Volume 1, No. 8, October 2000

Kashmir Cauldron

Smash The Conspiracies Of The Delhi Rulers !

— Mukesh

Kashmir has seen fast political developments in a short span of four-five months. The latest being the declaration of cease-fire by the Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) on July 24, the first and only round of talks with the GoI (Government of India) and then the withdrawal on August 8. Before these quick succession of developments, the Kashmir scene witnessed the release of the All Party Hurriyet Conference (APHC) leaders in April; Farooq Abdullah’s painful gyrations at the prospect of peace talks with the Hurriyet; the passing of the autonomy resolution in the Kashmir Assembly in June, pushing the move of the GoI for talks with the APHC into the dark; and then the government’s wholesale rejection of the Autonomy Resolution and its campaign for the separation of Jammu and Ladakh from Kashmir. While the autonomy issue was still rampaging through the newspaper columns, bang came the announcement by the most powerful fighting organisation of Kashmir, the Hizbul Mujahideen, to stop its military operations for a period of 90 days. This announcement pulled the air out of the sails of the autonomy resolution.

But the ceasefire too collapsed, due to differing perspectives. The HM sought negotiations; the GoI sought surrender. The HM sought a ceasefire as a first step in a political process; the GoI had no interest in any political process, it sought total capitulation. Now, the GoI continues its attempts, to force a surrender in the name of a new ‘ceasefire’. For this, cloak-and-dagger operations of the RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) and IB (Intelligence Bureau) are working at high pitch.

The present political machinations around Kashmir is the result of the changing geo-political equations in the Indian subcontinent; wherein the central focus of a US-Pak axis has gradually shifted to a US-India axis. The process of this change climaxed with the Clinton visit. Earlier, the US used the Kashmir issue, to arm-twist the Indian rulers to accept its dictates. Earlier too, Pakistan was its faithful ally, to counter Soviet influence in Afghanistan and also South Asia. Now, with the US-India axis fully in place, the US has no use for the Kashmir issue; and seeks to pressurise Pakistan to rein in the islamic fundamentalist forces, many of which were a product of their own illegitimate alliance. Now, having brought the Indian rulers under its thumb, the US seeks a subcontinent under Indian hegemony, for its ‘peaceful’ exploitation by the TNCs, primarily based in India. This is best achieved by a settlement of the Kashmir issue and through dialogue with Pakistan. The US demands dialogue, the Indian rulers avoid it, in order to fuel their anti-Pak hysteria.

The present political maneuverings in Kashmir has to be seen within this frame-work, wherein, not only Pakistan, but many of the liberation fighters are being pressurised by the US to seek a ‘reasonable’ settlement with New Delhi. With many leaders of the Azaad Kashmir movement dependent on Pakistan and having links with the US, the latter’s change in policy can affect their ability for independent decision making.

Through the cobweb of lies and deceit churned out by the Indian rulers, let us first try and fathom the manoeuvrings behind the scenes, in order to understand the recent events, and the dangers confronting the Kashmiri liberation fighters. Many a poisonous reptile is trying to cosy up to them.

First we will look at the role of the US, then the Indian and Pakistani rulers and finally the liberation fighters.

For all BJP’s big-talk of no third party intervention in the Kashmir dispute, the US’s hand is to be seen everywhere. It instructs Delhi, it pressurises Islamabad and it maintains close liaison with many of the freedom fighters. To assist in this process, it has high-profile US based ‘Kashmiris’, like merchant banker Mansoor Ijaz and the Kashmir Study Group’s Farooq Kathwari. Let us see its covert and overt operations (i.e., whatever is visible of it) on all the forces at play.

