Where 5,000 Graves Don’t Speak

Are the mass graves of Kashmir less heinous because they are the handiwork of a democracy?

MIRZA WAHEED

Recently, I came across the work of Slovenian poet Tomaz Salamun and found myself unexpectedly distressed, even outraged, after reading his short poem Not the War. In the words “Not the murder, silence brings one back to the scene of the crime”, Salamun is perhaps talking of love. But I am thinking war, and am transported back home, to Kashmir, to scenes of nameless burials and sites of extra-judicial killings.

I was angry at the silence of the Indian State, and more crucially perhaps, the hushedness of the country’s vibrant civil society, at the discovery of thousands of unmarked graves in troubled Jammu & Kashmir. It has been nearly a year since the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC), a human rights body appointed by the state government, released an extensive report on the presence of 2,156 bullet-ridden bodies in unmarked graves in the border districts. It confirmed what a local rights group, the International People’s Tribunal of Kashmir, had revealed in a landmark investigation in 2008. Hundreds of the bodies were of men described as “unidentified militants”, killed in fighting with the armed forces during the armed insurrection of the 1990s. But, according to the report, at least 574 of them were of those “identified as local Kashmiri residents”.

Like many Kashmiris and Indians, I waited for something to happen—international outrage perhaps, a furore, a commission of inquiry and, one might be forgiven for thinking, even the possibility of justice—for the State cannot exonerate itself from its responsibility of delivering justice with a mere investigation. (Surely, one doesn’t hear too often of mass graves these days, except perhaps those of the Balkan conflict of the 1990s or of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq!) But, apart from news reports in the Indian and the international press, and the local administration’s vague talk of a truth and reconciliation commission—I wonder how one can reconcile in the absence of truth—nothing significant has happened.

Kashmiris have, of course, always known that the hundreds of Kashmiri men who disappeared, mostly in the 1990s, but also in subsequent years, did not vanish into thin air—they were buried, unaccounted and unrecorded, in nameless graves in the Himalayan tracks near the LoC. We have also known that not all of them were combatants killed in fighting with the armed forces. Many of them were victims of fake encounters and extra-judicial killings, as has been revealed in the many cases of men previously described as “dreaded militants” found to be innocents killed for medals or money. In one appalling instance of wilful perversion of justice—the Pathribal fake encounter of March 2000, around the time US president Bill Clinton was to visit India—the Indian State has so far refused to prosecute army officers involved in the premeditated murder of five innocent men portrayed as terrorists who had massacred 35 Sikhs of Kashmir. This, when the Central Bureau of Investigation has submitted evidence that the men were “killed in cold blood”. Many in Kashmir have reconciled to the idea that justice may never be done, the guilty may never be punished and grieving relatives may be condemned to Sisyphean waiting.

The publication of the SHRC report last year, confirming the presence of unmarked graves at 38 sites near the mountains of Kashmir, while reopening old wounds also gave fresh hope to the kin of those who had disappeared—that there may be some closure after all; that the Indian State may, in a rare moral turn, address one of the darkest chapters of the 22-year-old uprising against its rule in Kashmir; that it may finally be willing to listen to what rights groups, journalists and the parents of the missing have been saying for years.

Surely one does not hear of mass graves too often these days, unless they are those of Saddam’s iraq or the Balkan conflict? So why the silence over those found in a Democracy’s garden?

Does not such a discovery merit even a customary response from the Indian State? As far as I remember, there has been no official comment by the Central government in Delhi, so deeply entrenched is India’s policy of indifference and denial on Kashmir. And what of its intellectual classes who were on site, and rightly so, when India signed the UN resolution against Sri Lanka for its atrocities against Tamil civilians during the campaign against the ltte? If the conscience of a nation is not stirred by the discovery of thousands of nameless burials in what it claims as an integral part, the claim not only rings hollow, it was and will only ever remain a claim.The report came out last August, and the same commission subsequently ordered a further probe, citing the presence of nearly 3,000 more graves in the remote districts of Poonch and Rajouri—some allegedly with multiple bodies in them. But apart from one impassioned editorial expressing shame, a couple of speciously-framed TV shows attempting, among other things, equivalence between the all-powerful state and a beleaguered people, the media, while running the story, largely ignored the issue. “There is every probability that these unidentified dead bodies buried in various unmarked graves at 38 places of north Kashmir may contain the dead bodies of enforced disappearances,” the SHRC report had said. How can we not, then, express outrage over what could potentially constitute evidence of crimes against humanity? We’d do that if, say, the graves were made in Tripoli, under a dictatorship, wouldn’t we? Somehow, and for reasons unknown, unmarked graves (some with only heads in them) found in the disputed backyard of the world’s largest democracy have been deemed not heinous enough. Are we to assume mass graves made in a democracy are somehow more humane?

