Kashmir hogs the limelight in the global media. For reasons obvious. Killings and protests. Greater Kashmir has compiled the excerpts of news reports and opinion pieces published in some of the influential international magazines and newspapers on the current unrest in Kashmir

Foreign Policy Magazine: In a report titled “Voice from Kashmir” published on July 12, 2010 wrote:  “It is difficult to tell what will happen here (in Kashmir) over the next few weeks. But like the violence, the cycle of disappointment also exists. The Indian government might be able to quell the situation momentarily and make claims about how it is serious about the "peace process" and dialogue with Pakistan. Then, the process will be delayed. Meanwhile, the cycle of violence will continue.”

Newsweek: In a report titled “Ignore the Kashmir Hawks: Singh can make peace in the Valley” published on July 17, 2010 writes: “For Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, the spate of violence presents a difficult challenge. He needs to resist hawks in his government who justify the heavy-handed tactics of the security forces. Instead, Singh should recognize this protest movement for what it is: an expression of pent-up anger and frustration by young Kashmiris who feel alienated from the rest of India.

They are frustrated with the lack of economic opportunity in the state, and they are fed up with living : hundreds of thousands of Indian soldiers and police are stationed in Kashmir, their presence visible throughout the valley. These security forces have been granted legal immunity, a situation that has only invited abuses.

With a few important gestures, Dr Singh could defuse some of the anger on the streets and buy important support for a lasting peace with Pakistan.
Dr Singh should reach out again to the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, the umbrella group of Kashmiri separatists. The Hurriyat, bowing to its hardline faction, has rejected Dr Singh’s previous offers of dialogue for two reasons: the continued extension of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act to Kashmir and the separatists’ insistence that they have a seat at the table in negotiations between New Delhi and Islamabad on Kashmir’s final status. Lifting the act, however, might provide enough political cover for moderates, such as Hurriyat leader Omar Farooq, to enter into talks.

But unless Dr Singh addresses the concerns of disaffected Kashmiris about human rights, economic development, and political autonomy, he may find he has brokered a historic peace without bringing peace to the Valley.”

The Economist: In a report titled “Stony Ground” published on July 8, 2010 writes: “The underlying cause of the latest violence in Kashmir is the disenchantment of mostly jobless young people after two decades of street battles, bandhs, and curfews. They have been disappointed in hopes for both economic development and some form of autonomy from the government in Delhi.

The authorities both there and at the state level have been treating the protests as a continuation of the secessionist insurgency that began in 1989, but the protests now are primarily acts of civil disobedience.

Omar Abdullah, of the National Conference party, a scion of the state’s leading political dynasty, became its youngest-ever chief minister early last year. But the new approach he promised has not materialized.

The Wall Street Journal: Noted columnist Sumit Ganguly in an article titled ‘The Flag March Won't Fix Kashmir: Only economic development and devolution will solve the state's problems’ writes: “After 15-year hiatus, the Army has been deployed again in Kashmir, India's only Muslim-majority state. The trigger event this time was the death of a 17-year demonstrator who was struck by a tear-gas shell. The Army will resort to a colonial relic, the ‘flag march’, to display military might and cow the protestors off the streets. Yet while this might work in the short term, the Army's deployment is no panacea.

The problem that the government confronts has no military solution. The anger that has spilled out into the warren-like streets of Kashmir's villages is not the work of Pakistan-supported militants or organized indigenous separatists. Instead it is the spontaneous outburst of a generation of young Kashmiris who have witnessed much hardship over the last two decades of the insurgency. This anger has its roots in economic stagnation and political stalemate.

Kashmir today isn't the hotbed of violence it once was. India's authorities have managed to restore a substantial degree of both law and order to the state. It cannot allow these demonstrations to spin out of control and thereby fritter away these hard-won gains. The Kashmiri people deserve better.”

The Christian Science Monitor: In a report titled “Kashmir intifada? New view of India, Pakistan territory dispute” published on July 13, 2010 writes: “The use of the phrase intifada, which means uprising, highlights how the unrest in Kashmir has been led by rock-throwing boys, not the trained militants or political factions of the elder generation. It was that generation's earlier efforts that failed to end India's military presence in the disputed region along the Pakistan and Indian border where many Kashmiris simply want independence.

There appears to be broad agreement among experts that the boys, for now, are not acting in concert with militants. Yet, much of the security apparatus in the state is focused on fighting insurgents, not managing protesters.”

The Washington Post: In a report titled “In Kashmir, stone throwers face off with Indian security forces” published on July 17, 2010 writes: “The stone-throwing this summer began June 11, when a 17-year-old student, Tufail Mattoo, was killed by a tear-gas shell that shattered his skull, making him an instant martyr. The tactic has a long history in Kashmir, but many here say that this year, it has taken on a new resonance for Kashmir's youth, who make up 70 percent of the population.

One young Kashmiri with a degree in computer applications edited a powerful video to the lyrics of the Everlast song ‘Stone in My Hand’ and posted it on YouTube, prompting police to launch a manhunt for him. The lyrics – ‘I got no pistol, ain't got no sword. I got no army, ain't got no land. All I got is stones in my hand’- became the anthem of Kashmiri youth and is hummed on the streets here.”

Los Angeles Times: In a report titled “Kashmir on edge” published on July 7, 2010, writes: “The latest murky cycle of violence in Indian Kashmir began late Monday in the Gangbugh neighborhood of Srinagar with the killing of a teenage boy.

