Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by admin in ATROCITIES OF THE ROGUE INDIAN ARMY, Hindu India, HIndu Terrorism, INDIA EXPOSED, INDIAN OCCUPIED KASHMIR on September 2nd, 2019
On 26th August 2019 The Consulate General of Israel in Mumbai, along with one Indo-Israel Friendship Association, is organising a public discussion on “Leaders’ Idea of Nations in the Context of Zionism and Hindutva” at the Convocation Hall of University of Mumbai. The poster of the event displays images of Theodor Herzl and V.D. Savarkar. This is only an expression of the ongoing relationship between Zionists and Hindutvawadis.
There is a misconception that “Zionist” is a synonym for Jew. One can not be a Zionist without being a Jew, and one can not be a Jew without being a Zionist. There are people who still think that Zionism is just Jewish self-determination and not a reactionary colonial ideology.
But this is not true!
One can be a Zionist without being a Jew or without being pro-Jew. A Zionist can be anti-Semitic.
Adolf Eichmann loved Zionism and even said, “Were I a Jew, I will be a fanatical Zionist.” But Eichmann hated Jews. That’s how he eventually became the architect of the Holocaust. But to him being a Zionist and the architect of the Holocaust were not contradictory. To him, Jews living among and with Germans was a problem. So he wanted to solve this problem by exterminating Jews from Germany.
Eichmann’s pre-World War II views were quite in line with two prominent figures in the history of Zionism. The first was Theodor Herzl. Herzl was the founder of Zionism and the visionary who conceived the State of Israel.
But as a cosmopolitan European Jew, Herzl knew he was in a minority. There were millions of other Jews in Central and Eastern Europe who were very much not like him: not cosmopolitan, not well-educated, not secular, not well-connected, not comfortable. These Jews were a problem: they were poor, they stuck out like a sore thumb in their native lands, they didn’t speak the language, they observed strange, primitive customs. Worst of all, they provoked hatred and anti-Semitism due to their alien strangeness: “The unfortunate Jews are now carrying the seeds of anti-Semitism into England; they have already introduced it into America.”
So Herzl, after originally espousing mass conversion to Christianity as the solution to this problem, later turned to establish a Jewish State as a way to solve the European Jewish problem: “Send all the refuse from Europe’s teeming shores to the Middle East.”
Also influenced by rising European nationalism, Herzl dreamed that Jews could take control of their own destiny in their own land. But not in Europe! Because Jews were alien to Europe and Europeans had shown themselves unwilling to absorb Jews. To Herzl, these eastern European Jews were refuse that must be cleaned up in order to permit Europe to enjoy its respective national homogeneities (French, English, German, etc.). Herzl remarked, “We, the Jews, not only have denigrated and are located at the end of the path, we spoiled the blood of all the peoples of Europe…Jews are descended from a mixture of waste of all races.”
With the demagogic politicians (Demagogic politicians are those who try to win people’s support by appealing to their emotions than using reasonable arguments) of his own and more recent times, Herzl shared both contempt for the Jews and affinity with them.
Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of the Revisionist Party which today is the Likud party, said, “Zionism is a colonization adventure, and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force.” He further said, “The Jewish people are very nasty people. Its neighbours hate it and they’re right.”
It is very evident that some of the founders of the State of Israel either hated Jews or saw them as a fundamentally alien presence in Western civilization that must be eliminated from Europe (by creating the State of Israel in the Middle East) or by exterminating Jews altogether (as done by Hitler and Eichmann).
The creation of the State of Israel is the Zionist project. It is an idea of Zionism, which is a colonial idea. This can be seen in Herzl approaching England to help create the State of Israel.
Herzl approached Britain because, he said, it was the “first to recognise the need for colonial expansion.” According to him, “the idea of Zionism, which is a colonial idea, should be easily and quickly understood in England.”
Arthur Balfour, the colonial father of the modern State of Israel, is a Zionist. Like Eichmann and Herzl, for Balfour Zionism solved a problem. He hated the Jews. He believed, like much of the then British aristocracy, that Jews were alien to Western Christian civilization. They could never be integrated into it properly. Thus, the best solution was to remove them from the shores of England and transport them to Palestine where they could flourish on their own.
The project of creating the State of Israel served two purposes: it removed Jews from among Europeans in Europe, and it permitted Jews to achieve their own separate national identity.
Another important purpose that was in the mind of the founders of the State of Israel and of the European countries and the US was that the State of Israel would become a “beacon of the West” or the “bastion of the Occident” in the Middle East to checkmate the Arab and the Muslim nations (i.e. the enemies of the West) there. With this colonial mindset, the Zionist founders of the State of Israel and the West created the State of Israel. They instilled the “western racist mindset” in the Jews who settled in Palestine. The settler-Jews started seeing themselves as the harbingers of civilization and the indigenous Arabs as the primitive communities that must be evicted or eliminated (if necessary), just as in the Europe Europeans saw Jews as the underclass and wanted to remove Jews from among themselves either by eviction or by extermination. The settler-Jews became the enlightened or civilized colonizers, and the native Arabs became the underclass in Palestine.
This is the mindset of the present-day Jewish nationalists in Israel. Judaism for these Jews is not a spiritual value, it is a physical manifestation of power in the world. These Jews understand that not all Jews are their “brothers/sisters”. For them, some Jews are weak, very “womanly” and not “manly”, too liberal, too humane, too universalist, who are a waste or refuse.
The western racist and colonial mindset of Jews made them find new allies in Christian Zionists, African dictators, European neo-Nazis. Zionism or Nationalism, as these Jews define, is less a movement dedicated to the common good of all those living in Israel and to ethics and morality, but more a movement dedicated to the self-interests of the Israeli Zionist political leaders, NRI Zionist Jews and their Israeli and Western Zionist patrons!
The Face of Hindu Terrorists of BJP=The Party of Indian PM Narendra Modi
One of the misconceptions about “Hindutva” is: “Hindutva” is a synonym for “Hinduism”. One can not be a “Hindu” without being a “Hindutvawadi”, and one can not be a “Hindutvawadi” without being a “Hindu”. People in India and outside think that “Hindutva” is Hindu self-determination, and not a reactionary “elite upper-caste Hindu ideology”.
