Kashmir: Time for a Radical Approach?

-

The Kashmir dispute is the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world today. Pakistan considers Kashmir as its core political dispute with India. So does the international community, except India. While Indian security forces are practicing an unprecedented reign of terror in Occupied Kashmir being widely reported world-wide; the Indian government, currently led by Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, is neither willing to negotiate the issue multilaterally—through international mediation—nor is it ready to sort it out with Pakistan through bilateral negotiations. India and Pakistan have already fought two wars over Kashmir. The exchange of fire between their forces across the Line of Control, which separates Azad Kashmir from Occupied Kashmir, is a routine affair. Now that both India and Pakistan have acquired nuclear weapons potential, the possibility of a third war between them over Kashmir, which may involve the use of nuclear weapons, cannot be ruled out. The likely nuclear disaster in South Asia, whose cause may be Kashmir, can be averted with an intervention by the international community. Such an intervention is urgently required to put an end to Indian atrocities in Occupied Kashmir and prepare the ground for the implementation of UN resolutions, which call for the holding of a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

-

# 211

HisExcellency wrote:
+++
``During the 1857 uprising, the Bengali regiments revolted against the British. But the Punjabi regiment fought for the British. The British had succeeded in dividing the Indians along ethnic lines. After 1857, the predominance of martial races in British Indian Army became greater.``
+++

The designation of the racist ``martial races`` was based on political calculations of the imerialist power and not on physical facts. The myth has been kept alive in Pakistan to protect the interests of the fauji-landlord Mafia. To that end, this Mafia would rather fight India to the last Kashmiri than give peace a chance.

And, of course, it would never occur to this fauji-landlord Mafia to resettle the ``Biharis`` in the ``recruitment area`` between the Indus and the Jhelum. This Mafia would rather bank on the fears of the de-franchised native Sindhis to keep the ``Biharis`` rotting in refugee camps in Bangladesh for eternity.

Here`s the problem, in a nutshell - Pakistan`s ruling elite has been throwing temper tantrums in the hope of ``solving`` the issue of Jammu & Kashmir on its own terms. It is issuing threats that unless it gets its way in Jammu & Kashmir, the world in general and India in particular will have to face the dire prospect of:
(1) confrontation with a Talibanized Pakistan and/or
(2) confrontation with a nuclear Pakistan.

Pakistan`s ruling elite is an incorrigible lot. It would rather acquire real estate in Jammu & Kashmir than bring home the stranded Pakistanis (aka ``Biharis``) who have had their lives on hold for the last 31 years in UN-run refugee camps. Pakistan feigns lack of fund to put off the repatriation of the hapless ``Biharis`` even as it funnels funds for organizing terror in neighboring Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Pakistan`s ruling elite is not doing anyone any good by such brinkmanship. Pakistan does have nuclear weapons but it is sheer lunacy to threaten to use them unless the Jammu & Kashmir issue is settled on its terms - this is temper tantrums at its worst.

America, and much of the world, is concerned because Pakistan not only has nuclear weapons but rattles them regularly in the hope of getting its way on Jammu & Kashmir. It has steadfastly refused, till now, to forswear first use of nuclear weapons. The Pakistani Generals are either insane or are indulging in dangerous brinkmanship to ``resolve`` their claims on Jammu & Kashmir on their own terms. This (and not any imagined collusion of ``Jews, Hindus & Americans``) is what makes it such a dangerous place on earth.

Muslim Kashmiris have no reason to want the expulsion of the Pandit community any more than Muslim Sindhis had any reason in 1947 to want
the expulsion of Hindu Sindhis.

Powerful outsiders (including Qaid-e-Millat Liaqat Ali Khan)
engineered the expulsion of the Hindu Sindhis to promote their own
agenda of creating a constituency in the nascent country.

And in 1971, while all Bengalis in East Pakistan were victimized, the
Hindus were victimized disproportionately more. Pakistani army was
trying to do a Sindh on East Pakistan by specially targeting the
Hindus. In fact, it victimized Muslim Bengalis, it did so with the
specious plea that the Muslim Bengalis were not good Muslims!

Today, Pakistan`s ruling elite is doing a Sindh on Jammu and Kashmir.
It is Pakistan that has engineered the expulsion of the Pandit
community. Muslim Kashmiris do not condone the expulsion any more than
the Muslim Sindhis condoned the expulsion of their Hindu neighbors in
1947.

