J & K news and discussion

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 07 Jun 2009 09:31

Gerard wrote:Some dangerous liaisons in July
By MJ Akbar

Cool. 2010 Nobel Peace prize comes to India.

archan · Post by **archan** » 07 Jun 2009 09:42

What do the knowledgeable folks here feel would be the percentage of Indians who would be happy with the LOC turning into IB, which is the premise of the MJA article?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Jun 2009 10:13

archan wrote:What do the knowledgeable folks here feel would be the percentage of Indians who would be happy with the LOC turning into IB, which is the premise of the MJA article?

Interesting. Who is paramount? Indian Parliament or MJA? Parliament of India made a statement on J&K that entire POK and NA belongs to India. Then why is MJA misquoting Indian position?

It doesn't matter what percentage of Indians will be happy to turn LOC into IB. Does it solve India's problems such as poverty and corruption? Per BRF standards, I insist that these problems are solved first before we think of any other problem, be it J&K or others.

If MJA indeed believes in this type of la-whori logic, then does he support building Ram temple in Ayodhya? The damage is already done na... why dont he provide this vision to his audience for the peace and prosperity of India.

Personally, I think it would be a historical blunder on India's part to agree to LOC as IB proposal. Obama is not India's PM and he cannot solve India's problems. If Pakistan has a panga with India it has been exporting terrorism for the past 20+ years and India will address it. BO is trying to solve his Afghanistan problem by paying from Indian pocket.

As per IPC, if my neighbor occupies part of my land, then if I prove it in the court then the neighbor is required to vacate my land. How can GOI have a different rule?

It is in India's longterm interests to have POK/NA as disputed territories. It is also in its interest to have Aksaichin, and Tibet as disputed territories. Who knows who will be king and who will be servent in 2050?

satya · Post by **satya** » 07 Jun 2009 17:57

Some dangerous liaisons in July

It is common knowledge that Washington acutely wants the next round of Indo-Pak talks to be between the chiefs of the two armies, rather than the heads of the two governments. There is a substantive challenge, from terrorists and ideologically motivated theocratic groups like the Taliban, to the stability of the region between Kabul and Delhi. This can best be met by cooperation between Indian and Pakistani forces.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jun 2009 20:06

There is still the Lok Sabha resolution of 1992 during PVN Rao govt about the integrity of J&K and that includes everything. I guess the US will have to pay-up to alter it and not rely on Reliance.

I was told that one of the factors that flummoxed Maharaja Hari Singh was the access road for the Valley. The line drawn would have cut him off. He didn't get any hearing from Delhi on this as the GOI was busy with rest of India.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 07 Jun 2009 22:04

There is a new book on J&K - "Untold story of Jihad" by a Pakistani author Arif Jamal in B&N. He is harvard's paid mulazim.

Written for a western audience, he neverthless acknowledges the pakistani mischief (Akbar Khan's plans to invade as early as 1947, Mushy's disaters) , atrocities on KPs etc.

I am thinking whether these are straws in the wind pointing to the direction of thinking of western think tanks. There is a strand of opinion wondering whether it is time to look at alternate options?????

These articles are first sent out by expendable underlings to gauge the public opinion.....the real strategists like Dennis Kux, Schaeffer, Dick Haas etc. will come out in the open only when they are sure it will be acceptable.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2009 00:07

If people have nothing to contribute except whines about irrelevant issues please dont post. Enough trolling. Thanks.

Please consider this as a warning.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 08 Jun 2009 04:14

The whines have been moved to the thread appointed for that purpose

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Jun 2009 18:34

Central forces to play secondary role in J&K

mmasand · Post by **mmasand** » 12 Jun 2009 01:30

Gerard wrote:Central forces to play secondary role in J&K

Still quite unclear how various security agencies are going to work in tandem in one state.Who will have jurisdiction and who will respond and take decisions during insurgency operations.Will Intelligence agencies of the army share intelligence with the JKP.They might be the most modern state police force in india in terms of experience and ammunition but do they have the numbers to keep every nook and corner in check?

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Jun 2009 02:05

mmasand wrote: Still quite unclear how various security agencies are going to work in tandem in one state.Who will have jurisdiction and who will respond and take decisions during insurgency operations.Will Intelligence agencies of the army share intelligence with the JKP.They might be the most modern state police force in india in terms of experience and ammunition but do they have the numbers to keep every nook and corner in check?

