I've traveled to India roughly 20 times over these past decades (just once to Pakistan) and can safely refer to it as my favorite country on the planet. I've also been to Kashmir twice and can vouch for its physical beauty and its expansive cultural and historical interest. I can also attest to the fact that not all of Kashmir is majority-Muslim: Jammu and the south are mostly Hindu while Ladakh and Zanskar are predominantly Buddhist. Further, the heavily Muslim Vale of Kashmir (the fulcrum of the region's problems) at one time had a large Hindu population, most of whom moved away out of fear following the tribulations of 1947. Despite all this, I believe that the author of this op/ed is correct in blaming successive Indian governments for the dire situation in the Vale. The area should have been permitted to become part of Pakistan as the majority of its citizens (excluding the Hindu maharajah) had originally preferred to see happen. Even now, some sort of referendum should be instituted, at least within Srinagar and the surrounding area. Self-determination is (or should be) the fundamental right of all human beings. For the Palestinian Arabs, for the Kurds, the Scots, the Catalans- and also for the Kashmiris.
118
@stu freeman, you might be surprised to know that there are many Muslim majority cities and villages in India, and were so during the Partition as well. Pakistan, when it was created, was defined as a land for Muslims and a theocracy. India, on the other hand, is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, democracy. So why would Kashmir valley be made part of Pakistan just because of majority Muslims living there. And why would the conflict start in 1989, 40 years after the Partition.
91
@stu freeman. Cogent argument Stu Freeman.
No political problem defies a solution if the will from all parties is there. If the majority in the Vale are Muslims and they have already reached such heightened levels of agitation to the point of producing suicide bombers, it makes sense to cut them loose. Let them join Pakistan.
What other implications exist - water flows to the rest of India, more or fewer security threats?
Sometimes parties to a conflict need mediators as president Carter was for Egypt and Israel. Pakistan and India need a mediator of Carter caliber.
13
@stu freeman I was with you until your final sentence which sneaks a non-indigenous group, the Palestinian Arabs, into a list of indigenous people. You only need to look at the Palestinian Arab clan names which all betray the central fact that not one of them claims to originate from the Holy Land. You can add the equally revealing fact that, among the people you list, only the Palestinian Arabs have no name in their own language for their supposed homeland. There is no need to shoehorn the Arab war against the Jews into discussions of unrelated matters.
As for Kashmir itself, blame can be assigned to many parties (including China which has gobbled up about 20% of Kashmir - which is generally never mentioned). The chances of a free and fair referendum to allow Kashmiris decide their own fate seems improbable. No one can force India, Pakistan or China to disgorge any territory. Sadly, Kashmir, like other trouble spots in the world, appears to be fated to remain a problem to be managed rather than something that can be fixed. The trust and goodwill is simply not there. Perhaps someday leaders will emerge who will have prepared their own people for peace, but that seems a distant prospect.
31
That very old observation now applies to the entire planet. Whom the gods would destroy they first drive mad.
“What led that young Kashmiri man, Adil Ahmad Dar, to become a suicide bomber who brought South Asia to the brink of war? The last suicide bombing in Kashmir — and the first — was 19 years ago.”
Same reasons that led those suicide bombers to hijack plane in 2001 and kills hundreds of people in NewYork. These are the same people that were trained by America to attack Russian forces in Afghanistan. Then after the war, Pakistan used same people to wage proxy war against India.
And they are still doing that.
Who is to blame for this? Go figure...
9
Problem in Kashmir is same as Islamists demanding self determination in Mindanao( phillipines),Southern Thailand,Northern Nigeria, This is a world wide problem
5
Highly biased article written by an apparent sympathizer of the insurgency -- it carefully dances around the reality that religious fundamentalism has seeped into the Kashmiri consciousness, abetted by Pakistan-funded groups and those affected by it seem to lack the ability to live within the (admittedly imperfect) democratic setup of India.
11
Most comments miss the point - This is about Kashmiris and their fate - give them a voice to decide what they want to do. The Author is a Kashmiri and his voice must rise above the self-serving comments being made in this forum
6
Brilliantly written.
4
Pakistan prime minister saved his country by releasing the pilot.
4
It can only harm the hopes for a free Kashmir for the indepence movement to include the same Islamist terrorists that killed thousands o Americans on 9/11/2001.
The Kashmiris will have to attract American support, and including future Usama bin Ladens will only dash that hope.
1
Man & beast. Beasts r far superior than man as the latter is created only to destroy this universe. Proof. Read the history of human civilization. Created to kill one another & to destroy the Nature & other fellow creatures. Incorrigible beast than man is. Ashamed of the one among them to be born with hatred & sadism in my DNA.
Sorry to say this but your article sounds a bit naive. With a slightly better knowledge of the Indian subcontinent and its history, and also the current Indian government's global outreach efforts, you could have put together better reasons for the facts that you just state of the happenings of the past few days. For example, to say that "Modi and his govt were sitting silent" and a day later "Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan decides to release" - yes they are facts that everyone knows but you reporter seems to be clueless why that would happen when there was no such precedent. Kashmir is where it is because of a lot of Pakistan meddling and infiltrating. Many of the ones we call "residents" today in Kashmir were infiltrated from Pakistan "yesterday". While that has been happening, Article 370 has forbid the regular Indian citizen from moving to Kashmir himself though since 1947, Kashmir has been a part of India!!!! So just filling a place with infiltrators and later claiming they have a legitimate right to independence is something many countries have done in the world. US criticizes China on Tibet on the same lines! Why? We should be saying that Tibet really belongs to China based on its current demographics but we all know that that narrative ignores an atrocity that was committed. Look deep enough in Kashmir and you will see the same - Hindu pandits who lived there for centuries were driven away to create the current Muslim Kashmir! Talk about that if you can.
10
Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism that also has nuclear weapons.
Take note of problem that India faces - death by a thousand cuts while exercising restraint to avoid a nuclear holocaust.
This is why George W. Bush was right to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, and why Barrack Obama was gravely mistaken to leave Iraq to ISIS.
American cannot afford a nuclear ISIS or a nuclear Al Qaeda; India already faces a nuclear state sponsor of terrorism in Pakistan.
7
India, like Israel, is burdened with a territory and population over which it can’t easily surrender control due to very real and proven security concerns (the former acquired by partition and the latter by defensive war). India has committed far, far, far more killings and brutality than Israel, and with much more dubious justification on average. But the media coverage of that is vastly (vastly!) different from the constant hyperbole directed toward Israel. Hmmm....I wonder why....oh wait, Israel is the one with Jews, right?
2
Can’t believe that this article is so biased and has only shown one side of coin. Kashmir issue is being going on since independence’s of India. you could never justify suicide bombing who killed innocent 40 CRPF persons. you want India to demilitarized kashmir so all terrorists with help of ISI and PAK army will takeover kashmir valley and will try to invade other region and can create same situation. Muslims are happily living in every part of India peacefully. some relious issue is presence in every part of India such as racial tension in USA but doesn’t mean that we should segregate region or ask them to make their own country ! Kashmir is part of india and it will be in future. Pak has try fighting war three time in past but didn’t succeed and now they are trying to invade while creating this terrorist situation.
s are to blame. it is well known that Pakistan copied the Palestine playbook in Kashmir. Just like the Palestinians, the Kashmiris are being used ruthlessly as cannon fodder in the proxy war against India. There are no weapon or bomb factories in Kashmir. So where are the Kashmiri militants getting the IEDs, the communication equipment, the small arms, the explosives and the expertise to make a car bomb? Who is training them in urban warfare against Army troops? Why do school boys come out of mosques after Friday prayers with stones i
6
George Carlin once joked about India and Pakistan having nuclear weapons (https://youtu.be/Wx-s8WNjuhY?t=476)
"Ancient hatred with modern weapons," Carlin said, is something he needs for his entertainment. He went on to joke about reincarnation and martyrdom and nuclear weapons.
Of course, it is no laughing matter, especially now.
1
Muslims of Kashmir seem to suffer from an inter-generational Stockholm Syndrome. They want to cling to the ideology that led to the killing of their forefathers and destruction of their own heritage. So much for Kashmiriyat!!
5
Like Palestine, Kashmir was BRITAIN'S fault. I'm glad Little England is withdrawing from the rest of the world. I hope they put a wall around their little island along all their beaches.
6
I have never read a more one-sided piece in the NYTimes. In this article, Pakistan seems to be a passive recipient of Indian aggression, while playing the role of victim and martyr. Pakistan in reality, continues to harbor terrorists including Bin Laden as the US knows.
Should the NYT try to be even-handed in its reporting and not allow revisionist history? Or are OpEd writers excluded from writing about facts?
10
Mr Peer's justification of the action of the suicide bomber is, hollow, to say the least. He says that the humiliation by Indian security forces, was the reason, that Dar took to blowing himself up. He does'nt mention the fact that thousands of radicalised Kashmiris, like Dar take to the streets to pelt stones and fire bombs at the Indian security forces. These radicalised youth want to create a pan Islamic state and raise ISIS flags in the heart of Srinagar. They dream of a Caliphate in a Kashmir, which used to be tolerant land, before Pakistan and its proxies started to meddle. Mr Peer does'nt mention that hundreds of thousand of Kashmiri Pandits were thrown out of the valley as chants of Nizame Mustafa and Allah Hu Akbar resonated the streets in the early nineties. He forgets that terrorists like Dar killed, maimed, raped thousands of minorities and people who did'nt want an Islamic Kashmir. The Kashmiri Pandit community could have picked up guns or blown themselves as suicide bombers. Instead they choose to focus on education and peace, in line with the centuries old Kashmiri ethos. Today the Kashmiri Pandits are one of the most prosperous communities in India and different parts of the World, including America. They are engineers. doctors and corporates executives. While they miss their homeland, they never choose to resort to violence to get back what was theirs. Kashmir is bleeding because the majority Kashmiris have failed to introspect on the real cause.
10
I was born in kashmir, and all i wanna say is the people of kashmir should be allowed to decide their own fate but Offcourse indian government will always try their best to make sure nobody even highlights the issue coz they’ve basically enslaved all those innocent Kashmirs, #FreeKashmir, People in Pakistani occupied Kashmir are treated like Real Pakistani citizens and sometimes even better, and that’s a fact everyone’s aware of, everyone deep down knows that even if u heald a election in both sides of kashmir askin if the people of kashmir want to be with Pakistan or India, they’ll choose Pakistan a 100%. All i wanna say is Kashmir is a issue the world needs to know about and the world really needs to talk about. Because it has been decades of oppression on Kashmiri people, This enslavement of kashmiri people needs to end.
5
To the writer of the article I want to say that you appear highly biased towards India. Looking at things from only Kashmir's point of view. To tell you the truth India spends more money on Kashmir's than any other region in the country. The simple reason for that is through Kashmir India not only shares border with Pakistan but also with China. What if India removes its forces from Kashmir and the next thing you know we have Chinese soldiers in Kashmir. They did that to Tibet didn't they. Who will stop them then. I heavily doubt that the biased people from The New York times will come to the rescue of the Kashmiri from the Chinese. Pakistan is only fighting a proxy war in place of China. So people around the world and the Kashmiris themselves will have to understand that India can and never will leave the gates of Kashmir open for Pakistan and China to get an easy access to the rest of India. Sadly for Kashmiris they are torn in the middle. But for India it is not about having a control over Kashmir but rather keeping the rest of country safe. Just a little piece of information the Kashmiris don't pay any form of tax to Indian government. But on the other hand Indian government highly subsidises the goods imported in Kashmir from Indian tax payers money. So Kashmiris get everything tenth the price of what rest of the Indian gets. If we are using Kashmir to keep our country safe we are paying for it also. JAI HIND.
4
The western media have always leaned towards Pakistan, even though this country of fanatic muslims has harbored terrorists and fostered terrorism ever since its birth. Why does prominent newspapers like NY Times and Washington Post ask Muslim writers to write commentaries on India and Pakistan, when we all know they will always side with Pakistan, a Muslim country and not with India, a secular country. Despite overwhelming evidence of Muslim collusion (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc) in fostering terrorism, western media refuse to acknowledge this stark fact. This attitude is going to bring down democracies all over the world, and let fanatic muslims rule this world in the not too distant future.
8
The graffiti on many a wall in Kashmir, as in this photograph, proclaim we want freedom.
Sure. By all means, have it. Just tell the world what have you done with it in the Islamic states or the Muslim majority countries, from Egypt to Pakistan, Afghanistan? Name on peaceful, trnquil society.
5
A string of Indian commentators here extol the virtues of the long extinct Indian secular state without a shred of self reflection on how far the Indian secular state has fallen under Modi and the BJP. The meteoric rise of toxic Hindu nationalism, a jingoistic media and right wing urban middle classes have turned a blind eye to lynchings of Muslims for allegedly eating or transporting beef, barely registered disapproval of murder of Christian missionaries and liberal critics in addition to doubling down on the repression of Kashmiris they supposedly can’t afford to let go for fear of losing a “secular” state. After the attack in Pulwama Kashmiri students were attacked all over India and forced to flee but the media was baying for Pakistani blood. It is amusing to see so many Indian commentators glowingly selling Indian secularism to impress western audiences when at home liberals and minorities are increasingly cowed and threatened as anti-national traitors or closet “Pakistanis”.
13
What' s happening here is similar to what's going on in Palestine. Can any of the readers notice that?
I am not sure if Mr. Bashrat Peer know of radicalization. He should be very well aware of the fact that someone is radicalizing Kashmiri youths and my guess is it won't be India for sure. Who has been responsible for destabilizing whole South Asia?- Count Afghanistan and now Iran. Have this writer ever heard of Baloch struggle. I am sure he must understand who is driving not only young Kashmiri youths but also illiterate Pakistani youths for fighting a Jihad in whole of South Asia.
3
Pakistan is a rogue country that has always been trying terror tactics to get Kasmir. Too bad for them. Kashmir and Kashmiri folks are pro India and Pakistan should back off forever. It needs to focus on the sorry state of affairs and eliminate all the terrorist organizations that it currently supports.
2
Current border will not change irrespective of what Kashmiri or Pakistani trrrorists may wish. India cannot and will not let that happen, no matter it is Modi or some other version of Manmohan/Sonia in power.
The action of the suicide bomber is heinous, causing the death of 40 Indian soldiers who were not actively involved in any act of warfare at the time of the attack.
But India has an awful human rights record in Kashmir and unless the security forces there attempt to clean up their act and stop the rapes, torture, maiming and extra judicial killings of Kashmiri civilians, there is a real danger there will be more of this fanatical young man to harm Indian soldiers in tit for tat acts of random violence.
2
The writer intentionally(or may be unintentionally) skips the darkest part of history where Kashmiri Hindus were persecuted and evicted from their homes during fascist and Islamist movement during 1990s. Millions of Kashmiri Pandith Hindus were made refugees overnight. I talked to one Kashmiri Pandith in US and he gave brutal and gruesome testimony of persecution. "Pandiths leave the valley and leave your women if you want to live" These ugliness were being announced in mosque loudspeakers. This is very dangerous for a writer to avoid things that dont serve his/her agenda.
Separatists and Islamists in Kashmir have raised ISIS and AlQaeda flag. The writer will never see, hear or mention these things buy truth is if India, a democracy let Kashmir go it will turn into another Islamist launchpad of terror fueled by Pak state sanctions. It will bring only death to the world. The writer will never mention that.
Indian government's policy in Kashmir can be harshly criticized, Kashmiris should be given equal freedom as Indian citizens, in fact according Indian constitution, Kashmir is semi-autonomous and given special status in governance. Still it will never satisfy the separatist and the terror Pak proxies because they want Shariah based Islamic state there in Kashmir.
3
A graffiti demanding freedom in a language not understood my most Indians or Pakistanis? Interesting indeed.
1
One commenter called for the total elimination of Islam from India, or at least as much as Buddhism was gotten rid of in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Dream on, Buster. A form of Islam has been for a thousand years a part of India's glorious 5,000-year history. Islam not going anywhere.
The Kashmiri militancy is a political phenomenon. The way most of Kashmir and parts of Tibet became Muslim in the 16th and 17th centuries is the way of Islam that rejects casteism, the skin-color or birth-based social hierarchy.
As long as there is Brahminism with its abominable caste system, Islam will shine as a beacon of egalitarianism in this world and the hereafter. No matter what social hierarchy is practiced among Muslims, in doctrine at least all stand shoulder to shoulder in the mosque. For a "Shudra" or untouchable, that's gpod enough.
1
The solution is quite simple:
Trade Srinagar for Skardu!
That's right.
The coveted Vale of Kashmir exchanged for desolate waste Eastern Baltistan.
This is an equal area swap and will result in 4 million Sunnis getting their wish to be part of Pakistan and about 200,000 Ladhaki Shias who will no longer be persecuted because they will now be in India.
Google "Arts and Opinion Ceding the Territorial Imperative" .
