[Prev][Next][Index]
The Kashmiri Hindus and the Indian intellectual response to their plight
The following article is an excerpt from a speech given by Dr. A.K. Raina
at the recently concluded World Kashmiri Pandit Conference in New Delhi.
_________________________________________________________________________
KASHMIRI HINDUS & THE INDIAN INTELLECTUAL RESPONSE TO THEIR PLIGHT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Dr. A.K. Raina)
It is the tragedy of our times that human suffering is weighed on
ideological scales. Men are condemned or glorified, not by what
they do or what they bequeath, but by the vociferousness of their
supporters. Murder is permissible, in fact laudable, if enough
supporters can be found in the streets and coffee houses. There
are men who justify Pol Pot as there are those who still use Nazi
salute. The classic case of the Soviet Union is now open and sub-
ject to public audit. Men pleaded for the appeasement of Stalin,
like they had done for the appeasement of Hitler earlier. The
system was held out as the one of great future without decadence
caused by affluence as in the West.
We, in India, have been blessed with more than a fair share of
this crowd, and we have been paying the price for manufactured
truths and crafted histories almost whole of this century.
Nowhere has this influence been more sinister than in the debates
on Kashmir. Theories about its people, its history, its culture,
its sufism, its secularism, its equalitarianism and its innocence
have been peddled and popularized that had next to nothing to do
with fact, truth or reality.
It is not important that George Fernandes says that 3% Kashmiri
Pandits occupied 80-90% jobs (he would have become even more po-
pular had he added, "the rest the Ladakhi Buddhists")- he is sim-
ply ignorant- but the fact that none in the same august gathering
challenged the data or asked him to substantiate is terrible, for
many sitting there knew it was false. Similarly when Balraj Puri
asserts that even the Hindus did not want to be in India nobody
challenged him. When he pontificates on the Nand Rishi led Islam-
ization of Kashmiri, he is patently wrong and one step ahead of
the JKLF propaganda regarding secular basis of terror.
Such kind of intellectuals said nothing about Sheikh Abdullah's
assertion of the unique identity of the Kashmiri nation and his
resisting encroachment s on his so-called Kashmiriat; but the
Praja Parishad Movement in Jammu in favour of complete integra-
tion with India was condemned as fascist, anti national and com-
munalist. That the giant of secularism was displaying his human-
ism when he offered persecuted Kazakh muslims of China (Kashmiri-
yat!) settlement in the valley, but refused ever since 1948 the
hindu refugees, who had run away from the mayhem in POK, settle-
ment, place or citezenship even though they were bonafide ci-
tizens of the erstwhile state.
Many intellectual wonders condemn Nehru, for mistakes he made and
did not make, but most have gone along with a fake image of
Sheikh, an image engineered by deception. A terrible consequence
of keeping this image fresh and this argument against two nation
theory valid in perpetuity has been the marginalization of all
regions of J & K, all its people, barring the valley and its
muslim population. Thus J & K has been successfully reduced to
16% of its size, occupied by the valley, and 40-45% of its
muslims that reside in this 30 x 70 km area (which is 16% of the
state). Their identity is what must be protected, and the rest
can be ignored, if accidently they come into notice ever. Gen-
erally they do not even get noticed.
But the ignorance, or feigned ignorance, is the worse when it
comes to plebiscite. Nehru gave the commitment to Sheikh and the
people of the state at the time of accession, which for curious
reasons, and possibly to make Sheikh feel important, he got en-
dorsed by him. It was here, in reply to the covering letter ac-
companying the instrument of accession that Mountbatten, replying
on behalf of India committed India to a referendum after acces-
sion, once law and order was restored and the state freed of the
invader. The state was never freed of the invader and the re-
ferendum never held; Jammu and Ladakh anyway didn't want it, nor
would the Kashmiri Pandits. The UN resolutions, in a sense, sim-
ply reaffairms this in its totality and in some details. Yet it
is always made out to be a solemn promise given only to Kashmiri
muslims who are simultaneously glorified as having chosen secu-
larism by coming to India.
We should have gone for plebiscite anyway, moralists moralise. "A
people who have a distinct language, culture and religion and who
constitute an overwhelming majority in Kashmir valley cannot be
retained in India by force and against their will for an indefin-
ite period," asserts Tarkunde. Note how the state becomes the
valley; how the concern gets limited only to its chosen. What
about Kashmiri Pandits who qualify on all these counts for the
same treatment. But they don't count.
