May 2003 Issue

The U.S. continues to pursue 'Brezhinski line', i.e. using Islamic fundamentalist groups for hegemonistic designs. Its concerns on global and cross-border terrorism are only America-specific.

There is a need to evolve innovative military and diplomatic responses to force Pakistan to desist from sponsorship of cross-border terrorism. New Delhi must tell Americans firmly that their advice will be welcome only, when they are sensitive to Indian concerns. At the same time, Indians must engage American public and the business community, to educate them on how U.S. policies were indirectly encouraging Islamic fundamentalist forces. Such forces could strike U.S. interests too.

Panun Kashmir delegation meets Vohra, reiterates homeland

KS Correspondent

SRINAGAR, Apr 25: A three-member delegation of Panun Kashmir, headed by its Chairman, Dr Ajay Chrangoo met Mr. N.N. Vohra, the Centre's interlocutor on Kashmir, this morning. It made a detailed presentation on Kashmir and the problems of the displaced Pandit community. The other members of the delegation were Mr. Kuldeep Raina, General Secretary and Mrs. Nancy Kaul, General Secretary, Daughters of Vitasta Women's Wing of Panun Kashmir. The meeting lasted over an hour.

Homeland Reiterated :

The delegation told Centre's interlocutor that no serious thought was being given to the return of Kashmiri Pandits to their homes in the Valley. The manner in which the J&K government is addressing the question has boomranged on Kashmiri Pandits. Dr. Chrangoo said, "The return of our community is being addressed more as a cosmetic, non-serious exercise rather than with the seriousness such a human problem deserves". The members impressed upon Vohra that the Kashmir government's appeal to the Pandits to return would evoke the right response only if a safe zone with Union Territory Status was carved out north and east of the river Jhelum. "The Union Territory Status is essential because we want the Indian Constitution and all the Central laws to be applicable to the places where we live and not laws with intermediary interpretations, as happens in Kashmir", Vohra was told.

The delegation held that last month's Nadimarg massacre in which over two dozen Pandits were killed was partly triggered by media reports that the Kashmir government was mulling plans for the return of Hindus to Valley. The members told Vohra, "It has to be a political dispensation of a far greater magnitude than the platitudes which the Central and State governments have become used to".

Panun Kashmir delegation talked about the genocide against the community. It made a strong plea for the provision of employment opportunities and improvement in the condition of migrant camps in Jammu. It demanded that Centre should build economic and psychological stakes for the displaced community in the state. Only then could it return to Valley. The members demanded that in no case the ratio of its employees should be allowed to fall below 1990 strength. It may be recalled that there were 13000 state government employees of Pandit community in total employee strength of 3.5 lakhs. They also referred to Centre's indifference to their plight. One and a half year back, the Prime Minister had announced raising of relief from Rs 2400 to Rs 3000. It has still not been implemented. Panun Kashmir demanded that relief should be raised to Rs 5000.

The delegation accused State government of building psychological attrition on community and worsening its plight. It referred to PK' delegation's visit to Sangrampora in 1997, where S.P. Budgam told them that the State government had not taken local administration in confidence on Pandit delegation's visit. NC government had virtually imperilled their security and BSF had come to their rescue.

On the policy of tokenist return of Pandit community, the delegation said the government was trying to delegitimise the communal and subversive role of separatists and was legitimizing the creation of monolithic Islamic state. Return of Pandits was not possible unless it was linked with ethnic-cleansing process and ideological contours of separatists ideology.

Dr. Ajay Chrangoo told Mr. Vohra that no single-track approach would help retrieve  Kashmir. The Centre had to gear up social groups who were opposed to separatists. He argued how Panun Kashmir was a valuable strategic option for retrieval of situation.

Secular Nation-Building:

The Panun Kashmir delegation pleaded that the crisis in Kashmir basically reflects the failure of the secular nation-building process. Dr. Chrangoo told Vohra that if the solution to Kashmir problem has to be found then the communal politics has to be defeated.

The delegation explained how Kashmir was a military problem and in the present Political scenario, there was no space for political dialogues. The PK Chairman told Vohra that by responding to military problem with peace, the government was compromising peace and surrendering peace to those who violated it.

Three genres of secessionism:

Dilating upon this, they explained that there were three streaks of secessionism in Kashmir’s Muslim politics. One demanded independence, second was for annexation of State by Pakistan while the third one, represented by NC was demanding autonomy and a semi-sovereign state, with two constitutions. The three variants of separatist politics only complemented one another. GOI has been making mistakes by patronizing one variant of communal-separatist politics to fight another.

Expressing pessimism over Centre’s approach the members of the delegation argued that in the absence of an alternate ideological pole of politics in Valley, the fight against secessionists has remained hamstrung.

Outlining various steps that need to be undertaken for setting the things right in Kashmir, the members of the delegation presented a three point solution. One, the Central government must desist from enacting symbolic/tokenist return, and link it with broad aspects of the problem. Second, Centre must not succumb to the politics of blackmail, resorted to by either mainstream Valley groups or the separatists. In this context they upbraided Central leadership for giving long rope to Sheikh Abdullah in earlier years and bungling of Chief Ministership issue recently. The nation had to pay heavy price for it. In 1989-90, when Mufti Syed was Union Home Minister, lowering down of security forces’ presence created a situation where people in thousands came out in streets to stage secessionist demonstrations. Again recently, Vohra was told, disbanding of STF undermined counter-insurgency efforts. Third suggestion was the Centre must contest and not cover up communal politics. The members minced no words in telling Centre’s interlocutor that they were not going to legitimize religion-based politics in the state. They asked Mr Vohra how was Centre going to build stakes ‘high for the separatists.

The Panun Kashmir leadership apprised Mr Vohra that they had raised similar issues when they met Mr KC Pant in May 2001 at Srinagar. They said Kashmiri Pandits had become civilisational and political frontline victims in the ongoing proxy-war. In Kashmir the challenge is not correcting so-called historical wrongs but re-establishing secular nation-building principles, they added. Referring to the contradictions in Centre’s approach, they said “Kashmir has been projected as the refutation of two-nation theory, but sad story was it has been governed on two-nation principle”. They warned this contradiction will not only destroy the J&K State but also undermine the entire polity of India.

The delegation lamented that India had allowed itself to be cornered on the issue of human and civil rights in Kashmir, because it allowed a selective discourse on human rights to flourish in the country. This discourse only concerns itself with “excesses” of the state and takes it out from the compulsions imposed on the state by the terrorist environment. GOI failed to place Kashmiri Hindu displacement in proper perspective. The members also referred to the role of NHRC, which was undermining the position of patriotic victims of terrorism.

Interaction with Media:

Later the Panun Kashmir delegation met the representatives from Kashmir’s print and electronic media and had lively and frank interaction with them. In the troubled history of Kashmir, Panun Kashmir had few chances for interactions with Valley’s media. Dr Ajay Chrangoo, head of PK answered questions, asked by media-persons.

Q: Doesn’t homeland demand entail a communal division of Valley?

AC: This is the only secular political approach existing in Valley, as it links the survival of Kashmiri identity with free flow of Indian Constitution. Kashmiri Pandits have found, over the years, they were living in a defecto Muslim state. They have now resolved not to be part of any political process, which promotes or camouflages Muslim communalism.

Q: How can the Valley Muslims be dubbed as communal? Didn’t they protest strongly over Nadimarg massacre?

AC: We have to understand the whole process in a balanced way. We know it very well that the local Muslims were involved in all the major massacres that have taken place. Why are Kashmiri Muslims trying to wish away this reality and after each massacre trying to give an impression that only foreign mercenaries were involved. If foreign mercenaries alone are involved, isn’t it a more serious indictment of Kashmiri Muslim society, because a widespread societal connivance is required for foreign terrorists to operate. We have also in mind how lakhs of people joined Sheikh Abdullah’s funeral. After a few years only, his grave had to be protected.

Q: What has led to the present crisis?

AC: It is failure of secular nation-building process. The crisis in Kashmir can be reversed only through reversal of process of communalisation of Kashmir’s social milieu. GOI’s emphasis has been totally misplaced.

Q: How can a 2 percent minority lay its claim to a large chunk of land in Kashmir?

AC: What is the basis of our demand has to be addressed? You cannot have a correct census of our community, when violence rules the roost. The figures of displacement, available with GOI project our population strength to be around 350 thousand. In this various diasporas of Kashmiri Pandits have not been counted.

Q: Doesn’t this homeland demand visualise expulsions of Muslims from the demanded territory?

AC: Indian Constitution and its free flow does not exclude anybody. How do you assume that there are no Kashmiri Muslims, who want to live in such a dispensation? Conversely, we can ask whether those, who believe in separatism, have any dispensation for those who do not believe in autonomy, “azadi” or outright secession. Where will these people go in case these separatist proposals fall through?

Q: Do you have a final solution in mind?

