Re: [mukto-mona] atrocities in PoK

I agree that with Dr. Das - the root of Kashmir conflict is not religion; it's a strategic interest for both parties from the points of view of defense and natural resources. The religious communality is being used to achieve that goal. Otherwise, it will need all-out war, which is not an option between two nuclear-armed parties.

Yes, there is no possibility of merger of any former Pakistani provinces with India now due to regional Islamic politics. If merger happens for whatever reason, India will break into pieces, like a crystal vase. Even merger between Bangladesh and West Bengal will break apart greater Bengal from India. India has at least ~200 million Muslims, if they add more, it will be unstable forever. Indian politicians are aware of it. So, there is no chance of any merger in the future. Indian strategic interest lies in the independence of NWFP and Baluchistan, just like Bangladesh.

Jiten Roy

On Sunday, February 9, 2014 9:51 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

I find most of Dr. Das's points quite flawed.

 

Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan was a sensible man, and he wanted NWFP to be a part of the secular India, as opposed to the Islamic fanatic Pakistan. If his wish came to fruition in 1947, his people most likely would have been more civilized now, than what they are in reality now. However, looking at the reality on the ground, there is no reason to believe that the population of that land wants to be a part of India now.

 

I believe Islam would keep the Pakistani provinces together for a long time. Even as I agree that Pakistan is destined to fragment, I believe that it would take a very very long time; just guess how long it would take to wash off the religious fanaticism from the heads of the people there. There is no shortage of Islamic fanatics in any part of Pakistan now. I am convinced that if East Bengal were a contiguous state to what is Pakistan now, there would be no Bangladesh today. East Bengal had enough collaborators in 1971 to keep the province with Pakistan, if the Pakistani military had convenient arms supply for them and for themselves.

 

I do not believe India's leadership would be stupid enough to 'swallow fragmented parts' of what is Pakistan today. There is no vacant land to swallow; they would have to take in a lot of religious fanatics. No smart leadership would do that. And India has enough human right activists to stop anything like a mass expulsion of any kind of people from their homes, even if a crazy leadership (which is unlikely anyway) ever wanted to do that.

 

SuBain

 

=================================================

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] atrocities in PoK

 

All the rivers in Pakistan originate in Kashmir. Besides, Peswar led by Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan wanted to join India and Baluchistan wanted to remain Independent.  Islam can not glue together the provinces of Pakistan, even Jiye Sind movement is not dead yet.  Pakistan is destined to be fragmented, India has high hope to swallow fragmented parts of the strange land created by the British rulers in 1947.  
Sent from my iPad

On Feb 8, 2014, at 8:55 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

"the least important of which is religion" - I am also ignorant.

 

Could you educate us with some details, Dr. Das? Thank you in anticipation.

 

Sukhamaya Bain

 

==============================

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] atrocities in PoK

 

Apparently, Mr. Chakrabarty is ignorant of the reasons of dispute on Kashmir between India and Pakistan, the least important of which is religion.
Sent from my iPad

 

==========================================

On Feb 7, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

Dear moderators

The following message has not yet been published. Is there any reason for not publishing it? Please make me aware of your policy. 

I really want to share my views with the most active members of the group. It can be an interesting debate. 

Thanks. 
Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 5, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

I have an "impossible" proposition. It is impossible in the sense that neither India nor Pakistan will agree to it one of the reasons being that the the trust level between these two neighbors is minimal. Any way, my proposition is that India and Pakistan agree to a time frame to create an independent Kashmir. 

The other reasons that make the proposition are

1. Pakistan will not want to lose Azad Kashmir although India is kind of tired of spending money and other resources to keep J&K with her. 

2. Kashmir part of J&K may want to be free but Jammu may not. 

3. India may want to have Kashmir and Jammu as two separate independent states as an alternative political solution. 
Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:52 PM, "Sankar Kumar Ray" <sankarray62@rediffmail.com> wrote:

 

Civil rights activists are legitimately opposed to unbridled atrocities by the Indian military and para-militarily forces in Kashmir ( India-occupied Kashmir, according to the Pakistanis) but mysteriously silent about atrocities in Azad Kashmir (we call it Pakistan-occupied  Kashmir). But the Friday Times of Lahore had the conscience unlike organisations such as APDR, PUCL and  PUDR, not to speak of Dodhichi 

For Ikram – Life in Pakistan occupied Kashmir – Azad Kashmir

By markulyseas

From The Friday Times, Pakistan's First Independent Weekly Newspaper  -  17 Jan 13 (http://my.telegraph.co.uk/markulyseas/markulyseas/4145/for-ikram-life-in-pakistan-occupied-kashmir-azad-kashmir/)

The "Azad" in AJK smacks of oxymoronic rhetoric. Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) is neither a free territory, nor a province of Pakistan. Muzaffarabad has always been under the control of Islamabad and the curtailment of the freedom of expression is constitutionally protected. Without meaning to refer to the new name just bestowed on an old province, let me ask, what's in a name?

Here is what.

