Sunday, August 24, 2008

Kashmir exposes India

India congratulates itself for its tolerance of different religions. While India truly is a home to some of the biggest religious groups on the planet, it is losing its credibility on treating different religious groups equally.

The current imbroglio in the state of Jammu and Kashmir is a clear fight between Hindus and Muslims though our media, politicians and analysts would like to describe it as political situation that has gone out of control. The pent up hatreds are coming into the foreground. That is causing a dent in the image of India’s tolerance.

Amarnath

For many years now, millions of Hindus from all over India have thronged to Amarnath in Kashmir to pay visit to their gods, and for most part, their visits were peaceful, though Kashmir is a predominantly Muslim region. Now, a new controversy has been created when a certain tract of land was allocated for taking care of visiting Hindu pilgrims. Kashmiri Muslims opposed such a move by raising the objection that it would lead to permanent settlement in the region thereby leading to change in demographics of the region – which is sacrosanct in that state since Indian Independence. The government acquiesced to roll back the decision on allocation of the land. I am not sure if such an allocation was right and if the roll back was wise. But what followed next was quite idiotic – very characteristic of modern but religious India.

Protests

Hindus in Jammu took umbrage at this roll back and came onto streets to protest- defying curfews and targeting minority Muslim population in Jammu region. These protestors include ordinary people, housewives, college girls, school children, the middle class and poor- not exactly the political goons as you may want to believe. Some protestors who defied the curfew died in police firing. One of the TV reporters commented, ‘Kuch Paane ke liye, Kuch Khone Padtha hain’, clearly showing his sympathy to Hindus. What he meant was, to gain something one has to lose something. Little did he know that he was actually voicing opinions of many Hindus in India who think it is time to get to streets to fight for Hindu dignity which they believe they have lost to Muslims for many years now – starting with Ghazni’s raids into India more than thousand years ago!

That ‘losing something’ involved death of few protestors in Jammu. ‘Gaining something’ involved the pride of Hindus.

Kashmir Blockade

To push Kashmiri Muslims into a corner, to stifle them, so that they learn their lessons, so that they dare not defy the might of Indian Hindus ever again, these protestors in Jammu defied curfew to completely block the roads going to Srinagar. This economic blockage of Kashmir Valley was justified by Hindus as a necessary measure to bring the government to its knees. One leader of Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti says [1]:

We knew that unless Kashmiris are made to feel the pinch, the government will not pay attention.

Very soon, the Kashmiri Muslims started to feel the pinch. There was shortage of medical supplies and other essentials in the valley.

Kashmiri Muslims could not even sell their apple produce to earn their living. Meanwhile, Hindu Jammu was gleaming in pride that they have made Kashmiri Muslims suffer. One Samiti convener has this to say [1]:

People in Jammu too are suffering as a result of the blockade, but no one is worried about us. As always the interests of Kashmiris are paramount.

The hypocrisy is not lost. First, you go ahead and create an economic blockade thereby inflicting pain onto others. Then, you sympathize with yourself saying that you too have suffered because of the blockade which you created in the first place.

Kashmiris look towards Pakistan

This event alone has done more harm to Indian cause in Kashmir than the last twenty years of army rule there. In a poll that was conducted by Indian Express in 87% favored independence, and only 3% wanted to merge with Pakistan, less that those who favored staying with India at 7%.

Now, this economic blockade showed Kashmiri Muslims where Indian Hindus really stand. If needed, they are ready to starve them and cut them off to subjugate them. The frustrated Kashmiri Muslims, who were deprived of medicines, and who had to put off their weddings because of shortage of supplies, took to streets. Since India was not ready to let them earn their living, they looked towards Pakistan, and marched towards Muzaffarabad in POK or Azad Kashmir to sell their produce. That meant defying India. Naturally, they were stopped by Indian Army resulting in killing of few marchers. After that, more and more Kashmiri Muslims thronged streets in Kashmir Valley defying curfew orders resulting in more killings. One couldn’t help but notice many Pakistani Flags being waved on TV.

If there was any trace of goodwill that India garnered, it was flushed down in one go.

