Pakistan: Goodbye & Good Luck

Source: http://www.newslaundry.com/2013/05/pakistan-goodbye-good-luck/

Human beings cut off ties with one another all the time. This not only prevents a fight-unto-death scenario, it also allows the adversaries to cool off and move on – go their separate ways.

The time has come for India to cut off all diplomatic, economic, cinematic and other ties with Pakistan. In perpetuity. Good luck and goodbye, Pakistan. May you prosper and may your people find peace.

I say this with a degree of conviction and moral certitude that our forefathers, barring perhaps Mahatma Gandhi, would have approved of. Let me explain.

Pakistan has a pathological hatred of India and the idea of India.

It was a nation created because of it. The creators of Pakistan abhorred India’s plurality. They disbelieved the assertion of many – including Gandhi – that Hindus and Muslims can stay as brothers. They doubted India’s assertion of secularism. No, they said, a time will come when our people will be under the boot of the majority. We want a separate land for our people.

The first speech Mr Jinnah gave in the newly created Pakistan was astonishing in its effrontery. He talked of how he wanted Pakistan to be a secular state! That’s right – you can’t bear to live as one in a secular state, but now that you’ve created your own nation – based solely on a religious conviction and unfounded fear of the majority – you are happy to believe that your newly-turned majority desires nothing else but a secular state where all minorities shall live in peace. Well, we know what came of it, the experiment that was Pakistan.

Pakistan has never been able to reconcile with the fact that an overwhelming majority of Muslims – whom Pakistan’s founders were supposedly fighting for in the first place – decided to stay back in India. This is a thorn that pricks Pakistan daily and will continue to do so.

Those who doubt the sincerity of Indian Muslims and forever taunt them and address them as “they”, forget this simplest of facts. A huge piece of land was created especially for them – “Come all ye brothers, to our promised land where you will never live under fear of the majority” – and then, when the time came, these very people, the Indian Muslims, ignored the call. Can anything else be more telling of the idea of India?

Pakistan has a pathological hatred of India because millions of Muslims decided to stay back.

The hatred became acute when Pakistan broke into two, of its own internal stress. A nation that was based on religion could not keep itself together to even celebrate its silver jubilee.

All history – right from the time of Herodotus – is contemporary when you factor in the fact that we read, assess and describe a few thousand years on a timeline of 13.8 billion years. What monumental folly! No wonder we cannot trust history and we fail to learn from it.

The cutting off of economic ties will not hurt India. It may hurt Pakistan, but if they believe it won’t then so be it. Our bilateral trade is minuscule compared to our trade with other countries.

It is, however, the cutting off of ALL ties, meaning people-to-people mostly, that divides opinion in our country, to the extent that we begin to label people as hawks and doves. We somehow believe it is not morally right.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Clip_77For all the unimaginable work that Bapu did for us, and the path he showed us, there were some blunders he committed that went on to condition us. The Mahatma, we must understand, had an unrivalled moral compass, more so if you notice the decades he was active in – Hitler, Churchill, Stalin, Mao, and Mussolini were his contemporaries.

I believe he was wrong in demanding that India pay Pakistan a chunk of money we owed them Rs 55 crore ($ 78.5 million today) even though it was certain that Pakistan would use it against India, in buying arms and expanding its skirmishes and not-so-contained battles over Kashmir. In any case, the two nations were at war when Gandhi demanded we make this payment.

The only man who stood up to Gandhi was Sardar Patel. I don’t know how to say this, and pardon my ignorance of history, but I am yet to find a blunder that Patel committed in all the years that he served India’s cause. I love Bapu and I like Nehru, but it is inescapable that the two made some astonishing mistakes. If anyone can list a single blunder of Patel, I’d be the wiser.

Those who say he was a right-wing fanatic know nothing! Patel exhibited the goodness of Gandhi but crucially, he did not let it – like Nehru did every time – cloud his exemplary realpolitik wisdom. In essence, Patel was an incredible student of history. People forget how close he was to Bapu – many a time Bapu told him to keep Nehru in check for he worried Nehru was getting too close to the Communists.

Patel was forthright in his objection to handing Pakistan the money. He went to Gandhi and told him so in as many words. But what can anyone do if the man he loves and admires decides to go on a fast-unto-death over the issue? What does a son do when the father blackmails? The awful dilemma of Patel – realpolitik versus Gandhi’s moral compass – is described in many books (Alex Von Tunzelmann’s Indian Summer comes to mind immediately). But the most objective description is in Joseph Lelyveld’s Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and his struggle with India. What does one do when the person you love asks something from you that you don’t want to give? In the end Patel backed out.

That was the first occasion when Pakistanis knew Indians are emotional people, that their every judgment from thereon would be clouded by emotion and the desire to feel good about taking the high moral ground.

We have suffered ever since at the hands of Pakistan. Not a day has passed when it hasn’t desired the destruction of India. Those who are old enough to remember the 1980s would recall how, when Pakistan was clearly fomenting trouble in Punjab, we gushed at Zia-ul-Haq’s arrival at the Jaipur test match. Even though we saw Pakistan’s intentions we wanted to embrace her, we wanted to take the high moral ground. This continued all through the 90s and continues to this day. The release of the Kandahar terrorists and their rapturous welcome in the streets of Pakistan; the 26/11 massacre; the LOC beheadings; the murder of Sarabjit…nothing will stir us into cutting all ties with Pakistan. Why? Because we think it’s not ethical and moral to do so.

But this is where we are so wrong!

India was one of the few countries which were unequivocal in cutting all relations with the apartheid South Africa. Those who say sports and politics shouldn’t be mixed forget that for decades we as Indians didn’t want anything to do with South Africa. It was even written in our passports, for crying out loud! Can any right-thinking person say that it was wrong on our part to do so?

Those who say that the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are like us, good people, nice friendly people – why do they forget that the same held true for a large number of white south Africans, too? Were Nadine Gordimer and Dr Christiaan Barnard racist? But nations don’t behave like how their well-meaning people would like them to behave.

Apartheid continued for 50 years. The South African economy, based on diamonds, and gold, and mining and agro products, was one of the largest in the world during the time of apartheid, so much so that those who call themselves the upholders of morality and ethics now – the Western world – continued to trade with South Africa until as late as 1989!

But we were steadfast. And I am proud of that, proud that we can look Mandela and Tutu and Biko (if he was alive) in the eyes and say we stood with you, brothers, we were there right beside you.

We could have benefited a great deal from trading with the apartheid regime but we stood up for principles. Not all white South Africans were racist pigs. But despite that we wanted nothing to do with South Africa.

Why can’t we realise that the situation with Pakistan is exactly the same? Come what may, no matter how many Pakistanis think well of India, the pathological hatred that was the basis of their nation’s creation will make sure that Pakistan will use any opportunity to humiliate India, to bring her down, to break her.

I have nothing personal against Pakistanis. The majority of them are fine people and I have many of them as friends. But this is about our people, their continued suffering. It is time we took a stand, like we did against the apartheid South Africa despite losing out on economic trade and other ties.

We must cut all ties with Pakistan and be in no hurry to resume them until we are certain that the leopard has changed its spots. We must not worry about Pakistanis not being able to come and play cricket here. Did we lament when Gavaskar and Chandra and Amarnath couldn’t play with the South Africans? On the contrary, we were proud of them. Not so the case with the few West Indians who went on a rebel tour to South Africa in the 80s. They are derided to this day in the West Indies for selling out.

No, it’s much more than sports or Bollywood or literary contacts. It’s about two brothers realising reconciliation is impossible if one of them fails to confront the truth.

Pakistan, we wish you luck. Goodbye

Your’s Sincerely
Diljit C Shah
N. Gopaldas & Co.,
36, Chinnakadai Street.,P.O. Box 328,
Tiruchirapalli – 620 002. India
email: diljitshah@yahoo.co.in

Markandey Katju: Pakistan is a Fake & Artificial Country’

‘I do not believe that there are two nations, there is only one nation, that is India, and Pakistan is part of India. Pakistan was created in pursuance of the wicked British policy of divide and rule and the bogus Two Nation Theory’

Retired Justice Markandey Katju’s remarks about Pakistan generated lot of publicity for him which probably he desired all along.

His correspondence with former Pakistani foreign secretary Shamsad Ahmed, reproduced below, provide the necessary background into his views about Pakistan and his article published in the Pakistani newspaper articulates his thoughts on the future ahead for the two countries.

Correspondence with Mr Shamshad Ahmed and Editor of ‘The Nation’:

1. Email to Editor of The Nation

Dear Sir,

I am a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India and, presently, am the Chairman of the Press Council of India. I understand that you are the publisher/editor of the newspaper The Nation. I read online an article in your esteemed newspaper entitled “May You Live Long, Katju!” by Mr Shamshad Ahmed, former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, criticising my views expressed in a speech given by me some time back in a function in New Delhi.

In that speech, I said that Pakistan is a fake and artificial country created by the British and their agents in pursuance of the wicked British policy of divide and rule and the bogus Two Nation Theory (i.e. Hindus and Muslims are two nations). In reality, there is no such thing as Pakistan; there is Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and NWFP, all of which are really part of India.

The purpose of partitioning the country and creating Pakistan was to make Hindus and Muslims keep fighting with each other even after the British withdraw from the subcontinent so that India (of which I regard Pakistan as a part) may remain weak.

When I meet my Pakistani friends, we talk in Hindustani and we feel no different from each other.

In my opinion, India and Pakistan will reunite in the next 20 years or so under a strong secular modern minded government, which will not tolerate religious extremism, whether Hindu or Muslim, and crush it with an iron hand.

I would like to send you my rejoinder to Mr Shamshad Ahmed’s article, if you are willing to publish it. I know it may require courage to publish my article, but the time has come when the truth must be told to people.

Regards,
Justice Katju

2. Email to Mr Shamshad Ahmed (former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan) :

Dear Mr Shamshad Ahmed,

I read your article in TheNation (February 26th issue) on my views about Pakistan being a fake and artificial nation created by the British on the basis of the bogus Two Nation Theory in pursuance of their wicked policy of divide and rule.

I would like to write and get published my rejoinder. In my opinion, India and Pakistan are really one nation temporarily divided, but which is bound to reunite in the next 20 years or so under a strong, secular modern minded government, which does not tolerate religious extremism and bigotry, whether Hindu or Muslim, and crushes it with an iron hand. 

Regards,

Justice Katju

3. Mr Shamshad Ahmed’s Reply:

Dear Justice Katju,

I just saw your message.

Let me tell you, difference of outlook on nationhood aside, I am one of your admirers. I was telling this to Shahid Malik, who is a good friend of mine.

In my view, you will serve your ’cause’ well by focusing more on bringing the two countries closer on their outstanding issues. On my part, like several of my Indian counterparts, I remain engaged with them on Track Two for reducing India-Pakistan tensions and helping them resolve their outstanding problems. I am proud of co-authoring the ‘Composite Dialogue’ with my Indian counterpart Salman Haider in June 1997, a process that in my view must continue purposefully to bring the two estranged countries together.

