Kashmir from the Left

Ras Siddiqui
Sep 27, 2003

The recent verbal pugilism by and at the reminded this reporter of a “Discussion Forum on ” held in San Francisco at the end of last month. Others have reported and commented on that event which was held at the California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) in San Francisco on August 22nd so this report is not exactly on time, but the ferocity of the exchange at the UN has certainly encouraged a revisiting this issue through that discussion.

Organized by the People for in and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Program at CIIS, San Francisco and supported by the Friends of (FOSA) organization, this was an attempt by the “Progressives”, the leftovers of the South Asian Left in Northern California (sorry to offend some people but that is what we are) to see what could be done about this historical problem so that our dream of reconciliation between and could be realized, hopefully within our lifetimes.

Featuring two main speakers Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai of the Kashmiri American Council and Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy of Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, , and very ably assisted by three knowledgeable people namely Zulfiqar Ahmad of the Global and Security Program at the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development in Berkeley, Dr. Angana Chatterji Professor, Social and Cultural Anthropology Program at CIIS and Researcher and community activist Akhila Raman. This report will concentrate on Dr. Fai and Dr. Hoodbhoy’s presentations.

Mr. Zulfikar Ahmad is the nephew of the late Dr. Eqbal Ahmad, one of the icons of the Pakistani and American Left who left quite a mark on Progressive worldwide. And with that comment one needs to add that one of Dr. Eqbal’s contemporaries and admirers and the major spokesman for the Palestinian struggle in the western world Dr. Edward Said has just passed away. One cannot ignore this huge for progressives worldwide without acknowledging his huge contribution to the struggle of the powerless. Dr. Said was one Christian who did more to explain and its culture to the West then many of our bearded brethren.

Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai is no stranger to us. His effort at highlighting the plight of Kashmiris here in the United States has been going on for a long time. Whether it is on a , in a Mosque, a Library or a gathering of progressives or just concerned , Dr. Fai has been the Kashmiri version of Edward Said to his people. Through thick and thin he has been a spokesman for the All Parties Hurriyet (Freedom) Conference (APHC) a group that has been at the helm of the Kashmiri peoples struggle against the of which it views as an occupying power. Let us begin with his speech.

“We are not against and talking bilaterally. They have been talking for 55 years. I was the happiest person when P.M. made the offer to ,” he said. But on the talks he said that they have to provide results because all talks thus far have failed. But he ruled our “doing nothing” as an alternative because that will only make the problem worse. He ruled out the idea of the current Line of Control (LOC) becoming the future border between and or that autonomy alone could become the final compromise. But he did add that “all parties need to understand that there is no solution to the problem,” because is a political issue that needs a solution via political means. On talks he first called for an Intra- dialogue which included all Kashmiris on either side of the LOC. He then called for talks between the APHC and and then talks between and . He stressed the need for non-violent means, but in future talks “there must be no pre-conditions,” he said. “We should not concentrate at this point on the final solution,” he added. He said that a broker like Nelson Mandela could help facilitate these talks and mentioned the Irish process as something to look at. He concluded by saying that a solution without taking into account the Kashmiris would not work.

Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy is possibly the oddest physicist that currently lives in . His writes under the header of “Particle Politics” for the webzine http//www..com and in various newspapers, magazines and journals both in and internationally. And the most interesting part to all this is that he appeals to peaceniks worldwide and is horrified by and very critical of any nuclear brinksmanship in . He is a major proponent of increased spending on social programs and the reduction of defense expenditures in and has been very critical of the rising tensions in the region. He is also related by into Dr. Eqbal Ahmad’s which may or may not have something to with his social (one would have to ask Mrs. Hoodbhoy that question).

Dr. Hoobhoy started off by saying how wonderful it was to have such gathered here. He then spoke of the horrors which are a part and parcel of the problem today where an average of 12 to 14 people a day are being killed and the casualty figure already has reached the 70,000 mark. He described this as a long lingering dispute almost as old as the Israeli-Palestinian problem. He said that he was “pessimistic” and questioned the reasons behind this conflict. Approaching this issue from a very philosophical angle Pervez spoke of “versions of reality” and especially where they reach mythical realm. He gave examples of the current reality by quoting from the Pakistani Press; “Freedom Fighters kill 7 Hindu pilgrims.” He added that there was “very little sympathy in for the Pandits who had to flee . He spoke of the Kashmiri plight and that there was very little sympathy in for the tens of thousands of Muslims pushed by conflict into the Pakistani side of . He said that 3000 people (mainly Muslims) have been kidnapped by the Indian security forces. “Where they are nobody knows,” he said. He said that was acting like an occupying power in with one soldier present there for every ten Kashmiris. “There is a new generation of Kashmiri who have grown up under the shadow of the gun,” he lamented. He said that the local Kashmiri did not like the Indian soldiers and is intimidated by the militants. He added that today’s grand mess has historical roots in the division of the subcontinent on the basis of . “Under the rules of Partition, should have been part of .” He went into the complexities added to the mix by Sheikh Abdullah and that reneged on a settlement because did not fulfill its part of the bargain. He said that after the 1965 and wars between and the issue had died down but that ’s mismanagement has resulted in the present conditions and this was nurtured by (which today is not doing the Kashmiris any good) and that has had to pay a huge social cost for this support of the militancy. He said that was losing international support and sympathy because of the extremism within. He said that peaceful political and moral support should be provided to the Kashmiris but not any other kind. He spoke of the privileges and influence enjoyed by the Army in which would not really be possible without this conflict with over but the Army itself did not want a with nuclear implications on its hands. He said that was a core issue as it was also a corps commander’s issue. He added that neither nor are any closer to today and that the first thing that needs to be done is to tone down the propaganda volume on both sides, He spoke of the 30 odd solutions proposed already by reasonable people but that to implement any of those a “spirit of accommodation was absolutely essential.”

Akhila Raman presented a number of slides and a whole lot of information on the conflict. She called for a compromise solution that can work but will have to be beyond the stated positions of and . With valuable comments and input from Dr. Angana Chatterji and a unique humanitarian insight from Zulfiqar Ahmad the Question and Answer session afterwards did not turn into a shouting match that might have turned out to be too chaotic to manage All viewpoints were heard and the Kashmiri Pandit voice of concern and plight was heard loud and clear.

In conclusion it was refreshing to see the progressive viewpoint heard from and the voice of both Muslim and Hindu Kashmiris at this discussion. That progressive Indians and Indian-Americans organized this interaction needs to be welcomed. And while we the people of South Asian origin in the United States recognize the suffering caused by this conflict to all three parties involved (Indian, Kashmiri and Pakistani) and yet still refuse to budge from our misguided notions and positions let me end here with the words of wisdom presented by the panelist that otherwise said the least at this discussion. “Challenge yourself to dream a little.”