The unfinished agenda of 1947 partition has brought 2 nations at the brink of war. This isn’t the fault of Pakistan or India rather British should have sorted things in a manner that befitted the 2 nations. Saying this, US did the same in Pakistan when it abruptly left at the end of cold war. What about the Jehadis ? No road map or channelization was provided. These 2 grave mistakes have made the Kashmir issue complex. However, it is absolutely correct that Pakistan has suffered more because of the War. US only realized their mistake when 9/11 took place. It was too late. Damage had been done. Knee jerk response provoked US to pressurize Pakistan to help in so called ‘war against terrorism’ Pakistan did help but it wasn’t simple. It suffered a lot of casualties. Now, about Kashmir, the facts are intermixed with history, local uprising and new political compulsion for Modi 2 encash Pulwama. Has any body in India bothered 2 analyse that Pakistan’s first line response against India can very well be the ultimate response. Do you really think that Pakistan would hesitate in using the ultimate option when it would be left with no option. Despite this, the response of Pakistanis has been sobre with stress on peace. In India, war hysteria continues. What all the stake holders fail to understand is that it is year 2019. Whatsapp exposes everything. Calculate the conplixities you old politicians. You will realize, the war is solution for an end not for winning elections!!
2
Writer completely ignorant about what is the reason to do stone pelting. Reason is very simple Kashmir kept away from other part of India because of some special statuses. Removing that special status will bring outside world to do business and improve economic status of Kashmir. There by giving young people som work to get money to survive and will not have time to throw stone. Writers outside of Pakistan-India are not considering the history while writing on big newspapers. Every one want to use some others house problems to provide free advice.I request outside people to advice indian govt remove all special statuses and should treat that state as any other state. Leaving sick peoples together will increase sickness.
Shameful! How the writer has not discussed about the targeted violence against Hindus in Kashmir ? That they were forced out of that state after attacks and killings discriminately. Kashmir will always remain an integral part of India. There is more freedom guaranteed in India than many other parts of the world. These people should never sympathize with suicide bombers, in Kashmir or any other part of the world. This is not a freedom movement but an Islamic Jihad. Say no to terrorism.
3
India already ceded a rather large chunk of their territory for the sake of peace with their Muslim population. It’s now called Pakistan and Bangladesh. Kashmir was never part of the deal, and rightfully belongs to India.
2
The blame lies a lot more on Kashmiris. You have driven away all your minorities. You have let the Islamic fundamentalists take over your society. India cannot allow another intolerant Islamic state. The fight will go on until one of either a secular democratic society or a fundamentalist Islamic society triumphs. Whoever wins there is a price to pay, Indians , Pakistanis and mainly Kashmiris will pay that price. The militant Sikh influence in Punjab had also started around the same time but the Punjabis chose eventually to stop supporting the militancy and become an influential part of peaceful and prosperous India. Kashmiris on the other hand have a stronger Islamic identity and loyalty to Pakistan. You can argue that their identity is Kashmiri but then how do you explain, the ethnic cleansing and full page ads in Kashmiri dailies warning the Kashmiri Pandits to leave.
4
The author suggests: (a) "ohmigosh the situation is murky," preempting any attribution of cause, and (b) both India and Pakistan are equally at fault, but not really, it is India that led this nice young man to slaughter 45 Indian soldiers. The western world, given to moral and intellectual relativism, coupled with other maladies - might buy this argument.
Well, not really.
The author carefully neglects mention of the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus by Islamists since 1947, and well before. Doesn't say much about Pakistani military financed insurgency in Kashmir (and in India) since 1971? Not even the complete turn to medieval Islam over an obsession with Kashmir that has rendered Pakistan a basket case.
Surely, Mr. Peer knows that the Indian troops in Kashmir are not holiday; they are trying to prevent a wholesale slaughter of Hindus (a land in which we lived since Millennia until the Islamic invasions). Every gun, bullet, IED, explosive in Kashmir - used to slaughter Hindus, comes from Pakistan's military.
Mr. Peer's article deserves rubbishing. The nice lad who killed Indian soldiers - he says - did it in retaliation to Indian troops raiding his home. Sure. Perhaps India and Indian troops, to prevent such a thing from ever happening again, plain self-destruct because Pakistan wishes it so.
Get a life Basharat.
2
This article lacks objectivity. It sounds more like a Pakistani government’s propaganda. India is a vibrant democracy. There may be some “hypernationalist television networks”, but we also have balanced media networks to counter them.
For people like Mr Peer Kashmir’s history starts with the Muslim invasion. Mr Peer conveniently forgot the long history of Kashmir and association with the rest of the Indian sub-continent. Kashmir is not home only to Muslims, it is home to Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs too. Mr Peer chose not to address the issue of Kashmiri Hindus who fled the state after the militancy started.
Pakistan and it’s closet supporters like Mr Peer are in a state of denial. Almost every terrorist attack in any part of the world has Pakistan connection. Jaish-e-Mohammed openly admitted responsibility for the latest suicide attack in Pulwama, yet the government of Pakistan wants actionable intelligence to take action against those murderers! If Pakistan ceases exporting the jihadis, a peaceful solution for Kashmir issue will emerge.
Referring to the propaganda video released by Pakistan, Mr Peer refers to “A civil and graceful conversation“, but forgets to mention that it is heavily edited and that it is against Geneva convention protocols.
It is disappointing to see such a superficial and biased article in NY Times.
2
The young suicide bomber is just a pawn in the hands of Jihadist.He is a victim of Wahabi extremism.In the video that was released by JeM, it is the young sucide bomber calling upon the Muslims,I repeat only Muslims not the Kashmiris to fight the infidel. Kashmir problem is not a political problem or a land dispute between India and Pakistan and Pakistan is source of Islamic Jehadist.
1
This article is so misleading. The final sentence caught my eye:"Indian troops raided their home, locked them inside and set it on fire."
Reading it one would assume that the inhabitants of the home were burnt to death. However, if you follow the link, its revealed that the inhabitants survived indeed. Why this selective reporting?
1
Mr. peer seems to be unapologetically empathetic and supportive of Pakistan, a nation that harbors terrorists, and don't forget, hid Osama bin Laden from the US for years...all the while taking billions of dollars from the US in the name of fighting terrorists. Don't forget, Pakistan-based group Jaish-e-Mohammad claimed responsibility for the most recent attack on Indian soldiers. Claims and casualties are always exaggerated, but India lost more than 40 of her innocent sons by the suicide bomber, Adil Ahmad Dar. What is India supposed to DO? What any nation is supposed to do? All of this happened soon after Saudi Arabia's Prince's visit to Pakistan.
3
This entire problem is because of religion. Why Kashmir belongs to Pakistan because some or more of their residents are Muslims. Why should Pakistan exist as a separate country just because their inhabitants are predominantly Muslim. People in Pakistan and India have the same cultural history.they eat the same food and see the same movies and listen to the same music. There is no need for two countries. No need for nuclear weapons, F16s and MiGs. Make the impossible possible join them both.
1
All the wars, atrocities and finger pointing by either side can come to a quick end by an open, democratic process of a referendum on the status of Kashmir. In an absence of a vote on self-determination, innocent blood will soak the valley as each side is exploiting the vulnerable population. Shame on you!
1
Good to see India is not afraid to strike back against Islamist terrorists supported, trained, and funded by Pakistan. I only wish I could say the US had as much muster.
2
Look at the facts. How many terrorist attacks historically in Kashmir sponsored by Pakistan (by Lashkar, Jaish etc. with links to Pakistan) and how many terrorist attacks sponsored by India. The latter is zero. The facts don’t lie, Mr. Peer. Why do you have terrorists only on one side of the border? Still more, how did Pakistan end up with the territory that belonged to India in 1947? Kashmir is a strategic location, and how will India give it up, given Pakistan’s past behavior and the terrorists organizations thriving in the region? So that they can have total control to launch even more terrorist attacks? And this is a usual ploy employed by Pakistan-leaning journalists. That the Kashmiris want independence, that much of the problem stems from Indian soldiers brutalizing them, and there is a moral equivalency here between India and Pakistan. The reason is they have nothing else to justify this terrorism against a country that has gone on for far too long. They are equating a side that takes lives with another that has paid for this terrorism for 50 years, with the blood of its countrymen. I am no supporter of Modi. But dont employ India’s Hindu nationalists as a justification for this bombing. How many overt and covert attacks happened against India in the intervening period (the Mumbai attack in 2003 alone killed more than 150 people). People like you seem to want to tailor the narrative to your agenda, which is what I do not know
2
We just don't seem to be killing people as efficiently as we used to. Can't we line up a few hundred thousand of our brightest young men on each side of the border and have some proper mayhem? What a weird species we are. I suppose no one is really going to be happy until we irradiate the entire region. What's a few hundred thousand men women and children? We have plenty more. And when they grow up, why-we can just do it all over again!
Mr Basharat Peer's attempt to rewrite Kashmir's history will fail gloriously!
Kashmir has been a Hindu kingdom since before the midieval times. It has always been recognized as belonging to the Indian subcontinent. the last Hindu ruler was king Udayanadeva's chief queen Kota Rani. During her reign, Shah Mir, a migrant who was in the service of the royal family, organized a rebellion against Kota Rani and declared himself as the king. Shah Mir tried to introduce Islam into the kingdom. Sikandar Butshikan (1389-1413) converted Kashmiri Hindus to Islam and created a very oppressive reign destroying Hindu temples, imposing Jizya (a tax on non-muslims) and banned display of any Hindu religious signs. In 1820, King Ranjit Singh annexed Kashmir but the British defeated the Sikhs in 1846 and then sold it to king Gulab Singh, the ruler of Jammu. Since then, Kashmir was an independent kingdom ruled by Hindu kings and stayed independent even after India became independent. Kashmir would have been independent today if Pakistan had not invaded it in October 1947. King Hari Singh had to accede it to India to save his kingdom from Pakistan's clutches. Indian army units flew to Srinagar and drove away the invading Pashtuns. Untimely declaration of ceasefire resulted in today's balkanization of Kashmir: India rules 50% of Kashmir while Pakistan occupies 37% and China 20%.
2
Does Pakistan allow journalists to freely report about political situation from the areas of occupied Kashmir? The world wants to know.
2
The real villains in this tragic saga are the Brits who dismembered India & then walked away from the jewel of their former empire unconcerned of the human tragedy that unfolded
3
Support for Modi is similar to support for Trump - socio-economic decline and hence insecurity of the upper castes/whites (choose depending on your country) against the rising “others”. That part in clear. Modi/Trump will lose if the Dalits/minorities votes are united. We all know that.
Coming to the specific issue of Kashmir, let me throw a wrench. The problem of Kashmir is that it is developmentally 50 years behind the rest of India. Srinagar could challenge Bangalore or Hyderabad as knowledge centers only if Articles 370 and 35A (apparently an illegal amendment) were absent.
Readers may be shocked. Hyderabad was a Muslim State when the post independence Indian army rolled in via a bloody war against the Muslim partisans. The Indian government stapled Indian citizenship on everyone - Muslim or Hindu - and told them they have all rights as any other Indian and nothing special. Today if you visit Hyderabad, you will hardly believe that it is the Indian “West Bank”.
Remove the articles from the Indian Constitution, and let Srinagar rival Bangalore as a knowledge center.
2
"Pellet gun" is the Indian euphemism for shotgun. They control crowds with blasts of bird shot, much cheaper than tear gas. Blinding hundreds does not appear to bother them.
3
How cruelly ironic, that a placed described for centuries as “paradise on earth” is the focus of so much murderous conflict.
Tragically, Kashmir can now only be described as “paradise lost.”
2
I feel compelled to add my comment to this overwhelmingly slanted article. Complaints about pellet injuries seldom mention the fact that these are only used when mobs attempt to lynch the security officers. Which country on the planet will tolerate mobs attempting to lynch the police?
Mobs are driven into religious frenzy by mosque 'speakers' funded by Pakistan. There is documented proof of money being handed out to kids for throwing stones and molotov cocktails at the police - rate sheets are easily available, charting 'x' rupees for hitting a cop, bonuses for burning police vehicles.
Its easy to cast 'protestors' as the victims in the narrative, but the facts are far more complex. This is not to let Indian security forces off the hook - I'm certain there are cases of excessive force and such. But one shouldn't justify religion based secession and terrorist suicide bombings based on 'humiliation' by police.
2
Didn’t India already cede a rather large portion of their sovereign territory for the sake of peace with their Muslim population?
In 1947, the Maharajah of Kashmir had a choice, and he chose India. If the local Muslims prefer to live under Pakistani rule...they should move there.
This is an extremely and shamelessly pro-Pakistani opinion piece. The NYT should provide a balanced view of the situation, e.g., by simultaneously publishing a contrary opinion piece expressing a pro-India opinion of Kashmir's recent history.
4
Being a resident of this unfortunate land. Let me tell to those Indian people or like minded. That kashmiris never supported any religious extremism, we love to live together happily and peacefully, be it Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhs, or Christian, but indian media and politicians are doing everything to highlight issues of pandit exodus from valley, for Their political gains and pursuing policy of divide and rule. I work with my pandit brother in offices,we are so nice to one other.
But the conflict which has been inflicted on us for decades has badly affected our lives. Half a million troops covering our small patch of land has turned our homes like prison. Now the war hysteria, dragging people to prison, torturing, raping, blinding, has become a common norm here by Indian troops who enjoy legal immunity for decades. Let me tell my Indian fellows who hate us simply because we are Muslims.
We don't hate you brothers, but ur army in Kashmir has alienated us from you. I wanna go freely and happily to India and Pakistan, like EU,so that we meet our divided families across loc. Modi government instead of finding some intermediate ways like that of Musharraf formula is fighting us with armed fist simply to appease their voters, don't forget he is butcher of Gujrat, and was denied visa by U. S till he became PM.
My request is to international community, kindly help we people from power politics of greedy politicians. Resolve Kashmir issue through ways of dialogue.
59
Until a few decades ago Kashmir was an independent country and it acceded with India on a condition of self determination.India hasn't so far kept it's promised and is holding people against it's will,which never works.This dispute also involves the British as they didn't decide Kashmir fate b4 leaving India.
I have lived with beautiful people of Kashmir and extremely generous and peace loving.
They deserve a life of dignity like any one of us.
If India has to prove itself to be a leader in an international sense it will have to find a peaceful solution and soon.
I don't see pakis tan as an issue anymore as Imran khan the current PM seems to be very sincere about resolving this dispute.
The Indian media tries to spread lies about Kashmir being a communal dispute and very recently top journalists have used words like jihadist etc.Its far from truth.They want self determination.
The suicide bombing isn't in the name of religion ...It's the last hope of the hopeless.The youth have seen so much loss of self dignity that they would rather die and get some.
I hope one day my country India stops the attrocities in the valley
36
One can relate the phrase that ignorance is the mother of all evils with the existing Kashmir issue. Kashmir is witnessing a political vacuum from last five years. Killing being the norm in Kashmir and till date this routine killing failed to draw attention of people across the globe towards the burning issue which indeed deserves attention vis-a-vis solution at the earliest.
The irony of the K-ISSUE is that instead of solving this conflict the two countries, that is, India and Pakistan are availing the issue as a fodder for full filling their political aspirations. Humanity has been kept on hold and political skirmish has been given due respect by the so called wisdom holders of the both countries. When goal is power then issues of this kind are made more difficult because politics is known as dirty game. Nonetheless, human rights violation should be counted as slur on the face of democracy but unfortunately it is considered as a pride of nation as polarized societies get solace iut of such issues. When Chest thumping and might is considered as a remedy of issue, without realizing that such arrogant policies may give birth to many 'Adils', then how one can think that current politics can provide any solution to it. There a saying that a wound which doesn't heal causes cancer and Kashmir is really becoming that wound now. For the people who happen to be inhabitants of the place are made to get suffocated at all fronts whether it is political, military or social front.
11
I am a Kashmiri. I live here. The world has no idea what atrocities and war crimes Indian army is doing here. They have killed thousands of innocent people, blinded hundreds. There is no space for peaceful protests and it leaves no choice but to fight violently against this oppression. If world wants that there should be a peaceful South Asia, it must tell India to end its brutal, illegal, illegitimate military occupation in Kashmir.
30
I am originally from India. In my teen years, I was participating in a non-violent political protest when I, along with a few others, was picked up by the police. Instead of pressing charges, the police made us do push ups and caned our behinds, and then after we had rubbed our noses on the ground and intoned that we will no longer destroy public property, we were released. The point is that this sort of informal justice is meted out by the police every day - yet we don’t all become suicide bombers.
26
You could probably take Kashmir out of India and Pakistan but can you really take India and Pakistan out of Kashmir?
Even if by some miracle the economy and social justice in Indian Kashmir (the part of Kashmir under Indian control) were fixed is it really true that terrorist attacks would cease -- specially the state of Pakistan's economy.
I don't question anyone who sees Indian governments surgical "Bin Ladenesque" operations as bogus (and propaganda (and perhaps a lie too) ramped up for the coming elections. But I also doubt that the recent bombing as the actions of a "lone wolf" without aid.