Pakistan`s ruling elite, for all its talk on self-determination, dares
not risking a plebiscite in Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) even after
altering PoK`s demography with immigrants from Punjab and NWFP. And
most Pakistanis aren`t even aware that a constitutional provision
(Article 370) in India protects Jammu and Kashmir from such
demographic invasion from the rest of India. Indians from other
provinces of India, cannot, by law, acquire immovable property in
Jammu & Kashmir.

The ``Bihari`` issue has been festering for the last 31 years. As far as
I am concerned, there is a crying need to end their nightmare.

It is not India`s responsibility to bring justice to the Sindhis & the
Mohajirs, the Shias and the Ismailis, the Ahmediyas & the Zikris in
Pakistan. It is Pakistan`s responsibility. Charity begins at home.
Pakistan needs to give a higher priority to doing the needful for them
instead of incessasantly beating the drums to get its way on Jammu &
Kashmir.

# 222

HisExcellency wrote:
+++
``Nehru`s homosexual tendencies explain why he wasn`t man enough to face a plebiscite in his own ancestral state (Kashmir).``
+++

HisExcellency is so eager to prove the manliness of the fauji-landlord mafia of ``martial races`` that he has now turned into a quack psychologist!

# 222

HisExcellency wrote:
+++
``it was this 2 year period that finally estranged Muslims from Hindus.``
+++

The Muslim League in UP, because of its class composition, was not in tune with Nehru`s socialist leanings. Muslim League hadn`t done particularly well in the elections of 1937. While Nehru was quite willing to have Khaliquzzaman as the Muslim League representative in the UP ministry, he wasn`t as eager to have Liaqat Ali Khan. Well, this didn`t sit well with the Muslim League establishment in UP.

In Bengal, Fazlul Haq was a populist figure with a base among share-croppers and workers. He had become Bengal`s Premier in 1937. And understandably, once again for ideological reasons, Fazlul Haq didn`t sit well with the Muslim League establishment which was more at home with Nazimuddin or Ispahini.

Class conflicts, rather than religious conflicts, were at the root of the disenchantment of the Muslim League with the Congress in 1937. And, yes, it succeeded in 1945 by cleverly playing the religion card. But even without the Congress, the same problem continued to bedevil the Muslim League even in Pakistan.

This is how M.B.Naqvi described the causes of the demise of Jinnah`s Pakistan in 1971.

+++
www.jang.com.pk/thenews

The News, Karachi, Pakistan
Wednesday December 11, 2002-- Shawwal 06, 1423 A.H.

Why Jinnah`s Pakistan ended
by M B Naqvi
mbnaqvi@cyber.net.pk

``One emphasises a narrower reason for the earliest power struggle
between the Punjab and Bengal Groups in the first Constituent Assembly
in 1948-49. East Bengalis had opened their account with the
expropriation of all intermediary landed interests between the state
and the cultivator. This without compensation reform frightened the
social elites in West Pakistan, almost all of whom landlords. Bengalis
acquiring the central power seemed to them like encouraging the new
Bolsheviks to repeat that enormity here also. So they were determined
to deny the Bengalis their due share of power and entered into an open
conspiracy: they sought help from the bureaucracy and got it. With
West Pakistan`s landowning MPs help, they cornered all power``
+++

re: #227

These are Stanley Wolpert`s words not mine. May be you should write an angry letter to Mr.Wolpert and condemn him for writing the truth about Nehru.

[The designation of the racist ``martial races`` was based on political calculations of the imerialist power and not on physical facts. ]

Wrong! This was based on military assessment of Ranjeet Singh`s army. Unlike other armies in the India, Ranjeet`s army was trained by French generals Ventura and Allard. A Russian gunner Viewkenawitch and French General Court were employed as the artillery experts. Moreover, Ranjit had a special intelligence wing that was run by his Prime Minister Fakir Syed Nuruddin with the guidance of Henry Steinbech, a German.

[It would never occur to this fauji-landlord Mafia to resettle the ``Biharis`` in the ``recruitment area`` between the Indus and the Jhelum.]

Mr.Empty-Vessel,
Do you know that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had ordered the construction of 96-acre housing unit in Mian Chunnu in December 1997. Neither the Army nor the so-called landlord Mafia objected.

Nine years earlier, Pakistan government had set up a repatriation fund of Rs 700 million under the aegis of Rabita Alam-e-Islami Trust Fund. It was Benazir Bhutto, the Sindhi Prime Minister who shelved this plan.

Read the details at:
http://paknews.com/art1apl-3.html

It doesn`t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Army and Pakistani elite is not against repatriation of Biharis into Punjab or Sindh. It is the Sindhi politicians who feel that repatriation would hurt Sindh`s economy and lead to increased crime rate.

