Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Archive for category INDIA SPLITTING INTO 5 NATIONS

The Rajputana Liberation Movement

 The Rajputana Liberation Flag

A Sun to represent the Saura-Saka religion of the Rajputs and a yellow band to further emphasize that heritage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rajputana Liberation Movement

The Rajputana Liberation Front was formed with the following objectives:

1. To restore the Rajput civilization of Rajasthan to its former glory and free the Rajputs from the shackles of Brahminist slavery by establishing a sovereign and independent Rajputana or Rajputstan,

2. To restore the ancient Saka civilization of Sakastan and foster greater unity with kindred Saka races such as Gurjurs, Jats, and Gujaratis.

3. To restore the Rajasthani language to its pristine purity by removal of Sanskritic corruptions, to revive the ancient indigenous Mahajani Rajput script by abolishing the Sanskritic Devanagari, and encouraging usage of Rajput rather than Brahmanic grammar.

4. To revive the ancient Rajput-Saura religion of Sun-veneration by declaring it a separate and independent religion in its own right, and not a mere sect of Brahmanism ie. Hinduism.

In all this, the RLF does not advocate the use of violence by Rajputs or other Sakas but uses solely peaceful methods of achieving its objectives.

 

What is Rajputana?

`Rajputana’ means `Land of Rajputs’ in Rajasthani, it is an indigenous term for `Rajputstan’. Rajputana has been a historical reality since the Sakas entered into India in the centuries following the birth of Christ. They established a large Sakastan which included at its peak the Indus-Ganges Valley and western India. The locus of Sakastan and those regions which have best preserved their Saka heritage are, however, the Rajputana and Gujarat sub-regions. Rajputana was never part of the Indo-Aryan dominated regions of Maharashtra or of Aryavarta. The Saks formed a distinct race with its own civilization and religion. The Rajputs are also not `Hindu’, we are instead Sauras or Sun-worshippers.

Rajputana thus embodies the supreme Saka ideals. It is the firm conviction of the RLF that the preservation of Saka ideals requires an independent Rajputstan. For the last fifty years, the incredible damage done to the Saka heritage of Rajputs has been immense and incalculable. Indeed, the Rajput culture is at grave risk of being wiped out from the face of the Earth. Only independence can lead to a resurrection of the Rajput civilization.

 

History

During their centuries-long rule of northern India, the Rajputs constructed several palaces. Shown here is the Chandramahal in City Palace, Jaipur, Rajasthan, which was built by the Kachwaha

Rajputs.

Origins
The origin of the Rajputs is the subject of debate. Writers such as M. S. Naravane and V. P. Malik believe that the term was not used to designate a particular tribe or social group until the 6th century AD, as there is no mention of the term in the historical record as pertaining to a social group prior to that time.[2] One theory espouses that with the collapse of the Gupta empire from the late 6th century, the invading Hephthalites (White Huns) were probably integrated within Indian society. Leaders and nobles from among the invaders were assimilated into the Kshatriya ritual rank in the Hindu varna system, while others who followed and supported them — such as the Ahirs, Gurjars, and Jats – were ranked as cultivators.[1] At the same time, some indigenous tribes were ranked as Rajput, examples of which are the Bundelas, Chandelas, and Rathors. Encyclopaedia Britannica notes that Rajputs “… actually vary greatly in status, from princely lineages, such as the Guhilot and Kachwaha, to simple cultivators.”[1] Aydogdy Kurbanov says that the assimilation was specifically between the Hephthalites, Gurjars, and people from northwestern India, forming the Rajput community.[3] Pradeep Barua also believes that Rajputs have foreign origins, he says their practice of asserting Kshatriya status was followed by other Indian groups thereby establishing themselves as Rajputs.[4] According to most authorities successful claims to Rajput status frequently were made by groups that achieved secular power; probably that is how the invaders from Central Asia, as well as patrician lines of indigenous tribal peoples, were absorbed.[1]

Rajput kingdoms

A royal Rajput procession, a mural at the fort in Jodhpur.[5]
See also: List of Rajput dynasties
From the beginning of the 7th century, Rajput dynasties dominated North India, including areas now in Pakistan, and the many petty Rajput kingdoms became the primary obstacle to the complete Muslim conquest of Hindu India.[1] These dynasties were disparate: loyalty to a clan was more important than allegiance to the wider Rajput social grouping, meaning that one clan would fight another. This and the internecine jostling for position that took place when a clan leader (raja) died meant that Rajput politics were fluid and prevented the formation of a coherent Rajput empire.[6] Even after the Muslim conquest of the Punjab and the Ganga River valley, the Rajputs maintained their independence in Rajasthan and the forests of central India. Later, Sultan Alauddin Khilji of the Khilji dynasty took the two Rajput forts of Chitor and Ranthambhor in eastern Rajasthan in the 14th century but could not hold them for long.[1]

