Kashmir:
Terrorism Or
Freedom Movement?
By Akhila Raman
22 March, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Despite
recent welcome thaw in Indo-Pak relations, Kashmir is continuing to
bleed. This article argues that the massive bloodshed continuing in
Kashmir is not merely a result of cross-border terrorism as the Indian
State would like us to believe, but that there is also a genuine freedom
struggle going on against the repressive Indian State by the Kashmiris
who are alienated equally with India, Pakistan and the militants and
whose grievances have their historical roots in the events of 1947.
"I cannot drink water
It is mingled with the blood of young men who have died up in the mountains.
I cannot look at the sky; It is no longer blue; but painted red.
I cannot listen to the roar of the gushing stream
It reminds me of a wailing mother next to the bullet-ridden body of
her only son.
I cannot listen to the thunder of the clouds It reminds me of a bomb
blast.
I feel the green of my garden has faded Perhaps it too mourns.
I feel the sparrow and cuckoo are silent Perhaps they too are sad."
? A Kashmiri Poet[1]
Manmohan Singh and Pervez Musharraf have extended hands of friendship,
smiled, rubbed noses and posed for the media. There have been new buses
and trains to Pakistan from India and vice versa amidst few blasts.
A nuclear accident risk reduction agreement has been signed. Some analysts
in India have been upbeat that Kashmir issue would soon simmer down
once India and Pakistan reach an agreement. After all, wasn't it only
an issue of disgruntled Pakistan which was stoking cross-border terrorism
in Kashmir and hiring mercenaries to go and fight the Indians?[2] Or
is there more to it than meets the eye?
Kashmir is bleeding as we
speak and the daily casualty rate is much higher than in Palestine.
The once serene and lovely Kashmir Valley with its gorgeous mountains
and rivers, which inspired generations of poets to eulogize its beauty,
has now become a Valley of Blood. Over 40,000 people have been killed
in Kashmir by both the militants and the Indian security forces since
the 1989 insurgency, according to conservative official reports[3];
the unofficial estimate is twice that number; Half of them innocent
civilians- men, women and children.
A young Kashmiri woman I
met in Srinagar made a sharp remark which hit me hard: "We look
upon your Indian State exactly as you Indians used to regard British
Raj before 1947: as Imperialist Occupiers." The heavy Indian military
presence around every city block was chilling. She narrated in chilling
detail the humiliations Kashmiris had to endure on a daily basis from
the Indian presence: arbitrary cordone and arrests, torture, rape, custodial
and "encounter killings". A young Kashmiri man who had been
maimed in custodial torture loomed around the corner. The recent "encounter
killing" by Indian forces, of Abdul Rehman Paddar, a civilian carpenter,
whose body was exhumed later in response to protest demonstrations by
locals and shown to be a civilian by DNA tests is another case in point[4].
No wonder there is little love for the Indian State in the hearts of
many Kashmiris.
Kashmiri activists claim
that India and Pakistan have historically treated Kashmir conflict as
a mere land dispute completely ignoring their legitimate grievances.
Ever since May 1998 nuclear tests by both countries, Kashmir has become
a nuclear flashpoint besides bleeding the economy of the two impoverished
countries. Pakistan for its part, claims that it is merely giving ?moral
and diplomatic? support for an indigenous freedom struggle in Kashmir
despite the fact that Pakistan-backed militants have killed numerous
kashmiri civilians. The Indian State continues to insist that all would
be well in Kashmir but for Pakistan?s cross-border terrorism and the
mainstream Indian opinion continues to be along these lines which indirectly
sanctions the Indian State?s hardline repressive rule in Kashmir which
has ravaged the lives of millions of people. Who is right and how did
we get here and how can we begin to understand this tragedy amidst the
nationalistic rhetoric on either side?