Current episode debunks India’s credentials

The fabric of Indian secularism is laid bare – it is seen as hollow. It is clear that this whole fight in the state of Jammu and Kashmir is religious in nature. The clich├ęd idea that J&K is single state is a chimera. It is clear once again that people of Kashmir feel and act quite different from people of Jammu.

The present crisis erupted because of a harbored feeling within Jammu inhabitants who felt they were being sidelined in the state – that only Kashmir gets all the attention while Jammu has to get a step-brotherly treatment, that it has pay the price for India’s obsession with its secular credentials.

BJP and Jammu people contest that the share of Jammu in legislature is lopsided favoring Kashmiris. Citing the number of voters, which is not the right way of looking at it, they come to a conclusion that indeed their percentage share in the state is less. However, this myth is exploded. It is the population that should constitute the share not the number of voters. Some people may or may not vote – for example, in Naxal regions, the voter turnout it usually less. That does not translate into less number of legislators from those regions.

Though this contention from BJP and Jammu is fabricated, it goes without saying that there are many differences between the two regions to warrant bifurcation (or trifurcation) of the state. Every episode in the last many years clearly indicates that Kashmir and Jammu are not similar in religious composition, language, ethnicity, and aspirations. Why the pretense to hold the state together instead of dividing it on the basis of religion (Hindu/Muslim) or language (Dogri/Kashmiri)? Why doesn’t India come to terms with realities and understand that aspirations of Kashmiris in the Valley are very different from those living in Jammu? Why don’t we call spade a spade?

That’s because we continue to delude ourselves that India’s identity is opposite to that of Pakistan. Since Pakistan believed a nation could be formed on the basis of religion, India believes the exact opposite – that it is home to many religions and that a religion should never be an identity to discuss autonomy. Since it negated the idea of creation of Pakistan on the basis of religion, it continued to subdue and suppress all separatist movements in Kashmir which sought autonomy on the basis of religion. India continues to believe that it is tolerant- so tolerant that no religious group would ever seek separation of either a state or nation based on religion. If such a movement exists it casts a blind eye, or gives different interpretations, or accuses neighbors of fomenting such nefarious ideas in its otherwise innocent citizens, but it never admits that religion is an identity that needs to be addressed as a group.

India lives in an illusion that its democracy and religious tolerance are inalienable and inviolable characteristics of India and that nobody can debunk or puncture these widely held principles. If any counter-evidence is produced, it rubbishes that evidence. This is no different from holding onto any ideology that blinds people from reasoning. Indians are blinded by constructions of their own superiorities, such as democracy, secularism (ingrained in Hinduism, not Constitution), and religious tolerance, and they never question these belief systems.

Kashmir exposes India’s illusions

India lost all its bonhomie it created in the last many years with just one event of Amarnath controversy. It is clear where Indian Hindus stand. When it comes to protecting their interests, which can be as trivial as allocation of extra land for their pilgrims, India can choke a population of minority religion into submission by starving them if necessary. This is not just confined to Kashmir. In Gujarat, India casts a blind eye to the government in power that targets certain community on the basis of religion.

With what comfort or dignity can Indian minority live in this country when the majority believes it can do whatever it wants with impunity to further its interests?

India’s credentials as a tolerant state are fast eroding. No political party can stand to the might of rising Hindus who are ready to back their position on the world stage as a dominant power, even if that means suppressing certain communities or religions. Time and again we are succumbing to religious demands and we don’t know how to deal with them. Our approach is ad hoc and most often the solutions are awkward and clumsy. On one hand we don’t want to recognize religious identities and groups as legitimate groups but at the same time we succumb to various irrational religious sentiments.

India needs to recognize a religious identity as a legitimate identity (like language, caste, region, etc) and that this identity forms a distinct group whose members may share similar aspirations. It then needs to address these groups’ aspirations within legal and constitutional confines by separating religion from state. Indians don’t know how to do that. Indians think that identifying a human as male or female would make the state masculine or feminine. A state can address religious groups without having to recognize it as an instrument of state and we need to just learn how to do it.