However, the truth is, not all Hindus are “Hindutvawadis”. There are many Hindus in India and outside who do not subscribe to the Hindutva project of “nation”.
On the other hand, one can be a “Hindutvawadi” without being a “Hindu” or without being pro-Hindu. During the “Humanity Against Terror” charity concert in Edison, New Jersey, US, in October 2016 to show support for Donald Trump and raise funds for Kashmiri pundits as well as Hindu refugees from Bangladesh, organised by the Republican Hindu Coalition formed in 2015 by Indian businessmen in the US, including the Chicago-based businessman and founding chairman Shalabh Kumar (who pledged to donate one million dollars for Trump’s presidential campaign), to promote the interests of Hindu Americans with Republican policymakers, Trump said, “We love Hindus (notice, NOT INDIANS).” Trump’s apparent embrace of Hindu-Americans makes sense. Trump, who is islamophobic, is popular with India’s Hindu nationalist bloc, which is virulently Islamophobic.
Though Trump said that he loves Hindus, his policies on immigration prove contrary to his statement. Trump has tightened restrictions on people working in the US on an H-1B visa, a move that works against Indian-Americans (including Hindus), who have been the overwhelming beneficiaries of that system. Two-thirds of Indian-Americans agree with the statement: “Undocumented or illegal immigrants should have an opportunity to eventually become US citizens.”
Trump’s love for Hindus was not visible when a 32-year old Hindu immigrant, Srinivas Kuchibhotla, was shot dead in Kansas by a man shouting racial slurs. Trump broke his silence on this incident only after six days, condemning the attack in a joint session of Congress. His strong stand against immigration forced Trump to be silent about the attack on the Hindu immigrant.
To Trump, just like Eichmann, being a lover of Hindus and against immigration are not contradictory. To him, Indians, including Hindus, and scores of other ethnic communities, living in the US are a problem. So he wants to solve that by tightening immigration policies.
On the other hand, the promoters of the Hindutva project of “nation” share both affinity and contempt for Hindus. This is evident in RSS/BJP’s attitude towards the SCs and STs.
The reluctant outreach of the Hindutva organisations to SCs and STs informs their dilemma about their relationship with the latter. They include them as “Hindus” in order to prevent them from embracing normatively egalitarian religions such as Islam and Christianity so that their number will not dwindle. By this time, the colonial exercise of enumeration on religious grounds had produced a census mentality in which a community’s numerical strength had become synonymous with its power. So the Hindutva brigade can not afford to forgo SCs and STs for the sake of statistics.
Since SCs and STs own neither land nor other resources, nor are they educated enough to look for government and non-government jobs, the only recourse that is left open for them is social mobility through the reservation.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar understood the devastating consequences of the exclusion of SCs and STs in areas of education, employment and power. So he demanded the rights to representation in proportion to their population in educational institutions, public services and legislative bodies. One of the consequences of such demand was the incorporation of the provision of reservation in educational institutions, jobs and legislatures as articulated in Article 330 of the Constitution of India.
Crimes committed often against SCs and STs reiterate the fact that their rights are more often violated. Since the upper caste people are the law-makers, enforcers of the law, and the ones who occupy the seats of justice, rights are continually denied to the SCs and STs.
For the above reason, Prevention of Atrocities (SC/ST) Act of 1989 and Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955 (amended in 1976) are introduced.
Although RSS/BJP consider SCs and STs as “Hindus”, they covertly and overtly oppose the reservations for SCs and STs. Many upper caste people, often RSS/BJP supporters, are hostile to quotas because they believe that reservation takes away their seats in educational institutions and their job opportunities.
Since coming to power RSS/BJP government has focused on making reservation policy for SCs and STs ineffective. From privatisation to bringing Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation and selling government companies to bringing the lateral entry scheme are attempts by RSS/BJP to deny SCs and STs their share. Most of the jobs in India are already private or in the unorganised sector where reservation policy is not applicable.
From denying reservation for SCs and STs to diluting SC/ST Act, RSS/BJP has never hidden its agenda.
Through policies that are detrimental to SCs and STs, RSS/BJP government is fortifying the graded caste inequalities promoted by the caste system.
Caste is an important determinant of social, economic, corporate and political power in contemporary India. The influence of caste on corporate boards and its network is staggeringly against SCs and STs.
A recent study examines the caste diversity of corporate board structures in India based on a sample of top 1,000 companies listed in the Indian stock exchanges for 2010. The average board size of the top 1,000 companies in India was found to be nine members; nearly 88% of them were insiders and 12% were independent directors. The distribution of board members according to caste shows that nearly 93% were forward caste members; 46% Vaishya and 44% Brahmin. The OBCs and SCs/STs have a meagre 3.8% and 3.5% respectively.
Caste Numbers % to Total
The empirical results show that caste diversity is non-existent in the Indian corporate sector, and the Indian corporate board is dominated by forward castes and lacks diversity. Indian corporate boards consist of members based on caste affiliation rather than on other considerations (like merit or experience). It is difficult to fathom the argument that lack of merit is the cause for under-representation.
As long as the task of judging the merit of SCs and STs is in the hands of the upper caste Hindus, there is very little chance of their being declared “merit worthy”.
Although there is a law against the practice of untouchability, the practice continues. A study in 2006 by a Human Rights organisation has brought out the existence of more than 124 forms of visible and invisible untouchability practices in the social, economic and political life of SCs and STs.
Ambedkar links the origin of untouchability to beef-eating. In his 1948 work The Untouchables: Who Were They and Why They Became Untouchables?, Ambedkar contends, “What is the cause of nausea which the Hindus have against beef-eating? Were the Hindus always opposed to beef-eating? If not, why did they develop such nausea against it? Were the Untouchables given to beef-eating from the very start? Why did they not give up beef-eating when it was abandoned by the Hindus? Were the Untouchables always Untouchables? If there was a time when the Untouchables were not Untouchables even though they ate beef why should beef-eating give rise to Untouchability at a later-stage? If the Hindus were eating beef, when did they give it up? If Untouchability is a reflex of the nausea of the Hindus against beef-eating, how long after the Hindus had given up beef-eating did Untouchability come into being?”