I am not sure if The Nation will publish your article. The media freedom is only a farce, not only in our countries, but also in West’s champions of free press.

I have been sending articles critical of American global policies and overbearing power-based agenda to Western newspapers. None was accepted. Even The New York Times and Washington Post are allergic to anyone else writing against American policies. More than anyone else, you know better the reality of ‘free media’ today. With more and more corporate conglomerates owning the news outlets, the media is becoming a commercial enterprise. They print what sells. This is the story all around.

I am not sure any newspaper in Pakistan will print anything questioning Pakistan’s raison d’etre. But you may try.

Do let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.

My best regards and good wishes to you.
Shamshad

4. Email to Mr Shamshad Ahmed:

Dear Shamshad Sahib,

There is no question of bringing two countries together when there is, in fact, a single country, India.

Pakistan is a fake country, artificially created by the British in pursuance of their nefarious policy of divide and rule and the bogus Two Nation Theory. Pakistan is, in fact, a part of India, and we will be reunited, maybe in 20 years or so, under a strong, secular, modern minded government, which does not tolerate religious extremism, whether Hindu or Muslim, and crushes it with an iron hand.

Your ‘Quaid’ was just a British agent, who was shamelessly furthering the wicked British divide and rule policy. The whole game of the British was that even after they withdraw from India (and Pakistan is part of India), our country should remain weak, for which it was necessary to divide us on religious lines and make us keep fighting with each other. It is time someone spoke the truth and, perhaps, it is for me to bell the cat.

When I meet my Pakistani friends, we speak in Hindustani, we look like each other and feel no difference between ourselves.

We were befooled by the Britishers into thinking that we are each others’ enemies, but how much longer must we remain befooled? I do not care whether my article (which I am working on) is published or not, but I will not deviate from what I believe is the truth. In Sanskrit, there is a saying: “Satyamev Jayate”, which means “ultimately truth wins”.

Regards,
Justice Katju

5. And finally, on Saturday, 2 March 2013, The Nation published Justice Katju’s article titled:

The truth about Pakistan

June 3 1947

“Dekho mujhe jo deeda-e-ibrat nigah ho,
Meri suno jo gosh-e-naseehat niyosh hai.”

— Mirza Ghalib

According to reports, Pakistani cities— Karachi, Quetta, Peshawar, etc – are rapidly becoming killing fields, with bomb blasts and gun firing a regular occurrence, and ethnic violence between Sunnis and Shias, and persecution of minorities escalating. Nobody knows that when he steps out into the streets of these cities whether or not he will return alive. A beautiful metropolitan city like Karachi is becoming, if it has not already become, a Jurassic Park.

Mr Shamshad Ahmed, in his article, entitled “May You Live Long, Katju!”, published in The Nation on February 26, 2013, has said that the present situation in Pakistan is due to “a failure of governance, not of the nationhood.” I respectfully beg to differ.

In my opinion, the present violent strifes and disturbances in Pakistan are the logical and inevitable result of creating a theocratic state in this subcontinent and, hence, the only solution is the reunification of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh under a strong, secular, modern minded government, which does not tolerate religious extremism and bigotry, whether Hindu or Muslim, and crushes it with an iron hand.

To explain my point, I have to delve into history. As explained in my article, “What is India”, in my blog: justicekatju.blogspot.in (as well as in the video on the website: kgfindia.com), India (in which I include Pakistan) is broadly a country of immigrants like North America. The ancestors of 92 to 93 percent people living today in our subcontinent were not the original inhabitants here, but came from outside, mainly from the northwest (the original inhabitants being the pre-Dravidian tribals). People migrate from uncomfortable areas to comfortable areas, and India was a paradise for agriculture, with level land, fertile soil, plenty of water for irrigation, etc. It is for this reason that India has so much diversity— so many religions, castes, languages, ethnic groups, etc because each group of immigrants brought their own language, religion and customs.

Hence, the only policy that can work in our subcontinent is secularism and equal respect to all communities and sects. This was the policy of the great Emperor Akbar, whom I regard (along with Ashoka) as the greatest ruler the world has ever seen. At a time when the Europeans were massacring each other in the name of religion (Catholics massacring Protestants and vice versa), Akbar, who was far ahead of his times, declared his policy of Suleh-e-Kul, i.e. universal toleration of all religions, and it is because of this policy that the Mughal Empire lasted so long. It was Emperor Akbar who laid the foundation on which the Indian nation is still standing, his policy being continued by Jawaharlal Nehru and his colleagues who gave India a secular constitution.

Up to 1857, there were no communal problems in India; all communal riots and animosity began after 1857. No doubt even before 1857, there were differences between Hindus and Muslims, the Hindus going to temples and the Muslims going to mosques, but there was no animosity. In fact, the Hindus and Muslims used to help each other; Hindus used to participate in Eid celebrations, and Muslims in Holi and Diwali. The Muslim rulers like the Mughals, Nawab of Awadh and Murshidabad, Tipu Sultan, etc were totally secular; they organised Ramlilas, participated in Holi, Diwali, etc. Ghalib’s affectionate letters to his Hindu friends like Munshi Shiv Naraln Aram, Har Gopal Tofta, etc attest to the affection between Hindus and Muslims at that time

In 1857, the ‘Great Mutiny’ broke out in which the Hindus and Muslims jointly fought against the British. This shocked the British government so much that after suppressing the Mutiny, they decided to start the policy of divide and rule (see online “History in the Service of Imperialism” by B.N. Pande). All communal riots began after 1857, artificially engineered by the British authorities. The British collector would secretly call the Hindu Pandit, pay him money, and tell him to speak against Muslims, and similarly he would secretly call the Maulvi, pay him money, and tell him to speak against Hindus. This communal poison was injected into our body politic year after year and decade after decade.

In 1909, the ‘Minto-Morley Reforms’ introduced separate electorates for Hindus and Muslims. The idea was propagated that Hindi is the language of Hindus, while Urdu of Muslims (although Urdu was the common language of all educated people, whether Hindu, Muslim or Sikh up to 1947). All this vicious propaganda resulted in the partition of 1947, which created a fake, artificial theocratic nation called Pakistan.

Nation states arose in Europe around the 15th century because of the rise of modern industry. Modern industry, unlike feudal handicraft industry, requires a big market for its goods and a large area from where it can get raw materials.

The creation of a state based on religion destroys the very basis of a nation, because it cuts off industries from markets and raw materials. British imperialism created India as a big administrative unit. The British policy was to prohibit the growth of heavy industry in India; otherwise, the Indian industry, with its cheap labour, would have become a powerful rival to British industry.

When the British left India, they divided us so that we may remain backward and weak, and not emerge as a modern powerful industrial state (for which we have all the potential). This was the real reason for creating Pakistan.

I submit that Pakistan was doomed from its very inception; firstly, because there is such tremendous diversity in our subcontinent that only secularism can work here and secondly, because a modern nation cannot be based on religion (because this will cut it off from its markets and raw materials).
Mr Shamshad Ahmed has written in an email to me that I should try to bring the two countries closer, instead of challenging the very raison d’etre of Pakistan. I replied that I do not believe that there are two nations, there is only one nation, that is India, and Pakistan is part of India. Pakistan was created in pursuance of the wicked British policy of divide and rule and the bogus Two Nation Theory, whose whole aim was to make Hindus and Muslims fight with each other. I am confident that with time people, both in India and Pakistan, will realise the truth in what I am saying, and India and Pakistan will reunite under a strong, secular government that deals with religious extremism, whether Hindu or Muslim, with an iron hand.

Secularism does not mean that one cannot practice his religion. It means that religion is a private affair, unconnected with the state that will have no religion.

When I meet my Pakistani friends (and I have lots of them), we speak in Hindustani, we look like each other, and feel no difference between ourselves. We were befooled by the Britishers into thinking that we are enemies, but how much longer must we remain befooled? How much longer must blood flow in religious violence in Quetta, Karachi, Gujarat, etc.

Mr Shamshad Ahmed wrote in his email to me that he doubted whether any Pakistani newspaper would publish my article challenging the very existence of Pakistan. I replied that I did not care whether it would be published or not, but I will not deviate from what I believe is the truth. In Sanskrit, there is a saying, “Satyamev Jayate”, which means “truth ultimately triumphs”. And as Nietzsche said in Thus Spake Zarathustra: “What matter about thyself, Zarathustra! Say thy word and break into pieces!”


All text courtesy Justice Katju’s blog Satyam Bruyat

Reciprocity in Attacking Each Others’ Prisoners

Clip_144

When it comes to reciprocity, there is no equal to the kind practised by India and Pakistan with each other. No wonder, because it requires a special talent to mirror hostility in such a perfectly choreographed manner. The attack on prisoner Sanaullah Haq in Jammu’s Kot Bhalwal jail that sent him into a coma and led to his eventual death from multi-organ failure was part of the endless tit-for-tat that the two countries end up playing with each other. That it was a fellow prisoner who assaulted him in retaliation for the killing of Sarabjit in Pakistan by inmates does not exonerate Indian officialdom. In fact, it is unforgivable that even after there was an alert across jails to ensure no revenge attacks on Pakistani prisoners, the Jammu attack could not be prevented. The jail superintendent and other officials have rightly been suspended, and an inquiry has been ordered.

Even so, the incident has exposed India as a country that still has to grow up, and that despite its eagerness to pretend otherwise, suffers from some of the same dysfunctionalities as its western neighbour.

In keeping with the pattern, Pakistan gave a state funeral to Sanaullah, a Harkat-ul-Ansar militant convicted and sentenced to life for two bomb blasts in Kashmir, to match the one given Sarabjit, convicted for bomb blasts that killed 14 people in Pakistan.

None of this reciprocal madness gives much hope for the future of India-Pakistan relations.

Until now, tit-for-tat hostility was practised only by officials on both sides, sometimes targeting each other’s diplomats for surveillance, attacks or expulsion, at other times targeting ordinary people, as for instance by denying them visas or harassing them in other ways.

What is worrying about the Sanaullah incident is that people-to-people relations are also on their way to getting tainted in the same way, and officials are allowing this to happen. A section of khadims at the Ajmer dargah said they would not permit Pakistani pilgrims to attend the urs. Shockingly, New Delhi also recommended to Pakistan that the pilgrimage be called off as after the Sarabjit incident, it could not ensure the security of travellers from across the border. Going by this, next it will be the turn of the Sikh jathas who go on pilgrimages to gurudwaras in Pakistan to face a similar situation. Before it comes to that, the cycle of nastiness has to be broken.

Telling Pakistani pilgrims that they are welcome to come to Ajmer would be a good place to begin. And there’s no need to demand reciprocity.

