----- Original Message -----
From: Niloufer Bhagwat
To: Seema Mustafa
Cc: Feroze Mithiborwala
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: A must read, The Kashmir Crisis: Playing ‘hard state’ by Seema
Mustafa
What did Afzal Guru know about alleged surrendering militants and alleged
counter terrorism operations and what did the other youth know about 26/11
collaboration between intelligence agencies which made their elimination a
priority , their former criminal record became useful in the elimination .
Creating unrest in Kashmir assists in the global war of terror of which India
is an important flank tied as it is to finance capital of London and Wall
Street which all the talks about BRICS does nothing to camouflage . Are we
about to deliver up Kashmir to the Balkanization policy for most countries on
the agenda of Corporate policy for the world including of major banks and
financial institutions which dictate wars, sectarian strife and the breaking up
of countries using the religious , sectarian or other card . Finally it is the
money trail which is important for societies as much as individuals ........
Several parties in India have forged a consensus and we are seeing this
consensus being played out even as politics collapses .
Niloufer Bhagwat
----- Original Message -----
From: Feroze Mithiborwala
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:27 PM
Subject: A must read, The Kashmir Crisis: Playing ‘hard state’ by Seema
Mustafa
Dear All, Seema Mustafa has exposed the Congress startegies as it
prepares for the general elections, whilst using the hanging of Afzal Guru as
another 'card'. Its shameful to say the least, as the Indian State continues
with this monstrosity against the people of Kashmir.
in solidarity, feroze
Playing ‘hard state’
SEEMA MUSTAFA The Congress’ calculation is clear: it wants to appropriate
the “hard on terror” image that the BJP and its prime ministerial aspirant,
Narendra Modi, swear by.
PTI
Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah (right) and his father, Union
Minister Farooq Abdullah.
Television news channels, whose jingoistic coverage of the incidents of
violence in January along the Line of Control almost had India and Pakistan at
each other’s throats, once again managed to polarise public opinion following
the hanging of Afzal Guru, who was sentenced to death for his role in the 2001
terrorist attack on Parliament House. In fact, one news anchor went so far as
to declare that “all secular, progressive and nationalist” citizens supported
the hanging, as, clearly in his view, any contrary view fell in the realm of
the anti-national.
The first day of hysterical coverage gave way to sane and sober voices in
sections of the print media. Journalists and commentators pointed to the
travesty of justice in the trial and the hanging. Lawyers commented on the fact
that Afzal Guru did not get a senior lawyer to represent him during the most
crucial part of the trial. Human rights activists drew attention to the fact
that the courts could not use the “collective conscience of society” argument
as a sufficient reason to award the death sentence. A legal and human rights
debate raged on the issue of the death penalty. Alongside, the questions of
rights and ethics, which the television channels had failed to raise, made the
headlines in the print media: Why was Afzal Guru’s family not informed in time
about his hanging? Why was he denied a last meeting with his wife and son and
other family members? And, the main query: Why was the government in such a
rush to execute Afzal Guru?
It is a fact that New Delhi showed scant respect for the sentiments of
Afzal Guru’s family and the people of Jammu and Kashmir. In a mockery of
justice, the letter informing his family about the hanging, supposedly sent by
Speed Post, was delivered four days after the execution. No one asked, and
hence there was no answer from the government, as to why the family was not
informed over the telephone. If the idea of the government was to keep the
execution a “secret”, surely a letter sent by Speed Post negated it, as it was
an open document and would have broken the news at a time (if delivered, of
course) when it was clearly intended to remain a top secret. It does appear
then that the intention was not to inform the family for, as Jammu and Kashmir
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has said, he himself could have arranged for the
family to meet Afzal Guru without anyone knowing about it. But this was not
done, and appears deliberately so.Apart from the obvious legal aspect, this
execution has raised several political issues as well. Foremost is the hype
that hanging a “terrorist” is the act of a “hard state”. And India is thus, in
this view, now a hard state since it has hanged two “terrorists”—Ajmal Kasab
and Afzal Guru—in quick succession. Just as it would have been considered a
hard state had it a few weeks ago declared war against Pakistan, regardless of
the consequences.
PTI
Ifthikhar Gilani. The Delhi Police arrested the journalist and his wife and
locked up their children in a room.
The need of the hour is to redefine this notion in the context of rights
and justice wherein a state that oppresses and marginalises its people, a state
that is unable to tolerate dissent and opens fire at protestors, a state that
cracks down on innocents from time to time, a state that refuses to equate
security of citizens with hunger and poverty is a “soft state” in the
conventional sense of the term. And therefore, a state that looks after its
citizens, that respects their rights, that understands their sentiments, that
dispenses justice and rights with an even hand is a “hard” state. Militaristic
postures and death penalties are little more than macho manifestations of a
nationalism that does not secure a country; governance with a soft hand and use
of hard action to uphold the dignity and freedom of every single citizen and to
ensure that justice reaches the last man and woman can and should be the only
determinants of a state that is responsive to its citizens’ security and
welfare.
Alienating Kashmir
A second issue that is staring India and the government in the face is the
impact this execution has had on the Kashmir Valley. It has generated shock and
anger and set back the clock by several years. It has ensured not just the
further marginalisation of the leadership in the valley—both the so-called
mainstream and separatist—but it has imbued a sense of helplessness that
carries tragic overtones. It has consolidated the view that Kashmiris have no
place in India, a dangerous consequence affecting now even those who had stayed
on the fence despite the police killings of 118 youth in 2010.
