AhsanAmin
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2013
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
Most Pakistanis have sheer pain in their heart when we read the news of Indian atrocities in Kashmir everyday. In past few months, due to merciless pellet gun shootings by Indian Army, about a thousand Kashmiris have suffered eye injuries and more than 150 Kashmiris have died. It is evident that Indian government is trying to suppress the voice of Kashmiri freedom again by use of sheer force. This raises the question whether it is possible in 21st century that governments could squash the will of people by use of brutal force. I believe the answer to this question depends upon what path Kashmiris choose in their struggle for freedom. One thing is however very certain that nobody including mighty India can deny the rights of Kashmiris for long if Kashmiris choose their steps wisely. A land truly belongs to her inhabitants and Kashmir only belongs to Kashmiris and if they want independence, they can never be subjugated by force forever.
Here the question arises what steps Kashmiris have to take in order to make sure that destiny of Kashmir is decided by themselves. In order to make it a success, Kashmiris would have to make sure that they make well thought out and organized steps towards asserting themselves. Despite unwillingness of most Kashmiris to accept legitimacy of Indian rule, their efforts for freedom have been sporadic with irregular bursts of activity that started as a reaction of Indian brutalities. The reason for current unrest in Kashmir was the killing of popular Kashmiri separatist Burhan Wani by Indian security forces. Kashmiris have to step back and ask themselves whether their sacrifices of thousands of young men over the decades have brought them any closer to freedom from Indian rule. The answer is that if there is no concerted and organized effort at every grass root level towards freedom from India, irregular outbursts of popular anger against India will never result in victory in Kashmiri struggle for freedom.
When we look back at the history of political struggle for the rights of Kashmiris, we recall the elections for state assembly in 1987. Muslim United Front (MUF) knew they could win the elections in Kashmir and therefore MUF decided to participate in general elections. Those elections are still known in Kashmir for legendary rigging by Indian government. When disgruntled Kashmiris were asked to go for elections again two year later in 1989, the official polling rate in the Kashmir valley was less than ten percent because Kashmiris had lost faith in elections held under Indian control. This rigging of elections in 1987 by Indian government paved way for armed struggle in Kashmir. Though armed struggle brought Kashmir issue to forefront again, India was able to suppress the Kashmiri efforts for freedom by sheer use of force under governor rule that lasted seven years from 1990 to 1996.
I strongly believe derailing of democratic process in 1987 was a turning point in the history of Kashmir. At this point historians would like to ask the question whether turning of a peaceful democratic process into an armed struggle for freedom was a judicious decision. Was it worth the sacrifices of thousands of Kashmiri youth that died as result of armed conflict. Leaving the search for right answer to historians, Kashmiris however, can do justice to thousands of lives given for the cause of freedom of Kashmir by making wise choices today that in fact result in freedom of Kashmir from India. I believe all Kashmiri parties opposed to Indian rule should make an effort towards a robust and enduring peaceful political struggle again. By robust and enduring struggle, I mean a struggle that continues despite any possible setbacks, occasional problems and deliberate election rigging. Even if pro-independence parties are not politically organized enough to win the state elections right away, they must continue to struggle and continue to assert themselves on all possible forums. Look at Scottish National Party (SNP) which unlike pro-independence Kashmiris (who have a very large following in Kashmir) was never considered a major force in Scotland but they continued to make efforts to present their message to Scottish people and finally became the most formidable force in Scotland. Why can Kashmiris who have given thousands of lives for the cause of freedom not organize themselves as a political force and struggle on all possible levels to achieve their cause.
I would like to stress one point that Kashmiris should organize their struggle for freedom in a way that preserves the sanctity and dignity of human life both Kashmiri and Indian. They should make sure to avoid the forms of conflict that result in any undue loss of human life and choose the methods of struggle that are politically most effective. Look at the struggle for freedom of Pakistan from British Raj, our leader M.A Jinnah never took a step that would result in violation of laws at that times by his party and always made strong denunciation of violence throughout his struggle for freedom. It was only through his wisdom we were able to get a separate country for Muslims in India. Even Nelson Mandela was a great fan of Jinnah and said that he learnt political struggle for freedom from life of M.A Jinnah whom he called his hero. If Kashmiri leadership has to look for an ideal to follow, they should look at peaceful political struggle of M.A Jinnah.
