Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable

[dabong1]

Local journalists assaulted, censored in Kashmir

New York, August 25, 2008—The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns restrictions on the media by security forces trying to quell unrest in the northern Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Central Reserve Police Forces beat at least 10 journalists for reporting on Sunday during a strict curfew imposed indefinitely on major towns in the Kashmir Valley to restrain anti-government protesters, according to international news reports. The journalists were carrying official passes issued by the local government to guarantee them free passage during the curfew, the reports said.

No newspapers were published today in Srinagar because of disruptions, according to daily Asian Age reporter Yusuf Jameel, who spoke with CPJ by telephone from Srinagar. The Associated Press reported that paramilitary forces beat two more news photographers with curfew passes today. Police killed five people in clashes with protesters defying the curfew on Sunday and Monday, AP reported.

Local authorities have also banned all news programming on local television channels, according to news reports.

“We call on local authorities in Kashmir to protect journalists reporting on the unrest,” said Bob Dietz, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “News about the conflict should be broadcast without restrictions on media outlets or reporters in the field.”

Jameel told CPJ that although the curfew had been lifted and re-imposed once, authorities had told journalists before Sunday's attacks that their former curfew passes were still valid. Fresh passes were later issued, he said, but it was very difficult to reach the relevant offices in order to pick them up. “We’re not being allowed to move about freely,” Jameel said.

At least one of the journalists injured on Sunday, Bilal Bhat, who works for a private television channel, was still being treated for a rib fracture in a Srinagar hospital, Jameel said.

Jameel had an Internet connection but said many residents of Kashmir are relying on national cable broadcasts and international radio stations for information about the unrest.

Insurgents who dispute Indian rule of the Muslim-majority state, which is also claimed by Pakistan, have waged a violent independence movement claiming tens of thousands of lives since 1989, according to news reports. Photojournalist Ashok Sodhi was killed in crossfire in Kashmir in May.

Stability in the region deteriorated further in June when separatist groups rallied Muslim protesters over the transfer of local land to a Hindu shrine.

CPJ News Alert 2008
CPJ condemns curbs on media -DAWN - Top Stories; August 27, 2008

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

agnostic, why are you wasting your time on these jokers? they have nothing to add, except cheap shots.

You're too merciful on these people, I would have banned them a long time ago. it's become obvious they can't defend their claims legally.

I don't know - hopeful that the 40 percent Indians will add to their numbers, and that reason and good sense will prevail over jingoism, that a peaceful future between South Asian nations is more important than a 'wounded psyche'.

Assad - most people posting on forums are opinionated, and most are hardened into their positions. Nonetheless, even if one is steadfast, it is important to see the other sides arguments, if only to validate ones own by showing them to be wrong.

But I agree, the discussion is going around in circles.

The choices for Kashmir are either military or peaceful.

1. Military - War or a continued insurgency - I support neither.

2. Peaceful - Protests, even greater autonomy for IK, a continued expression of 'separateness', and perhaps greater ties between AK and IK - leading to even greater numbers in India realizing the immorality of their position, and possibly a jointly administered AK and IK, if not full freedom.

 

[Flintlock]

I don't know - hopeful that the 40 percent Indians will add to their numbers, and that reason and good sense will prevail over jingoism, that a peaceful future between South Asian nations is more important than a 'wounded psyche'.

Where did you get that 40% figure? I hope its not off some poll in TOI.

But I agree, the discussion is going around in circles.

The choices for Kashmir are either military or peaceful.

1. Military - War or a continued insurgency - I support neither.

2. Peaceful - Protests, even greater autonomy for IK, a continued expression of 'separateness', and perhaps greater ties between AK and IK - leading to even greater numbers in India realizing the immorality of their position, and possibly a jointly administered AK and IK, if not full freedom.

There is a third option - and the best one:

Pakistan stops sponsoring terrorists and separatists, both directly and indirectly. The Indian Army can move out over a period of time, and everybody is happy.

There is nothing to be gained by kashmiris by separating from India - apart from a victory for the religious extremists, which will simply embolden them.
They have autonomy in most things, and are able to run their own affairs in whichever way they see fit.

Pakistan has succeeded in creating hatred for Indians among Kashmiris, but that's about it. So celebrate your victory while you can, cause I doubt that there are going to be any more.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That's how all countries are created. However, the authenticity of the claim is decided by other factors.

