How India mistreats Kashmir

[Tronic]

Read the post more intently before bragging bullocks. The context was regarding your bringing in the 1947 partition.

The context may be the partition, but your argument still doesn't add up. No one asked the Kashmiris what they wanted in '47, so your point was moot. You stated, "People were given a choice to chose their loyalities," and I merely corrected you, no they weren't! I'm not saying we should go back in history, but just saying that we should not lie to ourselves. It doesn't help anyone.

And my argument stands, as vindicated by the present policy that is endorsed by all most EVERYBODY who matter or who have authority on the subject in hand.

That's again not true. There is a wide debate on this policy and a big push to revoke AFSPA in many parts of Kashmir and India. I know where I stand, and I know where you stand. Leave it at that. AFSPA will have to go today or tomorrow, and the pressure against it continues to build up.

As I have said before, I don't believe you have the authority or qualifications to challenge the current approach towards addressing the Kashmir insurgency, that is endorsed by people who have real-life experience and serving authority on the matter. Had your ideological pontification had any realpolitik or practical credibility, I am sure many in the decision loop would have advocated the same and the same would have been implemented. About time for you to smell the coffee.

It's being challenged by a lot more folks than just me. Be it the National Security Advisory Board for the North East (National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) for repealing AFSPA : 21st nov12 ~ E-Pao! Headlines) or even a former GOC (4:35 Truth Vs Hype: Kashmir - The riddle of AFSPA - YouTube). AFSPA continues to become a bigger question mark every passing day. It is rather time for you to smell the coffee.

I repeat, "even if that warrants disproportionate force", when it comes to the question of India's territorial integrity. It IS that beautiful, grow up.

I think it is you who needs to realize that Chechnya isn't actually a beautiful example. The Russians have been fighting there for the last three centuries, and continue to fight to this day. It's the worst example to ape and your short-sightedness fails to see the wound being left open to be exploited by India's rivals at any moment of weakness in India's future. Maybe there's a reason the Chinese have chosen to settle their land-disputes with all their other neighbours except with India, with whom they choose to keep open a dispute over some worthless rocks.

You have brandished your nonchalance for the nation's territorial integrity on two instances already, argueing in favour of secessionists forces on religious and ethenic lines and have been confronted by ALL your countrymen with NOBODY endorsing your reasoning and commentary.

Actually, I have only voiced my support for the PEOPLE, never the secessionists. Everything else is people's insecurities at work.

All I have done is tried to put in a realization that if you do not win over the people, you will never win over the land, and will continue to be embroiled in wars for centuries.

[Double Edge]

You are scared that everything will go back to the 90s, so a repressive state is your answer. The North Eastern states have had brutal laws in place for more than 40 years now! To say that the only way for India to remain intact is through brutal and repressive laws, it reinforces an idea that India is, in fact, a non-viable state!

A couple of disturbed areas along with a Maoist insurgency does not make for a non-viable state :)

The Paks lost a significant portion of their country in '71 and have been under worse and are still not a non-viable state. So lets not apply this 'failed' thinking towards our country as well.

The only way for India to grow as one society is through recognizing that injustice actually tears our country apart, not meld it together. It is a sense of justice that binds people together, it is justice which makes us one society, and any threat to that sense of justice undermines the entire system. Sooner or later, the country will fall apart if it continues on this path. There is nothing to show that the North Easterners feel any more Indian than they did 40 years ago. Infact, I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite is true today. It can easily be seen through the rise to power of regional political parties, who rally people around the cause for justice.

What are we trading for to provide the Kashmiris with their rightful claim on justice ? Nothing

Is there any peace accord in place with the Paks to enable such ? Nope

Therefore there are no protections whatsoever should AFSPA be removed nor guarantees that an insurgency will not take root and inflame the region. Remember, all the Paks need for a short term tactical gain is to put Kashmir on the front pages of western media. Our job is to deny them.

So lets not put the cart before the horse, moral values and justice notwithstanding.

Now, we have stated that we will not talk about Kashmir until the unfinished business of 26/11 reaches a satisfactory conclusion. That process is also going nowhere. We never seem to have enough proof to get at the masterminds behind 26/11. The UPA or any other party cannot let this one slide or they will pay a heavy price at the next elections for relinquishing their duty to get to the bottom of that atrocity. Failure to do so means we give the Paks carte blanche to attack anywhere else in the country with impunity.

Unfortunately, the Kashmiris are just going to have to get in line here.

The greater factor for wanting Kashmir is water, more than anything else. Kashmir feeds major water sources of India and is the lifeline for Pakistan. The ideological angle is also there, playing second fiddle to the water, and India is doing a terrible job at making it's ideological argument.

Am beginning to suspect its more a case of Pak domestic politics than geopolitics. How do the Pak leaders tell their people that they have to make do with less water than the previous year, surely the Indian must be hogging the water, How dare they (!~)

Take the Cauvery dispute between my state and the Tammys. They say we are not releasing the agreed to amount of Cauvery water to them. But the real problem is the monsoons failed this year. Therefore we do not have enough water for ourselves before we can give them their share. This has resulted in no end of jousting between our party & their party. This circus will continue until next year where we hope the monsoons will be more plentiful and the dispute magically goes away like it did the last time it came up in 2006 for similar reasons, a failed monsoon.