The PPP and World Sindhi Congress opinion on Biharis is as follows:
Biharis migrated to East Pakistan of their own free will. Instead of merging with the Bengali population, they formed tried to impose their own culture and language on the Bengalis. During the 1971 war, they formed terrorist groups called Al-Badar and Al-Shamas to attack Bengali shops. You can read that stuff at:

http://www.safhr.org/contents3312_4.html

You can`t peg everything that comes to your mind in your state of stupor, on Pakistan Army or the ruling elite. There is actually widespread debate in Pakistan on the Bihari issue.

nakhok

Please do not insult hisflatulence by calling him hisexcellency. Use the correct nick. Thank you.

[Also, did it specify the kind of shirts the indians should wear? What about food? Did it also say that indians can only eat urad dal? ]

Thanks for making my point. India has no regard for UN. Unfortunately comparing a Plebiscite resolution with apparel, dal, food and bathroom habits will not win the argument for you. Seems like you are an infant trapped in an adult`s body.

[It was invaded by a neighbor in 1947. It went to the UN and got some resolutions passed. ]

You got your high school history wrong. Kashmir, not India was invaded by militias. India went to the UN because it couldn`t dislodge the militias with all its air power and army.

If India was really interested in fulfilling its promise, it would not have embarked on the Article 370 political wheeling & dealing with Sheikh Lackey. In less than 6 years, India even backtracked on UN role in Kashmir.

No wonder, the Kashmiris are firing bullets up the Indian nose.

re: nakhok

Jinnah`s movement was popular but not socialist.

M.B. Naqvi`s article correctly describes the attitude of West Pakistani social elites after independence. A sort of mini revolt against Jinnah was launched by Mian Mumtaz Daultana, a powerful Punjabi landlord. However, Daultana lacked the popularity of Jinnah.

Jinnah`s death in 1948 left Liaqat in charge. But being a mohajir from UP, he didn`t have any power base in West Pakistan. For the same reason, he didn`t hold elections until 1954.

re: #231

Nehru`s socialist leanings could sway the lower income groups but not the upper and middle income Muslims. As always the case, the frontrunners of a socialist movement are lower income people because they tend to gain a proportionately large amount of the economic pie.

On the other hand, those well-versed with Islam, can understand that socialism and Islam are at odds with each other. While on the one hand, Islam declares that ``the worker is friend of Allah``, Islam enshrines private property as a sacred trust. Some of the prominent Muslim figures such as Prophet Muhammad, Caliphs Umar, Abu Bakr and Usman were indeed wealthy men who gave a lot of charity to the poor.

Given this background, socialist ideologies could never win the hearts of enlightened Muslims. Even after independence, India adopted socialism for 3-4 decades whereas in Pakistan, socialism just lasted 4 years (1972-76).

The Muslim League campaign was always an economic one. Religious was just added to counterbalance the strongly religious outlook of Congress movement. As you know, Gandhi always packaged his actions in Hindu religious beliefs. Ahimsa and satyagarh, for example, were lifted straight out of Hinduism. Both imply a spiritual struggle.

The 1857 conflict left the Muslims of India in dire economic straits. The British had taken India from Muslims so naturally they were suspicious of Muslims. An intense economic apartheid was adopted towards Muslims. This rendered them educationally backward, economically weak and political disorganized. Jinnah`s campaign was aimed at precisely these weaknesses. Even in Muslim majority areas, most of the businesses were owned by Hindus. In the famous Anarkali bazaar of Lahore, there were at one time only 4 Muslim shops and 87 Hindu owned shops. Hindu shopkeepers had formed a cartel to prevent Muslims entrepreneurs from obtaining capital for opening their shops.

In 1945, if you walked into Chandhi chowk of Delhi, and picked any street vendor at random, he would invariably turn out to be a Muslim descendent of the Mughals.

In 1905, the Muslims of Bengal asked the British Viceroy to partition Bengal into East and West. As a result of this partition, the East Bengali Muslims experienced an enormous change in their quality of life and economic status. The West Bengali Hindus started lobbying against this and within 6 years they got the partition annulled. In united Bengal, Muslims had ``nothing`` whereas Hindus had ``everything``. In divided Bengal, Muslims could have ``something``, but even that ``something`` was not tolerable to the Hindus.

This religious-economic discrimination of the Hindus towards Muslims was very acute in UP, Bengal and Sindh in particular. That is why even in 1937 elections, anti-Congress Muslims were able to win a lot of seats.