During the height of Mughal rule in India, most Rajput rulers formed a close relationship with the Mughal emperors and served them in different capacities.[7]The only Rajput ruler who did not submit to Akbar was Rana Pratap of Chittor. However, even his own brother sided with Akbar during the conflict between the two sides.[8] Akbar married Rajput princesses and his heirs, Jahangir, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb could all be considered partly of Rajput extraction by either having mothers or grandmothers who were Rajput. Raja Man Singh I of Amber was one of the most trusted generals of Akbar while his son Mirza Jai Singh served Aurangzeb in a similar capacity. Jai Singh was instrumental in defeating the great Maratha leader Shivaji in 1663.

British colonial period

Mayo College was established by the British government in 1875 at Ajmer, Rajputana to educate Rajput princes and other nobles.

A water reservoir inside Chittorgarh Fort as seen in 2006
According to historian Virbhadra Singhji, Rajputs ruled in the “overwhelming” majority of the princely states of Rajasthan and Saurashtra in the British Raj era. These regions also contained the largest concentration of princely states in India, including over 200 in Saurashtra alone.[9]

James Tod, a British colonial official, was impressed by the military qualities of the Rajputs but is today considered to have been unusually enamoured by them. Although the group venerate him to this day, he is viewed by many historians since the late nineteenth-century as being a not particularly reliable commentator.[10][11] Jason Freitag, his only significant biographer, has said that Tod is “manifestly biased”.[12]

The Rajput practices of female infanticide and sati (widow immolation) were other matters of concern to the British colonialists. It was believed that the Rajputs were the primary adherents to these practices, which the British Raj considered savage and which provided the initial impetus for British ethnographic studies of the subcontinent that eventually manifested itself as a much wider exercise in social engineering.[13]

In reference to the role of the Rajput soldiers serving under the British banner, Captain A. H. Bingley wrote:

“Rajputs have served in our ranks from Plassey to the present day (1899). They have taken part in almost every campaign undertaken by the Indian armies. Under Forde they defeated the French at Condore. Under Monro at Buxar they routed the forces of the Nawab of Oudh. Under Lake they took part in the brilliant series of victories which destroyed the power of the Marathas.”[14]

Independent India
On India’s independence in 1947, the princely states, including those of the Rajput, were given three choices: join either India or Pakistan, or remain independent. Rajput rulers of the 22 princely states of Rajputana acceded to newly independent India, amalgamated into the new state of Rajasthan in 1949–1950.[15] Initially the maharajas were granted funding from the Privy purse in exchange for their acquiescence, but a series of land reforms over the following decades weakened their power, and their privy purse was cut off during Indira Gandhi’s administration under the 1971 Constitution 26th Amendment Act. The estates, treasures, and practices of the old Rajput rulers now form a key part of Rajasthan’s tourist trade and cultural memory.[16]

In 1951, the Rajput Rana dynasty of Nepal came to an end, having been the power behind the throne of the Shah monarchs figureheads since 1846.[17]

The Rajput Dogra dynasty of Kashmir and Jammu also came to an end in 1947.[18] though title was retained until monarchy was abolished in 1971 by the 26th amendment to the Constitution of India.[19]

The Rajputs of India are today considered to be a Forward Caste in the country’s system of positive discrimination. This means that they receive no favour from the administration.[20]

Subdivisions
Main article: Rajput clans
There are several major subdivisions of Rajputs, known as vansh or vamsha, the step below the super-division jāti[21] These vansh delineate claimed descent from various sources, and the Rajput are generally considered to be divided into three primary vansh:[22] Suryavanshi denotes descent from the solar deity Surya, Chandravanshi from the lunar deity Chandra, and Agnivanshi from the fire deity Agni.[23] The four prominent clans in the post-Gupta period – Chauhans, Paramaras, Pratiharas and Solankis — all claimed their mythological origin to have been from a sacrificial fire at Mount Abu.[4]

Lesser-noted vansh include Udayvanshi, Rajvanshi,[24] and Rishivanshi.[25] The histories of the various vanshs were later recorded in documents known as vamshāavalīis; André Wink counts these among the “status-legitimizing texts”.[26]