It probably means that central police organizations will not "HUNT" the terrorists but would leave it for JKP to take care unless explicitly requested by them. CRPF may be relegated to guarding infrastructure and provide back up man power as and when requested by JKP. We need to see how it pans out though.

May be one of the COIN experts on board can elaborate.

sum · Post by **sum** » 12 Jun 2009 10:06

Honestly, don't think that any sane babu will trust the "dependable" JKP to be the spearhead in the valley...

Might be just posturing with the media wherein the CRPF will be less visible than earlier though they might still run the show (JKP might be given the thankless job of handling the weekly stone pelting sessions in the valley which was earlier done by CRPF+JKP)...

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 12 Jun 2009 10:32

CRPF was given charge of internal security on recommendations of Kargil Review Committee which wanted one force to look after one task. BSF which was previously involved in anti-terror operations in j&k was shifted out and CRPF was given total charge. Now if CRPF is also being removed from the main duty for which it was tasked then it's going against the advice of the committee which after much thought recommended such a security setup.

And the j&k police or any other state police are not the ideal force which can develop intel, track the movement of terrrorists, setup ambushes and finally arrest or eliminate them. Previously they had been given charge and they failed badly leading loss of lives, destruction of public property and collapse of justice system when terrorists were openly threatening to kill judges who passed adverse judgements against them. That's the reason then BSF and other central security forces were brought in to hunt down terrorists and restore law&order. Lessons that had been learnt through loss of men have been forgotten and another foolish attempt is being made to appease the unappeasable professional rageboys.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Jun 2009 11:23

How good is the JKP? It is easily the most stressed state police in India. Wasn't there a gap in intel gathering when BSF moved out and CRPF moved in?? May be JKP has better intel assets

While arming JKP may not be an issue... I guess what needs to be looked at is available man power and training.
I would still like to believe that babus are much better informed.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jun 2009 22:05

I thik the move to give primacy to J&K Police is a part of the piss process.

Unfortunately the TSP will mistake it for a climbdown and ratchet up the attacks. This might lead to blowback. Lets see.

As an aside. I think Omar Abdullahs' USp is he speaks like an outsider while leaching of Indian largesse. This prevents true separatists to come to top.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 12 Jun 2009 22:16

ramana wrote:I thik the move to give primacy to J&K Police is a part of the piss process.

Unfortunately the TSP will mistake it for a climbdown and ratchet up the attacks. This might lead to blowback. Lets see.

As an aside. I think Omar Abdullahs' USp is he speaks like an outsider while leaching of Indian largesse. This prevents true separatists to come to top.

Very indicative of the famed chankian strategy .. prop up proxy opponents so that the real opponents' voice is dumbed down

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 12 Jun 2009 22:33

According to Arif Jamal…the idea to purge the JKLF in a “Night of long Knives” style operation came from Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. United Jehad council chairman Syed Salahuddin is supposedly close to Hekmatyar and Hezb ul Mujahideen trainees were sent to HEzb e Islami (HEI – Hekmatyar’s gang of thugs) camps in Khost outside of ISI supervision. Hekmatyar reportedly advised him not repeat his mistake of not eliminating Massoud and others.

Salahuddin took this advice to heart and put it for approval to ISI who in any case were not too enamoured of the azaadi jazba of Amanullah Khan and Mallik. This led to the JKLF’s reduced role in the fight with the Indian state.

I suspect that faggot Yasin Mallik took the non violent role to avoid getting eliminated by the HEM and at same time keep the soft option open as a bargaining tool…both with the Indian state and with the ISI. In short his strategy is a repeat of the Hindu strategy of keeping the flames alive through least resistance.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 13 Jun 2009 00:51

Govt to review AFSPA in J&K: PC

Expect the Manipuris and the Nagas to also demand the same for their states now.

sum · Post by **sum** » 13 Jun 2009 10:19

vsudhir wrote:Govt to review AFSPA in J&K: PC

Expect the Manipuris and the Nagas to also demand the same for their states now.

This is just similar to any normal pre-poll announcement...

