^^An Indian army soldier, wearing red shirt torn by protestors, is paraded by villagers shouting anti-Indian Army solgans in Bandipore town, 65 kilometers (40 miles) north of Srinagar
I’m sorry if I say this is too loud or barefaced, but what India needs is Azadi (Independence) from Kashmir. From 1948-2008, we have spent 60 long years trying to compromise with a set of people who have never thought of themselves as Indians. In a state with a ‘Prime Minister’ till 1953, the call for ‘liberation’ was never too bleak for the naked eye. Right through the 1970s, 80s they cheered Pakistan, chanted mantras for ‘Freedom Movement’, ‘plebiscite’, ’autonomy’ and with insurgency since 1989 India has been demonized for no sin.
Having poured in billions in aid and billions more in fighting militancy, Indian Army faces the disgrace of being treated as an occupying force in its own territory. They now call for the withdrawal of the Indian forces from the valley; in the eyes of the world, international press, hawkish neighbors and radical regimes Indian forces are gross mutilators of human rights and have made the life of the ‘innocent’ Kashmiri terrible.
Face it: The Army doesn’t enjoy being pushed to the worst possible proxy war with the threat from locals and foreign militants always lingering and a terrorist or two lurking in the dark alleys. The army is called in only when the worst possible breakdown of the constitutional machinery occurs, which was and will be the state of Kashmir eventually.
With thousands of jawans and officers lost to the cause, 20 years later we see this as the India’s worst investment of resources to a thankless people. The fact of the matter is that as a soft-state India hasn’t quashed Kashmir like China has done with Tibet or Israel is doing with Palestinians, we have not done it because we have not been a militarist state, every nation has a state ideology (like the U.S. believes it is the sole guardian of democracy), India more than anything has tried to uphold secular democratic framework of a motley of cultures. Imagine the body-blow the secular state ideology has received when India’s army has to patrol its only Muslim majority state...humiliating!
Why then do we stick to Kashmir when the Kashmiris don’t wish to continue with The Union? The once secular and vividly romantic environs of Kashmir Valley have erupted in August 2008 to let loose all the conceited anger, hatred and filth which had accumulated since decades. The Kashmir v/s Jammu, Hindu v/s Muslim, India v/s Pakistan, Separatist v/s Moderate malevolence strewn across the state has maligned and ‘Paradise Lost’ is more apt than clichéd.
Here’s why..
India sticks to Kashmir as it is the very idea of the Indian secular state and the firm belief that a Muslim-majority Kashmir can be happier, more prosperous in the secular fabric of India than at the hands of a buffer ‘Azad Kashmir’ or a full P-o-K.
India suffers from this bout of ignominy in admitting that in Kashmir, the proving ground for its state ideals, the unity in diversity and associated paraphernalia has collapsed under the weight of dead bodies.
India understands, if Kashmir goes there’ll be no stopping the band-wagon, virtually all NE states and every separatist group would get the booster dose for ‘Liberation’.
India’s eternal romance with paradise crown of Dal Lake, Gulmarg and Wular, the picturesque snow fields where Shammi Kapoor once sang ‘Yahooo!’ is a mainstay to modern Indian geopolitical psyche.
You are free to add as many more….
The common media projection of gullible Kashmiris being played at the hands of Pakistan has fallen on its face as the August demonstrations proved that if one call for protest by the Hurriyat could mobilize 5-lakh ordinary Kashmiris, there is definitely a sense of lack of understanding on our side.
The question is do we still wish to understand, standing at the crossroads of the giant leap to becoming a superpower or falling back to being the world leaders of the third world. Nehru said it and the tryst continues, our destiny is being remolded every second now. Do we wish to carry the burden of a thankless people who haven’t let any progress whatsoever get through them in the past 60 years? Is there a need and logic in attempting reconciliation?
A 100-acre plot of land, that is all it took to bring down the ‘stabilized’ Kashmir rhetoric, that is all it would take for these people to claim sovereignty and oaths of fealty for Pakistan. Indian deserves much better and thus more than ever now, the Kashmiris need to decide what their fate would be:-
a.) With and as a constituent of a resurgent India or
b.)On the whimsical path to Azad Kashmir and dream to be paralyzed into mis-governance and turmoil worse than now (like India’s many neighbors) or
c.) To join the God-forsaken Pakistan, which will be unique for the decades to come in having the Taliban, radical Islamists as well as the Americans against itself and yet serving as their battle theatre, on a plummeting social and economic base.
The radical Sangh Parivar and the dream of ‘Akhanda Bharat’ should take the reality bite and it is time Kashmir and Indian subconscious woke up to the reality. It is Kashmir’s call for the future!
