The recent situation in Kashmir had me intrigued and I wanted to find out if there is any base, other than the age old separatist rhetoric, behind the boil. Incidentally, I came across this purportedly facebook post by a young Kashmiri lady - Shazia Bakshi touting reasons about how she went on from being an Indian to being a Kashmiri - vis-a-vis her 'identity'.
It had me concerned, not because her arguments held much water, they didn't as a matter of fact, and I will come to it, but more because that outlined how gullible even the educated Kashmiri youth is to anti-India calls and related brainwash. You would expect their education to have a say in determining right from wrong during their inner-voice debates, and lead them to choose a path to co-existence, peace and prosperity; over religious, regional and perceived-superior (and hence mistaken) identity.
Since the writeup came from a girl who claimed to be an Indian before she became a Kashmiri, I decided that one writeup was from horse's mouth, and was enough to gauge the situation and the mindset there in Kashmir.
One thing was crystal clear to me - the veil of her 'Indianness' was pretty thin. the vitriol was in your face. It was obvious she got brainwashed at the slightest of a bait. In fact, that write-up was probably not aimed at Indians, but at Kashmiris, who were/are sitting on the fence, recruiting them towards the Burhan-Wani-cause. After all, what better person to recruit sane minded people towards a path to destruction, than someone who claims to be 'one of them'.
Initially I wanted to rip through each and every argument she had in her writeup; but then I realised many of the arguments were not worth the response anyway. They were not arguments, they more felt like her attempt at convincing herself. What needed response was the way she sympathized with Burhan Wani, claiming the guy had not even fired a bullet. It was a ludicrous premise, if not ridiculous. Should India/army have waited till he fired a few rounds and killed people in buckets? Nevertheless, I found it intriguing enough to check out more about Burhan Wani.
The first image I found, was that of him wearing a kalashnikov and (Pakistani?) army fatigues. Then there was a neutral sounding article about Burhan Wani in Huffington Post (india), detailing his life. An interesting anecdote about why Burhan Wani became a Hizbul Mujahideen commander - mind you, commander of an organization that's declared a terrorist outfit by India, the EU and the USA - was the incident where an army patrol bullied him and his brother, friends in his late teens. And that was enough of a reason for him to join a state-fighting terrorist outfit. His father puts in a very convincing defence as to why his son joined a terrorist camp: his 'ghairat' (self-respect) made him retaliate. And I think this is thread most of the Kashmir-cause-champions hang on dearly to, most of the time - that 'you did it first and we are retaliating'. Playing victim is an excellent alibi to veil over your real intentions and deeds. Here is a wikipedia article that very succinctly explains the psychology behind abusers routinely engaging in self-victimization -
Spot on, wiki! That explains most of these alibis, doesn't it? I sometimes wonder if the Kasmiri Pundits, who were driven out of their homes, if not killed, for staying in their motherland of Kashmir, had started retaliating violently, leaning on their 'ghairat' (self-respect), would these same Kashmir-cause-champions or Burhan-Wani sympathizers give credence to that 'ghairat'?
Destruction, killing people or inciting mobs to go against a state/republic is not how you avenge/revenge or satisfy your 'ghairat'. At least not in this post barbarian era. There are better, diplomatic, social and evolved ways to address your concerns in this day and age.
After all, we don't see people in rest of the India turning against the state and becoming terrorists because of overtures by army and police (unless they are resuscitated by the communist, who get funded, we know from where). There are so many examples of police overtures being fought in courts all over india. i am sure someone will quickly point out that kashmir situation is 'different'. Well, maybe it is. Any thoughts about who/what made it different? The pattern of arguments that follow this question are the same old Ruy Lopez with Sicilian Defense boilerplate: eventually ending at "we want to join Pakistan". Good, now you are talking. What follows is my, a proud Indian's, message to all those thinly-veiled 'Indian' Kashmiris (and their sympathizers) who advocate Kashmir joining Pakistan. A tough stance that I wish India takes, instead of soft-gloving Kashmir.
"""
Now that we have cut all the crap and arrived at the root cause, let's get one thing out of the way before we discuss any further: it's not happening - you are not taking Kashmir to Pakistan, no matter how hard you try. Get over it. It's been 50 years since Kashmir was merged with the then new born India, and while the details can be argued for and against till the end of the time, the Kashmir deed is done and dusted in the last century. India has spent way too much time and resources since then in building its defences and guarding Kashmir as its own territory. No one and nothing, not even a nuclear holocaust - in which India has higher chances of surviving than Pakistan, can change that fact now.
One step further, it's definitely not happening on the basis of religion. India has never adhered-to/believed-in the two-nations theory - reason why the Hindu-rashtra theory is fought with tooth and nail. If Kashmir was to let off to Pakistan just because it's majority Muslim as of now, then the left and center won't have any face to fight against the right when it comes to the Hindu-rashtra theory. So forget the right, you can't get much of support even from the left or center for your cessation demands.
As for a plebiscite, India will never accept one since Pakistan has worked overtime to increase its own settlements in the PoK to bias any future plebiscites; while India still gives you a special status through Article-370. You should hang on to it, rather than stretching it so much that the rest of India looses its patience and starts demanding the article be dropped for good. It's the taxes we Indians pay, that has sustained Kashmir and your life style over the last 50-60 years. Reference: here is the latest [2016-17 budget for J&K at a glance](http://jakfinance.nic.in/Budget16/budGlance.pdf) that shows 48% of your budgeted 'income' is out of the grants that the central government bestows upon you. Don't you forget that.
Better be sane, stop brainwashing your kids, and learn to co-exist with Kashmiri Pundits and the rest of India. That's the path towards peace, prosperity and a better quality of life.