IIRC, nothing will happen on this front.

wig · Post by **wig** » 14 Jun 2009 14:49

the Jk Police has elements that have performed commendably. however that cannot be said of the entire force. i recall reading somewhere of an officer who was instrumental in the fight against pak sponsored terrorism was sidelined by the elected govt in 1996. In 1990-91 when kashmiri pandits had to migrate in some of the worst religious / ethnic cleansing the then CM Dr Abdullah, Farooq did some strategic/ tactical migrating of his own to Britian or wherever. he returned much later when things were better and the union govt of HD Deve Gowda got him back as CM. so much of the afspa outpourings is just that! if these guys were serious why do some of these separatists / politicians not leave their security.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 14 Jun 2009 16:25

Acharya wrote: http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2729014
The Canberra Times - Friday 31 October 1947

FREE PAKISTAN ARMY ADVANCING TOWARDS CAPITAL OF SRINAGAR

NEW DELHI, Thursday- With the issue of peace or war between the Dominions of India and Pakistan still in the balance, reports from Karachi reveal that the 10,000 Pathan and Moslem forces of the Free Kashmir Movement have advanced to within 10 miles of Srinagar. According to the Lahore correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph", the Governor-General of India (Earl Mountbatten), is using all remaining influence to bring about peace talks, but Pakistan's failure to reach any definite decision about sending troops to Kashmir or calling off the invading tribesmen and withdrawing covert support for them has produced tension.

A spokesman' for the Pakistan Government bluntly told Reuters correspondent that Pakistan would refuse to accept Kashmir's accession to India and the accession might prove a threat to world peace. The "Daily Telegraph" correspondent at New Delhi says that free troops, who are well disciplined and equipped with field artillery, are driving back the small Indian force defending Srinagar. Every available aircraft is being used to fly in reinforcements from India.

In a dispatch from Srinagar "The Times" correspondent says that the rebel force has been reinforced by several thousand Moslem peasants and numbers about 10,000. The defending force comprises about 1,000 Kashmir State troops and two companies of Sikhs. Indian troops are just beginning to arrive by air and the Indian Government intends to send more, but the question is whether or not they will arrive in time the save the city.

The correspondent says that the Free Kashmir troops are advancing on Srinagar in a three pronged drive from the west and north-west and are gravely menacing the capital. Earlier, the leader of the Kashmir Congress Party (Sheikh Abdullah), who, although a Moslem, has been asked by the Maharajah (Sir Hari Singh) to form an interim Government, claimed that Indian troops had hit back at the Invaders, about 26 miles west of Srinagar, driving the raiders ahead of them. He added that the raiders were mostly Pakistan troops in civilian dress. They were first-class marksmen, but hardly a match for the trained Indians.

Abdullah said the Interim Government, which he would lead, would extend over Kashmir and Jammu a plebiscite to determine Kashmir's accession to India would be held as soon as possible, and he would not object to India and Pakistan jointly supervising the plebiscite.

While revolutionaries at one point reached to within 10 miles of the capital, two Sikh companies, comprising the city's main western defence, were forced to retire from Baramulah, 40 miles west, to hurriedly prepared defence 20 miles from the capital.

The New Delhi correspondent of the "Daily Mail" says the Indian Government has transferred nearly all mercy planes from the task of evacuating refugees to flying reinforcements to Kashmir. Most of these planes are piloted by Britons and Australians, and the Pakistan Government has protested that such a military use of commercial planes is against international law. The Government of India has ordered all Indian Commercial Airlines to go to Delhi immediately says Reuters correspondent at Bombay.

The Kashmir proposal to accede to India and the sending of Indian troops represented an attempt to encircle Pakistan, said Quaiyum Khan, Premier of tho North-West Frontier Province. Pathans are determined to fight to the last man, rather than allow the taking over of Kashmir, which is a Moslem-majority State, belonginig to Pakistan as a matter of right" Khan added.

He appealed to Afghanistan, Persia, Turkey and Governments associated with the Arab League to prepare to face the new danger"

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 14 Jun 2009 17:54

Politicians preying on south Kashmir tragedy

An Islamist cleric almost unknown outside his home town appears to be winning the fight. Maulana Tariq Ahmad has emerged as the principal voice of the protests in south Kashmir. Like other Islamists in Jammu and Kashmir, Maulana Ahmad claims the deaths in Shopian were state-sponsored murders: crimes intended to degrade and eventually destroy Islam in Kashmir.

Beneath the primal rage which is apparently driving the violence lie cold-blooded power struggles: a war for leadership of Kashmir’s Islamist movement; the struggle for space between Islamists and pro-India political parties; and, in turn, the battles of the National Conference, People’s Democratic Party and the Congress against each other.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 14 Jun 2009 18:22

Pandits slam Abdullah government's handling of Shopian deaths

...Roots in Kashmir, a group of Kashmiri Pandits who had fled the Valley at the peak of militancy 20 years ago, condemned the incident and said that a law and order issue had been spun into controversy with separatists ranting 'about Azadi (freedom) and removing the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFPSA) from the valley', instead of delivering justice to the victims' family.