Genesis:
The genesis of this bloody
dispute dates back to the events of 1947 when India and Pakistan became
independent from British Rule. The State of Jammu and Kashmir(J&K)
[5] was ruled by a much-hated tyrant Hari Singh who was oppressive against
the majority Muslim population, whose plight was succinctly summarized
in a couplet by the famous Kashmiri poet Mohammed Iqbal:
In the bitter chill of
winter shivers his naked body
Whose skill wraps the rich in royal shawls
Kashmiris had begun a liberation movement in 1931 under the leadership
of the charismatic leader Sher-i-Kashmir (Lion of Kashmir) Sheikh Abdullah
which marked the beginning of a strong Kashmiri Nationalism. The vacillating
Hari Singh was compelled to accede to India under threat of invasion
from Pathan tribesmen backed by Pakistan. In theory, the Rulers of the
Princely States were allowed to accede their States to either India
or Pakistan, irrespective of the wishes of their people; But as a practical
matter, they were encouraged to accede to the geographically contiguous
Dominion, taking into account the wishes of their people and in cases
where a dispute arose, it was decided to settle the question of accession
by a plebiscite, a scheme proposed and accepted by India [6]. Being
a Muslim majority State and contiguous to Pakistan, Kashmir was expected
to accede to Pakistan; since the Hindu Ruler acceded instead to India,
a dispute arose in the case of Kashmir.
The Promise
Jawaharlal Nehru, the first
Indian Prime Minister hailed from a Kashmiri Hindu(Pandit) family whose
ancestors had lived in the lush-green Kashmir Valley(Vale) and hence
had a great deal of emotional attachment towards the Vale as can be
inferred from the beautiful poems he had written comparing the Vale
to a beautiful woman. Besides, he was a great friend of Sheikh Abdullah
to the extent that when the Lion of Kashmir was arrested by Hari Singh
for his Quit Kashmir movement in 1946, Jawaharlal had rushed to his
rescue braving imprisonment.
Following the accession of
Kashmir to India, Nehru promised the Kashmiri people in a famous speech
at Lal Chowk in Srinagar that their wishes would be consulted in a plebiscite
or referendum regarding the future of J&K. Naturally he was confident
that the popular leader Sheikh Abdullah would be helpful in convincing
his people to choose India in a plebiscite to be held in future and
thus his beloved Vale would remain the Jewel in the Indian Crown. He
would repeat this promise time and again in various speeches from 1947-1951
and the 1948 Indian White Paper clearly records that the accession of
Kashmir to India is provisional until such time as the will of the people(self-determination)
of the State could be ascertained by a plebiscite[7]. Some of the aging
locals i met in Kashmir still remember the promise of plebiscite given
by Jawaharlal Nehru in an emotional speech at Lal Chowk Grounds in Srinagar
more than half a century ago.
The strongly nationalistic
Kashmiris were fearful of joining India given the communal holocaust
raging elsewhere in India during the Partition. This is clearly articulated
in a famous speech by Sheikh Abdullah on 22 Oct, 1947 where he explains
the apprehension of the Kashmiri Muslims in joining India, given the
massacre of muslims in Kapurthala and elsewhere in India. However, Abdullah
would consent to provisional accession to India on 27th October clearly
stating that it was an ad-hoc accession ultimately to be decided by
a plebiscite[8]. Throughout the next few decades, he would continue
to oscillate between a pro-India position and demand for self-determination,
constantly torn between his friendship with Nehru and promise to his
people.
The Plebiscite Conundrum
Following the first Kashmir
War in 1947-48, India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire and did sign
the 1948 and 1949 UNCIP resolutions agreeing to a plebiscite to be carried
out in 3 stages ? Ceasefire; Truce Agreement followed by a Truce Stage;
Plebiscite Stage. However, a plebiscite was never carried out due to
differences in interpretation of the resolutions, some of them being-
Procedure for and extent of demilitarization; Whether actual withdrawal
of Pakistan?s troops is to be done before or after the Truce Agreement[9].
This is the origin of the famous Indian accusation, ?Pakistan did not
withdraw the troops first?. Further, India would resist plebiscite efforts
from 1954 citing Cold War alliances between Pakistan and the US. Both
India and Pakistan criticize each other for the failure till date. Who
was the real culprit? Whoever it was, Kashmiris would consider this
as a breach of promise by India and denial of self-determination.
Elections: Substitute
for Plebiscite?
The Indian State continues
to argue that elections held in J&K since 1951 are effectively a
substitute for a plebiscite- that people have come out and voted and
indicated acceptance of the Indian Rule. However, Kashmiris reject this
argument saying that they were merely voting to elect leaders for local
day to day governance, that the larger question of self-determination
has been denied and that in any case the elections have been rigged
since 1951 and that the Center was effectively installing local puppets
in the State and ruling indirectly.
The fact that every single
Assembly election in J&K since 1951 till date has been rigged(with
the possible exceptions of 1977 and 2002 which were relatively free
and fair. Even they have been marred by allegations of rigging and coercion)
has been meticulously documented by reputed Kashmiri activists like
Prem Nath Bazaz[10]. The election farce has been captured succinctly
by none other than B.K. Nehru, who was Governor of Kashmir from 1981
to 1984, in his memoirs published in 1997.