The issue of Kashmir is a sad one. I cannot fathom the terrible impact militarization of Kashmir has done to the common people.
But I don't see the current rhetoric adopted by the governments as helpful and I am sure that any attempt to solve Kashmir issue that invokes historical precedence is doomed to fail.
3
The Islamic Republic of Pakistan was demanded by the Muslim League of Mr. Jinnah on the premise that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together. India was created on Nehru's premise that religion is a personal choice and has nothing to do with the state.
Although it looks self serving and ham fisted, India's desire to hang on to Kashmir is based on the belief that the secular worldview of Nehru is nobler than Jinnah's obscurantist view. Jinnah wasn't a fundamentalist at heart but wanted to be the father of a nation and therefore used fundamentalist forces to get what he wanted.
Nehru was content to be the leader of a nation (the father after all was Gandhi) and wanted a united India.
7
I understand that the writer is commenting on the structural violence in Kashmir which has amplified the tussle between the two neighbors. However, there is very little by means of solution possible here and things are bound to continue like this - Kashmir smack in the middle. Even if Kashmir gained independence, its economic dependence and political pendulum will always be shared between India and Pakistan. The possibility of having an independent region which can possibly vitalize itself economically and politically is nearly impossible in this case.
The sentiments of people living in the middle of war need a more pragmatic solution. I am sure second and third generation Kashmiri youth who have the opportunity to move on are opting to go farther away from Kashmir and relocating themselves. It is a tough decision to move out of your own lands. But if the region were peaceful, would the youth not gravitate eventually towards more developed areas?
5
This is such a biased and incorrect viewpoint. The state of J & K was handed over to India by its king in 1947 when Pakistani army attacked Kashmir, raped and murdered people. Therefore since the territory then belonged to India because of the accession the Indian army stopped the Pakistani Army at the LOC (Line of Control). Kashmir does not belong to just Kashmiris but to the entire Republic of India. Each Indian has a right over Kashmir. Each Kashmiri Pandit who were thrown out of Kashmir by radical Islamists has a right over Kashmir. The people responsible for state of Kashmir today is Pakistan and radical Islamists. Kashmiris have been given education and jobs throughout India because they are Indians first. But many of them supported the Pulwama attacked leading to the death of 40 crpf men which were present for the security of Kashmiris themselves from radical Islamists.
First and foremost you don't have the right to say that Kashmir should be freed because it belongs to Kashmiris. Kashmir belongs to every Indian especially Kashmiri Pandits thrown out of the valley (their families were murdered, raped and burned alive). And in a hypothetical scenario even if it was independent it would not stay long because Pakistani terrorists would occupy it and make it into another Afghanistan.
So keep your nonsense to yourself
8
"Jawahar" of Nehru's name is Arabic for Jewel, no Hindu besides JH Nehru is named after this name. "Bhat" of JKLF founder Maqbool Bhat is a Brahmin name. KAshmir Shaivism, Godees LAkhsmi is called "Kashmera Pura Vasene" meaning Resident of Kashmir. The Kashmir problem was foisted and let it simmer by INternationalists. Pakistan does harbour extreme Jealousy and Hatred towards Indians. Prince Moh Bin Sultan on his recent visist to Delhi mentioned USA asked to encourage Wahabisim.
Here is Led Zepplin's Song in on Kashmir a reminiscence of the Unobtanium.
youtu.be/GaFlGW3Nk1g
World is soon going to find out That Life on Earth is the Dream of Lord Maha Vishnu.
2
America has not been able to dismantle the deep state actors in ISI despite knowing that omar sheriff who killed denial pearl was mentored by JeM chief Masood Azar. India is now cleaning the mess.
This article is one sided and baised. Why it's not mentioning the f16 down episode?? Why it's not mentioning atrocities on kashmiri hindus.
Please don't paint incomplete picture and misguide the readers.
3
A very good article on Kashmir conflict.It may be informative for rest of world and mainland India but an ordinary narration of sufferings of this troubled region.This troubled part of India has gone through hell for past thirty years,be it mass exodus of Kashmiri hindus from Kashmir valley,massacres by security forces in valley and of hindus in troubled regions of Jammu province by militants or day to day sufferings of ordinary people both at the hands of security forces and militants.The muscular policy of nationalist BJP government has further alienated the people and situation is worsening with every passing day.Three wars have not helped resolve the issue and another war would not help either.During thirty years of militancy relative peace was experienced when PMs, Atal Bihari vajpayee and Manmohan Singh made some positive moves both internally and externally.Ongoing conflict suits Pakistan and its military and would never like to end it.The worst sufferers are the people and conflict must end for their sake.The GOI must take urgent steps to end alienation and give a sense of belonging to the people.Dovallian doctrine may win another election for BJP but would not help resolve Kashmir issue.
7
@Shabir Ahmad Bhat
The government of India needs to get rid of Article 370 for a lasting solution. I hope you'll agree.
2
Look at the history to this before commenting on how two countries have ruined Kashmir.
1. As part of the mess left behind every where in the world by the British be it Palestine - Israel, India - Pakistan, India - China, Iraq created by grabbing some from Kurdistan, Sunni Central Iraw, Shia Eastern Iraq into a country on Churchill's whims to many many countless others.
Back to Kashmir.
As per law , the accession by the Rules of Kashmir is full and final and documented.
Pakistan tried to grab and still holds illegally parts of J&K and have illegally given some to China.
There is no question of a resolution unless these illegally occupied territories are returned.
UN resolutions are not applicable as more than 70 years have gone
Terrorism be it 9/11, 26/11 and over 70 years of legal proven terrorism from Pakistan is not welcome by the world.
It would be best that facts are verified before publishing comments and opinions.
Imran Khan is not elected but nominated by the Army, Pakistan like Turkey, Egypt and other middle eastern countries is a dictatorship run by corrupt military officers.
Majority of Pakistani Youth want to move on and have a better life so do Indians and once this occupation is removed these two talented youths can produce economic miracles..
4
@Anirudha The governments of Pakistan and Turkey are elected and non militaristic. Please get you facts straight before commending on issues unrelated to India.
Although I plead ignorance about what's occurring behind the scenes, by what you relate, practically since the partition of India and Pakistan, don't you thik wise to have the big one's grant independence to Kashmir? That may resolve the constant fights, restore some justice and grant peace for all. It may be akin to allowing the Kurds, also courageous folks, to seek statehood...and help keep peace in the chaotic always belligerent Middle East, no one allowing each other the benefit of the doubt (in Spanish we have a saying: "como el perro del hortelano, no come ni deja comer").
1
Let’s zoom out over a 1000 years and let’s play out this scenario :
Between 1000-2000 Iran , Afghanistan, Pakistan all became majority Islamic and today they and Bangladesh are close to 100% Islamic with almost no surviving Zoroastrians, Buddhists or Hindus or 100s of other beliefs that thrived in those regions.
In the memory of Indians : Afghanistan , Pakistan, Bangladesh have been carved out of older Buddhist/Hindu societies. Having said that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan or Bangladesh.Now how do expect the Indian society to react if another piece of land is carved into another majority Islamic state. The fear in their minds is what piece of land is next.
India is making it clear: no more Islamic states. You can be a Muslim or Christian or Sikh or Buddhist or Zoroastrian in India. But same is not true in neighboring Islamic republics. So Kashmiri society has to choose between a militant Islamic state or a secular democratic state. One choice will eventually win. The full price will be paid by Kashmiris.
Indian Muslims can not afford another neighboring Islamic state. They belong to India and India belongs to them. All the funding for the militancy in Kashmir comes from Saudi/Pakistan/earlier USA. I notice you are from Bolivia. You had a tragic euro-Christian invasion and are now close to 100% Christian with native belief systems subjugated and wiped out. Kashmir is hopefully the last battle between secular India and the Arab Islamic invasion.
2
@manfred marcus
With the likes of Basharat Peer and his ilk in charge an independent Kashmir will be known for its migrant caravans. There is going to be a bull market in building walls!
1
Pakistan is and has been the top exporter of terrorism, conflict, and terrorist ideology. It is a safe harbor for terrorists and a willingly incubator of extremist thinking in thousands of madrassas and other institutions. Without Pakistan's meddling Kashmir would be just another place of mundane struggles and common power plays.
This writer has inserted his own favored keyhole view of events with a touching narrative humanizing terrorists.
9
This article tries to be so factual and unbiased. If only that was the case.
The Indian forces seem inhumane, firing bullets at innocent protesters! The author just forgot to highlight that the protesters usually intervene when the Indian army is conducting counter insurgency ops against terrorists. A few dozen stone bearing protesters can on occasion be enough to cause serious injuries to soldiers, apart from allowing the terrorists to escape, and perhaps allow the escaping militants to take out a few soldiers. But of course, if the soldiers respond in any way, they're oppressors.
The suicide bomber killed 40 paramilitary soldiers. He did get training and explosives from somewhere. But any response from India to this attack is obviously a jingoistic measure by the Indian Prime Minister. The author doesn't say it outright, but the soldiers that do die in Kashmir due to insurgency are just collateral that are expendables, and should be forgotten.
The author does mention how Indian administration has been oppressing the population in his opinion. He does forget to mention in his history 101 that thousands of Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir were killed or forced to leave changing the demographics of the state.
As an Indian origin person, I perhaps have an agenda in ponting these out. But so does the author, who is trying to paint a picture where India bears the majority burden of wrong doing, while the stone pelting, terrorism supporting people of Kashmir are guilt free.
7
This articles name is misleading. It was not the young suicide bomber who brought the countries to this point.
Pakistani military intelligence has successfully proved that it has absorbed the technology for jihadist terror suicide bombings like that done by the Taliban and ISIS.
Pakistan is the only nation that successfully uses suicide bombers against its enemy.
Pakistan wants the world to believe that any aggrieved young man in Indian Kashmir knows where to obtain 250KG of RDX explosive and how to rig a set up to do such a terror act. Only a nation state acting within their national anthem of Plausible Deinaibility can do such a terror act.
8
How convenient that not a single mention is made of how Kashmiri Hindus were hounded out of their homes in the valley by our Kashmiri Muslim brethren. I guess that does not fit neatly into Mr. Peer’s narrative of how the Kashmiris have been wronged but themselves have wronged no one.
14
Kashmir Plebiscite which is mandated in UN resolutions is dead Pakistan did not demilitarize their zone of occupation as mandated by UN resolutions.The demographic alteration of population by the ethnic banishment of Hindu Pandits has made the consideration of Plebicite a joke. Indian government has made less mistakes in Kashmir compared to what Succesive Pak governments done to their own citizens.Way out is for Kasmiri younger generation to concentrate on studies as a means for social mobility rather than throwing stones.Kashmir with 1% of Indian population gets 10% of Federal funds. In comparison most populous Northern state of UP with 13% of population gets only 8.3% of Federal funds .India is a multiethnic country cannot afford another Talibinized Islamist country in the border. This will have disturbing effect on 170 million Muslim
Indians.
100 years from now will US allow California,Arizona and Texas to have plebicite if the majority of locals want to merge with Mexico
5
@Azad
Pakistan has also changed the demographic on its side of Kashmir by settling Punjabi Sunnis so much so that they are in majority now and the indigenous ethnic Kashmiris are in minority. Pakistani military is dominated by Punjabis and Pathans and their officer corps are entirely Sunni Punjabi or Sunni Pathan. No Sindhi, Balauch or Kashmiri has ever risen above the rank of Brigadier in the Pakistani military. The Kashmir Valley is 15 % Shia, Leh-Ladhakh is Buddhist majority while Jammu is Hindu majority. These people are not going to do well under a Sunni government. The women are another group that a Sunni government will try to snatch freedom from.
Kashmiris resisted Indian occupation from day one.Pathetic is it that India invaded and annexed Junagadh Princely state despite the instrument of accession to Pakistan,citing popular sentiments.But when it came to Kashmir they used the same Instrument of Accession to call Kashmir a part of India,neglecting popular sentiments.India has since been subjecting the people of Kashmir to inhuman brutalities.If history has taught us one thing,it is that you can't kill an idea.But Indian politicians in their sheer arrogance and oppression think otherwise.
1
Kashmir is used as scape goat by politicians from both sides.. When ever they feel questioned or challenged by their own people immediately there is a surge in violence .
What it is like to live in Kashmir, I will probably never know. I do know that attempts by Pakistan to subvert Indian Kashmir, and to wrest it away from India, precipitate the spiral of violence in Kashmir. India has accepted the Line of Control as the international border and does not attempt to foment trouble north of it. I can't understand why Pakistan cannot do likewise instead of fomenting trouble south of the Line of Control on Indian territory. Pakistan's ex-ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani, writes in the Washington Post on March 1 https://goo.gl/wZShuf "Pakistan’s support for terrorist groups is well documented, even as it has been officially denied by successive Pakistani governments." Ambassador Haqqani's is not the only voice - there are others from within the Pakistani establishment who admit to Pakistan's destructive role in Kashmir.
8
It is disingenuous of Mr Peer to claim both sides are to blame. it is well known that Pakistan copied the Palestine playbook in Kashmir. Just like the Palestinians, the Kashmiris are being used ruthlessly as cannon fodder in the proxy war against India. There are no weapon or bomb factories in Kashmir. So where are the Kashmiri militants getting the IEDs, the communication equipment, the small arms, the explosives and the expertise to make a car bomb? Who is training them in urban warfare against Army troops? Why do school boys come out of mosques after Friday prayers with stones in their pockets? Who brainwashes them to form mobs and throw stones at security personnel? When the security personnel retaliate with pellets, the injuries are shared with the world media. Mr Peer, the premise of your article that both India and Pakistan are equally to blame for the misery in Kashmir is nonsense. It is Pakistan which has chosen to make islamic jihad a tool of state policy. As long as the mullahs and the generals call the shots in Pakistan and continue to foster extremists groups, there is no hope for peace in the Kashmir valley.
8
No one should try to rationalize or look for motives behind something as perverse as suicide bombing. They end up justifying and defending terrorism itself, without wanting to do so.
2
The author convineintly failed to mention that before India's military presence in the region rose, anti-India and anti-Hindu sentiments from across the border simply warned all Hindus in the region to either go away from the Kashmir valley or let their women and homes defiled. Nobody mentions the hand of ISI, Pakistan army, terrorsim from across the border and hard jihadi elements for the exodus of tens of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits. So there you have it, by the end of the article Pakistan is a peace-loving country and India is a violent nation.
Claps to the author.
7
People have reported that there is a huge Chinese presence in Pakistan. I have heard that rural poverty is terrible compared to the Punjab district of India, a thriving agricultural region. People in India joke, "Who would want to live in Pakistan?" China sees India as their top Asian rival, so their presence in the backward and failing society of Pakistan is a way of shoring up a country which borders India. This puts Chinese influence all around India. And the irony. Look how China is treating Muslim people in their own country. Pakistan should kick them out while they can.
2
@Kuhlsue It is apparent that Pakistan is crying crocodile tears for their Islamic brethren in Kashmir, just because you can see their reaction (or lack thereof) to how China is mass incarcerating the muslim majority in Xinjiang. It follows that the Pakistani motivations in Kashmir are more political and economic than religious. However, it is perfectly content bank rolling Islamic fundamentalism to achieve this aim.
How different would South Asian history (and the evolution of Pakistan) be if Kashmir had gone to Pakistan at partition?
How different would the Middle East be if Israel had not been created (or created in Europe where the Holocaust occurred) and the Muslim world had the luxury of evolving without a lightning rod that ever greedy dictator and king could leverage?
Interesting questions. But the fact is that Israel has existed for over 60 years. And Kashmir (most of it) has been part of India for over 60 years.
We can't rewrite history. We have to deal with the reality that exists today.
A democratic, multi-religion, multi-ethnic country (probably the most diverse country on the planet) cannot simply give away a state with millions and say its territory is not inviolable and it has failed to satisfy the citizens of Kashmir so it bids them goodbye. No democracy can maintain its inviolability and do so.
Pakistan and the Kashmiris have to accept Kashmir is part of India. Pakistan has to stop funding, encouraging and training terrorists that kill and disrupt Kashmir and elsewhere in India. All that creates is horror for Kashmiris who cannot fully benefit from India's lavishing them with more aid than any other part of the country.
The "answer" does not lie with India. It lies almost entirely with Pakistan.
Most of the Middle East seems to have accepted that Israel is not going away. Now Israel has to accept it must live in peace with its neighbors and free Palestine.
5
There can be a logical solution of Kashmir. India was divided based on religion in 1947. India is a secular country with 13% of population who call themselves as Muslims. If India gives Kashmir to Pakistan there 130 million Muslims need to leave India. If this is possible then India should give Kashmir to Pakistan.
6
In the 80s a group of Sikhs in Punjab decided they needed to secede from India and form an independent country. They resorted to violence and terror but India rightly did not permit them to secede. There are many parts of India with large muslim populations. For example, the Union territory island of Lakshadweep is 96% muslim. Lakshadweep is and will always remain part of India. Parts of countries simply cannot decide to become independent, break up and leave. The Southern States of the United States were not allowed to leave in 1860. That is just the way it is. Period.