The Congress ministry of 1937-39, further drove the wedge between Congress and Muslims. Muslim public opinion had completely turned against Congress therefore Muslim leaders like Jinnah, Liaqat, Fazal-e-Haq, Pir of Pagara, etc reflected their constituency`s opinion.

# 230

HisExcellency wrote:
+++
``Wrong! This was based on military assessment of Ranjeet Singh`s army. Unlike other armies in the India, Ranjeet`s army was trained by French generals Ventura and Allard. A Russian gunner Viewkenawitch and French General Court were employed as the artillery experts. Moreover, Ranjit had a special intelligence wing that was run by his Prime Minister Fakir Syed Nuruddin with the guidance of Henry Steinbech, a German. ``
+++

HisExcellency is stating that Ranjeet Singh`s army had better military training. But I don`t see how this validates the ``martial races`` theory of the British rulers. That racist theory had more to do with the needs of the imperialists than with any physical fact.

# 230

HisExcellency wrote:
+++
``These are Stanley Wolpert`s words not mine. May be you should write an angry letter to Mr.Wolpert and condemn him for writing the truth about Nehru.``
+++

HisExcellency claims, Stanley Wolpert wrote, ````Nehru`s homosexual tendencies explain why he wasn`t man enough to face a plebiscite in his own ancestral state (Kashmir).`` Can HisExcellency cite the edition and page number for this claim?

+++
``Pakistan government had set up a repatriation fund of Rs 700 million under the aegis of Rabita Alam-e-Islami Trust Fund.``
+++

Yes, General Pervez Musharraf was member of the Board of this Trust Fund. But now the funds have been frozen at American command because the funds were being used to fund terrorism instead of repatriating the ``Biharis``.

+++
``It is the Sindhi politicians who feel that repatriation would hurt Sindh`s economy and lead to increased crime rate.``
+++

That doesn`t explain why the Fauji-landlord Mafia can`t settle the ``Biharis`` in ``recruitment are`` in Punjab and why it would rather spend the Rabita Trust fund money to sponsor terrorism.

re: #235

[Nehru`s homosexual tendencies explain why he wasn`t man enough to face a plebiscite in his own ancestral state (Kashmir).`` Can HisExcellency cite the edition and page number for this claim? ]
+++++
Read that post (#230) again. Wolpert`s quote ends two paragraphs before this one. The last 2 paragraphs are not a direct quote, these are my comments on Wolpert`s quote.

[the funds have been frozen at American command because the funds were being used to fund terrorism instead of repatriating the ``Biharis``. ]
---------
The State Department did not specify the time frame during which Rabita was engaged in terrorist funding. We don`t know for example, that these activities happened after 1999 or before that. If it happened after 1999, then atleast the Nawaz scheme was being duly implemented.

[That doesn`t explain why the Fauji-landlord Mafia can`t settle the ``Biharis`` in ``recruitment are`` in Punjab and why it would rather spend the Rabita Trust fund money to sponsor terrorism. ]
++++++++

Mian Chunnu is in Punjab. Rs 250 million of the Rs 700 million were already spent between 1997 and 1999 on building a 96-acre housing complex at Mian Chunnu for Biharis. This tells us that atleast 36% of that money was well-spent. Once again, read the link in that post for references.

Repatriation of Biharis is not straight forward matter. These people chose to migrate to East Pakistan and then refused to merge in that culture. The PPP and Sindhi does not even consider them Pakistani citizens. As you know, PPP was in power for half of 1990s. The PPP Prime Minister Benazir didn`t want to spend any money on Biharis even in Punjab. That`s why repatriation issue was like a ping pong.. When Nawaz Sharif came to power, he revived the repatriation project. When Benazir came in, she shelved it.

Now Musharraf is not touching this issue (as well as Kalabagh Dam issue) simply because he doesn`t want to tackle too many problems at the same time. It`s just bad politics to start a new controversy when you already have your hands full in previous ones. (i.e. LFO, Afghan turnaround, referendum).

re: #232

The Punjabi/Sikh/Pathan army managed to stop the British advance for more than 3 decades whereas no other army in India including those of Tipu Sultan, Siraj-ud-Daula, Nawab of Oudh, etc could effectively pose a challenge.

The British sincerely believed that rugged, physically well-built and mentally tough people were more suited to a life of soldiering. The following abstract of a dissertation gives a preview:

http://www.easternct.edu/personal/faculty/mcneilk/long_abstract.html

I am searching for the dissertation, and will post it soon.