?From 1953 to 1975, Chief
Ministers of that State [of J&K] had been nominees of Delhi. Their
appointment to that post was legitimised by the holding of farcical
and totally rigged elections in which the Congress party led by Delhi's
nominee was elected by huge majorities."
[Curiously enough, this reminds
one of similar tactics of Indirect Rule in foreign lands by installing
local puppets, very often used by the world?s present Superpower] Kashmir
State?s Rulers also have trampled people?s democratic rights by participating
in rigged elections and becoming effectively puppets of New Delhi and
colluding in erosion of autonomy promised under Article 370.
Article 370: Autonomy
or Erosion of Rights?
In 1949, the Indian Constituent
Assembly adopted Article 370 of the Constitution, ensuring a special
status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir with Indian jurisdiction
in Kashmir limited to the three areas namely defence, foreign affairs
and communications. This was confirmed by Abdullah in 1952 Delhi Agreement
and the State was allowed to have its own flag.
Much has been made out of
this allegedly special status for J&K with the Hindu Right demanding
abrogation of Article 370. In reality, Article 370 which was envisioned
as a temporary measure till self-determination, has been seriously eroded
with the collusion of local puppet Ministers installed in rigged elections,
by extending various articles like 356 and 357 to the State, by virtue
of which the Centre can assume the government of the State and exercise
its legislative powers. Today, Kashmiris are worse off than people in
other States in many respects[11]- having been denied self-determination,
Article 370 eroded and repressive acts such as Armed Forces Special
Powers Act which lead to arbitrary arrests, torture and killing of thousands
of innocent civilians.
Such trampling of democratic
rights planted the seeds of a second wave of Kashmiri Nationalism ?
Jammu and Kashmir National Liberation Front (NLF) was founded by Amanulla
Khan and Maqbool Butt in the late sixties, which would later become
JKLF and would play a major role in the 1989 insurgency.
1989: Popular Insurgency
or Terrorist movement?
With the rising discontent
against the Indian Rule ? long promised and denied self-determination,
erosion of autonomy, consistently rigged elections and lack of employment
opportunities ? the 1987 rigged election was a watershed event in the
Kashmiri politics. The Muslim United Front(MUF) candidate Mohammad Yousuf
Shah was imprisoned though he was on the lead and he would later become
Syed Salahuddin, chief of militant outfit Hizb-ul-Mujahedin (Hizb).
His election aides (known as the HAJY group) - Abdul Hamid Shaikh, Ashfaq
Majid Wani, Javed Ahmed Mir and Mohammed Yasin Malik - became disenchanted
with the electoral farce and joined the JKLF.
Thousands of young disaffected
Kashmiris in the Valley were recruited by the JKLF and a full-fledged
Freedom Movement against the Indian Rule began in 1989. The insurgency
was not only militant but also popular - Hundreds of thousands of unarmed
people marched on the streets of Srinagar between January and May 1990
demanding a plebiscite. This popular insurgency was brutally handled
by the hardline Governor Jagmohan by firing indiscriminately at unarmed
demonstrators. An officially estimated 10,000 desperate Kashmiri youth
crossed over to Pakistan for training and procurement of arms.[12]
What was Pakistan's
Role?
Pakistan has long held the
resentment that Kashmir, which rightfully belonged to it as a Muslim
majority State, was snatched from right under its nose by a clever India.
Hence Pakistan has invaded Kashmir/India and gone to war four times
over Kashmir in 1947, 1965(Operation Gibraltar), 1971 and 1999(Kargil).
Pakistan had hoped that Kashmiris would rise against the Indian Rule
in 1965 following Operation Gibraltar, but that did not happen. Thus,
when a full-blown indigenous insurgency erupted in 1989, Pakistan was
only too happy to take advantage of the golden opportunity and would
fuel the insurgency enormously by supplying arms and training Kashmiri
and foreign militants[13].
The pro-independence JKLF
had a secular agenda and this was not to be tolerated. After all, Pakistan
has not been too keen on the independence option and would love to have
Kashmir to be part of Pakistan and thus backed the Hizb which favoured
accession to Pakistan and played a role in decimating the JKLF by cutting
off financing and in some instances provided intelligence to India against
JKLF(!) . JKLF eventually declared a ceasefire in 1994 and remains a
political group. Militant groups with Islamic agenda would proliferate
through the nineties and have eventually hijacked the indigenous Kashmiri
movement. Today, roughly the indigenous Kashmiri fighters account for
only one-third of the total number of militants[14].