AC: The lesson of this century is that final solutions do not work. Final solution of jews led to the creation of Israel. Final solution for Palestine is almost on the brink. Palestinians are on the verge of getting homeland. Final solution for Kurds also failed. The reality of Kurds’ attaining homeland has become a distinct possibility. I can assure you, each massacre against Pandit community and every bullet fired at a Kashmiri Pandit will not only build the logic for homeland. It will in fact deliver it.

Panun Kashmir delegation later flew to Jammu to brief the press about its talks with the Centre’s inerlocutor.

Sampriti organises seminar on ‘Literature in Exile’

KS Correspondent

JAMMU, Apr 30: Sampriti an organisation of displaced writers organised, a three-day seminar here on ‘Literature-in-Exile’. The seminar was inaugurated by the renowned art personality Kapila Vatsayan. In her inaugural remarks she stated ‘Exile is the pain and it prepares the mind and men to make endeavors to further realise the lost promise of Kashmir’. She said, Kashmiriyat must be undestood in the context of exile. The eminent scholar, who too spent her childhood and adolescent years in Kashmir, referred to the important role Kashmir played in Indian aesthetics movement, Buddhist art and Shaivite philosophy.

Prof. Amitabh Mattoo, who presided over the seminar, said Dalai Lama-the spiritual leader of Tibet had once told him that because of exile the narrow fundamentalism has given way to pluralistic ethos.

Dr. B.L. Koul, in his paper “Vista-pan ka purv abas in literature,” discussed the role of Kashmiri scholars before migration. He threw light on the contribution of Dina Nath Nadim, Vasudev Reh and Moti Lal Saqi. He said many Kashmiri scholars had made forecasts about the events, which forced the community to flee its homeland. Prof. Kaul said 1986 communal incidents of Anantnag were also a premonition. He added that the pain and agony of the displaced community will end only after it is rehabilitated in its own homeland.

Earlier, Mr Moti Lal Kemu, a well-known theatre personality said that during the exile 150 books were written in Hindi, Kashmiri, Urdu and English. He, however, expressed serious concern saying the threat posed to co-existence in Kashmir can have serious repercusions as well. Prof. Omkar Koul, ex-Director, Centre of Indian Languages said there are various achievements of the migration in the field of literature. One is that women writers emerged, forgotten poets were published, monumental works were written, source material was made available and a number of literary organisations came into being.

Dr. Om Goswami said that migration has been taking place since old times but this time it is more metaphorical and vicious as the Pandit community was forced to abandon its homeland under the blunt edge of the ethnic sword. Dr Bali, in his paper said that the "Literature in Exile" has not been projected with full might and verve but in a whispering manner. He said the main brunt of the exile was born by old people, whose families fragmented. What can be more painful for them that at the time of death, they can find only their spouse at bed side and not children, Dr Bali lamented. He opined the people in exile were not bitten by sever frost but by the venomous desperation.

Prof. B.L. Fotedar commented that displaced writers were still apologetic in fixing the responsibility for exodus and this had affected the quality of literature brought out in exile.

Indo-Pak Dialogue: No Euphoria in India

By P.K. Kothari

India's 1800 about turn on resuming dialogue with Pakistan and delinking it from the stoppage of cross-border terrorism as a pre-condition, does not come as a surprise. The nation has often felt let down by the lack of vision and absence of grit and determination, displayed by the political leadership. Oft-repeated rhetoric on Pakistan has been unmatched by action.The leadership has never acted decisively and boldly when necessary. Tendency to react in a knee-jerk fashion and yielding, too often, to external pressure has become part of strategic culture, evolved by the NDA government.

American Pressure:

Extending the olive branch to Pakistan, the Prime Minister, Mr Vajpayee, at the Srinagar press conference argued: “What has happened in Iraq is a Chetavni (warning) to the rest of the world, especially to the developing countries. India and Pakistan should sit down and sort out their problems. Inviting a third party will only expand the problem".

Of late, U.S. officials have been trying to arm-twist India into opening dialogue with Pakistan, by issuing nuanced statements. The CIA Director, George Tennet, stated recently : “The cycles of tension between India and Pakistan are getting shorter. Pakistan continues to support groups that resist India's presence in Kashmir, in an effort to bring India to the negotiating table".

The U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage stated that the Indo-Pakistan situation was totally frightening and the need of the hour was to “stop the weakening of international security architecture and put an end to the spread of nuclear weapons". He went on to praise Musharraf, as a man of his word, who had been able to curb the infiltration of Muslim militants from Pakistan into Kashmir. Mr Armitage also praised his role as reliable US ally : “In the war against terrorism, General Musharraf and his colleagues in Islamabad have been absolutely spectacular in breaking up terrorist cells, most recently one directed against our consul in Karachi, for which we are enormously grateful”. Applauding America's pro-Pak tilt, Pakistani Foreign Minister, Khurshid Ahmed Kasuri praised U.S., saying it was an “honest broker”, playing positive role.

Ground Reality :

The plain fact is, really nothing has changed in Islamabad's attitude towards India and terrorism. Since the Prime Minister's April 19 speech in Srinagar, J&K has already witnessed four bloody 'fidayeen' attacks- at Bandipore, Radio Kashmir (Srinagar), Tral (Pulwama) and Drug-Mullah (Kupwara). There have been two attempts on the life of State Finance Minister, Mr Muzaffar Hussain Beig. As per official estimates, 350 terrorists (150 alone in April) have sneaked into Jammu during the past four months.

Fearing another brutal summer ahead, Ambassador Lalit Man Singh, told a gathering on Indo-U.S. relations, at the University of California, Los Angels: "Close to 100 training camps have been spotted across the LOC, holding some 3,000 trained terrorists to be sent to India. An additional 1,500 are already on the LOC, waiting to slip across, with the active assistance of the Pakistan armed forces...Terrorists leaders in Pakistan have been released from detention and are being freely allowed to mobilise funds for Jehad". Pakistan has also begun diverting Taliban elements into Kashmir, to deflect U.S. pressure and to replenish the terrorist ranks. It has since equipped terrorists with Anza and many other SAMs.

Referring to the ground reality, Stephen Cohen, a Brooklyn scholar observes: “The structural differences between the two countries are deep. They seem to be conspiring to make the Americans believe that they are serious”.

Compulsions :

U.S. pressure, Pakistan's internal compulsions, lack of grit to deal with a rogue state and rethinking on the “rigid” stand have all figured in the calculations that went into Vajpayee's offer. The NDA government has been quick to sense priority to Israel-Palestine problem, North Korea and Kashmir as the post-Iraq agenda of US.

Even at the height of Iraqi campaign, Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State told the New York Times : “India, Pakistan and the whole of the sub-continent problem was part of the “broader agenda” that the U.S. planned to go back to after Iraq. Americans also warned India against pre-emptive strike against Pakistan. Joanne Prokopowicz, the State Department Spokeswoman said : "Any attempts to draw parallels between the Iraq and Kashmir situations are wrong and are overwhelmed by the differences between them".

There is a strong view in Delhi that the "rigid" stand, so far, has only served to reduce the space for Kashmir-related diplomatic manoeuvres. Pakistan's internal compulsions may have also figured in extending the olive branch. Musharraf's lack of domestic credibility, slowing down of foreign direct investment and increasing friction between U.S. and Pakistan over latter's covert support to Al-Qaeda-Taliban elements, have all influenced the Indian perceptions. Pakistanis believe, a dialogue with India, would help decrease U.S. pressure over its double-faced role vis-a-vis Al-Qaeda.

In the perceptions of the present NDA-Govt., New Delhi cannot engineer a change in Islamabad's behaviour without help from U.S. This assessment makes Delhi yield too often to American pressure. Manoj Joshi, a Defence expert elaborates : "New Delhi's current predicament is palpable and in part of its own making. Indian officials claim that the country was close to ordering its forces to go to war at two different points of time in 2002. But the final order did not come and a major reason for this is that India lacks the military capacity to punish Pakistan, which continues to facilitate the work of Jehadi terrorists in the state. India has little choice now but to lean on the U.S. to check Pakistan".

Security Threat:

Despite the optimism displayed in official rhetoric on both sides recently, the mood in India is full of scepticism and one of betrayal by Americans. Many top security experts of the country have done well to focus on the long-term Pakistani threat to Indian security.

In a brilliantly researched paper, read to a distinguished gathering in New Delhi recently, Prof. Satish Kumar stated Pakistan poses a long-term security threat to India. He said this was inherent in the nature of Pakistan state, its ideology, its power structure and the imperatives that determine the behaviour of its ruling establishment. He warns: "These factors are not likely to change in the next 20 to 30 years. India has to cope with this kind of adversary. Its strategic capabilities and thinking, its national will and character must respond to the situation accordingly".