Beneath the vansh division are smaller and smaller subdivisions: kul, shakh (“branch”), khamp or khanp (“twig”), and nak (“twig tip”).[27] Marriages within a kul are generally disallowed (with some flexibility for kul-mates of different gotra lineages). The kul serves as the primary identity for many of the Rajput clans, and each kul is protected by a family goddess, the kuldevi. Lindsey Harlan notes that in some cases, skakhs have become powerful enough to be functionally kuls in their own right.[28]

Culture and ethos

A talwar, developed under Rajputana Khanda in the Maharana Pratap’s period
The Rajputs were a Martial Race in the period of the British Raj.[29] This was a designation created by administrators that classified each ethnic group as either “martial” or “non-martial”: a “martial race” was typically considered brave and well built for fighting,[30] whilst the remainder were those whom the British believed to be unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyles.[31]

                                                      Rajput Lifestyle

The double-edged scimitar known as the khanda was a popular weapon among the Rajputs of that era. On special occasions, a primary chief would break up a meeting of his vassal chiefs with khanda nariyal, the distribution of daggers and coconuts. Another affirmation of the Rajput’s reverence for his sword was the Karga Shapna (“adoration of the sword”) ritual, performed during the annual Navaratri festival, after which a Rajput is considered “free to indulge his passion for rapine and revenge”.[32]

Rajputs generally have adopted the custom of purdah (seclusion of women).[1]

By the late 19th century, there was a shift of focus among Rajputs from politics to a concern with kinship.[33] Many Rajputs of Rajasthan are nostalgic about their past and keenly conscious of their genealogy, emphasizing a Rajput ethos that is martial in spirit, with a fierce pride in lineage and tradition.[34]

Rajput diet
The Anthropological Survey of India identified that in Gujarat, Rajputs are ‘by and large’ non-vegetarians, regular drinkers of alcohol, and also smoke and chew betel leaves.[35] These traits are also followed by Rajputs of Maharashtra with mutton, chicken and fish being consumed, and also pork (which historically dates back to the predilection for Rajput warriors and princes to hone their fighting skills by hunting and eating wild-pig).[36]

, , ,

No Comments

CPEC Panic in India : Indian Fears & Paranoia About China-Pakistan Economic Cooperation

 
 

Secessionist Movements in India

Editor’s Note: India is fuming over  China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. It is a thorn in the side of India. It has tried sabotage, subversion, and brutal massacres of lawyers in Quetta to destabilize Balochistan, the main beneficiary of CPEC. But, breakapartIndia has failed miserably.It is a sad commentary on the pathetic rage of India against the existence of Pakistan. India succeeded with Russian and British break apart United Pakistan, by creating a vassal state Bangladesh. A nation which is still struggling to find its identity. India’s infiltration of Indian soldiers into poorly defended E.Pakistan and leveraging the linguistic resentment among E.Pakistanis resulted in breakup of United Pakistan. However, despite 71 years of Pakistan focused hatred and devious designs by Hindutva fanatics like Ajit Doval, India’s efforts are thwarted by facts on the ground. India itself breaking apart with serious fissures appearing in five different regions,
  • Assam separatist movements.
  • Dravida Nadu.
  • Indian Occupied Kashmir.
  • Khalistan movement.
  • Naxalite–Maoist insurgency.
Pakistan came out of Indian subversion as a stronger nation. It became not only a Nuclear Power, but also developed its own sophisticated miniature Nuclear Weapons mounted on lethally accurate short-range missiles, namely RAAD, NASR.
India in its blind rage cut its nose to speight its face. 
Let this be a lesson for India that people living in glass houses, should not throw stones. A day is not too far when the fissures in India will become independent nations. The precedent for such a happening was set by India, by deliberately breaking United Pakistan. It will happen soon, as predicted by India’s faith in karma, or what goes around comes around. The rest is history.
 Note:apologies for poor indents.

China has made quick strategic moves to encircle India while advancing its growing global interests.


by Arun Kumar Singh

( December 16, 2016, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian)

Whilst most Indians have been rightly focused on India’s attempt to leapfrog into the digital and cashless economy after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surprise announcement of November 8 about demonetising Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, some equally important news, which may have dangerous strategic implications for India, have been sidelined. China has made quick strategic moves to encircle India while advancing its growing global interests.

The Chinese Navy has been deployed in prolonged anti-piracy operations off Somalia since 2008. It has added conventional and nuclear submarines for such deployments though submarines have no role to play in anti-piracy operations. China has built and militarized seven artificial islands in the disputed South China Sea. It has improved its relations with the Philippines’ new President Rodrigo Duterte with a $20 billion aid package.