1
It is strange that a man who did this suicide attack is being known as indigenous Kashmiri, but still blame and retaliation is shown against Pakistan. What about hundreds of bomb blasts including innocent school kids slaughter in Pakistan. Who is behind those attacks. If terrorists are being nurtured by Pakistan elements, are they being bred to attack Pakistan own innocent people. What about serving Indian officer Kalbaushan Jadau who was captured in Baluchistan.
World has to see sacrifices of Pakistan in war on terror including human and financial. It is a pitty that still it is being blamed for harbouring terrorism.
Who ever is behind these attacks is an enemy of both India and Pakistan. The fact is Terror attacks in Pakistan are being done by Indian spy agencies. But since Pakistan is week on diplomacy front as well as economic front, the world listens to Indian version of story and ignores what Pakistan has to say. It's time for a reality check. If India blames few of the bomb blasts on Pakistan, who are to be blamed for hundred thousands of bomb blasts in Pakistan?
1
@Fawad Nice logic there. Whoever did the suicide attack in Kashmir is "an enemy of both India and Pakistan" but the terrorist attacks in Pakistan "are being done by Indian spy agencies". Too bad that the world doesn't look at this situation thru the colored glasses that you seem to be wearing!
@Fawad, if you rear snakes in your backyard they are bound to strike you. Don't blame India for bomb blasts in Pakistan for that. Blame your generals who have allowed and encouraged Jihadi terror organizations to flourish.
Pakistan was the brainchild of Muslims in what is left of India after Partition. Those Muslims who did not wish to be Indians had promised that they would leave for Pakistan. Most did not and chose to remain in India.
Other than Kashmir there is currently no movement by Muslims still living in India to break up the country one more time. That is because they have seen the disasters that Pakistan and Bangladesh have become as Islamic countries.
Any Muslim still living in any part of Jammu and Kashmir has two choices he or she can make: Stay in Kashmir and become 100% Indian
OR
Leave Kashmir and settle in Pakistan.
Had all Muslims left India then a referendum in Kashmir may have been an option. But by staying in India after breaking it up Muslims have lost all defenses for a referendum because of religion.
5
But why did Pakistan attack Kashmir when it was a free state in 1947 and not under India ?
2
The story tells one side of it. It does not talk about kashmiri pandits thrown out of Kashmir by the terrorist group.you have also forgotten about stone pelting by youth on police for money. Don't you think the police also have family? There are kashmiris who are developing after settling in other parts of India. We need to think of betterment of lives but not blame on country
2
As one who was born before Indian independence, I lived in the southern part of India peacefully. I have had the benefit of friendship, education, and teaching with Hindus, Muslims, and Christians. We never discussed religion as a divider. We celebrated all the religious festivals together. I also lived and worked in two Muslim majority countries and I never encountered opposition to my being a Hindu. In all of my 70+ years, I never encountered hostility from any religious groups. I wonder what has gone wrong in India or Pakistan. Is it the division of the country? If that is the cause, can not the politicians in both of the countries sit, talk, and bring the people together?
26
@Anam
Anam,
My heart goes out to you. I believe India should never have been divided. The same goes for Palistine.
Division only creates the conditions for hate between different peoples.
If India had any real compassion a referendum should be held and Kashmir then should be part of the country that wins the vote.
Sincerely,
Jack Disraeli
1
@wobbly
A referendum sounds like an easy option, but it is much more complicated than that
1) Demographic changes have happened in the valley against minority populations. Shouldn't the Hindu and Sikh populations who were violently ejected from Kashmir have a vote? 2)Before a referendum, Pakistanis should vacate the part of kashmir they forcibly occupied in 1947. But unlike in India, there have been no prohibitions against non-Kashmiris from settling there, so a referendum becomes impossible. There used to be religious minorities on that side as well
3) You talk about the problems with division and yet you are advocating another division in Kashmir. Kashmir has already been divided along the line of control.
Honestly if, Kashmiris want they could pick a side and move, just as the rest of the subcontinent did. In 1947 Karachi was 40% Hindu and 10% Christian - did they get a choice as to whether to become part of Pakistan? Partition was painful across the board, but generations later everyone has learned to live with the fact that borders were redrawn, except in Kashmir.
4
I find Modi and his extreme right wing ideology abhorrent but Mr Peer presents an overly simplistic and somewhat distorted view of the situation. The suicide attack in Kashmir was by no means work of a lone suicide bomber acting on his own. It was a planned suicide attack by a trained terrorist aided and abetted by a known terrorist organisation, JeM. That Mr Peer would call it the work of of a lone, misguided suicide bomber without assigning any blame to JeM and patrons in Pakistan brings into question his lack of objectivity in this matter.
Fact remains that Kashmir is a far more complex issue with no clear and easy solutions. To suggest that the issue can be resolved without addressing the issue of cross-border terrorism is just a pipe dream. It is like saying that Syrian situation can be resolved if the world left it alone and let ISIS operate there freely.
Indian leadership has been heavy handed in its dealing with the situation in Kashmir but Mr Peer seems to forget that Pakistani leadership has never been interested in a peaceful solution for Kashmir either. As a matter of fact, Kashmiris on the Pakistan occupied side have even less say in their future with terrorist groups being given fee hand to run proxy wars out of their territory. Perhaps, Mr Peer should read up on history to understand the events leading up to the present day situation before pontificating on the matter.
4
To all the folks offering "solutions" to the problem. Thank you, but the reason they have not happened is because folks benefit from these crises. Egoistic leaders and their personality cults, military and commercial interests - domestic and foreign, a dumb populace which will do everything except the sensible thing, enabling the above. So we need to think next level.
Regardless of all the talk of partitions, plebiscites, promises, etc... we need to recognize reality:
The so-called nuclear threat - India is threatening Pakistan because they are sheltering terrorists who are killing Indian nationals and jeopardizing Indian stability. Makes sense?
Pakistan is threatening India, because India is attacking terrorists, who Pakistan claims they do not support anyway. Does that make sense? Think about it.
Liberalized India has new infrastructure, new wealth and a growing middle class the government needs to foster and ,above all, protect. The Bombay attacks showed, in a free-spirited India, a terrorist has an abundance of targets - railway stations full of people, 5-star hotels full of the rich and famous, homes of expats, etc. How do you protect them?
Pakistan, a failed democracy, has a military regime using the nation as a gun-running, terrorism-sponsoring base, a thug haven. What is their long-term vision or exit strategy? Their western and Arab allies use them for nefarious purposes at the expense of the citizen's welfare. Mr. Imran Khan is a nice guy in the wrong game.
30
@Suppan
Modi says he is responding to terrorists. But a Trump or Modi can never be believed. They are both islamophobes. Modi has blood on his hands in Gujarat. From Pakistan's point of view, why should they believe India is striking back at terrorists even if they don't support them ? Modi,and India could be scapegoating them for internal violence. While most Indians are seriously concerned about their own safety and the violence in Kashmir,and worried about the prospect of war, it is not beyond Modi and his hindu nationalists, who destroyed the Ayodhya mosque, killed an unknown number of muslims in 2002, and raped muslim women and set them on fire, to use an internal attack by islamists as an excuse to 'strike terrorist camps in Pakistan'. An election is around the corner, and Modi is a Trumpista in his own way who incites fear and hate toward muslims,Modi is using a suicide bombing in Kashmir, which was apparently carried out by the Pakistan based Jaish, and has many hinduphobes supporting it in Pakistan as well, to his own personal political ends. Inequality is worse in India than almost anywhere. Unemployment is at a 45 year high. Modi has hit his reality check after claiming credit for 10 percent gdp growth in gujarat. His policies and politics are both a disaster. Manmohan singh produced 10 percent gdp growth in 2008. Modi, in spite of manipulating figures has not gotten anywhere close.His currency denomination caused widespread misery and the GST produced nothing
7
What a surprise. A partition plan of a contested region and a partition not recognized by any involved (and that includes China).
Mr. Peer seems to stress Indian violence and is apologetic and understanding re Pakistan, forgetting violence and terrorism against Hindus.
How is it that each side claims it all? How can they be so stubborn? Do they not have large countries? What is so hard to agree upon?
Can it be an attachment to the land and history?
Could it be that some disputes such as this have no solution, at least for the present and foreseeable future.
2
Here we are in the 21st century and countries are still waging war for property. For bragging rights. For religion. We haven't come very far.
1
Until there is respect for the rule of law there will be no peace or solution. Treat the other side with civility and the protection of human rights.
A plague on both your houses.
The obvious solution to the Kashmir problem is to give the people there the right to self-determination. This could even be done across the localities within Kashmir so that no ethnic group would be forced to stay as part of India or Pakistan (or an independent Kashmir) if it doesn't want to.
Also, the idea that India is this benevolent state that allows for multi-multiculturalism and is protecting Kashmir from extremism is quite fanciful. Just read the reports about how the Indian army has been killing, blinding, and kidnapping and torturing protesters in Kashmir. Even the environment in India proper is becoming extremely laced with hindu nationalism (discrimination against Muslims and Dalits, killing people suspected of butchering cows with impunity etc...).
1
Pakistan, and Imran Khan, cannot credibly claim that they have cracked down on the Jaish, LeT and other islamist outfits that have repeatedly carried out suicide and terror attacks in India. The islamist outfits can spark a war that will almost certainly go nuclear, between india and pakistan. The radiation can spread in any direction, even spreading as far as europe, africa, or the far east. These islamist outfits are similar to the hamas and hezbollah in the threat that they pose to the jewish people in isreal, except that their target is hindus in India. In fact, the Pakistan army is complicit in these acts. They use the islamists as a proxy army to keep the pot boiling in kashmir. It would be in the world's interest, and pakistan's to eradicate the islamist outfits and to put pakistan under heavy pressure, including economic sanctions if it fails to act. Pakistan has frequently alleged India's involvement in islamist attacks within Pakistan, and unrest in Baluchistan. India's involvement in those has never been proven.It is not in India's interest and will make matters more difficult for Imran Khan or another civilian leader in Pakistan. A civilian government in Pakistan headed by somebody like Imran Khan, trying to promote peace with India, should be in India's interest or may do the least harm to India.
3
I find it appalling how the author seems to draw a moral equivalence between the Indian and Pakistani militaries. One example, which still troubles me, is when the author refers to how the Indian and Pakistani militaries are known for "notoriously shredding the Geneva Convention to bits."
Have you heard of Capt. Sourabh Kalia? The man who was brutally, inhumanely tortured by the Pakistani military, in ways I cannot possibly describe. Are you aware of the thousands of times the Pakistani military has violated the LoC ceasefire, killing innocent Kashmiri civilians? Are you aware, as many readers have pointed out, of how mercilessly millions of Kashmiri Hindus were driven away from their homeland, by jihadists and separatists funded and trained by the Pakistani military? Of the fact that it was PM Modi, who was the one who made the first outreach, only to be awarded with attacks on Army personnel?
The title of your article suggested that you would provide a fair analysis of the Kashmiri crisis. But, with all due respect, I believe you have omitted important details and almost entirely focused on the mistakes of the Indian side, without devoting attention to equally, if not more consequential, Pakistani actions which ultimately led to the situation we are now witness to.
5
First, stop blaming Pakistan for problems in Kashmir, India being a democracy and as true with most democracy, they don't keep their promises and keep moving the goal post. Let India accept that they are the major part of the problem and hopefully this way the punt by India would leave Pakistan and Kashmiri to decide what needs to be done.....Kashmir has never been th=integral part of India.
@Haris Khan India Jammu Kashmir is part of India and will always remain. Pakistan occupied so-called Azad Kashmir is part of India and so is so-called Pakistan. India will still survive but Pakistan will be reduced to ashes, self-destruction. India doesn't need to do anything against Pakistan but India feels pain when Pakistan is in turmoil.
New York Times, in regard to Kashmir has become very one sided. There was no conflict about Kashmir in the first place in 1947 when Indian partition took effect. The basis of partition was that Muslim majority portions in east and west would become Pakistan. The native rulers could choose to be with India or Pakistan. The Hindu maharaja of Kashmir decided to remain with India after some thinking. But then terrorists from Northern provinces of Pakistan raided Kashmir. India resisted but they managed to control a portion of Kashmir, part of which they gave to China later. There was a considerable Hindu population in Kashmir. A section of radical Muslims drove them out. Most of the Hindu refugees are now in Jammu but are also spread all over India. The conflict is now centered in a handful of areas in Kashmir and supported by terrorists with covert help from ISI, the Pakistani intelligence service. This government agency is autonomous, the civil government has no control over it. The 10 terrorists of Lashkar-e-Taiba who murdered more than 160 Indians and foreigners were in constant contact with their handlers in Karachi. Their voices have been verified and identified by Indian and foreign agencies. These terrorists are out free on streets of Pakistani towns and are even collecting money for future attacks. The group that is behind the latest attack in Kashmir is led by a terrorist who had to be exchanged against passengers of a hijacked Indian Airline plane.
7
There are several sides to the problem.
- Kashmiris are caught in the middle of a conflict between india, pakistan and china, mainly india and pakistan. The state is not what it was in 1947. china annexed part of kashmir, and pakistan gave away a part of kashmir that it occupied in 1947 to china. There is a homegrown component to the violence in kashmir, where islamists are also active.
- The US, a force for stability in the region after invading afghanistan in 2001 is undergoing fatigue and wants to pull out. The taliban has mounted several suicide attacks and could overrun afghanistan anytime after the US leaves.
- pakistan is under severe economic stress. saudi arabia just made a big rescue loan. the US is tired of pakistan's taliban supporting suicide attacks in afghanistan. the billions of dollars in US aid to pakistan, dangled as a carrot, have been ineffective and not produced the desired results. imran khan faces several internal challenges. the pakistan army supports the jaish and let and wield power. islamists within pakistan cause him serious problems. unrest can always surface again in baluchistan.
- india is getting fed up with the jaish and lashkar who have been mounting attacks out of pakistan, and the pakistan army using them as proxies, since the late 1980s. while imran offers them talks they want concrete action from pakistan,addressing their main concern-the jaish e mohamad, and lashkar targeting india.
2
The small men and women, who call themselves leaders of the Kashmiri people, have tried to equate their agitation with the freedom struggle waged by Indians against the British. This is a false equivalence.
The Indian Congress, which spearheaded the freedom struggle, clearly spelt out the ideals which would guide their actions - non violence, no religious or caste discrimination and no hate. These high ideals helped garner support for the freedom struggle from across the world, including the US.
On the other hand, these so called Kashmiri leaders have spoken in different voices, have been ambiguous towards the use of violence, and have failed to delink their struggle for autonomy from that of islamic fundamentalism. They have also failed to condemn the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits from Kashmir. It is no wonder that they have not only failed to get international support, but have alienated themselves from mainstream India.
It this lack of principled leadership in Kashmir which has led the youth to become enamored with the romantic notion of armed conflict with the Indian state, and the consequences are there for all to see. Pakistan has continued to fish in troubled waters. It is for responsible leadership in Delhi to heal the wounds and to dispel the the sense of alienation among the Kashmiri people. Only thus will the cycle of violence stop and peace return to this paradise on earth.
3
Wow, what a biased article! Pakistan is the ENTIRE reason Kashmir has not been at peace past two decades. JeM, the organization behind the suicide bombing that precipitated the current crisis is a DESIGNATED terrorist organization by the USA, UK, Russia, BRICs among others, and its head has a $10 million reward by the US government on his head. Yet JeM operates freely in Pakistan. There is zero point in any “talks” between India and Pakistan, as Pakistan continues to deny existence of any terrorist organizations, just like it denied that it shelters Osama Bin Laden.
The Pakistani prime minster also serves at the will of the army, and the last time their prime minister and Indian counterpart met (in Pakistan, no less), that prime minster was jailed shortly thereafter and is still in prison, to make way for the current one. The Pakistani army does not want peace with India.
Kashmir is home to millions of Hindus, Sikhs and others, who have no desire to join an Islamic country like Pakistan. Many of them were killed or chased away by Muslims, so it’s impossible to hold any real elections.
5
One man's freedom fighter .... this adage is as clichéd as it can get when it comes to Kashmir. The reduction of a massive human security problem to an ahistoric yet political point scoring opportunity is a common thing between Indians and Pakistanis.
The article poses a pertinent question, one that was also asked in not too long ago in India's own south: why would someone resort to a suicide attack. In Kashmir's case only a simpleton would assume that its because Pakistan wanted it so. If that was the case there'd been tens if not hundreds of suicide attacks in the J&K. After all Pakistan itself had over 475 suicide bombings in the space of 10 years. Therefore Kashmir should have been a logical battleground for the same holy warriors where they could go to war against an infidel army occupying Muslim lands .
But that did not happen. Kashmiris had no appetite for such actions.
The fact is Kashmiris have never been pushed against the wall as much as they find themselves now. A Hindu nationalist government in New Delhi seeks reelection in next month. It has been ruling Kashmir from the centre having suspended Kashmir's elected assemblies.