The authenticity should only be decide by the human factor - for all the criticism of the "Muslim invaders' you sure show your true colors when it comes to your country invading another.

Clearly, an independent Kashmir is a rather poor option, and being a part of India is far better for the future of kashmiris and the rest of India than being a part of Pakistan.

All these factors, along with the historical links that Kashmir and the rest of India enjoy, make Kashmir a part of India.

You claiming to determine what is better for the future of Kashmiris is patronizing and treating them like children. It isn't your decision to determine what is better, and nor do you care (its just another canard thrown out to try and justify India's continued occupation - as I said, India itself was far worse than the British when it seceded from them).

The only way it is 'better for the rest of India' is because the jingoists among you won't have a 'wounded psyche' and can boast about having a larger landmass. It is only 'better for the rest of India' because the irrational hate towards Pakistan you guys have been indoctrinated with wont allow you to do the right thing.

BTW, I'd love to see you use the same arguments that you used against India, on both your own country and China. I'll wait patiently for that day to come.

In Pakistan I have countered those arguments related to Balochistan (and NWFP) on the Balochistan thread - the opinion of the people was taken into account.

I am not aware of whether that was done in Xinxiang province, and if not, then I would apply the same arguments to them, but since Pakistan does not claim Xinxiang, it is not our business.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Where did you get that 40% figure? I hope its not off some poll in TOI.

Not conducted by ToI, but sponsored by them though an experienced polling agency.

There is a third option - and the best one:

Pakistan stops sponsoring terrorists and separatists, both directly and indirectly. The Indian Army can move out over a period of time, and everybody is happy.

There is nothing to be gained by kashmiris by separating from India - apart from a victory for the religious extremists, which will simply embolden them.
They have autonomy in most things, and are able to run their own affairs in whichever way they see fit.

Pakistan has succeeded in creating hatred for Indians among Kashmiris, but that's about it. So celebrate your victory while you can, cause I doubt that there are going to be any more.

Pakistan hasn't sponsored militants for years now, and India has been free to do as it pleases in the valley. Until a few weeks ago you guys were cheer leading how much development and progress Kashmir was seeing, but despite that the sentiment remains, because it is not a tangible you can bribe, buy or sell.

That ideological victory in Kashmir is what has caused so many in India to support the right of Kashmiris to choose their own destiny, and that is what we must continue to nurture, through non-violent means, until enough irrationals become rational.

 

[Flintlock]

The authenticity should only be decide by the human factor - for all the criticism of the "Muslim invaders' you sure show your true colors when it comes to your country invading another.

Well, the Muslims invaders did nothing except destroy the pre-existing social order, build nothing in its place, and make themselves rich.

They had no right to rule over India. But we are digressing.

You claiming to determine what is better for the future of Kashmiris is patronizing and treating them like children. It isn't your decision to determine what is better, and nor do you care (its just another canard thrown out to try and justify India's continued occupation - as I said, India itself was far worse than the British when it seceded from them).

Well, when the Government of Pakistan claims that it knows better than the Tribal Headman of a village, is that being patronizing and treating the villagers like children? Why not let the village run its own affairs and do whatever they please?

The truth, as I say, is absolute, and not relative to the feelings of one million or one billion.
A billion Christians believe that Jesus is real. Doesn't make it true, does it?

The only way it is 'better for the rest of India' is because the jingoists among you won't have a 'wounded psyche' and can boast about having a larger landmass. It is only 'better for the rest of India' because the irrational hate towards Pakistan you guys have been indoctrinated with wont allow you to do the right thing.

Its better for India because the territorial and ideological l integrity is one of the pillars of our country, and we cannot compromise upon it.
That is all I am going to say.

In Pakistan I have countered those arguments related to Balochistan (and NWFP) on the Balochistan thread - the opinion of the people was taken into account.

Yeah, I remember.....how everybody was celebrating the assassination of a separatist leader. I wonder if the same feelings will be displayed if India decides to assassinate some prominent leaders from Kashmir.

I am not aware of whether that was done in Xinxiang province, and if not, then I would apply the same arguments to them, but since Pakistan does not claim Xinxiang, it is not our business.