Based on an analysis of various religious texts, the father of Indian Constitution argued that Brahmins, who once had no compunctions against the slaughter of animals, including cows, and were the greatest beef-eaters themselves, not only gave up beef-eating but also started worshipping the cow as a deliberate strategy. “The clue to the worship of the cow is to be found in the struggle between Buddhism and Brahmanism and the means adopted by Brahmanism to establish its supremacy over Buddhism.”
In other words, Ambedkar lays the blame for untouchability on the ancestors of today’s proponents of Hindutva ideology and relates it to cow protection, an agenda that RSS/BJP take seriously.
In the “new India,” the Brahminical supremacy is violently enforced through groups of vigilantes known as gau-rakshaks. This has denied both affordable protein food and vocation for many SCs.
The attitude of RSS/BJP towards SCs and STs has been exemplified by K.M. Munshi.
K.M. Munshi, an ardent Brahmin leader (later in August 1964, Munshi chaired the meeting for the founding of the Hindu nationalist organization “Vishwa Hindu Parishad” at Sandipini Ashram), proposed an amendment to the Report prepared by the Advisory Committee on Minorities that was submitted to the Constituent Assembly on August 1947: “To (a) delete Scheduled Castes from the list of the minorities, (b) include the following addition, “I-A: The section of the Hindu Community referred to as Scheduled Castes as defined 1 of the Government of India Act 1935, shall have the same rights and benefits, which are herein provided for minorities specified in the Schedule to para 1.”” The inner motive for the amendment is best expressed by the words of Munshi himself. He said, “Any safeguard as a minority, so far as the Scheduled Castes are concerned, will possibly prevent their complete absorption in the Hindu fold.” He stated, “Harijans are part and parcel of the Hindu community. Safeguards are given to them till they are completely absorbed in the community.”
When Munshi claims that “Harijans are part and parcel of the Hindu community”, why is he again saying that “Safeguards are given to them till they are completely absorbed into the community”? Are the SCs “Hindus” in reality? If they are “Hindus”, then what is the necessity for them to be “completely absorbed into the (Hindu) community”?
The above seem to be contradictory statements: “Harijans” are Hindus, but at the same time they are not completely absorbed into the Hindu community! Why are SCs not “completely absorbed into the (Hindu) community”?
Being a lawyer, by saying that “Harijans are part and parcel of the Hindu community”, he gives “Harijans” an illusion that they are “Hindus”. By this, he does not want to forgo such cheap, free, obedient and ever-loyal workforce. If the “Harijans” move out of the Hindu community, then the entire edifice of the upper caste power structure will crumble.
So, Munshi is saying, in a way, to SCs: “You continue to be the obedient and loyal workforce for us.”
Secondly, Munshi also acknowledges that the Harijans are not “completely part of the Hindu community.” Anyone with some knowledge of the Hindu scriptures will know that SCs are not recognised as a part of the chaturvarna or the four-fold division of castes and are in fact “outcaste”, technically known in the Hindu scriptures as “Antyajya”.
So the dilemma that is explicit in Munshi’s amendment and later statements is representative of that of RSS/BJP. The caste system is an essential feature of the Hindutva project of “nation”, and without caste, that project will collapse.
RSS/BJP are the strong advocates of the caste system and graded caste inequality. This is evident in the leadership of the RSS.
From 1925 to 2019 (i.e. 94 years), there has not been a single lower caste RSS Sarsanghchalak (Head). The position of sarsanghchalak is decided through nomination by the predecessor. Until as of August 2019, RSS leadership has always been held by upper caste, primarily Brahmin. The individuals who have held the post of sarsanghchalak in RSS are:
This status quo is more likely to be maintained in the RSS.
With caste-based social structure, Manusmriti as the law-book and the upper caste leadership in the “Hindu Rashtra”, the SCs being outside the pale of caste system can not expect to find a place in the political, economic, educational, religious and social arrangements of the “Hindu Rashtra”, and equal human dignity, human value and human rights.
Caste system will be strictly implemented in the “Hindu Rashtra”. That means graded caste inequality will be a norm or characteristic of the “Hindu Rashtra”.
The social status of a caste is determined by the Hindu scriptures and has little to do with whether a member of a particular caste holds a job or does not hold a job or nature of job he/she holds, or his/her economic status. Neither a rich SC/ST nor an educated SC/ST is acceptable to the upper caste Hindu as the worth of sharing his/her table. SCs and STs are doomed to being outside the pale to be ever considered an equal with the upper caste in “Hindu Rashtra”. Children of SCs and STs will continue to suffer prejudice in schools, colleges and workplaces.
The caste discrimination will continue to be maintained through endogamy, a sense of caste prestige, and social distance.
Practically, SCs and STs will be forced to serve the upper castes. That means, going back to the “caste vocations” and “caste equations”! Those at the top of the caste ladder will again enjoy the fruit of the sweat and blood of the SCs and STs.
Caste-based reservation in India started in 2nd century BC. In Manusmriti, the law-book of “Hindutvawadis”, all laws are based on caste and no merit is ever considered. It divides people into upper and lower castes, and “outcaste” on the basis of their birth and not on the basis of merit. Wealth, political power, spiritual leadership, education, ownership of land, trade and all lucrative aspects are reserved for the upper castes.
This will undermine democracy and change the nature of the polity, where a large segment of people will be denied equal human dignity, equal human value and equal human rights. They will be denied equal opportunities for education, employment and political power. Thus, SCs and STs will be deprived of reaching their potential in the “Hindu Rashtra”.
The deception and the lie of the proponents of “Hindu Rashtra” will be exposed, when these questions are asked: Who are main proponents of “Hindu Rashtra”? To which caste do they belong to?
The proponents of “Hindu Rashtra” are the strong believers and observers of the caste system. Their strong belief in the caste system is reflected in the caste status of the top leadership. That means, the establishment of “Hindu Rashtra” does not benefit all Hindus, leave alone minority communities such as Muslims and Christians. It benefits only those who are at the top of the caste ladder and class ladder. Their rallying cry for the establishment of “Hindu Rashtra” is to secure or gain power for those at the top of the caste ladder and the class ladder.
