Arjimand Hussain Talib
In any credible democratic system, the rule of law is paramount. India’s democratic values, press freedom and commitment to the rule of law within its borders are generally well respected globally. When it comes to Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), the standards fall short of global benchmarks and Kashmiri expectations. The current state of human, civil and political rights, civil liberties, freedom of speech and assembly and press freedom in J&K does not meet international benchmarks.
In such a backdrop, the statements issued by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the Amnesty International (AI), to some extent, about the Kashmir situation this week seem to have fallen short of expectations in Kashmir. AI’s demand for release of human rights activists is welcome. HRW’s point that the J&K government should carry out a High Court order to ensure protection for the arrested children is welcome too, but the language used leaves a lot to be desired. J&K High Court has not given directions to the government on the establishment of juvenile courts and observation homes for children only, it routine gives directions on a number of cases of detention, arbitrary arrests, etc; which the government chooses to ignore and which HRW has chosen to remain mum about.
HRW said “Hundreds of these children, locally known as the "stone pelters," are at risk of arbitrary detention and abuse as authorities struggle to identify the often-masked culprits and contain the protests.” An international human rights body is not expected to use terms like “often masked culprits”, which sounds too judgmental. The language used also seeks to absolve the central government of its responsibilities in Kashmir, which has the primary and the final say on law and order and security matters in Kashmir. Both the organizations did not speak about the curbs on civilian movement, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, undeclared curfews, ban on SMS use, media clamp down, threats to Facebook users, etc.
HRW’s struggle to strike a balance in its stand seems to have lost sight of some plain facts. It said “Teenagers have thrown stones at security forces and destroyed public and private property. To contain the rioters, the police have sometimes used excessive force, causing deaths and injuries with live bullets, rubber bullets, and teargas canisters.” Use of such language creates some degree of justification for arrest of children.
Quoting Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at HRW, the statement said, "Violent protesters and the people inciting them are breaking the law and should be punished…but the J&K government needs to comply with Indian and international law for detention and prosecution, and give special attention to the requirements for
children." While mentioning the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), HRW’s statement read, “CRC, to which India is a party, permits the prosecution of children for criminal offenses but requires authorities to arrest or detain a child only as a matter of last resort and for the shortest appropriate time. Every detained child has the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance.” But the question that arises is: does participation in peaceful protests by
children amount to criminal offence?
Ms Ganguly’s statement, "The authorities believe that greed and misplaced anger motivates these children to commit violence," adding "But leaving children vulnerable to abuse in detention, without proper access to justice, will only fuel the unrest" again raises some serious questions. The use of words like “greed” and “misplaced” anger with children are highly judgmental.
The HRW statement further said that “the protesters as well as the security forces have been responsible for casualties during the protest marches.” It is, again, something which is far from the truth. The HRW statement’s use of terms “apparently” “allegedly” makes certain political statements which are unbecoming of an advocacy-based human rights group. A human rights group of such repute is supposed to do its home work well and not rely on desk work alone – without engaging in fact finding on the ground by impartial people devoid of a political baggage of their own.
(c) Arjimand Hussain. Not to be reproduced anywhere else.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
Case for UN-OCHA in Kashmir
Thinking beyond the UNMOGIP, and its mandate
Arjimand Hussain Talib
A spokesperson for the United Nations (UN) Secretary General said last week that their office was getting regular updates about the on-going situation in Kashmir. When asked whether the UN would like to comment on the situation here, there was no answer.
The unrest and the civilian killings in Kashmir over the last one month are colossal
in scale. The state actions in containing demonstrations of unarmed civilians have been extraordinary. A strong crackdown on dissenting voices, withdrawal of mobile phone services, use of live ammunition on protesters, army deployment, media curbs, etc. signal to an extraordinary political and humanitarian situation. Although the unrest has received some degree of international media attention, yet the international community remains as oblivious to the happenings in Kashmir as ever before.