Convicted Indian spy Sarabjit Singh suffered severe injuries in the head when some suspects attacked him when he left his barracks for strolling in Kot Lakhpat jail on April 26, 2013. Singh was admitted to the ICU of the Jinnah Hospital where a medical board comprising senior neurosurgeons was treating him. He later died.

The suspects attacked Singh when he left his barracks for strolling. They assaulted him with bricks and other blunt weapons and left him seriously injured. The reason behind the incident could not be immediately ascertained.

Profusely bleeding, Singh was initially moved to the surgical emergency of the Jinnah Hospital.

Sarabjit was received with several deep head injuries and he was unconscious. He was wearing a police trouser and casual shirt when shifted to the emergency. Keeping in view the deteriorating condition of the patient an endotracheal tube had been placed into the trachea (windpipe) to help him breathe artificially. After initial treatment in the emergency unit, Singh had been shifted to the main ICU and put on ventilator.

In September 2012, Singh had written a letter to his sister and daughters, alleging that the jail authorities were slow-poisoning and mentally torturing him.

Quoting the prosecution, the official said Singh had illegally crossed into Pakistan on Aug 29, 1990. He was arrested on charges of carrying out four bombings in Faisalabad, Multan and Lahore and was later sentenced to death.

Preneet Kaur, Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, has said that “it is deplorable that this attack took place. The Indian High Commission has sought consular access. As soon as we get a response, we will act”. Two officials from the Indian embassy have rushed to Lahore from Islamabad. Pakistan Foreign Office in a statement said it would investigate the incident.

Sarabjit’s sister Dalbir Kaur has said: “I had told everybody he is not safe. This is a conspiracy. The attack was pre-planned.”

The Kot Lakhpat jail currently has some 17,000 prisoners though its official capacity is only 4,000. There have been instances in the past of prisoners being killed within the prison.

Authorities had tightened Singh’s security after the recent execution in India of Afzal Guru, who was convicted of involvement in the 2001 terror attack on the parliament.

Singh’s mercy petitions were rejected by courts and former President Pervez Musharraf. The outgoing PPP-led government put off Singh’s execution for an indefinite period in 2008.

Just a few months back, an Indian prisoner died in mysterious circumstances at the same Kot Lakhpat prison. He was allegedly inhumanely beaten to death for committing the ‘crime’ of washing his clothes at a public tap at the courtyard of the jail. India alleges that the jail authorities did not request the hospital authorities to conduct an autopsy for almost two months. Even after the autopsy the report has still not been presented.

The Lahore High Court refused to entertain a petition for the inquiry into the mysterious death of the prisoner on the pathetic argument that the lawyer did not have power of attorney from the victim’s family (who are in India). This is contradictory to the fact that the higher courts take so moto actions on political cases without obtaining ‘power of attorney’ to gain popularity in the media.

He was represented by Mr. Awais Shiekh who acted on behalf of the victim, following reports published in the Daily Express Tribune.

Chamail Singh, son of Salaar Singh, (48), a resident of Targwal Khalkay village, Akhnoor tehsil, in Jammu, India, was imprisoned on spying charges after a military trial sentenced him in June 2012. At the time of his death he was nearing the end of his sentence of five years due to time served. Singh was tried by a military court in Sialkot, Punjab, under section 59 of the Pakistan Army Act 1951 for spying and imprisoned.

Mr. Tehseen Khan, a lawyer by profession, who was released just three days after Chamail Singh’s death, told the Express Tribune, on 18 January that he witnessed Singh’s killing. He said that that at 7:45am on 15 January Singh was washing his clothes at a tap in the jail’s courtyard when Assistant Superintendent of Jail (ASJ) Nasir Nawaz with two chakar imdadis or hawaldars, Muhammad Sidique and Muhammad Nawaz, stopped him.

The ASJ asked him “does he think the jail is his home where he can wash his clothes wherever he wants?” The officials also taunted him saying how an Indian spy enjoys himself after working against Pakistan. The agents should not have such facilities. They also used some filthy and derogatory words against Indians, Khan told the newspaper.

When Singh responded, the hawaldars started beating him on the orders of the ASJ. The ASJ himself allegedly pounded Singh with his fists. Kicks by the others drew blood from Singh’s upper lip and brow. The newspapers quoted Tehseen as saying that the three men continued to beat him for a full minute, at the end of which he was dead. The jailors then dispatched Singh’s body to the jail hospital.

In desperation to hide their crime, the jail authorities took affidavits on plain paper from eight prisoners, all Indian nationals, that his death was natural. This was done in the absence of a magistrate which is a legal requirement. According to Express Tribune (ET) the affidavits state that Singh lit a cigarette after washing his clothes and died of natural causes. Later on his body was shifted to Jinnah Hospital where it was kept for almost two months in the morgue. No autopsy was conducted and the Punjab provincial government tried to cover up the whole incident.

The autopsy of the body was finally conducted on 13 March two months after his death but the report has not yet surfaced despite the fact that it was announced that report will come out on or before 25 March. The Federal Investigating Agency (FIA) and other agencies have confirmed that Singh was tortured to death. The newspaper received the initial report from the hospital that “traces of four injuries were found on Singh’s body including a fracture in the right knee joint, an abrasion on his upper lip and injuries on his thigh.

By delaying Singh’s post-mortem report, the Kot Lakhpat prison authorities tried to hide the marks of injuries on his body caused by the beating, advocate Awais Sheikh, who works as a counsel for Indian prisoners in Pakistan, told ET.

After publication of the news in ET, the same lawyer filed a petition in the High Court of Lahore for an inquiry into the death of an Indian prisoner by torture. The High Court immediately turned downed the petition on the grounds that the lawyer does not have power of attorney from Singh’s family. This was a clear effort by the High Court to save the provincial rulers from any embracement due to the case. The provincial government of Sharif has also not taken any action to probe the incident although ET has been continuously publishing follow ups of the incident since 28 January.

Pakistan Cannot Afford to Compete with India Whose Economy is 9 Times Bigger

An Aesopian nuclear competition is under way between Pakistan and India.

Clip_85Pakistan, whose economy and domestic cohesion are steadily worsening, is the hare, racing to devote scarce resources to compete with a country whose economy is nine times as great. India is the tortoise: Its nuclear program is moving steadily forward without great exertion.

The tortoise will win this race, and could quicken its pace. But the hare continues to run fast, because nuclear weapons are a sign of strength amid domestic weaknesses and because it can’t keep up with the growth of India’s conventional military programs.

At present, there is rough nuclear parity between India and Pakistan, with Pakistan having a larger arsenal and India having more advanced air- and sea-based capabilities. Both countries are expanding their capacity to produce bomb-making material, adding cruise missiles to their arsenals and planning to send nuclear weapons to sea. Pakistan’s arsenal now exceeds 100 warheads. India is not too far behind.

India, like China, has adopted a relaxed approach to nuclear deterrence. In both countries, national security is equated with strong economies and domestic cohesion. Indian and Chinese leaders value nuclear weapons as expressions of national will and power, rather than as military instruments.

As befitting the home of Mahatma Gandhi, Indian political leaders have great ambivalence about nuclear weapons. They seek the moral high ground while attending to national security imperatives. No other country has waited 24 years between testing its first and second nuclear devices.

In Pakistan, the situation is starkly different. Economic growth is hobbled, foreign reserves are dwindling and the country is plagued by bloodletting. Decisions about nuclear requirements are made by a few generals who view these weapons as a military necessity as well as a political instrument. In Pakistan, political leaders take their guidance from generals. In India, the requests of military leaders often land on deaf ears.

Pakistan’s nuclear requirements were set high initially, and grew higher still after the George W. Bush administration agreed to cooperate with India to build nuclear power plants. This civil-nuclear agreement has languished, while Pakistan’s military-nuclear programs have ramped up.

After testing nuclear weapons in 1998, Indian and Pakistani authorities embraced a doctrine of minimal, credible deterrence. Now the word “minimal” applies less and less, as their stockpiles have doubled over the past decade. There is little chance that Pakistan and India will end fissile material production for bombs anytime soon.

Pakistan’s nuclear weapons can be used to warn India not to advance on Pakistani territory. Its military doctrine has recently embraced short-range, tactical nuclear weapons to counter India’s conventional military advantages. At the high end of the targeting spectrum, Pakistan’s military appears intent to deny India victory in warfare and to destroy it as a functioning society in the event of a complete breakdown in deterrence.

Slowing this trajectory will be difficult. Nuclear weapons are widely perceived in Pakistan as the nation’s crown jewels. Most Pakistanis begrudge governmental corruption and incompetence, but not money spent on The Bomb, which has been imbued with great powers, including the power to keep India at bay and to lift Pakistan onto the world’s stage.

Finding stability in this competition will be difficult, in part because China weighs heavily in Indian calculations and because civil-military relations in Pakistan are so unbalanced. Fifteen years and two major crises have passed since India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998 — and they still haven’t engaged in serious, sustained nuclear risk-reduction talks.

What might change Pakistan’s calculation that more nuclear weapons equates to more security? One way is for New Delhi to take dramatic steps to improve relations and to “take away the enemy image,” similar to what Mikhail Gorbachev accomplished when he was leader of the Soviet Union in his dealings with the United States.

There is, however, little appetite within India for bold steps to reinforce the obvious need of the Pakistani Army to focus on internal security threats. Another potential game changer is severe perturbations in Pakistan’s economy. Economic upheavals would, however, create even more domestic instability without changing the Pakistan military’s dependency on The Bomb.

The safest route to reduce nuclear dangers on the subcontinent is through concerted efforts to improve relations between Pakistan and India. The surest way to do so is by greatly increasing cross-border trade. Leaders in both countries have endorsed this course of action, but underlings are moving slowly ahead of national elections. Even modest progress can be stopped short by another mass-casualty attack on Indian soil designed to disrupt improved ties.

A nuclear arsenal built on very weak economic foundations is inherently unstable, which is reason enough for India to pursue sustained and accelerated trade and investment opportunities with Pakistan. These methods, which have dampened tensions between China and Taiwan, could also serve a similar purpose on the subcontinent.

Michael Krepon is co-founder of the Stimson Center, a think tank, and director of its South Asia and Space Security Programs.

 

Indian Police at its Best

Clip_50The Delhi police crime branch claims to have foiled a plan of ISI to settle its spies in India.

The police said they recently arrested two fresh recruits of the spy agency, including a woman, from the New Delhi railway station. This announcement came on December 12, 2011 but in the same announcement police said that the couple was arrested on December 5, when they arrived at New Delhi railway station with a plan to kill the chief minister of Gujrat.

The Indian media was so biased that it has not enquired from the police as to when were they arrested and why the police took one week time to produce them before the court? This act of police is against the Indian law according to the section 57 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc). The police is bound to produce an accused person within 24 hours of arrest.

The Indian media has still not contacted the couple to get their side of the story but in its so called nationalism scandalized the couple as Pakistani agents.