Mr. J.N. Dixit, former Foreign Secretary concurs with this assessment. Delving deep into the official documents related to strategic planning by Pakistan concerning its relation with India, he opines: "whatever admonitions and pressures that the U.S. may generate on Pakistan, there is not going to be any qualitative or positive change in Pakistan’s policies towards J&K". Arguing that alienating J&K from India is not a limited one issue objective for it, Mr. Dixit concludes: "The objective is the long-term strategic objective of the Pakistani power structure to destabilise India by generating violence and communal divisiveness and then fragmentation of India on the basis of centrifugal, ethno religious forces, which it seeks to create, sustain and encourage".

Mr. Dixit dismisses Pakistan's quest for dialogue as spurious, saying "its reiterations of insisting on a dialogue will be cover for these policy objectives and will also be an exercise in preventing world powers from understanding the substance of Pakistani machinations". Didn't Musharraf himself say, a month after Lahore Summit: "Low-Intensity conflict with India will continue even after the Kashmir issue is resolved".

Air Marshal (Retd.) R.S. Bedi explains Pakistani Schizophrenia in these terms : “Instead of striving to come up as an independent and powerful nation and developing economic and cultural relations with similar India for mutual development of both, Pakistan sought to move on an entirely different course. It chose to challenge India. It sought military parity, started to nibble at India’s vulnerable parts and began to patronize Indian Muslims. Ambition for leadership and its denial to India became its core foreign policy objective. Migrant Muslims from India who had an ideological bias against Hindu India and who formed the ruling elite of Pakistan emerged as an important factor behind anti-Indian stance”.

Independent Pakistani assessments have not been different. Hussain Haqqani, former Foreign Minister and a Carnegie scholar says, a feeling of insecurity against a much larger and “hostile” neighbour was the original source of Pakistani apprehensions about its nationhood. He argues that Pakistani attempts to destabilize India have been directly related to this sense of insecurity. In his opinion, over the years, structures of conflict have evolved, with the Pakistani establishment as the major beneficiary of maintaining hostility. He says, “the exclusion of Bhutto and Sharif from the political process has benefited the Islamist political parties. Their political power makes it difficult for politicians and intellectuals to advocate a settlement with India”.

Army-Mullah Nexus:

The political instability in Pakistan gave place to military bureaucracy, which thrives on hostility to India and exports terror as its official policy. Army dominates virtually every section of national life. There has also been growing trends of Islamisation within Army. A western expert on Pak army, Stephen Cohen analyses : “The present arrangement of a military-led or influenced government will prevail indefinitely, but not transform Pakistan. Rebuilding weakened institutions is pointless if the Central operational principles of the Pakistani establishment remain hatred and distrust of India and intolerance of diversity at Home”. Pak army, in fact, needs Kashmir issue for its own survival. It is a pretext to paper over internal contradictions in Pakistan.

Absence of any political infrastructure has led the Jehadi groups to occupy the available space. The fundamentalist groups are collaborating with the army-led government in fomenting subversion in India. Farrukh Saleem, a noted Pakistani analyst observes : “The military government is now engaged in a dicey-double stance, appeasing the Americans in the international front and using the mullahs on the domestic front. Internal policy is all about derailing democracy and splitting up democratic forces. External policy is nothing but India-Centric. The Khaki and the mullahs both have an identical view of national identity and that of national security…Both use Islam and India to distract the population from real issues”.

Pakistan Army’s subversive role has been supplemented by the huge Jehadi infrastructure, built over the past two decades. It includes 40-50 thousand madrassas. There are today 200 thousand armed Jehadis in Pakistan, backed by over one million young people, Jehad oriented but not yet armed. According to one estimate, Pakistan’s defence budget-at Rs 180 billion-is supplemented by Rs 80 billion, collected by the ‘jehadi’ organizations for the “cause”.

What is alarming is that there is widespread public endorsement of jehadis in Pakistan. A recent poll in Pakistan showed 88% people believe that the holy Quran and Sunnah should be the source of all laws in Pakistan. And 64% of those polled agree that Pakistan’s security interests were served by supporting jehadi outfits in J&K.

Pak Intransigence:

For many reasons, Pakistan’s military believes it can continue to bleed India. One, India has been deterred from responding militarily to its provocations because of fear of nuclear escalation. Haqqani observes: “The possession of nuclear weapons has given the Pakistani elite a sense of invulnerability and has increased its willingness to consider options of unconventional warfare”. India’s empty rhetoric on pre-emptive strikes and failure to intimidate Pakistan, with unprecedented mobilization of its troops along the border, and their subsequent tame withdrawal, without achieving any of the explicitly declared objectives, reinforced Pakistan’s conviction that its nuclear posture had been able to put India on the defensive. Musharraf even claimed that Pakistani armed forces were able to defeat the enemy without fighting the war. This is an important reason for heightened terrorist activities in India lately.

U.S. Role :

Secondly, Pakistan army is convinced that it has the support of the U.S. not only in ruling the country, but also in receiving U.S. economic and military assistance, despite the provocations it indulges in against India. Pakistan, not without justification, has a belief that the U.S. A will not really do anything meaningful to embarrass it on cross-border terrorism.

Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State describes Pakistan’s support for its Jehadis not as support for “terrorism” but as “infiltration”. He, no longer, insists that infiltration has to end. Powell wants us to be satisfied if it has been “reduced”. G. Parthasarthy laments: “By constantly speaking of the dangers of nuclear conflict, the U.S. in effect, reinforces Pakistan’s resort to nuclear blackmail.”

Even while U.S. is hunting Al-Qaeda and Taliban elements, it wants to keep Jehadi pressure on India to fulfill its narrow geo-political objectives. U.S. went out of its way to help Pakistan-over $ 1 billion in aid, renewed IMF and World Bank soft lending, international debt-rescheduling of over $12 billion and the promise to write off $1 billion in U.S. debt. Against this U.S. has been trying to put spokes in the wheel for India’s defence cooperation with Israel and burgeoning relationship with Iran and China.

Why U.S. still regards Pakistan as its front-line ally and overlooks Pakistan’s double-faced policy towards Al-Qaeda Jehadis and the dangers of its nuclear assets falling into the hands of Jehadis and other rogue states?

G. Parthasarthy observes: “The U.S. needs Pakistan in its hunt for terrorists in Afghanistan and in Pakistan itself. It has concluded that it should support Musharraf and the Pakistani Army to achieve its objectives. This is a relationship of political expediency, but one India cannot ignore”. In the view of Farrukh Saleem, a Pak analyst : “Pakistan produces nothing that can help America grow….our goals do not overlap America’s…America’s real interest in Pakistan, as a consequence, is that we do not become a rogue state and that we do not become an agent of instability in the region. No more, no less”.

Reaction :

However, Americans are not taking any chances, once their direct security interests are threatened. It has been demanding regular purges of anti-American elements in ISI and Army. The recent air crash, in which Pak Air Chief, a known anti-American, was killed has led to lot of speculation on conspiracy theories. On the nuclear assets, Jane’s Intelligence Digest (March 21) says, a U.S. contingency plan has been put in place to neutralize the threat of Pakistani nuclear assets and technology falling into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists. This follows revelation on the murder of Daniel Pearl, by Bernard Henry Levy, a French security expert.

The Prospect:

Even as India hopes to wrest few concessions in dialogue with Pakistan, the patriotic opinion is exercised over a number of issues-What options for pressure and measured retaliation are available to India should the terrorist violence escalate beyond a point? Secondly, do we have a long-term vision to deal with a rogue army that undermines democracy at home and promotes Jehad abroad.

The present, NDA government has put all its eggs in the American basket to bail out India from the mess in Kashmir. What it can lead to-G. Parthasarthy, India’s foremost expert on Pakistan and former Ambassador warns on a prophetic note : “Nations lose their independence, self-confidence and self-respect not by importing foreign technology, goods and services, but by mortgaging their minds to foreign doctrines and concepts”. 

Allama Iqbal-Searching for Pandit Roots

Dr. Ramesh Kumar

Sir Sheikh Mohammad Iqbal, who subsequently became famous as Allama Mohammed Iqbal was born in Sialkot on November 9, 1877. That Iqbal came from Kashmiri Brahmin stock was well-known. However, there were few details on how his ancestors came to settle down in Sialkot. The claim that Iqbal’s family originally hailed from ‘Saprain’ a village on Shopian-Kulgam road, lacks historical data. Saprus, even if all of them hailed from this village, have been living in Srinagar city for more than five centuries. Another difficulty to trace roots of Sapru family in Kashmir is the lack of tradition to maintain geneology, among Kashmiri Pandits.