Early this year, China acquired its first foreign naval base facility in Djibouti, which also hosts US and Japan maritime surveillance aircraft. Now that Somali piracy has been largely neutralized, China has made various moves to ensure that its Navy has a permanent presence in the Indian Ocean region by getting base facilities for warships and aircraft. This will protect its sea lanes of commerce and also its newly-proclaimed Maritime Silk Route, which is a part of the well-known “one belt one road” connecting China to Europe by reviving the fabled Silk Route of medieval times. Let’s examine some of these Chinese moves, which are now becoming a reality.

The first of these relates to the Chinese-built Hambantota port in Sri Lanka, where China is now apparently going to control 80 percent of the facility. It will have management control of this new strategically located deep-water port in India’s immediate neighborhood.

Wily and farsighted China has also built a massive international airport just 18 km from Hambantota port, named as Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport. With Sri Lanka in no position to repay China for these infrastructure projects, and also others like the world-class highway linking Colombo to Galle port, there are some media reports about China taking Hambantota port and the Mattala airport on a 99-year lease. This will pave way for a Chinese naval base in our neighborhood, thus converting Sri Lanka into a long-term Chinese ally.

In the meantime, US President-elect Donald Trump spoke to the Taiwanese President. This indicates that China and the US may be heading for a possible confrontation. To emphasize this point, last week, a US Navy long-range maritime patrol and anti-submarine aircraft P-8A, operated from China-built Mattala airport. Two rival superpowers in India’s backyard is not good news for India.

Next is the publicly announced forthcoming induction of two Chinese-built conventional submarines by the Bangladesh Navy in January 2017. It may be well known that Bangladesh is now planning to commercially exploit its newly-acquired expanded exclusive economic zone in the Bay of Bengal. China — which has already sold warships to Bangladesh — has now made a long-term presence in Bangladesh possible, by not only selling submarines at subsidized rates but also providing $20 billion loan and signing deals worth $13.6 billion during President Xi’s two-day visit on October 14.

To solve its “Malacca dilemma”, China provided soft loans of $13.75 billion to Malaysia for building its East Coast rail line and also to sell four Navy warships at subsidized rates. The total package is about $34 billion.

Similarly, Thailand, which has Chinese-built warships in its Navy, has embraced China by placing orders for three Chinese conventional submarines in July 2016. China is apparently ready to finance and build the Kra Isthmus Canal (across Thailand), which will save hundreds of miles of sea passage for warships, submarines, and merchant ships, by linking the Gulf of Thailand to the Andaman Sea.

Finally, we come to China’s all-weather friend — Pakistan. It is the beneficiary of $51 billion for the China-Pakistan economic corridor, linking China’s restive Xinjiang province through disputed Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to China-financed, built and managed port of Gwadar. Recently, Pakistan announced that the Pakistan and Chinese Navies would jointly patrol the waters off Gwadar port to provide seaward security to this port, which last fortnight received the first Chinese merchant ship as part of CPEC.

Another media report mentions that the Pakistan Navy has created a special task force to provide seaward security to Gwadar port. Yet another recent media report says that Gwadar International Airport, financed and built by China, is ready to operate fully loaded A-380 Airbus aircraft, which are the largest aircraft flying today.

The Chinese Navy is already in the IOR, and its warships and submarines will soon be based at Chinese-built ports literally in our backyard, while Chinese warplanes will operate from Chinese-built airports which are next to Chinese-built seaports.

All this while India, its Parliament, and people are in the throes of a well-meaning digital revolution to become a cashless society. Hopefully, Mr Modi will take decisive steps to counter this latest seaborne threat to our national security.


Vice Admiral Arun Kumar Singh retired as Commander-in-Chief of the Navy’s Eastern Naval Command in 2007. A nuclear and missile specialist trained in the former Soviet Union, he was also DG Indian Coast Guard.


 

, ,

No Comments

The Army, the Government, and the Chinese Corridor. by Saeed A.Malik

             

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Army, the Government, and the Chinese Corridor.

 

By

 

 

Saeed A. Malik.

 
The main driver of Israeli foreign policy objectives in the region is the Oded Yinon Plan i.e to break into small principalities, all Arab states which have the potential of being a threat to Israel any time in the future. Because of the incredible influence which Israel exercises on U.S policies, the Yinon Plan was infused into U.S policy for this region. Thus whatever the U.S objectives in the region, the play of the Yinon Plan can plainly be seen behind the U.S destruction of Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Even a fool could have foreseen that the de-baathification of Iraq, and the dismemberment of its army would lead to the dismemberment of the state itself. Indeed Gen Shinseki advocated that the invasion force should be half a million U.S troops so that post-invasion stability of governance would be ensured, as did Colin Powell. The former was forcibly retired, while the latter was marginalized, and we see Iraq precisely in a state as Yinon had advocated. The same is true of Libya, and the same is the aim for Syria.
 