There are two main reasons why the international community is not so concerned about the current Kashmir situation. One reason is that there is almost negligible advocacy at international level for an international intervention. If at all there is some advocacy that is symbolic and ill guided. Another reason has something to do with 9/11. Kashmir has acquired an image of a place which is part of the larger problem of “international terrorism”. There is hardly any appreciation of the fact that whatever is happening in Kashmir is fundamentally driven by a peaceful people’s movement – seeking a change in political status quo and tight military control. So the days when Kashmir was seen as a genuine political nationalist struggle where the UN had a clear role to play are gone.
The current international indifference has also something to do with the failure of Kashmir’s civil society in looking beyond the UN’s political resolutions on Kashmir. It is a fact that the UN continues to portray Kashmir as a disputed region in all its maps. Its communications also recognize it as such. But there is a technical difference between depiction of a region as ‘disputed’ and ‘conflict affected’. The ‘disputed’ status, despite its own political significance, does not necessarily underline humanitarian urgency. Designation of Kashmir as a ‘conflict zone’ would do that.
The question here is why hasn’t such thing happened so far? Naturally, the governments in New Delhi and Srinagar would not do that. Those advocating for Kashmiri right to self determination and safeguarding of their human rights at home and abroad have missed an important point over the years: the role of UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Kashmir. And also the absence of the UN Cluster System in Kashmir
The United Nations’ Military Observers’ Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), based in Srinagar and Muzaffarabad, has a limited mandate. Their primary work is to report any violations or change in the status quo of the Line of Control (LoC).
OCHA's has a broader mission - to “mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action” to alleviate human suffering in emergencies, which includes conflict situations. Importantly, one of its missions is also to advocate for the rights of people in need.
OCHA is the arm of the UN Secretariat that is responsible for bringing together humanitarian actors to ensure coherent response to emergencies. It also ensures there is a framework within which each actor can contribute to the overall response effort.
Beyond humanitarian coordination, what is required in Kashmir today is underlining the urgency for some urgent political initiatives to ensure that the trouble in Kashmir does not spill over to the larger South Asian region. That, naturally, would happen if there are credible situation reports from a body like OCHA, which will be taken more seriously by the international community. What Kashmir needs today are situation reports by impartial international actors which depict the real humanitarian situation there.
Although the European Commission (EC) on Friday announced an emergency aid of 2 million euros ($2.5 million) for the victims of the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir, it was not a special initiative in response to the current situation. The EU’s low scale humanitarian aid for Kashmir has been pouring in for some eight years now, addressing the longer term impacts of the conflict.
The UN Resolution 46/182 which serves as the basis of the OCHA mandate is clear that the “responsibility for people affected by emergency lies – first and foremost - with their respective states”. But it also says that the “states in need are expected to facilitate the work of responding organizations.” Given the UN’s recognition of Kashmir as a disputed territory, the definition of the governing ‘State’ cannot be normal in meaning and scope.
There are people who argue that since there is no UN OCHA office in India, its ambit of work cannot be extended to Kashmir. That is not a convincing argument. UN OCHA has directly and indirectly responded to many emergency situations in India. One example is the Gujarat earthquake.
Then there is a full-fledged UN OCHA office in Pakistan, whose area of work includes Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK). UN OCHA has played, and continues to play, a key role in the coordination of the government and the international emergency response efforts in PAK.
The UN OCHA has a strong presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) as well. Humanitarian actors, donors, and diplomatic missions alike rely on OCHA for its wide range of information and analytical products in the OPT. These include bridging the gaps in humanitarian needs, weekly and monthly humanitarian updates, briefings and field tours. More importantly, OCHA provides leadership, guidance and support on coordination and policy issues, particularly the roll out of the cluster approach, and development of a principled and strategic approach to access. One of its key functions is the regular reporting on the overall humanitarian situation, and routine monitoring, reporting on, advocating for, and facilitating humanitarian access in the OPT.
Looking at the dire humanitarian situation in Kashmir today, especially the highly inadequate infrastructure to treat the casualties, UN OCHA has a strong case in Kashmir. Its case is also strong for the fact that people are dying for lack of timely medical aid and treatment. The death of two women last week just because their travel to hospital was hindered by troopers serves as a grim reminder.
There are many more instances which are not reported.
Arjimand Hussain Talib
A spokesperson for the United Nations (UN) Secretary General said last week that their office was getting regular updates about the on-going situation in Kashmir. When asked whether the UN would like to comment on the situation here, there was no answer.