India at the end of Modi's term is a polarized country. Modi has shown glimpses of absolute mania in his current job and when he was Gujarat's CM . India has treated Pakistan a "whipping boy"
whilst Pakistan has thus far responded in kind.
1
Maybe I'm wromg, but all this trouble didn't exist before 1947 when Brittain ruled India.
@Fred Renkema
India and Pakistan didn't exist before 1947
I read the comments and they seem to be a history lesson on this conflict that is forever going on. Is there a solution that is safe for the world? I have never known so far of a truly peaceful area with a very high majority of Muslim population. There seems to be too much seeking for martyrdom that is fanned by religious leaders.
Tolerance and blasphemy laws do not sit well together.
2
This article completely ignores the fact that Pakistan has been using terrorism/insurgents as a part of it's state policy to destabilize Kashmir for decades. The Kashmiri youth gets brainwashed in the name of Islam and is provocated to take up arms and revolt against the Indian state. The fight in Kashmir these days is little to do with Freedom and more to do with Islam. The same radicalization resulted in ethnic cleansing of the Hindus from the Kashmir valley at multiple times.
5
While America is focused on imaginary ethnic sectarian nuclear weapons from Iran and North Korea India and Pakistan are the real threats.
Unlike Iran which is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has no nuclear weapons neither India nor Pakistan are NPT parties and both have nuclear weapons.
India is the most populous parliamentary democracy. India is the most populous Hindu nation. India is the 2nd most populous country with the 2nd largest military. India has the 3rd largest Muslim population.
Pakistan is the 2nd most populous majority Muslim country. After partition it used to be called West Pakistan. And Bangladesh was East Pakistan before a ethnic sectarian civil war separated them into sovereign nations.
The other nuclear weapons rogue nation outside of the NPT is Israel. As long as Israel. India and Pakistan operate outside of the NPT no credible case can be made against Iran or North Korea or any other nation.
1
Remarkable that no one mentions that India took the matter to the UN and there remains a Security Council resolution, mandating that there be a plebiscite held under the UN whereby Kashmiris will themselves decide if they want to remain with India or Pakistan. Kashmir is not a bargain real estate that either India or Pakistan can claim and end of story. There was a time when many Kashmiris were interested to live with India but the extremely brutal, increased and every day repression (google the UN report that came out last year) by India (use of pellet guns on innocent including children and rapes of women are among the egregious human rights violations) has led to an overwhelming and indigenous demand of independence from India.
Taking advantage of the post 9/11 international narrative against terrorism, Israel and India both put effort and succeeded quite a bit in painting the struggles of Palestinians and Kashmiris as both problems that are not solvable due to terrorism. Blessed by the US support in particular (India less compared to Israel) both violate UN resolutions and international human rights laws with impunity.
So might is right regrettably holds currently but world history also demonstrates that genuine and sustained freedom struggles ultimately cannot be suppressed forever.
1
India has held fair elections since its birth, and if and when an impropriety is found in an election, it is adjudicated by a very fair election commission. Does Mr. Peer’s allegation of rigged election in year 1989 sufficient to justify thirty years of terrorism? I have one question for Mr. Basharat Peer. If one allegedly rigged election in 1989 can justify 30 years of terrorism in Kashmir, how many terrorist movements and insurgencies should have been spawned in Pakistan where every election is rigged by the Pakistani army and the ISI? There is no festering, large scale insurgency in Pakistan because people, press and TV stations who question the army know exactly what happens to them, and how plain clothes army/ISI agents threaten them and their families. Indian army’s presence in Kashmir is open and all to see, and soldiers are court martialed for any bad behavior; but Pakistani army’s heavy boot on the necks of people yearning for freedom in Sindh, Baluchistan, Kashmir, Gilgit, Baltistan keeps the insurgency stifled. One more point for all-knowing Mr. Peer, does he know the real cause of the increased violence in Kashmir was not the 1989 election; but after the 1989 withdrawal of Russia from Afghanistan the billions of dollars, weapons and mujahedeen paid by the US and Saudi Arabia were redirected by Pakistan into Kashmir? Some journalist are either ignorant or do not like the inconvenient truths.
3
I read this article expecting to gain a better understanding of this conflict, thinking that—with a headline that promised “Both countries share responsibility”—it would offer a balanced view. But after that entire article offers indictment after indictment of India without listing a single “responsibility” that Pakistan shoulders.
4
This column written by the author never talks about Kashmiri Pundits who have been driven out of their country because the militants from Pakistan brought terrorists in Kashmir who raped their women and attacked their homes. These people were driven out of their land, migrated to India as refugees, this is never mentioned in this article.
Pakistan has to stop fomenting terrorism in this region and the Pakistani military takes advantage of the situation and supports them. Remember Bin La Den hiding in Pakistan? Do we understand how he could hide under the nose of the military? Pakistan must denounce terrorism, hand over JeM leader to India and help Kashimiri people live as respectable citizens first before any resolution can be thought of.
2
After all the dust of history and bias settles, one fact remains: Pakistan is a terrorist state. It attacks India via cross border terrorism. Make no mistake, there is no moral equivalency here between the two countries.
If for a second we think that India gives away Kashmir to Pakistan and redraws LOC in the hope of peace, do you really think Pakistan will stop exporting terrorism? Nope, they won’t.
2008 Mumbai attack mastermind roams freely in Pakistan - that itself should tell you a lot about Pakistan.
2
Well in 1947 the Muslims wanted there own country. Pakistan was created and over 50
Years the minorities were hounded out of the country with Hindus making less 2%. The Christians keep getting attacked and discrimInated against. India on the other hand with a Hindu majority decided to be secular state with 15% Muslims. There are more Muslims in India than Pakistan today . If India allows Kashmir to break away then the secular nAture of India will be questioned. If the Muslims always demand a Islamic state where they are a majority but then demand equal rights that they do not provide to others there is going to be a backlash. I am committed secularist. However, I demand the same
Rights for minorities in Islamic countries as Muslims demand in secular non Muslim countries.
1
It is stunning how Pakistan, an autocratic religion-based failed state where minorities are persecuted, has spun the narrative to the extent that a publication that supports freedom of speech and democracy has bought into it.
3
Remarkable that it is scarcely mentioned that India took the matter to the UN and there remains a Security Council resolution, mandating that there be a plebiscite held under the UN whereby Kashmiris will themselves decide if they want to remain with India or Pakistan. Kashmir is not a bargain real estate that either India or Pakistan can claim and it'll be end of story. There was a time when many Kashmiris were interested to live with India but the extremely brutal, increased and every day repression (google the UN report that came out last year) by India (use of pellet guns on innocent including children and rapes of women are among the egregious human rights violations) has led to an overwhelming and indigenous demand of independence from India.
Taking advantage of the post 9/11 international narrative against terrorism, Israel and India both put effort and succeeded quite a bit in painting the struggles of Palestinians and Kashmiris as both problems that are not solvable due to terrorism. Blessed by the US support in particular (India less compared to Israel) both violate UN resolutions, international human rights laws and civilized norms with impunity.
So might is right regrettably holds currently but world history also demonstrates that genuine and sustained freedom struggles ultimately cannot be suppressed forever.
Islamists and their suicide bombers are a scourge everywhere in the world, even in America. Islamists struck America in the 90s when the USS Cole was attacked, and then on 9/11. There have been violent attacks by Islamists even in America. Suicide bombings are almost entirely carried out by Islamists today. A few Sri Lankan Tamils carried out similar attacks, but that was a long time ago. The US has been fighting the Al Queda and ISIS since 9/11. The Taliban remains a serious extremist threat in Afghanistan.When the US leaves the ISIS will take root there. Pakistan hosts the Jaish, LeT and other islamist terrorist groups, who have carried out several attacks in India including the 2002 attack on Indian Parliament, the 2008 Mumbai attack, and attacks directed at the Indian military and police. The Kashmiri pandits, a hindu minority, were driven out of kashmir by pakistan backed islamists in the 1980s. The Pakistan army has used the Islamists to fight a proxy war in Kashmir for decades now. India has a serious problem too. Modi butchered 2000 muslims in gujarat in 2002. His government is a failure with unemployment at a 45 year high and his response to the latest suicide attack has been toothless and ineffective. India's air force appears to have dropped bombs in an empty forest, while Modi has made unproven claims that he destroyed a Jaish terrorist camp. Imran Khan's government, like all other civilian governments there is a Pakistan army puppet government with no power.
3
There are elections in India and Narandra Modi's party cannot win until there some semblance of conflict between India and Pakistan. Modi is determined rather desperate to push the call for an all out war despite Pakistani PM Imran Khan repeated offers for negotiated settlement of the Kashmir Issue which will not only eradicate the menace of terrorism but also bring peace to the people of Indian held Kashmir.
The world should Intervene and stop Modi's hand before its too late , because an all out war between the two Nuclear armed countries would mean the complete annihilation of both India and Pakistan.
1
The only resolution would be if India offered a democratic referendum to the people of Kashmir to decide their fate, but I suspect India already knows what the outcome of that vote would be, therefore it is unlikely they would ever propose it.
3
@John Ellis it's true that India will not allow it. Its also true Pakistan will also allow it in an alternate universe. It's called geo politics. The same thing happened in Iraq , Afghanistan, Serbia , Africa so on so forth. Though I deeply Symphothize and as a parent understand what every Kashmiri goes through, this is a hard reality nonethless.The possibility of going with India, Pakistan or even China or being Independent does not solve Kashmir dispute. They will either have issues with India , Pakistan or China in one way or other. The only solution is for India and Pakistan to unite against extrememists and politicians on both sides.
2
Pakistan has been playing this game for a while. Low level terrorost attacks below the threshold of war undear the threat of nuclear escalation. Modi called their bluff and they had to beg every major power to help deescalate. Pakistan has been put on notice - the nuclear bluff will not work anymore. Terrorosm will be met with a strong response. Hopefully this will lead to peace.
4
Whatever is happening and whatever has happened in Kashmir is very unfortunate and depressing. leaderships of both countries are to be blamed. Every body knows there can not be military solution, stakes are too high. best way out is for both India and Pakistan to accept the parts of Kashmir under their respective control and move on to more pressing needs of their people. They should not worry about losing and winning of elections and do the right thing.
6
Excluding the Chinese controlled portion of Kashmir, the most sensible thing to do is both nations agree on the LoC the official boundary.
3
Kashmir should learn from the Brexit mess about their fate when they lose access to India’s markets and resources. It will become another Afghanistan.
7
Unlike in Palestine and Koreas, a serious intervention by US and Russia could bring a solution in Kashmir.
I would set a plebiscite date in 5-8 years from now so that Kashmiri Hindus could also return to their lands and have a say.
I guess they may end up becoming Independent and not choose either side. The ballot would have options to become independent, join India or join Pakistan.
4
@SridharC Intervention from US and Russia in India Jammu Kashmir, will not go down well with India, it would be a disaster. Like all states of India, Jammu Kashmir is part of India and will always remain. No major foreign countries (US, Russia) can separate another country (India) terrority, can not interfere very deep there is a certain limit. Plebcite or Independence is out of the question for India. I think you should separate your own country states and ask for independence or other countries should interfere in your internal country/states. No country can lose its terrority, countries look to gain terrorities.
1
Democracy denied always has one outcome.
Until India gives people in Kashmir the right to leave, this will not end.
Blaming Pakistan is simply a bid to avoid responsibility for their own actions.
3
@John Kennedy, it is not that simple. The opinion piece presents a narrative and ignores any facts that challenge it's assumptions:
1. The 1987 elections always get the blame, but there have been several free and fair elections (per UN) since. Some of these elected governments even issued amnesties to former militants to bring them back into society.
2. The beginning of the insurgency coincided with defeat of Soviets in Afghanistan. An emboldened Pakistan found itself with surplus of hardened militants and Kashmir valley was their next project and rehab program. Pakistani military intel has used proxies to bleed India by a thousand cuts and is unlikely to change its behavior unless it carries a cost to them. Anytime Indian and Pakistani civilian leaders are close to an agreement, a large terrorist attack or massacre in India usually follows to ensure its failure.
3. As we have seen from example in Afghanistan, Pakistani military intel is unlikely to stop a proxy war unless it gets its way completely. If past is any guide minorities in the region including Hindus, Gujjars, Bakarwals, Shias and Kashmiris who opposed the militants will be refugees or worse.
4. Latest wave of militancy is often blamed on anecdotes of mistreatment, but it ignores the larger social media driven ISIS style online radicalization taking root in South Kashmir valley. The current militancy has larger religious overtones unlikely to be addressed by Independence or anything close to it.
3
Sure can tell from the name where u belong to.. freedom and all is well and good if its done on either side of the wall in absence of military rulers .. and India is not ruled by military shadow or front... kashmiri Hindu’s when people like Mr. Dar talk about suffering population completely gloss over it... there are 300k kashmiri population hounded out by so called freedom lovers from there home without any hope of ever letting them go back.. really you want to talk freedom of on religion?
The groups are being disentangled, on India's do one thing show willingness to follow this path so we can sell the concept easily to our citizens with this mind set.
Willingness some agreement.
Where is the proof that terrorist groups that operate in Kashmir and are supported by Pakistan are being dismantled?
"“low-intensity conflict...” Another example of semantic surrealism enabled by formal and informal, selected and elected policymakers, representing a range of principals of faith, ideologies and toxic, anchored certitude, who continue to operate with personal unaccountability for their harmful voiced and written words and their done-deeds. Benefiting from, and fostering, the divisiveness of both traditionalized, historical as well as newly created WE-THEY cultures and realities. Which violate. Daily. Limbs. Lives. Psyches. Souls and spirits. As many of US have the opportunity to read about IT, and then turn to the next article. Radio station. TV channel. Other social media. And the band played on. Few have chosen to "Fail better."
The only solution to this is economic.
Any talk of reducing hostility, accepting current borders, etc. is just that: talk. Meanwhile, India will continue to lumber along the path to mid-income nation status, achieving an annual per capita income of $12000-15000 by the end of the next decade. There will be missteps, political gridlock, bad governance & corruption, natural disasters, and the overarching sceptre of climate change along the way, but the movement towards prosperity is inevitable. And the choice facing the people of Kashmir will be: to join in this growth and share in the prosperity or not.
There is no evidence to support the opposing view that either Kashmir's "independence" from India or accession to Pakistan will lead to safe and secure lives for any Kashmiri.
India's calculation needs to be, despite the shrill baying for war by members of an increasingly lunatic right-wing media, is that it can continue to absorb the pain caused by occasional terror-strikes, and local protests; engage in the occasional limited counter-strike to manage opinion at home; and keep trying to marginalise Pakistan on the global stage. The aim should be to cut the funding and aid that Pakistan receives, both economic and military, to the point that for the terrorist management company that is the Pakistan Army, the cost-benefit analysis of spending on a constant conflict with India, to distract the population from a dysfunctional economy and society, becomes increasingly negative.
10
The only solution is democratic.
Let the people of Kashmir vote on whether they wish to remain in India.
You have to wonder why Kashmir has not progressed like the rest of India. Are they psychologically crippled by their ties to a failed state?
There has been sufficient analysis of this problem in these comments and in recent NYT articles. Let’s talk about solutions. A referendum is unlikely to happen. It is even more unlikely that any party would give or even seen to be giving an inch of their ‘land’. A face saving solution moderated (even if coercive behind the scenes) by a major power having traction with both, is the only way forward; such power can only be US.
During Musharraf era, first with Vajpayee and later with Manmohan Singh, the contours of such a solution had begun to emerge. A key pillar of this solution was to make the borders diffuse and porous and allow free movement of people and goods. This had started bringing down the temperatures and had started taking the entire Kashmir to some semblance of normalcy. Musharraf had come very close to formalise this formula with India before the deep state in India, yes India, backed out from it.
I feel we are at that stage again. Imran Khsn genuinely wants to move on and military is on one page with him on this issue, apparently at least. What better way to test this out without putting absurd pre-conditions. The distance reached with Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh previously could be the starting point. I fully believe that there is hope; we only need a strong moderator to knock two heads together.
7
@Arabian Sea. Yes. Mr. Vajpayee started bus diplomacy and India was backstabbed when Pakistani army along with terrorists occupied post in Kargil drass sector which resulted in Kargil war.
World knows where Osama bin Laden was found and eliminated. Pakistan has always backstabbed india's attempt to restore peace. This time Pakistan is talking about peace as they are broke and there is international pressure.
India is a peace loving nation and we do not want war.
But it should not be seen as our weakness.
22
@Arabian Sea, a very thoughtful analysis which gives me hope. Agree with you on the contours of a solution but not the reasons they failed to take root in the past. Anytime Indian and Pakistani leaders are close to a solution, a large terrorist attack or massacre in India with clear links across the border usually follows to undermine it. This suggests powerful forces arraigned against it on the Pakistani side. I just hope PM Khan has made enough inroads and can use recent events to change the equation. I am sadly not as hopeful as I should be about the outcome, but one cannot give up hope.