[1] Outlook, August 18, 2008

31 comments:

  1. Hi

    Kashmir consits of three regions,each with Islam,Hindu and Bhuddism as major religions.Kashmir valley(now muslim majority)was a hindu region which has bravely fought the muslim butchers for centuries.It is birth place of Maharhi Kashap,Kota Rani,Kalhan etc.,

    Continious genocide of hindus by Terrorists and Seperatists has resulted in migration of thousand of hindus from the valley leaving thier homes,properties nd belongings.

    Hindus are visiting Amarnath for centuries.The shrine can be visited only during summer.Lot of piligrims die due to land slides.

    Government has transferd 40 hecters of forrest land for construction of shelters for these travellers.

    Muslims of kashmir valley protested for this land transfer,which the governer after being appointed to that capacity cancelled the land transfer,which was celebrated with lot of fan fare with pakistani flags.

    Why muslims are not sensitive to the death of thier fellow citizens?
    Is hatred is the core messege of islam?Why moderate and progrssive muslims are marginalised?Is terrorism is the voice of Islam?

    Not that these people has never opposed the transfer of land to mafias and smugglers.

    Compare the 40 hectare land transfer for shelters to the facilities provided to haz piligrims-Seperate air terminal,Haz cell in ministery,Special team of doctors and nurses,Haz officers to Saudi arabia to take of these visiters.These facilities every year,year after year.No muslim country provides these facilities.

    Here are the few questions
    -Why the so called secularits,human right activts do not oppose the waving of pakistani flags?
    -Why hindu piligrims are denied even temporary shelters in their own country?What are Haz committee recmondations on it?
    -When kashmir hindus can return to thier homes?
    -Why the religious people oppose transfer of land to a shrine?Why they are not opposing transfer of land to smugglers and maffias?
    -When the occupied kashmir will be freed from Pakistan occupation?
    -Why valley people consider the piligrims as trepassers?If they do that because they are majority in the valley,what is their advice to the rest of fellow muslims where they are minority?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting commentary on latest kashmir issue. Let us hope that everybody puts some thought into this matter and let peace prevail.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i dont see the problem. kashmir region is very important to muslims and hindus. why cant hindus visit their shrines when there is a muslim population living there? i suspect people of all religions will get along if the politicians and war mongers will simply shut up. but that aint going to happen any time soon, is it?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Kashmiri Muslims opposed such a move by raising the objection that it would lead to permanent settlement in the region thereby leading to change in demographics of the region" –

    "But what followed next was quite idiotic – very characteristic of modern but religious India. Protests Hindus in Jammu took umbrage at this roll back and came onto streets to protest"
    The Kashmiri muslims protested without verifying if the land grant was permanent or temporary (it was temporary and the GOI assured of it). How can a group of pilgirms alter the demographics of a state in two months? Somehow that doesn't seem idiotic to you but the protests against the revoked order is idotic. Strange logic.


    "Some protestors who defied the curfew died in police firing. One of the TV reporters commented, ‘Kuch Paane ke liye, Kuch Khone Padtha hain’, clearly showing his sympathy to Hindus".
    Pakistanis can proudly proclaim they are Islamic, Kashmiris can scream all they want about establishing an Islamic state, but the poor guy cannot show any sort of support to people from his own religion because, unfortuanately he is part of a 'secular' country and any support shown to Hindus amounts to Hindutva and religious extremism.

    "The hypocrisy is not lost. First, you go ahead and create an economic blockade thereby inflicting pain onto others. Then, you sympathize with yourself saying that you too have suffered because of the blockade which you created in the first place. Kashmiris look towards Pakistan"

    The hypocrisy is not lost on kashmiri Muslims either. First you go ahead and purge the valley off Kashmiri pundits(there can be no place for idolators and infidels in an Islamic nation). You encourage the proliferation of terrorists camps amongst you(for some vague idea of "azadi") making the government send a huge army to control their activities, then you play the victim card and say how badly you've been treated by Hindu India and the Indian army. Hypocrisy is not restricted to one religion or one group of people. People of Jammu are learning the basics of how to play the victim card from Kashmiris.

