For the Fallen
They shall not grow old, as we that are left grow old,
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
- Laurence Binyon
Great things are afoot. Peace may soon be coming to a valley that has been referred to as heaven on earth and nuclear flashpoint at different times by very different people. Whether or not the current relative calm will turn into lasting peace is anybody's guess, but I can't help but think about all the Kashmiri militants/freedom fighters (depending upon which side of the line of control you are on) who died in this conflict. More so because I do not see anything being achieved in return for their lives.
While it is true that "Azad Kashmir" or "Pakistan occupied Kashmir" fares no better than the Indian Kashmir, I wonder what exactly has changed since the insurgency began in the 1980s. From what I can see, not much. This is what has me worried about the current peace initiative. If nothing has changed, then where did all the passion which led a peace-loving people to pick up guns go? My guess is, that like the rest of India, they're just watching and waiting to see what the governments of both Pakistan and India will do next. If the results are not in line with the expectations of the majority of Kashmiris, it could fan a fire so intense that all of India's military might may not be enough to put it out.
To some of you, these views may sound highly anti-Indian. But take this fact into consideration, the Chinese consider Tibet as much a part of China as Indians do Kashmir. Would you be surprised if they might look upon India as India looks upon Pakistan? I am not passing judgement over the Tibetan government in exile, but just trying to illustrate how national fervor can cloud the judgements of even the best of us. Saying that Kashmir was handed over to us by its ruler is no excuse, because it is a well known fact that certain people in the Tibetan government also co-operated with the Chinese when they came calling.
When the Sin Fein (the Irish Republican Army's political face) negotiated the laying down of arms by the IRA, it was done in lieu of the promise of significant autonomy for the Irish people to rule themselves, and also led to better relations with the Republic of Ireland. My firm belief is that unless we can hand the people of Kashmir (on both sides of the Line of Control) the same sort of autonomy to govern themselves, we will not see an end to this conflict. The price of blood after all, is not cheap. The souls of all the Kashmiris who died in this long and hard-fought conflict demand no less.
Part of the problem on both sides of course are the armed forces. Although it is logical to conclude that any right thinking people would prefer living in a stable, secular democracy rather than a dictatorship, every day life in Kashmir has come to resemble a Nazi police state where the armed forces are frequently above the law. The end result of this is that Indian Kashmiris enjoy none of the democratic freedoms the rest of us take for granted. What's more, our suspicion of them is fast turning the valley into a gigantic Muslim ghetto. The first step has to come from the rest of the country, and our leaders need to go out and build consensus on that. What is more, we need to take Pakistan down the same road with us. Fate has handed us a chance, it would serve us well not to squander it.
If Pakistan and India do manage to come to a long standing agreement, there is always the problem of Pakistan holding up its part of the bargain. But this wouldn't be the first time that an agreement signed under a military government would be made to stand the test to time. Fortunately, the record of such agreements is quite good. Spain made many agreements under the rule of General Franco which still stand today. As long as the agreement is equitable and fair to all parties, there is no logical reason why any government, autocratic or otherwise would abandon it. A case in point is the water sharing agreement between India and Pakistan that has survived the brunt of three wars. The people of both countries know that they need this to move on, all that is lacking is the political will to take a few bold steps.
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
- Laurence Binyon
Great things are afoot. Peace may soon be coming to a valley that has been referred to as heaven on earth and nuclear flashpoint at different times by very different people. Whether or not the current relative calm will turn into lasting peace is anybody's guess, but I can't help but think about all the Kashmiri militants/freedom fighters (depending upon which side of the line of control you are on) who died in this conflict. More so because I do not see anything being achieved in return for their lives.
While it is true that "Azad Kashmir" or "Pakistan occupied Kashmir" fares no better than the Indian Kashmir, I wonder what exactly has changed since the insurgency began in the 1980s. From what I can see, not much. This is what has me worried about the current peace initiative. If nothing has changed, then where did all the passion which led a peace-loving people to pick up guns go? My guess is, that like the rest of India, they're just watching and waiting to see what the governments of both Pakistan and India will do next. If the results are not in line with the expectations of the majority of Kashmiris, it could fan a fire so intense that all of India's military might may not be enough to put it out.
To some of you, these views may sound highly anti-Indian. But take this fact into consideration, the Chinese consider Tibet as much a part of China as Indians do Kashmir. Would you be surprised if they might look upon India as India looks upon Pakistan? I am not passing judgement over the Tibetan government in exile, but just trying to illustrate how national fervor can cloud the judgements of even the best of us. Saying that Kashmir was handed over to us by its ruler is no excuse, because it is a well known fact that certain people in the Tibetan government also co-operated with the Chinese when they came calling.
When the Sin Fein (the Irish Republican Army's political face) negotiated the laying down of arms by the IRA, it was done in lieu of the promise of significant autonomy for the Irish people to rule themselves, and also led to better relations with the Republic of Ireland. My firm belief is that unless we can hand the people of Kashmir (on both sides of the Line of Control) the same sort of autonomy to govern themselves, we will not see an end to this conflict. The price of blood after all, is not cheap. The souls of all the Kashmiris who died in this long and hard-fought conflict demand no less.
Part of the problem on both sides of course are the armed forces. Although it is logical to conclude that any right thinking people would prefer living in a stable, secular democracy rather than a dictatorship, every day life in Kashmir has come to resemble a Nazi police state where the armed forces are frequently above the law. The end result of this is that Indian Kashmiris enjoy none of the democratic freedoms the rest of us take for granted. What's more, our suspicion of them is fast turning the valley into a gigantic Muslim ghetto. The first step has to come from the rest of the country, and our leaders need to go out and build consensus on that. What is more, we need to take Pakistan down the same road with us. Fate has handed us a chance, it would serve us well not to squander it.
If Pakistan and India do manage to come to a long standing agreement, there is always the problem of Pakistan holding up its part of the bargain. But this wouldn't be the first time that an agreement signed under a military government would be made to stand the test to time. Fortunately, the record of such agreements is quite good. Spain made many agreements under the rule of General Franco which still stand today. As long as the agreement is equitable and fair to all parties, there is no logical reason why any government, autocratic or otherwise would abandon it. A case in point is the water sharing agreement between India and Pakistan that has survived the brunt of three wars. The people of both countries know that they need this to move on, all that is lacking is the political will to take a few bold steps.
posted by Arun at 8:20 AM
5 Comments:
Whenever I think of state of affairs in Kashmir (which is not very often), the only thing that worries me is what goes in minds of people whose lives depend on decisions taken my political parties. Some peace-loving people made up their mind and picked up guns; what about those who stuck for peace? I am sure there are Kashmiris to whom nothing but the wellbeing of their family matters. Who, just like most of us, only care about going to a good school, getting a decent job, and living happily with their family. Even if the two countries manage to reach a long standing agreement, will those people get the pacification they deserve? For them it seems to be a no-win situation.
~Anupma
And I just noticed that you are citizen 41!! :D
It is the peace-loving Kashmiris I am talking about. Believe it or not, not all of the so-called militants (or freedom fighters) come from Pakistan, Asfghanistan, or assored Arab states. A lot of these people are native Kashmiris whose families were destroyed by insurgents or the armed forces. I don't think most people would sit quietly if their loved ones were taken away from them and shot in the dead of the night (by the security forces OR the insurgents). I know I would take up arms in such a situation. What about these people, what sort of justice can anyone offer them? Clearly, an eye for an eye won't work, but I think we've gone way past Gandhian solutions here. What is the middle ground here? Nobody seems to know.
i want to go to the dal lake :(
I'm sorry. Did you say dull lake :)
Post a Comment
<< Home