Letter by scholar Mannan Wani on why he chose to pick up gun

[Corona]

Northern Ireland, Wales and England make up the majority, does that mean Scotland cannot hold a referendum to decide the future of their own land? What kind of definition of democracy is taught in India?

There are different types and models of democracy, and I don't believe there is any country that follows true democracy in the world.

The Indian democracy is bound by the constitution. That means democracy within the constraints of the constitution as opposed to a free for all type process where anybody can do anything. To put it simply, democracy to serve the country first, then the people.

saw an indian journo calling for the indian army to use real bullets on protesters and many bakhts there spreading hate, one called for evicting kashmiris

But did we do it? Did we use real bullets against protesters? Did we evict the Kashmiris out of Kashmir?
There will always be individuals calling out for genocide and violence based on their personal views of things, but they're hardly the representatives of the larger population simply because they're screaming louder. The Indian government and the army doesn't follow orders from individual opinions, they have a system in place.

 

[ssethii]

There are different types and models of democracy, and I don't believe there is any country that follows true democracy in the world.

The Indian democracy is bound by the constitution. That means democracy within the constraints of the constitution as opposed to a free for all type process where anybody can do anything. To put it simply, democracy to serve the country first, then the people.

So you are following the "Akhand Bharat" model for your democracy, Am I right?

 

[Corona]

So you are following the "Akhand Bharat" model for your democracy, Am I right?

I had to google what Akhand Bharat meant to reply to your post. That should indicate how much I care for Akhand Bharat.

As for the government's policy, absolutely nobody is aiming for or believes in Akhand Bharat despite what any religious extremists will tell you. India is limited to its current international borders and does not wish to expand territorially in any direction with the exception of resolving the Kashmir issue. Putting priority for our country before anything else doesn't mean we follow an expansionist or imperial style of democracy. We're quite satisfied with what we have.

 

[SorryNotSorry]

Sad, but he is a goner.

 

[Hamza913]

We love Kashmir too

Irrelevant, the question is, does Kashmir love you?

How well represented are Kashmiris in the Hindustani government and military? Or other major institutions? How is their province doing as compared to others in Hindustan? Are there major separatist movements in Hindustani Kashmir?

You need to ask yourselves the above questions and answer them honestly.

Not really. Kashmir comes first, then Kashmiris.

How can you prioritise a piece of land that holds no major significance to you over human lives?

The Pakistani angle is a recent one. I believe even now many would prefer independence to being with either country. Of course religion muddles things up, and a clean cut 'us verses them' view of things aligns things in Pakistan's favor.

On the contrary, the concept of Kashmiri independence from both Pakistan and Hindustan is a recent one. The traditional view has always been the desire of unification with Pakistan, hence why the Pakistani invasion of Kashmir saw a large amount of local support.

You will find so many Pakistanis who are Kashmiri and damn proud about being Pakistani (e.g @Talwar e Pakistan and my very own grandmother), but I am yet to meet a single Hindustani Kashmiri who is proud about being Hindustani (I've only ever seen them in the news or online, which shows how much of a minority they are).

Kashmir = source of water...

Nothing else for Pakistan...



First give that privilege to Baloch, Sindhis, Punjabis, etc... in Pakistan...

India is a democracy and the will of majority is paramount...

People who inhabit the region of Kashmir form a critical part of Pakistan, with many Pakistanis such as myself having ancestors from the region and others actually being from there. They're also Muslim, and the more religious among us such as myself view them as brothers because of this.

Survey's have been done on the Baluchis. The majority of them do not want independence from Pakistan, sorry to burst your bubble but it's true.

As for Sindhis and Punjabis, don't make me laugh. The creation of Pakistan was one of the best things that ever happened to us.

 

[Novice09]

People who inhabit the region of Kashmir form a critical part of Pakistan, with many Pakistanis such as myself having ancestors from the region and others actually being from there. They're also Muslim, and the more religious among us such as myself view them as brothers because of this.

Survey's have been done on the Baluchis. The majority of them do not want independence from Pakistan, sorry to burst your bubble but it's true.

As for Sindhis and Punjabis, don't make me laugh. The creation of Pakistan was one of the best things that ever happened to us.

