J&K Part 3: Potential "FAQs" About My Opinions

Note: This is part 3 of a 3-part series about the J&K dispute. In Part 1, I presented an unbiased history of the J&K conflict, followed by my proposed roadmap for a peaceful and permanent resolution, and my rebuttals to the rationalizations given in India for disallowing a plebiscite in J&K. In Part 2, I presented my detailed rebuttal of one of the most common rationalizations - that a potential exit of (parts of) J&K from the Union of India will somehow lead to a civil war and a Balkanization of India. In this post, I list some questions that I anticipate from people regarding the opinions that I have expressed on my blog. Of course, I might answer questions or comments from readers otherwise too.

FAQs:

1. Is this not sedition against the Republic of India?
No. I am exercising my freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution to start a conversation. I opine that India's approach to the J&K dispute has hitherto been inhumane. I am not advocating any political uprising or movement against India. I am merely stating facts and a constructive opinion on how we can resolve an intractable political dispute that has cost India dearly in terms of human lives. And time. And Rupees!

2. Wait, are you not an Indian?
Haha, of course, I am. No one except me (or the Supreme Court of India) has the right to declare otherwise. :) Being an Indian, it pains me to see my country on the wrong side of history.

3. Do you realize that you have an "un-Indian" opinion?
I disagree. I believe my opinion is the "most truly Indian" of any opinion on J&K. How so, you ask? Think for a moment of what Gandhi, Vivekananda, Buddha, Ambedkar, and Mother Teresa would have done about J&K. Yeah, I realize this sounds kinda like the "what would Jesus do" position among liberal Christians the US, but whatever! I detest the hypocrisy of the left and center as well as the jingoism of the right in India. I am inspired by these true icons of India, and I am not afraid of stating the truth. :)

4. Have you been brainwashed by Americans?
LOL. No. Like I said, my opinion is "most truly Indian", and it is based solely on my readings, my analysis, and my interactions with people with alternative viewpoints. Also, I do not support any punitive measures against India with respect to the J&K dispute.

5. Are you pro-Pakistan or an ISI agent or supporter of Islamist terrorists?
ROFL. No. But I do think that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is on a course to self-destruct. And that the ISI is a glorified criminal syndicate. And the Islamist terrorists are inhuman war criminals who should either surrender to justice or get killed in combat.

6. Are you a Marxist or some other radical like Arundhati Roy?
LMAO. No. I think communism, Marxism or otherwise, is a failed ideology that should be confined to the dustbin of history. And I think Arundhati Roy is a good writer, but that's all about her. But since Prashant Bhushan is from the AAP, I am beginning to be amused when people give him grief! Just kidding. :D

7. What is your political alignment in Indian politics?
Full disclosure: I have found that a majority of my policy preferences coincide with those of the BJP, especially that of the Vajpayee administration (surprised?). In fact, long ago, I have been to a BJP meeting in Chennai to understand them better. However, their response to the Gujarat riots of 2002 have changed my view of the BJP. I consider myself "non-aligned" politically. My opinions on a range of issues are sort of a hybrid of the BJP and the Congress (this is the case for most of my friends), and many not espoused by any major party, especially this one about how to resolve the J&K dispute. :)

8. Do you realize that you might be intimidated by the far right, possibly including death threats?
Perhaps, yes. But I certainly hope not, because it would be sad. Most of my opinions are based on historical facts and ground reality as well as the influence of some of the people that the Indian far right claims to "champion". In fact, I agree with Mahatma Gandhi that the claims of the Sangh Parivar to represent "true Hindu culture" mostly ring hollow, primarily due their virulent anti-non-Hindu violence - none of the Hindu religions condone this. But then, there is also this large intersection of my policy views with that of the BJP. Oh, the irony! :)

9. Separatism in Punjab was successfully resolved. India can do the same in J&K.
This argument is another key piece of the "walls of denial and delusion" that I mentioned before. I have already addressed Punjab's case in part 2. The J&K conflict is older than the Republic of India. And the evidence has always been overwhelmingly clear - most of the Muslim-majority of J&K has not accepted themselves as Indians. They view India-controlled democracy as a sham, since the separatists are not allowed to contest elections under the Indian constitution. They view J&K as a "colony under occupation by a colonial power", much like how Palestinians view Israel (this comparison is widespread in Kashmir Valley). Their viewpoint makes me cringe as an Indian, especially given India's own history with fighting brutal colonial oppression by Britain. Indians definitely need to do a lot of soul searching, and I certainly hope I am helping with that.

10. Why do you care about J&K?
Honestly, I don't really care, at least not much! :) I am just presenting the facts followed by my opinion on the J&K dispute, from a dispassionate, and somewhat objective standpoint. Of course, I do seriously care about my country respecting the rule of law, democracy, and human rights. So, in this sense, I care about the J&K dispute since it is a conspicuous blot on India's democracy. I have written a similar post about why Telangana's should get statehood within India a few years ago, and criticized India's silence on Lankan human rights violations.