It was in 1969, Dr R.K. Parimu, the author of “History of Muslim Rule in Kashmir”, provided a vital clue to Iqbal’s ancestory. In 1939-40, when Dr. Parimu had been assigned the task of organizing and listing the Persian records for the state government in the J&K State Record office in Jammu, he stumbled upon a paper among the Persian documents. According to this document, one Sahaz Ram Sapru was in charge of the revenue of Kashmir during the regime of Afghan Governor, Azim Khan (1813-1819). Sapru” as per the document, had held the revenue in arrears, having expended the money in marriages, etc. in his family. When the report went to the Governor, he summoned him. Sahaz Ram admitted his guilt like a brave man. He was young, charming and attractive. The governor was moved and offered him death or Islam as a penalty. As per Dr Parimu, Sapru accepted Islam and at the same time requested that as Muslim he would not like to live in Kashmir. He was allowed to settle in Sialkot.

This view is discounted by Moulvi Hassan and rightly so. Pandit Sahaz Ram was first appointed as revenue collector in 1796 by Afghan Governor, Abdullah Khan Alkozai (1796-1800). Sahaz Ram was appointed Dewan in 1806 by the new Governor, Ata Mohammad Khan Barakzai (1806-13). The Governor was a just and generous ruler and led a simple life. In 1813 when Azim Khan became Governor, (1813-19) Pandit Sahaz Ram Sapru, was reappointed as Governor’s Dewan. Pandit Sahaz Ram Sapru’s loyalty and ability had stood him in good stead. He had been in Governor’s service since 1796. The same Azim Khan had lynched Pandit Hara Dass Tiku, brother of Dewan Nand Ram Tiku.

When Sikh victory seemed imminent, Azim Khan hurriedly left Kashmir in 1819. He left his family and the huge treasure of one crore in cash and kind in the custody of his loyal official, Pandit Sahaz Ram Sapru to follow him. Pandit Sahaz Ram escorted Azim Khan’s family and wealth to Kabul.

Fearing persecution at the hands of new Sikh rulers, for his extreme loyalty, to Azim Khan Pandit Sahaz Ram Sapru decided to settle down in Sialkot, a town just 14 kms from Jammu. He acquired lot of lands.

Family Tree:

The genelogy of Iqbal’s family so meticulously prepared by Mrs. Rajkishori Rawal (nee Sapru), daughter of Pandit Amarnath Sapru, Ist cousin of Iqbal’s father, starts with Birbal Sapru, father of Iqbal’s grandfather Kanhai Lal. There are enough reasons to believe Pandit Sahaz Ram Sapru was father of Birbal Sapru. Birbal Sapru’s family settled in Sialkot around the time Sahaz Ram left Kashmir.

In nineteenth century there were just four Kashmiri Pandit families in Sialkot town. One was Ram Narain Handoo and his brother Hriday Narain Handoo, the maternal uncles of A.K. Hangal, the film actor. Second one was Birbal Sapru family. Third family was that of Mohan Zutshi. The fourth one was that of Damodar Pandit. All these Pandit families were related to one another. Damodar Pandit, a leading astrologer, who taught Sanskrit at Govt. High School, Sialkot had two daughters. One was married to Ram Narain. Handoo’s father and second to Pandit Radhakrishan Sapru, the son of Birbal Sapru. Mohan Zutshi’s grandson Gopi Krishan Zutshi was married to Ram Narain’s sister.

Birbal Sapru:

Pandit Birbal Sapru had inherited lot of lands, located in Punjab Gujarat- Sobha Singh Ka Kila and Kuja. Despite the affluence, Sapru family of Sialkot did not form part of the upper class elite of the Pandit community in Punjab. This family disliked services and led simple life. Tragedies struck the family too frequently. The only male survivor of the clan was Pandit Amarnath Sapru, who died decades ago.

Pandit Birbal Sapru had one daughter Gango and five sons-Ganga Bishan, Thakur Dass, Kanhai Lal, Mukand Lal and Radha Krishan. Gango had two sons-Dina Nath and Amar Nath, besides six daughters. Dina Nath’s wife died too young, leaving behind a son, Kailash. Kailash completed college education and died soon after. Amar Nath went to study abroad and married an English lady. He took the name of Amar Nath Purbi and attained the top post of Director customs in J&K State government. He enjoyed great popularity among officials and the people. After the death of Amar Nath Purbi, his wife returned to England alongwith her lone daughter.

Ganga Bishan and Thakur Dass looked after the family lands. Ganga Bishan was married to Vedna but the two lived an unhappy married life. Vedna died young. Thakur Dass married Bhagvanti. They did not have any child. He adopted his youngest brother, Radhakrikshan as his son.

Kanahai Lal :

Kanhai Lal, Allama Iqbal’s grandfather was the fourth child of his parents. He was married to ‘Poshi’. In-laws had named her ‘Indrani’. Three sons and five daughters were born to them. The three sons were Ratan Lal, Iqbal’s father, Behari Lal and Nand Lal. Ratan Lal fell in love with a Muslim girl in the neighbourhood and married her. The family disowned him and Ratan Lal converted to Islam.

Behari Lal’s birth has an interesting story behind it. One day, Indrani who was carrying Behari Lal, was enjoying siesta after lunch. In dream, she saw a big snake crawling over her body and heard it saying, “Indrani. I am going to take birth from you in the form of a son and will destroy all your three houses”. Drowned in fear, Indrani opened her eyes and saw a snake actually moving over her body. Indrani subsequently turned short-tempered. After giving birth to Behari Lal, she gave him in adoption to Imberzali, her sister-in-law.

It was Nand Lal, who was the darling of his parents. He developed a unique personality, which combined simplicity with concern for others’ welfare. He would just survive on milk and bread and did not marry.

Kanhai Lal’s four daughters died quite early. His last surviving daughter Prano was married to Ram Prashad Sopori in Amritsar. After Prano’s death, Nand Lal took full care of his nephew ‘Srikrishan’. It were the efforts of Nand Lal that Srikrishan passed Matriculation with good marks. After he was admitted to college, Nand Lal was consumed by Plague. Now Indrani had to assume the full responsibility for looking after Sri Krishan. He joined police service and after a training course at Sagar got a good post. Srikrishan was married to Senapati, a girl from Bakshi Kashmiri family, settled in Jammu. She was named Chand Rani by Indrani. Chand Rani took her sister’s son in adoption, who too joined police.

‘Kunwari-Bahu’:

Mukand Lal Sparu was the fourth son of Birbal Sapru. He was married to a beautiful girl, Rajo. Her mother-in-law enamoured of her great beauty had named her Imberzali. It is the name of a flower, that grows in Kashmir Valley. Once Mukand Lal fell ill. All cures failed. His mother brought an astrologer, who told her that her daughter-in-law was the cause of Mukand’s illness. He advised that if she desired good health for her son, Mukand should not even see the shadow of his wife. The astrologer asked Mukand’s mother to keep her daughter-in-law under strict veil. Imberzali, who was still in her teens, faced torture from her mother-in-law. She would be overworked and frequently subjected to assaults. No family member would even intervene. At times she would be denied food and even turned out from the house. She came to be known as ‘Kunwari Bahu’.

Mukand Lal passed matric from Punjab University . Only three students had passed the examination and he had stood first. He became a judge in Amritsar. Mukand had a sterling character and was never overwhelmed by the fame he achieved.

To pass their time, drowned in sorrow, both Indrani and Imberzali had taken to spinning the wheel. Imberzali’s mother-in-law had given Indrani’s son, Behari Lal in adoption to her. Sapru family celebrated the Yagneopavit ceremony of Behari Lal with great pomp and show. He was seven years of age then. It was around this time Mukand Lal passed away. Behari Lal was married to Chanda, who was named Brij Rani. Only five months after her marriage, Behari Lal left this world. Imberzali was crest fallen. Few months later Brij Rani gave birth to Shiv Nandan at Sialkot. At his Kahnethar (naming ceremony), ceremony, the entire Pandit Baradari of Sialkot had been invited. Indrani, Imberzali and Brij Rani performed mundane ceremony also at Sialkot. Few months after the mundan ceremony, Shiva Nandan fell seriously ill and death snatched him.

Iqbal’s return :

Around this time, Indrani had come to Amritsar to stay with Imberzali. One day there was a gentle knock at the door. When Brij Rani opened the door, a  young boy entered. Bowing his head in reverence, he wished Namaskar to the two old ladies and sat down near them. Astonished by the boy’s grace, the old ladies in a single voice asked him, “Who are you? Where from have you come?”

The boy, in a moving tone told them, “Amma Jan, Don’t treat me as a stranger. I am Iqbal, the son of your own Ratan Lal. Your and Sapru family’s blood runs in my Veins, Amma! When father came to know about the tragedies that have struck this family, he felt humiliated and worried. He has sent me to you. He is confident, that you will accept me as your own. I am a part of your body. I am your own grandson, Dadi Jan”.

Indrani got lost in her thoughts. Her flial love for her grandson had to contend with the decadent social code of the time. Izzat of the family depended on the community consensus. The Kashmiri Pandit Samaj of those days was bitterly divided by the polemics exchanged between Bishan Sabha and Dharam Sabha. Indrani had already lost her Ratan Lal, fearing for family Izzat. Indrani could not speak anything. Ratan Lal had sent Iqbal for family rapproachment.