Since you want to know the history of MUSLIMS and Kashmir... most of the Kashmiri MUSLIMS are converts... remember 9th Sikh GURU... Guru Teg Bahadur gave his head while trying to stop Aurangzeb from forcing Kashmiri Hindus to convert to Islam... don't think that the problem of Kashmir and Hindu genocide in that region is new...

When you say that Kashmiri freedom fighters... never forget that more Kashmiris are in Indian Forces than the terrorists who are brainwashed by extremists...

 

[kinsr]

Irrelevant, the question is, does Kashmir love you?

How well represented are Kashmiris in the Hindustani government and military? Or other major institutions? How is their province doing as compared to others in Hindustan? Are there major separatist movements in Hindustani Kashmir?

You need to ask yourselves the above questions and answer them honestly.

Dissidence emanating from dissatisfaction is not new and is a part of the whole democratic process. The separatist movement is fuelled by the same Islamic hatred for others as is evident in other parts of the world.

Who stopped Kashmiris from becoming an integral part in Indian society? Has any one ever been stopped from joining Administrative services/Armed Forces just because he/she was a Kashmiri? Google for Shah Faesal or Amir Athar-ul-Shafi Khan, toppers from IAS, both muslims and both Kashmiris.

 

[ssethii]

I had to google what Akhand Bharat meant to reply to your post. That should indicate how much I care for Akhand Bharat.

As for the government's policy, absolutely nobody is aiming for or believes in Akhand Bharat despite what any religious extremists will tell you. India is limited to its current international borders and does not wish to expand territorially in any direction with the exception of resolving the Kashmir issue. Putting priority for our country before anything else doesn't mean we follow an expansionist or imperial style of democracy. We're quite satisfied with what we have.

Kashmir issue arose because of Indian expansionist policies and animosities due to partition. You people would never be satisfied as the apparent butt-hurt started since the first Muslim ruler arrived in the subcontinent and continued to grow ever since and which reached its climax during partition.

 

[Hamza913]

Dissidence emanating from dissatisfaction is not new and is a part of the whole democratic process. The separatist movement is fuelled by the same Islamic hatred for others as is evident in other parts of the world.

Who stopped Kashmiris from becoming an integral part in Indian society? Has any one ever been stopped from joining Administrative services/Armed Forces just because he/she was a Kashmiri? Google for Shah Faesal or Amir Athar-ul-Shafi Khan, toppers from IAS, both muslims and both Kashmiris.

The separatist movement is fuelled by a desire to simply stay away from you guys. Just because the movement has a bit of a religious flare to it does not make it invalid, that's a pretty poor argument since I'm fairly certain many Hindustanis who fought against the British had a bit of a religious flare to them as well.

I'm not saying nobody has stopped them, I'm saying most of them don't want to, which speaks volumes.

You cannot be a Muslim and work in the Hindustani military. If you work in the Hindustani military, any person who was previously a Muslim becomes a Murtad.

Since you want to know the history of MUSLIMS and Kashmir... most of the Kashmiri MUSLIMS are converts... remember 9th Sikh GURU... Guru Teg Bahadur gave his head while trying to stop Aurangzeb from forcing Kashmiri Hindus to convert to Islam... don't think that the problem of Kashmir and Hindu genocide in that region is new...

When you say that Kashmiri freedom fighters... never forget that more Kashmiris are in Indian Forces than the terrorists who are brainwashed by extremists...

Kashmiris were Muslim long before Sikhism came along. It was the Shah Mir dynasty from Swat that firmly established Islam in Kashmir. You also seem to forget that pretty much every single Muslim Empire in the region had large numbers of locals fight in their military and work in their administration.

Also, most Muslims in Pakistan and Hindustan do have ancestry from the Islamic conquerors:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3163234

"The study showed that the Muslim Gujjars differ significantly from their counterpart, the Hindu Gujjars"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20067368

"we observed a certain degree of genetic contribution from Iran to both Muslim populations"

 

[Corona]

Kashmir issue arose because of Indian expansionist policies and animosities due to partition. You people would never be satisfied as the apparent butt-hurt started since the first Muslim ruler arrived in the subcontinent and continued to grow ever since and which reached its climax during partition.

NO.