The unrest and the civilian killings in Kashmir over the last one month are colossal
in scale. The state actions in containing demonstrations of unarmed civilians have been extraordinary. A strong crackdown on dissenting voices, withdrawal of mobile phone services, use of live ammunition on protesters, army deployment, media curbs, etc. signal to an extraordinary political and humanitarian situation. Although the unrest has received some degree of international media attention, yet the international community remains as oblivious to the happenings in Kashmir as ever before.
There are two main reasons why the international community is not so concerned about the current Kashmir situation. One reason is that there is almost negligible advocacy at international level for an international intervention. If at all there is some advocacy that is symbolic and ill guided. Another reason has something to do with 9/11. Kashmir has acquired an image of a place which is part of the larger problem of “international terrorism”. There is hardly any appreciation of the fact that whatever is happening in Kashmir is fundamentally driven by a peaceful people’s movement – seeking a change in political status quo and tight military control. So the days when Kashmir was seen as a genuine political nationalist struggle where the UN had a clear role to play are gone.
The current international indifference has also something to do with the failure of Kashmir’s civil society in looking beyond the UN’s political resolutions on Kashmir. It is a fact that the UN continues to portray Kashmir as a disputed region in all its maps. Its communications also recognize it as such. But there is a technical difference between depiction of a region as ‘disputed’ and ‘conflict affected’. The ‘disputed’ status, despite its own political significance, does not necessarily underline humanitarian urgency. Designation of Kashmir as a ‘conflict zone’ would do that.
The question here is why hasn’t such thing happened so far? Naturally, the governments in New Delhi and Srinagar would not do that. Those advocating for Kashmiri right to self determination and safeguarding of their human rights at home and abroad have missed an important point over the years: the role of UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Kashmir. And also the absence of the UN Cluster System in Kashmir
The United Nations’ Military Observers’ Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), based in Srinagar and Muzaffarabad, has a limited mandate. Their primary work is to report any violations or change in the status quo of the Line of Control (LoC).
OCHA's has a broader mission - to “mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action” to alleviate human suffering in emergencies, which includes conflict situations. Importantly, one of its missions is also to advocate for the rights of people in need.
OCHA is the arm of the UN Secretariat that is responsible for bringing together humanitarian actors to ensure coherent response to emergencies. It also ensures there is a framework within which each actor can contribute to the overall response effort.
Beyond humanitarian coordination, what is required in Kashmir today is underlining the urgency for some urgent political initiatives to ensure that the trouble in Kashmir does not spill over to the larger South Asian region. That, naturally, would happen if there are credible situation reports from a body like OCHA, which will be taken more seriously by the international community. What Kashmir needs today are situation reports by impartial international actors which depict the real humanitarian situation there.
Although the European Commission (EC) on Friday announced an emergency aid of 2 million euros ($2.5 million) for the victims of the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir, it was not a special initiative in response to the current situation. The EU’s low scale humanitarian aid for Kashmir has been pouring in for some eight years now, addressing the longer term impacts of the conflict.
The UN Resolution 46/182 which serves as the basis of the OCHA mandate is clear that the “responsibility for people affected by emergency lies – first and foremost - with their respective states”. But it also says that the “states in need are expected to facilitate the work of responding organizations.” Given the UN’s recognition of Kashmir as a disputed territory, the definition of the governing ‘State’ cannot be normal in meaning and scope.
There are people who argue that since there is no UN OCHA office in India, its ambit of work cannot be extended to Kashmir. That is not a convincing argument. UN OCHA has directly and indirectly responded to many emergency situations in India. One example is the Gujarat earthquake.
Then there is a full-fledged UN OCHA office in Pakistan, whose area of work includes Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK). UN OCHA has played, and continues to play, a key role in the coordination of the government and the international emergency response efforts in PAK.
