Sinister campaign to paint army as villain in Kashmir

Who should be held responsible for the death of five innocent civilians in Kashmir Valley last week? The submission by a minor girl before a chief judicial magistrate that she was not molested by a soldier exposes a sinister campaign to discredit security forces. Kashmir was on the boil all through last week after a rumour spread that an Indian soldier had tried to molest the minor girl. Angry mobs were out on the streets, shouting slogans, pelting stones at security forces and police. Who instigated them to create a law and order problem in the Valley? 

As it appears, there was a deliberate attempt to vitiate the atmosphere. And those who did it knew very well how the security forces would react. And the security forces fell into their trap by opening fire on a rowdy crowd which led to the death of five people who perhaps were not party to the conspiracy.  Among those who died was a young boy who wanted to represent Indian cricket team one day. It just took one rumour and five innocent lives were snuffed out leaving behind their families to mourn their loss forever.

It is a well known fact that there are some forces which do not want the presence of Indian army in Kashmir. From time to time, there have been vicious campaigns against the army over its alleged excesses on “innocents” and human rights violations in Kashmir Valley. The same forces have become active once again to discredit security forces which have been battling against all odds to maintain law and order situation in the state.

But normalcy is anathema to a few in Kashmir who are working against the interests of their own brethren. As long as their personal interests are served, they don’t mind sacrificing the lives of others. Their personal interests are well served as long as Kashmir remains tense. Kashmiris should ask themselves whether they have benefited by frequent “hartal” calls given by separatist leaders. Why is that innocent people get killed and instigators remain confined in safe environs?

Who will explain the latest killings? It is very easy to put the blame on security personnel who were forced to open fire. But who provokes them? They are often abused and ridiculed. A recent video which went viral speaks volumes about how security personnel have to put up with humiliation. The video of a soldier, who was chased, thrashed and humiliated by a bunch of young boys, showed his helplessness.  How does one expect a normal human being to react when his honour is at stake? And security personnel are humans too.

The political leadership of the state rushes to New Delhi every time any such incident happens. Every time, the oft-repeated arguments against Armed Forces (Special Powers) Acts (AFSPA) are put forward before the federal government. No state favours special powers which give soldiers virtual immunity from prosecution. But can security forces fight insurgency with their hands tied down? In fact, Indian army has on occasions taken punitive action against its soldiers whenever they were found to have violated norms. But human rights activists and critics say the prosecution process is slow and not all cases are probed.

Here in lies an important question. If security forces can be accused of human rights violations then so are violent protesters.  If security personnel come under attacks, what are they supposed to do? Should they become sitting ducks? Does the constitution not give them right to defend themselves if their lives are threatened? This is a question which needs to be debated at length. The AFSPA, which covers large parts of northeastern India and Kashmir, gives security forces powers to search, enter houses and shoot-on-sight. Human rights activists say the soldiers misuse the law and commit abuses, whereas the army says it needs the law to tackle insurgency. Both sides have contrarian view points. Special powers come with some responsibilities as well. The army will do well to get such unsavoury incidents probed by an independent commission.

All said and done, the casualties could have been avoided had the situation been handled tactfully. Why rumour mongers were allowed to have field day in the first place? The local government is equally responsible for not acting fast and allow the situation to simmer. A video first released by the army wherein the girl denied molestation by a soldier was trashed. The protesters claimed that the girl gave the statement under duress. Among those who doubted the veracity of the army video were myriad factions of the Hurriyat Conference which brought the Valley on a standstill by giving “hartal” calls for days together.  Should the Hurriyat not be held responsible for letting the situation deteriorate? It is disheartening to see the innocent youth falling victims to separatists’ agenda and losing their precious lives.

CAN INDIA TAKE PAKISTAN AT ITS FACE VALUE?

Has India scored a self-goal by inviting Pakistani investigating team to Pathankot? It would be naive to expect from Pakistan to agree to any amount of evidence shared with it in terror-related activities in India. For, any kind of admission will expose Pakistan to be bracketed as a rogue state, inviting harsh sanctions. Therefore, Pakistan cannot be expected to make a complete turnaround from what it has been parroting for the last several decades that it does not allow its territory to be used against any country, more so against India, for terror activities.

As expectedly, Pakistan’s Joint Investigation Team (JIT), which was taken to a guided tour of Pathankot air base, has reportedly debunked India’s claims that the militants came from Pakistan. Seven Indian security personnel were killed in the attack which continued for almost three days. Pakistani newspapers quoting JIT sources have termed the entire operation “stage-managed” by New Delhi to malign Islamabad. In all probability, New Delhi will lodge a strong protest when the JIT report is made public as Indian investigators earlier claimed that their Pakistani counterparts were stumped when presented with irrefutable evidences.