    "Current episode debunks India’s credentials The fabric of Indian secularism is laid bare – it is seen as hollow. It is clear that this whole fight in the state of Jammu and Kashmir is religious in nature"
    Absolutely true. Indian secularism is hollow because secularism in the sub continent is a one way path, Hindus are supposed to be secular while Muslims can openly declare that all they want is the rule of Allah (as in Kashmir). No wonder secularism is such a miused word here. Secularism can exist only when people of other religions accept it. There is no point in Hindus talking about secularism, because you see ultimately they are seen as jokers both by the Kashmiri Muslims and our friendly neighbour Pakistan.We should just emulate our Muslim neighbours and declare India a Hindu state.


    "Why doesn’t India come to terms with realities and understand that aspirations of Kashmiris in the Valley are very different from those living in Jammu? Why don’t we call spade a spade"?
    Exactly. We should understand the Kashmiri psyche. We should come to terms with the fact that the Kashmiris want an Islamic nation. And that is something hard to accept, because we are hopeless Indians who actually think that there can be something called equality of all religions whether they are in the majority or minority. Sadly this myth was busted by the mass exodus of Kashmiri pundits. Why aren't we calling a spade a spade? Why are we calling this whole struggle "kashmiri nationalism", we should call it the struggle for an "Islamic state".

    "When it comes to protecting their interests, which can be as trivial as allocation of extra land for their pilgrims, India can choke a population of minority religion into submission by starving them if necessary".
    Oh yeah, now Hinduism becomes the oppressive majority religion! What a joke.Somehow when Hindus applied the same logic to Muslim majority Kashmir (where minorities were systematically persecuted), it was called the will of the majority! In fact this whole kashmiri nationalism is for the establishment of an Islamic state. As you had said in a previous paragraph "but it never admits that religion is an identity that needs to be addressed as a group", If we want to apply that logic here shouldn't Hindus (who are the largest religious group in India) ask for India to be declared a Hindu nation (they are the majority after all). I don't support such calls but it seems that is what your arguments point to.



    "With what comfort or dignity can Indian minority live in this country when the majority believes it can do whatever it wants with impunity to further its interests"?
    You should apply these lines to Kashmiri nationalism and see how apt they sound.

    "That’s because we continue to delude ourselves that India’s identity is opposite to that of Pakistan. Since Pakistan believed a nation could be formed on the basis of religion, India believes the exact opposite – that it is home to many religions"
    This is the truth whether you like it or not, and no it is not a delusion,not yet.

    "Indians think that identifying a human as male or female would make the state masculine or feminine".
    This made no sense to me at all.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "With what comfort or dignity can Indian minority live in this country when the majority believes it can do whatever it wants with impunity to further its interests? "

    Sometime back Biharis were threatened, beaten and humiliated in Mumbai, simply for being Biharis. I can imagine that they must have felt loss of dignity. Yet did anyone came forward to argue a separate nation for Biharis?

    Yes. India has botched in Kashmir. But that is only half the story because India has botched in pretty much entire India. The second part of the story is equally important. There is not a single country in the world which has a sizable Muslim minority population and is not a subject of Islamic terror. Even, developed countries like UK and France have not been able to cure Muslim sense of victimhood. This cannot be just a coincidence.

    The fact is that the concept of an Islamic ummah is in direct conflict with the concept of a multi-religious nation-state. This fact was recognized by Jinnah in his two nation theory. In fact Sujai has also noted in one of his articles that the act of Islamic violence world over are more an expression of injured nationalism than religion, which is true. A muslim nation is a psychological reality for the muslims even if it does not have any geographical territory today. Moreover, this reality is incompatible with the concept of a nation-state, which is more a product of late 18th-19th century ideas. Most of the countries today are built on this concept of nation-state and therefore if they have a sizable muslim minority population, they are constantly at odds with the competing reality of Islamic nation.

    -- Manish Saxena

    ReplyDelete
  6. See the language of Prakash..these sort of language and mentality is definitely not going to help us find a solution..it is the language of intolerance.