The UN OCHA has a strong presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) as well. Humanitarian actors, donors, and diplomatic missions alike rely on OCHA for its wide range of information and analytical products in the OPT. These include bridging the gaps in humanitarian needs, weekly and monthly humanitarian updates, briefings and field tours. More importantly, OCHA provides leadership, guidance and support on coordination and policy issues, particularly the roll out of the cluster approach, and development of a principled and strategic approach to access. One of its key functions is the regular reporting on the overall humanitarian situation, and routine monitoring, reporting on, advocating for, and facilitating humanitarian access in the OPT.
Looking at the dire humanitarian situation in Kashmir today, especially the highly inadequate infrastructure to treat the casualties, UN OCHA has a strong case in Kashmir. Its case is also strong for the fact that people are dying for lack of timely medical aid and treatment. The death of two women last week just because their travel to hospital was hindered by troopers serves as a grim reminder.
There are many more instances which are not reported.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Kashmir’s new enemy - PowerPoint
Understanding Kashmiri and Afghan similarities
Arjimand Hussain Talib
President Barack Obama’s sacking of the top American commander for Afghanistan, General McChrystal, last week was preceded by an interesting drama. American commanders banned the use of Microsoft PowerPoint (PP) presentations for all kinds of meetings and briefings in that country.
International Herald Tribune produced an article on the issue, titled “The enemy has been found, and it is PowerPoint.” The article analyzed why America, in its opinion, was losing the war in Afghanistan. It reasoned that the US Army commanders and the civilian leaders, responsible for the Afghanistan mission, were ill-informed about the country. It said that the reason carrot and stick strategies were not working in stabilizing the country was that PP presentations formed the backbone of the administration’s information analysis!
In Afghanistan, a big developmental effort is on in the country, which includes building of roads, schools, hospitals, drinking water facilities and so on. Yet, in spite of the enormous US investment to win over the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, the country is taking its own course. Nobody knows where it is heading. That may mean anything - even a NATO deal with the Taliban to take over Kabul, based on certain conditions!
Afghanistan and Kashmir plots have a few interesting similarities – both the US-led coalition and New Delhi believe that economic and social bounties targeted at local populations will win the war for them. But is that so?
This June was the bloodiest month for the NATO forces in Afghanistan since they started the military campaign in the country in 2001. This June also happens to be the bloodiest so far in Kashmir since Omar Abdullah took over. Look at the mayhem being unleashed by India’s security agencies on Kashmir’s streets. Look at the people’s anger. Look at the Internet Intifada. And see the political assertiveness of Kashmiri teenagers - our Millennium Generation!
Clearly, New Delhi’s efforts to “win the Kashmiri hearts and minds”, begun in 1947, remain as haywire as ever before. The writings on the wall today convey the same as what they conveyed in 1947. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s Friday statement symbolizes that very realization – that how carrots and sticks have failed in subduing Kashmiri quest for political sovereignty.
Interestingly, lately, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has himself taken to PP to present the state’s political and economic situation before New Delhi’s leadership. Army commanders and police officers are said to be doing the same.
PowerPoint is arguably good in displaying statistics. It is also good in selling an idea effectively. It is just awesome in highlighting one’s achievements in a bullet form. But it is miserably bad in presenting an effective analysis of a complex political situation like the one prevalent in J&K, or even Afghanistan, today. Despite its pleasing eloquence, PP easily hides more than what it reveals.
Now look at the conclusion drawn at the Kashmir situation review meeting in New Delhi on Wednesday that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chaired: the Lashkar-i-Tayiba (LeT) was behind the ongoing protests in Kashmir! Could anything be as bizarre as this?
People who see conspiracy theories to spontaneous street protests in Kashmir miss the point altogether. See first hand and you will realize that it is the jeans-clad boys next door who organize these protests. There are no ghosts or invisible hands behind. The reason they are doing it is that Kashmiri political movement has simply transferred to their generation. These boys do not act on behalf of – or are members of – any party. They are individual parties, who go by their political instincts; feel hurt by the bullying and humiliation by at the hands of security forces, love to vent that anger through slogans and stones whenever they can, and do not bother about repercussions.
Quite often – like when Omar Abdullah was voted to power – India’s political and media establishments write off Jammu & Kashmir’s movement for political sovereignty. Every time tourists swell this place, or there is an election, or a dance and song competition is held at the SKICC, people in New Delhi see the end of the possibility of its rule being challenged again. But every time this premise is proved wrong.