Israel tried its very best that Iran too should be destroyed and split into small principalities, but the sheer exhaustion visited on the U.S by the Iraqis who decided to fight back, foreclosed this option. This being the situation, how can Israel countenance a strong and thriving Pakistan, which not only has the bomb, but also varied delivery systems, and which Israel sees as an enemy? Logically therefore a failed Pakistan, which international powers would be obliged to de-nuclify would be much more in Israel’s interests–and by extension, those of the U.S as well.
 
Apart from the Israeli-U.S policy nexus vis a vis a Pakistan whose nuclear wings must be clipped, the U.S has other concerns about a strong Pakistan which is averse to taking dictation from the U.S. One of these concerns is that Pakistan is refusing subservience to the U.S Afghan policy objectives where such objectives are seen as undermining Pakistan’s perception of its own national interest. Another U.S concern is that whereas the U.S would like to see India built up as a credible counter-weight to China, Pakistan, by constantly snapping at India’s heels is a constant distraction in the way of the achievement of this U.S aim. And most importantly, Pakistan, by allowing China an opening onto the Arabian Sea, is directly undermining the most important driver of the U.S foreign policy i.e the containment of China, which it sees as the premier challenge to U.S hegemony around the world.
 
The third country which would like the CPEC initiative nipped in the bud is India, which sees Pakistan as a nuisance in the way of its becoming the unchallenged regional hegemon of the area; and this is quite apart from the ideological view that India’s independence from colonial rule cannot be considered complete till such time as it is ” akhund” [complete] again.
 
Pakistan should therefore have absolutely no doubt that these three countries [ plus their allies] will strain every sinew of their power towards sabotaging the CPEC.
 
And what are the tools they will employ to undermine Pakistan? These tools are already deployed and are in operation for all to see, except for those of us who are willfully blind:
–Aiding the terrorist onslaught against Pakistan. Dont we already know this,  and the names of countries involved?
–Burdening Pakistan with a volume of debt which it will never be able to repay. Why is it after all that IMF obliges Ishaq Dar each time he goes to them, begging bowl in hand? Does anyone, anywhere in the world, freely extend credit to a country or entity which is a bad credit risk? Cant we see through this easy credit? Cant we see that in less than 5 years we will have reached a debt ceiling which it will be beyond our capacity to repay? And what happens then? Is this not a road to default and sanctions, which will lead to Pakistan giving up its nuclear assets?
–And the most potent tool of all–key members of our national “leadership”, both here and in Dubai, willfully undermining the very foundations of the state by both hollowing out the country financially, and also selling it out to those bidding for its ultimate demise! Does anyone not see this happening already? Which one of our top leaders is not a billionaire? And which of these has made his billions through honest sweat? And will such people, who can sell their grandmothers for a pittance, not sell off their country when the time comes? The problem is that the time is already here and the sale is going on day and night.
 
 Unfortunately, it is said to be extremely high  interestin loan facility from China i.e  @ $4.5 + Libor
 
It is not for nothing that as the Chinese unfolded their plans for the CPEC, they went to the Army Chief for guarantees of security. This was not just a comment on the power the Army enjoys, but more so a comment on the lack of trust which may credibly be imposed in our civilian leadership.
 
But with the politicians now haggling over the route of the CPEC, the Chinese have issued statements of concern which have been released to the press. This is not the way the Chinese function. They eschew press statements and use them only as a last resort. The level of Chinese concern should make it clear that the enemy sleeper cells among our national leadership have been activated to sabotage the project. This has been the standard operating procedure to undermine third world countries by the first world for decades.
 
If it is not the case already, the Army should wake up to what is happening. It should also include mega corruption, which has undermined the country and taken it to the very brink, as a national security imperative. If the Army refuses to see the writing on the wall, it must know that its days of glory and power cannot be extended to beyond five years, because then it may not have a country to defend. And then all the Generals will be like the rest of us. It is my bet that in five years or less the IMF will call in our debts, and we will not be able to repay. The Last Post will then be sounded.
 