    Kashmir and India too is now in a big mire and it is getting more and more deep into it. This land issue was a small one which could have been settled, if our politicians and especially our central and state governments were a bit more sensible. Instead, they too chose to play the game of religion and appeasement.

    And now, it is going to engulf the whole country, if not settled immediately. I am sure that the hindu community would try to flex their muscles, as they are now doing in orissa, killing and looting the christians..and they are in that mood of chasing the minority. The hindutwa leaders should realize that they are playing with fire. The situation would not be then that of bosnia, or any other..it depends on the life and stability, and the prudence of more than 1 billion people..if it turns to the worse, the bloodshed would be unimaginable..let the fanatics on both side realize that at the earliest.

    nothing more sujai.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Some blogger had given 3 options for this mess. Have a referendum and let Kashmiris decide:

    a: Join Pakistan
    b: Be with India
    c: Be independent.

    In thge garb of being secular the Hindu majority is being trampled upon and who cares how many Hindus die.

    ReplyDelete
  8. the myth of the economic blockage,spread by the 'seculars' like sujai

    http://www.frontlineonnet.com/stories/20080912251801000.htm

    not that it will do anything to opne the eyes of rabid secularists but the secular and islamic lies have to countered.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dear Rajeeve chelanat:

    What part of the language troubled yoy and why?Can you please give some feedback.

    Gopal: there is a commentery on BBC South asia on different solutions.You may be interested in it.

    Anonymous: Thanks for the link

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rags:

    Pakistanis can proudly proclaim they are Islamic, Kashmiris can scream all they want about establishing an Islamic state, but the poor guy cannot show any sort of support to people from his own religion because, unfortuanately he is part of a 'secular' country and any support shown to Hindus amounts to Hindutva and religious extremism.

    Yes. That is what I ask of this country. If India wants to emulate Pakistan the way you described, I completely oppose it. I don’t think Pakistan is not a good example for India to emulate. If its standards are so low, I am not really happy about it.

    We should just emulate our Muslim neighbours and declare India a Hindu state.

    We differ in our expectations from this nation. I don’t want us to be foolish just because our neighbors are.

    We should come to terms with the fact that the Kashmiris want an Islamic nation.

    On the other hand, I think all they want is freedom.

    Somehow when Hindus applied the same logic to Muslim majority Kashmir (where minorities were systematically persecuted), it was called the will of the majority!

    I am not justifying what Kashmiri Muslims did to Kashmiri Hindus. Just because they have done it does not mean we have to do the same to them. In the end innocent people die no matter who does it.

    If we want to apply that logic here shouldn't Hindus (who are the largest religious group in India) ask for India to be declared a Hindu nation (they are the majority after all).

    Leave logic to people who can think! ;-)

    Reread what I wrote. I was quite sure someone would make such an unrelated conclusion as you did. And hence I clarified how India can work with religious groups without having to resort to combining state with religion.

    "Indians think that identifying a human as male or female would make the state masculine or feminine".
    This made no sense to me at all.


    Of course it didn’t make sense – that’s why you came to unrelated conclusion I cited above. Basic prerequisite for applying logic is that it is done by a thinking box! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  11. a secular state does not mean it has to treat different religious group equally.. it means it should not care for religion at all.
    secularism & democracy is too important a trait that it cant be given into just bcos we have an angry irrational mob in our hands and our politician only knows ad hoc solutions.
    addressing and acknowledging religious identity is opening a can of worms. irrationality, myths, religious sentiments and many such worms are kept away from government only by secularism.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sujai,

    I am curious. Are you in favor of holding a referendum in Kashmir? (It sounds like it, but you didn't spell it out.) If so, what do you think about the consequences? Communal backlash, national integrity (other states might start secessionist demands), security concerns etc.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I don’t think Pakistan is not a good example for India to emulate."
    Sounds very logical isn't it?