Imberzali could not restrain herself and told the young boy, “Iqbal, you have been born to a Muslim mother. Neither our family nor our biradari will accept you again. It is impossible. You better return”.

Iqbal still wanted to take a chance. He told Indrani, “Dadi Jan. Father does not care for us. He is all the time lost in his own world. Ammi is also worried. I have come with a firm belief that you won’t disown me because I am your own”. Indrani was all tears. This account is based on the family history maintained by Sapru family.

For many days after Iqbal had left, Indrani continued to feel as if he was sitting besides her.

Radha Krishan :

Pandit Radha Krishan Sapru was the youngest child of Birbal Sapru. A model of honesty and loyalty, he was deeply religious too. He was married to Parvati, the daughter of renowned Sanskrit teacher, Damodar Pandit. She was called Rajrani at in-law’s house. Her marriage was performed at the famous shrine of Dhuni Saab, Mansa Razdan, at Killa Darpan in Punjab Gujarat. Father had bequeathed to her his varied learning. She was a good poet and composed around eighty poems, most of these in Punjabi. She also wrote few poems in Urdu. She could recite Shiv Mahima-Sutr, Indrani, Hanuman Chalisa, Vishnu Sahasarnama etc without any aid. Her knowledge of Ramayan, Mahabharat, Yog Vashisht, Gita, Upanishad was proverbial. Radha Krishan knew Urdu and Persian. He served in Sialkot district office.

Radha Krishan and Rajrani had one son, Amarnath and three daughters Jainti, Rupo and Shamo. Jainti was married in Khar family. She had two daughters Rameshwari and Gouri. The latter died quite young in Multan. Rameshwari had two daughters-Bimla Koul and Khema. Bimla was wife of Late Pandit Kashyap Bandu, the well-known Pandit leader. Shamo was married to Bal Krishan Gurtoo, son of Pandit Gopi Nath Gurtu. Shamo had one daughter Kameshwari (Kamandedi-born in 1901) and one son, Santosh Gurtu. Kameshwari was married to Inder Krishan Koul, younger brother of Pandit Ganga Ram Kaul. He died only a year after the marriage. Santosh Gurtu, is a well known journalist, who once edited “The Pratap”.

Rupo was married to Ram Nath Karwanyu (Pandit). She had three sons Pran Nath, Iqbal Nath and Omkar Nath. Pran Nath’s one son, Opinder Nath is settled in Holland and teaches chemistry at the University. The other son, Prof. Ravinder Kumar, who died recently, was a foremost scholar on Colonial India. He served for many years as Director Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. Rupo’s only daughter was married in Thutha (Atal) family. Dr Jagat Mohini and Dr. Chand Atal, a well-known scientist and art collector are grand children of Rupo. Pran Nath Karwanyu also tried his hand at poetry. He once wrote, “Abhi Ruk Jaye Pandit Ka Janaza, Mujhe Kooch Puchna Hai Jism Aur Jan Se.”

Amar Nath,  the son of Pandit Radha Krishan also imbibed the best traditions of the family. After matriculation, he joined service as Accounts officer in Army. At the age of 18, he was married to Brij Kishori, who belonged to Kashmiri family, Thola. They had one daughter, Raj Kishori (born-1910) who was married to Pandit Jeevan Nath Rawal. Brij Kishori died at the age of 29 years in 1920.

Pandit Amar Nath:

Pandit Amar Nath served for a few years in Iran as well. He knew Urdu, Persian and Sanskrit. Intensely proud of his Kashmiri Pandit heritage, he translated Vaakhs of Lalleshwari, Kashmir’s patron saintess, into Hindi, Urdu and Punjabi, without any fault. Pandit Amar Nath also authored Kashmiriyon Me Vam Marg and Poshpuza, which were widely acknowledged. He wrote hundreds of poems. His entire poetical collection, as per his family, lies with Prof. C.L. Sapru. His manuscript, Sahita, remains unpublished.

Pt. Amar Nath Sapru was a Yogi of high order and followed Arya Samaj tenets. He donated his entire property and rich collection of books to Gurukul Kangri, Hardiwar, where he passed his last days.

*The author is a keen researcher on Kashmir's History and Culture. 

Blackwill contests U.S. policy on cross-border terrorism

Our Diplomatic Correspondent

Ambassador Blackwill's forthright support to India's stand on cross-border terrorism has cost him his job. He leaves the country as a great friend of this ancient nation. The ambassador challenged the State department, arguing how its dangerous policies vis-a-vis cross-border terrorism were preparing the ground for a renewed, more lethal phase of Islamist terrorism. The state department, which is seen as a part of the problem in this country, how could it stomach its own ambassador reminding it, "the fight against international terrorism will not be won until terrorism against India ends permanently. There can be no other legitimate stance by the US, no American compromise whatever on this elemental geopolitical and moral truth. US, India and all civilised nations must have zero tolerance for terrorism".

The state department, which is pursuing 'Brezinski line' in achieving geo-political objectives, brushed aside concerns and the assessment of Ambassador Blackwill. He warned that Pakistan having nuclear weapons in its armoury, might Jeopardise the American interests. In an article on the theme, "An action agenda to strengthen America's alliances in Asia", he forecast that the adverse impact may start coming to the fore in the next five years. He feared that Pakistan was on the verge of joining the category of a “failed state” and a fragmented nation, dominated by Islamic fundamentalists. Besides risking an Indo-Pak war Islamabad ran the risk of passing on the nuclear technology and fissile materials to a few other equally fanatic Muslim states.

Ambassador Blackwill reminded the state department how it was a mistake on its part to have viewed India " through the prism of its confrontation, with Pakistan". Also, the US fixation with India's nuclear programme, at the expense of a broader strategic approach, was not a correct one, he added.

The state department's obsession of a possible war over Kashmir and its blatant support to Pakistan in seeking parity with India, has only led to greater Jehadi intransigence and keeps South Asia smouldering.

Ambassador Blackwill did not believe that India has to hold a dialogue with Pakistan before terrorism comes to an end, a view clearly not endorsed by Christina Rocca, who authored the infamous statement after Nadimarg advocating a dialogue. Blackwill did not give to Hurriyat the political attention they craved for and refused to meet them on his two visits to Kashmir. He cancelled his only scheduled meeting with them, when APHC announced establishment of an "election commission" to monitor the poll in the state. At a briefing at 15 Corps Headquarters, Blackwill even interrupted when the word "militants" was used. He declared, "There is no such thing as militants. They are plain and simple terrorists". Ambassador also refrained from lecturing India on the issue of communal violence in Gujarat.

In early February this year, Rocca, known for her anti-Indian stance confronted Mr Kapil Sibal, Indian Foreign Secretary, accusing New Delhi of deliberately turning up the tension with Pakistan by threatening to take "strong measures". She also strongly believed that it was in US's interest to give General Musharraf whether over Kashmir or Afghanistan--a longer and longer rope. The pro-Pak lobby in state department was joined by the non-proliferation hawks to unleash a patently pro-Pakistan policy. There was an American demarche that told India to back off on Afghanistan. It was done to keep Pakistan in good humour. The non-proliferation lobby sought to put brakes on the Trinity issues (civilian nuclear, high-tech transfers, space) on which the transformed relationship between India and the US is not reflected. The State Department's recent policies to de-emphasis the need for Pakistan to fulfill its commitment on cross-border terrorism; and the increased emphasis on dialogue have put a spanner in the anti-terrorist campaign. In this scenario, Ambassador Blackwill was becoming increasingly irrelevant. With growing tension between Pentagon and the State Department, neither George Bush nor Condelizza Rice could help him out This left no options for Blackwill.

Ambassador Blackwill had previously spent 14 years teaching at Harvard and 22 more years as a career foreign service officer. He taught International Security at Harvard and was a specialist on Chinese affairs. His knowledge about China and Russia is phenomenal. At the time of his posting to India, he had left an ambassadorship to NATO. He preferred India, believing he could inject substance into the Indo-US relations.

He established a close rapport with Deputy Prime Minister, L.K. Advani. His interactions with Indian bureaucrats and politicians made him more sensitive to Indian concerns. Blackwill didn't allow India to fall of the agenda and assiduously reminded top U.S. policy makers of the need to carry Indo-US relationship to a higher pedestal. He used his personal clout to push things forward. Among his major accomplishments was pushing for easing curbs on high-tech trade to India, increasing both the quality and quantity of senior US visitors, enhancing the military relationship and organising an Indo-US strategy group at the respected Aspen Institute. The problem the ambassador faced with the State Department was not merely on the pace of the India-US relationship but the sequencing of actions vis-a-vis Pakistan.

Blackwill's departure is a big loss to India. Selig Harrison, an expert on India at the Centre for International policy in Washington, said he believed relations between the two democracies were at a stalemate. He added the hopes for progress for strengthening ties that were aroused when president George W. Bush came to office had not borne fruit.  