This is exposed by their opposition to reservations to SCs and STs, who are considered by them as “Hindus”.
At the same time, by implementing the anti-conversion law throughout India, the proponents of “Hindu Rashtra” will stop SCs and STs from embracing normatively egalitarian religions such as Islam and Christianity. Thus, SCs and STs will be kept within Hindu-fold to serve the upper caste!
Therefore, the Hindutva project of “Hindu Rashtra” is by the Upper caste, of the upper caste and for the upper caste!
Since the majority of opposition political parties follow caste and class systems, they do not have a counter-message. Only those political parties and common people who do not follow the discriminatory systems of caste and class can come up with a counter-message and expose the deception and lie of the proponents of “Hindu Rashtra”.
References
Ajit. D., Han Donker, Ravi Saxena, “Corporate Boards in India: Blocked by Caste?” Economic & Political Weekly, Vol xlvii, No. 31, 11th August 2012.
Richard Silverstein, “Loving Israel, Hating Jews.”
https://www.richardsilverstein.com/2017/08/06/loving-israel-hating-jews/
Rikha Sharma Rani, “Why Trump Celebrated a Hindu Religious Holiday.” Politico Magazine, 31st October 2017. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/31/trump-indian-americans-gop-215771
Sakshi Human Rights watch – Special Report, Hyderabad, India, 2006.
Surendra Kumar, “Debunking Myths About India’s Reservation Policy.” Dailyo, 17th May 2017. http://www.dailyo.in/politics/caste-system-reservation-quota-ambedkar-merit-dalits/story/1/17238.html
Vikas Pathak, “Hindutva and the Dalit Question.” The Hindu, 9th December 2015. http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-bjps-coopting-of-ambedkar/article7962369.ece
“Israel Consulate in Mumbai Organises Event on Hindutva and Zionism.” Sabrangindia, 23rd August 2019. https://sabrangindia.in/article/israel-consulate-mumbai-organises-event-hindutva-and-zionis
“Forms of Untouchability and Discrimination on SCs and STs.”
http://velivada.com/2016/01/22/more-than-100-forms-of-untouchability-and-caste-discrimination/
Kamalakar Duvvuru teaches the New Testament with an objective of promoting peace, justice, unity and love. He can be reached at kamalakar.duvvur@gmail.com
Posted by admin in Asif Haroon Raja (Retd):Pakistan Army, INDIA EXPOSED, Indian 5th Generation Against Pakistan on March 2nd, 2019
Background Information. The intelligence agencies of India USA, Israel and the puppet government in Kabul (RAW, CIA, NDS) duly supported by MI-6, Mossad and BND based in Kabul have been targeting Pakistan from Afghanistan as well as Iran from 2003 onward to destabilize, denuclearize, de-Islamize and Balkanize Pakistan. The collaborating agencies have been making use of paid proxies and hybrid war to achieve their objectives. Pakistan security forces after fighting the war on terror for 15 years finally succeeded in chucking out all terrorist groups and restoring peace. Today Pakistan is in a much stronger position to deal with internal and external challenges which have dismayed India and its strategic partners.
Pre-Pulwama Attack Situation
India is highly perturbed over the fast-changing regional scenario which is going in favour of Pakistan and is against the interest of India. Despite India’s best efforts to scuttle CPEC, it is making good progress. Game-changing CPEC has disrupted India’s plan to isolate Pakistan. The US-Taliban peace talks in which India has no role, while Pakistan is playing a key role has upset India. The US plans to strike a peace deal with the Taliban and arrive at a political settlement. The US-NATO troops intend to exit from Afghanistan, which will pave the way for the Taliban to regain power. That would mean decrease if not the termination of Indian influence and increase of Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan.
The gulf between Pakistan and the Arab Gulf States in the aftermath of the Yemen crisis in 2015 had been quickly filled up by India by getting close to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and UAE. The void has now been filled and bitterness removed after the change of government in Islamabad and quiet diplomacy of Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa. Much to the disappointment of India, old camaraderie between Pakistan and KSA-UAE has been restored. KSA, UAE and Qatar have extended generous financial support and oil on deferred payment to help the new government led by Imran Khan to tide over its economic crisis.
China is continuing to consolidate its strategic relationship with Pakistan and to bolster CPEC. The USA found itself stuck in Afghanistan and wanting to exit safely and honourably is waving an olive oil to Pakistan and extending an offer of a free trade agreement. Amidst the happy tidings for Pakistan, planned high profile visit of Crown Prince M. Bin Salman to Pakistan and then to India and the expected Saudi investment of $20 billion together with setting up of an oil refinery at Gwadar seaport to further boost up CPEC alarmed India. Visit of Afghan Taliban to Islamabad on 17th, hearing of Kalbushan case in ICJ on 18th, crucial meeting of FATF on 18th for which India was lobbying to put Pakistan in the blacklist, and PSL matches taking place in Karachi-Lahore were other important events in that timeframe.
Internally, Narendra Modi is facing heavy criticism from the public since he has been unable to fulfil the tall promises he made to the people of India. Instead of uplifting the GDP above 11% as boasted by him, the GDP has dropped below 7% and devaluation of bigger currency notes and taxation have affected the small businessmen and farmers. His extremist policies against the minorities in India and craze to promote Hindutva have declined his popularity and minimized his chances to get re-elected. In Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK), Kashmiris have got alienated and Kashmir is fast slipping out of the hands of India owing to oppressive policies of BJP government.
Moreover, the atrocities of Indian security forces are now being noticed with concern by the international community, the UN and even the saner elements in India. Modi is feeling frustrated that he has failed to overawe Pakistan through his aggressive tactics, keeping the Line of Control hot by carrying out repeated violations (300 in 2016, over 1900 violations in 2017 and that many in 2018), resorting to water terrorism and hurling threats to break Pakistan into four pieces. Much to his distress, the electoral loss of BJP in five states has panicked him.
