Pakistan: Intolerance in the curriculum

Pakistan: Intolerance in the curriculum

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2011

Pakistan: Intolerance in the curriculum

Just a few days ago, 10 Ahmadi children, seven of them girls, were expelled from a school in the Hafizabad area, simply on the basis of their religious identity. The incident took place soon after preachers promoting anti-Ahmadism had visited the town and lashed out with familiar vitriol against a religious group that has been thrust out of the mainstream and then subjected to years of vicious discrimination.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Int'l Desk

Source/Credit: The News | Pakistan

By Kamila Hyat | October 13, 2011

There have been several shocking incidents over the past week or so that go only to highlight the kind of intolerance we are facing in our society and the manner in which this is spreading. Worst of all the spirit of hatred has also seeped into classrooms, and is being used to poison the minds of children.

This process will of course lead to the emergence, even before our watching eyes, of yet another generation persuaded that it is acceptable to discriminate on the basis of beliefs or other factors, or that minority groups are inherently inferior to the majority – deserving no place in mainstream society.

Just a few days ago, 10 Ahmadi children, seven of them girls, were expelled from a school in the Hafizabad area, simply on the basis of their religious identity. The incident took place soon after preachers promoting anti-Ahmadism had visited the town and lashed out with familiar vitriol against a religious group that has been thrust out of the mainstream and then subjected to years of vicious discrimination.

The feeble plea by the principal of the private school, that he did not wish to turn away the children from the school doors but had no choice in the face of threats made by villagers, just goes to show how weak we have become.

No one has answered the question of the distraught father of three of the girls driven away from school who asks how his daughters will now receive an education. Beyond the representatives of the Ahmadi community in Rabwah and some human rights groups, no one has spoken out in their support.

The issue has not been discussed by furious media anchors, even though the Constitution of our land lays down in unequivocal terms that every citizen has a right to education and cannot be denied this under any circumstances.

Such silence is perhaps the most dangerous element of all. The streets and other public places have been left to bigots, such as those who have been on the streets demanding the immediate release of Mumtaz Qadri, the man sentenced to death for the murder of Salmaan Taseer.

Precisely the same silence prevailed after yet another horrendous incident at a school a few weeks ago when an eighth-grade Christian girl was turned out of a POF-run school in the town of Havelian after making a minor spelling mistake in an Urdu paper.

Her teacher interpreted the mistake as an act of blasphemy, publicised the matter – which essentially revolved around one dot in a paragraph about a ‘naat’ – and as clerics staged protests the powerful POF management chose not only to expel the girl, but also to transfer her mother, a nurse at a hospital.

Such incidents have occurred elsewhere too. Ahmadi children have been punished in schools, their faith ridiculed and admission denied simply on the basis of their religious beliefs. Amidst all this, we talk of ‘the silent majority’. But do we really know what people believe and think?

It is true that many, indeed most, do not agree with the rabid views of the extremists. We would like to believe this is true. But popular thinking has been warped over the years by all kinds of factors that began essentially with the deliberate and evil distortions initiated in the early 1980s when our society first began its most serious transformation into an uglier, nastier place.

Discrimination is not based on religious beliefs alone. At an elite Lahore private school, a child from a different ethnic background was mocked and subjected to continuous ridicule for his appearance. It seems that the school management didn’t do very much to check this behaviour or persuade the majority of students who had resorted to uncivilised conduct towards the student to correct their ways.

Racism and bigotry of course need to be stopped using some degree of force within an environment in which the two have spread quite far and grown deep roots. African students based in colleges in Lahore and other cities will no doubt testify to the kind of treatment they face, solely on the basis of their skin colour.

One question that we all need to ask is why the government sits by as a silent spectator while all this happens. It needs to play a far more proactive role. We stand where we are today as a result of carefully thought out behaviours and policies put in place in the past. They succeeded in twisting minds and creating an atmosphere in which hatred, distrust and intolerence could blossom.

The need now is to begin an immediate reversal of this process. In the first place, the relevant authorities need to take notice of the instances of expulsion from schools on the basis of open and undisguised discrimination; this would put in place a good example of what should be done and where right separates from wrong, like oil from water.