You usually give your opinions on most things, so the comments on these subjects are quite conspicuous by their absence.

So lets either be completely non-partisan, or stop pretending to non-partisan.

 

[Flintlock]

Pakistan hasn't sponsored militants for years now, and India has been free to do as it pleases in the valley. Until a few weeks ago you guys were cheer leading how much development and progress Kashmir was seeing, but despite that the sentiment remains, because it is not a tangible you can bribe, buy or sell.

That ideological victory in Kashmir is what has caused so many in India to support the right of Kashmiris to choose their own destiny, and that is what we must continue to nurture, through non-violent means, until enough irrationals become rational.

Both directly and Indirectly.

1. Stop funding the separatists.
2. Stop sending militants.
3. Stop broadcasting propaganda via television and radio.
4. Stop giving "moral support" by various means.

Also, stop equating economic progress with bribery and insincerity. Economic progress is far more important than any religious sentiments. It needs ingenuity, dedication and a frame of mind that religious extremists simply cannot have.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, when the Government of Pakistan claims that it knows better than the Tribal Headman of a village, is that being patronizing and treating the villagers like children? Why not let the village run its own affairs and do whatever they please?

The truth, as I say, is absolute, and not relative to the feelings of one million or one billion.
A billion Christians believe that Jesus is real. Doesn't make it true, does it?

We do let the Tribal head run the village - check out FATA! In fact, the deteriroration of the authority of the "Tribal Head' by the Taliban is what let them expand so fast, something the GoP is trying to reconstruct.

Also, since India will be larger than all but one nation in the world, your argument is still essentially that of a 'might is right', in that you are denigrating the ability of tens of millions of people to decide their destiny, just because hundreds of millions in India might get their 'feelings hurt'.

The truth is not relative when it comes to this - you occupied a people, and now your only reason to not let go is jingoism and might.

Its better for India because the territorial and ideological l integrity is one of the pillars of our country, and we cannot compromise upon it.
That is all I am going to say.

Jingoism and 'might is right' is what your position is, as has been illustrate by RR and I- you can't say anything else, because your position is so morally bankrupt.

Yeah, I remember.....how everybody was celebrating the assassination of a separatist leader. I wonder if the same feelings will be displayed if India decides to assassinate some prominent leaders from Kashmir.

Sure, when you can actually hold a referendum or Jirga from all the communities/Tribes to actually legitimize your control over the Kashmiris.

You usually give your opinions on most things, so the comments on these subjects are quite conspicuous by their absence.

So lets either be completely non-partisan, or stop pretending to non-partisan.

I have already stated that my arguments would apply in the case of Xinxiang, if the territory was incorporated without the people approving.

I do not however follow the subject closely, so I don't comment on it, as I do not comment on Kosovo, or Darfur, or the Indian North East.

 

[Pankaj]

No plebiscite in Kashmir is going to happen in any near future because We Indians and our govt. feels there is no such popular uprising, but just a bunch of fanatics sponsored by pakistan.

This is the general sentiment in India.

So there is no use of any amounts of discussions b/w India and pakistan over Kashmir. Because we feel there is no such problem as is made it out to be by Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

1. Stop funding the separatists.

No - our right to support peaceful seperatists - it is disputed territory since 1947 and we have a claim to it.

2. Stop sending militants.

Already done, and a negligible number making it over in the absence of our support.

3. Stop broadcasting propaganda via television and radio.

No - our right to ideologically influence the Kashmiris since we claim the territory.

4. Stop giving "moral support" by various means.

No - we should continue to raise the issue peacefully and diplomatically and press for a resolution to the territorial dispute.

Also, stop equating economic progress with bribery and insincerity. Economic progress is far more important than any religious sentiments. It needs ingenuity, dedication and a frame of mind that religious extremists simply cannot have.

What is important for a people is for them to decide - not everyone wants to be a capitalist, money hungry pig.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No plebiscite in Kashmir is going to happen in any near future because We Indians and our govt. feels there is no such popular uprising, but just a bunch of fanatics sponsored by pakistan.

This is the general sentiment in India.

So there is no use of any amounts of discussions b/w India and pakistan over Kashmir. Because we feel there is no such problem as is made it out to be by Pakistan.

Ah yes - thank you for stating the obvious.

If you were to read my posts you would find that I have already moved beyond that.