1
@Arabian Sea
First Pakistanis have to determine who is running their country. Is it the occasional, democratically elected Prime Minister, or is it the permanently-in-charge military? PMs can meet with Indian PMs and come up with all sorts of deals. But if the military can disrupt it with a direct attack or a terrorist attack on India, all of the talk and paperwork is just another waste of time.
Both countries have a lot of "tradition" in their mores. Tradition can be valuable wisdom gleaned from past experience. Tradition can also be worthless, old baggage being dragged along from decade to decade, century to century due to the lethargy of old habits. Overcoming the latter and strengthening the former aspects of tradition is challenging enough, not knowing whether your interlocutor actually has the power and standing to deliver on his/her promises is a deal-killer.
Mr. Imran Khan is a charismatic gentleman, and has a lot of fans in India from his cricketing days. There is enormous goodwill in India towards Pakistani musicians, scholars, etc... But all of that is useless when the regime in Pakistan is using it as an Adda for Goondas from the West and the Middle East to use as a weapons proliferating den, a playground to hunt and kill endangered species and live the good life, all at the expense of Pakistani's poor and not-so-poor who deserve a better shot at life and a government more interested in their welfare than is shaking down the West for a few dollars and F-16s.
1
If there ever were a referendum in Kashmir, Kashmiris would probably vote for independence by at least a plurality. But even if India accepted the vote, it’s doubtful that Pakistan would. In addition, it would not be easy for Kashmir to survive as an impoverished independent state. Even if Kashmiris voted to join Pakistan, it would come as no surprise if they regretted the choice in due time. And finally, there is China, which also occupies part of Kashmir, and might like to occupy more. It’s a mystery why nobody seems to protest this occupation. All things considered, it might be best to work to improve the status quo rather than create even more uncertainty and risk of conflict.
14
@Bob, I believe if ever there is a referendum where the Kashmiris vote for independence, Pakistan will occupy it the next day. Pakistan controlled Kashmir which they call Azad or free Kashmir is anything but free. Their politicians are puppets of the Pakistan government. Each person there has to swear allegiance to Pakistan and they live under ISI's watch. Gilgit and Baltistan are not part of Kashmir. But Pakistan has occupied them by force and trying to annex them. Their independence movements are being violently suppressed by Pakistan's ISI. Why international observers and press are not allowed there?
I am not sure if readers here remember or not but the Maharaja had sold Kashmir to India against the will of the Kashmiris in 1947. That's where it all started. Since then there were countless unanimous declarations passed in UN starting in 1950-1960s demanding India to give Kashmiris a referendum to decide what they want to do with their future i.e, whether to join India, Pakistan or become an independent state. But Russia kept vetoing those calls or India kept stonewalling those declarations. And that was extremely wrong on part of India as Kashmiris were literally bought like a herd of goats. A lot has happened since then in Kashmir and in Pakistan and India. For both Pakistanis and Indians, giving up on Kashmir or doing something humane for Kashmiris is almost impossible given the relics of old political concepts are still around in both countries. Regardless, India has actively suppressed Kashmiris' right to choose and Pakistan just wants piece of the pie to get more control over water sources in Kashmir and Kashmiris are being grinded in this war.
18
@Amir
This is just fiction sold to Pakistani public by the establishment controlled press. Kashmiris have zero interest in joining Pakistan, Pakistani military promotes the Kashmir issue to maintain its hold on government and control of resources within Pakistan, hostility with India is the reason for Pakistan to maintain a military it cannot afford and cannot trust. The time for refrandums is long past. Pakistan has changed the ethnic composition of the Kashmir it holds, the UN resolutions specifically called for Pakistan to wthdraw its troops, something Pakistan conveniently forgets. Pakistan has fought 4 wars with India without gaining an inch of war. Every time Pakistan fought a war with India, its own government collapsed. A solution has to be sought where existing borders are respected with free movement of people.
10
@Amir
The history of Kashmir's accession to India is a bit more nuanced than that. The Maharaja chose to remain independent and India wasn't really pushing too hard for accession. In fact, Nehru was not in favor of accession without a plebiscite. He even wrote a letter to Pakistani PM Liaquat Ali Khan promising this. And it's not a given that a plebiscite would've gone in Pakistan's favor. The most popular party in the valley back then, National Conference, and its leader Sheikh Abdullah were in favor of accession with India.
Everything changed dramatically when Pakistan recruited a bunch of tribal Pashtun militia from the frontier provinces to attack Kashmir. They were not just fighting Maharaja's armies, but also committing atrocities on minority civilian populations in the conquered areas. This is when Maharaja asked for India's help and India got involved. It was Mountbatten who insisted on Kashmir's 'temporary' accession with India before India sent in their army, just to make India's intervention legal. It's this proxy war adventure by Pakistan in 1947, in my mind, the original sin in this whole saga. Absent this, the plebiscite might very well have happened back then. The matter then went to the UN and the condition set by UN for the plebiscite was that Pakistan had to withdraw the militias and the regulars from the region, while India was allowed to have a minimal presence enough to maintain law and order. And alas, this never happened!
9
To your statement about the Maharaja selling Kashmir, that argument goes two ways - most Indians at the time of Independence thought that Gandhi gave away Indian land to Muslims to form Pakistan.
Pakistans trajectory has shown that a state based on religion is inherently weak.
3
The dispute over Kashmir has a long history and provokes strong emotions on both sides. It is instructive to read the book ‘The Pakistan Army’s Way of War’ by C. Christine Fair. Drawing an equivalence between Pakistan’s support for Islamist terrorism as an arm of state policy and India’s efforts to counter it is no longer acceptable as scholarly or unbiased.
18
@Rahul it was the Islamic terrorism that brought the USSR down to it's knees, the Islamic terrorism was trained by Pakistan and funded by the US and the West against the Soviets. During that time they were known as the mujahideen today they are known as terrorists.
I was at a cinema earlier and saw a trailer for Hotel Mumbai. I cast my mind back to the many different terrorist atrocities across India and their clear links to Pakistan. And to the fact that not a single perpetrator has been brought to justice despite India, over the decades, providing a lot of evidence of Pakistani complicity. Fact is most of the world does not care about Indian (or Pakistani) blood being shed .. but wakes up to the devastating impact of a broader military conflict. Yet, even imperfectly, India plods on despite having on its western borders a military running like an Islamic caliphate. I would remind readers here that Osama Bin Laden was found in a house adjacent to the Pakistani military academy.
Re Mr Peer’s article, it is undoubtedly true that politicians in Delhi & Srinagar have mismanaged the situation. I believe the crisis of the last three decades has benefited many such apparatchiks because of the amount of money spent to ‘solve’ this problem. However, what Mr Peer has ignored is the ethnic cleansing of over half a million Hindu’s from the Valley of Kashmir in the late 80’s / early 90’s by the folks who convinced this young man to take the lives 40 Indian paramilitary soldiers. Kashmiri Muslims are converts from Hinduism .. the original identity of the Valley.
So, Mr Peer, India cannot, and will not, tolerate the creation of another caliphate. Once was enough in 1947! A majority ethnicity or religion does not equate to a separate country.
51
Indeed India has a greater responsibility, being the more responsible partner. While terrorism needs to be effectively countered, part of that is winning hearts and minds by doing the right things. If history has taught anything, J&K cannot be won by guns or martial law. The response to a this bombing cannot be a Jallianwala Bagh type of armed response.
Development by more educational and economic opportunities for the youth, investment in the traditional arts ... such efforts have been successful to combat the extremist leftist movements in other parts of India. Religion and a neighbor always ready to foment trouble are additional complicating factors but history has taught us that it will not be easy. It is in India's interest to try its best to solve the problem, just like the many other internal problems facing her. J&K and the northeast are integral parts of India and time has come to treat these parts with similar efforts as the other regions of the country, stop-gap measures will not work.
9
This is a thoughtful viewpoint and well worth the read. There is one point I'd like to make: in all the years since the British left, Pakistan has been the sole aggressor in India's territory. Admittedly, the region is contested, but it is Pakistan that initiated the 1947 war and continues to brazenly support terrorists in India. This is not just about the recent suicide bombing. Think about the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai for which there is abundant evidence that Pakistan was centrally involved. Think about the Kargil war of 1999 when the Pakistan army actually crossed the border and took up positions on the Indian side. There are numerous cases like these not to mention the trouble that Pakistan continuously stokes in Kashmir. The Indian army has, for all its own faults, maintained their position on their own side of the border. I think I agree that both sides could try and negotiate peace through talks, but I hardly think you could argue that India does not have just cause to take action at this stage.
29
@Peace you are obviously totally biased in favor of India and have no sympathy for the people who live in the prison that India has made of Kashmir.
The author clearly seems to have a soft corner for Pakistan. He conveniently attributed the Kashmir issue to Indian repression around late 80s, missing out the most important detail. Kashmiris fight for freedom had long time back turned into a religious one from the political. During late 80s thousands of Hindus of Kashmir valley were murdered and forced to flee the valley. This single instance lead to the heavy presence of Indian army in the valley.
India has tried to bring Kashmiris to the mainstream, giving them subsidies in education which even we dont get. But these Kashmiris choose to go back and join the militants rather than making a living for themselves and improving the condition of the valley. Occupation of Kashmir, as they say, is not adding any value to India but we know if we loose control over them, the very next day they will become a part of Pakistan and create much more trouble for India. Separation of a state on the grounds of religion has never been a successful one and we all know that. The real issue in Kashmir is the religious extremism and no one is ready to acknowledge that.
58
@Rahul
If I have a quarrel with one person, you can give me the benefit of doubt. Perhaps it is not my fault but the fault of the other guy. But, if I fight with everybody, it would be natural for you to think that it is not the fault of the world but that there is some problem with me.
Muslims seem to have a problem with the world. Apart from fighting among themselves (Shia versus Sunni), they are fighting against the Christians, the Jews, the Buddhists, the Hindus, as well as the penguins and the rabbits. They are fighting against the Philipinos, the Chinese, the Israelis, the Russians, the French, the Germans, the Indians, the Americans...the list is long. Have I left out anyone? The question is why? Why can’t they live with others? Why is it that they want to separate from the larger nation wherever they find themselves clustered in one area or state. They seem to have no concept of democracy. The fact that while they may be in majority in one part, so are others in a democracy. Diversity requires that you learn to live with others. That is why Islamic countries shy away from encouraging diversity. But no country can allow them to separate from the larger nation and that is why the world is in conflict with Muslims. Time for them to do some soul searching.
2
@Rahul it seems that Indians have banded together to insert anti-Pakistani comments here.
@local Instead of making comments like this, it might serve a purpose and educate others if you do an actual rebuttal of what @Rahul has written above.
1
I do admire Imran Khan's action in this episode. I believe that he by acting unilaterally and releasing the downed Indian pilot has de-escalated the serious tension in the region. I do hope that Imran Khan has enough cache with Pakistani military establishment to continue this trend of making peace with India. He is a much beloved figure in India due to his cricketicing heroics in the past and can use his standing in India to make progress toward peace in India. I also wish him luck in convincing Kashmiri leaders to move away from their islamist tendencies and to move toward a secular society that can help nourish peace and economic growth in the region.
10
A disappointing and not surprising, one-sided view of this situation. The author places the onus of the miserable state of Kashmir on the Indian side with no culpability whatsoever to the terrorist organizations run and funded by the Pakistani government. He also forgets the 2 million Kashmiri Hindus driven out of their home by Kashmiri separatists who terrorized them in their own home- an inconvenient truth when defending Kashmir. Peace can only come when both sides value it and since Pakistan defines itself only on a hatred for India, this is sadly unlikely to be reached.
India, while not a saint in Kashmir, has made multiple overtures of peace (1999-Vajpayee, 2014 Modi) and each time it has been met with deceit. India takes the high road almost every time despite an attack on their Parliment, Kargil incursions , murder of innocents in Mumbai and countless attacks on their armed forces- all supported and orchestrated by Pakistan. When they defend themselves, they are asked to "show restraint"- I doubt that the US or the UK would be so forgiving.
90
Kashmir was a kingdom ruled by a Hindu Maharaja who had the option to stay like Nepal a separate country. Following the independence of British India, 2 countries were formed, India and Pakistan based on religion. India chose to remain a secular country while Pakistan chose to be an Islamic Republic. When Kashmir was being overrun by a rag tag army, the Hindu Mahraja decided to have his kingdom join with India and expected the Indian army to clear Kashmir of the invaders.
The then first prime minister of India Nehru, himself a Kashmiri Hindu decided with prodding from Gandhi to go to the UN while the iron man home minister of India Sardar Vallabhai Patel wanted a clean separation and complete control of entire Kashmir. Left to the UN, a cease fire was declared and the administration of Kashmir was divided by a line of control. Since then Kashmir has remained a divided state. The India part of Kashmir has had a local democratically elected government interspersed with army rule whenever law and order got out of hand.
To complicate matters, Pakistan surrendered a portion of Kashmir to China and further divided Kashmir. After so much blood shed, ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri pundits, crack down on militants and civilian deaths caught in the crossfire, Kashmir remains in a state of constant flux and never ending quagmire that should never have been in this miserable state. A monumental tall statue in honor of Sardar Patel is a reminder of how one leader had the right idea.
9
That would not have been the right idea @Girish. The right idea would've been to conduct the plebiscite right then. It may very well have been the iron man who prevented that.
@Aneesh from San Jose The Iron man Sardar Vallabhai Patel, freedom fighter and the first home minister of India in whose honor the tallest statue in the world was recently built in Gujarat, India did not prevent plebiscite. Patel's job was to unite India in the aftermath of the partition of India and he did his level best. As I say in my post above, Kashmir was an independent Kingdom that belonged to a Hindu Maharaja and had it not been that his kingdom instead of being left alone was attacked by infiltrators from across the borders of Kashmir in Pakistan that were drawn by the British. Patel's job was to clear Kashmir of the infiltrators. Instead of Kashmir a peaceful place of natural beauty often compared to Switzerland, remaining a Kingdom like Nepal, it became a perennial battleground of bloodshed, bombs and barbarism.
When you see the state of a divided Kashmir today and for the past 72 years as described by Basharat Peer in which he says both Pakistan and India share responsibility to a ruin and destroying generation of lives and dividing Kashmiris, I see a hopeless situation for the Kashmiri people caught in the cross fire unless Indian and Pakistani leaders agree to govern Kaskmir with the interests of the Kashmiri people protected. For starters, Kashmiri people on both side of the line of control 1) select their own leaders to govern Kashmir by a free non violent democratic process. 2) Clear Kashmir of all terrorists and 3) Build the infrastructure of Kashmir.
1
Europe was also hit by a series of attacks by Islamists just a few months or a year ago. The US is fighting islamists in africa, syria, iraq and afghanistan for almost two decades now. Islamists are a threat to the entire world. They want to impose their hardline and extremist form of islam on the rest of the world. On the other side are the islamophobes. Trump and the GOP are islamophobes. Pakistan based islamists and their backing by the Pakistan army is an extremely serious threat. Islamist suicide bombers and terrorists can produce the spark anytime that sets of a massive forest fire in the form of all out war, even possibly involving nuclear weapons, for the first time. It is very likely that at some point India will be forced to retaliate after a series of pakistan based islamist attacks for two decades now that have gone unanswered, and that could cause an all out india-pakistan war for the first time since 1971
17
@whatever Phobia: an extreme or irrational fear of something. With Islamists wreaking murderous havoc in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Europe, and not too long ago in North America, fear is hardly irrational.
Both countries need to find peace and acceptance without violence.
1
@Joe The scenario in Pakistan has changed. If l were the Indian Government, even I wouldn't know whom I should Contact for 'Peace'.
1. Pak Govt denies its ties to Terror and 'advocates' Peace.
2. Pak Army, at the same time, is involved in Unproked Firing/Attacks. There have been 2936 instances of such 'surprise' firings in past 12 months.
3. Pak-located Terrorists are killing Indian citizens and Indian soldiers in multiple numbers.
What we have here, is a country where there's no singular sovereign entity. Pak's government is manipulated by the Pak Army and their intelligence services. This is literal example of a helpless government and perhaps a failed nation.
Pak Gov. recently quoted "Masoor Azhar has been receiving dialysis treatment in Pak Army hospital". Need I say more?
Masood Azhar has been Osama bin Laden's favourite associate. According to one of journals, bin Laden hoisted a success party,when Masood Azhar was released in exchange for 144 souls in an airplane hijack.He is a wanted Terrorist in India. I bet,u can imagin the sort of 'peace' aftr knowing Pak harbours him.
Pls tell how Peace can be achieved when Pak entities are advocating Peace with India by killing Indian soldiers?
Do You Know? -
POK has never had problems with Terrorists/Insurgents. Does a Perpetrator ever complain about Insurgency?
One would simply become disappointed, if you pay careful attention to the results of numerous
'Peace Processes' that ended up with Indian soldiers being dead.