    Yeah right, Mr.thinking box. We'll apply your logic here and give Kashmir independence. We don't have to stop with Kashmir, we'll do that to every other region having separatist claims, after all if people don't want to be part of India they shouldn't be forced to right?
    BTW,the kashmiris have no moral right to talk bout azadi until they have compensated the Hindu pandits.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Vishal:
    I am curious. Are you in favor of holding a referendum in Kashmir?

    I think I have discussed this topic in detail on my blog. Kashmir I-VII.

    Greater autonomy, independence, are some of the options I prefer. I also believe that the state should be seen as three distinct regions.

    If so, what do you think about the consequences? Communal backlash, national integrity (other states might start secessionist demands), security concerns etc.

    I don't think that these are real concerns. I think they are all imaginary concerns.

    The real concern is if India is confident enough to take bold decisions. Or is it shit scared?
    The real concern is that India and Indians are really insecure about their own country. They think that the idea called India is so fragile that a single act of good faith will somehow crumble the idea called India like a pack of cards.

    On the other hand, I think India is much stronger than what many people believe. We live here in spite of many options we have. We really believe in the idea called India, and we are fighting our case to make this nation better, because we all believe in it, not because we have no options, not because we have other alternatives.

    There are enough number of people in India who have not given up on India, and they will continue to hold India together. It is in their interest to be part of India, and they will continue to do so without the a gun pointed at their head.

    Security? What security? National security? If one can defend such a fragile region as Siachen Glacier, why can we defend the plains. It is much easier to defend the plains than the mountains any day.

    If other states demand secession, what can one do about it? Do you really think India is held together only because of fear- that India somehow keeps itself together by keeping half a million army forces in each state?

    North-east is definitely a big problem. But it is not related to Kashmir. Our policies in North-east are independent of Kashmir. We really botched our job there. We will have to face the reality someday or the other. May be, we are waiting for a large scale massacres to happen before we move start changing our policies in those regions.

    Communal backlash? Who will backlash against who? On what pretext?

    The real consequence is that India will be absolved of many duties that it is now extending on the name of holding territorial integrity which is flawed to start with. Are we just interested in the land but not the people residing on it?

    India has to sober up, become mature, and start acting like a rational adult instead of a bigoted loony high on opium.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. India has to sober up, become mature, and start acting like a rational adult instead of a bigoted loony high on opium.

      wow. I wonder why our entire litany of higher authorities are not as clever as you are. Why don't you infiltrate into the higher ranks of our administration and affect some real good change and teach the great country called India how to be rational and not be a relegated bigot?

      Delete
  15. Rags:

    Yeah right, Mr.thinking box. We'll apply your logic here and give Kashmir independence. We don't have to stop with Kashmir, we'll do that to every other region having separatist claims, after all if people don't want to be part of India they shouldn't be forced to right?

    Absolutely! ;-)

    BTW,the kashmiris have no moral right to talk bout azadi until they have compensated the Hindu pandits.

    The minute you talk about morality, it is a never ending game. We will go back to the roots of the problem and there is no end in sight.

    Think this way- what happened to millions of Hindus who migrated from Pakistan during Partition? Did all those Hindus get compensated? Not really. Why not? It was an exercise that had to be done during Partition and we did it. Millions lost their lands, fields, farms and wealth, and yet no country compensated them for it. Imagine Kashmir is still an unresolved issue from Partition and now think back and ask the same question.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Are we just interested in the land but not the people residing on it?"

    You got your answer. If the Kashmiris favour Pakistan they can pack their bags and leave for the land of "pure". Indians do not have a problem with that.

    "The minute you talk about morality, it is a never ending game. Think this way- what happened to millions of Hindus who migrated from Pakistan during Partition? Did all those Hindus get compensated? "
    During partition, BOTH Hindus and Muslims crossed borders and both of them lost their lands and livelihoods. However in Kashmir only the pundits have been systematically discriminated for several years and thrown out. There is no comparison here. Besides why should I see it your way? It certainly is a most twisted way of viewing things. By the above reasoning you are actually legitimising the discrimination of Kashmiri Pundits by saying it is all part of the greater task of Partition, so KMs are actually justified in kicking out the KPs, they are just doing what Partition did to their other Muslim brothers.