Unheard of in diplomatic protocol, Clinton was on the phone to Vajpayee, within hours of the August 1 Kashmir massacre. Normally, it takes days to work up a presidential phone call. The lengthy conversation would not have been restricted to expressing ‘sympathy’ for those killed. Obviously urgent instructions were necessary. Besides, at the time of the declaration of the ceasefire on July 24, the Prime Minister’s National Security Advisor, Brajesh Mishra, was in the USA. It was only after his return to India, five days later on July 29, and a thorough briefing by the US, that the GoI responded to the ceasefire call. And even, in the midst of the tensions and dialogues, Farooq Abdullah, went abroad on a three week ‘holiday’. In end September, a top-level counter-insurgency Israeli team, in fact, made a detailed tour of Kashmir. A few days later the US counter-terrorist high level team, after holding talks in New Delhi, threatened to declare Pakistan a terrorist state.

If we turn to Pakistan, we find that just a month earlier Musharraf had sent his foreign minister, Abdus Sattar, to Washington. Also, well before the ceasefire call and even after, the former ISI chief, General Hamid Gul, was stationed in the USA. Besides, the US was able to pressurise Pakistan to turn a blind eye to RAW’s lengthy discussions with some HM leaders within Pakistan and also get the GoP to stop Masood Azhar (freed in the hijack episode) from speaking at an anti-India meeting in mid-August and putting a ban on his entry into Sind province.

Even the freedom fighters are not free from US interference, manipulations and attempts at domination. Though there are regular contacts with the US-based Kashmiri tycoons acting on behalf of the US administration, the state department also directly intervenes. In mid-May a four member delegation of top US diplomats went on a three day visit to Kashmir. The details of these meetings were never disclosed. Also the chief of the Jamaat-e-Islam (of which the HM is the military wing) spent a long time in July, in both Tokyo and Washington. While in Washington Quazi Hussain met assistant secretary of state, Karl Inderfurth, under secretary of state for counter-terrorism, Michael Sheehan, and many others. In fact, he hastily returned to Pakistan after the ceasefire call, lest it give the impression that it was brokered in Washington.

During Vajpayee’s visit to the US, the Americans made sure that he does not even come in contact with Musharraf; yet they once again said they were willing to mediate on Kashmir if both governments agreed.

So, the US is neck-deep in the Kashmiri imbroglio, notwithstanding all pretenses of the Indian rulers, that it is opposed to third-party intervention. As with other parts of the world the US here too, seeks to be the sole arbiter on the Kashmir question. Though it is not necessary that it always gets its way. With the collapse of the ceasefire, the US state department, condemned the HM, and also added that a final solution should entail a dialogue between India and Pakistan.

Rajiv Gandhi had a simple method of stabbing the movements in the back — sign an Accord to get the agitation to end; then renege on the political deal agreed, and thereby maintain control as before, without granting any of the concessions agreed upon. This happened with the Assam, Punjab and Mizo Accords. The history of the Naga ceasefire is as dubious, with it continuing endlessly and the various governments granting nothing to the Naga people.

In the present events in Kashmir the government has not issued a single statement that it is willing to discuss the political demands of the movement. Let alone Azaadi, its hysteric opposition to the autonomy resolution of the National Conference (NC), its persistent stand that it is only prepared to discuss within the framework of the Constitution; and the BJP’s standpoint of not even accepting Article 370 of the Constitution — all this indicates that its agreement for ‘peace talks’ was nothing but a ruse to get the militants to surrender, not a dialogue for a political solution to the problem.

Throughout the entire ceasefire episode never has it even accepted that political demands exist, that the people of Kashmir have some aspirations. On the contrary, the refrain has been only one : that the people of Kashmir desire peace, which has been disturbed by Pakistan-sponsored cross-border terrorism. So, when it even refuses to see the reality in Kashmir, there is no question of it even considering any of the political issues involved.