In recent months, some well-meaning commentators and Kashmir experts have started talking about moving on, about the dividends of peace, about economics as opposed to politics—as though these dual aspects were congenitally detached. This is more or less consistent with the outpourings of some members of India’s new class of beat intellectuals—they move from issue to issue, or studio to studio, with equal panache—and their callousness towards the tragedy of Kashmir is matched only by their disdain for even contemporary history. Perhaps the most serious and bizarrely anti-intellectual assertion, and therefore an insidious one, seems to project the idea of peace as somehow incompatible with the idea of justice, and those who demand it as some kind of violence fetishists—as though talking about massacres stems democracy and progress.

In the Indian establishment—and indeed the political philosophy espoused in statist writing on Kashmir employs language disturbingly reminiscent of an ‘establishment project’—there has been a sudden spurt in conversations around the ‘dividends of peace’ in Kashmir. This is, of course, not possible without the buy-in of a thriving comprador class in the conflict-torn land. Translated into realpolitik, this otherwise benign phrase seems to convey to a subject population that it is time they forgot their long-held aspirations for freedom, as also about possible crimes committed by a state that has been nothing but militaristic in its dealings with them. The jackboot comes draped in a flag emblazoned with the words “Let bygones be bygones”.

As for the talk of a truth and reconciliation commission to close the story of unmarked graves, while it is unambiguously noble in its pacifist aspirations and surely the right thing to do to assuage the pain of a people, it seems ludicrously premature in a place that is run by a system of repression. (It must be noted that, for all practical purposes, the Indian State and its client elites operate without a moral system in Kashmir.) One is, again, compelled to ask some elementary questions: truth and reconciliation, yes, but on who on whose terms? Can it mean anything if the terms are set by a repressive state? One hates to suspect this, but the people who tout this as a solution may not even fully understand the import of the phrase and have perhaps forgotten that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa came into effect after the end of apartheid, not while it was in full play. Even if one were to make an attempt to attend to the views of those who preach “moving on”, a single, simple, inquiry stands in the way: How does one move on from thousands of graves in one’s front garden?

Previously Posted on Outlook India

Read More

The Sentencing of Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai (Setting the Record Straight )

On March 30, 2012, Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai, the man the international diplomatic community has known for more than 20 years as the ambassador for Kashmir to the United States, stood before Judge Liam O’Grady in a federal court in Virginia and received a sentence of two years for the part he played as Director in funding the Kashmiri American Council, using contributions that allegedly had skirted certain tax regulations regarding how they may be made to a non-profit organization.  The technicalities involved in the sources of that money and how it ended up in the bank accounts of the KAC are still too complex for me to really understand, and probably not worth going into anyway, but its clear from the outcome that some violation of tax laws did occur and Dr. Fai was willing to take the rap for it.  In fact, both he and his wife believe sincerely that the judge was quite fair in handing down the sentence.  Although Dr. Fai’s reputation was sullied momentarily by charges that he was a spy for the Pakistani ISI and illegally lobbied members of Congress and two presidents, none of that proved true, and such charges were voluntarily dropped by the prosecution.  

What is quite dismaying, however, is the mincemeat that was made of this sentence by the press.  Despite the rather mundane issue of so-called tax dodging, many in the press continued to allege falsely that he had been convicted of being on the payroll of the ISI, convicted of being an unregistered lobbyist,  convicted of advocating and propagating the Pakistani position on Kashmir, and convicted of trying to influence the American government for the benefit of Pakistan.  So it is important that we set the record straight.   

Although initially charged under the FARA act [FARA refers to the Foreign Agents Registration Act] as an unregistered agent of Pakistan, Dr. Fai was never convicted on this allegation, which seemed clearly intended to support negotiations the U.S. and Hillary Clinton were engaged in with India at the time. Politically motivated and entirely fraudulent, the U.S. government believed that Dr. Fai’s reputation and career were expendable for whatever trite and meaningless advantage it may have offered in the politics of deal making.   

 

As his attorney, Nina Ginsburg stated during the hearing, “Judge, I think Mr. Kromberg’s arguments to the Court are appalling.  [Federal investigators] have a lot of words that were captured in intercepts, 20 years of intercepts, hundreds of thousands of interprets, and Mr. Kromberg cannot stand in front of this Court with one example of a statement, a public statement by Dr. Fai, a writing by Dr. Fai, a position taken at a conference he sponsored, not one, not one word, that is anything that could be characterized as propaganda for the Pakistani government.  

