Exchange of diatribe

 
 
   
State of affairs can get worse before they get better. Arch enemies devoted to mutual hatred can become idyllic friends when the worst is over. India and Pakistan fought deadly wars and in the immediate aftermath started finding areas of agreement to be friends. International Convention for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR 1966) meant to streamline administration in decolonized countries and ICESCR (1966) designed by third world as protection of their economic social and cultural rights were attempts at peace after the world witnessed devastating consequences from wars. 

In immediate aftermath of catastrophic world war 11, all countries enlisted as members and signed the UN Charter 1945, vowing not to fight wars again and save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. The western half of the world kept their word but countries in South Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and Middle East came to blows at great cost to their nations. America and Japan became close allies after Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima destruction and Germany is a great friend of France, forgetting what they did to each other in recent past. One essential element of friendship was pacific settlement and removal of disputes at the core. 

Closer to home UN Resolution 38, 17 Jan. 1948 (doc. S -651) or treaties like Tashkent (1966) or Shimla (1972) may have stopped wars but worth mentioning kept organic disputes like Kashmir unresolved. As a result more lives were lost in future years, more wars, either subliminal or in combat or on borders kept reprising throwing all nations involved into turmoil. Just at this moment politics, diplomacy and media take pride in throwing diatribe across the border from both sides. Kashmir is ignored as a basis of this process. 

A war may be deferred due to nuclear dynamic but the threat will persist with Kashmir hanging in the air. TV programs have become a stage for saber rattling and media champions brush aside the ravages of a live conflict and sufferance of people in Jammu & Kashmir and aim their arrows for a battle. I like what Salman Khurshid the Foreign Minister said in reply to a query from a journalist. He said or words to that effect that ‘People (of India) are in contact with us and it is wrong for you to say they want hostility as reprisals against Pakistan’. Media sponsor TV shows as if preparing the nation for a war, relegating the rhetoric of peace to the politicians. There is drama in showing cross border firing and alarm raised about intercepting infiltration. 

What is happening in Kashmir is known to the world and recently concern was voiced by United Nations and America at escalating tensions on Line of Control. Kishtwar is burning from the fire ignited in Gool and history is taking tumbles in Jammu from the time the British left and Qur’an was desecrated that lead to riots. The mordant feelings lie dormant but do not disappear in the permafrost of time and sprout in unexpected places. Simply as an example I knew Ali Chola in Nowhatta who was an indomitable stone pelter. He died in seventies but left his son Habib Chola the most daring fighter known to endure shrapnel wounds in his combat operations but he still did not deter his ten year old son playing cat and mouse games with bullets and stones. This pervasive state of mind runs through generations of a wide spectrum of society and its sporadic nature is well known. No TV programs are aimed to placate their feelings or challenge their objectives. 

Kashmir reverberates with fluxes shaking Jammu while unrest stirs the cities and towns of the whole beleaguered state. Just to pick a few incidents from this wheel of violence in its immediate aftermath of two youth killed in Sumbal on 30 June 2013, 4 people are killed and 42 suffered serious injuries in Gool Jammu and heralded a fresh spate in Kishtawar that lost three men in political mayhem. Allegation is leveled at gun wielding VDC and extremists in despoiling the sacred land of Shah Asraruddin leading to perpetual curfews. Border skirmishes also escalate concurrent disaster as the asymmetric civil war in which civilians are involved leading to unremitting hostilities. As a response governing structures come alive and a set pattern of actions like curfew and show of force puts into effect calm, an exercise replayed. In all this there a message that stands proud. Is there a continuum of a theme of dissent and never ending sense of insecurity? Is that peace enforced by curfew a signal of return to normality? 

Democracy in its proper form unveils misdeeds, owns up responsibility and serves punishments to guilty but in Kashmir Mutually Hurting Stalemate (MHS) that exists between India and Pakistan does not permit democracy to work. A resolution of Kashmir politics is exigent towards pre-requisites for living together as a parcel of humanity in this troubled part of the world. The international Community will hear the rhetoric of terrorism in Kashmir and truism of exploitation of masses remains under covers. 

(The author can be contacted at majidsirajuk@yahoo.com and www.Kashmircaselaw.com)