It was in the backdrop of series of upsetting developments for Modi when seen in context with approaching elections in India in May 2019 that it was apprehended that he might resort to some sort of misadventure with a view to infuse fresh life into his election campaign, distract the attention of the world from IOK, find an excuse to further step up ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Muslims, change the demography of Kashmir Valley, drum up old narrative that Pakistan is abetting terrorism in Kashmir and isolate Pakistan diplomatically. It became all the more crucial because of the planned visit of Crown Prince on 16-17 February.
Pulwama Attack
On 14 February, a suicide bomber rammed his car filled with explosive into the military convoy in Pulwama (part of Jammu in IOK) killing 40 Indian CRPF soldiers. Within minutes of the occurrence, India blamed Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) and Pakistan without even carrying out preliminary investigations.
Possibilities Open
False Flag Operation. India has mastered the art of false flag operations and has been using it frequently to project itself as the victim of terrorism (attack on Indian Parliament in 2001, Mumbai attacks in 2008, Pathankot and Uri attacks in 2016). Indian leaders utter lies without any qualm and have been consistently cooking up fake stories to malign Pakistan. Need for engineering an attack was felt by the BJP to garner the votes of Hindu Far Right, to dampen the visit of Crown Prince in Pakistan and to colour his perceptions. Most probably.
Indigenous Attack. The way the Kashmiris are being oppressed, killed, maimed, tortured, raped and humiliated since 1989 by Indian forces and are being denied the right of self-determination gives them a strong cause to resort to the extreme measure of suicide attacks. Even the children and girls throw stones at the Indian soldiers and do not fear them. Adil was among the many who were detained, tortured and made to rub nose on the floor. This option is probable but doesn’t suit India.
Pakistan Sponsored Attack. Pakistan draws no benefit and stands to lose on all accounts particularly when its national policy and strategy is defensive, and has shown extraordinary restraint in the face of Indian indiscriminate firing along the LoC causing deaths and injuries to a large number of civilians. Pakistan has paid a heavy price in controlling terrorism, it is making concerted efforts to get itself out of the FATF grey list and its main focus is on improving the economy. Hence this option is unviable and ruled out but suits India the most.
Orchestrated War Hysteria
From February 14 onward, Indian media stimulated a calculated hysteria duly augmented by BJP hawks. Drums of war were drummed and slogan of ‘teach Pakistan a lesson’ was loudly chanted. Options of how best to avenge the attack in Pulwama were openly discussed on Indian media channels. Kashmiris were hunted all over in Jammu and Indian cities, killed, thrashed and girls kidnapped. The state machinery backed up the goons belonging to RSS, BJP, Shiv Sena and other extremist Hindu groups. Additional 12000 troops were inducted into the already saturated Kashmir Valley to further tyrannize the Kashmiris.
It was owing to jingoism of India that the Crown Prince delayed his visit to Pakistan by one day and visit of the Taliban to Islamabad was also cancelled. Highly successful visit of the Crown Prince to Islamabad followed by failure of Modi to extract a statement from the visitor advising Pakistan to rein in Pakistan-based terrorist groups allegedly involved in Pulwama attack thoroughly disappointed him.
Failure of UNSC to blame and condemn Pakistan, rejection of Indian accusation against Pakistan in Pulwama attack by Turkey, and Trump desisting from pointing a finger at Pakistan further upset Modi. Wholehearted support of Indian Sikhs to the marooned Kashmiris added to Modi’s woes.
Since Modi had stirred up the emotions of Hindu extremists to a high pitch and they were baying for Pakistan’s blood, he was left with no option other than undertaking some kind of a token strike inside Pakistan to pacify them. Weighing the pros and cons of each option short of war and with no human cost, it was decided to opt for air option against a civilian target under the garb of striking an imaginary training camp of JeM.
Pakistan’s Readiness
Contrary to Modi’s warmongering and irresponsible statements, PM Imran Khan gave a balanced and mature response by offering peace and dialogue and at the same time curtly stating that “Pakistan will not think to react but will react”. Chairing the NSC meeting, he authorized the military to react with full force whenever attacked. Gen Bajwa made it clear that the Pak Army’s response will be beyond Indian expectations and will stun India. The message was loud and clear; “don’t mess up with nuclear Pakistan”! In a meeting between the Army and PAF chiefs on 25 February, they expressed satisfaction over the operational preparedness of armed forces for a befitting response to any Indian aggression.
All the three services, as well as the air defence, carried out necessary preparations to face the possible Indian threat. The PAF started flying combat air patrols (CAP) in a rotation along the eastern and northwestern borders.
Sensing the ugly mood, Pakistan Foreign Minister expressed his apprehensions to his counterparts of other countries that India is up to something nasty and it must be restrained from undertaking a military venture against nuclear Pakistan since it will have horrendous consequences.
Indian Air Intrusions
On the night of 25/26 February, one of the CAP observed Indian jets flying towards Lahore-Sialkot border. Although it turned back when challenged, I guess it was probably a deception to distract attention from the main strike. The next batch of jets was observed by another CAP along Okara-Bahawalpur front across the border which was also a diversion. The 3rd heavy batch of Mirage-2000s was next spotted by the CAP approaching Muzaffarabad sector-Kiran Valley. They crossed the LoC from Tangdhar salient opposite Balakot sector and penetrated 4-5 miles at 0345 a.m. When challenged by the CAP, the jets flew back in haste at 0350 a.m. after jettisoning their payload of 4 bombs at Jabba. The bombs fell at a deserted place causing no human casualty or damage to property except for uprooting some pine trees. It was not an attack on any military target but an intrusion which sought a civilian target.
Claims made by India. True to its tradition, India has claimed that the attacking jets successfully targeted JeM camps in Balakot, each bomb weighing 1000 kg and in their 21 minutes operation, they killed 350 militants and destroyed a madrassa supposed to be a training centre of JeM. The claim is preposterous, fictitious and entirely based on a figment of imaginations. This claim is similar to the one invented after the fake surgical strike conducted in AJK in September 2016, which has not been proved to this date. Indians are foolishly celebrating the fabricated victory and deriving a vicarious pleasure.