There is no time to lose. It is quite obvious that things are growing worse and worse virtually by the day. Our only hope for the future lies in nurturing a generation that is able to think more openly and adopt an approach which is different to the destructive one that has become a normal part of our society today.

The provision that all citizens are equal needs to be turned into reality and not just a clause in a document that fewer and fewer people seem to be very bothered about.

How do we begin this? Schools are a good place to start. Government schools are perhaps the best, given the number of children attending them and the control the administration should have over them. Through curriculums and training for teachers, both children and those entrusted with the delicate task of educating them need to learn to think differently.

This is not an easy task of course. But it has been done elsewhere; Ireland, where Protestants and Catholics were deeply divided in the north for so many years, is one example where attempts towards greater harmony through schools have met with some success.

There are other examples in the world. We need to emulate them and move towards building a place where people are ready to speak out for what is right and refuse to allow extremist elements – who attempt to validate their intolerant ways by citing a distorted version of religion – to dictate how we live and what we do.

The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor. Email: kamilahyat@hotmail.com

Read original post here: Pakistan: Intolerance in the curriculum

An Ahmadi Muslim's Plea: Be My Voice

An Ahmadi Muslim's Plea: Be My Voice

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2011

An Ahmadi Muslim's Plea: Be My Voice

Unlike the general blasphemy laws, however, the specific anti-Ahmadi Muslim laws of Pakistan have not found even this much of luck. They have been conveniently forced out of the discussion and few are aware of the existence and continuous abuse of these draconian laws.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | US Desk

Source/Credit: The Huffington Post

By Kashif N. Chaudhry | October 10, 2011

Religious freedom (or the lack thereof) in Pakistan cannot be emphasized enough. Due to the preposterous demeanor of Pakistan's self-righteous right-wing, many in the world today are aware of Pakistan's notorious blasphemy problem. Much frustration has been expressed on liberal Pakistani blogs and through international media outlets -- especially after the heartless murders of Governor Salmaan Taseer and Minorities Minister Shahbaz Bhatti -- on the abuse of these laws. Even though nothing is expected to change anytime soon, at least the first vital step toward that goal is being taken: raising awareness.

Unlike the general blasphemy laws, however, the specific anti-Ahmadi Muslim laws of Pakistan have not found even this much of luck. They have been conveniently forced out of the discussion and few are aware of the existence and continuous abuse of these draconian laws. The silence of the liberal Pakistani blogosphere and the international media in this regard is baffling.

So who are the Ahmadi Muslims and what are these laws?

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community was founded in 1889 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908), who claimed to be the long-awaited messiah. Ahmad single-handedly waged a struggle to bring about a renaissance of Islam. He declared that in this age the doctrine of violent jihad was against the teachings of Islam, a declaration met with edicts of heresy. Ahmad urged Muslims to emulate Prophet Muhammad's example. Accordingly, Ahmadi Muslims champion a complete separation of mosque and state, promote universal human rights and interfaith dialogue and practice nonviolence and non-retaliation amid brutal persecution in parts of the world. There are more than 600,000 Ahmadi Muslims living in Pakistan with tens of millions in 200 countries.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA -- the oldest Islamic-American organization -- has helped foster the Islamic ideals of peace and loyalty to nation through its Muslims for Peace and Muslims for Loyalty campaigns, respectively. It recently launched the nationwide Muslims for Life blood drive campaign to commemorate 9/11 and demonstrate Islam's emphasis on sanctity of life. The Community's charity organization, Humanity First, has been at the forefront of disaster relief both nationally and worldwide. Help, for instance, continues to be dispensed to the victims of Hurricane Katrina to date. Ahmadi Muslims have a central leadership, the Khalifa.

It is not surprising, therefore, that Muslim clerics perceived the rapid spread of the Community in its early days as a threat. Having failed to defeat them through reason and discourse, they took to sticks and stones -- literally.

After the formation of Pakistan, anti-Ahmadi Muslim groups organized to conspire and instigate massive nationwide riots. Friday sermons became an opportunity to spew venom against the Ahmadi Muslims. They were declared "apostates" and "worthy of being killed." Extremist right-wing influence ushered in violent street protests. The State succumbed to their pressure tactics and declared the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community to be non-Muslim in 1974. In April of 1984, Pakistani President Zia-ul-Haq issued Ordinance XX. Zia was a military dictator who had taken over the country after a coup d'état in 1977. To legitimize his autocracy, he assumed de facto leadership of Pakistan's extremist cause. Because the hatred and violence had failed to halt the progress of the Ahmadi Muslims, he decided to use force.