    So who should compensate the KPs? Or should they just be left to their fate? You talk so much about the rights of Kashmiri Muslims, what about the rights of Kashmiri Pundits?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Rags:
    You got your answer. If the Kashmiris favour Pakistan they can pack their bags and leave for the land of "pure". Indians do not have a problem with that.

    It would be a wise idea to know the composition of the valley at different points of time. It will give you a perspective on making a sound argument. Otherwise, it will look like an argument for the sake of argument!

    Besides why should I see it your way?

    You don't have to. For a while, you sounded balanced and rational and that's the only reason I am entertaining this discussion! ;-)


    By the above reasoning you are actually legitimising the discrimination of Kashmiri Pundits by saying it is all part of the greater task of Partition,

    I am not legitimizing the the actions that led to mass migration of Pandits out of the valley. I am not legitimizing the targeted killings of Hindus in Kashmir Valley.

    Taking care of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits is India's responsibility. India cannot shirk from its responsibility.

    So who should compensate the KPs?

    India.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sujal K crocodile tear for muslim but hard dick for hindu women,only lumpen has such quality,he forget hindus in pakistan and bangladesh and muslim migration in India,tell me who want pakistan?After creation pakistan 30% extra people from pakistan enter India only for religion,but shameless muslim not went to their love Pakistan,only word Hypocrite.

      Delete
  18. Yeah sujai, if someone agrees with you they are rational and balanced, if not they are irrational and unbalanced. ;-)

    Anyway, you can rationalize it whichever way you want by citing partition but I do feel a great sense of injustice that KPs who were driven away from their homes by KMs have to be compensated by Indians. Yes, Indians do have the responsibility of rehabilitating the Pundits, but KMs just can't wash their hands off them.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Rags:

    Why didn't India not take care of Kashmiri Pandits? Was it waiting for Kashmiri Muslims to send the funds as compensation?

    India has nearly 300 Billion dollars sitting in foreign exchange. It is not a poor country anymore. So, how come India did not take those initiatives.

    Is the compensation so important that unless Kashmiri Pandits are compensated by Kashmiri Muslims, India will not discuss their autonomy or freedoms?

    How come no government, even BJP and NDA, which shed crocodile tears for the plight of Kashmiri Pandits, never stepped forward to take care of Kashmiri Pandits. Were they all waiting for Kashmiri Muslims to pay up?

    but I do feel a great sense of injustice that KPs who were driven away from their homes by KMs have to be compensated by Indians.

    Your feelings are completely misplaced. The more you speak it shows how less you understand of Kashmir, its composition, the economic status of its people, the representation in education and employment, those important factors which cannot be ignored.

    Most young people wake up suddenly, in far away places, and start believing that the struggle in that valley is everything to do with religion.

    The plight of Kashmiri Hindus can easily be handled by India if it has a desire. Instead of waiting for 'justice' to happen, India should step forward and take care of its people - if it thinks they are its people.

    Seeking reparations from Kashmiri Muslims, whose economy is in shambles, thanks to many years of Indian occupation, is not an important topic to hold off solving Kashmir problem.

    Its like stalling India's Independence because it is waiting for India to send the required funds to Pakistan.

    No exodus, even if it forced, has resulted in compensations.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "Most young people wake up suddenly, in far away places, and start believing that the struggle in that valley is everything to do with religion."
    Yeah, and I'm one of those misguided souls who just woke up from their sleep and realized Kashmir's existence isn't it? ;-)

    Kashmir's economy is underdeveloped alright, but the people there are better off (economically) than many other Indian states.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hi
    Referendem:The conditions to hold referendem are no support for cross border terrorism and no terror camps in the valley.Refer to Security advisor recent comments on the no of camps operating on pakistan soil.
    I do not see the present kind of psuedo secular,minority governments can handle these camps.
    We do not have money like China to influence the politics of the other countries.We do not have the resolve like Turkey to nutralise the camps.

    Seconly,Kashmiris have participated in indian elections several times expressing their belief in the system.

    Thirdly,Look at the plight of muslims who crossed the border.they are still treated like outsiders.Visit MQM website once.