'Unequivocally we condemn the state government's handling of this entire episode. What was ideally a law an order problem has now spun into a huge controversy... the chief minister should also have resigned for the way he led Kashmir to one more crisis,' a statement released by the group here said.

...'The separatists were quick to latch on to the issue. The calls for justice soon got lost in the din of cries for Azadi and removal for AFSPA,' said Aditya Raj Kaul, a youth activist who has previously initiated mass protests and campaigns for justice in the Priyadarshini Mattoo and Jessica Lal cases.

'In this hour of grief we are with the family of the victims. May God give them power to overcome this grief. Although we are in exile, yet we mourn alongside the family of the victims,' said the group's founder member Rashneek Kher.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Jun 2009 19:23

Mark Tully says India should be magnanimous and offer more than LoC

“India can and should in its own interest take some magnanimous initiatives to resolve the Kashmir issue. Every one knows that India would like to settle the issue by turning the Line of Control into an international border. But that would not be the end of the matter. It has to consider something more than LoC if wants a lasting peace in the region,” said Mr Tully

He did not elaborate what he meant by ‘something more than LoC’ but said the announcement by the Indian home minister the other day that Delhi wanted to withdraw its troops from the cities and towns of Kashmir was a decision in the right direction and hoped that Pakistan would regard it as such and reciprocate.

India is one country where cranky white guys/gals can offer her gratuitous advice and we will revere him/her.

kittoo · Post by **kittoo** » 15 Jun 2009 19:53

SSridhar wrote:Mark Tully says India should be magnanimous and offer more than LoC

“India can and should in its own interest take some magnanimous initiatives to resolve the Kashmir issue. Every one knows that India would like to settle the issue by turning the Line of Control into an international border. But that would not be the end of the matter. It has to consider something more than LoC if wants a lasting peace in the region,” said Mr Tully

He did not elaborate what he meant by ‘something more than LoC’ but said the announcement by the Indian home minister the other day that Delhi wanted to withdraw its troops from the cities and towns of Kashmir was a decision in the right direction and hoped that Pakistan would regard it as such and reciprocate.
India is one country where cranky white guys/gals can offer her gratuitous advice and we will revere him/her.

Not this one. I don't think he understands what Kashmir is for Indians.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Jun 2009 20:14

kittoo wrote:Not this one. I don't think he understands what Kashmir is for Indians.

kittoo, Mark Tully had spent almost his entire life in India and had been BBC's chief correspondent for South Asia for decades. I would be surprised if he does not understand what has happened in J&K. And, if he is so glaringly deficient in his knowledge, he should keep his mouth shut rather than offer advice to India.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 15 Jun 2009 20:15

Only the weak are offered advice.
The strong are listened to!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Jun 2009 20:40

SSridhar wrote:
kittoo, Mark Tully had spent almost his entire life in India and had been BBC's chief correspondent for South Asia for decades. I would be surprised if he does not understand what has happened in J&K. And, if he is so glaringly deficient in his knowledge, he should keep his mouth shut rather than offer advice to India.

Such people are informers. They spend a lot of time and also have Indian family members. Then they have a seperate dialogue with the westerners and then comment on what Indian should do or should not do.

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 15 Jun 2009 20:44

If Mark Tully is saying this, this means that in the very least GOI / MMS is offering the LOC to the Pakistanis.
This is downright anti national. GOI is bound by the parliamentary resolution and answerable to the people of India.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Jun 2009 21:39

Acharya wrote:Such people are informers. They spend a lot of time and also have Indian family members. Then they have a seperate dialogue with the westerners and then comment on what Indian should do or should not do.

Absolutely right.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Jun 2009 22:06

Pulikeshi wrote:Only the weak are offered advice.
The strong are listened to!

Unfortunately so true. In countryside , even a simpleton knows that "kamjor ki Bivi, sab ki Bhabi hove se". We have seen this happening to Bakiland and now gora dares to think same for India. This is the result of pathetic impression created by the disgusting behavior of our politicians who cannot think beyond their Pinocchio noses.

Now beside LOC , lets offer Sunni population transfer .