 

“It is an outrage for [the prosecutor] to say that that is what that man spent 20 years of his life doing when his writings, which we, unfortunately, took up a lot of paper, and I apologize for burdening the Court, every one of his writings, every declaration of every one of those conferences, what came out of the mouth of this man was, [quote] I’m not taking a side.  This is important, tens of thousands of people are dying, pay attention to what’s happening in Kashmir.  

 

“And his letters,” Ms. Ginsburg continued,  “he submitted letters to two Presidents of this country saying, I’m not taking a position, everyone has to give something, no one is going to be satisfied.  

 

“There is not one word that Mr. Kromberg can point to that Dr. Fai ever uttered that was propaganda for the government of Pakistan.  

 

“He received suggestions from people who would participate in these conferences. He accepted some and rejected some.  Topics, one of the topics that appears in these communications, the Pakistanis want him to raise the matter of 2,700 mass graves discovered in Kashmir.  

 

“Well, the Pakistanis didn’t have to tell him that that is a topic that should be discussed at an international peace conference.  There were 2,700 mass graves discovered in Kashmir,” his attorney added. 

 

Dr. Fai was greatly honored and supported by people from all faiths.   Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, and even atheists wrote dozens of letters regarding Dr. Fai to the judge.  These were people from the Unites States, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Canada, Bahrain, Qatar, Turkey, from both sides of the ceasefire line in Kashmir, and many other countries.  The courtroom was filled to capacity with people who came from places like California, Kansas, Illinois, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Washington DC, North Carolina, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and other states.  

 

The judge publicly took the note of the letters, acknowledging the people in the court in a positive manner at least twice, and demonstrated great appreciation for the cause of the people of Kashmir.  It’s an interesting and ironic twist that, although the government may have gained some short-term advantage with India in filing spurious charges against Fai,  the case against India regarding Kashmir gained greater mileage and publicity in the long run since it also became obvious that an airing of the issues convinced a number of people involved directly and indirectly with the case, including the judge, that the many years of sacrifice given by Dr. Fai to his country was sincere and justified. 

 

“I learned a whole lot reading this material,” Judge O’Grady declared.  “I don’t for a minute question that [Dr.] Fai is a true patriot of Kashmir, even though he is a U.S. citizen, and the people that he has advocated for.  I think he also loves the country and its people, and it’s reflected in his writings and it’s reflected by the people that are here today.”  

 

Efforts by the prosecutor to paint Dr. Fai as a “shill” for Pakistan fell on deaf ears.  Pointing out the prosecutor, Ms.Ginsberg said angrily,  “Mr. Kromberg’s arguments to the Court are appalling in light of the fact that the Government originally charged Dr. Fai with a FARA offense, elected to drop that offense, and is now essentially making a closing argument that he would make to a jury if Dr. Fai was charged with violating the FARA statute, all without giving him the slightest ability to refute with facts.”    The prosecution had dropped the charge entirely on its own, without negotiation or effort by the defense, before the case ever reached the court.  

“Judge,” she said,  “Pakistan would have Kashmir annexed to Pakistan. Dr. Fai is a Kashmiri.  He doesn’t have to have Pakistan tell him that India shouldn’t be murdering tens of thousands of Kashmiri people.”    

 

It was the genuineness of the cause of Kashmir and the succinct articulation of Dr. Fai which caused the judge to make clear that he was totally convinced that the accused in no way misrepresented the people of Kashmir when he said in his closing remarks, “I see no reason why you can’t continue to advocate on behalf of the Kashmiri people and to write.”  He shared his belief in that cause when he added, “I hope that this cause continues to be identified as an important international matter.  And good luck to you.”  

 

The people of Kashmir should remember that Kashmir is not a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan but that it has its own international dimension as mentioned by Judge O’Grady.  While the efforts of Dr. Fai have been somewhat muddied by these waters, the river flows on and the water will clear by these facts that have been revealed through this legal process.  Dr. Fai continues to stand strong and, God willing, he will continue to advocate the cause of Kashmir while he is incarcerated.  

 

Once he is released, he will again advocate this just cause before the international community, because he has been given the full support and confidence of American jurisprudence and was in fact encouraged by the judge to continue his work.  That should be evidence in and of itself that the original allegation that he was acting as a foreign agent for Pakistan was completely false and without substance.  The judge was eminently clear in recognizing the ongoing tragedy in Kashmir, acknowledging the many years of labor by Dr. Fai for his own homeland, and a full acknowledgement of those facts was made possible in public through this legal process.  