So its approach to the ceasefire call was one of manipulative games. Initially, both Brajesh Mishra and Vajpayee said that talks would take place within the frame work of the Constitution. The same stand as taken with the Hurriyet, which they had outright rejected. Later when the HM objected and also demanded the talks be tripartite involving Pakistan, the GoI changed its tune, and said the talks would be without preconditions. Then Vajpayee said that the talks would be on the basis of ‘humanness’.... and that the Indian Constitution was the best symbol of humanity. What is this, if not playing games with the adversary? Later he made the most ridiculous statement, saying that the HM may raise issues outside the Constitution, but the GoI would reply only within its framework. No self-respecting organisation could possibly consider talks with such double-dealing !!

The government, while agreeing for talks, appealed to the HM cadre to come overground and discuss modalities of the ceasefire (If they came overground there would be no ceasefire to discuss, as even maintaining arms — let alone using them — is impossible in the overground). Then the army began distributing leaflets in Kupwara, Sopore and Ganderbal, urging Hizbul cadres to come overground. It even organised a cricket match in Kupwara.

Next a hasty meeting was organised on August 3, between the GoI and HM commanders through an intermediary — one Quereshi, who had long-since dissociated himself from armed struggle. This meeting was attended by Home Secretary Kamal Pande, top army officers and a host of RAW and IB elements. What shocked the HM commanders was that a meeting planned with underground leaders was made a public event. When HM representatives arrived at the Nehru guest house for off-the record talks they found the entire world press waiting for them — in an attempt to expose them and blunt their capacity for returning to military confrontation. Such underhand methods reflected a total betrayal of the norms for discussion.

What is more, the home department made open statements, saying that they hoped "the Hizbul commanders would come overboard and help the security forces in pinpointing the dens of the other pro-Pak outfits ....." In fact the attempt by defence and home ministry officials to portray the Hizb ceasefire as a kind of surrender was already being noticed in Kashmir. Thus, even before the first round of talks, the valley was abuzz with rumours that the Indian government was trying to break the Kashmiri part of the organisation away from Pakistan. These fears received a huge fillip with the media exposure on August 3.

At the talks itself the GoI totally ignored the 12-point charter of demands put forward by the HM as conditions for the ceasefire.... which included, revocation of the disturbed areas act, release of detenues, removal of bunkers, end of custodial killings and creation of an atmosphere conducive for the resumption of political activities. Kamal Pande merely announced that a team headed by special secretary C.S. Phunsong and other members of IB and RAW would work out the ground rules for the ceasefire. He also reported, that plans were discussed on how to identify HM cadres "so that they are not targeted." Besides, in the field, actions against the HM continued. In Udhampur the army shot dead HM leader, Shabbir Ahmed.

Talks were again fixed for August 5 with the government eager to consolidate the surrender, in the name of the ceasefire, with the modalities being worked out by the intelligence agencies. But the meeting did not take place as most of the HM commanders did not turn up. They had returned to their areas to take stock of the situation before continuing the talks. There they found the army distributing handbills and propagating that the cadres come overground now that a ceasefire was in place — i.e., organising surrenders !!

Meanwhile the Pakistani based HM chief, Syed Salahuddin, under pressure from the GoP (Government of Pakistan) set a deadline for August 8 that the talks be tripartite involving Pakistan as well. Panic-stricken that the ceasefire/surrender schemes may fail, the RAW chief, A.S. Daulet, himself flew down to Srinagar in a special aircraft on August 6, to meet up with Dar (the HM commander-in-chief of Kashmir operations, who had announced the ceasefire). Though it is reported that quiet dialogue took place between IB, RAW, Quereshi and Dar the ‘ceasefire’ could not be saved. On August 8, after the deadline was passed, the HM announced the renewal of armed hostilities.

Since then the GoI and Indian media, have gone on and on with statements of the government continuing secret dealings. Farooq Abdullah infact openly stated on August 10, that the GoI was working towards a split in the HM. The DIG of Police stated that clashes between the HM and Lashkar will increase. The government is clearly working, to organise surrenders, to pit Kashmiris against Kashmiris, create confusion dissensions and splits, and drown the movement in blood. There is no political process on the GoI’s agenda, they only want the Kashmiri people under the boot of the Indian rulers. This was also reflected in the resolution, passed at the BJP convention in Nagpur.