Furthermore, the same worthies argue simultaneously for Article
370 as well as self-determination. Article 370 is part of the In-
dian Constitution and cannot apply to anyone seeking self-
determination, which is tearing oneself apart from that very con-
stitution. You can have one or the other, but not both as the
Sheikh wanted and as his fan club desired. "1977 was the first
and only free election held in Kashmir", we are told. May one ask
how many Shias voted then and how many of their men and women
were attacked. And Kashmiri Pandits? But these are inconvenient
statistics: How many recall the frenzy created during those days
about Sheikh's last days and terminal illness.
And now the Sheikh's mausoleum has to be protected by an Indian
Army batallion to protect it from the very people whom he had
trained.
Everyone has an opinion on Kashmir. The more you abuse the Indian
state, the more invitations you receive for international confer-
ences. It is not for nothing that most references in the world
media that are used to castigate the nation and its policies are
supplied by our own intellectuals, who know when to stay silent.
The studied silence on the issue of persecution of the Kashmiri
Pandits betrays warps of their mind and intellect. Compelled at
times to comment on it, most take the easiest route of castigat-
ing the whipping boy Jagmohan, or, if they are a cut above, of
condemning the Kashmiri Pandit community itself. Jagmohan was
doomed before he left Delhi for Jammu. No one, of course, dares
to question Mr. Jagmohan's facts. But abuse and innuendo he has
received in plenty, enough to silence a generation. The Rambo,
that he is painted, went and started shooting to make the muslims
cower in fear. He bribed Kashmiri Pandits to emigrate. But the
so-called intellectuals very conveniently brush under the carpet
the murder of KP leaders, holy men, scholars and poets. Not at
all do they mention the newspaper advertisements threatening this
miniscule, helpless minority with dire consequences if they
stayed longer than 48 hours. They forget what the mosques blared
out day and night and forget the desecration of the temples.
Tragic is the fact that one hardly meets a Kashmiri muslim bur-
dened with this guilt; our intellectuals have greatly succeeded
in his moral cleansing and aided ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri
Pandits.
It is most important, therefore, that we conserve our energies so
that our little community, which has been a victim of Jehad ter-
ror and the intellectual bankruptcy of this nation, gets all the
strength at our disposal. Let them who will, talk about
apartheid in Africa, cleansing in Bosnia and oppression in Kash-
mir. Contrairiwise, let other wise men defend or castigate Indian
policy and security in the vale. Both sides have, more-or-less,
given us up as a small sine qua non of settlement of Kashmir is-
sue sans its original beings.
We are not the only ones to suffer; Dogras and Ladakhis have also
suffered the same doublethink and doublestandard. Yet, there is a
difference- a critical one, that seperates life from death, ex-
istence from atomization- we aren't where our homes are. We
aren't refugees either entitled to the largesse of UNHCR, that
was reserved for the Afghans in Delhi, we are simply non-
descript, like those brothers who ran away from POK in the wake
of the 1947 bloodshed. A crowd that is not a people, a group that
is not a nation, a diaspora that is not Jewish; no tears, no tak-
ers, no funerals and no tombs.
Convert, flee or die; we were told exactly six centuries ago as
of this day. We did all three. We do the same today, with periods
of mitigation in-between for which we must remain eternally
grateful to some great souls from our past. Like cowards we ran
away, say some. Like knights, please march in, they should be
told. We should have fought to the last man, to our death, advise
others. But weren't we down to the last man right in the begin-
ning; and dead to boot, or wasn't the demography clear to you.
Like Jews Battleproof! But when did the Jews fight before America
fought for them. Kindly revise your history. This invective and
innuendo should not discourage us. This is the greatest armour
our intellectuals on both sides wear. It gives them comfort and
it saves them risks.
We must collect our resources and inform the world that we also
exist, that we are a 'people' as much an entity, as much a nation
as Bosnian muslims are; and as much persecuted with the exception
that we are not even in the position to raise arms and die for
our land. We must ask the world to stand on its commitments to
all peoples as in the UN charter, we must tell the world that we
are also a concerned party in Kashmir. We must clarify and em-
phasize this as a whole civilizational corpus that we form as an
ethnic group of high refinement and achievement we are at death's
door. And our protectors are nowhere in sight. Nay they may sell
us, we are afraid, while buying peace in Kashmir, for a fraction
of thirty pieces of silver.
We must ask for help from whomsoever will and launch a great
search for friends all over the globe. We will be condemned for
globalizing the issue, so be it; people supposed to keep it lo-
calized haven't done their duty anyway. We are fighting for sheer
survival, and in this hour of darkness, who but the Mahatma can
be our spiritual and political guide. We must unwaveringly fight
with truth, and all its multidimensional power equipment.
Time is running short and this may be our last chance to come to
our own rescue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------ End of Forwarded Article