"""
It had me concerned, not because her arguments held much water, they didn't as a matter of fact, and I will come to it, but more because that outlined how gullible even the educated Kashmiri youth is to anti-India calls and related brainwash. You would expect their education to have a say in determining right from wrong during their inner-voice debates, and lead them to choose a path to co-existence, peace and prosperity; over religious, regional and perceived-superior (and hence mistaken) identity.
Since the writeup came from a girl who claimed to be an Indian before she became a Kashmiri, I decided that one writeup was from horse's mouth, and was enough to gauge the situation and the mindset there in Kashmir.
One thing was crystal clear to me - the veil of her 'Indianness' was pretty thin. the vitriol was in your face. It was obvious she got brainwashed at the slightest of a bait. In fact, that write-up was probably not aimed at Indians, but at Kashmiris, who were/are sitting on the fence, recruiting them towards the Burhan-Wani-cause. After all, what better person to recruit sane minded people towards a path to destruction, than someone who claims to be 'one of them'.
Initially I wanted to rip through each and every argument she had in her writeup; but then I realised many of the arguments were not worth the response anyway. They were not arguments, they more felt like her attempt at convincing herself. What needed response was the way she sympathized with Burhan Wani, claiming the guy had not even fired a bullet. It was a ludicrous premise, if not ridiculous. Should India/army have waited till he fired a few rounds and killed people in buckets? Nevertheless, I found it intriguing enough to check out more about Burhan Wani.
The first image I found, was that of him wearing a kalashnikov and (Pakistani?) army fatigues. Then there was a neutral sounding article about Burhan Wani in Huffington Post (india), detailing his life. An interesting anecdote about why Burhan Wani became a Hizbul Mujahideen commander - mind you, commander of an organization that's declared a terrorist outfit by India, the EU and the USA - was the incident where an army patrol bullied him and his brother, friends in his late teens. And that was enough of a reason for him to join a state-fighting terrorist outfit. His father puts in a very convincing defence as to why his son joined a terrorist camp: his 'ghairat' (self-respect) made him retaliate. And I think this is thread most of the Kashmir-cause-champions hang on dearly to, most of the time - that 'you did it first and we are retaliating'. Playing victim is an excellent alibi to veil over your real intentions and deeds. Here is a wikipedia article that very succinctly explains the psychology behind abusers routinely engaging in self-victimization -
It is common for abusers to engage in victim playing. This serves two purposes:
1. justification to themselves – as a way of dealing with the cognitive dissonance that results from inconsistencies between the way they treat others and what they believe about themselves.
2. justification to others – as a way of escaping harsh judgment or condemnation they may fear from others.
Spot on, wiki! That explains most of these alibis, doesn't it? I sometimes wonder if the Kasmiri Pundits, who were driven out of their homes, if not killed, for staying in their motherland of Kashmir, had started retaliating violently, leaning on their 'ghairat' (self-respect), would these same Kashmir-cause-champions or Burhan-Wani sympathizers give credence to that 'ghairat'?
Destruction, killing people or inciting mobs to go against a state/republic is not how you avenge/revenge or satisfy your 'ghairat'. At least not in this post barbarian era. There are better, diplomatic, social and evolved ways to address your concerns in this day and age.
After all, we don't see people in rest of the India turning against the state and becoming terrorists because of overtures by army and police (unless they are resuscitated by the communist, who get funded, we know from where). There are so many examples of police overtures being fought in courts all over india. i am sure someone will quickly point out that kashmir situation is 'different'. Well, maybe it is. Any thoughts about who/what made it different? The pattern of arguments that follow this question are the same old Ruy Lopez with Sicilian Defense boilerplate: eventually ending at "we want to join Pakistan". Good, now you are talking. What follows is my, a proud Indian's, message to all those thinly-veiled 'Indian' Kashmiris (and their sympathizers) who advocate Kashmir joining Pakistan. A tough stance that I wish India takes, instead of soft-gloving Kashmir.
"""
Now that we have cut all the crap and arrived at the root cause, let's get one thing out of the way before we discuss any further: it's not happening - you are not taking Kashmir to Pakistan, no matter how hard you try. Get over it. It's been 50 years since Kashmir was merged with the then new born India, and while the details can be argued for and against till the end of the time, the Kashmir deed is done and dusted in the last century. India has spent way too much time and resources since then in building its defences and guarding Kashmir as its own territory. No one and nothing, not even a nuclear holocaust - in which India has higher chances of surviving than Pakistan, can change that fact now.
One step further, it's definitely not happening on the basis of religion. India has never adhered-to/believed-in the two-nations theory - reason why the Hindu-rashtra theory is fought with tooth and nail. If Kashmir was to let off to Pakistan just because it's majority Muslim as of now, then the left and center won't have any face to fight against the right when it comes to the Hindu-rashtra theory. So forget the right, you can't get much of support even from the left or center for your cessation demands.
As for a plebiscite, India will never accept one since Pakistan has worked overtime to increase its own settlements in the PoK to bias any future plebiscites; while India still gives you a special status through Article-370. You should hang on to it, rather than stretching it so much that the rest of India looses its patience and starts demanding the article be dropped for good. It's the taxes we Indians pay, that has sustained Kashmir and your life style over the last 50-60 years. Reference: here is the latest [2016-17 budget for J&K at a glance](http://jakfinance.nic.in/Budget16/budGlance.pdf) that shows 48% of your budgeted 'income' is out of the grants that the central government bestows upon you. Don't you forget that.
Better be sane, stop brainwashing your kids, and learn to co-exist with Kashmiri Pundits and the rest of India. That's the path towards peace, prosperity and a better quality of life.
"""