Under the new laws, Ahmadi Muslims were arrested for using Islamic terminology. For example, saying the Salaam (greeting of peace) meant imprisonment. Thousands of Ahmadi Muslims filled jails across the country. On one side of prison sat rapists and murderers and on the other sat those who invoked peace on a passerby. The right-wing went on to demand the death penalty. Zia conceded and introduced the death penalty for propagation of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community and distribution of Ahmadi Muslim literature.

These barbaric anti-Ahmadi Muslim laws exist to date. Hundreds of Ahmadi Muslims remain behind bars in Pakistan -- and hundreds have been killed.

These vicious laws are a threat to international religious freedom. They continue to embolden religious extremists in other countries like Bangladesh and Indonesia where similar demands to outlaw the peaceful Ahmadi Muslims have been put before the governments. In the case of the latter, these demands have been accepted in part, setting in a fresh wave of violence (caution: graphic). Because the hatred against the Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan was promoted and not checked by the State, it continues to be exported as far out as the U.K.

Pakistani and International media make no mention of this dangerous state-sanctioned violation of religious freedom and basic human rights. Despite the fact that Pakistan's anti-Ahmadi Muslim laws are a blatant breach of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there has been no outcry from the United Nations either.

United States' foreign policy recognizes religious freedom worldwide as one of its goals. While the persecution of Ahmadi Muslims gained momentum under Zia, the United States -- a close ally -- was busy funding his government and supporting the Afghan revolution. The plight of the Ahmadi Muslims went unnoticed. Three decades later, it is very encouraging that the U.S. State Department's International Religious Freedom Report 2010 on Pakistan takes serious exception to Pakistan's anti-Ahmadi Muslim laws. Much, however, needs to be done to effect a change on ground. I am hopeful that as a primary supporter of international religious freedom, the U.S. will continue to play a positive role to this end.

Meanwhile, please join me in doing the least we can do: take that first step toward change: raise awareness.

Follow Kashif N. Chaudhry on Twitter: www.twitter.com/KashifMD

Read original post here: An Ahmadi Muslim's Plea: Be My Voice

http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.com/2011/10/pakistan-state-supported-anti-ahmadiyya.html

http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.com/2011/10/pakistan-state-supported-anti-ahmadiyya.html

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2011

Pakistan: State-supported anti-Ahmadiyya agitation in Azad Jammu and Kashmir

Choudhry Abdul Majeed, the prime minister of AJ&K, recently visited a religious madrasa at Faizpur and made uncalled for remarks against the Ahmadiyya community, it was reported in the media.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Int'l Desk

Source/Credit: AMC Persecution report

Edited by Imran Jattala | October 12, 2011

AJ&K: Although a new government has taken over after the general elections, the sectarian and extremist elements have not only maintained their agitation against the Ahmadiyya community but also have raised its level to a threatening point.

The anti-Ahmadiyya agitations take place with the collusion of ruling politicians.

Choudhry Abdul Majeed, the prime minister of AJ&K, recently visited a religious madrasa at Faizpur and made inappropriate remarks against the Ahmadiyya community, the media reported.

"Qadianis’ activities will be watched in Azad Kashmir – Ch. Abdul Majeed," the headline read in the daily Nawa-i-Waqt, Rawalpindi, on September 9, 2011.

“Muslim children should never be taught by Qadiani teachers (in public schools)," said Mulla Atiq-ur-Rehman, a member of the legislative assembly (MLA), who runs the Islamic madrasa, it was reported on the same occasion..

"Qadianis can exist here only as a non Muslim minority. … They are not allowed to practice Islam. (etc),” Mulla Atiq-ur-Rehman further said according to the newspaper report.

The Director of Public Affairs in the Ahmadiyya head office at Rabwah, Mr. Saleem-ud Din, strongly condemed the incident and sent letters of complaint to the President of Pakistan and to the President of Azad Kashmir.

"For some time now there has been increase in organized anti-Ahmadiyya activities in Azad Kashmir," the complant letter stated.