According to the details received through the victims and legal documents Mr. Imran Yousaf Chippa, son of Mohammad Yousaf and Sofia Kanwal were married in October 2011 in Karachi. They went to Nepal for their honey moon on November 17, 2011 with the return ticket of November 24. On the departure day as the couple were going to Katmandu air port in a taxi, a Suzuki gypsy jeep cut them off and four persons from the jeep asked their identity. As the police saw the Pakistani passports they were taken to a nearby police station. They were forcefully pushed into the jeep and their hands were chained and their eyes were blindfolded with the dopatta.

After 30 hours of the drive they were locked in a room and later on after several days of detention they came to know that it was a farm hours near the New Delhi airport. The officers sitting in the jeep were taking the names of each other in numbers like one two, three and whenever they were contacted to their center through the wireless they told that a Pakistani couple has been arrested from Nepal. The couple was kept there up to December 12, 2011 and were severely tortured to confess that they were working for the ISI and had planned to kill the chief minister of Gujrat state.

Imran, the victim, was tortured continuously for all the days of his illegal captivity, his legs were tortured to the point where he cannot walk or sit properly. His right leg was injured with a knife and it is almost paralysed. His back still bears visible signs of electric shocks. His genitalia also has signs of cigarette burning. When he was hung upside down alcohol was poured into his anus. The nerves of the legs were damaged during the interrogation which was taken by many intelligence agencies including RAW.

During the interrogation, it was said that the couple were arrested from Nepal by the agents of RAW.

Sofia, the wife, was beaten with fists and kicked to confess. At many times she was threatened with rape if she did not confess.

On December 12 morning, the couple was told that they are going to release them as the agencies did not find any evidence of them being agents of the ISI. They were taken in a jeep to an unknown place and after a one hour long drive at 4 PM the couple found themselves before the Tis Hazari court at New Delhi. When they were taken out from the jeep a heavy contingent of media people arrived and was estimated to be not less than 200 persons. For further information, please read the report published in the Hindustan Times and an audiovisual report broadcast in News24 TV regarding this case.

The couple was produced before the court of Mr. Vinod Yadev, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) who immediately sent them for judicial remand and couple was lodged in Tihar Jail.

After court proceedings the police addressed the media and claimed that the couple was arrested from Delhi railway station and had the plan to assassinate the chief minister of Gujrat. The media have not asked to interview the couple. The media and journalists ran many concocted stories against the couple without listening to their side of the story when they were produced in the court.

During the court proceeding through the evidences it was proved that they were arrested from Nepal but the media have never covered this fact and totally ignored it in an effort to spread sensationalism and hatred against Pakistan.

In March 2012, Imran took off his clothes before the judge and revealed the torture marks on his body and asked the judge to listen to the actual facts from them. The judge finally agreed to do so. He took his statement in his chamber and for the next six days he continuously asked the couple to come and record statements with all evidence. On March 20, 2012, the judge granted interim bail to the couple for two days and it continued every two days for some time.

Finally on April 13 the couple received bail and was released.

The couple lives in Gujrat as it was Imran’s place of birth place but his relatives and friends do not want to associate with him as he has been declared by the media as an agent of Pakistan.

 

Hanging of Afzal Guru: India Provided Another Martyr to Kashmiris

Clip_136The hanging of Afzal Guru, a local Kashmiri, has convinced many youngsters in J&K that the Indian state is ready to trample on their rights. There is open talk of rebellion on the internet. “Guru is martyred. Welcome to another 30 years of war,” says a Facebook post.

This is especi­ally because of the perception that Afzal  was not given a fair trial and executed by the Congress to appeal to Hindutva votes in 2014.

Scores of Kashmiris are in jails or in hiding after the 2010 ‘street intifada’. Silence over 125 civilian deaths due to police and CRPF action hasn’t helped. Police has filed FIRs in only 20 cases, while even minors have been punished in stone-pelting incidents.

At the political level, things are not moving forward. The New Delhi-Srinagar dialogue remains stalled for the past many years. Afzal’s hanging now ensures Hurriyat will stay away from talks at least for a couple of years. Polls due in Kashmir late next year.

Despite statements and promises, AFSPA continues to remain in force across the Valley and there seems little hope that the army will agree to any withdrawal, even partial. A complete withdrawal would have been a big confidence-booster.

The rise of Hindu terrorism and Hindutva across the country makes many Kashmiris sceptical about a safe future with and in India.

Kashmir has now got its second empty martyr’s grave. And somehow, the mere fact of it being empty gives it more resonance—as if an echo chamber has been added to that other one lying vacant, that of Maqbool Bhat. The one reason why Mohammed Afzal Guru’s body was not handed to his family was the fear that his grave would become a rallying point for anti-India sentiments in the Valley. That effect is all the more palpable in absentia—with his body lying secured and quarantined in a grave in Delhi’s Tihar jail. The hasty, early morning hanging of Afzal Guru has become a new inflection point in the Kashmir story—its violent history of estrangement and anger.

A little over a year away from assembly elections in the state, Kashmiris are glorifying Afzal as “a martyr of the nation”. Three days after his execution, they have dug him a grave next to Bhat’s at the Martyrs’ Graveyard Eidgah in Srinagar. And placed an epitaph similar to the one on Bhat’s: “Shaheed-e-Watan Mohammed Afzal Guru: His remains are lying with the Indian government as a trust of Kashmiri nation, and we await its return.” The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front founder too had been executed in Tihar—on February 11, 1984—and it’s next to him that Afzal now lies buried. Bhat’s hanging had marked a watershed in the history of Kashmir as a full-blown insurgency had broken out in the region five years later, with thousands of youth idolising him.

In Srinagar, so paranoid was the state machinery of history repeating itself that it tried to forestall it. The police removed his epitaph on Tuesday night, only to replace it a day later, fearing wider protests. On February 9, the day of the hanging, funeral prayers were held for Afzal across the Valley despite a strict curfew. Anti-India protests have not dimmed even five days after the event—a grim remin­der of the 2010 agitation. An indefinite curfew in place since Afzal’s hanging has not quelled it. Three young men have already lost their lives.

How this climate of anger will play out is a big question for the state government. In the long run, it’s the spectre of a spurt in militancy that will haunt J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah and most Kashmiris. Many are apprehensive that Afzal’s controversial hanging will reinforce the feeling of alienation among Kashmiris, with another generation turning towards militancy and pushing the Valley back into its recurrent nightmare.

Even Omar, despite his patchy record in handling mass psychology in Kashmir, seems to instinctively sense something is horribly wrong this time. “Like it or not, this has reinforced the point that there is no justice,” Omar had said in the aftermath of the hanging. “We will have to deal with how we can change that sort of alienation.” And then, also, that the immediate fallout was security-related and “far less challenging than the long-term effects”.

The nervy state’s worst-ever three-day censorship on local media hasn’t helped things either. Newspapers (about 50 hit the stands in Srinagar every day) suspended publication, citing orders from the authorities despite no written order being produced. And a population of seven million, cooped up indoors, remained virtually disconnected, with cable as well as mobile network and internet blocked.

It didn’t stop social networking sites from being flooded with talk of rebellion. At the forefront are young, educated, tech-savvy Kashmiris who have grown up amidst conflict, nurse a deep sense of alienation and bear a grudge against the Indian State.

“Afzal Guru is martyred. Welcome to another 30 years of war,” said Omar, a young doctor, in his Facebook post. “It was February then (when Bhat was hanged). It is February now. This is not the time to whip up passions, because the seeds for a fresh revolution have perhaps been sown by the oppressor itself,” said another post. These youngsters have replaced their profile pictures with slogans like ‘I am Afzal, hang me’, the background black, as a mark of protest.

Mohammed Altaf Khan, 63-year-old former schoolteacher and one of Bhat’s close aides, better known by his nom de guerre Azam Inqilabi (the great revolutionary), says he has “not even an iota of doubt” that Afzal’s hanging would incite a new generation of Kashmiris to pick up arms.

“Thousands of young Kashmiris came out on the streets during the 2008 and 2010 agitations,” he says. “They were convinced that non-violence would force India to find a permanent solution for Kashmir. But by hanging Afzal, Indians have sent a clear message that they are rash and brash in their decisions when it comes to Kashmir. India has literally instigated one more of our generations to become mujahideen. It will not happen tomorrow, but I can say without any fear of contradiction that Afzal’s hanging has sown the seeds of another armed revolution.”

For many in Delhi, Inqilabi’s statement may appear as rhetoric, an exaggeration, but there are plenty of signs on the ground that evoke a sense of foreboding. For instance, scores of Kashmiris, in their teens and 20s, are either in jails, or in hiding or making rounds of police stations after the 2010 ‘street intifada’. Fuelling the anger is the Omar Abdullah government’s inexplicable silence over the cases of 125 civilian deaths in police and crpf action during the agitation. The police has till date filed firs only in 20 cases despite court intervention, while even minors have been punished for participating in stone-pelting. Since the new year, the government has also been reopening old cases against former militants in its bid to control the dissent.

Police sources say that after the 2010 agitation, at least two dozen young men joined militant groups, particularly the Lashkar-e-Toiba. The actual number could be much more. Unlike the ’90s, things are shrouded in secrecy. At times, even the families are caught unawares. Militancy may no longer be an option with the new generation of Kashmiris, but yes, Afzal’s hanging is likely to heighten the Kashmiri alienation. The implications would not be immediate, as some tend to believe, but they will be there. We can only keep our fingers crossed.

Kashmir’s former director-general of tourism and prominent political commentator Mohammed Ashraf too says a Kashmiri “takes his own time to react”. “Maqbool Bhat was hanged in 1984. Kashmiri boys started crossing LoC for arms and training from 1987 onwards, and we then had 1990. Similarly, this hanging too will have a long-term impact and we may see another eruption after a couple of years.”

Indeed, PDP chief spokesperson Naeem Akhtar thinks the very fact that Kashmir hasn’t erupted on expected lines is wor­rying: “Kashmir has been a place which would erupt even on minor issues. Afzal’s hanging has delivered a sense of defeat among Kashmiris, more dangerous in the long run.”

Back in Afzal’s native village Seer Jagir in Sopore, soldiers of 22 Rashtriya Rifles guard the only entrance—a wide steel gate. Near the gate, an instruction board lists the dos and don’ts of passing through the small village. Some years ago, on the roof of the Sadbhavana school built by the army in the village, soldiers had written in bold letters: “We love humanity.” A few metres ahead, though, another had this chilling warning: “One bullet, one terrorist.” So much for goodwill.

Born into an affluent family of apple merchants, Afzal would have been a doctor by this time, perhaps living comfortably and in prosperous obscurity somewhere in West Asia, like many Kashmiri doctors, rather than making it to the headlines if things hadn’t gone awry. As someone who once crossed over the LoC to fight the Indian State but who later also surrendered, it proved difficult for authorities to believe he had come entirely clean.