The Kashmir issue arose because of the half-as*ed way the British went about leaving the subcontinent to lick their own wounds after WW2, the impatience of all parties involved including the Indian and Pakistani sides, an abysmal understanding of how people and regions are connected beyond the sphere of religion, a laughably inadequate understanding of geography, and most importantly in the case of Kashmir absolutely no clue on how to deconstruct the ridiculously elaborate systems the British placed on the subcontinent to consolidate their power.

I'm talking about the princely state system placed by the British to control, or to be more accurate, project the illusion of control on their subjects. When independence came in 1947, an entire generation of 'pretend kings' were faced with the reality of becoming actual kings. Trust me, when you've been raised for generations with all the comforts of a king and none of the responsibilities, the prospect of actually managing a kingdom might not be all that attractive. They were also aware of the fact that if they decided not to join either of the two countries, an invasion and forceful assimilation in the future is very likely. Add to this the convenient location of Kashmir in the middle of the two countries that were being split apart too quickly on religious differences and you can see why Kashmir is in the situation it is now. We had to fight over something and Kashmir was at the right place at the right time.

Don't give me that BS excuse of Muslim rule in the past thinking that it'll knock me off my feet. I've always considered the Muslim rule as an integral part in the history of India, just as I consider Muslims as a part of India. For better or worse, every single person, country or empire in existence was influenced by the past in one way or another. You can't change the past, you had no hand in the past and you weren't responsible for the past. Only people who have nothing to show in the present will laud the achievements of those who died eons ago under different circumstances.

Irrelevant, the question is, does Kashmir love you?

How well represented are Kashmiris in the Hindustani government and military? Or other major institutions? How is their province doing as compared to others in Hindustan? Are there major separatist movements in Hindustani Kashmir?

You need to ask yourselves the above questions and answer them honestly.



How can you prioritise a piece of land that holds no major significance to you over human lives?



On the contrary, the concept of Kashmiri independence from both Pakistan and Hindustan is a recent one. The traditional view has always been the desire of unification with Pakistan, hence why the Pakistani invasion of Kashmir saw a large amount of local support.

You will find so many Pakistanis who are Kashmiri and damn proud about being Pakistani (e.g @Talwar e Pakistan and my very own grandmother), but I am yet to meet a single Hindustani Kashmiri who is proud about being Hindustani (I've only ever seen them in the news or online, which shows how much of a minority they are).



People who inhabit the region of Kashmir form a critical part of Pakistan, with many Pakistanis such as myself having ancestors from the region and others actually being from there. They're also Muslim, and the more religious among us such as myself view them as brothers because of this.

Survey's have been done on the Baluchis. The majority of them do not want independence from Pakistan, sorry to burst your bubble but it's true.

As for Sindhis and Punjabis, don't make me laugh. The creation of Pakistan was one of the best things that ever happened to us.

• I believe @kinsr 's second paragraph explained some of your questions to my satisfaction. Hate for the simple purpose of hating someone cannot be soothed by any rational means. I don't believe every Kashmiri hates us for the sake of hating us, there are mistakes on our side too, but there exists a non insignificant number that does partake in extremist behavior.
• I said the same of all the regions. Priority of the majority over the few in dire situations. Besides, if the Kashmiris were to move out of Kashmir, they wouldn't be prioritized over.
• Maybe I was wrong about their preference at the time of independence, but that preference was in the backdrop of religious views. Irrelevant to my argument, but still there. Even then, violence as a modus operandi for separation was a recent phenomenon attributed to the religious extremism of the 80's and 90's. These extremists tend to be some of the more vocal supporters of unification with Pakistan than the others. As for being proud, I believe there are factions who very much in the Indian side of thing when it comes to pride in one's country. Try the pandits of Kashmir or the locals of the eastern side of Kashmir, although I have inadequate info on this and am basically quoting others I've seen on this forum. Maybe they can help you there.

 

[Hamza913]

cond paragraph explained some of your questions to my satisfaction. Hate for the simple purpose of hating someone cannot be soothed by any rational means. I don't believe every Kashmiri hates us for the sake of hating us, there are mistakes on our side too, but there exists a non insignificant number that does partake in extremist behavior.