Having poured in billions in aid and billions more in fighting militancy, Indian Army faces the disgrace of being treated as an occupying force in its own territory. They now call for the withdrawal of the Indian forces from the valley; in the eyes of the world, international press, hawkish neighbors and radical regimes Indian forces are gross mutilators of human rights and have made the life of the ‘innocent’ Kashmiri terrible.
Face it: The Army doesn’t enjoy being pushed to the worst possible proxy war with the threat from locals and foreign militants always lingering and a terrorist or two lurking in the dark alleys. The army is called in only when the worst possible breakdown of the constitutional machinery occurs, which was and will be the state of Kashmir eventually.
With thousands of jawans and officers lost to the cause, 20 years later we see this as the India’s worst investment of resources to a thankless people. The fact of the matter is that as a soft-state India hasn’t quashed Kashmir like China has done with Tibet or Israel is doing with Palestinians, we have not done it because we have not been a militarist state, every nation has a state ideology (like the U.S. believes it is the sole guardian of democracy), India more than anything has tried to uphold secular democratic framework of a motley of cultures. Imagine the body-blow the secular state ideology has received when India’s army has to patrol its only Muslim majority state...humiliating!
Why then do we stick to Kashmir when the Kashmiris don’t wish to continue with The Union? The once secular and vividly romantic environs of Kashmir Valley have erupted in August 2008 to let loose all the conceited anger, hatred and filth which had accumulated since decades. The Kashmir v/s Jammu, Hindu v/s Muslim, India v/s Pakistan, Separatist v/s Moderate malevolence strewn across the state has maligned and ‘Paradise Lost’ is more apt than clichéd.
Here’s why..
India sticks to Kashmir as it is the very idea of the Indian secular state and the firm belief that a Muslim-majority Kashmir can be happier, more prosperous in the secular fabric of India than at the hands of a buffer ‘Azad Kashmir’ or a full P-o-K.
India suffers from this bout of ignominy in admitting that in Kashmir, the proving ground for its state ideals, the unity in diversity and associated paraphernalia has collapsed under the weight of dead bodies.
India understands, if Kashmir goes there’ll be no stopping the band-wagon, virtually all NE states and every separatist group would get the booster dose for ‘Liberation’.
India’s eternal romance with paradise crown of Dal Lake, Gulmarg and Wular, the picturesque snow fields where Shammi Kapoor once sang ‘Yahooo!’ is a mainstay to modern Indian geopolitical psyche.
You are free to add as many more….
The common media projection of gullible Kashmiris being played at the hands of Pakistan has fallen on its face as the August demonstrations proved that if one call for protest by the Hurriyat could mobilize 5-lakh ordinary Kashmiris, there is definitely a sense of lack of understanding on our side.
The question is do we still wish to understand, standing at the crossroads of the giant leap to becoming a superpower or falling back to being the world leaders of the third world. Nehru said it and the tryst continues, our destiny is being remolded every second now. Do we wish to carry the burden of a thankless people who haven’t let any progress whatsoever get through them in the past 60 years? Is there a need and logic in attempting reconciliation?
A 100-acre plot of land, that is all it took to bring down the ‘stabilized’ Kashmir rhetoric, that is all it would take for these people to claim sovereignty and oaths of fealty for Pakistan. Indian deserves much better and thus more than ever now, the Kashmiris need to decide what their fate would be:-
a.) With and as a constituent of a resurgent India or
b.)On the whimsical path to Azad Kashmir and dream to be paralyzed into mis-governance and turmoil worse than now (like India’s many neighbors) or
c.) To join the God-forsaken Pakistan, which will be unique for the decades to come in having the Taliban, radical Islamists as well as the Americans against itself and yet serving as their battle theatre, on a plummeting social and economic base.
The radical Sangh Parivar and the dream of ‘Akhanda Bharat’ should take the reality bite and it is time Kashmir and Indian subconscious woke up to the reality. It is Kashmir’s call for the future!
1 comment:
when someone runs, more often than not, they run AWAY from something, not towards.
thats exactly whats happening in kashmir. there have been human rights violations, contrary to what bollwood wants you to believe. and calling kashmiris a "thankless people" is as outrageous as calling them "innocent". they're just ppl. who haven't led normal lives for a very long time now. a people who's fate has depended largely on what governments did to please the voters of the rest of the country, who, sadly have no inkling of whats going on but are fiercely patriotic about "the crown". how many of the people denouncng kashmir and kashmiris for being thankless or unpatriotic even know who raja hari singh was?or sheikh abdullah? and how kashmir happened to become a part of india in the first place?but they vote,and hence all the secular drama.
they're not "innocent" kashmiris, yes. aren't you glad?
Post a Comment