The Jehadi organisations operating in Kashmir condemned the Hizbul announcement as treachery and a betrayal of the freedom struggle. The Hizbul chief, Syed Salahuddin, was removed from the Chairmanship of the United Jehadi Council and his organisation expelled from the Council. The UJC is an umbrella organisation of 17 different groups, with the Hizbul as the biggest one, commanding the largest following in both parts of Kashmir, across the Line of Control (LoC). The large number of jehadi groups owe allegiance to various islamic sects and are all linked to the ISI. The ISI itself promotes factionalism within them as it is not keen to see any one group become too powerful. Some of these groups are vehemently anti-US as well.

Pakistan’s support to the Jehadis stems back from the time of the US-Pak axis, which sent such forces into Afghanistan to fight Soviet-imperialist rule. With the collapse of this superpower, many, like the Taliban, became vehemently anti-American. Meanwhile, with the US cosying up to India, Pakistan became cornered. Pressure was put on it to rein in the Jehadis and come to a settlement with India.

But, the Pakistani rulers, like their Indian counterparts, need a diversion for the masses, and the anti-India sentiments comes in handy. Besides, though Pakistan’s bankrupt economy, forces it to accept US arm-twisting, it will find it difficult to live with Indian hegemony in South Asia, even at America’s dictates. This can result in a war.

The US’s only fear is to prevent Pakistan from going into the islamic fundamentalist camp. With islamic militants in Central Asia, Middle East, North Africa, South East Asia, etc., targeting the US, it hopes to use Pakistan to bring some of them under control. On the other hand, the BJP’s anti-moslem stand, ideally suits US policy. And the growing BJP-Zionist connection helps cement the anti-islamic axis internationally. Vis-a-vis India, this will result Pakistan’s importance declining within the Western imperialist orbit — specifically that of the US.

These conflicting pulls and constraints are being reflected on the Pakistan-dependent militants, and even organisations like the Jamaat-e-Islami.

Ofcourse, the Kashmir freedom fighters, while fighting India, must steer clear of dependence on Pakistan, if they desire true Azaadi.

The very method of giving the call of ceasefire was strange. Abdul Majid Dar alone announced the unilateral ceasefire in a ‘safehouse’ amongst a handful of Kashmiri journalists. This was only ratified a few hours later by the Pakistani-based HM Chief, Syed Salahuddin.

Following the ceasefire call a number of commanders gave contradictory statements while others ignored the call and continued with their armed actions.

The very next morning, Ghulam Nabi Khan, the HM’s deputy chief, issued a joint call to field units for an escalation of the jehad, along with the head of the organisation’s Pir Panjal Regiment, Nasr-ul-Islam. Two days later, station 14, which services the Rajouri-Poonch belt told its field units that some 1,000 cadres would be sent across the LoC soon. In Anantnag, Hizb leaders, Shabbir Bhaduri and Mohiuddin Ahanger, made clear that they did not intend to respect the cessation of hostilities. On August 1, the HM targeted the family of a pro-India militia and wiped out 8 members of a government-sponsored VDC. On August 2, the HM Srinagar Operative, Sayyid Mir, attempted a bomb attack, and Bashir Mir, the Bandipore District Commander of the HM, was involved in an attack on an army camp.

So, it was clear, that there was no unanimity in approach to the ceasefire. Infact, the problem goes deeper, linked also with the differences in the Jamaat-e-Islami. A section of the Jammat have, of late, become advocates of the peace process. In fact, the newly elected Ameer of the J-e-I, Gulam Mohammad Bhat, who defeated the hardline, Geelani’s (J-e-I’s representative in the APHC) candidate, has, for quite some time, been calling for an end to violence, and has gone on record to say, that the HM’s campaign is defeating the Jamaat’s core objective.