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 16 Jun 2009 01:33

>>“India can and should in its own interest take some magnanimous initiatives to resolve the Kashmir issue. Every one knows that India would like to settle the issue by turning the Line of Control into an international border. But that would not be the end of the matter. It has to consider something more than LoC if wants a lasting peace in the region,”

Why? To show magnanimity?

Tully, who has gone native but retains some value for his land of origin, was a BBC correspondent, which is funded by the British government, which in the not so distant past was more than marginally responsible for the mess that exists on our western border. His views will be given due regard, and because of his mental condition will be treated with magnanimity. But he should remember with what is left of his mind that he has been taken into our home, welcomed and made a member of the family. It is not for him to suggest giving the keys of the house to the neighbourhood thief.

Never forget what his country's forefathers were responsible for. Forgive if you want to.

wig · Post by **wig** » 16 Jun 2009 21:24

I feel sad that westerners feel confident to advise us on all topics. but when a couple of lac kashmiri pandits were forced out of their homes and hearths -there were very few exceptions - none of these "knowledgeable" westerners raised his voice at ethnic cleansing going on inside india with active assistance from pakistan to what in now euphemistically titled as "non state actors"
the directors of these non state actors in pakistan are even now active with nefarious plans and all we get is advice. contrast that with western action in erstwhile yugoslavia and one feels the difference

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 17 Jun 2009 13:32

Kashmir’s rising tide of hate
Praveen Swami's Article..... must be read in full. Edited version to avoid copyright issues.

Early this month, Nigeena Awan was dragged out of her home at Kellar, Kashmir, beaten up and executed with an assault weapon from point blank range. Her father, Mohammad Sharif Awan, was ordered to bury his daughter without ceremony; the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, which carried out the execution, also warned neighbours against dignifying her death with last rites.

Hours after Awan’s death on June 3, People’s Democratic Party leader Mehbooba Mufti visited Shopian to stage a protest against the alleged rape and murder of two local women — one of them, like Awan, a high school student. She said nothing about Awan’s execution, though. Nor did Islamist cleric Tariq Ahmad, who has emerged as the key leader of the Shopian protests, say anything; nor, for that matter, did the local leadership of the National Conference. No one has called for the men who killed Awan to be found and prosecuted. No one even bothered to visit her family, even though the hamlet of Pahlipora at Kellar is just a 10-km drive from Shopian.
<snip>
But violent death has visited the Shopian area often, for the most part without drawing comment. In April, 60-year-old Reshma Awan, like Nigeena Awan a member of the Gujjar pastoralist community, was executed by the Lashkar-e-Taiba at Pahlipora. Her son, Mohammad Aslam Awan, was shot and seriously injured while attempting to protect his mother. Last month, Dachnoo resident Mohammad Saifuddin was killed similarly. And a day after Nigeena Awan was murdered, unidentified men shot dead shopkeeper Mohammad Abdullah Gela at his Sangarwani home.

What, then, is it that has vested the Shopian deaths with special significance? The silence that surrounded Awan’s death necessitates an examination of the complex — and often deceitful — politics of death in Jammu and Kashmir.

“Long live Pakistan, We want freedom,” chanted the mob of young men who, armed with shovels and axes, gathered to demolish Sabina Hamid Bulla’s home in downtown Srinagar on May 5. Back in 2006, as Ms Bulla’s home was being brought down, few understood its full import. The Islamist assault on Ms Bulla, a Srinagar madam whose brothel is alleged to have serviced top politicians, businessmen and bureaucrats, sparked off a series of fateful events.

Even the most obtuse among the ranks of Kashmir’s Islamists understood by 2005 that their movement had failed. Much of the secessionist leadership was preparing to make peace with India. Large swathes of the Islamist vanguard, the Jamaat-e-Islami, had allied themselves with the PDP; important elements of the Hizb were preparing to accept defeat.

Kashmir’s Islamist patriarch, Syed Ali Shah Geelani — recently described by Hizb ul-Mujahideen chief Mohammad Yusuf Shah as “the name of our struggle”— set about crafting a response to the crisis.

Mr. Geelani’s followers began to make the wider case that the secularisation of culture in Kashmir constituted a civilisational threat. In an article published in May 2006, Islamist leader Asiya Andrabi attacked “young Muslim girls who have lost their identity of Islam and are presenting the look of a Bollywood actress but not Fatima and Aisha (R.A.) [Prophet Muhammad’s daughter and wife].”

