Skip to main content

Kashmir's New Surge of Violence

After the massive protests in 2010 and over two lakh people attending a militant’s funeral in 2016 has once again proved to the world that Kashmiri people have sacrosanct desires of an independent homeland.

The desire of freedom is torched and it is once again resonating in the hearts of Kashmiri people. But lives are also been lost. Pallbearers in Kashmir have been most active lately. 

But even after every cyclical protest happened in Kashmir, the biased Indian media or its brainwashed people can't evolve their morality over the political problem. 

Curfews cannot get peace nor Kashmir problem is an employment problem. The major grievance of the protestors is the lack of respect of human rights in the past and also about their political demands that haven’t echoed in the chambers of Indian politicians, who very conservatively take it as an internal security problem and less of an international political problem. But by no means does India get the right to injure common people by using weapons that imply authoritarianism and direct murder.

The administration in Kashmir is not the real stakeholder in the resolution process. .A referendum or an exhaustive political arrangement according to the will of the people won’t only cover the protestors who hurl stones. It will be a political perception test for every politically aware adult. It has been enshrined by UN to us. In 2016 Kashmir protests, however, hundreds of people have been injured in a very short amount of time in the quest of this ambition.

The use of controversial pellet guns, criticised by Human Rights Watch officials,  have maimed protesters, mobile and internet communications are  barred, press has been muzzled, ambulances have been attacked by the police, there are dwindling food supplies and a curfew culture has been imposed like it has happened after every mass political strike. Eye surgeons have been working day and night to heal the wounded. The situation is like a war zone and ordinary life has been inured to a rising panic.

Infact on tools like Twitter and common public opinion in India, an individual can witness that hardcore Indian people are trying to renew their nationalist ideals after every civilian death in Kashmir. In what way do they get a right to celebrate our slaughter? Why are they blinded by Indian democracy so much that they can see nothing beyond it? See their tweets, general comments or perceptions, the hate against a prejudiced Kashmiri population is all there.

Every other ordinary Kashmiri is not allowed to step outside. Infact “house arrest” – a term which was synonymous for Kashmiri separatist leaders, holds true for common Kashmiri people as well. People are living like in a prison cell. The violence has been engraved in our memories as obituaries. 

The separatist faction have isolated themselves from the resolution process for a rancor because for India every solution is under its constitutional ambit. There can be no end to perpetual sufferings until India pacifies its nationalism, talks with Pakistan & demilitarise - or let the UN take over.

Importantly, why are separatists been talked about in the Indian media only during political upheavals? There is a perceptive difference in the Indian media and the international media the way they see the Kashmir dispute. During elections, seperatists were fringe elements but now they are stakeholders. Why does India want civilian blood to spill first & then want to recognise their viewpoints on Kashmir?

The interlocutors that were formed by Indian Government made suggestions that were misleading because they aligned their reportages to India's interest. There can be no half-baked solutions. This is a grave concern of how India has handled Kashmir over the years. As violence runs unabated and no reactionary measures growing, world sees a political struggle of a long forgotten Kashmiri people.

Popular posts from this blog

Kashmir's Geo-Strategic Position

Also published on viewpoint, Rising Kashmir

Kashmir is gifted with strategic leverages for emerging nations. That’s why, it’s is a vale of caged aspirations. The current geo strategic position for Kashmir is dictated by three emerging nations, which are bred with Secular, Islamic and Communist ideologies.
Kashmir is a mountainous valley and is surrounded by a hilly and mountainous terrain. The land of Jammu, Muzafarabad, Gilgit, Baltistan and Ladakh constitute an area of highlands. They border Pakistan, Afghanistan, Xinjiang, and some parts of Chinese administered Tibet. Kashmir also has proximity to Central Asian Republics. With the nature of increased arm strengths developed by India, Pakistan and China, the geo strategic position of Jammu and Kashmir continues to get importance.
Throughout history, all the political changes that have occurred outside of Kashmir, have had a direct strategic impact on the territorial integrity. The wars of foreigners throughout centuries intensified th…

Scanning The Dixon Plan

Sir Owen Dixon was a judge from the Australian High Court, whose meticulous report drafted to UN in 1950 received a commendation for the obstinacy of his analysis of the Kashmir resolution from the Security Council. He is regarded as an Australian scholar of impeccable credentials. 

Infact Major William Alan Reid, who was an observer with the U.N Military Observers Group in  Kashmir (UNMOGIP) got inspired by his work for his B.A Honours thesis titled “Sir Owen Dixons Mediation of the Kashmir Dispute” (July 2000) for which the writer is greatly indebted.  Reid is currently working on the doctoral thesis for the same subject. He has even consulted his notes, some of his fifty interviews, his diary and personal correspondence as well as the Australian archives, besides other published works.  To add more facts, there has been a tradition of Australian scholarship on India represented by Professors like Robin J Moore, Ian Coplan and B. Millar to name a few. 
Academia studying Kashmir confl…

Calling Off Kashmir Dispute

There has been no transparency in discussions arising from bilateral talks on Kashmir. From the last few years, calling off the Kashmir dispute has been the favourite argument arising out of Indian media commentators and political leaders. It is because of existing narration of implanting fervent Indian nationalism inside Kashmir valley.
Economic development, financial incentives and being part of India’s GDP growth have been other reasons given to call off Kashmir dispute. But is it fair? Why did India and Pakistan make attempts to reconcile through international agreements in the past at the first place, despite several wars fought on the borders?
British research has also deemed instrument of accession controversial. Importantly, what makes India run away from its moral responsibility when thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in the conflict? When were economic grants more sacrosanct than human lives? Maybe, when it comes to Kashmir, all humanist ideals, which Indian poli…