“Afzal wanted to live quietly with his family, but the STF (the notorious counter-insurgency wing of the Kashmir police) would not allow him,” his wife Tabassum wrote in her appeal to the Indian government in 2004. “Afzal was to leave his home, family and settle in Delhi again. He struggled hard to earn a living and he had decided to bring me and Ghalib to Delhi. Like any other family, we dreamed of living together peacefully and bringing up our children, giving them a good education and seeing them grow up to be good human beings. That dream was cut short when (Afzal was arrested in the Parliament attack case).” This dream will now never be. It was cut short in a way Tabassum, like many others, could never have imagined—coming to know of her husband’s exe­cution on television news, being denied even the grace of a last meeting.

The family had been persecuted even after Afzal’s arrest and subsequent conviction. Police and army raided their home countless times, forcing them to abandon it for almost one year. “For one year we were not allowed to see Afzal. We handed over his surrender certificate given by the BSF to a Supreme Court lawyer who later denied receiving it,” Tabassum had said. “Will you speak out at the injustice my husband has faced? Will you speak out on my behalf? I am, of course, fighting for my husband’s life, for the life of my son’s father. But I also speak as a Kashmiri woman who is losing faith in Indian democracy and its ability to be fair to Kashmiri Muslims.”

Tabassum had visited Afzal in Tihar in November 2012. “The meeting was a routine one. Afzal gave no indication that his days were numbered. His only worry was the future of (his 14-year-old son) Ghalib whom he wan­ted to become a writer,” Afzal’s cousin Yasin Guru said. He pours scorn on Union home minister Sushil­kumar Shinde’s statement that Afzal’s family was info­r­med about his execution via  speed post­—the missive reaching them two days after the hanging. “I wonder how a country that boasts about its democratic credentials can be so stone-hearted,” says Yasin.

There’s across-the-board sympathy for Afzal largely because of the belief that his conviction rested solely on circumstantial evidence. Says Lalit Magazine, a Jaipur-based Kashmiri Pandit, “Whatever little faith I had in India’s justice, I have lost it completely (after Afzal’s hanging). I am sad and shocked. Votebank politics has prevailed over justice and fair play.”

There are lots of other voices questioning the timing of Afzal’s execution. The timing is symbolic—it took place two days before Bhat’s death anniversary. The choice of date of Afzal’s hanging was deliberate, many Kashmiris say. Like every year, pro-freedom groups had already called for a black day on Bhat’s anniversary. The Indian government could not have been ignorant of it. They think Indians wanted to send a clear message to Kash­miris: ‘We don’t care for your sensitivities. You are a helpless people, unwilling to accept your defeat.’” Afzal’s family, meanwhile, is asking only one question: “Didn’t he deserve the right to see his family before his execution?”

It has been eleven days since Afzal Guru was hanged, and Sopore is in mourning. The apple orchards encircling the town stand bare in the winter freeze, the temperatures at shivering point even during the day. The town itself is crawling with the CRPF and the army, as always. They are everywhere: in the alleys, on the streets, around the main square. As we go past the only entrance to the village Afzal Guru is from, Seer Jagir, scores of local policemen and riot-control vehicles can be seen camped out at the only playground the town has. It looks like an island of sorts, with the army at the centre and the river Jhelum around it.

We park our car outside Afzal’s anc­estral house. A black banner, alongside another bearing the face and legend ‘Shaheed-e-Watan Afzal Guru’, flutters in the icy wind on an otherwise sunny February day.

Afzal Guru sonA young boy appe­ars on the terrace of the double-storey house. But Ghalib, Afzal’s only child, disappears just as soon. Not wanting to intrude on his grief, we decide to leave him alone. But before we can move any further, we hear an angry voice scream out: “What more do you want? You have all killed my husband. You hanged an honest man to fulfil the conscience of your people. You have taken away everything I had. Leave us alone….”

It’s Tabassum, wife of Afzal Guru. It hasn’t been long since the news of her husband’s hanging on February 9­­—after having spent seven years on death row—filtered in through television channels. The same ones showing ministers and politicians congratulating themsel­ves on television cameras for sending a terrorist to the gallows. The Gover­n­ment of India letter bearing the news arrived two days later, well after the execution. The hanging was a secret, but the grief is public. And Tabassum is inconsolable: “You are all butchers,” she continues to scream at us. “You killed him without any evidence and reason. You killed him for your politics and your games. Why have you done this to me?” The question hangs in the empty air; we do not have an answer.

Surely even a terrorist deserves the benefits of a legal system till the very end? The state had made its decision, but Tabassum, like many others, was left wondering whether Afzal was given a fair trial. As she speculates a future without her husband, Kashmir speculates about its future in the aftermath of the hanging.

People have gathered in the upstairs drawing room. Cousins, brothers, uncles, other relatives, they are all here, talking in groups. Just the, there is a call from the local PDP leader and an animated conversation breaks out. The party, a family member informs us, has been making overtures to Tabassum.

Aijaz Guru, Afzal’s elder brother, is angry. “No one supported him,” he says, “be it Kashmir’s politicians, separatists or anyone else. They all abandoned him. Now everyone is playing politics in his name, drawing mileage out of his death. Everyone is gaining at the cost of a poor Kashmiri’s life.”

Afzal Guru brotherA thin man joins the gathering at this point, quietly listening to the discussion around him. Afzal’s younger brother Hillal is less concerned about the politics outside, he thinks there is more that is being played inside. “No one used to come here,” he says. “Tabas­sum has been living with her parents for the last few years. Now they have gathered here for the mourning of my brother, but all that is going on in here is politics.” People have already started making money in Afzal’s name, Hillal says. Local politicians have started dividing the family on political lines. “No one is telling the real story. It was only Tabassum who fought for her husband. Even I am not in a position to help her. I am a poor man and it is hard to survive here.”

Afzal and his brothers have led completely different lives. Elder brother Aijaz is a prosperous timber merchant, his prosperity evident in his impeccable attire. Hillal looks, and is, less prosperous. They had not kept in touch much over the last few years, but Afzal’s death has brought them together. “People are planning a rally,” says Aijaz. “Thousands will gather for it and march in protest. I hope the situation doesn’t get out of control.” He’s willing to fight for justice for his brother but at the same time maintain a safe distance from the politics. “I am an Indian,” Aijaz is quick to emphasise. “I am a businessman who has nothing to do with separatism and I have been living separa­tely from the family for the last 15 years.”

Meanwhile, the drawing-room discussion veers towards the JKLF from whom Afzal had disengaged but which ex-miltant badge he had to wear the rest of his life. The JKLF, family members say, should not be allowed to get any mileage out of the hanging. The PDP has approached them, but the family is confused by the direction they should take. The National Conference too has approa­ched Afzal’s wife, but there are no takers for them in this house of mourners. Chief minister Omar Abdullah may cry himself hoarse saying he was kept in the dark, but no one’s willing to grant him benefit of the doubt.

A group of villagers has gathered outside. “He (Afzal) was different from the others in his family,” they tell us. “He was a good student, a kind person and an honest man. He was influenced by the idea of an Azad Kashmir.” Younger brother Hillal could not agree more: “He was not like us. He believed in Islam and humanity. He used to read a lot and think about the future of Kashmir, our people and culture.”

Afzal Guru wife TabassumHer anger dissipated for the moment, Tabassum too offers a few glimpses into their married life. She says Afzal was a gentle man who wanted to lead a simple life. “I will always be proud of being his wife, nobody can change my belief,” she says. She also declares that all the letters Afzal is said to have written to the separatists are actually fake. “He never wrote to them. All that has surfaced in his name is nothing but a gimmick created by separatist leaders for their political gains.” In one such letter to Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Afzal is said to have claimed that he was ashamed that his family had asked for a mercy petition as he wanted to die a martyr. Tabassum claims Afzal never wrote such a letter. “He never apologised for the mercy petition,” she insists. The family categorically maintains that most of the news about Afzal is simply not true and has been planted by different political agencies. “But there is no point in talking about it now,” says Tabassum resignedly. “Why are these questions being raised only after my husband’s death? How many people know about the kind of torture he had to endure in Delhi? Will we ever know under what circumstances he was forced to make a statement in front of the media?”

The family insists we avoid talking to Ghalib, Afzal’s teenage son. He was robbed of the simple pleasures of growing up on his father’s lap, listening to him tell stories, or even poems. “My son will follow the same path as his father. Become a good, kind and honest man like him. His father is now a hero, he too will become one,” says Tabassum, determination momentarily overshadowing the grief in her voice. Ghalib may be young but perhaps he’s not entirely unaware of how his father’s death marks an important chapter in the Kashmir saga.

Prof SAR Geelani

Prof S.A.R. Geelani, who was accused with Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain in the Dec 13, 2001, Parliament attack case, was acquitted by the Supreme Court in 2003. He tells Panini Anand why he’s shocked by the Afzal hanging.

Do you think that by hanging Afzal, the government has made him a hero for Kashmir?

The way the government has dealt with him; he is the hero for everyone in Kashmir. He is our martyr, our hero.

Two hangings in three months. Some people put Kasab and Afzal on the same level.

How can anybody do this? What kind of perverted mind equates the two?

What do you think about the timing of his hanging?

I feel it was nothing but a political decision. Look at the way in which the Supreme Court worded its judgement. The sentence the court used is: “to satisfy the collective conscience of the society…”  This is a political language, not a legal language. It’s clear that law doesn’t want him to be punished; there are political considerations which want this man to be hanged.

When you say, it was a political decision, are you hinting at the hardline stance of the ruling Congress party?

There has always been a Hindutva lobby within the Congress party. It’s nothing new. Look at the recent  Gujarat elections. Ahmed Patel was nowhere to be seen. Wasn’t it the Congress party that opened the gates of the Babri Masjid for worship by the Hindus? For the last couple of years, innocent Muslim youth across the country have been jailed. Had they not facilitated, the Babri Masjid would have not fallen. The Congress is misusing the UAPA and AFSPA. There are many shades of Congress party which come out from time to time as and when required for political benefits. I don’t see any difference between Congress and BJP. They are two sides of the same coin.

What about the state leadership? The day Afzal was hanged, many Kashmiri leaders were in Delhi. Don’t you think that the state’s political leaders and the government were taken into confidence before hanging Afzal?

The Jammu & Kashmir government is like a puppet. Remember the day when Kasab was hanged? The  secrecy was maintained. Go and see what Omar Abdullah tweeted then. He said that if this can be done in secrecy, others could be done as well. He was hinting at Afzal Guru. There is no reason not to believe that he was not aware about it or rather, knew about it.

In 2006, Farooq Abdullah warned of serious consequences in the valley if Afzal was to be hanged. My feeling is, Omar Abdullah was taken into confidence on the matter. Why didn’t Omar fly a chopper for the family of Afzal, so that they could meet him for one last time? Seeing the unrest in the valley, Omar is singing a different tune now. I believe other mainstream parties were also taken into confidence on the Afzal issue.