There are no issues with the Indus water treaty as you well know, we never held any water back even during war time. So take the Cauvery dispute and apply it here as well. Monsoons succeed everybody is happy otherwise there is much hot air & contention.

Interlocutors were a very recent step. Should have happened long ago. That said, it's still a step in the right direction, even if it's a very small one.

Regardless, it is an effort by the state to understand Kashmiri grievances in their own terms.

Until the interlocutors report comes out in public, is discussed in Parliament as well as in the media the bulk of us are not really going to have much of a basis to talk more objectively about the subject.

[Deltacamelately]

The context may be the partition, but your argument still doesn't add up. No one asked the Kashmiris what they wanted in '47, so your point was moot. You stated, "People were given a choice to chose their loyalities," and I merely corrected you, no they weren't! I'm not saying we should go back in history, but just saying that we should not lie to ourselves. It doesn't help anyone.

You brought in the partition, hence the context. The Kashmiris were represented by their ruling King, just like many other Princely States and hence the decision will be considered legit by the GoI.

That's again not true. There is a wide debate on this policy and a big push to revoke AFSPA in many parts of Kashmir and India. I know where I stand, and I know where you stand. Leave it at that. AFSPA will have to go today or tomorrow, and the pressure against it continues to build up.

Tomorrow's ground realities will dictate whether AFSPA stays or not. As of now, the Army requires it. We have no ambitions to enforce such in Kashmir to "rule" that place. However, as long as the government wants the IA to conduct CI, the AFSPA is the only immunity against the militants, so it stays now.

It's being challenged by a lot more folks than just me. Be it the National Security Advisory Board for the North East (National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) for repealing AFSPA : 21st nov12 ~ E-Pao! Headlines) or even a former GOC (4:35 Truth Vs Hype: Kashmir - The riddle of AFSPA - YouTube). AFSPA continues to become a bigger question mark every passing day. It is rather time for you to smell the coffee.

Questioning and revoking/abrogating are two different things. The very fact that AFSPA is still in place vindicates that policy makers view it as vital to our efforts in Kashmir.

I think it is you who needs to realize that Chechnya isn't actually a beautiful example. The Russians have been fighting there for the last three centuries, and continue to fight to this day. It's the worst example to ape and your short-sightedness fails to see the wound being left open to be exploited by India's rivals at any moment of weakness in India's future. Maybe there's a reason the Chinese have chosen to settle their land-disputes with all their other neighbours except with India, with whom they choose to keep open a dispute over some worthless rocks.

Your thoughts. I am not beholding the Chechen operation as something to be happy about. Note I said, once the Chechens sought guns, there was nothing else left for the Russian military than to respond with violence. Same in the case of Kashmir, you wield guns, you invite bullets. You bring more violence to bear on the defending security forces, you invite disproportionate force. There's no other alternative. You seek long term solutions to political problem, you better drop guns and get into the discussion room with the civilian leadership and spare us folks. Even the Army believes that political problems are best solved by political solutions, as long as secessionist forces do not grab the guns and challenge the territorial integrity of the state itself. That brings us in.

Actually, I have only voiced my support for the PEOPLE, never the secessionists. Everything else is people's insecurities at work.

Unfortunately, that's exactly the opposite of what your posts in these two debates have demonstrated here.

All I have done is tried to put in a realization that if you do not win over the people, you will never win over the land, and will continue to be embroiled in wars for centuries.

Armed forces are technically not designed to actually "win hearts" of people who challenge the writ of the state, which they are part of. Not while the dissidents have not fully consumed every possible political process/solutions. Not while a substantial portion of them wield fire arms, rape and loot fellow-beings and publicly showcase their allegiance to an overtly hostile enemy, including raising her Flag.

[lemontree]

Your city elects the Shiv Sena and puts them into power, while not a single Kashmiri has ever voted for Geelani. This makes your argument lame....SS is legitimatized by the people's vote, Hurriyat is not.

Please understand Shiv Sena is a political party, their airm is to gain power through the ballot. They have facist policies but are proud Indians.
The Hurriyat is the overt sessionist wing of the ISI. Their aim is not to get legitmacy through the ballot, but through the bullet.

Once you have understood the nuances of guerilla warfare you will understand the aim and actions of the different factions.

I have seen Kashmiri processions/protests at the deaths on civilians and even at the deaths of fellow Kashmiri soldiers.

Never any mass protest at the death of a terrorist. Though, as your example of Geelani shows, even if 4 people gather to protest the death of a terrorist, you will willingly label it as "Kashmiris protest at the death of a terrorist". This is exactly what you have done with Geelani's example.

See the link below and educate yourself. The link shows the funeral of a killed HM terrorist.....looks much more that 4 people gathered there. http://english.sina.com/world/p/2010/0305/307270.html

That's a misnomer. A terrorist is only a terrorist if and when he targets civilians, and if the Kashmiris are being targeted, than I highly doubt they will support the terrorists. On the other hand, if the target are the armed forces, than technically, those are not "terrorists". Either way, had the Kashmiris chosen sides, the Kashmiris would not have defied death threats from the LeT and a call for boycott from the Hurriyat to go out and vote in one of the largest electoral turnouts to elect their representatives. Ofcourse, the bigots on both sides will always seek to look at the Hurriyat as the representatives of the Kashmiris, no matter how much the Kashmiris defy the Hurriyat and elect their own representatives.

Things are not as simple and black and white....