Later, Islamists leveraged the uncovering of Ms Bulla’s operations to argue that India was engaged in a conspiracy to undermine Jammu and Kashmir’s Islamic character. Kashmir University scholar Hameeda Nayeem even made the extraordinary accusation that the scandal pointed “unequivocally to a policy-based state patronage [of prostitution].”

In the summer of 2007, the rape-murder of a north Kashmir teenager was used to initiate a xenophobic mobilisation. Addressing a June 24, 2007 rally at Langate town, Mr. Geelani said: “Hundreds of thousands of non-state subjects had been pushed into Kashmir under a long-term plan to crush the Kashmiris.” He called for them to be “driven out of Kashmir in a civilised way [sic.].” By early last year, campaigns like these had almost become routine. Islamists mobilised against a career counsellor who, they claimed, had been despatched to Srinagar schools to seduce students into a career of vice. An Anantnag schoolteacher also came under attack, after a video surfaced showing that a group of his students had danced to pop film music on a holiday in the town.
<snip>
Mr. Geelani’s position stemmed from his long-standing belief that Islam and Hinduism were locked in an irreducible civilisational opposition. At an October 26 rally in Srinagar, he insisted that “the people of the State should, as their religious duty, raise their voice against India’s aggression” (emphasis added). This duty stemmed from the fact that to “practise Islam completely under the subjugation of India is impossible because human beings in practice worship those whose rules they abide by.”

Mr. Geelani’s success needs to be read against the evidently inexorable growth of the Jamaat-e-Islami from the 1950s. As scholar Yoginder Sikand has pointed out, the Jamaat believed that “a carefully planned Indian conspiracy was at work to destroy the Islamic identity of the Kashmiris.” It was even alleged “that the government of India had dispatched a team to Andalusia, headed by the Kashmiri Pandit [politician] D.P. Dhar, to investigate how Islam was driven out of Spain and to suggest measures as to how the Spanish experiment could be repeated in Kashmir, too.”

<snip>

Earlier this month, the pro-Islamist Kashmir High Court Bar Association released a report claiming the “perpetrators belong to a particular community, and had even vandalised the bodies of the victims.” Its general secretary G.N. Shaheen added, in case anyone missed the point, the rapes were carried out by “Hindu fascists.” Based on dubious evidence — the HCBA report asserts that the “ill-fated duo was raped even after their death,” a claim no pathologist has so far felt confident of making — the report was clearly intended to inflame.

Pro-Islamist media have been helping to ensure that the venom spreads as far as possible. In a June 16 article, Riyaz Masoor, editor, Rising Kashmir, suggested that the victims “represented the nation Kashmir and the rapists represented the state of India; it was the Hindu India raping the Muslim Kashmir.” Mr. Masroor accused the Indian Army, which until now has not been alleged to have played any role in the Shopian deaths, of going “on a raping spree.” “Let them carry a poison pill with them,” he advised the State’s women: “if, God forbid, they are caught, let them swallow the poison and embrace death and defeat the evil military man of the world’s largest democracy.”

The lies seem to be working. Even the United States-based MacArthur Foundation’s Asia Security Initiative last week claimed that the judicial commission investigating the Shopian deaths was questioning Indian troops — a claim whose credibility must be read alongside the bizarre assertions in the report that the Shopian victims were sisters who grew up in an apple orchard.
<snip>

Last year, Kashmir’s people decisively rejected Mr. Geelani’s communal chauvinism and defeated his demand for a boycott of the Assembly elections. The candidates they elected, though, have so far shown little integrity or commitment to those they represent: both the National Conference and the PDP have sought accommodation with Islamist secessionists. They must summon up the courage to take on Mr. Geelani — or risk being swept away by the rising tide of hate.

sum · Post by **sum** » 17 Jun 2009 22:32

So, finally Swami admits that the KMs are a lost cause and its not the evil Hindus of Jammu who cause the KMs to go beserk for the smallest reasons?

Finally, even Pravin Swami seems to have run out of reasons to defend the traitorous behaviour of a large bunch of KMs...he usually doesn't miss the mention of "chauvinist Hindus/RSS/VHP/Babri" in any article about the Hurri-rats (helps in the ==).

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 20 Jun 2009 03:24

Posting Full article

Status of Indian and Pakistani army in Jammu and Kashmir

By Dr Shabir Choudhry

Dr Nazir Gilani is among a few Kashmiris who regularly write on Kashmir and human rights abuse. He, at times, comes out with new phrases, which provide a new dimension to debates. In response to my article, ‘Another own goal’, he made an interesting remark:
‘India is not an occupier in Kashmir. She is there as the consequence of a provisional agreement with the Government of Kashmir. The jurisprudence of this provisional agreement is accepted by the Government of Pakistan in all her bilateral agreements with the Government of India, namely, Tashkent Accord and Shimla Accord’.