The Human Toll:
As mentioned earlier, the
human toll has been of horrendous proportions. According to official
handouts [PTI release, 13 September 1998] [15] -which tend to be conservative
in the number of civilians killed by the security forces and mostly
exclude thousands of custodial killings - 2477 civilians had been killed
by Indian security forces between 1990-98; 6673 civilians and 1593 security
personnel had been killed by the militants including 982 Hindus and
Sikhs [16]. Number of people missing since 1990 runs over 3000, according
to J&K Govt?s official release. The Kashmiri Pandits have borne
the brunt of this bloody conflict as well- they were forced to quit
the Valley in a massive exodus in 1990 and many of them still languish
in the refugee camps in Jammu and Delhi.
As of June 1999, an estimated
500,000 army troops and other federal security forces were deployed
in the Valley, including those positioned along the Line of Control
(LoC) [17]; There is roughly one soldier for every 10 Kashmiris and
the people suffer from the brutality of the Indian occupation on a daily
basis ? arbitrary arrests, torture, rape, custodial and ?encounter?
killings, exacerbated by the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and Disturbed
Areas Act with draconian powers and thousands of dreaded renegade militants
used by India? the total alienation and hatred of the population is
best summed up by the graffiti on the walls of Srinagar alleys ? ?Indian
Dogs Go Home?.
This is not to suggest that
militants have been angelic. They have committed similar human right
violations and killings as well[18] and innocent civilians are caught
in the cross-fire between the militants and Indian security forces.
However, there is an important difference between Militant and State
Violence: the latter is an order of magnitude more repressive than the
former for an equal number of killings, because the hapless people have
no one to run to.
Is the Kashmiri Movement
communal?
The Kashmiri Freedom movement
is often portrayed as a communal movement where Kashmiri Muslims are
pitted against the Hindus, but this is far from true. There is a rich
tradition of Kashmiriyat - a composite cultural identity with the glorious
traditions of communal amity, tolerance and compassion - in the Valley
dating back several centuries.
In fact, when communal holocaust
had been raging in Jammu, Kapurthala and elsewhere in India in 1947,
Kashmir Valley was quiet and 5% Pandit minority totally safe. In 1990,
when Pandits felt insecure given the killings of innocent community
members, secular JKLF tried to explain that the killings of prominent
Pandits were not communal but merely for political reasons like media
bias and sentencing of Maqbool Butt. Kashmiris came out in large numbers
and demonstrated in support of their Pandit brethren as they still do
every time innocent Hindus are killed, as witnessed in the 2003 massacre
at Nadimarg[19]. There have been instances of Muslims helping build
temples for Hindus- an example being the village of Ichhigam in Budgam.
What is clear is that Kashmiri
civilians are not communal by and large and Kashmiriyat continues to
flourish. What is not clear is: who are these communal forces which
target minority Hindus periodically? It could be jihadi militants with
an Islamic agenda; It could be Indian sponsored renegades to communalize
the conflict. Opinion remains divided. Only an independent investigation
by an impartial agency can reveal the true identity of these killers.
Kashmiris have repeatedly demanded inquiry into these killings by unidentified
gunmen and it continues to be ignored.
Is there a solution?
India continues to insist
that the accession of Kashmir to India is final and complete; Till recently,
Pakistan had insisted on the implementation of UN resolutions- a unitary
plebiscite for the whole of J&K; Musharraf broke ranks recently
going so far to state that Pakistan is willing to give up its territorial
claim on Kashmir provided certain conditions are met, but he faces intense
hostility from hardline Islamists in his country. Kashmiris are alienated
from both countries given brutal repression by India and violence by
pro-Pakistan militants. Is there a solution to this seemingly intractable
issue?
One reason why previous efforts
to solve the problem have failed is this: India and Pakistan have not
included Kashmiris as a legitimate party in tripartite unconditional
dialogues. The evolving consensus opinion is that UN resolutions are
out-dated, since the dispute has evolved into tripartite. That other
regional solutions should be considered given that various regions in
Kashmir have evolved independently since 1947 and that the conflict
is restricted to the Kashmir Valley whose area is less than 16% of the
total area of Indian controlled J&K.