 

A hero is someone who is willing to give his life for the cause of others. That description fits this man.  He has given all that he could and more.  No one I know or have known in my extensive experience in the political arena has demonstrated the selfless commitment and dedication I have seen in Dr. Fai.  Kashmir is blessed and the world is blessed as well by his fine example.   It is time that we all recognize that Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai is a true hero for having raised the plight of Kashmiris to the level of global consciousness, and I personally owe him a deep sense of gratitude for the beautiful example he has been to me. 

Previously Published on Al-Jazeerah by Paul Barrow 

Read More

Release Dr. Muhammad Qasim | A Prisoner Of The State

Dr. Muhammad Qasim: A mission, A vision 
HE IS DYING BEHIND THE BARS, DOES ANYONE CARE ??? 
Prisoner of State

Dr. Muhammad Qasim is set to complete 20 years of imprisonment in the month of June 2012. he was arrested in Feb 1993 for holding political views that are unacceptable to the establishment, he was released on bail by the TADA court Jammu in March 1999 and was rearrested in the same case in Feb 2000 on his return from UK after attending Kashmir conference there.

      Dr. Muhammad Qasim’s Health condition in prison:He has lost more than half his eye sight (-4.75 D) as he is regularly loosing his vision he has been advised Lasik by the doctors. He has been advised surgery by the orthopedist for his L4-L5 disc. He is regularly taking medicine for erosive duodenitis, chronic gastritis and intestinal ailment .Jail authorities never showed any concern for his ailments with the result his health is deteriorating with every passing day.

              JUDICIAL COURSE AND GOVERNMENT’S HARSH APPROACH:Dr. Muhammad Qasim was acquitted by the TADA court Jammu in July 2001.Government of India instead of releasing him booked him under the so called public safety act (PSA) and challenged his acquittal before the supreme court of India and the supreme court of India sentenced him along with two other persons for life.

Dr. Muhammad Qasim completed 14 years (mandatory period of life imprisonment) in Feb. 2008, accordingly state Review board recommended his release but politically biased government rejected review boards recommendations. It is the lone case in the history of lifers in Jammu and Kashmir where recommendations of the review board for the release of a lifer were rejected by the home department.

JK High court (SB) asked government you reconsider the review boards recommendations for Dr. Muhammad Qasim’s release with in 90 days in June 2010.Governmnet of India yet again showed her ruthless attitude and challenged the said order before the double bench of the JK high court. JK high court while setting aside the SB order adding that his case can be considered only after 20 years , made an important observation as under: 31:Irrespective of the provisions i.e. section 401 and 402 of the state code of criminal procedure, which corresponds to section 432 and 433 of the central code. The power of the executive is absolute and unfettered to remit sentence.(LPA No:120/2010)

Government of India did not give any head to this observation this , Dr. Muhammad Qasim remains in prison. You can do a lot!

Join The campaign spread the word

By becoming a member of this campaign all you have to do is to forward this brief profile of Dr. Muhhamad Qasim to all such organizations, Committees, Media men and individuals who are working for human rights and political prisoners, by doing this you are not supporting an individual but a just cause.

(C) http://www.releasedrqasim.org
Please Sign The Petition:  Amnesty International: Release Dr. Muhammad Qasim Campaign

Read More

Geelani digs deep into his eventful past

Chairman of Hurriyat Conference (G) Syed Ali Shah Geelani talks about his family background, hardships he faced to attain education and his journey from a north Kashmir hamlet to Srinagar. In an exclusive interview to Greater Kashmir Senior Editor Javaid Malik, Geelani reveals how he first became a reporter then a teacher and a politician.
Q. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR CHILDHOOD?I was born in a small hamlet Khonus located on the border of Sopore and Bandipora in north Kashmir on 29, September 1929. I belong to a very humble background. My father used to work as a seasonal coolie and earn Rs 10 monthly. But during those days Rs 10 meant a lot. We had goats and hens in our home. Despite poverty we used to live a peaceful life. My father was uneducated but he wanted his children to get education.  He sent my elder brother Syed Meerak Shah Geelani to a Maktaba (religious school) at Hardshiva village in Sopore run by late Syed Sonaullah Shah. My elder brother got religious education there. Shah Sahib was an expert of Arabic language. We were three brothers and two sisters. My parents lost their first son soon after he was born. Otherwise we would have been six. 