The British believe of martial races was based on their experience of wars with Scottish Highlanders. To the British mind, the Punjabis, Pathans, Sikhs and Kashmiris were Asiatic counterparts of Highlanders.

With hindsight, we know this to be false. The Vietnamese would not qualify as a martial race according to British definition. Yet they defeated the white American race, that the British would consider a superior race.

My point: British actually believed in the martial race theory. For the same reason, they prevented the industrialization of Punjab, Kashmir and NWFP. They didn`t want their ``Asiatic Highlanders`` to end up working as laborers and factory workers. They wanted this crop to end up as fauji-landlords instead.

re: nakhok

You have missed the point in my post #230. You tried to delegitimize Jinnah on the incoherent grounds that he never went to prison, as if going to prison would result in azaadi. Just to illustrate the inanity of that argument, I countered with the quote about Nehru`s homosexual tendencies.

Just like Nehru`s homosexual tendencies do not delegitimize him in the eyes of Hindus and Congress-wallahs, the refusal of Jinnah to lead noncooperation nonviolent satyagarhs does not delegitimize his status as the sole spokesman of Muslims. These leaders were essentially chasing different goals and using different methodologies to achieve those goals.

Nehru and Gandhi believed that nonviolence noncooperation would force British to leave India. To them, freedom was primary and the constitutional safeguards of minorities was something to be addressed ``after`` freedom was achieved. Nehru and Gandhi were after all Hindu leaders and the Hindu community was not as backward and illiterate as Muslims. That is why their concerns were different from those of Jinnah.

Jinnah was quite aware of the backwardness of Muslims and their susceptibility to fundamentalist Mullahs. He was also aware of the Congress arbitrariness while in power. So for him constitutional safeguards, modernity, economic aspects of independence and its impact on Muslim society was paramount.

Jinnah only launched the Pakistan movement when he became sure that the British were too weak to rule India for long. Indians believe that the British left because of Gandhi`s pressure. This a great delusion.

The British left because their exchequer suffered enormous losses during the World War II with Germany. With London bombed out, and most of their industrial capacity used up by war... Britain was no longer in a position to run a huge empire. Lord Kitchener, the Treasury Secretary, told British PM at the end of WW2, that Britain has only enough gold left to feed its own citizens for a year.

Jinnah realized this in 1941 and expressed this to Liaqat and his sister Fatima in correspondence. It was at this point that Jinnah decided that Muslim League should accelerate its movement.

What happened after Jinnah`s death cannot be blamed on him. Dead men can`t rectify things. Only the living can. So lets rectify the Kashmir problem while we are living.

# 237

His Excellency wrote:
+++
``That`s why repatriation issue was like a ping pong..``
+++

The repatriation issue is a ping pong because the military doesn`t care a damn for the ``Biharis``. It had used them like the cat`s paw and once it decided that the ``Biharis`` were no longer useful, it discarded them like the rind of a squeezed lemon.

The Pak military doesn`t care any more for the Kashmiris than it does for the ``Biharis``. It is ready and willing to fight a proxy war to the last Kashmiri if that`s what it takes to preserve its vested interests. Pak military regime has everything to lose and nothing to gain by giving peace a chance.

Civilian control of the army is a must for peace. Negotiations can be meaningful only if the negotiators are elected representatives of the people. Army generals have no real incentive to negotiate in good faith - they have a vested interest to make themselves look like indispensable saviors of the nation - that is what allows them to justify usurping the largest share of the national pie for themselves.

Pakistan`s military, the largest body of organized crime in Pakistan, continues to monopolize power - it is determined to continue as the final arbiter of who gets to steal in pakistan and how much.

The public are quite capable of weeding out the politicians who must get re-elected to stay in power. It is the corrupt military with its monopoly over the guns that poses the problem. It is the military that has left the people so helplessly victimized.

Here are some insight into why some of the pakis (e.g HisExcellency ) in here are so full of hate for India and Hindus. According to the articles here - they have been taught to do so from childhood, right from the schools texts. And these schools are the regular ones, not madrassa types.

http://www.thefridaytimes.com/inews8a.htm

Excerpts:

+++
The books, which do not name the authors, are literary equivalent of hate speech...“Hindu” India and Britain are depicted as enemies while Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Ummah are extolled. ``
+++

Words like “dark”, “ugly” and “short” are used to describe Hindus while Muslims are presented in glowing terms.
+++

Fifth grade students, for example, are taught that the 1971 war was a Hindu conspiracy
+++

“Gandhi was with the Muslims and against the English when the Caliphate Movement started but without giving any reason switched sides. This is typical of Hindus.”
+++