Omar Abdullah, son of a Kashmiri nationalist leader, was elected the chief minister of India's Jammu and Kashmir state in late 2008 on a pledge to make security forces more accountable and to focus more effort on winning the hearts and minds of locals rather than wielding brute force. In a visit last month, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pledged "zero tolerance" for human rights violations in Kashmir.

But political infighting, Abdullah's soft leadership style and a tangle of overlapping security force jurisdictions have resulted in limited change, critics say.

Politicians, academics and human rights groups have long cited a culture of impunity among security forces in Kashmir, epitomized by a controversial 1990 national law granting soldiers the right to detain or eliminate all suspected terrorists and destroy their property without fear of prosecution. Critics have called the provision, which doesn't clearly define "terrorists," as a license to kill.”

The Financial Times (London): In a report titled “India struggles to contain Kashmiri rage” published on July 15, 2010, writes: “Even as insurgency has waned (in Kashmir), India’s security forces maintain an overbearing presence. Young, English-speaking graduates can’t find jobs. New Delhi, distracted by a Maoist insurgency in central and east India, has made no serious overtures towards the alienated, politicized population. India’s proposals to give Kashmir greater autonomy gather dust.

While New Delhi blames Pakistan-based militants for inciting unrest, local people insist the protests, including small sit-ins in various Srinagar neighborhoods are indigenous expressions of genuine anger and frustration. And in the absence of any credible political process, Kashmir remains volatile.”

The Times: In a report titled “Martyrdom sparks schoolboy revolt in Kashmir” published on July 17, 2010 writes: “Srinagar has witnessed a series of street battles between stone-throwing boys, some as young as eight, and security forces with Kalashnikovs. The schoolboy "stone pelters" have become the new face of the region's tensions. Since Tufail's death, 14 protesters and bystanders have been killed. Last week the Indian army was deployed in Srinagar for the first time in two decades to quell the violence.

The stone pelters - who grew up amid the separatist insurgency that erupted in 1989 and claimed 68,000 lives - say they have been backed into a corner.

"We remember the horrors of the insurgency. We don't want violence. But it is the only language India understands," Sharif, 20, said in a Srinagar backstreet during a curfew. "We want azadi (freedom) from India, from Pakistan, from fear. The more they stamp on us, the stronger our will becomes."

Arab News: In an article titled “Kashmir urgently needs a healing touch” published on July 16, 2010 writes: “Kashmir is burning because of the decades of failed policies and actions of the shortsighted, self-serving politicians in Srinagar, Delhi and Islamabad. This surge of violence and protests, ostensibly in response to police firings and faked encounters, is actually a result of decades of suppression, injustice and deprivation.
The long pent-up volcano of Kashmiri anger and frustration has burst open. And it threatens to consume everyone and everything in its path.

This is a movement that is now not in anyone’s control, not the dithering Hurriyat, not the PDP, not even Pakistan. This is a people’s protest, a protest against their own leaders for letting them down, against Pakistan for exploiting them and a protest against Delhi for not keeping its promises all these years.

What Kashmir urgently needs is a healing touch and some dramatic, bold steps by the government in Delhi. If India is keen to win back Kashmiris, perhaps Congress President Sonia Gandhi, not Manmohan Singh, should visit the Valley and talk to ordinary people, especially those who have lost their loved ones over the past few months.

As a mother and as a woman who’s lost her own husband to violence, she’d bring the soft touch that the Valley badly needs. She could win Kashmiri hearts and minds too by reaching out to an alienated and angry people. Mere rhetoric and empty gestures won’t work anymore though.

The first step to peace and normalcy in Kashmir is a normal approach to the state: That is, stop treating it like a war zone and get more than half a million troops deployed there out. Secondly, and more importantly, start talking to both Kashmiri leadership and Pakistan to sort out this mess once and for all. Real and meaningful talks, not the kind of photo opportunities we have had so far. This is the only way to bring peace to this breathtakingly beautiful, but cursed land.”

Aljazeera: In an article titled “Losing Kashmir” posted on Aljazeera on July 14, 2010, former CIA official, Robert Grenier writes: “The current unrest in Kashmir, which has led to the deaths of another 15 civilians in the past month, only serves as a reminder of the centrality of Kashmir and Kashmiris in the dispute - despite the state department's craven labeling of current Kashmiri violence and repression as ‘an internal Indian matter’.

Make no mistake: Settlement of Kashmir is critical to broader regional stability. Without a settlement of Kashmir, the Indo-Pakistani proxy battle which greatly complicates prospects for a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan is unlikely to abate.

Thus, the challenge of an effective peace process in South Asia will be to cut through the chimera of ‘confidence building measures’ which lead nowhere, and to frame an agreement which goes far enough in addressing the legitimate grievances of Kashmiris to make the loss of Kashmir acceptable to the majority of Pakistanis.

Once such an agreement in principle is reached, it will then be necessary for the Indian and Pakistani governments to collaborate closely in an effort to make the agreement, including some significant Indian concessions to Kashmiris' desire for greater autonomy, politically saleable on both sides. In the same vein, it would also be necessary for India and Pakistan to collaborate in empowering the moderates in Kashmir itself who are capable of bringing about a political solution.”

Lastupdate on : Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:30:00 Mecca time
Lastupdate on : Mon, 19 Jul 2010 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:00:00 IST