• I said the same of all the regions. Priority of the majority over the few in dire situations. Besides, if the Kashmiris were to move out of Kashmir, they wouldn't be prioritized over.
• Maybe I was wrong about their preference at the time of independence, but that preference was in the backdrop of religious views. Irrelevant to my argument, but still there. Even then, violence as a modus operandi for separation was a recent phenomenon attributed to the religious extremism of the 80's and 90's. These extremists tend to be some of the more vocal supporters of unification with Pakistan than the others. As for being proud, I believe there are factions who very much in the Indian side of thing when it comes to pride in one's country. Try the pandits of Kashmir or the locals of the eastern side of Kashmir, although I have inadequate info on this and am basically quoting others I've seen on this forum. Maybe they can help you there.

A lot of them dislike you simply because you won't get lost. You know that one person who can't take a hint to buzz off? Hindustan is that person. They wouldn't resort to militancy if you listened to them.

You're kidding right? Have you forgotten about all the fighting Kashmiris did in 1947?

The pro-Hindustani people in the area are a minority. Everyone else either wants independence or unification with Pakistan.

 

[kinsr]

The separatist movement is fuelled by a desire to simply stay away from you guys. Just because the movement has a bit of a religious flare to it does not make it invalid, that's a pretty poor argument since I'm fairly certain many Hindustanis who fought against the British had a bit of a religious flare to them as well.

I'm not saying nobody has stopped them, I'm saying most of them don't want to, which speaks volumes.

You cannot be a Muslim and work in the Hindustani military. If you work in the Hindustani military, any person who was previously a Muslim becomes a Murtad.

Again, its your assumption only that Kashmiris dont want anything to do with India.

Which most of them are you talking about? The ones indoctrinated into the supremacy of Islam rather than the law of the land? The ones like them wont fit anywhere, not even in Islamic Republics. There is a growing number of even educated Muslims globally who are falling for this Muslim victim hood trap, Kashmir is no different. You are completely wrong when you say a "bit" of religious flare, its "completely religious" in nature. The whole claim of Pakistan/Seperatists is based upon purely "Religious" basis. The whole Kashmir quagmire is about Muslims got nothing to do with Hindus. You trying to equate Kashmir terrorism to Indian freedom struggle is completely fallacious. Indian freedom struggle was genuinely for the Independence of people of India, it had people from all shades of life in India, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhist, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis, Tribals, The hot headed ones, the cold headed ones, almost everyone and it was hardly religious in nature. Now its for you to name me five non Muslim leaders who are pro-Independence in Kashmir, I'm sure you know about demographics of J&K, 7.5 million Muslims and 5.5 millions non-Muslims.


The number is not so large as it may appear to you. Out of a population of 1.25 Cr, there are about 75 Lakh Muslims, how many do you see coming out to streets to protest? not more than a few hundreds at any time. They are allowed to protest, as long as they dont threaten lives or properties. That's what they get for being a citizen of India. Of course the forces will respond in case the protests turn violent (stone pelting, arson, loot, lynching) and it will happen anywhere in India not just Kashmir, just that those Kashmiris haven't been able to find something productive to do so they merely protest.

Millions of Kashmiris come down southwards every winter to sell their wares like Carpets, Shawls, Dry fruits, Saffron, Medicinal herbs, Woollens, wooden wares etc. they are very tightly integrated into the India economy and they do earn well for to last the whole year. I know many a Kashmiris from North as well as South Kashmir and yet to meet one who is really dissatisfied with India. On the contrary they all seem to be happier with the kind of money they make (400% to 700% profits on Saffron, Medicinal herbs like Ashwgandha & Shilajit). More so, they despise the militancy which has ruined the tourist business completely, and which forces them to bring the whole load of produce down southwards instead being sold in Kashmir itself.

As I said earlier in my previous post. India doesn't discriminate someone for being a Kashmiri, if you have the capability you will make good in Life. There are thousands of Kashmiris who turn up to join Indian security forces (the same ones whom you say want nothing to do with India/Hindus), the same ones top IAS, the same ones get selected for IPL (Umar Nazir, Abid Nabi, Parvez Rasool), the same ones wins India Idol (Qazi Tauqeer), the same one play for India Football team(Ishfaq Ahmed, Mehrajuddin Wadoo).... I can keep on writing names of Kashmiris who have found a purpose in life than picking up a gun.