There are a number of reports that describe the human rights violations in Indian Occupied Kashmir but it is hard to come by reports of violations on Pakistan's side. The Pakistani government often pretends that the only problems faced by Kashmiris are in India. The official position that there are no human rights violations in AJK is a naïve and disingenuous position that needs to be challenged. According to the Freedom House World Freedom Reports, in 2008 Pakistan-administered Kashmir was given the status "Not Free". This index awards a score of 1 to a "free country" based on ratings of political rights and civil liberties. These ratings are averaged, ranging from 1 to 7, i.e. countries or disputed territories with scores from 1 to 2.5 are considered Free, 3 to 5 are Partly Free, and 5.5 to 7 are Not Free. In 2008, this index gave AJK a Political Rights Score of 7 and a Civil Liberties score of 5. The scores for AJK have improved to a 6 and a 5 respectively in 2010. In comparison, Indian Occupied Kashmir has better scores of 5 for political rights and a 4 for civil liberties, and a status of 'partly free', which ironically is exactly equivalent to Pakistan's national score and status!

According to Brad Adams, Asia Director at Human Rights Watch , the "Pakistani authorities govern Azad Kashmir with strict controls on basic freedoms… The military shows no tolerance for dissent and practically runs the region as a fiefdom." The presence of an elected local government is a mere formality. In 2006, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that the federal government in Islamabad, the army and the ISI control all aspects of political life in AJK. Torture is routinely used in Pakistan, and this practice is also common in AJK. HRW also documented incidents of torture by the intelligence services and other agencies and individuals acting at the behest of the security establishment but knows of no cases in which members of military and paramilitary security and intelligence agencies have been prosecuted or even disciplined for acts of torture or mistreatment.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has also articulated tight controls on freedom of expression as a key pillar of government policy in AJK. While militant organizations promoting the incorporation of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir State into Pakistan have had free reign to propagate their views, groups promoting an independent Kashmir find their speech curtailed. Publications and literature favouring independence are banned.

Pakistan has prevented the creation of an independent media in the territory through bureaucratic restrictions and coercion. Looking at the freedom of expression in AJK, before 2005, the only radio allowed to operate was the Azad Kashmir Radio, a subsidiary of Radio Pakistan. Similarly before the earthquake telephone landlines were limited and being strictly monitored and a very limited mobile telephone service was operational. HRW reports that all telecommunications stations were controlled by the Special Communications Organization (SCO), a functional unit of the Pakistani army. Only after the earthquake did the government allow private mobile phone companies to operate in Azad Kashmir when it was pointed out that the loss of life could have been lessened had people and rescue workers had this technology as they did in affected areas in NWFP (as it was then called).

It has been widely reported that refugees from Jammu and Kashmir are discriminated against and mistreated by the authorities. Kashmiri refugees and former militants from India, most of whom are secular nationalists and culturally and linguistically different from the people of AJK, are particularly harassed through continuous surveillance, arbitrary beating and arrests and restraints on political expression. Pakistani military bases in AJK are usually placed in close proximity to highly populated civilian areas supposedly because of a lack of space. But many Kashmiris told HRW that the Pakistani military uses the bases to keep a close watch on the population to ensure political compliance and control.

Freedoms of association and assembly are restricted and constitutionally repressed. Article 4(7)(2) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act of 1974, states: 'No person or party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the States accession to Pakistan'. In recent years anti-government demonstrations have been violently suppressed and examples of these incidents are not hard to find. In 2005, at least ten people were killed when the police fired on a group of Shia students, after which curfews were imposed in Gilgit to prevent demonstrators from assembling. In 2006 police detained leaders of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, including Amanullah Khan, after they attended a peaceful rally in Rawalpindi against the construction of the Bhasha Dam. Khan was detained for a week and was not permitted to receive visitors during that time, according to the U.S. State Department's human rights report. In October 2008, police baton-charged dozens of people demonstrating against the proposal to move the capital of Azad Kashmir from Muzaffarabad. Three people were arrested but released the same day. In November 2008, the police blocked activists of the pro-independence APNA who were protesting in favor of truck services across the line-of-control from entering a town near the line-of-control.

In 2007, the European Union (EU) passed Emma Nicholson's Kashmir report with an overwhelming majority and adopted it as an official EU document. This kind of report sits squarely in the grey area of the AJK problem. It has been touted in the media as being anti-Pakistan and there are Kashmiris who find it pro-Kashmiri rights and some call it dubious. The key problem with this report is that it fails to acknowledge Indian repression in Kashmir and portrays a benign image of a "pro-people" India.

The EU report titled 'Present situation and future prospects' was critical of the fact that the Pakistanside of Kashmir was governed through the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs in Islamabad, that Pakistan officials dominated the Kashmir Council. This report also highlighted the facts that at the time the Chief Secretary, the Inspector-General of Police, the Accountant-General and the Finance Secretary were all from Pakistan. Nicholson disapproved of the provision in the 1974 Interim Constitution, which forbids any political activity that is not in accordance with the doctrine of Jammu and Kashmir as articulated by Pakistan, and obliges any candidate for a parliamentary seat in AJK to sign a declaration of loyalty to that effect.

Looking at the rule of law, the whole system of law and order seemingly rests on the control by the army and Islamabad. A clear illustration was given at the time of the 2005 earthquake when the AJK governmental structure collapsed. Analysts noted how, in the aftermath of 2005 earthquake the local government system was exposed. To quote Akbar Zaidi, "the local government system and its elected bodies are part of the rubble along with the entire physical infra-structure of the area."

Due to the limited mandate of the AJK Legislative Assembly, the elected political leaders of Azad Kashmir essentially remain ostensible heads of the territory while the real power resides in Islamabad with the Ministry of Kashmir and Northern Areas (KANA). Naturally this requires an obedient AJK administration. Since the early 1990s, the decision-making authority and management of the Kashmir issue has been under the Pakistan military, the ISI and ISI backed militant organizations.

__._,_.___

****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___