The Question of "Shia Genocide" in Pakistan.

[H!TchHiker]

What was the reasons for the killing all these 1800 hundreds?.

Though intentions are different in each cases...but its a wave of terrorism more than 60 to 70 thousands sunnis died too...Though a loss of life is precious be it sunni, shia, christian , hindu or whatever religion somebody belongs to..
This has to be stopped no one has right to take anybody's life..
When a terrorist blow himself people died around him belongs to different beliefs and faiths..
There are some groups who hits the particular community like shias and others but then all terrorist groups interlinked somehow just there handlers are different..

 

[Safriz]

About 2,000 Hazara Shias have been killed in the city of Quetta alone, 4,000 have been injured, and 200,000 have attempted to flee the country ... If it isn't "Genocide", what is ?

I doubt your data, and your intentions

And go through the links provided in the previous post to understand that why Shia killings in Pakistan are often labelled as "Genocide"

2000 Hazara Shia?
Can you post links of news reports mentioning those numbers?
See i went through all news reports over the past 17 years and collected these numbers. If you want to counter argue, why not post the links of those news reports and we can count if 2000 Hazara have been killed or not?
Go on.

 

[Malik Alashter]

Though intentions are different in each cases...but its a wave of terrorism more than 60 to 70 thousands sunnis died too...Though a loss of life is precious be it sunni, shia, christian , hindu or whatever religion somebody belongs to..
This has to be stopped no one has right to take anybody's life..
When a terrorist blow himself people died around him belongs to different beliefs and faiths..
There are some groups who hits the particular community like shias and others but then all terrorist groups interlinked somehow just there handlers are different..

when some one target group of people with intention to kill for religious or race that's a genocide weather we like it or not

because the reason is obvious killing them all but slowly or push them to leave or accept the killers conditions.

The same things happened to shia in Iraq where they forced them to leave their homes towns to spare their lives now the Sunni towns that had shia is free of them they just can't go back home.

That's genocide but who cares of " world society ".

 

[mohd497]

Gawakadal massacre: On 21 January 1990, 51 civilians were killed by CRPF troopers during protests against earlier raids in which wanton arrests and molestation of women were conducted by CRPF troops.[70]

Handwara massacre: On January 25, 1990, two BSF patrolling parties in Handwara indiscriminately fired at peaceful protesters and killed 25 people. Many people were injured.[71]

Zakoora and Tengpora massacre: Indian forces killed 33 protesters and injured 47 on 1 March 1990 at Zakoora Crossing and Tengpora Bypass Road in Srinagar. The killers were not punished.

Hawal massacre: At the funeral of Mirwaiz Muhammad Farooq on May 21, 1990 over 60 civilians were killed by paramilitary forces and hundreds injured in the indiscriminate firing on the funeral procession.

Sopore massacre: On 6 January 1993 Indian troops killed 55 civilians in the town of Sopore and set fire to many homes and buildings.

Bijbehara massacre: On 22 October 1993 the Indian Army killed 51 civilians during protests over the siege of the Hazratbal Mosque. 25 of those killed were students None of the accused were punished.

Kupwara massacre: On 27 January 1994 the Indian Army fired at and killed 27 civilians, mainly traders, in Kupwara district. Survivors say that the soldiers carried out the massacre to punish people for observing shutdown on January 26.

Just 227 muslims died in kashmir. It is well below the car accidents so why call it genocide right?



You people are just amazing. Genocide is not done by state. It is definitely done by extremist outfit who see shias as enemies.

 

[war&peace]

Although I might be inclined to agree with the direction of your argument, I feel that I cannot agree with the comparison. Although factually speaking your point does hold validity, the number of people killed in traffic accidents is indeed higher, but comparing that with the deliberate and malicious targeted attacks towards a particular community does come off as a bit tone deaf.

Actually, I didn't finish my comment there. As I said that each loss of life is tragic and more so if it is intentional. Whether the number is small or large, the govt needs to act and protect its citizens and act against all such organizations and I think the state is trying its best especially since Zarb-e-Azb and Radd ul Fassad.

However, the use of the word genocide is not qualified by any stretch of the imagination if we compare this number with any of the well-known genocides around the globe, be it in Hilter's Germany, IoJ&K, Afghanistan, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Africa....long list.