George Tanham--A Great Friend of India

KS Correspondent

April has been bad news for India. It lost two great friends. One, Ambassador Robert Blackwill’s spirited defence of India on the issue of cross-border terrorism cost him his job. Secondly, George K. Tanham (1922-2003), who passed away recently, was more concerned about India than India's own strategic elite.

Prof. George K. Tanham, associated with Rand Corporation, was a longtime friend and scholar on India. He died on March 29, in Washington, after a prolonged cardiac illness.

George and Kathleen Tanham saw India as their second home. His home in Strasburg, Virginia was often visited by India's elite. Tanham was deeply concerned about lack of strategic culture in India. This made India vulnerable to proxy-wars and frequent imperialist blackmail. It also retarded its march as a rising global power.

George Tanham, in a seminal essay, "Indian Strategic Thought: An Interpretive Essay", published in 1992, had tried to explore the reasons which denied India its strategic culture. He made a study of cultural and historical factors that shaped Indian strategic thinking. He found Indian elites, "show little evidence of having thought coherently and systematically about national strategy".

Prof. Tanham believed history was a poor guide for understanding Indian strategic thought because "Indian history is often dimly perceived and poorly recorded". He added until fairly recently "Indians knew little of their national history and seemed uninterested in it".

George Tanham outlined four key elements, which influenced Indian perceptions on power and security. The experience of the British colonial rule nurtured in Indian thinkers a pre-disposition toward a predominantly defensive, land-dominated strategic orientation. Geography lent Indian thinking an "insular perspective and a tradition of localism and particularism". The discovery of history by Indian elites in the past 150 years have also influenced Indian strategic thinking. Lastly, a key element in Indian elite thinking has been the primacy culture in its world-view and the "assumed superiority" of this culture. This path-breaking study has been republished in a volume--Securing India.

Prof. Tanham, born in Englewood, New Jersey, was trained as a historian at the universities of Princeton and Stanford. He took part in action during second world war. After the war, he joined the teaching staff at the California Institute of Technology. In 1955, he moved to the prestigious Rand Corporation, which he served till his death. He distinguished himself by bringing out an excellent study on the dynamics of Counter-Insurgency warfare.

104 SPOs desert their posts

KS Correspondent

JAMMU, May 1: After disbanding of Special Task Force (SOG), Are SPOs and VDCs the next target? The security forces and the patriotic sections are worried at why the Central government is destroying its own instruments to counter the terrorists. In a situation, where internal subversion and lack of local support made counter-insurgency operations a non-starter, there was need for innovative instruments and strategies. The gap was filled by creating SPOs, launching VDCs and raising an elite force--SOG (STF).

When the proxy-war engulfed the Jammu province and the minorities became the target for ethnic-cleansing campaign, formation of VDCs became a dire compulsion. It not only pre-empted the exodus of Hindus from the strategic district, Doda but also lent a sharp edge to the counter-insurgency campaigns in the district. Doda region has often come under international scanner in map-making subversion.

Both the State government and the Central government have bungled in handling local instruments to counter insurgency. With the success of VDCs, the concept was extended to other regions and involved other religious groups as well. There are over 15,000 VDC members at present. They are given a pittance of Rs 200 per head. In terms of arms and communication equipment also they continued to get a raw deal. The erstwhile NC government ran a sinister campaign against VDCs.

The scheme of SPOs (Special Police Officers) was started by Union Home Ministry with the three objectives. One, to lure the militants to surrender. Second, to use them to fight terrorists, in lieu of their knowledge of militant outfits. Lastly, the semi-police job offered them protection again reprisal by the terrorists whom they deserted. This scheme was further extended to the unemployed youth, to keep them away from joining terrorists. There are presently 23,000 SPOs, who get a monthly salary of Rs 1500 a month. Most of them belong to poor families of the militancy-affected districts of Jammu province.

These SPOs were raised by the state police along with material and training support of the Army. Security forces' commanders describe SPOs as "our best force multipliers", who serve as PSOs and go out on counter-terrorist operations.

Many SPOs recruited belonged to those families, whose kith and kin were killed by terrorists. Naturally they had higher motivation, knew local language and treacherous terrain. They were physically and psychologically fit to take up arms in war against terror.

The PDP government, which  has been engaged in populism on security-related issues, failed to comprehend the fall-out of its ill-conceived policies. Senior police officers say that while the State government was keen to weed out the Ikhwani elements-the surrendered militants--the SPOs became a natural target.

Why the Union Home Ministry delayed the release of funds earmarked for the wages of VDC members and SPOs, has intrigued the observers here. Even if it is true, that some of the SPOs. Were being deployed in houses of bureaucrats and politicians for doing domestic chores or that they have been raised without prior approval, then who is to be blamed? Why does not Union Home Ministry have its own monitoring mechanism? Why are VDCs and SPOs receiving a raw deal in ex-gratia relief, when they are killed in operations?

The recent indiscipline in the ranks of SPOs in Doda districts needs to be viewed seriously. During the past week, more than 104 SPOs have mutinied in Doda district, in protest against the inordinate delay in the release of their monthly wages. The first batch of 40 SPOs had revolted in Police Lines in Doda on April 23. They had walked out, informing the authorities that were going to take on terrorists. The deserters had carried their weapons, ammunition and wireless sets. For two full days they walked to distant places, including Arnoda, Bharat and after crossing river Chenab camped at Shiva mountain belt. How SPOs were allowed to move out of the police lines on the pretext of carrying out operations against militants, with no senior police official heading them, too remains a mystery. All these SPOs were unemployed youth and not surrendered militants. After five days of negotiations, the deserters joined back. Many of them had not received wages for 5-6 months.

The batch had not yet reached the police lines in Doda, when another batch of 24 SPOs mutinied in Bhaderwah and its adjoining areas. Official sources said, a group of SPOs, equipped with sophisticated weapons, left the police post at Bhaderwah. They were joined by other colleagues at Sardhangal and Phanala posts. After traversing mountain ranges for two days, the deserters reached Padri Dar, on 28 April morning. Being the highest mountain-belt in the area, the senior police authorities were yet to reach them.

On April 28, another group of 30 SPOs from Gandhov, Bartha and Changa, deserted their posts, carrying alongwith them weapons and wireless sets. Their whereabouts remain unknown.

Though an inquiry into revolt has been ordered, it remains to be seen what its impact would be on VDCs and SPOs, engaged in counter-insurgency operations. The decision of the state government to allow only matriculates into the police has SPOs staring at a bleak future. At a time, when centre has decided to give new teeth to counter-insurgency operations by re-designating the combined  Unified Headquarters in J&K on the pattern of Unified Command in Assam, the developments in Doda demand beter vision on the part of Union government.

'Pandits will return only if they get a separate homeland'

Dr Ajay Chrungoo, the Jammu-based chairman of "Panun Kashmir", a representative body of displaced Kashmiri Pandits, was in Srinagar to meet New Delhi's interlocutor Mr N.N. Vohra to put across views on various issues facing the community. Shortly before the two sides closeted at a guest house on the banks of the Jhelum. Yusuf Jameel spoke to Dr Chrungoo, Excerpts:

Q: You are meeting Mr N.N. Vohra. What would you tell him?

A: The first and foremost issue we are going to raise before him is that the Nadimarg massacre has reinforced our belief that a separate homeland for the displaced Kashmiri Pandits ought to be carved out within the Valley where there would a free flow of the Indian Constitution. Where those who identify themselves with the Indian Constitution can live as free citizens in peace. It would have a Union Territory status. This has been the main demand of Panun Kashmir and other sections of the Pandit community. We will tell him that no other solution can prove lasting. We'll also put across our view that in the prevailing circumstances, the displaced Kashmiri Pandits will not return to the Valley unless it means a passage into the homeland mapped by Panun Kashmir.

Q: One believes Panun (Our Own) Kashmir is to be drawn along the northern and eastern sides of Jhelum and involves a vast area in the districts of Anantnag, Pulwama and Srinagar.

A: Yes, it does.

Q: It seems a dream unlikely to come true...

A: It will become a reality some day.

Q: What would Panun Kashmir's contribution and that of the Pandit community as a whole be towards resolving the Kashmir issue amicably?

A: Some people try to link the Kashmir problem with the partition of India and its aftermath. The first thing we want to convey to the Kashmiris, to our own people and other victims of terrorism, is, the problem of Kashmir is actually an outcome of the failure of secular nation-building. The way the issues were dealt with in free India with Kashmir being accorded exceptionality, a communalisation process started. For the last 15 years we have only seen its militarisation in Kashmir. A vicious situation has developed here. To retrieve Kashmir will be very difficult, even if its entire population wants it, unless the decommunalisation process starts in more than one way. One has to address some fundamental issues within the Kashmiri community. No political party or institution seems to be concerned about Panun Kashmir. We link a solution of Kashmir basically to reverse the process of communalisation and militarisation in the state. Unless this happens, peace will not return to Kashmir.