Saeed A. Malik.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

India’s Unrealistic Counterinsurgency Strategy By Sajjad Shaukat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUfMsoHV4I

 

 

 
Image result for india secessionist movements Flags
Image result for india secessionist movements Flags
 
 
 
Image result for india secessionist movements Flags

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

India’s Unrealistic Counterinsurgency Strategy

 

By Sajjad Shaukat

 

 

Learning no lesson from the past, and depending upon state terrorism, Indian Central Government has finalized the raising of Indian Reserve Police Battalions (IRBPs) in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) and Naxal/Maoist hit states or Left Wing Extremism (LWE) areas, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Out of the total 25 IRBPs proposed, five will be for IOK and 12 for LWE affected states whereas rest of 8, IRBPs for other states.

 

These battalions will be raised by recruiting local youths. In case of Naxal hit states, 75 per cent vacancies will be filled up by youths from the 27 worst-affected districts. In IOK, the recruitment process will concentrate on insurgency prone areas.

 

At present, there are 144 IRPBs in various states. In addition, Central Government has recently approved raising of eight additional IRBPs, four each of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

 

The cost of raising each of the battalion will be around Indian Rupee, 61 crore and 75 per cent of it will be provided by the Central Government. This cost is much lower than raising of a paramilitary battalion which costs around Rs. 160 crore.

 

Personnel of IRBPs are normally deployed in their respective states, but they can be deployed in other states too, if there is a requirement. The current raising is outcome of demand by respective states government in wake of the ever growing/persistence insurgency and freedom struggle.

 

Within a span of approximately six months, Central Government of India has approved the demand which reflects the surge of militants/insurgent activities in the LWE hit states/ IOK. It also highlights the manifestation of focus to curb militancy and raise the force level to meet the challenges, which have been repeatedly expressed by Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval.

 

Minister of Home Affairs Rajnath Singh has also repeatedly highlighted his focus to build the capacity of security forces engaged in fighting insurgency. The mentioned increase is a part of overall drive against Naxal/Maoist hit states and IOK.

 

Off late the insurgent/militant activities in LWE and IOK regions have seen a significant surge whereby Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) have suffered causalities. Therefore, immediate attention has been paid towards the new strategy.

 

While, despite concerted efforts—capacity, capability, weapons, equipments and training, the Indian security forces could not effectively counter/reduce the insurgent activities in these states.

The recent surge of insurgents/militant activities in the Nexal affected states of India has compelled the Central Government to enhance counter insurgency efforts in other parts as well. Therefore, the Home Ministry has given a go ahead for not only raising the additional battalions, but also pursuing the support of helicopters/UAVs to cover/ assist the security forces engaged in anti-Naxal/Maoist activities in the affected states.

It is mentionable that under the mask of democracy and secularism, Indian subsequent regimes dominated by politicians from the Hindi heartland—Hindutva (Hindu nationalism), used brutal force ruthlessly against any move to free Assam, Kashmir, Khalistan, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tamil Nadu and Tripura where wars of liberation continue in one or the other form. In the recent years, Maoist intensified their struggle, attacking official installments. In this context, Indian media admitted that Maoists have entered the cities, expanding their activities against the Indian union. While, even under the rule of Congress which claims to be secular party, Indian extremist parties like BJP, RSS, VHP, Shev Sina and Bajrang Dal have missed no opportunity to communalize national politics of India. They also intensified anti-Christian and anti-Muslim bloodshed.

 

After serving the BJP for 30 years, Jaswant Singh was expelled from the party for praising Mohammad Ali Jinnah and echoing the pain of the Indian Muslims in his book, “Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence.” While pointing out the BJP’s attitude towards the minorities, Singh wrote: “Every Muslim that lives in India is a loyal Indian…look into the eyes of Indian Muslims and see the pain.” He warned in his book, if such a policy continued, “India could have third partition.”

 

Past and present history of Balkan gives ample evidence that insurgency and movement of separatism in one country have drastic impact on other neighbouring states. Similarly, civil war and unrest either in Somalia or Sudan have affected all the states of Darfur region, while violent uprising in Egypt, Syria etc. has radicalized a number of the Middle East countries. Indian state terrorism in the Indian-held Kashmir will further radicalize India, giving a impetus to separatist movements in other regions of India.

 

It is noteworthy that currently, more than half of India’s budget is allocated for armed forces, and defence purchases, leaving even less to lift millions of its citizens from abject poverty. Hence, various injustices have further accelerated regional and ethnic disparities in India, particularly, under the Modi government.

 

It is worth-mentioning that the one of the important causes of the disintegration of the former Soviet Union was that its greater defence expenditure exceeded to the maximum, resulting into economic crises inside the country. In this regard, about a prolonged war in Afghanistan, the former President Gorbachev had declared it as the “bleeding wound.” However, militarization of the Soviet Union failed in controlling the movements of liberation, launched by various ethnic nationalities. On the other hand, while learning no lesson from India’s previous close friend, Indian fundamentalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi of the BJP extremist party is acting upon the similar policies.