Q. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR SCHOOLING DAYS?
I got my initial education at Botengo primary school. We had to walk up three to four kilometers to reach from our village to Botengo. Our teacher was Pandit Nitayanad. He was a noble soul used to teach us with love and affection. Students used to give him one kg rice and eggs as fee. Master Nitayanand despite being a Pandit used to teach us Deeniyat (Islamaiyat) and other books. He knew Urdu, Arabic, Persian and other languages.  He was a very good teacher and used to love his students. Memories of old days are very sweet. No doubt there was lot of poverty but there was lot of love, affection and humility; people used to respect each other. There were no fights, no discrimination on the basis of caste, creed and colour. I have spent my childhood in a very peaceful environment. We were so poor that we couldn’t afford to buy the books. We used to depend upon on the books of our classmates. I secured third position in Primary school. There was no Middle School or High School nearby our village. I had to join a High School in Sopore to pursue my further studies.

Q. ANY INCIDENT OF HIGH SCHOOL WHICH YOU STILL REMEMBER?I got slapped twice when I was in my High School. Once I plucked a flower and I was punished. Second time I was slapped when I was in class VI. I was the monitor of my class.  Our form teacher late Habibullah Wani of Nadihal Bandipora went to principal’s office to discuss some issue. When he returned there was lot of noise in the classroom. He became very angry and slapped me saying, “You are the monitor of the class. It was your responsibility to maintain discipline.”  I still remember these two slaps. I used to get Rs 3 as scholarship in Sopore High School as I had secured third position in Primary school.

Q. WHERE DID YOU PURSUE YOUR HIGHER STUDIES?
My story is very heartrending. I have written about it in my autobiography Wular Kinarey. I had to cover 18 miles everyday to reach the school. I had to leave  very early. My elder sister got married in Dooru and I started staying in her house so that I am able to reach the school on time. Till VIIth standard I pursued my studies from Sopore High School. In class VIIth incident took place. Late Muhammad Din Fok from Lahore visited one of their relatives at Sempora late Ghulam Muhammad Khadim, he was also from Lahore. Late Mubarak Shah, elder brother-in-law of my sister, used to work in the Nursery of Khadim Sahib. One day Shah Sahib took me along where I met Muhammad Din Fok. After meeting me, Fok Sahib told Shah Sahib that  I am very sharp and he would take me along to Lahore and get me admitted in a good educational institute. He took me along but instead of sending me to some school he sent me to his elder daughter’s house at Muzang as a domestic help. I stayed there for one year and I just kept on weeping as I was in a shock. My brother-in-law, Abdul Aziz Shah was an employee of Women’s college Lahore. Even my elder brother got appointed in the same college and I returned to Sopore after both of them intervened. I took admission in Baba Yousuf School in Sopore but I couldn’t complete my education there. After sometime my elder brother Meerak Shah Sahib came home and took me along to Lahore. I again got chance to complete my studies in Lahore. First I tried to commit holy Quran to memory, but couldn’t do it fully. Then I got admission in Oriental Night College where I did my Adeeb-e-Alim. During daytime we used to get religious education and in night we used to attend the college. Most Kashmiri students used to go to Lahore to pursue their studies. It used to be the centre of education for Kashmiris. Hafizullah Shah, elder brother of the former DGP of JK Ghulam Hassan Shah, used to be in Lahore. I would stay with him there. He led the prayers in a Mohalla Geelania. I have stayed in a Masjid at Lal Kuan. In Lahore every Masjid those days was equipped to provide religious education to youth.

Q. WHEN YOU RETURNED FROM LAHORE DID YOU LOOK FOR A JOB?
Yes of course. Those days late Ghulam Ahmed Ashai was Inspector of schools. I would visit his office regularly. He provided me with a leave chance here and there. My uncle Syed Muhammad Yousuf Shah Geelani led prayers at Lam Reshipora near Bandipora. He is the only Imam in JK’s history who led the prayers at one place for 60-years. He was a very influential man. He took me to late Muhammad Anwar Khan. He (Khan) gave me a letter addressed to Moulana Masoodi, who was the general secretary of National Conference those days. He kept me with him at Mujahid Manzil in old city. Those days Moulana Masoodi used to look after Khidmat newspaper. He asked me to work as a reporter in Khidmat and it was my first full fledged job. In 1946 late Sheikh Sahib raised the slogan of “leave Kashmir” which led to government launching a crackdown on Mujahid Manzil and I had to return to Sopore.