Q: You spoke about a vicious circle. The growing feeling in Kashmir is that vested interests on all sides are preventing a peaceful solution to the imbroglio. Do you agree?

A: I do.

Q: Many people also believe that the Nadimarg massacre was an attempt to stall the process of Hindu expatriates returning to the Valley. What do you think?

A: This is the state government's viewpoint. It wants to pronounce that the ground situation had improved and it had a control over things and, therefore, was all set to bring the Pandits back.

We believe that the violence against the minorities right from the start of militancy in 1989 is part of a bigger ideological campaign. It would be a grave mistake on one's part to delink it from that. We will not be able to tackle it if we see the violence against minorities as a local aberration. For many years, we have maintained that any attempt or effort to separate the religious cleansing from the overall ideological contours of the separatist movement is bound to fail. To raise a religious moralist has been the major imperative of the separatist campaign in Kashmir. To a great extent they have succeeded in their design. I believe what has happened at Nadimarg, and earlier elsewhere, is a strategic butchering. Like in any religious cleansing process, some people stay back in certain pockets, as stands true about today's Kashmir. From time to time they shall fall victim. Mufti Sahib (the chief minister) has sought to draw a link between the Nadimarg massacre and the so-called return process. But I see it only as an attempt on his part to underline his claim that he has control over the ground situation. He does not have any. The terrorist regime has made it emphatically clear to him that it is their writ that runs. The recent spurt in violence reflects an upgradation of terrorist violence following the setting up of a joint jihad council. You must have heard about and seen a series of terrorist attacks taking place in Poonch and Rajouri. As many as 37 houses of the minorities were torched at one place alone. The police was repeatedly targeted. Even Muslims who do not fall in line with terrorists were attacked. In a broader perspective, Nadimarg is part of that upgradation and game plan.

Q: If this is the ground situation, can Kashmiri Pandits really think of returning?

A: The lesson of the past 100 years is, final solutions don't work now. In the name of final solution, the English eliminated the indigenous population after descending on American soil. In Australia also, the indigenous population was got rid of in a similar fashion. The final solution plan for the Jews failed, the Palestine problem remains unresolved even after the eviction of millions of indigenous Palestinians from their land, the indirect solution to tackle the Kurdish problem also did not work. Until a few years ago, the view held was that the Kurds are virtually a hostage ethnic group that would perish with the passage of time. They have resurfaced with a big bang. A community facing an onslaught and extermination like we Pandits do, builds a logic to ensure its comprehensive protection which in our case is possible only in our own homeland.

Q: And that would be within the Valley? You will not agree to the expatriates' returning to the Valley and again mingling with the majority community?

A: There have been several migrations of Kashmiri Pandits in the past. There are instances of the migrants returning to their hearth and home after many years. We'll never forget Kashmir. We just can't live without Kashmir. No one can separate the two permanently.

Q: The areas you intend to bring on Panun Kashmir map have a huge Muslim population. What will happen to them? Will they be asked to leave? Will that not amount to a replication of Partition, and hence, defeat the very concept of India?

A: Look, when we talk about homeland and refer to its political demand, we have three main aspects in mind. Firstly, we want to bring back all those people who fled from the Valley and settle them in the homeland across the northern and eastern sides of Jhelum. Secondly, the relationship of the homeland with the rest of the country will be of a Union Territory. Thirdly, there will be a free flow of Indian Constitution without any restrictions or impediments. We basically talk about a political alternative that would link Kashmir's destiny with the free flow of the Constitution. Whosoever identifies himself with this kind of an arrangement can come and live in this homeland. We don't talk about a religious enclave. We are keen on a genuine secular constituency--an area where politics will not be done in the name of religious identity. Where there will be no issue of Muslim majority status or Hindu majority status. In the true sense of the term it would be a place where religious-identity politics will be delegitimised as was envisaged by the founding fathers of this country called India.

Q: And the indigenous population of these areas can stay back?

A: We don't visualise an expulsion of people. We visualise people living in a dispensation where there is a free flow of the Indian Constitution.

Courtesy: The Asian Age: 5/5/2003

Raise The Costs High For Pakistan's Terrorist War

By Sumer Kaul

It looks like a re-run of an old movie. The Prime Minister, as is his wont, suddenly waves an olive branch at Pakistan, Pakistan calls it a positive development, we call Pakistan's reaction a positive development and, across the seas, Washington and London see all this as a positive development and, lo and behold, there is an overnight change in the atmospherics and a palpable sense of optimism in the corridors of power in Delhi.

Taking a cue from this, certain pompous editorialists and commentators are building their usual castles in the musty air of their ivory towers, industrial and trade circles are happily speculating on what all they can cheaply import from and profitably export to Pakistan, and the big chiefs of the mercenary-minded cricket board are smacking their lips at the mega-bucks they will make from the anticipated resumption of India-Pakistan matches.

I find it difficult to share the optimism. After all, we have been here before, haven't we? The French call it deja vu, a feeling of something tediously familiar. Forget Tashkent and never mind even Simla, we have the all-too-recent testimonies of Wagah and Agra to the likely fate of such unilateral spasms of statesmanship.

So what is behind Mr Vajpayee's latest Noble-minded initiative? (The capital N and phonetic pun are not unintended). He says this his third (and "the last in my lifetime") attempt at sub-continental reconciliation is dictated by the transformed world situation post-Iraq, that all developing countries must wake up to the new threat, and that India and Pakistan in particular need to hear the "khatre ki ghanti", forget past acrimonies, enter into an honest dialogue and bury the hatchet, and presumably do so before the global hatchetmen conjure up some pretext or other and bury us both, a la Iraq.

Satya Vachan (as they say in those TV mythologicals), for there is no knowing what sinister designs the global overlords have up their sleeves. In fact, the prospect of a more muscled Anglo-American interest in the subcontinent came ominously to the fore even as their war machines were still pounding Iraq. The communique after the Bush-Blair summit clearly mentioned their intention to turn their attention to the India-Pakistan "flash-point". The series of meetings, already held or planned between American functionaries and their Indian and Pakistani counterparts underline the US-UK resolve to step in.

One wouldn't necessarily view this as a calamity if only the Anglo-American motivations were above-board and altruistic. But this has never been the case and if there were any doubts on this score they stand demolished in the light of their now openly proclaimed policy of undertaking invasive intervention wherever they fancy. It is perhaps in this light that some commentators see Mr Vajpayee's peace overture to Pakistan as a master stroke of pre-emptive diplomacy.

But is it really that? Given New Delhi's 'ji hazoori' to Washington on all matters and especially in regard to our actions and non-actions on Kashmir vis-a-vis Pakistan's jehadi terror, one tends to suspect that India's peace offer has been blueprinted elsewhere. In fact, considering that both India and Pakistan have virtually ceded the captaincy of their policies as well as the umpiring to the U.S., there may well be some kind of 'match fixing' going on here.

I hope I am wrong. I hope our leaders have at last woken up to the dangers of letting the Americans take 'interest' in our affairs. In other words, I hope Mr Vajpayee's olive branch is homegrown and that he will prove third time successful in reversing the half-century-long tide of India-Pakistan hostility. But having said that I cannot help the feeling that this is hoping against hope.

Resuming full diplomatic ties and overflights and train and bus services is all very well. So is the desire to establish full and open trade and sporting links and other people-to-people exchanges. But let us face it: while it would be desirable to do all this, the absence of such relations is not the cause but the result of our troubles with Pakistan.

In the ultimate analysis these troubles are traceable to the infirmities of Pakistan's foundational ethos, infirmities which its successive rulers, instead of correcting, have further perverted. Simply because Kashmir is a Muslim majority area Pakistan wants it (or rather that part which it failed to seize in 1947-48). That this two-nation obsession brazenly ignores the fact that historically and legally the state is an integral part of India and that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan is obviously of no import to the jackboot-jehadi regime ruling the roost in that country. In fact, this rabid and powerful combine has developed a deep vested interest in keeping the issue boiling and bleeding.

This situation is not going to change because of any emotional rhetoric for peace and friendship from India. As I see it there are only two ways in which it can change. One is if the United States decides to bring about a "regime change" in Islamabad. But given the original divide-and-rule imperialist mischief and the long-standing and still largely unchanged Anglo-American tilt towards the inherently more malleable Pakistan, I don't see them doing an Iraq in Pakistan, at least not in the immediate future.

The other way is for India to go all out to defeat Pakistan's bloody game without further delay or dither. Periodic diplomatic dramabazi just won't do. We must hit back with all means at our command. This should entail not only a ruthless operation against the terrorists and their local agents in Kashmir but paying back in kind their masters and mentors in their own country. We must raise the costs of Pakistan's terrorist war so high for them that the people of Pakistan feel impelled to oust the military-mullah dispensation, and thereby join the people of India to establish peace and harmony in our subcontinent.

