A historical perspective
The process of civilian killings in Kashmir is nothing new. We have been witnessing an aggression of sorts for the past 63 years. And the mainstream leaders have only helped in intensifying this aggression on unarmed civilians of Kashmir, writes Tahir Muzter
While going through the 63 years of Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan, without pro or anti sentiments, Kashmir has suffered at the hands of both the countries. This is history which cannot be changed as per the wishes of anyone. It seems the only thing on which India and Pakistan agree with regard to Kashmir is: Let Kashmiris die.
Events right from 1947 to this date endorse my view. And with reference to present genocide in Kashmir, it can be said that the Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah has joined the two countries in the killing spree. He just wants to be in power. And the tragedy is that the people of Kashmir are dying under the duly-elected government. A clear deception. When India is asked about the present genocide, the Indian Foreign Minister says: It is law and order issue and for that a duly elected government is working there and the law and order is state subject.
What I want to convey to the world and particularly to the “pro and anti lobbies” is that Kashmir has faced worst aggression from Pakistan and worst sort of betrayal in the name of democracy from India. It was Qaid Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah who made it clear—not once but thrice—that Princely States can join India or Pakistan or remain independent. But did Pakistan do? Got the third option deleted in the United Nations Organization while advocating Kashmir dispute there. And what did India do? Betrayed Sheri-Kashmir Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah—the biggest supporter of Kashmir’s accession with India.
He was dismissed as Prime Minister of Jammu & Kashmir, arrested and imprisoned for years together. It was done with the criminal intention of eroding Kashmir’s Special Status, guaranteed in the Constitution. This erosion continues in different shapes and at different stages. And there is no doubt that in this endeavour, India was or is being helped by leaders right from Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad to Omar Abdullah, just for the sake of power, money and glamour.
With such deeds and acts of betrayal, it can be proved that no mainstream leader in Kashmir is a leader but an agent of Delhi. Power game in Kashmir has always been ugly. Today what Omar Abdullah is telling about the political issue of Kashmir is different than what his father would say in the Indian Parliament. They are just trying to fool Kashmiris and New Delhi.
Regarding the pro-freedom leaders, one can only ask them a question: what does freedom mean in historical perspective? What roadmap do they have in this regard?
(Feedback at email@example.com)