This observation gave a new dimension to the debate and requires further consideration. The Indian army came to Jammu and Kashmir not as army of invasion; rather they came on request of the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir. On 22 October 1947 some parts of the State were invaded by unruly tribal warriors, killing and pillaging on their way to Srinagar, the Maharaja’s forces were not able to defend the State territory. The Maharaja had two choices: either let these tribesmen run over the country and destroy everything or seek help from India – he chose the later.
The Maharaja could not have got help from the government of Pakistan as they betrayed his trust; and despite the Standstill Agreement with the Maharaja, they stopped all the necessary supplies to the State and managed the tribal invasion to punish the Maharaja for not yielding to the demands of the Pakistani rulers who wanted State’s accession to Pakistan.
The Maharaja requested help from India, and signed an accession treaty on 26th October 1947, which was ‘provisionally’ accepted by the government of India. In line with the request of the Maharaja the Indian forces landed in Srinagar on 27th October 1947. Their primary purpose was to save the State from the invaders; and protect ‘life’, ‘liberty’ and ‘property’.
So Dr Nazir Gilani’s contention is that the Indian army did not invade the State, rather they went there on the request of the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, and went there to protect the state from invasion. They had a specific role to perform in the State. What they did there, wrong as it might be, does not change the legal position of the army’s presence.
In reply to some of the criticism, in my next article - It is a matter of perspective- I said: ‘He (Dr Nazir Gilani) is entitled to express his opinion and defend it. Others have a right to accept it, remain silent or challenge it. Question, however, is if the Indian army, using Dr Nazir Gilani’s phrase, is not ‘an occupying force’ then logically it is a ‘legal force’. If that is so, then what is the problem? Why people of Kashmir are complaining and protesting?
Another friend and a colleague in struggle, Mumtaz Khan, also cared to read that article and made the following comments: ‘The other point that didn’t fit into nationalistic profile of Shabir Sahib when he specifically sought opinion of Valley people on the observations of Gilani Sahib that is very much against the very essence of nationalism especially what Shabir Sahib believe in entire state Jammu and Kashmir as single entity but trying to localize it which opponent forces normally practice to keep this division alive. I do not mean to doubt his intentions but words normally create such impression’.
Perhaps my friend didn’t read carefully to note that I never used the word ‘Valley’ in that paragraph. I said: ‘I don’t know how many takers there will be for this argument in Jammu and Kashmir, and especially on the Indian side of the LOC’. Jammu and Kashmir does not mean the ‘Valley’. Similarly the phrase ‘on the Indian side of the LOC’ does not stand for the ‘Valley’.
Anyhow the fact is that many parts of the State have no complaints from the presence of the Indian army. For example, people of Gilgit and Baltistan have no problem with the Indian army. I have spoken to some leaders from Gilgit and Baltistan on the topic; they clearly have no problem from the Indian army. However their problem is related to the presence of the Pakistan army in Gilgit and Baltistan and many regard it as an army of occupation.
Similarly people of Ladakh have no problem with the presence of the Indian army in Jammu and Kashmir. I have spoken to many people from Jammu, and they seem to have no serious issue with the presence of the Indian army. However they had a serious problem with the presence of militants, many of them non Kashmiris, in parts of the Jammu region and wanted the Indian army to root them out.
Majority of people of Pakistani Administered Kashmir criticise what their brothers and sisters have to endure in the Valley, but have no direct problem with the presence of the Indian army (cross border skirmishes and firing created problems for the people, but that generally happened when there was infiltration taking place or when there was tension on the LOC which is manned by the Pakistan army from the other side).
That leaves us with the Valley of Kashmir, main part of the State in many ways; and which has faced wrath of the Indian army since 1989. The Indian army’s relationship with the Valley has been different from other areas of the State; hence majority of the people, especially in 1990s regarded the Indian army as ‘army of occupation’. I was referring to this fact rather than undermining struggle for unification and independence of the State, which has always been close to my heart.
After this explanation it would be pertinent to analyse the legal status of the Pakistani army in some parts of the State. Unlike the Indian army, the Pakistani army was never invited by a Ruler or any legitimate authority to enter the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Under terms of the Standstill Agreement, Pakistan was responsible for providing certain non military services which the government of the Punjab provided during the British Raj.
But despite the Standstill Agreement Pakistani government managed a ‘Tribal invasion’ to acquire Jammu and Kashmir. Unofficially Pakistani army and civilians entered the state territory to support and direct the tribal invasion. Officially Pakistani troops entered the State territory in April 1948, not on the request of Kashmiris, but to safeguard their strategic and other national interests.
The UN Security Council took a serious notice of illegal entry of the Pakistani troops in the State territory; and the UNCIP Resolution of 13 August 1948 explains this situation in the following words:
(l) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State. (2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting.