The author is a veteran Journalists, based in Delhi.

Kashmiri Pandits Demand Action

KS Correspondent

JAMMU, May 5: Nadimarg massacre has jolted 5,000 strong remnants of the Pandit community, still living in Valley. They have decided to give three months notice the State government to address their security concerns and reverse anti-Pandit policies. An extraordinary meeting, attended by 75 representatives from different parts of the Valley was held in the precincts of Ramji temple, Sathu on May 4. They have threatened fast unto death.

The President of Hindu Welfare Society, Moti Lal Bhat, put three demands. One, to set up clusters of Pandit community homes in different districts of the Valley to ensure security. Second, quick rehabilitation of displaced members who had to move out of their homes in far off villages. Lastly, employment of its youth to hold the community back from leaving the Valley. The urgency for the meeting was attributed to the security concerns demonstrated by Ganderbal and Mattan Pandits. The spokesperson of the society lambasted Mufti government giving false promises in the wake of Nadimarg massacre.

It may be recalled that five days after the Nadimarg massacre, the State government had intercepted a convoy of fleeing survivors on their way out of Valley and impressed, on them to stay back. Unconvinced by the government's assurances, a week later the survivors moved out to Jammu.

Addressing the concerns of Pandit community continues to remain Achilles heel for the Mufti government. The Pandit community is strongly annoyed over government's response to protection of its property, left over in Valley, apathy towards those displaced in the wake of massacre and failure to nab the Nadimarg culprits. Demolition of shops in the upcoming yatri Niwas at Durga Nag temple drew strong protests from Pandit community in the Valley. The State government also acquired 66.12 kanals of land at Batapora Shopian, belonging to Pandit community and notified it for the Bus Stand. The affected families countered, saying on one hand State government was claiming it was committed to create conditions for Pandits return, while on the other, it was dispossessing them of their left-over properties.

The State government has been harassing the recently displaced Pandits and dodging them registration as migrants. While the State government was quite generous in doling out appointment orders to the militancy victims, belonging to other communities, it has treated such cases from Pandit community with stark indifference. The families of late Shiban Lal Koul and Rohit Sadhu of Tang Marg and Bansi Lal of Gulabagh continue to wait for the "healing touch".

Displaced Pandit community is also sore over governments' failure to nab culprits, involved in Nadimarg massacre. On April 10,2003 DGP, A.K. Suri identified Zia Mustafa R/o Rawalkot (PoK) as the chief culprit. Lashkar-e-Toiba claimed Zia was arrested on March 16 from his hideout in Anantnag. Other reports said the nine police officials at Nadimarg picket were being interrogated for their direct complicity in the incident. Two terrorists, as per these reports, had visited the picket regularly over the past six months, often stopping for a meal or staying the night. They watched the recent world cup cricket series at the picket and even on March 21 stayed there. On the night of the massacre, the two terrorists were joined by six others, who actually carried out the massacre. Constable Abdul Rashid was sent alone to call the victims. His failure to warn the victims, call for help and even escape raised suspicions about involvement of policeman posted at the picket. Head constable Ghulam Ahmed War had applied for leave on the morning of massacre. It was refused. Not only he deserted the post but has also since disappeared. Repeated raids on his home in Kupwara have failed to locate him.

Praveen Swami, the noted columnist comments on the sad state of affairs, "while it seems probable that the Nadimarg killings involved the active collusion of police personnel on duty there, the fact remains that their failure is part of a larger pattern of security force dysfunction for which Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Syed is directly responsible. Also, the failure of the PDP, the Congress-I and for that matter the NC to organise any real mass mobilisation against the killings is a matter of concern". On the priorities of mainstream Valley political groups, Swami ruefully adds, "All the major parties joined in a protest strike on March 24, originally called by APHC to protest the war on Iraq. None saw it fit to hold any public rallies to condemn the killings. Nor has there been any meaningful action to assist the victims of terrorist violence".

Meanwhile, the Sikh community too has voiced fears over their security following recent developments. R.S. Bali, who was working as station engineer in Srinagar Doordarshan was kidnapped on March 22 during his visit to Bandipora. On April 4, his dead body was fished out of Jhelum river at Uri. This provoked strong resentment in the community. Subsequently a high-powered delegation of Sikh leadership of the state met the chief minister, and demanded fool-proof security. There has been direct incitement by LeT chief to kill Pandits and a number of Pandit villages were attacked after Nadimarg massacre.

Though State government has put on hold the so-called return plan and suggested few measures like night lodging arrangements in government accommodations, relief in cash and kind on the pattern of relief given to the Kashmiri Pandit migrants and job to at least one member of each Kashmiri Pandit family. All these remain an paper. The State government has also claimed that it was not trying to push Pandits to camps at Tulmulla and Mattan. Rs 10-crore was being demanded to beautify these holy places, it added. The displaced Pandit community continues to wait for clear vision and national  will to restore them their homes and end the genocidal attrition.  

Onkar Aima was a pure soul

By J.L. Manwati, Mumbai

If I were a poet I would pour my heart out and compose an ‘elegy’, If I was a Pastor I would sing a ‘requiem’ and if I were a painter I would paint a full canvass potraying the multifaceted personality of Kashmir’s proud and beloved son, Onkar Aima, who breathed his last on 28th September 2002, But, unfortunately, I am neither a poet nor a Pastor nor a painter, so I take refuge in the Canto (1) of the seventh chapter of Bhagavad Gita which, in my humble opinion, broadly encompasses the personality of Aima Saheb. Lord Krishna enunciates thus the virtues of Godly persons with divine nature in this Canto, which, undoubtedly Onkar was: -

“Fearless, purification of ones existence, inquisitiveness of spiritual knowledge, charity, austerity, simplicity, truthfulness, freedom from anger, compassion, fortitude, cleanliness, passion for honour. These are the transcendental qualities of Godly men with divine nature O-partha”.

Born in a venerable family of ‘Datatreya Kaul-Gotra’ Aima was the nickname acquired by the family as it is said, the family was gifted with a boon to be osteopaths (Waatangaer) who provide healing touch to people with orthopedic dislocations. At their Fateh Kadal joint family compound, it is believed, long queues of people with orthopedic ailments would be attended to by the family elders who were gifted thus. Onkar may not have inherited or practicised osteopathy of his elders, but surely he had imbibed in abundance the art of providing ‘healing touch’, of harmony and friendliness which was evident by his exemplary behaviour.

Having been endowed with an impressive tall personality with chiseled Aryan features Onkar was born with masculine charm. This God gifted body of exquisite physical features had been enveloped by Aima Saheb by his conscious effort with virtues of a ‘human being’ which made him the most lovable person.

In the post Independence era when the cultural renaissance threw up talents in the field of art and aesthetics in the Valley, naturally Aima Saheb with his handsome personality and irresistible befriending qualities emerged as unanimous choice for spearheading the cultural movement. Drawn into the cultural vortex he soon found himself leading the cultural movement of the time. This movement not only revived the folk and traditional theatre of Kashmir but with the passage of time the movement became ‘Progressive Think Tank’ of the post-independence era of Kashmir.

By this time Aima Saheb had mastered the art of friendship which remained most amazing characteristic of his personality. Friendship to him meant life long bond even in the vicissitudes of life - a rare quality in the present day shifting-loyalties scenario.

In those days the siblings from the ruling clan Viz. Bakshi Saheb’s family were his contemporaries. They could also not resist Aima Saheb’s infection of friendship. The friendship in the following years grew so much that Onkar became part of the family. Any other person in his place would have exploited the relationship for his personal benefits, as was, sorry to say, wont of many of our Kashmiri Pandits of the time but Aima Saheb with his passion for his honour and self respect knew where to draw the line between friendship and overbearance. This trait of his character endeared him more to his friends and he was considered as a true selfless friend.

When political exigencies forced his politically connected friends to take a different political stance on various burning issues, Aima fearlessly did give vent to his feelings, but it did not create any chasm in the friendship-in fact it continued and became more cohesive. Now that Onkar is gone, the bond I am sure, shall always remain with his bereaved family.

When the history of cultural upsurge in Kashmir would be documented it would be mentioned loud and clear that Onkar Aima was the lead actor in the first ever made Kashmiri film ‘Menziraat’, which bagged the President’s silver medal as the best regional film in 1964.

Being an ardent student of aesthetics his passion to satisfy his creative talent brought him to Bombay in 1965 to pursue his career in film industry, leaving his lucrative government gazetted job. The industry was quite receptive and offered this new face a lot of chances and Aima Saheb played different roles under famous banners of that era. But the irrepressible creative artiste in him remained restive. Here, the composite epicurean traits of Onkar, like the refined and discriminating taste, like subtlety of conduct, like exposition of beauty within, like sartorial preferences, like sobriety of approach and the finesse in all walks of life came to his res