One compromise regional solution
which could potentially work was proposed by eminent historian Alastair
Lamb in 1998 called Andorran Solution and a similar variant was proposed
by the Kashmir Study Group[20]. Following the well established precedent
of Andorra on the border between France and Spain, both Azad Kashmir
and the Kashmir Valley could be declared as autonomous regions with
its internal self-government but with its external defence and foreign
affairs controlled jointly by India and Pakistan. Major advantage of
this Andorran solution: No territory under Indian control would be transferred
to Pakistan and no territory under Pakistani control would be transferred
to India. Existing LoC will become the border. India retains Jammu and
Ladakh, Pakistan retains Northern Territories.
Hearts and Minds
It is high time India reconsidered
its continuing policy of holding Kashmir at gunpoint to showcase its
secular credentials to the world. Whatever be the final solution, it
is worthwhile remembering the emotional speech made by Jawaharlal Nehru
(ironically the very same leader who played a major role in the origin
of the dispute, by way of his sentimental attachment to the Vale) in
Lok Sabha on August 7, 1952:
..Ultimately - I say this
with all deference to this Parliament - the decision will be made in
the hearts and minds of the men and women of Kashmir; neither in this
Parliament, nor in the United Nations nor by anybody else?"
[ The author is a researcher on the Kashmir Conflict. ]
References:
[1]Poetry
in commotion, Muzamil Jaleel
[2]Indian
Embassy, A Comprehensive Note on Jammu & Kashmir
[3]SOUTH
ASIA INTELLIGENCE REVIEW, December 2002
[4]BBC
News: 'Kashmiri was civilian - DNA tests'
[5] Jammu and Kashmir is
also referred to as Kashmir in short. It consists of the Kashmir Valley
(15,948 sq.kms= 6158 sq. mile), Jammu (26,293 sq.kms) and Ladakh(59,146
sq.kms) under Indian control; "Azad" Kashmir (13,297 sq.kms)
and Northern Territories (64,817 sq.kms) under Pakistani control; Aksai
Chin, Demochok(37,555 sq.kms) and Shaksgam(5,180 sq.kms) under Chinese
control, at present. In the post-1949 ceasefire context, J&K(or
Kashmir) is used to refer to the Indian held territory, unless specified
otherwise. According to 1981 census, the Kashmir Valley has a population
of 3.1 million with 95% Muslim majority; Jammu and Ladakh are predominantly
Hindu and Buddhist respectively; the total population of Indian and
Pakistan controlled J&K is 6 million (with 64% Muslim majority)
and 2.55 million (with 100% Muslim majority) respectively. The term
'Kashmiris' has been used to denote the people of Kashmir or Kashmir
Valley depending on the context.
Jammu-kashmir.com,
Facts and Figures
[6]Govt.
of India, White Paper on Jammu & Kashmir , Delhi 1948, p.46.
[7]Govt.
of India, White Paper on Jammu & Kashmir , Delhi 1948, p.3, 46,
55, 77.
[8]Sheikh
Abdullah quoted in, Official Records of the United Nations Security
Council, 1948, Meeting No:226 pp.68-9
Sheikh
Abdullah, Flames of the Chinar, New Delhi 1993, p.97
[9]UNCIP
Resolution, 30 March, 1951.
[10]Prem Nath Bazaz, Democracy
through Intimidation and Terror, New Delhi: Heritage Publishers, 1978.
B. K. Nehru, Nice Guys Finish
Second, 1997, pp. 614-5
[11]A.G.
Noorani, Article 370: Law and Politics
[12]Balraj Puri, Kashmir:
Towards Insurgency, New Delhi 1993, pp.50-70
[13]Human
Rights Watch, Arms Pipeline, 1994.
[14]Kashmir Times, July 8
2002
[15]Amnesty
International, 1999 report
[16]Indian
Ministry of Home Affairs: Estimate of Hindus and Sikhs killed
[17]Jane's Intelligence Review,
(London) August 1, 1998
[18]Human
Rights Watch, 1999 report
[19] Balraj
Puri, Kashmir Towards Insurgency, Delhi 1993, pp.64-67.
Nadimarg
and Kashmiriyat, April 2003.
Kashmir Times, March 25,
2003
[20]Kashmir
Study Group: Kashmir: A Way Forward
Kashmir
Study Group: One Hypothetical Solution
Map
of J&K Courtesy Jammu-Kashmir.com
Click
here to comment
on this article