What’s bringing India and Pakistan to the brink of conflict is Pakistani military’s support for terrorists on its soil. The cause is not an isolated incident or one person - as this article’s title implicitly suggests. The cause is a decades long campaign of terror by Pakistan.
Pakistani trained terrorists have indulged in ethnic cleansing in Kashmir valley by driving out tens of thousands of Hindus. They’ve attacked the Indian parliament in the past and their leaders boast about these actions while releasing videos of the people who’ve indulged in them.
32
The International Community should step in. Kashmir should be de militarized and a UN-peacekeeping force should be called in to govern. The Kashmiris should be given 3 to 5 years to decide whether they want to be independent, join Pakistan or join India.
But all this will require the International community and dialogue from both sides.
3
@WAQAR AMJAD With all due respect, the UN as an organization is an abject failure and is not representative of the world as it exists in 2019. Its peace keeping forces have never solved anything unless the parties to a dispute agree to solve it themselves. Also, India (and Pakistan) are sovereign states that will not allow UN to have jurisdiction in areas that they control.
7
Look closer Mr Amjad and ask the UN to help out the Palestinians if you really care. Kashmiris in India are far better off than their brethren in Pakistan occupied Kashmir and certainly your Palestinian neighbors.
A basic question is why so many governments want to rule over peoples who don't want to be ruled by them. The usual result is permanent conflict and less prosperity for the ruling country, not more.Does some structural flaw in modern bureaucracy cause this senseless drive for control?
3
@jjames at replicounts
The basic answer to your question is that no country wants to give up land, and the water that flows through it. People are replaceable, governments have had no problem killing them or relocating them. Countries claim to be democracies but will not tolerate separatist notions.
1
@jjames at replicounts Not so in the case of the US where the North didn't let "peoples who don't want to be ruled by them" to secede. The point is no sovereign country worth its salt will easily let a region secede because of a militant armed struggle. In this case the stakes are even higher for India because of the fundamentalist Islamism that most of the terrorist groups operating in Kashmir espouse.
1
@jjames at replicounts dude jammu and kashmir was integrated with india on some terms, but the pakistan wants to occupy whole jammu and kashmir. They murdered and ousted around 200k hindus of the kashmir to make it a islamic state. Pakistan can't get in a conventional war with india as they have lost 4 times to india in the war so they support terrorists to attack india and brainwash muslims of kashmir against india.
The recent wars in the Middle East will tell us there is no winner in any war. Wars will generate more terrorists for sure. Bold initiatives for peace talks may be the only sane solution. Strong Leaders will not hesitate to solve problems with genuine diplomacy.
6
One important fact that cannot be overlooked is that both Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists are out to prove that nations and societies cannot exist on secular principles. Hence their premise that muslim majority Kashmir cannot be a part of secular India ( the actions of some fringe hindu right wingers being an aberration rather than the norm). When Pakistani authorities and Kashmiri Jihadists talk about freedom for Kashmir, what they want is Islamic governance wherein women are reduced to subservience as in Talibani Afghanistan. They want rule by Sharia wherein equality before law doesn't exist between believers and non-believers. They want blasphemy punishable by death. That is the future of Kashmir that the so called freedom fighters of Kashmir and their backers in Pakistan want. The plight of Kashmiri Pandits ( Hindus, i.e. non-Muslims) who were chased out of Kashmir by separatists under threat of forced marriages with Muslim militants, deprivation of life and property clearly illustrates the 'freedom' that Kashmiri separatists want. It is the freedom to oppress women, non-Muslims and impose a medieval Islamist way of life in a region that has historically and culturally been a part of India. The situation in Kashmir is thus no different from the fight against ISIS. It is a no-brainer as to where the civilized world's sympathies should lie. As for the stance of Pakistan, Jihad in foreign lands is their state policy. Peace then, seems exceedingly difficult.
64
@MS
India is first and foremost a Hindu state - not a secular state.
1
@asfghzs Yes. That is why the population of the minorities in India continues to rise and why they continue to do better economically, politically and culturally than their cousins in Pakistan. A religious state that affords all this to their minorities! Picture that!
2
@asfghzs — are you bragging or complaining?
These are all adults from another era who grew older, but never- ever grew up. It may seem odd coming from someone who is an American as per our own infantile politicians, however when people ask me where I am from I tell the the truth, "I'm from California..."
2
@Ephemerol
You might want to be a little more specific if you wish to be convincing.
The problems between Pakistan and India are complex, to say the least. There are enough blames to go around. However, Pakistan’s economy has continued to be weak and neither the present government nor the previous governments have focused on the growth of their own economy. They also have a number of internal sectarian problems, that continue to go unaddressed. Pakistan government has been using the tactics of starting something with India to divert attention of their own populations from their from their own problems. This is one such incident and nothing more. Pakistan government should focus more on education and growth of their own country.
14
@Arati
I understand the sentiments behind this comment, but neither the writer of this article nor anyone who is concerned cares about the internal situation of both the countries. It would be rather hypocrisy to blame others totally, however democracy which is the most successful form of governing people suggests that PEOPLE'S WILL is the ingredient behind a legitimate government. Huge military presence in JK is indication that its not acceptable to kashmiris whatever is going on. Blames will never result in peace
6
We should learn to not meddle with other's business.
Thank you New York Times for this wonderful article. It brings to light the root cause of the problem between the two countries. The solution to the crisis is complex as the other comments highlight but I wanted to bring to light that an important step is for folks in both countries to stop the hate for each other and to start to empathize and to love their neighbors. Only then can there be long-lasting regional peace and prosperity. Let's do our part to promote solution focused, pro-friendship and peaceful comments and to outdo the abusive and hate spreading comments/trends by individuals of both countries. Lets make peace, not war.
10
@JL
All the pro-peace talk is good in theory, in the real world when an invader attacks your home, you have to defend yourself with whatever means.
The unhappy saga of post-Partition Kashmir offers no shortage of blame to be distributed to all participants. But while the representation of independent India as being secular and tolerant is mostly true historically, Modi's more recent appeal has been explicitly to intolerance and Hindu nationalism. And he has an election around the corner that is shaping up to be closer than expected.
From the standpoint of Modi's temptation to opportunistically play the nationalism card, the timing of this suicide bombing could hardly have been worse. Even though he is always at risk of being undercut by the Pakistani military, in this particular instance Khan may possess the greater potential for exercising restraint.
9
@woofer
Imran Khan is just a front for the Pakistani military, he has no independent policy. The 2018 Pakistani election was the biggest sham in its 70 years of existence. The terrorist attack is gift to the Indian right wing. India is secular because the Hindu religion is a secular religion. Every Indian family has their own god, their own scripture and their own unique way of observing their religion. The Hindu religion has never had any problem with atheism and homosexuality so why should it have a problem with other religions.
Mr. Peer makes good points about Kashmiri Muslim sub-nationalism going back to 1947. At the time led to split in the main Kashmiri tanzeem (political movement) into Muslim and secular national factions. The latter decided to put its lot with India, and the former with Pakistan. Nobody knows more about it than Mr. Peer who is a Kashmiri himself and has been closely involved with the civil society movement there. However, it must be recognized that the violent only started in the 1990s with radical Islamization and "jihad" sponsored from across the border. The way forward is possible only if first Pakisatan decides to put a stop to sponsorship of terrorist violence, also referred to certain sections inside Kashmir valley as fedayeen violence. It is possible to understand terrorist violence, why young people take to it, but it is never possible to condone it or rationalize it. Political mobilization and non-violent protests to force political settlement should continue.
18
Kashmir problem is not as simple as the present Article suggests. It needs to be contained as best it can be. Pakistan is ruled by Military right from the start in 1947, and it has used all the time get money from USA.
11
Unfortunately there is no clear path forward in Kashmir. The unofficial border has not shifted since partition and is unlikely to do so. Why is the problem so hard?
1) No Indian leader can politically afford to appear weak on Kashmir. Much is made of Modi exploiting the situation cynically to improve his political fortune, but likely Congress or another government would have behaved similarly.
2) No Pakistani leader can politically afford to wash their hands off Kashmir. Theoretically, the military support from Pakistan could be stopped, but that would be the beginning of the end of Pakistani military's well entrenched position in Pakistani politics and society. Who needs a military if there is no enemy?
3) There are no military options even without consideration of the nuclear weapons. Jingoism tends to build support for military action, but a depression sets in when body bags start to come home. So military action is likely to be of "feel good" variety not something that changes the situation on the ground. In any case, it is hard to imagine a well defined military plan. What would be the military objective?
One can imagine that a truly bold leadership on both sides makes a "grand bargain" which would consist of demilitarization of the entire region and an open border. But it is not likely in the near future.
21
@Jaspal
>but that would be the beginning of the end of Pakistani military's well entrenched position in Pakistani politics and society. Who needs a military if there is no enemy?
Ahh, the fantasy of Hindus everywhere. To defang Pakistan's military so it can be bullied by India just like Nepal, Bangla & Sri Lanka. Funnily enough, the recent episode only rallied people around the Pak military even more. India's nationalism and aggression is only going to fuel militarism in Pakistan & Indian-occupied-Kashmir.
3
The other component in this story is that the region has been experiencing a severe drought. Saffron production - a major source of revenue has been plummeting. A severe drought tied to Global Warming has been cited as a contributing factor to the Syrian War- as well as unrest in Africa. India and Pakistan may have pulled back for now - but if the region becomes more desperate due to the drought - there will be more and more of theses events.
12
Open border with India is only permanent solution for complete progress of Pakistan. For that to happen, Pakistan needs to take a whole lot of steps unilaterally, then only India can put some steps forward.
3
@Sivaram Pochiraju Why dont you sit down and talk with Pakistan and settle the Kashmir problem once and for all, then there is no problem opening up the border and we will be very happy to have peace and progress and Indians are welcome to come and go as they wish to Pakistan and Vice Versa, problem is your extremist Hindu nationalist party in power and Mr Modi who feels the only way is his way or the highway, this will never work with Pakistan, we will continue to give moral support to our brothers in Kashmir and speak for them.
The author has raised a question you will hardly find an answer to let alone be asked in India. There is no sobering reflection in any segment of Indian society as to why Kashmir continues to be a black eye for the world’s largest democracy. During the peak of suicide bombing across the world, Kashmir hardly witnessed any until this one by Adil Dar. The causes laid out by the author in this opinion piece should be evaluated by Indian intelligentsia and policy makers. Unfortunately, the rage and jingoism in India is at its peak driven by their hindu nationalist Prime Minister. It is revealing and also surprising how someone like Mr. Modi who was banned from
Entering western capitals before he became PM, is elected by India which seems to be doing so well throughout the world in culture, economy, technology, and academia.
21
I can only speak for myself and my friends/ relatives with whom I have discussed the election. There was widespread support for Modi in 2014 and it was across religious communities. People underestimate how much Indians are frustrated with the Congress party - they are unbelievably corrupt and they are controlled by a single family. The vote was basically an anti-Congress vote.
In addition, Indians believed the Supreme Court when it cleared Modi of wrong-doing in the riots. They believed that he would revitalize the economy. Lastly there is a widespread belief in the inherent secularism of India - it was thought unlikely that the BJP could alter that. Now that Modi has under-delivered on the economy and we see more communal incidents, I think the election in 2019 will be significantly closer; unfortunately on the other side we still have Congress and the same corrupt family. 1.2 billion citizens deserve better than these two choices.
14
Thanks for sharing such valuable and intimate insight. What about progressive Indians, is there a yearning for a third force to break the hold of BJP and Congress? AAP was seen as a breath of fresh air but it has disappeared.
2
@Farrukh
I actually think most of the urban middle class is progressive - in the sense that we all go to school and work with people from different religious or ethnic backgrounds. I don't think hate-speech against a minority group will give anyone much votes. But I also don't know that a third party will get any traction unless they come up with a candidate who is a persuasive speaker and has a well-thought out economic plan. Ultimately people just want jobs. But if a rich country like the US can elect Trump, I'm not sure we should expect miracles here (no offense intended).
1
This article puts me in mind of an incentive policy implemented by Indian side. Couple of years back, all top ranks in elite Indian administrative services were doled out to Kashmiri youths of various religious sects. In the aftermath of said event, nothing came out of that quarter. Looks like those who could be dolled up into elitism are safe. Rest are dispensable.
3
This article gives out cliches similar to what you'd hear during the elections: both sides (fill in India/Pakistan or Democrats/Republicans) are to blame, no party talks about real issues. Those who know the real stories know that even if both sides are to blame, who is to blame more and who has continuously created issues in the first place.
For example, Jaish-e-Mohammed, the main instigator behind this violence is declared a terrorist organization by US intelligence as well. Why isn't there more international pressure on Pakistan to stop supporting terrorists. How did that Kashmiri kid get access to 250kg of RDX (C4). There are news articles claiming that Indian forces hit the area which was already vacated by terrorist organization during the earthquake of many years ago, so Pakistan did have terrorist camps and it is not like they are gone forever, they have just established camps somewhere else.
Easy to blame both sides, but when you look closely enough, one knows which side is really to blame.
35
@VS
Kashmir is not a priority for the US or any other major power. They need Pakistan's cooperation to get out of the Quagmire of Afghanistan. Kashmir will remain where it is because Pakistan's stand on the whole issue does not have any space for a solution. Pakistan wants more territory without giving anything in return, hardly a realistic policy for a state which is always on a financial brink and seeking bailouts from this power or that.
3
@VS
Protecting "Dharma" is the Sole forte of "True" Brahmins and "True" Kysthrias and nobody elses.
https://totallyfreepress.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-a-k-a-tim-osman/
Recently Imran Khan started talking peace. Whenever Pakistan’s prime minister starts talking peace, immediately there is a terrorist attack on India. The Pakistani deep state in action.
63
@Venti So true, and why would Pakistan do this on the eve of the arrival of the Saudi Prince MBS for such an important investment conference?
As well as the blast in Iran, what would Pakistan gain? Only a fool would believe Pakistan would be behind it when it is Pakistan that is trying to tamp down terrorism in the region, and trying to bring peace in Afghanistan.
Pakistan has lost 70,000 civilians, yet we never attacked any nation, despite knowing the terrorists were in Afghanistan and some were aided by India as admitted by India's Ajit Doval who was secretly recorded saying India is making trouble for Pakistan in Balochistan via Afghanistan. This is on youtube.,... Yet the Americans, the French, British, and others completely ignore the pain of Pakistan, and just cannot stand a powerful Nuclear armed Muslim nation, that is what bites them the most, its not about terrorism so much as to blame Pakistan and keep it weak.
@Rick Pakistan never 'overtly' attacked any nation mainly because its military is busy running the Pakistani state and not doing what a typical military does (defend/protect). Covertly, it has been breeding terrorists by the thousands and exporting the medieval ideology of fundamentalist Islamism to India, Afghanistan, Iran and others. Pakistani army tried to distinguish terrorists as 'good' and 'bad' and the loss of the lives they suffered were chasing what they deemed were the 'bad' terrorists (aka the ones that turned on their Pakistani patrons). However, they have been perfectly content supporting the 'good' terrorists like Osama bin Laden, Masood Azhar, Hafiz Saeed and their like, who do yeoman service to the state policy of destabilizing their neighbors.
Thank you for shining a bright light on the oppression and bloodshed of Kashmiris by the Indian military. Fighting insurgency is no excuse for that brutality. Democracy, however little of it is left in Kashmir, does die in darkness.
I sure hope the gesture of peace in returning the captured pilot is not the calm before the storm. With all the social media's reach, I hope that all the evolved minds in both countries can persuade their people to not get trapped in their leader's diabolical plots.
7
@Really__??
How about shedding a few tears about the Hindu genocide at the hands of Islamic terrorists and their supporters?
2
@Really__??
Evolved minds made up their minds what Pakistan represents long ago. A few terrorist attacks followed by pontification is not going make friends or win territory.
Ultimate responsibility for the Kashmir conflict, as indeed all conflict on the subcontinent between Hindus and Muslims, lies in the ill-conceived Partition of India - which alone caused staggering casualties. (Many parties can be blamed for that event, but that is also a fool's errand.) In the modern age, the only path forward is to accept the line of control as the de facto boundary, and make peace with it. India cannot now be reunified any more than a broken egg can be made whole. The best we can do is make an omelet, and share it. Over eons, humans learned to collect into every larger groups, for protection and economic efficiencies, till we reached the emergence of countries. The final (and critical) view is that we share a single planet, whose resources are limited -- and all boundaries other than the planet are illusory.
28
@PT
PT, after 72-years they are not gong to accept LOC as boundary. Let's be practical. Let the portion of Kashmir where Muslims are in the majority join Pakistan. That will end all the violence and suicide bombing. Too much blood and treasure spilled on this piece of land that is not a security asset for India. Read Stu Freeman's blog - makes a lot of sense.
@PT. And a pox on both their houses if they fail to see that. Religious posturing seems to be the underlying motivation for both sides. Magical thinking will kill us all.
@PT very well said!