You were one of the co-accused in this case. How do you see this punishment?

The Supreme Court acquitted me, otherwise I too would have faced the same punishment as Afzal Guru. It is completely inhuman what they have done to Afzal. This country prides itself on being the world’s largest democracy but today they have shown not even the basic human values. They have disregarded the basic human values; forget about the larger issues of a democratic system. The family was not informed. A small son was not allowed to see his father for the last time. My stand on Afzal’s case is very clear from very beginning that he never got a fair trial; never ever. People say that there was a trial process. Of course, there was— from trial court to high court and then the Supreme Court— but it was completely flawed and a farce. The judgment is presumptuous. He gave requests at least five times, seeking legal aid. He gave the names of the lawyers. Neeraj Bansal was made his counsel. If you see the records, you will find that Neeraj Bansal gave an application to the court saying that he doesn’t want to be Afzal’s advocate. The court asked him to do the job for assisting the court. So, he was not fighting the case for Afzal, he was assisting the court. It is completely a case of justice denied and today I can say that an innocent man was hanged.

How do you think the media has handled the issue?

Hitler had one Goebbels; today governments have many Goebbels in the form of the electronic and print media. They go on lying to the people till they are convinced that what they hear is the truth. They say that we should have respect for the courts, but do they have? The Supreme Court has declared the confession by Afzal illegal but they are showing it repeatedly even after his death. I mean, they are like vultures who want their pound of flesh from a dead man. Even the so-called security and other experts—I mean what kind of society do they want?

What is happening in Kashmir now?

In Kashmir, the message from the government is hard and harsh. The youth will get a message that there is no option; you can be heard only if you have a gun in your hand. No institution is going to help you. It’s only possible when you snatch your rights by using power. And it will bring disaster, not only to Kashmir but to the entire country. There was a different generation when Maqbool Bhat was hanged in 1984. Now, the Kashmiri youth is more informed, aware and literate. They are not like us; they are listening to the bullet fire and blasts since they were in the wombs, day and night. They are born under the shadow of the guns.

Will it affect the peace process and confidence building in Kashmir?

I pity the politicians for their narrow vision. They can’t see beyond the 2014 elections. They couldn’t see the disaster the hanging would bring to the people of Kashmir and this country. Today, it has been confirmed that Kashmir will never get justice from the Indian system.

While Afzal was innocent, you were acquitted. who are the perpetrators of the Parliament attack? Who are the culprits?

That is the question I have been raising since my release. If you see Afzal’s statement in the court, he has pointed a finger at the agencies. Everyone is talking about national security but nobody has bothered to look into those areas, role of agencies. I am shocked to see this. I was the first person to demand a white paper on this issue; the governments have never come up with it.

After Home Ministry’s offer to handover Afzal’s belongings to the family, will the family collect his belongings from Tihar and offer prayers at his grave?

The family’s demand is that Afzal’s body should be handed to them—to enable them to conduct the last rites. Prayers can be offered from anywhere; sitting in Kashmir or any other place. As far as his belongings are concerned, they belong not only to his family but to Kashmir. They are a treasure now.

by Dr Shabir Choudhry

18IN_KASHMIR_1_165064fOn the morning of Saturday 9th February 2913, Mohammed Afzal Guru was hanged in Tihar Jail of New Delhi and buried inside the Jail. This undesirable action was carried out only two days before 29th death anniversary of Maqbool Butt, who was also hanged in the same jail on 11 February 1984.

It was not the first time a Kashmiri leader was executed in unsatisfactory manner and buried without handing the body to the relatives. Afzal Guru, whether guilty or innocent is no more with us, and let us pray that Almighty bless his soul.

Afzal Guru was accused of masterminding the attack on the Indian Parliament on 13 December 2001, in which 14 people lost their lives. All five attackers were killed on spot. India accused the Jaish-e-Mohammed militant group for this attack which has links with some officials of the Pakistani establishment. Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain Guru were sentenced to death in December 2002 for planning and providing logistic support for the attack. On appeal the sentence of Shaukat Hussain Guru was reduced to 10 years; and he was released on 30th December 2010.

In the same case, two other people, Delhi University Lecturer, SAR Geelani and Afshan Guru, wife of Shaukat Hussain Guru were acquitted due to a lack of evidence. What that suggests is that there must be some evidence against Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain Guru. Afzal Guru was to be executed on 20 October 2006, but after his wife’s clemency appeal to the President of India, it was put on hold. On 3 February 2013, the present President of India Pranab Mukherjee rejected the appeal, hence the execution of the accused.

It is not common in India to hang people for murder. Since 2004, only two people have been executed. Mohammed Ajmal Kasab was executed in November 2012 for his involvement in the 2008 Bombay attacks; and Afzal Guru for his involvement on the attacks on the Indian Parliament.

One may not say that Afzal guru was completely innocent man; but he certainly did not deserve a death sentence. In one TV interview he acknowledged his role in the incident, which was limited to providing logistic support and weapons. He also acknowledged that he went to Pakistani administered Kashmir as a JKLF man for training; and he later on established links with Jaish E Mohammed. One Important point here is that Afzal Guru was not part of the team that attacked the Parliament. He did not kill anyone, although he had some supportive role in the incident. People who are directly involved in murders, at times, do not get death sentence, and question arises why Afzal Guru had to be hanged? Why his sentence could not have been changed to life imprisonment?

Timing of the hanging and the way it was carried out, and what they did to his body speaks volumes about callousness of the authorities. If he had to be sentenced to death, why he had to be hanged two days before the death anniversary of Maqbool Butt, when feeling are running very high; and anti India feeling are at its peak? Why his family was not allowed to meet him before executing him? Above all, why his death body was not given to his family?

Is that not clear breach of fundamental human rights, and against ethics and morality? Is this not to rub salt in wounds of the suffering people? Is this not a message to angry and frustrated people of Kashmir that their sentiments, dignity and honour were not important to the authorities?

What that indicates is that some people don’t want any kind of peace or normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir, as Kashmir dispute has become a big business and a valuable source for winning public support or diverting attention from other important issues. One Kashmiri journalist today phoned me and asked my views about this incident. I expressed my serious anger, concern and strongly opposed this action; and called it a breach of fundamental human rights.

He agreed with me, but added that Afzal Guru was not innocent, as he had some role in the incident – he provided weapons which were used to kill people; but he should not have been hanged. He also agreed that his body must have been given to his family. He said: ‘Choudhry Sahib the Kashmir dispute will never be resolved. One condition for a plebiscite is normal situation; and those who are in position of power always ensure that the normal situation does not prevail in Jammu and Kashmir State’.

Commenting on the incident General secretary of CPI(ML) Liberation, Dipankar Bhattacharya said: “Faced with growing popular opposition and resistance one very front, the Congress party and the UPA government are desperately trying to appease the BJP and the communal-fascist brigade.2

Arun Dhati Roy writes: ‘Like most surrendered militants Afzal was easy meat in Kashmir — a victim of torture, blackmail, extortion. In the larger scheme of things he was a nobody. Anyone who was really interested in solving the mystery of the Parliament Attack would have followed the dense trail of evidence that was on offer.

No one did, thereby ensuring that the real authors of conspiracy will remain unidentified and uninvestigated. But now that Afzal Guru has been hanged, I hope our collective conscience has been satisfied. Or is our cup of blood still only half full?’ 3

The Supreme Court judgment says the evidence is circumstantial: “As is the case with most conspiracies, there is and could be no direct evidence amounting to criminal conspiracy.” But then it goes on to say: “The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties had shaken the entire nation, and the collective conscience of society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender.”

Already demonstrations on both parts of the divided State have started. Whereas, demonstrations on the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir have become violent; demonstrations on the Pakistani side were peaceful and despite government support numbers were limited to few hundred people. Fearing demonstrations as a result of Afzal Guru’s hanging the authorities in Jammu and Kashmir imposed a curfew, but hundreds of people still came out resulting in some injuries.

The big test will be on 11 February. Despite the curfew, people will come out in thousands; and that could result in serious clashes resulting in loss of valuable lives and damage to property. I hope common sense prevails and the authorities do not show heavy handedness; and let angry people protest peacefully and express their sentiments.

This incident will remain controversial, as some will claim he was innocent, others will say he was part of the terror project and was rightly executed. Some will say he had some role in it but did not deserve death sentence. Whether innocent or not, but by hanging Afzal Guru India has provided another prominent martyr to the Kashmiri Muslims. Afzal Guru is dead, but he will live as a martyr, and will boost anti India sentiments. My fear is that some groups will claim that they have no hope for justice; and that will provide new recruits for violence and terrorism.

References:
1. http://www.jammukashmir.tv/player/News-Update/Afzal-Guru-a-terrorist-or-freedom-fighter-Afzal-Guru%5C%5C%5C%5C%5C%5Cs-interview-after-2001-Parliament-attack-.html
2. http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Afzal-Guru-hanging-who-said-what/Article1-1009265.aspx
3. http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-perfect-day-for-democracy/article4397705.ece
4. ibid

Democracy’s Noose kept Afzal Guru hanging, till death

by Avinash Pandey

He had to die. Die, because a nation wanted him to, or so were we told by the Supreme Court of the nation. He had to die to satisfy the collective conscience of the nation, the court added for a good measure. So, he did die, nay, hanged till death. His body was left hanging for a full thirty minutes after the levers were pulled, we were told by a media that was less reporting on the incident and more speculating on it.

The media had turned this somber occasion of a death into cannibalistic carnival reminiscent of a 20-20 cricket match on the anvil. They told us everything about the last moments of the one condemned to death. Most of it was later found to be completely false. They told us how uneasy the convict on the death row was on the eve of his hanging only to be rebuffed by the jail officials next morning who told us how calm and composed he, in fact, was.

Whether the collective conscience of the nation was satisfied or not was the only question they did not bother to find answers for. They paraded the family members of the victims of the attack the death-convict had allegedly masterminded and they interviewed political leaders asserting that India would not take an attack on its very heart lying down. They looked around for visuals of those celebrating the hanging, almost all of them clad in saffron scarves while waving the Indian tricolour and inflicted the same on the nation that has started to express itself through the likes of Arnab Goswamis screaming on the television sets.

They did, still, not try to find out where, and in whom, the conscience of the nation resides , forget making efforts to know if it was finally satisfied or not. They did not need to bother to, for they had delivered their judgement far ahead of the courts and were now merely getting disgusted with delay in hanging the convict. The delay, for them, was symptomatic of all that was wrong with India, their India to be precise. They had been questioning the delay incessantly. Their ‘nation’ wanted to know when the convict would be hanged.