At the end, I would like to say again that Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris and let there be no doubt if Kashmiris choose the mode of their struggle for independence wisely, nobody could deny them their rights. But the path to freedom demands constant and persistent political struggle. At times, the path to freedom also asks for restraint and regard for the dignity of human life. Only when this political struggle becomes popular at every grass root level through a determined and lasting effort that we could see our struggle bear real fruit. If Kashmiris decide to take the path of determined peaceful political effort on all possible fronts, it will still be a decade or two before we could see freedom for Kashmir that remained elusive for seven decades. But make no mistake, no country can impose its rule on Kashmiris against their will in twenty first century.
Here the question arises what steps Kashmiris have to take in order to make sure that destiny of Kashmir is decided by themselves. In order to make it a success, Kashmiris would have to make sure that they make well thought out and organized steps towards asserting themselves. Despite unwillingness of most Kashmiris to accept legitimacy of Indian rule, their efforts for freedom have been sporadic with irregular bursts of activity that started as a reaction of Indian brutalities. The reason for current unrest in Kashmir was the killing of popular Kashmiri separatist Burhan Wani by Indian security forces. Kashmiris have to step back and ask themselves whether their sacrifices of thousands of young men over the decades have brought them any closer to freedom from Indian rule. The answer is that if there is no concerted and organized effort at every grass root level towards freedom from India, irregular outbursts of popular anger against India will never result in victory in Kashmiri struggle for freedom.
When we look back at the history of political struggle for the rights of Kashmiris, we recall the elections for state assembly in 1987. Muslim United Front (MUF) knew they could win the elections in Kashmir and therefore MUF decided to participate in general elections. Those elections are still known in Kashmir for legendary rigging by Indian government. When disgruntled Kashmiris were asked to go for elections again two year later in 1989, the official polling rate in the Kashmir valley was less than ten percent because Kashmiris had lost faith in elections held under Indian control. This rigging of elections in 1987 by Indian government paved way for armed struggle in Kashmir. Though armed struggle brought Kashmir issue to forefront again, India was able to suppress the Kashmiri efforts for freedom by sheer use of force under governor rule that lasted seven years from 1990 to 1996.
I strongly believe derailing of democratic process in 1987 was a turning point in the history of Kashmir. At this point historians would like to ask the question whether turning of a peaceful democratic process into an armed struggle for freedom was a judicious decision. Was it worth the sacrifices of thousands of Kashmiri youth that died as result of armed conflict. Leaving the search for right answer to historians, Kashmiris however, can do justice to thousands of lives given for the cause of freedom of Kashmir by making wise choices today that in fact result in freedom of Kashmir from India. I believe all Kashmiri parties opposed to Indian rule should make an effort towards a robust and enduring peaceful political struggle again. By robust and enduring struggle, I mean a struggle that continues despite any possible setbacks, occasional problems and deliberate election rigging. Even if pro-independence parties are not politically organized enough to win the state elections right away, they must continue to struggle and continue to assert themselves on all possible forums. Look at Scottish National Party (SNP) which unlike pro-independence Kashmiris (who have a very large following in Kashmir) was never considered a major force in Scotland but they continued to make efforts to present their message to Scottish people and finally became the most formidable force in Scotland. Why can Kashmiris who have given thousands of lives for the cause of freedom not organize themselves as a political force and struggle on all possible levels to achieve their cause.
I would like to stress one point that Kashmiris should organize their struggle for freedom in a way that preserves the sanctity and dignity of human life both Kashmiri and Indian. They should make sure to avoid the forms of conflict that result in any undue loss of human life and choose the methods of struggle that are politically most effective. Look at the struggle for freedom of Pakistan from British Raj, our leader M.A Jinnah never took a step that would result in violation of laws at that times by his party and always made strong denunciation of violence throughout his struggle for freedom. It was only through his wisdom we were able to get a separate country for Muslims in India. Even Nelson Mandela was a great fan of Jinnah and said that he learnt political struggle for freedom from life of M.A Jinnah whom he called his hero. If Kashmiri leadership has to look for an ideal to follow, they should look at peaceful political struggle of M.A Jinnah.
At the end, I would like to say again that Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris and let there be no doubt if Kashmiris choose the mode of their struggle for independence wisely, nobody could deny them their rights. But the path to freedom demands constant and persistent political struggle. At times, the path to freedom also asks for restraint and regard for the dignity of human life. Only when this political struggle becomes popular at every grass root level through a determined and lasting effort that we could see our struggle bear real fruit. If Kashmiris decide to take the path of determined peaceful political effort on all possible fronts, it will still be a decade or two before we could see freedom for Kashmir that remained elusive for seven decades. But make no mistake, no country can impose its rule on Kashmiris against their will in twenty first century.