Q. WHEN DID YOU RETURN TO SRINAGAR AGAIN?
Second time I returned to Mujhaid Manzil was in 1947. Moulana Masoodi had come to Handwara and from there he arrived at Watlab in Sopore.  Moulana Masoodi was wounded as his arm was bandaged. Those days I was heading a team of labourers who were constructing the Watlab road. I heard that Moulana Masoodi had come to Watlab. I went to see him. One Army officer and late Ghulam Mohidin Sofi were accompanying him.  When Moulana Masoodi was leaving I told him that I am jobless. He told me to come to Mujahid Manzil. I didn’t know how to reach Srinagar as there were no resources available with me to reach there. During winters many fishermen from Srinagar used to visit Wular for fishing.  I requested the fishermen to take me along to Srinagar and they readily agreed. I reached Mujahid Manzil and saw Moulana Masoodi sitting in the lawn.  He saw me and told me “you have come, ok stay back.” I stayed there for four years. I again pursued my studies. I enrolled myself in the University of Kashmir for the course of Adeeb-e-Fazil. In the first convocation of KU I got the degree of Adeeb-e-Fazil. After that I got the degree in Munshi Fazil, Urdu Honors and Persian Honors. I pursued my higher studies under the guidance of Moulana Masoodi.

Q. DID YOU GET A PERMANENT JOB AFTER GETTING THESE DEGREES?
Soon after I completed my studies, Moulana Masoodi told me to join Police Force but I told him that I am not interested in joining the belt force. Ghulam Rasool Danposh and Ghulam Hassan Shah, who later became DGP, also joined the Police Force during those days.
 One day Moulana Masoodi called the then Inspector of Schools Syed Tayib Shah to Mujahid Manzil and told him to get me appointed as a teacher. I was appointed as teacher in Pather Masjid Primary School and I got the order in Mujahid Manzil. For one year I worked as teacher in Pather Masjid Primary School. After one year I was transferred to Rainawari High School.  During those days Qari Saiffudin, who was associated with Jamaat-e-Islami, used to teach there. Through him I was introduced to Jamaat. From Rainawari High school I was transferred to Raghunath Mandir Middle School Kani Kadal. I stayed there for one year. I worked as a teacher in Srinagar for three years.

Q. YOU REVEALED THAT MOULANA MASOODI HELPED YOU COMPLETE YOUR STUDIES AND GET YOU A JOB. THEN WHY DIDN’T YOU JOIN NATIONAL CONFERENCE?
Moulana Masoodi never told me to join National Conference. He taught me and fulfilled my needs. He taught me like his son. When I was in Raghunath Mandir  Middle school I had brought the books for FA and I wanted to pursue English Honours, but unfortunately Moulana Masoodi’s father underwent an eye surgery and he went to attend him. Many Jamaat activists used to come to Mujahid Manzil to meet me. Late Mohiuddin Sofi and other NC members complained to Moulana Masoodi that Mujahid Manzil has become a den of Pakistanis (smiles). After that Moulana Masoodi asked then Inspector Schools late Noorudin Sahib to transfer me to Bomai Middle School close to my native village. It was a big set back for me as I couldn’t pursue my further studies.

Q. WAS MOULANA MASOODI YOUR ROLE MODEL?
I was very much impressed and inspired by the personality of Moulana Masoodi, his honesty, his simple way of living. He was very intelligent, dedicated, and a perfect gentleman. The biggest quality he possessed was that he used to live a very simple life. He was well educated, great scholar and a teacher.

Q. AFTER BOMAI MIDDLE SCHOOL WHAT WAS YOUR NEXT DESTINATION?
I worked in Bomai Middle School for four months. During those days there was an Intermediate College in Sopore. Late Jalaluddin Mufti used to be principal of that college. He knew me as he used to come to Mujahid Manzil. A vacancy of Urdu and Persian teacher fell vacant in the college. Mufti Sahib recommended my name  for the post and I was transferred to Intermediate College Sopore where I stayed for nearly six year. This period was very crucial for me as it gave me exposure. I used to address congregations in Masjids. During those days I was reading the literature of Jamaat-i-Islami and I used to convey it to my students in my lecturers. After six years I was transferred to Dangerpora High school.

Q. WHAT MADE YOU JOIN JAMAAT-I-ISLAMI?
I was inspired by Jamaat’s ideology and the principles of the party. I was made the basic member of Jamaat-e-Islami in 1952 when I was in Bomai. After I was transferred to Dangerpora I used to come to Sopore and address Friday congregations. Those days late Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad was heading the state. His local MLA late Abdul Gani Malik didn’t like my activities. My speeches about resolution of Kashmir issue and Islam made him uncomfortable. I was transferred to Nadihal Bandipora but I didn’t join my new place of posting. First I went on a long leave and then I resigned in 1959 and joined politics fully. When I was posted in Sopore I was made Amir-e- Halqa. After I joined  Jamaat fully I was made Amir-e-Zilla of Kupwara and Baramulla. I was arrested for the first time on August 28, 1962. I remained behind bars for 13 months on the charges of raising Kashmir issue. In 1964 I was made general secretary of Jamaat.