The convict, by the way, had a name. His name was Afzal Guru. He was a citizen of India. Yes, in case we forgot, as the mainstream media wanted us to, he was a citizen of India. He was entitled to all the rights a citizen, any citizen of India has. None of his rights, including the right to life with dignity unless taken out by due process of law, were respected by the nation. He was denied a fair trial as many of the legal stalwarts of the country believe.

Now, he was robbed of his dignity even in death. He was hanged in utter secrecy, a secrecy that baffled even the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh. Let’s make no mistakes though. Mr. Singh was not upset at “the hanging” but at the “circumvention of basic human parameters”. Basic human parameters, for the uninitiated, mean nothing more than the fact that his family was not informed about his hanging and was not given a chance to meet him ‘one last time’.

The fact that Manmohan Singh is known for being upset after the illegalities have been committed and the benefits reaped by those under his immediate supervision is beside the point. Remember his stand on stone pelting in Kashmir, the very same state Afzal came from. He was upset then too and demanded maximum restraint from the security forces who showered bullets on those who pelted stones. He talked of humane policing. He told all and sundry how much he valued the lives of Indian citizens, even the Kashmiris. P Chidambaram, his subordinate who was directly in command of the security forces, ordered maximum crackdown on the protesters meanwhile without upsetting the Prime Minister anymore. He had already exhausted his quota of being upset about the issue.

Afzal Guru’s case, however, was a different one. Here was a man hanged not for absolute legal reasons but to satisfy the ‘collective conscience of the nation’. The evidence against him was circumstantial at best, not enough for hanging someone even for those with an absolute belief in capital punishment, forget those like us who oppose the death sentence as a residual barbarity in modern times. He was given death sentence nonetheless.

The conscience of the nation was not satisfied. It did not want him just to be given a death sentence. It wanted the death warrant signed and executed as soon as possible. Afzal Guru, the man, had been converted into an issue, an emotive one on top of that. The nation, read Bharatiya Janata Party was baying for his blood. They had to, for everything about the wretched fellow served the BJP’s purpose. He was a Muslim and a Kashmiri. He was accused of being involved in the conspiracy (we cannot write conspiring as there is no concrete evidence for that till date) to attack Indian parliament.

What better stick could they, and tens of other amoebic heads the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh clan have, to beat Congress and its politics of ‘minority appeasement.’ Afzal was no more a person languishing in jail for a crime he committed, as per the political doctrine of collective conscience, if not legally as per his own assertion. BJP has converted him into a devil whose dead body would be the hinge on which would turn the discourse of national security.

It was not about national security though, not for the BJP at least. After all it remains the same party which had sent the then Union Minister Jaswant Singh to Kandahar as an escort to the known terrorist Masood Azhar and two others in return for the passengers of ill fated Air India flight IC 814. It was also the same party which had unceremoniously returned the army after keeping it in a forward attack position for almost two years without achieving a single stated objective of the misadventure. The cost of the catastrophic buildup on the borders was astronomical. BJP led NDA had successfully managed to get more than 1500 Indian soldiers killed without fighting a war.

Neither had it anything to do either with minority appeasement or BJP’s newly found love about democratic institutions. It has kept its mouth tightly shut on the case of Balwant Singh Rajoana, convicted for the assassination of Beant Singh, the then Chief Minister of Punjab. Rajoana, unlike Afzal Guru, has neither sought any clemency nor shown any remorse for the notorious killing even while admitting his role in the same.

Unlike Afzal Guru, further, Rajoana was not hanged even after death warrant being signed as the jail officials returned the same under, allegedly, instructions of Akali Dal-BJP government ruling the state. Parkash Singh Badal, the Chief Minister of Punjab, had himself approached the home ministry asking for putting the decision on hold. The reasons he gave for the demand were simple. He wanted the ministry to respect the sentiments of the people; the sentiments that reflected in Akal Takht, supreme religious body of the Sikhs, declaring Rajoana as ‘Zinda Shaheed’.

The case of Afzal Guru was no different. There were a lot of sentiments attached to him. The Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, as in Rajoana’s case, had warned the central government about the law and order problems that would have ensued following his hanging. The centre did take notice of all that as it was evidenced from the secret hanging and the immediate clampdown on Kashmiris’ right to protest. The state was put under unrelenting curfew. All channels of communication, including social media were stopped.

No, I am not asking for Rajoana’s hanging. No one with a firm belief in humanity can ask for anyone’s killing, that is a foray of the thousands of murderous Bajarangis of the BJP stable. It is not about Rajoana at all in fact.

It is about BJP and its double speak. And of Congress’ abject surrender to this politics of homicidal hate. Afzal Guru was not convicted for legal reasons. Neither was he hanged for the same. He was sacrificed on the altar of petty electoral gains BJP wanted to make out of his death. And on the altar of the growing desperation of the Congress ridden by a battery of scams and bad governance. It is about the difference between Kashmir and Punjab. And the people living in the states.

It is about the very future of the nation and Congress in it, as well. Congress might succeed, for a while, in puncturing BJP’s Hindutva balloon and emerge victorious in 2014. It is going to lose the battle nonetheless. It is not the first time it is flirting with soft Hindutva politics. It has done that in 1989 by allowing the juggernaut of rathyatras and Shilanyas. It did never come back anywhere close to power in most of north India ever again. It did the same in Gujarat while trying to fight Modi’s Hindutva with Shankarsingh Baghela’s Hindutva. The results are for everyone to see.

If only Congress knew that people prefer originals over photocopies, even when it is all about banality of evil.

I did not know Afzal Guru personally. Neither did I know his wife and son. Today I know them all and my heart goes out to them. With ample help from the BJP, the Indian state has successfully made a hero out of a surrendered militant. With the new vacant grave it has dug in Kashmir for him, it has ensured immortality befitting a martyr on Afzal Guru.

None of it can offer any solace to the bereaved family whose only crime was to be related to Afzal Guru. Nor can it offer any solace to the democracy that has been demeaned by the act. I think of all those Pakistani friends telling me how lucky we are to be a democracy. I had never missed that half-jealous and half-desirous tone of those comments. I don’t know if I would believe them anymore.

Mr. Pandey, alias Samar is Programme Coordinator, Right to Food Programme, AHRC. He could be contacted at samar@ahrc.asia

Pakistan’s Army Concluded That If It Could Get Away With Bombay, It Could Get Away With Anything

The habit of bending over backwards

by MJ Akbar 

Clip_20As a conundrum, this one is hard to beat, possibly because it is uniquely Indian.

Why has appeasement of hardliners in Pakistan, an avowedly communal state carved out of the two-nation theory, become a touchstone for secularism in India? If this were limited to an irony it would doubtless find its level in the varied folds of public discourse. As an artful strategy to legitimize the present UPA government’s weak knees, it has more disturbing implications.

The subtext is subtle. There are only two sides to this coin of Manmohan Singh’s realm: accommodation or war, a nonsense familiar to historians of Europe between the first two world wars. An ultimatum is the last resort, not the first one; and there are many stages in-between, as President Obama’s policy towards Iran, for instance, indicates. But in the dictum laid down by Delhi, you either accept Pakistan’s token verbiage, or risk derision as a hawk.

Pakistan’s hard line towards India is held by the Army, which takes the final call on India, whether in strategic planning or real-time response. Its thinking is rooted in Partition. India won freedom from the British. Pakistan won independence from India. Pakistan’s fundamentalist patriots therefore locate the existentialist threat from India. Expand or manouvre the matrix and a man wanted across the world for terrorism, Hafiz Saeed, gets transformed into a commander of the faithful doing his duty in a holy war on Mumbai. Does this make dialogue impossible? No. But it makes it more complex.

Singh, backed firmly by Sonia Gandhi, has no use for complications. He bends in the hope that one more storm will pass over. But between Pakistan’s intransigence over terrorism, his own capitulation at Sharm el Sheikh within nine months of Mumbai, a succession of Pakistan officials who taunt India on Indian soil, and the mutilation of two Indian soldiers this week along the Rampur-Haji Ali sector, Dr Singh seems to have bent so far that he looks prostrate.

The ceasefire line across Jammu and Kashmir is a misnomer. It is always on fire. Lives are lost periodically in the tension of conflicting responsibilities, as India guards itself from the enemy without and insurgents within. But some instances are intended to send a larger signal. The gruesome killing of Lance Naiks Hemraj Singh and Sudhakar Singh was one such message.

Singh’s answer was to pull out the most tired clichés from the store. The Pakistan high commissioner Salman Bashir was “summoned” and told that barbarism was “unacceptable” over a nice cup of tea. Bashir dismissed India’s accusations with contempt. His boss, foreign minister Hina Rabbani, used two words where her Indian counterpart used one, calling India’s allegations “absolutely unacceptable”.

Examine Pakistan’s version of events. Islamabad claims India started the firefight on January 6 in which one of its soldiers was killed and another seriously wounded. Pakistan did not summon India’s high commissioner for coffee and photographs. It sent the 29 Baloch Regiment to extract two eyes for one. When India asked for an enquiry, Pakistan told India to jump – into the arms of the United Nations. Pakistan marshaled its array of diplomats to supplement action in the field. Dr Singh ordered Indian diplomats and armed forces to freeze and “de-escalate”.

Islamabad took the measure of Delhi in 2009 at Sharm el Sheikh, when, despite the international outrage over Mumbai and evidence of Pakistan’s involvement, it was Singh who made extraordinary concessions to put together a joint statement. The text was not shown to India’s National Security Adviser, M K Narayanan, who went ashen when he read the contents a little before it was released to media. Narayanan’s silence was purchased with a ghostly residence in Calcutta, also known as the Raj Bhavan.

Pakistan’s Army Concluded That If It Could Get Away With Bombay, It Could Get Away With Anything. It Has.

Pakistan’s generals have measured the Singh government’s girth, and discovered a circumference bloated by hot air. They know that the only reaction from hot air can be flatulence. They’ve the evidence they need. There were 57 cross-border violations by Pakistan in 2010, 60 in 2011 and 117 in 2012. Delhi’s response has been a private, and sometimes public, campaign to reduce our forces on the border. If it takes two sides to go to war, it also takes a partnership for peace. Manmohan Singh has the look of a lonely man abandoned by the partner of his dreams.


Even an Indo-Pak Nuclear War Will be Fought in Kashmir

26593_380813213557_112849003557_4000803_8218104_nIndia Warns Kashmiris to Prepare for Nuclear War

Indian officials are advising residents of strife-torn Indian Kashmir to prepare for a possible nuclear war by building bombproof basements and stockpiling food and water, adding to tensions between India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers, after deadly cross-border skirmishes in recent weeks.

“People should construct basements where the whole family can stay for a fortnight,” read the advisory, which was published January 21, 2013, in the newspaper Greater Kashmir. It comes in the midst of the worst fighting in Kashmir between India and Pakistan since a cease-fire was signed in 2003. Three Pakistani and two Indian soldiers have been killed, and one of the Indian soldiers was found without his head.