Also within the Hizb, earlier this year, some commanders sent out feelers through US-based Kashmiris, exploring the possibility of a ceasefire. In response, an Indian-based intermediary was sent to Pakistan, and talks were conducted for a few months with Dar and some others. Dar, who has been in Pakistan since 1997, was then allowed to return to Kashmir to feel out the field commanders. He arrived in April, with guarantees of protection from the units of the army and police who had awaited his return. Then came his aborted ceasefire call. Even now after the collapse of the ceasefire, Dar announced it would be re-negotiated in two months time and added "Bloodshed would not bring about a solution even in the next 10 years. It has to come through dialogue." Strange, such a statement coming from a man who has been witness to a decade of GoI brutalities.

There is nothing wrong with a temporary ceasefire (a genuine one, not a surrender) to allow for respite, to re-coup one’s forces, etc.... while keeping the ammunition dry and organisation on full alert. Any ceasefire, talks, negotiations, only have meaning when conducted from a position of strength, not weakness, with full knowledge that the issues will only be settled in the battlefield. The enemy with which one deals with, is a ruthless monster, who may only listen to reason when thoroughly battered.

Throughout this year the Kashmiri fighters have hit heavy blows at the Indian forces, attacking even their base camps. The people too have shown their support, with a near total boycott of last year’s Lok Sabha election. This advantage, needs to be pressed forward.

Today, roughly a quarter million troops (including the highly criminalised Special Operations Group of Iekwanis) confront about 5 million citizen in the valley. Human rights activists have documented 2,000 ‘disappearances’ in the valley. This horrifying number exceeds even the scandalous proportions reached during General Pinochet’s regime in Chile. All this, merely to crush the genuine aspirations of an entire people, which has seen nothing but treachery, duplicity and back-stabbing in a supposedly independent India.

This dates back to as early as 1953. In 1947, Jammu & Kashmir, unlike any other state of the Union, did not merge with India. It joined the Union, through an Instrument of Accession, on negotiated terms to be guaranteed by Article 370 of the Constitution. Jammu and Kashmir was recognised by the Indian Constitution (Article 370) as a special state — the only one with its own flag, citizenship and constitution. It was recognised that the head of Kashmir would be called ‘Prime Minister’ (not CM); that the governor would be elected by the state legislature, not appointed by the Centre; that the Supreme Court would only have appellate jurisdiction in Kashmir, etc, etc.

Then, in the 1980s it unconstitutionally extended President’s Rule, without a two-thirds majority approval in parliament. Finally, the last straw came with the massive rigging and brute force in the 1987 elections. Many of the present leaders of the present Kashmir freedom struggle, like HM chief, Salahuddin, having participated in that process, saw the futility of electoral means, and were virtually pushed towards armed struggle. It was then that the gun was taken up.

Since then an estimated 70,000 Kashmiris have sacrificed their lives for the cause of the freedom struggle. They have witnessed the horrors of rape, brutal tortures, and exterminations on a mass scale. The Indian rulers and their imperialist sponsors, who shout themselves hoarse about Indian ‘democracy’, hide the fact that this ‘democracy’ has been more brutal and cruel than most dictatorships in the world. The entire Kashmiri people have been brutalised; it is a wounded nation. No doubt they seek peace after over a decade of brutalities; but a peace with self-respect; a peace with the right to determine their own destiny — not the peace of the graveyard.

For the people of India, their real friends are not only the people of Kashmir but also the people of Pakistan. It is the rulers of India, Kashmir and Pakistan who whip up a hate campaign amongst the people. An anti-moslem, anti-Kashmiri hysteria serves the Indian ruling classes, to divert the people’s attention from their basic problems and push them into fatricidal wars; and an anti-Pak phobia helps whip up national chauvinism, and divert attention from the real foreign enemy — imperialism, specifically the US.