 

[Flintlock]

We do let the Tribal head run the village - check out FATA! In fact, the deteriroration of the authority of the "Tribal Head' by the Taliban is what let them expand so fast, something the GoP is trying to reconstruct.

The FATA is under Pakistani rule, and that's the important point.

Also, I'd like to point out that how the policy of letting the village headman do whatever he pleases has failed.

In any case, I'm talking not about FATA, but, say, Sindh. Isn't it patronizing for the government to tell the village headman in Sindh how to run his village?
Isn't it patronizing for a Village headman to tell his villagers how to run their lives?
Its not. Because the village headman knows better, just like the GOP knows better.
Similarly, the GOI knows better than the Kashmiris.

BTW....Kashmiris do run their own internal affairs.

Also, since India will be larger than all but one nation in the world, your argument is still essentially that of a 'might is right', in that you are denigrating the ability of tens of millions of people to decide their destiny, just because hundreds of millions in India might get their 'feelings hurt'.


The truth is not relative when it comes to this - you occupied a people, and now your only reason to not let go is jingoism and might.

Again, its not about feelings being hurt, but the concept of nation and nationalism.

If you don't believe in these concepts, then you shouldn't even be debating on this forum.

Jingoism and 'might is right' is what your position is, as has been illustrate by RR and I- you can't say anything else, because your position is so morally bankrupt.

You cannot possibly undermine my country's position without doing the same to yours.

Sure, when you can actually hold a referendum or Jirga from all the communities/Tribes to actually legitimize your control over the Kashmiris.

A referendum is not a Jirga, and assassination is not a legal way of resolving a dispute.

 

[Flintlock]

No - our right to support peaceful seperatists - it is disputed territory since 1947 and we have a claim to it.

Well, then don't expect the conflict to end anytime soon.

If you cut the fuel line, the fire will die down. But since you refuse to do so, you have to take the moral responsibility for the damage.

No - our right to ideologically influence the Kashmiris since we claim the territory.

Refer to previous para.

No - we should continue to raise the issue peacefully and diplomatically and press for a resolution to the territorial dispute.

Refer to first para.

What is important for a people is for them to decide - not everyone wants to be a capitalist, money hungry pig.

Sure....let the Taliban decide that they want to establish what they feel is the right society for Pakistan.

You guys have drawn your line, we have drawn ours.

You cannot allow your country to become radicalized, and we cannot allow ours to be fragmented on religious grounds.

As I said, you cannot undermine my country without doing the same to yours. Think about it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Flint:

The Sindhi, Baluchi, Punjabi and NWFP chose to join Pakistan - which is what gives the GoP authority to regulate them as an institution set up by the members of the Federation to govern their affairs on their behalf.

India does not get that authority because the people of Kashmir have not been asked whether they want to delegate that authority to India, nor whether they want to surrender their sovereignty to India.

That is why your analogy does not work. India's claim to Kashmir isn't because the Kashmiris want it, but because the irrational nationalists in India demand it to satisfy their egos.

A referendum is not a Jirga, and assassination is not a legal way of resolving a dispute.

It is nonetheless a consultative process, that the people of Baluchistan followed, in which tribes nominate someone to speak on their behalf, and the jirga was done with the specific aim of determining whether the people of Baluchistan wanted to join Pakistan - I see nothing of the sort in IK.

On Bugti - he wasn't just a seperatist, but a violent seperatist.
Do you hear me complaining about the militants being killed by Indian SF's in IK?

No - because that is the path they chose, as did Bugti.

 

[Flintlock]

On Bugti - he wasn't just a seperatist, but a violent seperatist.

Really? Lets look up wikipedia:

For the 1990 General Elections, Bugti formed his own political party, the Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP), being Balochistan's single largest party and was elected to the provincial assembly.

In 1993, he was elected to the National Assembly of Pakistan, representing the JWP in parliament. Also, in 1993, Nawab Bugti announced his candidacy to be President of Pakistan but later withdrew his candidacy and announced his support of the eventual winner, Sardar Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari. In 1997, Nawab Bugti was re-elected to the National Assembly of Pakistan, representing the JWP.

1. The guy was elected on more than one occasion.

2. Most of the kashmiri 'Moderates' have violent pasts. Shall we kill them?