News of the mutilation infuriated Indians, with Sushma Swaraj, the leader of the opposition in the lower house of Parliament, calling for India “to get at least 10 heads from their side” if the Pakistanis did not return the soldier’s head. After criticism that he was not doing enough, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India said he was reviewing ties with Pakistan. A special visa program between the two countries has been suspended, and Pakistani players in a new Indian field hockey league have been sent home.

Officials insisted that the advisory published was unrelated to these developments. Yoginder

Kaul, the inspector general of the Civil Defense and State Disaster Response Force, said the advisory was meant to commemorate the first anniversary of the creation of his unit.

“It has nothing to do with anything else,” Mr. Kaul said in a telephone interview. “It was a routine advisory issued on our raising day to create awareness among people.”

If so, it was remarkably ill timed. The advisory suggested that people build shelters in open spaces in front of their houses if they did not have basements because “some protection was better than no protection,” according to an article about the advisory in Greater Kashmir. Food and water should be restocked regularly, and ample candles and battery-operated lights should be included, it said.

If in the open during a nuclear attack, a person should “immediately drop to ground and remain in lying position,” the advisory said.

“Stay down after the initial shock wave, wait for the winds to die down and debris to stop falling. If blast wave does not arrive within five seconds of the flash, you were far enough from the ground zero.”

“Expect some initial disorientation,” the advisory added, “as the blast wave may blow down and carry away many prominent and familiar features.”

Abdul Qaiuum of Silikote, a village close to the dividing line on the Indian side, said in a telephone interview that neither he nor his neighbors were constructing new bunkers. “No firing is taking place,” he said. Besides, he added, “we are under two to three feet of snow in the village.”

Even after both governments embarked on efforts to improve ties after decades of war and recriminations, Kashmir remains a troubled region. India, heavily Hindu, controls the bulk of the predominantly Muslim region of Kashmir, which has been at the heart of disputes between the two nations since they won independence from Britain in 1947. The land along the cease-fire Line of Control is one of the most heavily militarized areas in the world.

The latest clashes started when an elderly woman on the Indian side decided to use a secret entrance into Pakistani territory so that she could see her children living on the other side, according to a report in The Hindu, an Indian newspaper. After the Indian military discovered the tunnel, it built emplacements to prevent its use.

But those emplacements violated the terms of the cease-fire with Pakistan, and Pakistani soldiers repeatedly warned their Indian counterparts to desist, which the Indians ignored.

Firing weapons across the cease-fire line is not unusual, but the beheading, which the Pakistan government denies responsibility for, added a volatile mix to the politically charged debate. Previous mutilations of soldiers’ bodies have generally been kept secret to avoid just the sort of news media firestorm that has erupted. National elections are scheduled to be held in Pakistan by May and in India by sometime in 2014.

 

Culprits for the Feb 2007 Train Blast Yet to be Convicted

Clip_79For more than one and a half years after they occurred, the blasts on the Delhi-Lahore Samjhauta Express, which claimed 68 lives, were believed to be the handiwork of Islamist terrorist groups.

The attack happened  on February 18, 2007, the day before Pakistan’s then foreign minister, Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri, was arriving to resume peace talks. So sleuths suspected the hand of Islamist groups intent on derailing the Indo-Pak initiative.

Now, the NIA has confirmed that the terror attack was actually the work of Hindutva outfits. The agency’s latest chargesheet, filed before additional sessions judge Kanchan Mahi, puts their involvement on record; it also rules out the involvement of jehadi groups. The perpetrators were seeking revenge for a spate of attacks “on Hindu temples and Hindus”.

It was in November 2008 that the railway police and an SIT of Haryana police, the agencies that first took up the case, got a whiff of the blasts being linked to Hindu terror groups. The name they turned up was Prasad Shrikant Purohit, a colonel in Military Intelligence, who was linked to the Hindutva group Abhinav Bharat. (He’s now in jail, as investigations of Hindutva terror plots widen.)

But definitive progress on that angle came since the NIA took up the case in July 2010. The chargesheet identifies the bomb-planters—Kamal Chauhan, Lokesh Sharma, Rajender Chaudhary, Amit Hakla and Sunil Joshi—as having had RSS links. In fact, Joshi, who was murdered in Dewas in December 2007, was an RSS pracharak. The chargesheet says the “blasts in Samjhauta Express, Mecca Masjid and Ajmer Sharif were  carried out by the accused in pursuance of a criminal conspiracy”. The suitcases used in the Samjhauta blasts were bought on February 14, 2007, from Kothari market in Indore and packed with explosive chemicals, fuel oil and digital timers.

A steady build-up of the case began since December 2010, when the NIA claimed evidence of Swami Aseemanand, who was formerly with the RSS, being one of the masterminds. He confessed before a magistrate, but later retracted. In February this year, the NIA arrested Kamal Chauhan, a former RSS worker, in Indore. He is believed to be an associate of Ramchandra  Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange, two absconding accused in the same case on whom the agency has announced a Rs 10 lakh reward.

Chauhan apparently took part in a training session in the Bagli forest of Dewas district, Madhya Pradesh. Joshi, Kalsangra, Sharma, Hakla and one Rajender Chaudhary attended the session. Call records confirm that they were all in touch. Arriving in Delhi by the Indore Intercity on fake names some time in November-December 2006, Chauhan and Chaudhary conducted recces of Jama Masjid and the Old Delhi railway station. Their assessment was that security at the mosque was tight, while it was lax at the railway station, so the Samjhauta Express was an easier target. The bomb-planters then took a Delhi train from Indore the day before the blasts. Arriving in the capital, they took a local train from Nizamuddin station to Old Delhi, stayed in dormitory, and reached the platform from which the targeted train was scheduled to depart at 11:05 pm. Job done, they went to Jaipur and took a bus to Indore.

Chauhan and Sharma are at the Central Jail in Ambala, awaiting trial. The rest of the accused are absconding, and Joshi, one of the key persons involved, is dead. Still, the agency hopes to be able to build a solid case. It’s awaiting comparative reports of the bombs used to see if links can be established to the blasts in Malegaon in Maharashtra and Modasa in Gujarat. That would complete the picture of the Hindutva terror story.

Several Pakistani Generals were Italian POWs

Sahibzada Yaqub Khan Clip_56 Tikka Khan Brig Hissam el Effendi Gen Kumaramangalam Gen AS NaravaneDuring the Second World War, all these officers were POWs in an Italian POW Camp No P.G. 63 located at Aversa which is a town in the Province of Caserta in Campania southern Italy, about 15 kilometers north of Naples.

There were a number of Axis prisoner-of-war camps in Italy during the War and the initials “P.G.” denote Prigione di Guerra (Prison of War). P.G. 63 held mostly Indian officers and soldiers.

Except for Gen Yahya, all these officers were serving in the 3rd Indian Motor Brigade during the Battle of Ghazala 1942 and were captured when their brigade was overrun by the Afrika Korps on the very first day of the battle. Inserted into the defences at the last moment and ill equipped to take on the brunt of the attack of Rommel’s three armoured divisions, it fought tenaciously and within the space of two hours destroyed 50 German and Italian Tanks (one estimate records 80 tanks destroyed). Most of the tanks were destroyed by the 25 Pounder Guns of 2 Field Regiment, Indian Artillery firing over open sights but the 2 Pounder anti-tank guns (mounted on trucks and called ‘Portees’) of the armoured motor regiments also inflicted substantial casualties.

Some 17 officers and 670 Viceroy’s Commissioned Officers and Indian other ranks were taken prisoner and while the soldiers were released (because there was not enough water), the officers were taken to the rear and subsequently flown to Italy.

Amongst the officers were Lt Sahibzada Yaqub, signal officer of 18th Cavalry (later Lt Gen and Foreign Minister of Pakistan) and Lt Hissam el Effendi with 11th Cavalry (famous polo player who retired as a Brig from the Pakistan Army).

The officer serving with the 2 Field Regiment who were captured included Maj P. P. Kumaramangalam (later Chief of Staff of the Indian Army from 1967–1970), Lt A.S. Naravane (retired as Maj Gen from the Indian Army) and Lt Tikka Khan (later Chief of Army Staff of the Pakistan Army from 1972-76).

Maj Gen A.S. Naravane in his memoirs “A Soldier’s Life in War and Peace” narrates his experiences in the POW Camp P.G. 63 and states that Maj P. P. Kumaramangalam was the senior most Indian officer and was appointed as the Camp Senior Officer and Capt Yahya Khan was the Camp Adjutant.

There were a number of Indian medical officers in the P.G. 63 and one of them, Dr Satyen Basu, a doctor from Calcutta, wrote an account of his wartime experiences entitled ‘A Doctor in the Army’ which were privately published in Calcutta in 1960. During his stay in the POW Camp he befriended Lt ‘Y’ and his impressions of Lt ‘Y’ (and it takes little guesswork to decipher that he is referring to Lt Sahibzada Yaqub), were:

“Lt. Y was one of the most intelligent young lads I had ever met. Born of a royal family in one of the Indian states his early education was in the R.I.M.C. He was thus earmarked for an army career. He had proved himself an able officer in the cavalry regiment that he was serving in. But I am sure his intellectual equipment was misplaced. At 22 he was a good portrait painter, and a connoisseur of music and the dance. In two months he had brushed up his knowledge of French which he could now speak fluently, and was well up in the German language. It seemed he normally agreed with Aristotle that intellectual attainment is the greatest pleasure of life, for he kept most of his time within his room reading some book or other. And yet he had a keen sense of humour. I got friendly with him in studying together a few lectures on psychology delivered by a professor in his former camp. But it was his amiable nature that made me his friend. When I spoke my mind to Lt. Y the Cavalry officer and asked him how he felt, he replied that it was in this prison that he had spent some of the best moments of his life. Never before, he declared, was he so free from worries and allowed to follow his own pursuits – books.”

Another officer of 18th Cavalry who was also captured was 2/Lt Abhey Singh the youngest son of Major-General Sir Onkar Singh, KCIE, a minister for the Princely State of Kotah.

2/Lt Abhey Singh was sent to P. G. 71 also in Aversa for internment.In May 1943, he was sent to P. G. 91 in Avezzano and it seems that both Maj. P. P. Kumaramangalam and Lt. Sahabzada Yaqub Khan were also transferred to this camp. In the confusion that followed the Italian surrender in September 1943, the three escaped from Avezzano. Since Lt. Yaqub Khan spoke Italian, it enabled them to solicit assistance from rural Italians who were sympathetic to the Allies. They spent four to five months attempting to move south to Allied lines, but were subsequently re-captured by German forces.

All three officers were transferred to POW camps in Germany and Maj. P. P. Kumaramangalam was interned in Stalag Luft III, 100 miles (160 km) southeast of Berlin. The camp is best known for two famous prisoner escapes that took place there by tunneling, which were depicted in the films The Wooden Horse (1950) and The Great Escape (1963)

Clip_57

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 209 other followers