There are as many, if not more, Muslims in India than there are in Pakistan. India is a developing country, still mostly poor and life is hard. So I am sure the Muslims in India have very legitimate grievances, but most would say that they are better off being in India. The first partition didn't work out so good so it doesn't make sense to continue with the same thinking. If every religious group is given a right to self determination Punjab, Nagaland, Mizoram and Meghalaya could also demand separation.
11
@Kedar
>If every religious group is given a right to self determination Punjab, Nagaland, Mizoram and Meghalaya could also demand separation.
Precisely the reason why the concept of India as a state rather than as a geographical term in and of itself is ill conceived. Even Churchil recognized that India was never one single state as its attempting to be today, but rather a geographical indicator for the various kingdoms, dynasties and small states that comprised the region. The British Raj should have been balkanized even further than it was in 1947 - "India" would be far more prosperous today if it was a dozen smaller states than what it is today.
4
Kashmir will remain stuck for years to come. The last thing India/Pakistan want is a new sovereign nation adding more uncertainty to an already complex geopolitical situation. Terrible circumstances for the Kashmiris.
4
@Amin Uddin
Kashmiris should learn to obey the law where they live or move elsewhere, there is a big world out there. If some Kashmiris are somehow hoping that the India-Pakistan conflict will somehow lead to them becoming an independent country, they will have a long wait. Pakistani held Kashmir now has a Punjabi majority because Pakistan never cared about niceties like indigenous rights. India is also one or two attacks away from the path Pakistan has already taken.
1
Kashmir is a complex issue .... and everyone involved is suffering except the politicians from both countries. One of the key element missing in this article which looks at Kashmir's past is the Kashmiri Pandit Exodus orchestrated by radical muslims and separatists in 1991. There are many narratives to the Kashmir story and there is no single truth. Hope this issue gets resolved for the people of Kashmir.
18
Where exactly is the rational sense in sending military aircraft to bomb territory because of one lone suicide bomber? It seems that at least the pilots of those aircraft saw that sense by bombing vacant uninhabited forest. They have eyes. They can see what they are targeting. But when the national leader calls for revenge and war, that's what is going to eventually happen.
During one Christmas in WW1 the opposing troops famously crossed lines and visited and celebrated with the the enemy. When the generals found out they soon put an end to that and made sure their troops got serious about the business of killing. When the war ended the troops continued the killing up to the very last minute of the declared end of the conflict even though they knew that an end of the war had been negotiated.
11
@Aristotle Gluteus Maximus
The US invaded Afghanistan to avenge the 9/11 Twin Towers destruction, so why are Indian lives not important enough. India has had a dozen bombings in the past 20 years, all traced back to Pakistan. Jaish-E-Mohammed, a terrorist group that operates out of Pakistan has claimed responsibility for the latest bombing but we know Pakistan will not pursue any action against Jaish leaders because they are only conducting what is Pakistani state policy and they all operate in Pakistan with tacit support of the Pakistani military. Osama Bin Laden was finally tracked to his hideout in Pakistan after 10 years and US still buys the fiction that he lived in a garrison town, a half mile from the Pakistani military officers training academy for a decade without the knowledge of the military in a country where nothing happens without the knowledge of the military and its intelligence services. US should apologize to Afghanistan because they invaded the wrong country after 9/11 because of Afghanistan's image but could not take on the real rogue state.
33
@Aristotle Gluteus Maximus
Please read and watch about Mumbai attacks. The terrorist attacks on India have been relentless - bleeding India with thousand cuts being the philosophy.
Those who think Pakistan would be happy or stop with Kashmir if they get it are sorely mistaken. The issues have deeper cultural and historical reasons, most of which are petty.
@Rahul
So, first of all, you think that if the USA does something then it is the defining standard of what is right and correct in the world? George Bush is an idiot, was an idiot for starting his war of terror on the Muslim world because of the 9/11 attacks.
I don't see the logic of arguing the worth of Indian lives as a rationalization for going to war to destroy even more lives.
But, let's get real. The world is over populated, India especially so. A good destructive killing war is needed to thin out the riffraff and make life something to look forward to again.
Pakistan knows it cannot take Kashmir and will never have it, India will never let it go and if it does, it can have serious repercussions on India's multi culture and multi religious unity.
All the Pakistanis including the Pakistani military knows the current status quo and the existing border is the solution. But Pakistan which defines itself in terms of anti India, anti Hindu needs an enemy and an issue, specially the army to keep Pakistan united and to keep its grip over the country. As against this India has defined itself since 1947 in terms of industrial and economic development. And the difference is obvious and in front of the world.
To make peace the ball is in Pakistan's court. So to end this Pakistan has to give up calls for annexation of entire Kashmir, accept present boundary lines and stop using its nuclear arms and missiles as a hedge against Indian action. Their nukes and missiles have become their blackmail weapons.
And last but not least, Pakistan ought to give up institutionalized hate campaign against India and Hindus. I call it institutionalized because school curriculum mandated and sanctioned by government preaches hatred against India and Hindus.
One cannot preach hatred to instigate general public and then talk about peace.
82
@RSB: Pakistan can't call for annexation of the entire region of Kashmir: it already gave a good portion of it away to China.
15
@RSB, A secondary aim of Pakistan's military establishment has been to endlessly bleed India with a thousand cuts through the insurgency. This is why large attacks on India follow any peace moves or settlement between India and elected civilian governments in Pakistan. Sadly the civilians do not control all of the military intelligence establishment in Pakistan.
@RSB
Actually the “ institutionalized hate campaign” that you refer to, appears to be stronger in India. ordinary Pakistanis dont feel the hatred that you seem to be describing, perhaps because we are a smaller country, love most Of Bollywood, have access to most Indian channels etc, and actually arent that pushed about India.there were peace rallies supporting Abhinandans release, and there is a genuine appreciation that people ( soldiers too) suffer in conflict. What i see of many Indians , they have very stereotypical views of Pakistanis, mostly see us as a bunch of trigger happy terrorists. Theres a lingering grievance that we “ broke” up India, perhaps u have much less exposure to us, i understand pakistani tv channels arent aired in India, and movies are banned, so maybe you see us as less than human.
This is not to say that Pakistani intelligence agencies are not nasty pieces of work and JEM should be bombing ANYONE in India, but DO acknowledge that you are mistreating people in Kashmir? You are blinding them, using them as human shields, killing them... this is at heart an indigenous freedom movement ( perhaps concentrated in the Srinager valley).
I guess the best analogy would be that of Bangladesh. The Bengalis had genuine grievances, and their demand for self determination was a just one.Yes India helped them to break away, but the opportunity was provided by our own leaders because of their inability to treat their Bengali citizens with dignity.
2
Unfortunately, in this article and so many others on the recent topic of Kashmir, a sense of balance is missing from the reporting. Yes, the Kashmir conflict is an old one from the days of Partition. However, which other major power would allow itself to suffer terror attacks from organizations sponsored by its neighbor for decades (since 1989 in this case)? Would the US ask Israel to simply ignore an attack from Hamas, or condemn it for “escalation” when it rightly retaliates? Terrorist proxy wars are the only real industry in Pakistan, and must be stamped out for the benefit for the world and security of the US.
142
@Jon Adams: One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. What were the members of the Irgun? What were the American colonists who fought the British?
14
@Jon Adams
It’s interesting you cite the example of Israel. It’s almost a replica of the Pakistan-India situation: an incomplete or poorly executed land transfer or partition, one that did not consider the indigenous population and ultimately terms were unilaterally dictated by the stronger party.
If you want the proxy armies to be withdrawn, the world has the responsibility of addressing the original grievance. That does not mean giving it all away, it means compromise. Crushing the opposition through a maximalist position — as is happening in both situations— is a recipe for continued strife.
11
@stu But then how do you view the American Civil War?
Were the Southern secessionists correct in their wish for self-determination? Or was the Northern victory a good thing for human rights overall?
In that context, while this may have started as a movement for more autonomy, it has now been marred by religious fundamentalism, in no small part due to aid from Pakistan.
Not only was there was the violent expulsion of religious minorities from the valley, but militants have kidnapped members of their own religious community and repeatedly burned schools.
Indian army personnel who commit human rights violations should absolutely be held responsible.
But there is no possible way that the militants, who claim they are fighting for self-determination, represent a movement towards human rights or peace. Remember that the Afghanis once hailed the Taliban as "freedom fighters" as well.
8
Kashmir has unfortunately become a mini-Afghanistan of sorts in being the unlucky territory surrounded by two egotistical nations who would rather keep the fires stoking to meet their politico-militaristic agendas than to address the needs and welfare of the local Kashmiris.
Both can't / won't make tough compromises to to risk looking weak to their masses and would rather keep the issue boiling to feed their mega-military machines each end.
A nuclear-tinder box, it behoves many globally how the populace of 1.5 billion of both nations can potentially suffer the holocaustic-consequences if a nuclear war breaks out to satisfy the egos of both neighbours.
5
This is where identity politics inevitably leads. I hope that it never gets this bad in the United States.
2
@R. H. Clark: Yeah, who needs another John Brown or another Nat Turner disturbing the peace?
7
If a conflict goes on for decades, it is because the costs of the conflict are manageable and the political benefits to the leaders of the two sides are real and tangible. Neither side cares about Kashmir per se and both sides benefit from a continuation of low level hostilities.
5
@Murray Kenney
You are partially correct. The Kashmir conflict is manageable for India because Kashmir represents approximately 1 % of its Population and 1 % of its economy. The Kashmir insurgency is more of a blow to India's pride, ego and its vision where all religions and communities can thrive. India has a Sikh Majority state and Christian majority states so Indians ask themselves why it cannot have a Muslim majority state in one of the countries where most Muslims live in the world. Paradoxically it is Pakistan which cannot afford the conflict, it already lost half the country (Bangladesh) in its pursuit of Kashmir. The Pakistani military needs to keep the Kashmir conflict alive so that it can maintain its status as the 5th largest military in the world with an outsize claim on Pakistan's fragile resources. Dictators have ruled Pakistan for half its existence as a result of the Kashmir obsession and no elected head of government has completed their term in 70 years with military coups, judicial coups, assassinations, imprisonment, judicial murder, summary dismissal etc. being the norm how a government ends. Everybody accepts that in Pakistan the real power lies with the military and the elections are just a sham. Pakistan is in negotiations with IMF for its 22nd bailout in 70 years and the Kashmir conflict will end when finally Pakistan is revealed as a basket case 10 times the size and scale of Venezuela or Zimbabwe.
27
@Murray Kenney
Or it could be that one country defines itself by keeping the conflict alive or else lose all sense of identity and th early of that country will never allow peace because they will not have a job should that happen. Hint: It is not the secular country.
5
Both countries do not share the responsibility for the conflict, it is Pakistan alone which is stoking the conflict for three quarters of a century. India is a secular country where 22 major languages are spoken and people of every major religion live. More religions have originated in India than any other country in the world. More Muslims call India home than any other country except for Indonesia. Kashmir itself is a multi ethnic, multi religious state with sizeable Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist minorities. Kashmir can only survive in a liberal state like India. Witness that Muslim minority population has gone up India (from 9.8 % in 1947 to 14.2 % in 2017). Witness also that the minority population in Pakistan declined from 22 % to less than 2 % over the same period. Even Muslims from a different sect than the Punjabi Sunnis who dominate Pakistan are not safe in Pakistan with regular incidents to terrorize the Shias, Hazaras, Kalash, Ahmedis and the Balauch not to speak of the Hindus, Christians and Sikhs who have been wiped out. Did Basharat, Geelani and others speak up when Kashmiri Pandits were being massacred in the Valley? Sorry to inform the author that there is no divine right to sovereignty. India was divided once on the basis or religion and the world got the failed state of Pakistan. The world cannot afford another theocracy! The entire Kasmiri insurgency is funded by the Pakistani military to justify is raison d'être like the Sikh insurgency that came before.
204
@Rahul" First off, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs have not been wiped out in Pakistan though their numbers have certainly decreased. Second, the fact of the matter is that Kashmiri Muslims have been gravely mistreated ever since the Indian nation was founded and that continues to this day under the heavy handed of the military and a sharply pro-Hindu government. What's going on in the Vale is little different from Gaza and the West Bank under Israeli rule.
34
Actually it's different than the West Bank in an important respect: the Indian constitution prevents non-Kashmiris from settling in Kashmir since 1947. Even people who have a deceased parent who was Kashmiri are prohibited from buying land in Kashmir. There are no settlers from India overtaking Kashmiri land.
In addition there was a forced exodus of Kashmiri Hindus from the valley in 1989. Instead, in many instances Kashmiri Pandit homes were taken over by the people who were their long-time neighbors.
There are many Kashmiris (both Hindu and Muslim) settled throughout India and I have heard their stories. I don't believe that India has been correct with handling Kashmir, but the comparison to the West Bank is a false equivalence.
59
@stu freeman
I would say a minority population going from 22 % to 2 % in 70 years is close to a wipe out. The Hindus and Sikhs were mostly forced out during the bloodletting in the initial years but groups like Christians, Shia, Ahmedi and Hazara who supported Pakistan's creation bore the brunt of Pakistan's bigotry as they made deals with the devil who had no intention of keeping its bargain. Kashmiri Muslims enjoy more rights under the Indian constitution than the average Indian and the Indian government has desperately sought a deal which will allow it to save face and for Kashmir to stay in the union. China and Pakistan occupy parts of Kashmir but it is no secret that India will bargain away those claims if it can get a deal where it keeps its current territory and the insurgency ends. As far as the treatment of the Kashmiris is concerned, they are being treated no better or worse than the Sikhs during the Sikh insurgency of an earlier generation or the people of Northeast India during the China sponsored Maoist insurgency which went on close to 50 years. You have to understand that this is a tough neighborhood, the breakup of India (or any other country) is in nobody's interest. If you want rights, you have to obey laws, that applies to Kashmir, Palestine, America or elsewhere. If some misguided residents of Kashmir are provoking the military under the propaganda of a foreign country, they are getting exactly what they deserve.
47
Pakistan, much like the prodigal son of the Indian sub-continent, is a failed state. After 70 years of independence, India has never had a military coup while no one has ever completed a term as Pakistan's head of state. I would consider it journalistic malpractice to ignore this and draw some sort of false equivalence. Pakistan’s leadership have had nothing to offer with regards to good governance. Instead, Pakistan (particularly through ISI) provides critical safe haven and sanctuary to the Taliban’s leadership, advice on military and diplomatic issues, and assistance with fund raising. Shouldn’t India make sure that Pakistan doesn’t get away with playing a similar role in Kashmir?
130
@Kedar: The Kashmiris (most especially, the residents of the Vale) should have the right to live in a "failed" state if such is their wish or to an independent state, which is the third possibility. India can make sure that Pakistan doesn't create problems similar to those that beset Afghanistan by just giving the Kashmiris the right of self-determination.
13
@Kedar In the case of Kashmir, it is clear both countries have mistreated the people and region. The fair thing would be to allow a referendum on independence but neither Pakistan or India care what the people of Kashmir want.
6
@Adrien
A referendum wouldn't be appropriate because, as @stu freeman correctly pointed out "Further, the heavily Muslim Vale of Kashmir (the fulcrum of the region's problems) at one time had a large Hindu population, most of whom moved away out of fear following the tribulations of 1947." The migration of Pandits out of Kashmir
has continued well past 1947. To say that India is the aggressor while so many Pandits have migrated out of Kashmir is contradictory. The military is a blunt instrument and typically doesn't interact well with the general population. Every insurgency is bound to gain the sympathy of the local population by just creating an environment that necessitates military presence.
10
The west is having a bit of a melt down these days. China doesn't care about anyone, and neither does Russia. The EU is probably the best place to look for allies who may help, but then, they also may see India as the likely ally in the region. Plus, the EU is dealing with UKs tantrum. Speaking of tantrums, our president routinely throws them and he could throw a tantrum regarding this issue, but I would not suspect any substantive input from the guy. It is unfortunate what is happening in Kashmir, but we don't understand it and quite frankly I never understand any long standing wars. What is to be done? That is always the thing that is lacking. Solutions typically are only good for one side and that is why the wars continue.
Fight to the death for the land or give it up and leave. It is clear that Hindus and Muslim cannot live together. I think the same of most people and more specifically all religions. Your God is the right God and all others are against your God. So, you are supported by God in whatever you choose to do. If you are too weak to win the war it's likely because your God wants it that way. The mysteries of Gods. You can't live without them and usually you live degraded with them. Am I right?
10
@Chris
You are wrong. Hindus, Muslims,Christians,Sikhs ,Zoroastrians and other religions can live together.United States and India are living examples.
Hindus believe in multiplicity of diverse religious paths to reach godhead. Multiple contradictory religious sects including atheists exist within Hinduism . Polytheist tradition does not allow Hindus to claim ther god /gods is better than others
5
@Chris: Most religions can co-exist and do not have passages in their 'holy books' calling for the extermination of all people who don't share their faith. The religions that are intolerant are doomed to failure in a diverse world.
1
@Chris Hindus and Muslims do live together in secular india. Something that makes pakistan unsure and insecure about its reason de entre.