End of Kashmiri fallacy?

Arjimand Hussain Talib

In a tussle for justice, when a stronger party controls almost all the options of the weaker party, the outcome is inevitably cynical.

“The Little” Brown Book of Anecdotes, edited by Clifton Fadiman (1985), has an interesting story about Basmarck - a former German Chancellor and a German liberal politician. It is said that Basmarck, enraged at the constant criticism from Rudolf Virchow (a German liberal politician), had his aides call upon the scientist to challenge him to a duel.

“As the challenged party, I have the choice of weapons”, said Virchow, “and I choose these.” He held aloft two large and apparently identical sausages. “One of these,” he went on “is infected with deadly germs; the other is perfectly sound. Let His Excellency decide which one he wishes to eat, and I will eat the other.” Almost immediately, the message came back that the Chancellor had decided to cancel the duel!

Today, all the options before the people of Kashmir seem to be perfectly controlled. So, it is quite hard for them to make a choice – a choice which could ensure justice with the blood of young boys and girls who chose to die than live a life of suffocation and humiliation. Sadly enough, some of the Kashmiris’ long-held beliefs – which look like their fallacies today - stand shattered too.

The outcome of the All-Parties Meeting held in New Delhi last week has disappointed the people in Kashmir beyond words. The message conveyed by the meeting is being interpreted by Kashmiris this way: no matter the nature and the means of Kashmiri quest for regaining their political sovereignty, New Delhi controls and chooses all their options. And a harsh way.

Shockingly, the meeting doesn’t seem to have considered any political and humane approaches to the political message Kashmiris are conveying through the street protests. The harsher military crackdown unleashed on the peaceful Kashmiri movement since then seems to rubbish the Kashmiri ‘fallacies.’

Fallacy number 1: Kashmiri people had long internalized a ‘realization’ that a transformation of their militant movement to a peaceful political one would gain them friends and political achievement.

Kashmiris’ embrace of an armed movement in the late 80s saw a strong military response from New Delhi. That response hardly raised any eye brows within India and abroad. Kashmiris got isolated, and even demonized, than ever before. There were hardly any supporters to their cause. The loss they suffered was colossal. Their political goal looked even more distant. In the process, New Delhi managed to consolidate its political, military and cultural control of Kashmir even further.

That period also made Kashmir’s civil society be at a loss of words. They were easily defeated in discussions and conferences. India’s civil society sometimes promised support if only Kashmiris abjured the gun. The JKLF example is well known. It shunned the armed path on the promise from some of India’s prominent civil society actors that doing so will mean proximity to their political goal. That never happened.
Post 2008, Kashmir’s political movement has been overwhelmingly peaceful. Peaceful demonstrations, street protests and Internet-based activism replaced the armed movement. Was New Delhi’s response any different?

Let us consider India’s media semantics and the political response to Kashmir’s current peaceful movement. Most of India’s media call the peaceful protest demonstrations ‘clashes’. So when news headlines read ‘2 killed in Kashmir clashes’, it automatically goes on to justify the killings.

‘Clashes’ justify unconstitutional and undemocratic Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), Disturbed Areas Act, Public Safety Act and so on. ‘Clashes’ justify the killings of innocent men in fake encounters on the LoC for army officers to win prizes. And yet, Kashmiris are reminded that they live in a ‘democratic’ system.

The term ‘clash’ in itself is quite judgmental. It is common sense, unarmed men, women and children asking for right to demonstrate, and confronted by armed forces armed to the teeth, does not qualify for a clash. The statistics of loss speak for themselves. Over a hundred civilians have been killed, thousands are injured till date. And, except for a few minor injuries, there is not a single casualty on the side of the armed forces so far.

Barring a few exceptions, most of India’s media organizations are misleading the Indian people again. The images shown on the TV are smartly edited and censored. Their local reporters are under great pressure from their news rooms and ‘editorial advice’. Hardly any news channel has shown the ‘violence’ perpetrated on hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri homes by armed forces during protests. The broken windows and glasses of Kashmiri homes are crying for cameras. So do peaceful protests and the slogans raised there.

Fallacy number 2: It is quite well known that Kashmiris for a long time now have preferred to wage their political struggle on their own, leaving Pakistan out of the equation, in spite of it being a genuine party to the issue. Post 2008, Kashmir’s renewed political movement has been completely indigenous, with almost no outside support. But look at the irony.

Since June, a number of conspiracy theories have been floated about the current movement - this being LeT-sponsored, Pakistan-instigated, jehadi-masterminded and so on. These theories were laid to rest when chief minister Omar Abdullah himself termed this movement self propelled and leaderless. Why these contradictions, Kashmiris have a right to ask?

Fallacy number 3: The leaders of the post 90s Kashmiri political and militant movement have always been advised that if their movement were a secular one, they would gain sympathizers not only within India but beyond as well. Despite the fact that Kashmir’s mainstream political movement has never been Islamist, Kashmiri leaders have taken great pains lately to insist that while Kashmiris were overwhelmingly Muslim, that did not automatically mean religious exclusivity.

One of India’s respected newspapers, The Hindu, carried an article on Friday titled “Kashmir's new Islamist movement” by analyst Praveen Swami. As usual, Mr Swami’s sermon was that a quest for ‘Islamist exclusivity’ was driving the present Kashmiri movement. Unfortunately, this is what seems is being believed and consumed by New Delhi’s political establishment too.

As Kashmiris today try to come to terms with these hard realities, they have questions. They are holding no guns today. There is no Pakistan supplying arms and ammunition. And yet, New Delhi’s response is no different.

New Delhi says it still needs AFSPA, DAA, PSA etc. to maintain order (sic.). Curfews are endless. Bullets are being showered on peaceful protesters like water cannons. Army has been given a go ahead to submit people into silence. People are being detained at a large scale. Media has been silenced.

Despite all this, Kashmiris find no friends today. No sympathizers. No civil society actors of India demanding all this to end. No international community shedding tears. No one saying Kashmiris do not deserve all this. No one supporting their political cause.

And all these are disturbing questions.