    See how the muslims of Afganisthan border are treated by the dominant muslims of Punjab.

    Compensation:money is not the only issue,Why any body need to leave their birth place(and thier parents for generations) because some people can torture them.

    If kashmiri muslims feel they are indians they sholud lean to live in a secular democratic country.
    If they think they belong to other country,the border they should cross the border.

    I know the terrorists are blowing the buses between kashmir and occupied kashmir,I do not hear any kashmiri has migrated(like KP),or killed by terrorists while crossing to the land of pure(jihadis?)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Audacity Of HopeAugust 29, 2008 12:43 PM

    Why didn't India not take care of Kashmiri Pandits?

    It is because of the fear of losing muslim votes and appeasing seculars like Sujai.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It is because of the fear of losing muslim votes and appeasing seculars like Sujai.

    Then they got the whole reading very wrong. Because Sujai would like it if India takes care of Kashmiri Pandits. Sujai would have more respect for India knowing that it is ready to take care of its people.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Because Sujai would like it if India takes care of Kashmiri Pandits. Sujai would have more respect for India knowing that it is ready to take care of its people.

    Must be a recent development that concern for Kashmiri Hindus rose up Sujai's list of priorities, because that concern is definitely not reflected in the number of posts on this blog.
    Der aaye durust aaye. :)
    -chirkut

    ReplyDelete
  25. Spoke too soon, without reading the comments between rags and Sujai. It's the same old pseudo-secular Sujai, more concerned for Mr. Hussein's silly paintings than Kashmiri Hindus losing their homes. Priorities, I guess.

    Oh, and Sujai, using emoticons is no way to wiggle out of an argument - that's called intellectual dishonesty. And then you accuse others of being irrational - look in the mirror first.
    "Thotha chana baaje ghana" is more apt for you.
    -chirkut

    ReplyDelete
  26. Chirkut:
    Must be a recent development that concern for Kashmiri Hindus rose up Sujai's list of priorities, because that concern is definitely not reflected in the number of posts on this blog.

    A blog is only one facet of a person’s life. A person is much more than his blog. He cannot be completely captured by his blog.

    Just because I have not expressed my sympathies for Kashmiri Pandits ON THIS BLOG does not mean I do not sympathize with them.

    In the same way, just because I sympathize with Kashmiri Muslims does not mean I am against Kashmiri Pandits.

    Unfortunately, I do not see the world in black and white. There are too many shades of gray.

    I have known Kashmiri Pandits before I knew about Kashmir. I have my best friends who are Kashmiri Pandits and they form a part of my life. In fact, I don't know a Kashmiri Muslim so closely.

    That does not mean I should have my allegiances towards Kashmiri Pandits blindly just because they are like my family.

    Maturity involves thinking a bit objectively. It’s not that tough to know about a topic objectively if we throw down our insecurities, prejudices and subjectivities. I try my best.

    [I am not sure why I am writing about myself here. Each time I do it, I give more room for some idiots to make a mockery of my personal life.]

    ReplyDelete
  27. Chirkut:

    Spoke too soon,

    Me too! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  28. That does not mean I should have my allegiances towards Kashmiri Pandits blindly just because they are like my family.

    --
    I don't think I mentioned "blind allegiance towards Kashmiri Pandits" anywhere in my comments. Classic case of mis-characterization. Please read my comments once more.
    ================================
    Maturity involves thinking a bit objectively. It’s not that tough to know about a topic objectively if we throw down our insecurities, prejudices and subjectivities. I try my best.
    --
    *laughing*
    For someone who has only very recently woken up (or mustered up the courage) and started writing about Islamic terrorism (and that too almost always accompanied by some Hindutva violence in an attempt to appear "fair-and-balanced") - something that the world has known since the days of Satanic Verses - it's clear that you still have lots of mature work to do. Keep at it though.
    -chirkut

    ReplyDelete
  29. Rags: awesome comments.

    I agree with almost everything Sujai says on this blog, except his bullshit views on Kashmir.

    You have answered Sujai's points very well.

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.