not relevant. So who raises the question of unfinsihed business of TNT? this is raised ONLY by these Pakis high on their PAk Studies propoganda or by the PAki Establishment which is run by Islamists, Feudals and the Army which is seething inside with the humiliation of past wars. So, when this character called Barachuta is asked to lay off and act like a normal human being I am just stating the fact that IM are by and large opponents of TNT and hence do not trust the Paki Muslims in raising issues which do not affect them. The IM does not trust them since they know that the very fact that they stand to gain more in a Democratic and Secular country of India and their progress is actually a refutation of the the foundations of the Pakistan which predicts hell for the IM- and hence they actively try to create all sorts of hell for the IM by sending their Jehadis to Indian soil or by internationalizing the Communal Issue by talking about the ``unfinished`` business of TNT in the context of Kashmir.
I hope my advise to this character- ``Lay Off!`` is clear now.

re:#86 by americanFOB
``By lumping different ethnicities together under the reign of the hindu government is a bad idea to begin with.``
If India were ruled by a ``hindu government``, as u put it, Indians would not have kicked out a right wing govt and elected a sikh as the PM. BTW, India`s President is a muslim.
Where have u been all this time? Jerking off in some corner of USA? Or is it India?
Sridhar

#80 by americanFOB
``Back in the real South Asia, I don`t think the dictionary can define the terms free, fair, or justice in good ole South Asia``
Who the fukc are u to judge that? Have u seen any elections in India?
Chowk is now-a-days getting infested with morons.
Sridhar

re:#77 by dost-mittar
You are an idiot to suggest that India should hold a referendum on Kashmir. What next? Should we let the Dravidians (some of them at least) decide if Tamil Nadu stays in India or not. Believe me, there are a large number of sympathisers in TN for such a cause. Only, they do not see any political future in it. A referendum on Kashmir will have a cascading effect. May be, India should hold a plebescite in the Northeastern states also. After all, a lot of people in that part of the country do not consider themselves Indians anyway.
I think people like u need to chill off.
BTW, if u have not watched the movie Lakshya, watch it. YOu will learn why India can never be a friend of Pak as long as a military dictator rules that benighted nation.
Sridhar

dost-mittar#77

``We have not allowed other Indians to buy property or settle in J&K, unlike Pakistanis who have reduced local Kashmiris into a minority in POK. If we were not going to be moral, we should have done what Pakistan had done in POK and China had done in Tibet to change the demographics of the state to make it more favourable to us.``

dm I don`t know what is the source of your information,you didn’t back it up with any evidence. The fact is that majority of young men from Azad Kashmir have left in search of jobs, to as far as Karachi and uk. It is probably the only region in south Asia where small farm steads are run by women and old men. Who would in they right mind would want to settle in a region, where there is hardly any industry, agriculture is poor due to mountainous terrain of the region, there is constant threat of shelling from across the LOC .

PS if you have any evidence to back your claim please print it.

I quoted this book on other threads - this portion is relevant here(pg53-54 of Islamist Networks, Mariam Al Zahab and Olivier Roy):

``..There were clear links between ISI and certain extremist movements active on the domestic front and in Kashmir. It was with the aid of ISI that Dawat wal Irshad created Lashkar-i-Taiba in 1990. The ISI changed tactics in Kashmir in 1993 following the attack on a group of Western tourists in Srinagar in 1992; from this date onwards the Pakistan secret services no longer operated openly in Kashmir but cloaked their activities behind intermediaries in what amounted to nothing less than a subcontracting and privatisation of the jihad. They also halted financial support for movements aimed at the independence of Kashmir and only helped those that favored its annexation to Pakistan. This meant that the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front lost much of its influence to the advantage of the Hizb ul-Mujahidin, who was active on the ground and linked to Jamaat-i-Islami. This faction in turn was supplanted by more radical movements at the instigation of Pakistani authorities. Indeed after the destruction of Babri mosque at Ayodhya in December 1992 the Pakistani secret services also aimed to profit from the radicalisation of Indian Muslims by recruiting motivated youths and training them, in Kashmir among other places, so that they would be able to attack Hindus throughout India. Finally, the ISI wanted movements active in Kashmir to attack the Hindus of Jammu and the Buddhists of Ladakh and so frighten them into leaving Kashmir. The Hizb ul-Mujahidin was reluctant to do this, since it wished to restrict its operations to Kashmir, but other movements, such as the Harkat ul-Mujahidin and the Lashkar-i-Taiba, were prepared to extend their activities beyond Kashmir and therefore became, after 1994, the groups favored by the ISI. General Pervez Musharraf, then chief of staff, called on the Lashkar-i-Taiba to reinforce his offensive in Kashmir in the spring of 1999 in the Kargil sector..``

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

urstruely

watch out!
Marhattas are invading kashmir riding the 3-tier sleepr coaches on Mumbai-Jammu-Tavi Express.

http://www.rajaranitravels.com/dostekashmir.htm

they even have a tour named LOC (those banias, they make money from anything)

http://www.rajaranitravels.com/kashmir_loc.htm

Faruk#90:
Bihar is definitely more diseased, yet it is a disease of another kind, which will hopefully be curable through normal processes. I agree that things have improved in Kashmir and let`s give the credit where it is due - to Vajpayee who staged the first-ever free and fair elections in Kashmir despite very difficult circumstances.
I think people did not notice that I had proposed giving Kashmiris a ten-year period of autonomy in which to decide if they want to be with India. As I had indicated in an earlier article (Adam Smith`s Invisible Hand and Kashmir), the valley`s economy is now more integrated with India`s than ever. If they are allowed peace with dignity for a period of time, they might decide to stick with India if rationality prevails over religious solidarity. They have everything to lose and nothing to gain by either independence or joining Pakistan.
But if the choice is between living with a chronic illness and radical surgery, I`ll go for the latter.

dost-mittar #85
Thanks but dunno about being less communal-minded! I view it as a long term systemic issue for India, which can not be isolated from the systemic issues in Pakistan(and increasingly Bangladesh). Building fences can not accomplish isolation for India. Pluralist Indians have to address these systemic issues otherwise the exclusivists will. At the same time, Indians need to seriously discuss the things that still remain to be done by the Indian side to make life in J&K less militarized and brutalized.