Also if we take the literal meanings, the genocide means to kill a generation. Now let's do a hand waving calculations to arrive at a rough number. I think the recent census puts Pakistan's population around 196 million and that means approx 39 million Shia Muslim and the killed make only 0.0046%. I think the growth rate of Shiite Muslims in Pakistan is much higher than the the killed. All of my calculations are focussed on disapproving the label genocide and also some people are trying to give an impression that the govt is complicit in that and that can have grave consequences for the country. So no genocide but more should be done to improve the situation and I think the situation has become better than before but of course it is not 100% under the control.

 

[Safriz]

when some one target group of people with intention to kill for religious or race that's a genocide weather we like it or not

because the reason is obvious killing them all but slowly or push them to leave or accept the killers conditions.

The same things happened to shia in Iraq where they forced them to leave their homes towns to spare their lives now the Sunni towns that had shia is free of them they just can't go back home.

That's genocide but who cares of " world society ".

Every terrorism Incident has been done for similar reasons. Some bomb blasts were against Army personnel becasue they were "Army", others targeted Neutral groups in FATa by Taliban becasue they were Neutral and not supporting TTP.
By that definition, in addition to Shia genocide, we had far bigger Army genocide, Moderate Muslim genocide and many more.
In considering if it is or it is not a genocide, the main factor is if the majority group in Pakistan is actively killing a minority group by chasing them in streets and in lynch mobs ? Same as Indian Muslims are being treated by Hindus?
Shia don't get that sort of treatment in Pakistan by Majority Sunni. So its not a genocide, just terrorism , same terrorism which kills far more sunni.

 

[M. Sarmad]

The definition of "Genocide" as laid out at the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide



Article II classifies genocide as: ‘Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d)Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group’.
http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/pdf/osapg_analysis_framework.pdf


Genocide is the culmination of a specific set of circumstances in which both the mens rea (mental element) – meaning the ‘intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such’ – and the actus reus (physical element) – any of the five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e above – are present.
(Otto Triffterer, ‘Genocide, its particular intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the group as such’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 14 (2001), 399.)


In a sense, then, it is the intent behind a killing that determines whether an act could be classed as genocide. Indeed, as former Secretary General of Medecins Sans Frontieres Raphael Destexhe once asserted, ‘genocide is distinguishable from all other crimes by the motivation behind it’.
(Analysis: defining genocide’, BBC News, 27-08-10, available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11108059,(16-04-14)




So, regardless of whether it is 1800 Shias killed (as claimed by the OP) or 22,000 (as claimed by some others), as per the UN definition, Shia killings in Pakistan can be termed as "Genocide"; a punishable crime under International Law

2000 Hazara Shia?
Can you post links of news reports mentioning those numbers?
See i went through all news reports over the past 17 years and collected these numbers. If you want to counter argue, why not post the links of those news reports and we can count if 2000 Hazara have been killed or not?
Go on.

http://www.maca-usa.org/MACADocuments/HazarasGierNick.pdf

 

[mohd497]

Every terrorism Incident has been done for similar reasons. Some bomb blasts were against Army personnel becasue they were "Army", others targeted Neutral groups in FATa by Taliban becasue they were Neutral and not supporting TTP.
By that definition, in addition to Shia genocide, we had far bigger Army genocide, Moderate Muslim genocide and many more.
In considering if it is or it is not a genocide, the main factor is if the majority group in Pakistan is actively killing a minority group by chasing them in streets and in lynch mobs ? Same as Indian Muslims are being treated by Hindus?
Shia don't get that sort of treatment in Pakistan by Majority Sunni. So its not a genocide, just terrorism , same terrorism which kills far more sunni.

oh really? I dont believe you. Other then army, government, shias. Any attack on ordinary sunni. Also give me the list!

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Every terrorism Incident has been done for similar reasons. Some bomb blasts were against Army personnel becasue they were "Army", others targeted Neutral groups in FATa by Taliban becasue they were Neutral and not supporting TTP.
By that definition, in addition to Shia genocide, we had far bigger Army genocide, Moderate Muslim genocide and many more.
In considering if it is or it is not a genocide, the main factor is if the majority group in Pakistan is actively killing a minority group by chasing them in streets and in lynch mobs ? Same as Indian Muslims are being treated by Hindus?
Shia don't get that sort of treatment in Pakistan by Majority Sunni. So its not a genocide, just terrorism , same terrorism which kills far more sunni.