11. Most of this will never work, especially the constitutional amendments; are you delusional?
See point 10 above. I don't have any "vested interest" in J&K's secession. And expressing an opinion is not a delusion! :)

12. Are you not insulting the sacrifices of the Indian armed forces?
Great question. I do not agree. The hallmark of a good soldier is obedience to higher authority. And the hallmark of a good army (armed forces) is obedience to the civilian government. In that sense, the Indian armed forces are among the most professional and ethical in the world, and I highly respect that. The decisions made on J&K so far by India are not the fault of the armed forces. I find it sad that so many soldiers have lost their lives, and so many families have lost their loved ones due to the misguided policies of the civilian governments. Thus, solving this dispute is, in fact, a tribute to the Indian armed forces. Having said that, I do not think we can absolve certain individual officers or soldiers against whom there is sufficient evidence from having to face justice for war crimes and other human rights violations.

13. Human rights violations in J&K are just Pakistani propaganda.
This argument is another key piece of the "walls of denial and delusion" among Indians. Frankly, this is the only argument I find offensive. Yes, Pakistan does engage in a lot of propaganda, both internally and at international fora. But it did not originate from a vacuum. Credible human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the UN have documented numerous serious violations over many years, including some that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. These include, like I said before, abduction and enforced disappearances, rape and gang rape, illegal imprisonment and torture, murders in the form of fake encounters, and murders of children during street uprisings. If you are an Indian, please pause for a moment and contemplate this question - What will your worldview be if such crimes happened in your neighborhood, committed by, say, British or American soldiers?. This has been going on in J&K for decades now. The perpetrators include Indian armed forces and politicians, Pakistani armed forces and politicians, and Pakistan-sponsored Islamist terrorists. I think all of them need to face justice. My opinion is not new; I have the same opinion about the violation of Tamils' human rights by Lanka's armed forces and politicians. Having said that, if the parties to the dispute - India, Pakistan, and Kashmiri separatists - collectively agree not to pursue war crimes charges against the others, I am okay with it somewhat. But personally, I still find it offensive that war criminals can be given a free pass.

14. What if an independent Kashmir Valley is later occupied by Pakistan or China or Islamists?
Again, I don't really care about the fate of any region of J&K that elects to opt out of the Union of India. Heck, I don't care even if they are enslaved by aliens from outer space (okay, aliens from outer space does sound worrying :D). And if there is a clear and immediate threat to India's security, action should be taken. Or, if the UN authorizes a humanitarian intervention, India can participate in a multilateral effort to restore peace, upon the request of their elected government. Deja vu? :) Yeah, maybe I will write another post about it circa 2050! :D

15. How about a "reunification" of India and Pakistan?
I disagree. I think reunification with Pakistan is a bad idea, no matter how it is sugar-coated. I will definitely vote against reunification, if it comes to referendum later in the future. Pakistan has a toxic "hate infrastructure" that thrives on dehumanization of the "other". Reunification would basically be like inviting intractable instability to all of India.

16. Why do you give such a big role to the UN and its organizations?
Ask Nehru; he started it. :) But on a serious note, I think the UN is best suited to carry out the roles I have outlined since it is neutral and impartial, and both India and Pakistan respect the UN (at least on paper). More generally, I think the UN is the best hope we have as a species to achieve true world peace and a single global federal government for all humanity. Thus, it is important to empower the various organizations of the UN more, and resort to multilateral decisions that respect international law rather than illegal unilateral actions.

17. Why are you so harsh on Indian policy?
It is not my intention to be harsh - just truthful. :)

18. Criticizing Indian policies while ignoring Pakistani, American, and Chinese policies is hypocrisy.
No, it is not. I am an Indian, not a Pakistani, American, or Chinese. Nor do their affairs particularly interest me. I leave it to my Pakistani friends to critique Pakistani policies. And my American friends to critique American policies. And my Chinese friends to critique Chinese policies... oh wait, never mind! :D

19. What would you vote, if you were a Muslim Kashmiri?
If I were a Muslim Kashmiri, I would definitely vote to become a state of the Union of India. Why? Independence would mean being a tiny, potentially unviable landlocked country hemmed in by 3 nuclear powers, and possibly becoming a "client state" of one of them. Pakistan is imploding thanks to the frankenstein it created. In contrast, India is a de jure and de facto secular liberal democracy. The higher judiciary never shies away from taking on the executive. India's celebration of diversity and inclusiveness has no parallels in human history. Indeed, I think India is a future wellspring of great opportunities.

20. Huh, J&K is already a part of India! What was the point of all this then?
There is world of difference between being forced into a Union, and electing to be part of a Union. My purpose is to stir your thinking about the true history of the J&K dispute, and discuss my ideas for resolving it. And to shatter the walls of denial and delusion about J&K created in the minds of many of my compatriots by jingoistic propaganda! :)

Note: Dedicated to the memory of late Prof. Veeraraghavan, a great man who got me interested in thinking and writing about constitutional, humanitarian, international issues.