DG ISPR Press Briefing. The DG ISPR Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor conducted an elaborate press briefing today and with the help of slides, he exposed the fake story woven by India. He has extended an open invitation to the local and foreign media persons as well as diplomats to accompany him to the scene of occurrence and see for themselves and to interview the locals whether any area had been bombed/strafed by jets and whether there was any trace of human blood, or any evacuation or burial of dead bodies was carried out, and whether there was a single brick found from the debris where the bombs had landed. He stated that the Pakistan military’s response will come definitely and will be different and will surprise India.
Pakistan’s Response
Indian incursion has united the divided society and the polarized political parties. A large number of rallies have taken place in various cities to denounce Indian aggression. The nation has gelled together to face the Indian challenge squarely. The National Assembly and all the provincial assemblies have censured the blatant intrusion of Indian jets and have extended their full support to the armed forces. The PM chaired the NSC meeting today in which it was decided that a credible response will soon be given at the time and place of our choosing. After the joint parliament session tomorrow, a meeting of National Command Authority will be held.
Until and unless Pakistan gives a hard-hitting response, it will encourage India to undertake similar air violations on the pattern of ground violations in Kashmir. On the diplomatic front, we should make a similar noise as is being done by Indian media and their leaders.
The writer is a retired Brig, a war veteran, defence analyst, columnist, author of five books, Vice Chairman Thinkers Forum Pakistan, Director Measac Research Centre, Member CWC PESS. asifharoonraja@gmail.com
Posted by admin in Independent Mizoram, India Will Die a Slow Death, Kashmir, Rajputstan, SECESSIONIST MOVEMENTS IN INDIA on January 5th, 2017
Insurgencies do not emerge in a vacuum. Their underlying root causes are invariably to be found in political, socio-economic or religious domains, their nature, and scope depending upon the nature of the grievances, motivations, and demands of the people.
India has had its share of insurgencies. In all, an estimated 30 armed insurgency movements are sweeping across the country, reflecting an acute sense of alienation on the part of the people involved. Broadly, these can be divided into movements for political rights – e.g. Assam, Kashmir and Khalistan (Punjab), movements for social and economic justice – e.g. Maoist (Naxalite) and north-eastern states, and religious grounds – e.g. Ladakh. These causes overlap at times.
Wikipedia lists 16 belligerent groups and 68 major organization as terrorist groups in India, which include: nine in the northeast (Seven Sisters), four in center & the east (including Maoist/Naxalites), seventeen in the west (Sikh separatist groups), and thirty-eight in the northwest (Kashmir).
By the very nature of its population mix, one that began evolving thousands of years ago with waves of migrants pouring in from adjoining lands at different periods in history, South Asia has never been a homogenous society. The multiplicity of races, ethnicities, tribes, religions, and languages led to the creation of hundreds of sovereign entities all over the subcontinent ruled by tribal and religious leaders and conquerors of all sorts. Like Europe over the centuries, the map of South Asia also kept changing owing to internecine warfare.
One must remember that India in its entire history until colonized by the British and united at gunpoint, was never a single nation, nor a united country. The numerous entities were in many cases territorially and population-wise much larger than several European countries, were independently ruled and qualified for nationhood by any modern standards.
During and after the colonial rule, such territorial entities were lumped together to form new administrative and political units – or states, without, in many cases, taking into account the preferences and aspirations of the people. For the people of these territories, which ranged from small fiefdoms to large princely states, and who had for centuries enjoyed independent existence, this administrative and political amalgam amounted to a loss of identity and freedom and being ruled by aliens. The new dispensation – democracy, in many cases brought no political or economic advantage.
To complicate matters, hundreds of religious and ethnic groups, some of which are fiercely sectarian and independent in nature, found themselves passionately defending their religions, ethnicities, languages and cultures, at times clashing fiercely with rival groups, challenging even the writ of the state in the process. As the time passes, it is becoming clear that keeping a conglomerate of nationalities and sub-nationalities together as one nation would be an impossibility, given the absence of a common thread that could weave them together.
Thus the artificial nature of the modern state created by the British colonialists and adopted by post-colonial India also triggers violent reactions in different hotspots.
India’s caste system, which tears apart its social fabric and divides people into potential warring groups, is unique to that country and has no place in the modern world. This sinister game has historically been played by the Brahmans in collaboration with the ruling class to their mutual benefit. The issue assumes more horrific dimensions when those who practice it among the Hindus insist that it is a divinely sanctioned concept and cannot be abrogated by humans. Even the anti-caste activist – Dr. Ambedkar, acknowledges that ‘to destroy caste, all the Hindu Shastras would have to be done away with’.
The system confers on the ‘higher’ castes the absolute right to plunder the wealth of those belonging to the ‘lower’ caste or Dalits (or the ‘untouchables’). For over four thousand years, the system has been driven by the intense hatred and by the yearning of the ‘higher’ castes to accept nothing less than abject subservience from the ‘lower’ castes. Ironically, its defenders have argued that it has kept a sense of order and peace among the people and has prevented society from disintegrating into chaos.
Although Dalits make up for the most part of the Indian population, they have remained deprived of the benefits of the current economic boom. This is because of the barricades that bar them from having access to education, job opportunities, and even state provided healthcare and food. They are forced into menial jobs, denied entry to temples, cremation grounds, and river bathing points and cannot even share a barber with the upper caste Hindu. Punishments are severe when these boundaries are transgressed. In Tamil Nadu, for instance, 45 special types of ‘untouchability’ practices are common.
Despite the fact that the Indian Constitution has abolished it, this caste based discrimination continues because it has infiltrated into the Indian polity, serves the vested interests of a powerful minority and gives it a hold over a helpless majority in the name of religion and ancient social customs. It has even been glorified by M.K. Gandhi who is reported to have said that ‘caste is an integral part of Hinduism and cannot be eradicated if Hinduism is to be preserved’.
The mentality of hate this creates in the lower castes in an age when the concepts of socialism, awareness about human rights and equality and dignity of man are spreading fast, this ‘helpless majority’ has begun to resort to violence to overthrow this yoke. The Maoist/ Naxalite uprising in eastern India is just one case in point.