 

At present, undoubtedly, India is witnessing increased incidents of violence and killings related to communal violence and insurgencies. Nevertheless, such incidents project security weaknesses and failures of the Indian government in curbing insurgent tendencies and problems of the public.

 

While, Indian government is raising Reserve Police Battalions to continue state terrorism, and on the parallel axes, announcement of rehabilitation schemes, development projects and incentives for surrender have been implemented to cope with the insurgency and uprising. It shows contradictory policy of New Delhi.

 

Instead of redressing the grievances of the Maoists by eliminating injustices against them and the Kashmiris by granting them their legitimate right of liberation, Indian government is again acting upon brutal force to suppress these movements through force. Therefore, India’s unrealistic counterinsurgency Strategy will badly fail, culminating into political suicide of the India union.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

 

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Why India Continues Cross-border Shelling? By Sajjad Shaukat

                                    

 

 

 

Why India Continues Cross-border Shelling?

                                                          By Sajjad Shaukat

 

Since October 6, this year, India accelerated cross-border shelling along the Line of Control (LoC) and Working Boundary (WB) and killed several innocent persons including their animals inside Pakistan. It compelled tens thousands of the residents of the villages to migrate to safe areas, with their livestock and other belongings.

 

In this regard, spokesman of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Maj-General Asim Bajwa said that Pakistan Rangers and troops “befittingly” responded to “unprovoked firing” by Indian Border Security Forces (BSF) and military troops. He also clarified that Pakistan’s Armed Forces are fully prepared to meet any aggression.

 

Regarding these constant violations, Pakistan government has lodged a strong protest, and also raised the issue with the UN Military Observers Group in India and Pakistan, asking for a visit of the observers to the affected areas.

 

Meanwhile, in India where Pakistan is accused of starting the skirmishes, leader of the fundamentalist party BJP and Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi is reported to have given a free hand to the Indian forces to go on aggressively with the violations. While, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Shariff convened a meeting of the National Security Commit­te on Oct 10, this year, and discussed the recent ceasefire violations by India at the LoC and WB.

 

It is notable that by acting upon a preplanned scheme, Indian soldiers crossed over the LoC in Kashmir on January 6, 2013 and attacked a Pakistani check post, killing one Pakistani soldier and injuring many troops. Contrarily, on December 24, 2013, New Delhi agreed for the meeting of Directors-General Military Operations (DGMOs) of both the countries, who met in Pakistan, and discussed specific measures strengthening the bilateral ceasefire mechanism across the LoC.

 

While, Islamabad and India had on November 25, 2003, agreed to observe ceasefire along all areas of WB, LoC and the Actual Ground Position Line in Jammu and Kashmir. However, Pakistan military indicated that Indian hostility has gradually increased since 2010 making lives of civil population living in closer vicinity of the LoC and WB difficult. Indian troops committed 86 ceasefire violations in 2011, 230 in 2012 and 414 in 2013. But, Indians have again resorted to unprovoked firing for about 224 times on both LoC and WB and killed several people on the Pakistani side this year.

 

In this context, military officials further elaborated that Indian perennial escalation across the LoC and WB is according to a deliberate plan. So question arises as to why India continues cross-border shelling inside Pakistan.

 

In fact, by promoting Hindu chauvinism on the basis of anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan slogans, extremist party, BJP won a landslide victory in the India elections 2014 by defeating the Congress. Now, BJP-led Prime Minister Modi has been implementing its party’s agenda against Pakistan. In this context, recent upsurge in skirmishes across the LoC and WB is also linked to upcoming elections in Indian occupied Kashmir, as BJP again wants to make Pakistan a scapegoat. Therefore, the border violations, accompanying hostile statements by Indian leadership are aimed at motivating support base before the elections, and even the expected delay in polls in Kashmir would provide more time to the Indian side to hype up sentiments at the cost of Pakistan. The BJP government is looking at winning a majority in the Kashmir assembly so that it could fulfill its manifesto pledge of revoking the special status, given to Kashmir under Indian constitution’s Article 370, and to strengthen its measures to annex the area.

 

As regards Indian covert aims, BJP rulers are trying to divert attention of international community from the Kashmir dispute, while, Kashmiri leaders and Pakistan have been keeping this issue in limelight.