I hope this explanation will help readers to understand legal status of both armies at the time of their entry in to the State territory. Their presence and role in the respective parts is subject of much controversy and resentment, but that is a separate topic

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jun 2009 04:25

Obama: No role in Kashmir

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Jun 2009 00:03

From Pioneer, 26 June 2009

FRONT PAGE | Friday, June 26, 2009 | Email | Print |

Army backs Omar’s khaki plan

Pioneer News Service | New Delhi

Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s statement asking the Central para-military forces (CPMFs) not to don combat uniform during street patrolling in the cities is backed by a similar call from the Army. But the paramilitary forces are opposed to the proposal.

Appreciating the Chief Minister’s contention, Army officials in Delhi said they have repeatedly submitted to the Government that CPMFs and the State police should be directed to wear simple khaki during patrol so that people could make distinction between Army and the para-military forces. In many cases, Army has got bad name for the excesses committed by the para-military forces because the common uniform blurs the distinction, the sources claimed.

They said battle fatigues were an integral part of the Army uniform and soldiers and officers wore them during operations and during war. The para-military forces were donning this uniform without any check, sources said.

The Army also clarified that it was not deployed in the towns and cities of Jammu and Kashmir. The counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency grid, governed by the Unified Command headed by the Chief Minister, clearly demarcated the roles of the various security forces operating in the State and the Army was carrying out operations only in the rural areas and inaccessible mountainous terrain.

However, top officials of the Central Reserve Police Force, which has deployed 77 battalions for internal security duties and counter insurgency operations in the trouble-torn State, say the combat fatigue is essential as it acts as camouflage in the valley terrain. The officials insisted khaki stands out and is suitable for desert terrain.

“CRPF personnel also have khaki uniforms and per se there is no harm in using it in city patrolling but most of the para-military personnel are engaged in counter-insurgency operations in the countryside, for which battle fatigues are essential,” a top official of the CRPF said.

Khakis for the CRPF will also lead to a shift of blame on paramilitary personnel for any atrocity committed by the local police. As per records, to date there is hardly any case of human rights violation against the CPRF in the State, the official said. The CRPF guards the Chief Minister and even the Director General of Police there, he added.

A senior official of the Border Security Force, which is now engaged squarely on the border and provides the first line of defence, says battle fatigues are necessary in the hilly terrains along the international boundary as it helps in camouflaging personnel.

So there is a tug of war on who is to be the fall guy for 'excesses'.

I think Omar Abdullah is making it difficult for the forces- paramilitary, Army and local police to operate. If they all wear different uniforms then they are easy to make out who is who and target them.

aditya · Post by **aditya** » 27 Jun 2009 01:25

In many cases, Army has got bad name for the excesses committed by the para-military forces because the common uniform blurs the distinction, the sources claimed.

What "common uniform"? All Indian security forces wear all sorts of camo even within the same unit.

As for the blame game politics I guess it is normal to an extent, but it shouldn't be allowed to go out of hand. Remember the kind of stories one used to hear in the 90s when surrendered terrorists used to be forced to "surrender" a second time because the first time they surrendered to the "wrong" agency, say army, whereas another agency, say BSF, wanted credit for the surrender.

On a separate note, I feel the term "paramilitary" needs to be replaced from a purely psy point of view. Many dumkopfs (e.g. BBC) don't get the difference between irregular "paramilitaries" and federal security forces like CRPF and BSF. As for the Hindi "अर्ध सैनिक" ("half-military"), it sounds downright ridiculous. Gives the same impression as say, "नफुन्सक सुरक्षा बल".

Something like "Central Police" would be more appropriate.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 27 Jun 2009 05:42

BBC:

2 Soldiers Killed in Suicide Attack in Kashmir

When I saw the news, I grimly rushed to see which area of J&K had been targeted. But then I read the article, and started laughing.