The strategy of doling out economic benefits to an alienated population does not necessarily win political loyalty. The participation of Kashmiris in state-sponsored development programs does create a sense of ‘normalcy.’ And even a political statement. But every time that sense is proved wrong. The “peace time”, when New Delhi and Srinagar governments tend to see ‘all is well’, often proves an anger accumulation period. A lot of emotions are suppressed during that period, which finally blow up when there is a bigger trigger.
Omar Abdullah’s perception that all trouble in the state basically emanates from, and is confined to, a few pockets in Srinagar has a sub text too. The reason there is a greater expression of anger and frustration in Srinagar is because its protesters have a sense of security by virtue of the city’s landscape. People in the countryside do not often throng the streets because they are vulnerable to persecution. A strong military grip ensures every protester is called to a military or police camp in the night if a demonstration happens.
The current spate of protests basically marks a transition of Kashmir’s movement for political sovereignty from the 90s’ generation to the Millennium Generation. This generation is different than its predecessors. Their movement will not die down because this generation is dynamic – stretches across the globe. It has technology at its hand – Internet, mobiles phones, digital cameras, You Tube, Facebook, etc. They are archiving Kashmir’s current happenings for the next generation. And are disseminating that to the world beyond to catch attention. And if you tell them they are being engaged in a ‘battle of ideology’, they are going to be damn rabid about their stand. That is, at least, what their Internet activism is saying.
There is another angle involved. Over the years, Kashmiris’ greater interaction with the Indian mainland has had a political spin off too. That interaction has, ironically, deepened the gulf between a common Kashmiri and the Indian state. Reason: A common Kashmiri in India has been intensely made to perceive himself or herself as the ‘other’ and ‘an enemy.’ Some acts of violence in India, and the state’s security reaction, have created an extraordinary situation for a Kashmiri youngster in India. A hyper vigilante culture of Kashmiri witch hunt has aggravated their feeling of being the ‘other.’ Talk to a student, a trader, or a fruit seller, they will tell you what the experiences of police and public humiliation and suspicion mean to them.
The intense pulls for cultural and political assimilation of Kashmir’s Millennium Generation with India, courtesy satellite TV, Bollywood and Internet, etc. should have ideally bridged that gap. But that has not happened. A PowerPoint presentation cannot explain that. The day that is acknowledged in PP presentations, Kashmir will be on a real road to peace and stability.
Arjimand Hussain Talib
President Barack Obama’s sacking of the top American commander for Afghanistan, General McChrystal, last week was preceded by an interesting drama. American commanders banned the use of Microsoft PowerPoint (PP) presentations for all kinds of meetings and briefings in that country.
International Herald Tribune produced an article on the issue, titled “The enemy has been found, and it is PowerPoint.” The article analyzed why America, in its opinion, was losing the war in Afghanistan. It reasoned that the US Army commanders and the civilian leaders, responsible for the Afghanistan mission, were ill-informed about the country. It said that the reason carrot and stick strategies were not working in stabilizing the country was that PP presentations formed the backbone of the administration’s information analysis!
In Afghanistan, a big developmental effort is on in the country, which includes building of roads, schools, hospitals, drinking water facilities and so on. Yet, in spite of the enormous US investment to win over the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, the country is taking its own course. Nobody knows where it is heading. That may mean anything - even a NATO deal with the Taliban to take over Kabul, based on certain conditions!
Afghanistan and Kashmir plots have a few interesting similarities – both the US-led coalition and New Delhi believe that economic and social bounties targeted at local populations will win the war for them. But is that so?
This June was the bloodiest month for the NATO forces in Afghanistan since they started the military campaign in the country in 2001. This June also happens to be the bloodiest so far in Kashmir since Omar Abdullah took over. Look at the mayhem being unleashed by India’s security agencies on Kashmir’s streets. Look at the people’s anger. Look at the Internet Intifada. And see the political assertiveness of Kashmiri teenagers - our Millennium Generation!