For the Pakistani rulers and some of their jehadi groups operating in Kashmir, an anti-hindu, islamic focus to the movement helps divert the Azaadi struggle in a pro-Pakistan direction. Though this weakens the movement, by diverting it from its attacks on the main enemy — the Delhi rulers — it serves Pakistan’s interest, which is not in favour of the popular call of Azaad Kashmir (for both sides of the LoC) free from both India and Pakistan.

So, the massacres of ordinary citizens, on August 1 in Kashmir, whether conducted by the pro-Pak elements or the Indian intelligence agencies (see box on Chittisinghpora on page 9) goes against the Kashmir freedom struggle as it only pits people against people and plays into the hands of the Hindu chauvinists. The killing of 35 on the Amarnath Yatra (notwithstanding the fact that of these, 20 have been proved to be killed by CRPF bullets) has been used by the Sangh Parivar, to intensify their hate campaign throughout India. Ofcourse, the 25 odd Bihar labourers (also hindu) killed, did not find any mention in their campaign — the lives of the pilgrims and their death became important political capital.

Whatever, by these killings, the gains were only for the Hindu chauvinists, not for the Kashmiri struggle. Ofcourse, since then, there have been a number of attacks on the army and para-military forces, wiping out over 50 enemy forces and injuring even more in just one month.

The war of liberation in Kashmir is to serve the interests of the Kashmiri people. Any peace too must be directed towards the fulfillment of this cause. Neither war should serve the reactionary designs of Pakistan, nor peace should serve the reactionary rulers of India. Any war, if it is to serve the interests of the Pakistani rulers; or peace, if it serves the interests of the Indian rulers will definitely go against the interests of the people of Kashmir. Any war or peace done at the bidding of the states of either Pakistan or India, or at the bidding of the US, will not only work against the interests of the people of Kashmir, but the sub-continent as a whole.

Tens of thousands of sacrifices which have been made by the Kashmiri people, in their attempts to throw off the Indian rulers’ yoke, call for more concerted military actions not some fake ceasefires.

That Pakistan has to be involved in any process involving Kashmir is undisputed. It is emphasised not only by the HM, and Hurriyet, but has also been accepted by the Indian rulers in the numerous agreements and Accords, like the Simla Agreement, Lahore peace process, etc. Besides, as the Hurriyet leaders say, part of the Kashmir territory lies in Pakistan.

What is disputed is the role of the US. The US gangsters have no business to poke their nose into trouble spots of the world, including Kashmir. Can one expect any just solution, from the world’s most notorious butchers ? They only seek to use the Kashmiri people as cannon fodder to promote their own geo-political interests. They did the same with the Kosovo people, East Timor people, and people of numerous other hot-spots throughout the world. Should the Americans try to poke their dirty nose further into the Kashmir cauldron, they must be taught a lesson. The people of Kashmir, Pakistan and India must jointly give them a bloody nose and send them packing. While the rulers of India, Pakistan and Kashmir fawn over their white bosses, and compete for their favours; the people of the sub-continent must assert some self-respect and kick them out of the region.

The current episode of the offer of ceasefire and its subsequent withdrawal shows that the movement needs to chalk out a correct political strategy, taking the interests of the Kashmir people as the central thing. Only this can help it overcome its political and military weaknesses. Besides, it must distinguish its real friends from its real enemies. It is one thing to utilise the India-Pak conflict to serve the movement, it is quite another to become dependent on Pakistan, forsaking its own freedom and manoeuvrability. The real friends of the Kashmiri people, are neither the Pakistan nor US rulers, but the people of Pakistan and even the people of India. Though temporarily a sizable section of the Indian people may have fallen prey to the anti-Kashmiri propaganda by the entire gamut of parliamentary parties; more and more people are realising the truth due to the vast efforts of some democratic and revolutionary forces, specifically like that of the CPI (ML)[People’s War].

There is no doubt that the Kashmiri liberation struggle will advance towards victory, so long as it relies on its own strength, distinguishes real friends from real enemies, and skillfully utilises the contradictions within the enemy camp.

<Top>