Even the author of the OP had a good opportunity in life, not everyone gets an admission into AMU and more so, he was funded by GoI for his PhD, but then, false indoctrination won over him. Else he could have been a good citizen anywhere, could have left for greener pastures, have a life, family, return something good for Kashmir, or even raise his voice against India in a non-violent manner, but then he chose a gun, now his only contribution to Kashmir cause will be to become fertile manure for the lands of Kashmir. He made a poor choice.

Rest about being Murtad and all... Only Pakistanis believe this BS. Serving ones nation doesn't make you murtad. By the way when a Kashmiri cop turns an extremist, does he becomes a Momin by default? or is there a ceremony.

 

[Hamza913]

Again, its your assumption only that Kashmiris dont want anything to do with India.

Which most of them are you talking about? The ones indoctrinated into the supremacy of Islam rather than the law of the land? The ones like them wont fit anywhere, not even in Islamic Republics. There is a growing number of even educated Muslims globally who are falling for this Muslim victim hood trap, Kashmir is no different. You are completely wrong when you say a "bit" of religious flare, its "completely religious" in nature. The whole claim of Pakistan/Seperatists is based upon purely "Religious" basis. The whole Kashmir quagmire is about Muslims got nothing to do with Hindus. You trying to equate Kashmir terrorism to Indian freedom struggle is completely fallacious. Indian freedom struggle was genuinely for the Independence of people of India, it had people from all shades of life in India, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhist, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis, Tribals, The hot headed ones, the cold headed ones, almost everyone and it was hardly religious in nature. Now its for you to name me five non Muslim leaders who are pro-Independence in Kashmir, I'm sure you know about demographics of J&K, 7.5 million Muslims and 5.5 millions non-Muslims.


The number is not so large as it may appear to you. Out of a population of 1.25 Cr, there are about 75 Lakh Muslims, how many do you see coming out to streets to protest? not more than a few hundreds at any time. They are allowed to protest, as long as they dont threaten lives or properties. That's what they get for being a citizen of India. Of course the forces will respond in case the protests turn violent (stone pelting, arson, loot, lynching) and it will happen anywhere in India not just Kashmir, just that those Kashmiris haven't been able to find something productive to do so they merely protest.

Millions of Kashmiris come down southwards every winter to sell their wares like Carpets, Shawls, Dry fruits, Saffron, Medicinal herbs, Woollens, wooden wares etc. they are very tightly integrated into the India economy and they do earn well for to last the whole year. I know many a Kashmiris from North as well as South Kashmir and yet to meet one who is really dissatisfied with India. On the contrary they all seem to be happier with the kind of money they make (400% to 700% profits on Saffron, Medicinal herbs like Ashwgandha & Shilajit). More so, they despise the militancy which has ruined the tourist business completely, and which forces them to bring the whole load of produce down southwards instead being sold in Kashmir itself.

As I said earlier in my previous post. India doesn't discriminate someone for being a Kashmiri, if you have the capability you will make good in Life. There are thousands of Kashmiris who turn up to join Indian security forces (the same ones whom you say want nothing to do with India/Hindus), the same ones top IAS, the same ones get selected for IPL (Umar Nazir, Abid Nabi, Parvez Rasool), the same ones wins India Idol (Qazi Tauqeer), the same one play for India Football team(Ishfaq Ahmed, Mehrajuddin Wadoo).... I can keep on writing names of Kashmiris who have found a purpose in life than picking up a gun.

Even the author of the OP had a good opportunity in life, not everyone gets an admission into AMU and more so, he was funded by GoI for his PhD, but then, false indoctrination won over him. Else he could have been a good citizen anywhere, could have left for greener pastures, have a life, family, return something good for Kashmir, or even raise his voice against India in a non-violent manner, but then he chose a gun, now his only contribution to Kashmir cause will be to become fertile manure for the lands of Kashmir. He made a poor choice.

Rest about being Murtad and all... Only Pakistanis believe this BS. Serving ones nation doesn't make you murtad. By the way when a Kashmiri cop turns an extremist, does he becomes a Momin by default? or is there a ceremony.

It's not an assumption. My grandmother was from Kashmir, and I know several other people from Kashmir. All of them have no desire to be a part of Hindustan, regardless to which side of the LOC they happened to be from.