Clearly, New Delhi’s efforts to “win the Kashmiri hearts and minds”, begun in 1947, remain as haywire as ever before. The writings on the wall today convey the same as what they conveyed in 1947. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s Friday statement symbolizes that very realization – that how carrots and sticks have failed in subduing Kashmiri quest for political sovereignty.
Interestingly, lately, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has himself taken to PP to present the state’s political and economic situation before New Delhi’s leadership. Army commanders and police officers are said to be doing the same.
PowerPoint is arguably good in displaying statistics. It is also good in selling an idea effectively. It is just awesome in highlighting one’s achievements in a bullet form. But it is miserably bad in presenting an effective analysis of a complex political situation like the one prevalent in J&K, or even Afghanistan, today. Despite its pleasing eloquence, PP easily hides more than what it reveals.
Now look at the conclusion drawn at the Kashmir situation review meeting in New Delhi on Wednesday that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chaired: the Lashkar-i-Tayiba (LeT) was behind the ongoing protests in Kashmir! Could anything be as bizarre as this?
People who see conspiracy theories to spontaneous street protests in Kashmir miss the point altogether. See first hand and you will realize that it is the jeans-clad boys next door who organize these protests. There are no ghosts or invisible hands behind. The reason they are doing it is that Kashmiri political movement has simply transferred to their generation. These boys do not act on behalf of – or are members of – any party. They are individual parties, who go by their political instincts; feel hurt by the bullying and humiliation by at the hands of security forces, love to vent that anger through slogans and stones whenever they can, and do not bother about repercussions.
Quite often – like when Omar Abdullah was voted to power – India’s political and media establishments write off Jammu & Kashmir’s movement for political sovereignty. Every time tourists swell this place, or there is an election, or a dance and song competition is held at the SKICC, people in New Delhi see the end of the possibility of its rule being challenged again. But every time this premise is proved wrong.
The strategy of doling out economic benefits to an alienated population does not necessarily win political loyalty. The participation of Kashmiris in state-sponsored development programs does create a sense of ‘normalcy.’ And even a political statement. But every time that sense is proved wrong. The “peace time”, when New Delhi and Srinagar governments tend to see ‘all is well’, often proves an anger accumulation period. A lot of emotions are suppressed during that period, which finally blow up when there is a bigger trigger.
Omar Abdullah’s perception that all trouble in the state basically emanates from, and is confined to, a few pockets in Srinagar has a sub text too. The reason there is a greater expression of anger and frustration in Srinagar is because its protesters have a sense of security by virtue of the city’s landscape. People in the countryside do not often throng the streets because they are vulnerable to persecution. A strong military grip ensures every protester is called to a military or police camp in the night if a demonstration happens.
The current spate of protests basically marks a transition of Kashmir’s movement for political sovereignty from the 90s’ generation to the Millennium Generation. This generation is different than its predecessors. Their movement will not die down because this generation is dynamic – stretches across the globe. It has technology at its hand – Internet, mobiles phones, digital cameras, You Tube, Facebook, etc. They are archiving Kashmir’s current happenings for the next generation. And are disseminating that to the world beyond to catch attention. And if you tell them they are being engaged in a ‘battle of ideology’, they are going to be damn rabid about their stand. That is, at least, what their Internet activism is saying.
There is another angle involved. Over the years, Kashmiris’ greater interaction with the Indian mainland has had a political spin off too. That interaction has, ironically, deepened the gulf between a common Kashmiri and the Indian state. Reason: A common Kashmiri in India has been intensely made to perceive himself or herself as the ‘other’ and ‘an enemy.’ Some acts of violence in India, and the state’s security reaction, have created an extraordinary situation for a Kashmiri youngster in India. A hyper vigilante culture of Kashmiri witch hunt has aggravated their feeling of being the ‘other.’ Talk to a student, a trader, or a fruit seller, they will tell you what the experiences of police and public humiliation and suspicion mean to them.
The intense pulls for cultural and political assimilation of Kashmir’s Millennium Generation with India, courtesy satellite TV, Bollywood and Internet, etc. should have ideally bridged that gap. But that has not happened. A PowerPoint presentation cannot explain that. The day that is acknowledged in PP presentations, Kashmir will be on a real road to peace and stability.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)