 

In this connection, terming the support and advocacy of the right to self determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmi (J&K), Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, while addressing 69th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), stressed for settlement of the Kashmir issue, and offered Pakistan’s readiness to endeavor for the same through negotiations. He also reminded the international community of its pledge for holding “plebiscite” in the Indian-held Kashmir, and resolves the issue in accordance with UN Charter. The speech generated appreciations from the political circles of Pakistan and Kashmir as well. It is also acknowledged that the speech is true reflection of sentiments of the people of Pakistan, who believe that peace and prosperity in south Asia is inter- linked with solution of core dispute of Kashmir between Pakistan and India.

 

Islamabad’s successful attempt at the UNGA seems to have irked Indian political, diplomatic and journalist circles. Under the growing frustration, a notoriously controversial journalist affiliated with the Indian NDTV namely Barkha Dutt engaged Pakistan’s prime minister’s special advisor on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz, and managed to create a controversy through aggressive posture to make him concede that Pakistani High Commissioner Abdul Basit’s meeting with the Kashmiri leadership in New Delhi was ill-timed, and affected secretary level engagements with Pakistan. No doubt, Barkha-Aziz episode has been projected, because under the pretext, India cancelled secretary level talks with Islamabad.   

 

Moreover, Indian media created an impression that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif by highlighting Kashmir issue made an effort to improve relations with military establishment in the backdrop of the protesters of the sit-ins led by PTI and PAT. It also generated controversy of gray relations between political and military echelons of Pakistan. By increasing cross-border shelling, New Delhi also wants to create pressure on Islamabad and the Armed Forces in wake of present political turmoil—and military operation Zarb-e-Azb which successfully continues against terrorists in North Waziristan Agency.

 

It is of particular attention that BJP leader Dr. Subramaniam Swami stated on July 12, 2014 that India needed only two years to defeat Pakistan militarily, and the only solution of Kashmir was war, as “there is no peaceful, democratic solution. Responding to the withdrawal of the US-led NATO forces from Afghanistan, he remarked, “Americans will hand over Afghanistan to Taliban and go…India should send at least 200,000 troops to Afghanistan.”

 

In these terms, Indian hawks think that in the aftermath of the withdrawal of NATO, they will keep their anti-Pakistan network in Afghanistan by harming the genuine interests of Pakistan which shares geographical, cultural and religious bonds with the former, and is determined to bring peace and stability there.

 

Now, as part of its blame game, India has intensified unprovoked firing at the LoC in Kashmir and WB in Sialkot to delay the Pak-India peace process, without caring for latter’s nuclear weapons.

 

Undoubtedly, every Indian government due to international pressure found it easy to make false pledges that it was willing to engage in peace process to resolve all issues like Siachen, Sir Creek, Wullar Barrage, Water and especially main dispute of Kashmir with Islamabad. But, New Delhi earnestly endeavored to find excuses and pretexts to cancel peace talks, while shifting the blame to Pakistan. For example, in 2002, under the pretension of terrorist attack on the Indian parliament, India postponed the dialogue process. Again, in 2008, India cancelled the ‘composite dialogue’ on the pretext of Mumbai terror attacks.

 

Particularly, on May 27, 2014 Prime Minister Modi’s meeting with Prime Minister Sharif in the oath-taking ceremony proved faultless, because Modi raised baseless issues of terrorism as pre-conditions to advance the Pak-Indian dialogue. He said that slow pace of trial against the terrorists of the Mumbai 26/11 terror case; being held in Pakistan is main hurdle.

 

But, Indian prime minister ignored the fact that on July 19, 2013 the Indian former home ministry and ex-investigating officer Satish Verma disclosed that terror-attacks in Mumbai in November 26, 2008 and assault on Indian Parliament in January 12, 2001 were carried out by the Indian government to strengthen anti-terrorism laws.

 

Notably, in the recent past, United Nations Military Observer Group India and Pakistan in New Delhi was asked to vacate official accommodation, claiming that its role had become irrelevant.

 

It is also mentionable that Pakistani business community is agitated by the High handedness of Indian authorities in India, whenever they participate in trade exhibitions. As per visa protocols of year 2012, both India and Pakistan are bound to give business visa “Exemption from Police Reporting.” Recently, Pakistani delegation members were fined $ 40 per participant for missing Police reporting during trade exhibition (Alishan Pakistan), held at New Delhi from 11-14 September 2014. Besides this, no relaxation is being granted by Indian authorities in issuance of visa to Pakistani businessmen. Element of non-cooperation and aggressiveness towards Pakistan is significant in conduct of Indian authorities after the arrival of Modi regime in power.

 

Nonetheless, we can undoubtedly conclude that India continues cross-border shelling inside Pakistan so as to obtain multiple designs against the former.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: [email protected]

, ,

No Comments