Islam IS superior to the law of the land, every single practising Muslim will follow Islam over the law of the land if they happen to contradict (fortunately, in most societies they don't).

What "trap"? It's true, we're being hit at from every angle. In Kashmir, we are getting attacked. In Palestine, we are getting attacked. Even in Western societies, the far right will never miss an opportunity to attack us verbally and physically. Do you really think that we are going to become so pathetic as to take it all without protest? Some of us may protest via atrocious and despicable means (e.g ba5tard terrorists who attack civilians), but do you really expect there to not be at least a few among us who will resort to these kinds of acts? Don't like Islamic militancy? Don't go around attacking innocent Muslims. Simple as. I don't get what part of this is difficult for some of you to understand.

Yes, we separated primarily based on religion, but what you fail to understand is that Islam is a complete ideology. It isn't just a personal belief system. It covers religion as well as law, economics, warfare, welfare, governance, etc. Practising Muslims are FAR too different to practising Hindus to get along in the same nation, and this has been proven correct post 1947.

The region of Hindustani Kashmir is predominantly Muslim, so the opinion of non-Muslims unfortunately plays second peddle (this is how democracy works).

As said before, there might be a minority of Kashmiris who enjoy their stay in Hindustan, but most do not.

It's not just us who believe it, just about every reputable Islamic scholar says the same thing. The Hindustani army is engaged in war against innocent Muslims, so joining it would make you a Murtad.

 

[ssethii]

NO.

The Kashmir issue arose because of the half-as*ed way the British went about leaving the subcontinent to lick their own wounds after WW2, the impatience of all parties involved including the Indian and Pakistani sides, an abysmal understanding of how people and regions are connected beyond the sphere of religion, a laughably inadequate understanding of geography, and most importantly in the case of Kashmir absolutely no clue on how to deconstruct the ridiculously elaborate systems the British placed on the subcontinent to consolidate their power.

I'm talking about the princely state system placed by the British to control, or to be more accurate, project the illusion of control on their subjects. When independence came in 1947, an entire generation of 'pretend kings' were faced with the reality of becoming actual kings. Trust me, when you've been raised for generations with all the comforts of a king and none of the responsibilities, the prospect of actually managing a kingdom might not be all that attractive. They were also aware of the fact that if they decided not to join either of the two countries, an invasion and forceful assimilation in the future is very likely. Add to this the convenient location of Kashmir in the middle of the two countries that were being split apart too quickly on religious differences and you can see why Kashmir is in the situation it is now. We had to fight over something and Kashmir was at the right place at the right time.

British are not responsible for the partition they were a mere mediator in the process. You are ignoring the plight of the Muslims before partition in Hindu dominated cities across the subcontinent, you can take Lahore as a prime example, that is why till date you don't understand or don't bother about why Muslims wanted a separate state after living together for almost a thousand years. Most of the Indians still believe M.A. Jinnah was a British agent who wanted to extend the British rule in the subcontinent through the method of divide and rule. Two nation theory is as relevant today as it was a century ago and you thought it is resting somewhere on the ocean floor of the bay of Bengal.

 

[Corona]

A lot of them dislike you simply because you won't get lost. You know that one person who can't take a hint to buzz off? Hindustan is that person. They wouldn't resort to militancy if you listened to them.

You're kidding right? Have you forgotten about all the fighting Kashmiris did in 1947?

The pro-Hindustani people in the area are a minority. Everyone else either wants independence or unification with Pakistan.

If they don't like us, they're free to leave. It's disappointing, but we won't stop them. You don't hang around a party you don't like. Our land stays though.

British are not responsible for the partition they were a mere mediator in the process. You are ignoring the plight of the Muslims before partition in Hindu dominated cities across the subcontinent, you can take Lahore as a prime example, that is why till date you don't understand or don't bother about why Muslims wanted a separate state after living together for almost a thousand years. Most of the Indians still believe M.A. Jinnah was a British agent who wanted to extend the British rule in the subcontinent through the method of divide and rule. Two nation theory is as relevant today as it was a century ago and you thought it is resting somewhere on the ocean floor of the bay of Bengal.

I neither said partition was unnecessary nor did I say the British were responsible for partition.
I said the way partition was carried out was botched and could've been done better, maybe in a way that didn't leave Kashmir in the situation it is now.