Q. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT MOI-E-MUQADAS MOVEMENT?
Moi-e-Muqadas movement started on December 27, 1963. On that very day I was in Bandipora and I got a message there I rushed to Sopore as there was lot of tension in the town. People of minority community were shaken. The first thing I mentioned in my speech at Sopore was that we should follow the teachings of Hazrat Muhammad Prophet (SAW) and need to bear it in mind that we should not harm the minorities. It eased the tension in the town and provided confidence to members of the minority community.

Q. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH LATE SHEIKH MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH?Late Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah along with his friends had come to see habitation around Wular. I was very young those days. One of our relatives late Abdul Ahad Shah was wearing a Kashmiri cap but it was  very dirty. He (Sheikh Sahab) told him if you don’t have soap you should still wash your cap. I still remember his words.  Next time I saw him was in Mujahid Manzil. Muhammad Hussain Chisti told me that a vacancy has fallen vacant in the Press and I should approach him (Sheikh Sahib). As soon as he saw me he asked me “Do you know English” I told him no. He said, “Leave then.”

Q. ANY SUCH INCIDENT, WHEN YOU CONFRONTED SHEIKH ABDULLAH?
In 1979 we had held a conference of Jamaat at Gol Bagh in Baramulla and passed a resolution that Kashmir is a disputed region and people should be given their right to self determination. Next day there was a board meeting in Baramulla and Sheikh Sahib in his inaugural speech said that some people hold conferences on the name of religion and pass resolutions that Kashmir is disputed. I was sitting in front of him. Soon after he finished his speech I took the mike to present my point of view. Mubarak Shah stood up and said it’s a board meeting we are not here to discuss politics. Shariefuddin Shariq and Ghulam Rasool Bahar stood up to oppose me, but Sheikh Sahib showed his magnanimity and asked them to sit down and let me speak. I spoke for more than one hour and he listened to me very patiently.

Q. TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR STINT AS AN MLA?
I contested first elections in 1971. It was parliamentary election. I was nominated by Jamaat to contest elections from Baramulla. We were winning but lot of rigging took place and we lost. Those elections were held during G M Sadiq’s regime. I was first time elected to Assembly in 1972.  After I was elected to Assembly I along with other Jamaat members staged a walkout on the very first day to protest against Governor not presenting his address in Urdu, the official language. We always used to oppose the bills brought to legalize liquor. On many occasions I was forcibly evicted from the Assembly.

Previously Published on Greater Kashmir

Read More

Kashmir: The Untold Story of Indian Occupation

By Tara Dorabji

A few days before I left for India, American journalist, David Barsamian, was deported from New Delhi for his coverage of Kashmir. Barsamian reports for AlterNet one of the few national free speech radio outlets in the US. News reports quoted officials saying that his deportation resulted from his reporting on Kashmir during his 2009-10 trip to India, while on a tourist visa. If reporting the truth in Kashmir can get you deported, I was in danger.

On my first day in Srinagar, the local head of surveillance let me know he was fully aware of my arrival. It was a discreet enough interaction, but served its purpose: I was being watched. My threat? A pen and paper to record the stories of Kashmiris.

The silence of India’s occupation of Kashmir blankets the valley, like the morning smog obscures the Himalayan Mountains. There is a new face to the hundred-year-old struggle for Kashmiri sovereignty and independence. Sahil, age 12, lit up when I asked what his hope for Kashmir is. “I have a hope that there is a freedom in Kashmir.” Sahil’s father was disappeared in 2002. For nine years he and his mother have searched for his father, only his absence is present. Every day after school Sahil comes home to help his mother work—embroidering cloth to earn a few rupees.

The strong current of popular, nonviolent uprising for freedom continues to grow in Kashmir. It distinguishes itself from the armed rebellion of the early 90s, yet the demand is the same: liberation from occupation—the independence of Kashmir. Despite the Indian government’s own estimate of only 500-700 armed militants in the area, Kashmir remains the most densely militarized land on earth. There are approximately 700,000 Indian military and paramilitary in Kashmir, policing a population of 12.5 million.