Of India’s population of 1.1 billion, about 800 million – more than 60% – are poor, many living on the margins of life, lacking some or all of the basic necessities. Despite its emergence as Asia’s third-biggest economy, India has the highest illiteracy rate in the world – 70%, and the people lack adequate shelter, sanitation, clean water, nutrition, healthcare and job opportunities. The groups that are mostly left behind are minorities. There is a growing concern that unless this situation is addressed, the country will be torn apart by the despair and rage of the poor sooner or later.
The so-called nationalist philosophy – Hindutva, is actually a euphemistic effort to conceal communal beliefs and practices. Many Indian Marxist sociologists describe the Hindutva movement as fascist in a classical sense, in its ideology and class support, methods and programs, especially targeting the concept of homogenized majority and cultural hegemony. Others raise issues with regards to sometimes-vacillating attitudes of its adherents towards non-Hindus and secularism.
Defining Hindutva, “The struggle for India’s Soul” (World Policy Journal, fall 2002) states that India is “not only the [Hindu] fatherland but also …. their pun ya bhumi, their holy land”. To Hindu extremists, all others on this land are viewed as “aliens” who do not belong there.
Hindutva is identified as the guiding ideology of the Sangh Parivar, a family of Hindu nationalist organizations of which Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad are a part. Not part of Sangh Parivar, but closely associated with it, is Shiv Sena, a highly controversial political party of Maharashtra. The record of all these right-wing radical parties in pursuing discriminatory policies towards minorities, particularly the Muslims, and engaging in their frequent massacres is no secret. This record alone is enough to show the true colors of Hindutvavadis (followers of Hindutva) and what Hindutva stands for.
Explaining the mindset of Shiv Sena, sociologist Dipankar Gupta says: “A good Hindu for the Shiv Sena is not necessarily a person well versed in Hindu scriptures, but one who is ready and willing to go out and attack Muslims … To be a good Hindu is to hate Muslims and nothing else.” This is borne out by the 2002 indiscriminate killings of Muslims in Gujarat for which Shiv Sena was held responsible.
The adherents of Hindutva demonize those who do not subscribe to that philosophy or are opposed to its pre-eminence and dub them anti-state or terrorists just as the Hindu scriptures in earlier times branded such people as rakshasas. As always, these groups have been ‘red in tooth and claw’ in violently resolving all their social, religious and political differences and killing, raping, burning and lynching those who show the audacity to stand up to them for their rights.
In 1947, these groups preferred violent upheaval and vivisection of India to sharing power with the Muslims and killed more people in communal violence, including Sikhs, Muslims, Christians and Dalits than ever before in recent history. Citing ‘ekta and akhandata’ (unity and integrity) of India, they have refused to allow self-rule to Sikhs (86%) in the Punjab, to Muslims (80%) in Kashmir, to Buddhists (90%) in Ladakh, to Christians in the North East of India and to the tribal population of central India.
It is this intolerance and bigotry that has generated alienation and hate among minorities, Dalits and people of other faiths – Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Buddhists. It lays the ground for angry and rebellious reaction among those who are targeted.
Naxalites or Maoists: The Maoist Movement of Nepal, supported ironically by the Indian Government, came home to roost. Inspired by the Nepalese Maoist forest dwellers who took over and ruled their forests, the lowest of Indian forest dwellers of Naxalbari (West Bengal) – the ‘adivasis’, launched their own Maoist movement and took control of their forests too.
According to one of the legends that support India’s diabolical caste system, the Adivasis were punished by the gods for killing a Brahmin (member of the highest caste – the 5% which more or fewer rules and controls India). As a punishment, the Adivasis were expelled to live like animals in the forest and, like them, survive by preying on the weaker, owning nothing.
When huge mineral deposits were discovered in some of the forested areas, the authorities decided to relocate the Adivasis in 1967. They refused. Having no other title, they did not want to give up what they held and this set in motion a cycle of resistance and reprisals, including rapes and murders by the powerful vested interests.
It is now recognised that exploitation of billions of dollars worth of mineral wealth of the central and eastern Indian tribal area by the capitalists without giving a share to the poorest of the poor forest dwellers whose home it has been for ages, lay at the root of the Maoist insurgency, modelled after the teachings of the great Chinese revolutionary leader.
These Maoists now inhabit an area known as the ‘Red Corridor’ that stretches from West Bengal to Karnataka state in the southwest. They are active across 220 districts in 20 states – about 40% of India’s geographical area. They also threaten to extend operations in major urban centers, including New Delhi. Indian intelligence reports say that insurgents include 20,000 armed men and 50,000 regular or full-time organizers and mobilizers, with the numbers growing. In 2007 Prime Minister Manmohan Singh acknowledged the growing influence of Maoist insurgency as “the most serious internal threat to India’s national security.”
The Seven Sisters: The seven states of northeastern India called the Seven Sisters are significantly different, ethnically and linguistically, from the rest of the country. These states are rocked by a large number of armed and violent rebellions, some seeking separate states, some fighting for autonomy and others demanding complete independence, keeping the entire region is a state of turmoil. These states include Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, and Tripura.
These states accuse New Delhi of apathy towards their issues. Illiteracy, poverty and lack of economic opportunities have fueled the natives’ demand for autonomy and independence. There also exist territorial disputes among states and tensions between natives and immigrants from other states which the governments have not attended to, accentuating the problems.
The Assam state has been the hotbed of active militancy for many years, ULFA (United Liberation Front of Assam) has been in the forefront of a liberation struggle since 1979, along with two dozen other militant groups, on the grounds of neglect and economic disparity. Over 10,000 people have lost their lives and thousand have been displaced during the last 25 years. The army has been unable to subdue the insurgents.
The divide between the tribals and nontribal settlers is the cause of the trouble in Meghalaya. The absence of effective governance gives rise to identity issues, mismanagement, and growing corruption. Like other states in the region, there is a demand for independence along tribal lines. The Achik National Volunteer Council has pursued since 1995 the formation of an Achik Land in the Caro Hills, whereas the Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council seeks to free the state from Garo domination.