I understand what you mean and I support your claim wholeheartedly
we are not Arabs nor Iranians, we are Paksitanis and this is why despite all the carnage we are together.
that said

victims dont care about philosophy and meaning of words. they feel besieged and see how the terrorists celebrate after their attacks
recall prior years they celebrated double centuries on the social media when they killed over 100 hazara/ shia community in Quetta in back to back attacks in 2 months span of time during Kynai's time.

indeed now an ordinary Pakistani victim regardless of his faith has far exceeded the number of shias killed in such targeted attacks but lets not desynthase ourselves that if the death toll is not in tens or hundreds we dont consider it worthy of our worries and condolence
for me even a single wrongful death under such circumstances is one too many

 

[SabzShaheen]

The definition of "Genocide" as laid out at the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide



Article II classifies genocide as: ‘Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d)Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group’.
http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/pdf/osapg_analysis_framework.pdf


Genocide is the culmination of a specific set of circumstances in which both the mens rea (mental element) – meaning the ‘intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such’ – and the actus reus (physical element) – any of the five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e above – are present.
(Otto Triffterer, ‘Genocide, its particular intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the group as such’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 14 (2001), 399.)


In a sense, then, it is the intent behind a killing that determines whether an act could be classed as genocide. Indeed, as former Secretary General of Medecins Sans Frontieres Raphael Destexhe once asserted, ‘genocide is distinguishable from all other crimes by the motivation behind it’.
(Analysis: defining genocide’, BBC News, 27-08-10, available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11108059,(16-04-14)




So, regardless of whether it is 1800 Shias killed (as claimed by the OP) or 22,000 (as claimed by some others), as per the UN definition, Shia killings in Pakistan can be termed as "Genocide"; a punishable crime under International Law





http://www.maca-usa.org/MACADocuments/HazarasGierNick.pdf

Even if it is granted to you that there is a Shia genocide in Pakistan, it isn't state sanctioned and all groups responsible are being effectively targeted.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Even if it is granted to you that there is a Shia genocide in Pakistan, it isn't state sanctioned and all groups responsible are being effectively targeted.

It isn't state sanctioned anymore (after Zia), but the criminal negligence and inaction (over the ongoing Shia Genocide) of the consecutive governments can't be ignored either.

 

[Safriz]

It isn't state sanctioned anymore (after Zia), but the criminal negligence of the consecutive governments can't be ignored either.

You must be on about Haq Nawaz Jhangwi?
All his speeches are on the record. Quote me just one in which he asked sunni to kill shia? Thee wasn't any.
All he did was expose Shia practices of insulting Sahaba and that's why state did not interfere.
Also you may know how Sipah-e-sahaba turned violent against Shia? Because Haq nawaz was assassinated by Shia. Not justified violence but still, the reason was the assasination.

 

[M. Sarmad]

You must be on about Haq Nawaz Jhangwi?
All his speeches are on the record. Quote me just one in which he asked sunni to kill shia? Thee wasn't any.
All he did was expose Shia practices of insulting Sahaba and that's why state did not interfere.
Also you may know how Sipah-e-sahaba turned violent against Shia? Because Haq nawaz was assassinated by Shia. Not justified violence but still, the reason was the assasination.

As I suspected ... Only a Jhangvi supporter could come up with such lies. Anyway, thank you for showing open support for Haqnawaz Jhangvi, and for trying to justify "the state patronizing sectarian terrorists".



When Haq Nawaz Jhangvi, the founder of the notorious Sipah Sahaba Pakistan SSP (Lashker e Jhangvi LeJ is an offshoot of SSP named after Haq Nawaz Jhangvi and is one of the country's most virulent terrorist organisations) was arrested in Jhang in 1980 for delivering a provocative speech against Shia in a mosque that fell in the route of Tazia procession, General Zia ul Haq personally intervened and got Haq Nawaz released.