It is important to point out here that after the execution of the Jammu and
Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) leader Maqbool Butt in 1984, the separatists
were able to force a shutdown in the valley only after two years. At that
point, while the people mourned Butt’s hanging, the disillusionment with New
Delhi was not complete and the alienation was clearly limited. The valley
eventually entered a period of militancy, but this was not directly prompted by
Butt’s execution, which was only an addition to many other factors.
V. SUDERSHAN
Kashmiri students protest against the hanging of Afzal Guru, at Jantar
Mantar in New Delhi on February 9.
In 2013, the atmosphere in the valley is very different. The people are
sullen, angry, distrustful and definitely alienated from both India and
Pakistan. Afzal Guru, a surrendered militant, in stature and in terms of
leadership, was several notches below Butt. And yet the response to his
execution has been immediate and widespread for reasons to do with the almost
unbridgeable distance between Srinagar and New Delhi. Official sources told
this writer that this intense reaction was expected.
Thus, the political point that arises here is that the government, whose
intelligence agencies are present in strong numbers in the valley, was fully
aware of the consequences of its action. For this reason, it decided to keep
the execution a secret, and placed the State under curfew and a strong security
blanket before announcing the done deed. Clearly, New Delhi did not care enough
for Kashmiris, having placed them outside the fringe of decision-making quite a
while ago. Even the voice of Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, whose party, the
National Conference, is a constituent of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA)
ruling at the Centre, is not heard. His demand for the withdrawal of the Armed
Forces Special Powers Act falling on deaf ears in New Delhi is a case in point.
The attitude is that Kashmiris can be ignored, and if they protest, the state
has the wherewithal to imprison them in their homes, impose strict curfews,
organise paramilitary and, if required, military patrols, fire at will, arrest
at will, snap Internet and mobile services, shut down cable television and
seize newspapers. In short, Kashmiris can be treated as occupied people with
the kind of measures in place that would not be tolerated by any other State in
the country.
The calculation
So, the next political question that arises from this is: why did Delhi do
it then? If the government knew that it would completely alienate Kashmiris,
what did, or does, it hope to achieve politically from the execution at this
particular point in time? No one was clamouring for the hanging at this stage,
and as in the case of prisoners who have been on death row for decades, Afzal
Guru’s execution could have been delayed as well. Why has the government
politically shot itself in the foot by opening a new chapter of confrontation?
AJIT SOLANKI/AP
Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. The Congress' strategy is to counter
the BJP's prime ministerial aspirant at any cost.
The answer is simple: the Congress party, having weighed the pros and cons,
is convinced that this one act, regardless of the alienation in Kashmir, will
help it emerge triumphant in the 2014 general elections. The Congress is
working around the fact that Narendra Modi will be the Bharatiya Janata Party’s
prime ministerial candidate. The Congress’ top leaders are of the view that if
this happens, the Muslim and secular vote, in a bid to defeat the Gujarat Chief
Minister, will automatically gravitate to their party. And hence, the Congress
needs to focus not on the minorities, but on the majority vote to prevent it
from consolidating behind Modi. The one major thorn in its side was Afzal Guru,
which was being hammered further in by the BJP, and the government acted in the
belief that by removing it, it would finally earn the applause and admiration
of the “hard” constituency as it were. Kashmir has become expendable in
government planning, and the sentiments of the people are clearly irrelevant in
New Delhi’s scheme of things.
Shutting out dialogue
The space in the Kashmir Valley that was willing to expand to cover the
prospects of a dialogue with New Delhi has been almost closed with this
execution. Some of the separatists, by meeting Jamaat-ud Dawa leader Hafiz
Saeed in Pakistan, have painted themselves into a corner and lost the
manoeuvring space they could still have claimed. The so-called mainstream
politicians, such as Omar Abdullah and his father, Farooq, and People’s
Democratic Party (PDP) president Mehbooba Mufti and her father, Mufti Mohammad
Sayeed, do not have the people’s trust or confidence, which have further eroded
with Afzal Guru’s hanging. For instance, no one in the valley believes that the
Chief Minister did not know about the execution well in advance; his passionate
views to the contrary fell on ears deafened over the decades. For most, the
hanging is a message from New Delhi that it is not interested in Kashmir and is
not willing to begin talks, which could at least partially address the
aspirations of the people for peace and justice.
The crackdown on Kashmiris in New Delhi was another indication of the same.
The senior journalist Iftikhar Gilani was placed under house arrest along with
his wife, his two terrified children were locked in a room by the officers of
the special cell of the Delhi Police; Delhi University professor S.A.R. Geelani
was picked up by the special cell; Kashmiri students demonstrating with others
from their universities were detained by the same police that had earlier stood
watching them being beaten at Jantar Mantar by Bajrang Dal youths. In its
wisdom, New Delhi had found the “enemy” to muzzle as soon as it hanged Afzal
Guru.
KAMAL NARANG
Bajrang Dal activists (left) clash with Kashmiri students protesting at
Jantar Mantar on February 9.
For Kashmiris, the growing alienation fuelled by years of trauma, and now
helplessness bordering on desperation, is not going to disappear. Curfews
cannot be sustained beyond a point by even the mightiest of governments, and
security cover cannot detect or even understand the murmurs of dissent within
before the volcano erupts. It is a highly foolish government that passes up the
opportunity to usher in an era of peace in a troubled area, and instead opts
for confrontation and violence as its weapon. Since the hanging of Afzal Guru,
sporadic protests have broken out all over the valley despite the curfew, with
deaths and injuries being reported in clashes with the police. The government
has wilfully opened a Pandora’s box.
Seema Mustafa is a senior journalist based in New Delhi.
__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New
Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity: a.. New Members 18
Visit Your Group
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us
Feedback .
__,_._,___
--
Feroze Mithiborwala
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