The Arunachal Dragon Force, also known as the East India Liberation Front, is a violent secessionist movement in the eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. The ADF seeks to create an independent state resembling the pre-British Tea Country that would include area currently in Arunachal Pradesh as well as neighboring Assam.
Mizoram’s tensions have arisen largely due to the Assamese domination and the neglect of the Mizo people by India. In 1986, the main secessionist movement led by the Mizo National Front ended after a peace accord, bringing peace to the region. However, secessionist demands by some groups continue to insist on an independent Hmar State.
Nagaland was created in 1963 as the 16th state of Indian Union after carving it out of Assam. It happens to be the oldest of insurgencies of India (since 1947) and is believed to have inspired almost all others ethnic groups in the region, demanding full independence. The state is marked by a multiplicity of tribes, ethnicities, cultures and religion. It is home to around 400 tribes or sub-tribes and has witnessed conflicts, including infighting amongst various villages, tribes, and other warring factions, most of them seeking a separate homeland comprising Christian dominated areas of Nagaland and certain areas of Manipur, Assam, and Arunachal Pradesh. The area is rich in oil reserves worth billions and government efforts to strike deals with the rebel groups have yielded no results. Thousands have died since the insurgency began.
The struggle for the independence of Manipur has been actively pursued by several insurgent groups since 1964, some of them with socialist leanings, arising out of neglect by the state and central governments of the issues and concerns of the people. For lack of education and economic opportunities, many people have been forced to join these separatists groups. The disturbed conditions have only added to the sufferings of the general population. The controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act (or AFSPA) has been extensively criticized, as it gives wide and unrestricted powers to the army, which invariably leads to serious violations of human rights.
It was the ethnic tensions between the Bengali immigrants after the 1971 war and the native tribal population in Tripura and the building of a fence by the government along the Bangladesh border that led to a rebellion in the 1970s. Very active insurgency now goes on amid very harsh living conditions for thousands of homeless refugees. The National Liberation Front of Tripura and the All Tripura Tiger Force demand the expulsion of Bengali-speaking immigrants.
Tamil Nadu: In the wake of their defeat by the Sri Lankan military in the Jaffna peninsula, the Tamil LTTE freedom fighters took refuge in the adjoining Tamil Nadu state of India, where on account of common ethnicity, religion, language and culture they mixed easily and enjoyed mass support for their cause. Overtime LTTE regrouped and recruited volunteers from amongst the Sri Lankan Tamil refugees and the local population and began to amass weapons and explosives.
There is a strong anti-India and pro-secessionist sentiment in Tamil Nadu. Most people want independence from India despite sharing a common religion – Hinduism, with the rest of Hindu-dominated India. Their argument: religion is not a binding force that can override other considerations, such as language, culture, ethnicity, people’s aspirations and an identity that entitles them to an independent existence. They argue that if Nepal can have an independent existence as a Hindu state right next to India why can’t Tamil Nadu? And they argue that one religion does not necessarily translate into one nationality. If that were so, there would not have been so many Christian and Muslim states enjoying independent status. Tamils are inspired by the Maoist/Naxalite movement but their secessionist organizations have been shut down after being labeled as terrorists.
Khalistan Movement of the Sikhs: The Sikh community has long nurtured a grudge against the Hindu-dominated governments in New Delhi for having gone back on their word given at the time of partition in 1947, promising autonomy to their state of Punjab, renaming it Khalistan, which the Sikhs considered to be very important from their religious and political standpoint. Real as well as perceived discrimination and a feeling of betrayal by the central government of Indira Gandhi brought matters to the head and fearing a rebellion from the Sikh militant groups, she ordered a military crackdown on their most revered shrine – the Golden Temple, in 1981, where armed Sikhs put up stiff resistance. An estimated 3000 people, including a large number of pilgrims, died. This ended in a military victory but a political disaster for Indira Gandhi. Soon afterward in 1984, she was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards and this, in turn, led to a general massacre of the Sikhs across India. Although the situation has returned to normal, the Sikh community has not forgiven the Hindus for this sacrilege and tensions continue. The demand for Khalistan is still alive and about 17 movements for a separate Sikh state remain active.
Another factor that has added to the existing tensions between the central government and the Sikhs is the diversion to the neighboring states of their most important natural resource – river water, which belonged only to Punjab under the prevalent national and international law. This deprived Punjab of billions of rupees annually. With 80% of the state population – the poor farming community, adversely affected, there has been a great deal of unrest. The military was used to suppress this unrest but there are fears that the issue could become the moot point of another Maoist uprising, this time in Punjab.
Kashmir: The Kashmir issue is as old as the history of India and Pakistan’s independence. It arose out of India’s forcible occupation of this predominantly Muslim state against the wishes of its people and in violation of the principle of partition of British India. A fierce struggle for independence continues unabated in the valley in which hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lives at the hands of the central and state government’s security forces and have been displaced. There has been an international condemnation of human rights violations. India has defied the resolutions of the UN Security Council that have called for the demilitarization of the valley and holding of a plebiscite to determine the will of the people.
India and Pakistan have fought three wars and efforts at reaching a solution through negotiations have not been fruitful.
The Indian internal scene presents a very disturbing scenario, one that has prompted Suhas Chakma, Director of the Asian Centre for Human Rights in New Delhi, to say that ‘India is at war with itself’. Alan Hart, the British journalist, while speaking about insurgencies in India at LISA seminar in July this year, agreed with this characterization. There is a consensus that this situation seriously threatens India’s stability and consequently its democracy.
In a changing world, as the poor of India become more and more aware of the affluence of the relative few who reap the benefits of the country’s development boom, the rich-poor division assumes greater significance and cannot be ignored. “The insurgency in all of its manifestations and the counter-insurgency operations of the security forces in all of their manifestations are only the casing of the ticking time-bomb under India’s democracy. The explosive substance inside the casing is, in a word, POVERTY” said Alan Hart, and said it rightly.
It is also important to understand that newly undertaken unification of India has not yet taken firm roots and it would be a bad idea for it to try and trigger fragmentation among its neighbors. There is imminent danger of the Domino effect taking the whole of South Asia down.
Read his bio and more analyses and essays by
Axis of Logic Columnist, Shahid R. Siddiqi
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