What will it lead to? The governments of both the countries will start trading charges and blame each other for not serious in jointly fighting the scourge of terrorism. With such misplaced adventurism, India is to be blamed for finding itself in a corner. The idea of inviting Pakistani investigators to India was ill-conceived in the very first place.  As tit-for-tat sharp exchanges likely in the days to come, the initiative taken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to drop in unannounced in Lahore on Christmas day to shake hands with his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif and give a kick-start to stalled talks will go waste.

Modi will be heckled by the Opposition for moving too fast to repair badly bruised ties with Pakistan. Already, knives are out even within his party for his style of diplomacy couched in secrecy. The party’s senior leader and former Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha, though now a spent force, was most vocal about Modi’s Lahore trip. That Pathankot happened within a week of his meeting with Sharif is a telling commentary of Pakistan’s cat and mouse game as far as the fight against terrorism is concerned. The attack once again proves that Pakistani generals are certainly not on board as far as mending relations between the two countries is concerned. Indian claims, if true, that the attack was masterminded and carried out by Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) sums up the story.

Had Pakistan been honest in its intent, it would have by now arrested the head of Jaish, Maulana Masood Azhar, whom India suspects of masterminding the Pathankot air base attack as well as the most daring attack on Indian parliament in 2001.  Instead, it lobbied with China which vetoed India’s request to add Azhar in the United Nations’ al Qaeda-Islamic State blacklist. China’s move is understandable but perplexing as well. When Jaish-e-Mohammad has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council, so why can’t its leader be? It shows that Pakistan does not want any harm to be done to Azhar who it considers to be a very important asset.

In fact, Pakistan has been in denial mode since it began using militants as a proxy to launch a low-cost limited war against India. It has been assiduously following the policy of dictator Zia ul Haq who propagated bleeding India through thousand cuts. Since then, Pakistan has sought to colour terrorism in Kashmir as freedom struggle. Pakistan’s three misadventures by going to war with India led to a rethink among the political and military establishment that it could not take its neigbour militarily. Therefore, it crafted a new strategy whereby militants would do the bidding on its behalf.  It started supporting, financing and arming local insurgents besides offering open support to the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, a political platform of the separatist movement to keep the Kashmir issue alive internationally.

Since 1988, when militancy first reared its head in Kashmir, at least 6,193 security forces have died fighting militants. A Jammu and Kashmir Data Sheets report updated till April 3, 2016 shows that 22,996 militants have been neutralised since then. The figure is alarming as one Indian soldier died as against the 3.71 mortality rate of militants. During the period 14,725 innocent civilians also lost their lives.

While Kashmir was on fire, a vicious campaign was carried out against the minority Hindus or Pandits as they are called in the state. A spate of killings followed persecution and threats by militants which led to the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus. Though the exact number of Pandits leaving the valley is not clear, according to conservative estimates, at least 100,000 of them were forced to leave the state. Thousands of them continue to live in the dingy squalid camps set up by the government in the Hindu-majority Jammu.

While Pakistan succeeded in engineering exodus of Hindus from Kashmir, the separatist movement started losing ground in subsequent years as locals became tired of supporting militancy which had only exacerbated their misery. The last two state elections are testimony to people’s disenchantment with separatists as they turned out in large numbers to participate in the democratic process. Several local militants, who felt cheated, also turned themselves to Indian authorities and most of them have joined the mainstream.

This was a major setback for Pakistan. As its overt and covert operations to destabilize Indian part of Kashmir failed, Pakistan began turning to various militant outfits which it had created and trained at its backyard. It started sending in militants belonging to Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Al-Badr to name a few to Kashmir who carried out some of the most audacious attacks on Kashmir as well as different parts of India. While offering sympathy to India soon after these attacks, Pakistan would routinely strut out its oft-repeated statement that it had not role and that it could be the handiwork of non-state actors. But who has been hosting those non-state actors? The problem is that the so-called world powers, which often call for a global action against terrorism, have been found wanting in their responses whenever India bled.

Therefore, to expect something unexpected from Pakistan is futile. All these promises of dialogues and cooperation in terrorism are nothing but an absurd pretence intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance before the international community to escape their censure and economic sanctions. The plain truth is that Pakistan has been increasingly enmeshed in its devious stratagem from which it is hard for it to escape unscathed.