When the state patronizes sectarian organizations, it has its consequences

Source:
REPORT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE AND DEFENCE PRODUCTION
http://www.senatedefencecommittee.com.pk/reports/report-3.pdf



Also, Arif Hussaini of Parachinar (the founder of Tehrik-e-Jafaria Pakistan) was killed in Peshawar in 1988 by a serving Army Officer who happened to be Zia's own aide de camp (ADC), Capt. Majid Raza Gillani


And the 'other' person on the motorcycle with the notorious terrorist Riaz Basra when he killed the Iranian Consul General Sadiq Ganji in Lahore in 1990, was reportedly an ISI official named Athar (Pakistan's drift into extremism: Allah, the army and America's War on Terror, 2005).


It's not without reason that the Pakistani Establishment has been accused (in the past) of patronizing and supporting anti-Shia sectarianism.

 

[Safriz]

As I suspected ... Only a Jhangvi supporter could come up with such lies. Anyway, thank you for showing open support for Haqnawaz Jhangvi, and for trying to justify "the state patronizing sectarian terrorists".



When Haq Nawaz Jhangvi, the founder of the notorious Sipah Sahaba Pakistan SSP (Lashker e Jhangvi LeJ is an offshoot of SSP named after Haq Nawaz Jhangvi and is one of the country's most virulent terrorist organisations) was arrested in Jhang in 1980 for delivering a provocative speech against Shia in a mosque that fell in the root of Tazia procession, General Zia ul Haq personally intervened and got Haq Nawaz released.


When the state patronizes sectarian organizations, it has its consequences

Source:
REPORT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE AND DEFENCE PRODUCTION
http://www.senatedefencecommittee.com.pk/reports/report-3.pdf



Also, Arif Hussaini of Parachinar (the founder of Tehrik-e-Jafaria Pakistan) was killed in Peshawar in 1988 by a serving Army Officer who happened to be Zia's own aide de camp (ADC), Capt. Majid Raza Gillani


And the 'other' person on the motorcycle with the notorious terrorist Riaz Basra when he killed the Iranian Consul General Sadiq Ganji in Lahore in 1990, was reportedly an ISI official named Athar (Pakistan's drift into extremism: Allah, the army and America's War on Terror, 2005).


It's not without reason that the Pakistani Establishment has been accused (in the past) of patronizing and supporting anti-Shia sectarianism.

Sipah-e-Sahaba was th only organization active during Jhangwi's life. LEJ and others came into existence after Jhangvi's assassination. So you need correction.
I visited Jhang during the era and both Shia and Sunni regularly attacked each other's places of worship, Sunni mosques had walls ridden with Bullet holes and same for Shia Imam bara. But those firing incidents were not to kill anyone but intimidate as only walls were fired at , not people.
Also Sipah-e-Sahaba were raising awareness about Insults against Sahaba by some Shia sects and also about insults to some others very close to Prophet PBUH.
That was a legitimate mission and nothing wrong with that.
After assassination of Jhangvi, the circle of violence started which continues to date and no side s innocent in this.

Also my original challenge to you stands as it is. Quote me one Speech of Jhngvi in which he asked sunni to go kill Shia. All his speeches were recorded and still available.

Me and many Sunnis like me reserve the right to condemn caertain shi apractices of Insulting Sahaba and even Ummhat ul; Momineen, but violence is not our right. Likewise Shia cannot ask us not to condemn what is mentioned above.

"Taali dono haathon sey bajtii hai"

 

[M. Sarmad]

Sipah-e-Sahaba was th only organization active daring Jhangwi's life. LEJ and others came into existence after Jhangvi's assassination. So you need correction.

Also Si[ah-e-Sahaba were raising awareness about Insults against Sahaba y some Shia sects and also about insults to some others very close to Prophet PBUH.
That was a legitimate mission and nothing wrong with that.
After assassination of Jhangvi, the circle of violence started which continues to date and no side s innocent in this.

Again, you are openly supporting Sipah Sahaba Pakistan (a banned terrorist outfit) and declaring their mission "legitimate" ..... This should leave no doubt in the mind of the readers that why did you come up with the implausibly low figures of 1800 Shias killed in 17 years.


And Jhangvi was killed in 1990, two years after the assassination of the founder of Tehrik-e-Jafaria Pakistan, Arif Hussaini (who was killed in Aug 1988). The Assailants/hitmen (regardless of who sent them, Jhangvi or Zia) were believed to be associated with the Sipah Sahaba Pakistan (http://web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/147). So, your claim that "the circle of violence started with Jhangvi's murder" is baseless