Under the British partitioning of India in 1947, Kashmir joined India as a quasi-independent region. For a short time, Kashmiris enjoyed much self-rule, self-determination and indigenous leadership. Kashmir led the world in revolutionary land reform, implementing a broad redistribution of resources that created a population relatively equal in wealth. Was it that the Indian ruling elite feared that Kashmir would serve as a model for India? Could there have been a broad redistribution of resources in the subcontinent?

There are many interpretations of how the trust and relationship between Delhi and Srinagar eroded. The result was a deliberate stripping of Kashmiri independence, which on paper was protected under article 370 of the India constitution. While most of these rights have diminished, land protection in the valley is still observed and only Kashmiris can own land in the region. It is this provision that has prevented a complete repopulation of the area.

With the erosion of Kashmir’s autonomy, came the military repression and arguably an attempted genocide. From 1989 to 2011 there have been 8,000 documented disappearances and 70,000 deaths of Kashmiris resulting from the Indian occupation. Torture is rampant. Khurram Parvaiz, Liaison of the International People’s Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Indian-Administered Kashmir (IPTK), works documenting the cases of torture. “The most underreported phenomenon in Jammu and Kashmir is torture. If you go to any village hundreds of people in every village have been tortured, not just men, but women, children and old people as well.” Parvaiz was involved in documenting the torture of over 1,500 people who became impotent because their genitals were electrocuted. He goes on to explain that there have been hundreds of boys who were raped by soldiers. In one case the abuse by the army was caught on video, still there were no convictions. Parvaiz continued to describe another case of torture, “I have documented very horrible cases, but this is the most horrible.” The army kept a 60-year-old man in solitary confinement for one month. During that time, he wasn’t given anything to eat, but his own flesh. They cut the flesh from his body and served it to him. This was all he was given to eat for a month. Recounting the torture Parvaiz said, “This was something that shook me. We have hundreds of Guantanamo Bays here. Why is nobody talking about it?”

The torture and death can be buried no longer. In July 2011, the State Human Rights Commission of Jammu and Kashmir (SHRC) released a report documenting 2,156 unidentified bodies in 38 graveyards. The state report verified the findings of Buried Evidence, released in 2009 by Parvaiz’s group. Parvaiz explained how the findings were initially swept under the rug, “The government said that these unmarked graves are all of foreign militants and people need not worry about it.” There have been limited DNA tests on the remains. Parvaiz cited that DNA tests of 53 bodies identified that 49 were Kashmiri civilians, one was a Kashmiri combatant and three were unidentified.

Parvaiz said, “It is the right of the family to have the body. The government does not want to give these bodies to the families because there is something to hide. They are hiding the marks of torture.”

Kashmiri children grow up watching graveyards populate their villages. As people are buried, the community holds their story, the memory. Oral history is their biggest weapon against India’s brutal occupation. Even under occupation, the stories of the dead cannot be silenced.

The families of the disappeared continue to fight for the truth. Bilkeez Manzoor became a member of the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons after her father disappeared in 2002. The army took him from their house in the middle of the night. They have not seen him since. Manzoor continues to fight for justice for her father and brought the case all the way to India’s supreme court. Manzoor recounted that she received threatening calls telling her not to continue with her case, “But I am not afraid. I thought I am strong; I should file this. I have never stopped.”

Manzoor explained her hopes for Kashmir. “I want independence. The armed forces, they destroy everyone’s lives through torture, through fake murders like disappearances. It is very horrible for us. When we have independence we’ll be free of this. With the independence of Kashmir, maybe the women will feel free.”

While the people of Kashmir resist occupation and struggle for freedom every day, their struggle is largely ignored by the international community. Khurram Parviz asked, “Why is the international community silent? The war which has been declared on the people of Jammu and Kashmir by the Indian state has been violent, has been brutal has matched all records of brutality around the world. What we have suffered in the last 20 years is no less than a war crime, yet there is silence by the international community.”

Looking at the high alpine lakes and valley surrounded by mountains, one cannot help, but think of Switzerland. With a population of 7.6 million people, Switzerland’s population is nearly half the size of Kashmir’s. Despite its small size, Switzerland spends about 1% of their GDP on military. If Switzerland can be independent, why not Kashmir?

Could the future independence of Kashmir be a headwaters in creating a new type of democracy? Perhaps if the nonviolent, popular movement of Kashmir is allowed self-determination a new brand of democracy will be born: a democracy that is not founded on control through military domination—one that does not wave the flag of democracy to cover up genocide.

Earlier Published on (C) Project Censored  

Read More