"...these elements have been patronized by the government of Azad Kashmir," Mr. Mr. Saleem-ud Din said.

"Ch. Abdul Majeed the prime minister of AJ&K and Pir Atiq ur Rehman, member of the AJ&K Assembly and President of Jamiat Ulama Jammu and Kashmir are in the lead of such activities in public rallies," the complaint included.

Most Muslim clerics feel free in Pakistan to issue edicts declaring anyone Wajib-ul-Qatl (must be put to death).

There are no laws against such declarations and hate incitements and many Wajib-ul-Qatl edicts are often followed up by target killings.

While Ahmadis are the usual victims of this violent indiscretion, non-Ahmadis also are targeted.

Governor Salman Taseer was was one such victom in recent past.

-- Ahmadiyya Times

-- By Imran Jattala. Follow on twitter @IJattala

Mohammed Yusuf Saraf, Kashmir’s Fight for Freedom

 "Kashmir's Fight for Freedom" by Mohammed Yusuf Saraf, who rose to become the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of "Azad" Jammu Kashmir (AJK).

“A large number of tribals, without wasting any time, arraigned themselves against the people of Baramulla and within a few hours many buildings were gutted. Houses built of pucca bricks were forcibly entered into and plundered, the inhabitants being held in thrall at the pain of death. Scores of houses on the left bank of Jhelum were burnt to ashes.”

“The Mother Superior of St. Joseph Hospital, three nuns and a British couple staying there were slain. Three of my Hindu neighbours – Shambhu Nath, Ved Lal and Arjan Nath – schoolteachers all, were murdered. As far as looting and arson went, no distinction was made between Hindus and Muslims.”

“For instance, when a tribal started to forcibly snatch away a blanket from a poor weaver called Ghani – the father of four daughters – he asked him, “Is it for this purpose that you have come to Kashmir?” Ghani was shot dead on the spot. The local cinema hall was turned into a veritable brothel. Exercising abundant caution, a well to do family sent all its women out of town. Due to some reason, one daughter-in-law of the house was unfortunately left behind. When a tribal spotted her, he ordered her to the camp. Displaying presence of mind, the girl sought permission to don new clothes and to carry her jewellery. The permission was granted. The girl entered a large room where fodder for horses was stored. She set the fodder on fire and herself jumped in. Not only the girl and her house, two hundred other houses of the mohalla were reduced to ashes.”

“A city dweller named Rasul, who owned an oil press, invited two hundred tribals for dinner. After having eaten, the ‘guests’ demanded women. Fortunately all women had been sent out earlier and there was just an old granny in the house. The tribal went away in thorough disgust.”

“The Kashmiri Pandit women wear a particular piece of jewellery in their ears which is never taken off during the lifetime of their husbands. The tribals, without giving them the opportunity to remove these themselves, tore at them mercilessly, leaving the ears of the women spouting blood.”

“While plundering houses, they did not stop only at cash and jewellery. Samovars and brass utensils were also looted, thinking them to be made of gold. Some tribals were seen wearing ferans that are the particular apparel of women.”

(Mohammed Yusuf Saraf, Kashmir’s Fight for Freedom, p.906-908) 

Baramullah's population of 14,000 before the invasion of October 22 1947 was reduced to 1,000 by the time the Indian Army freed it in the first week of November. The men had been killed. Something like 4,000-5,000 women of all communities had been transported back in lorries to be sold in markets in Peshawar, Rawalpindi etc. I have said this on the basis of my readings of the newspapers of the time etc but would much appreciate any further references.

Akbar Khan's *Raiders in Kashmir*- The Hurriyat's denial of it is therefore their central falsehood

Former President of Muslim League, Sardar Shoukat Hayat Khan, gave major details about the tribal invasion in an interview with Daily Jung, London in April 1995. Later his book ‘The Nation that Lost Its Soul’ and its Urdu translation ‘Gum Gashta Qaum’ were published and appeared in the market. Sample some excerpts from the book of Sardar Shoukat Hayat Khan:

“I was appointed supervisor of the Kashmir Operation. I requisitioned the services of Brigadier Sher Khan and Brigadier Akbar Khan. Both were from 6/13 Frontier Force (Puffers). We also requested that we be supplied with the guns of local make like the ones that were in the Lahore Fort. Apart from this we also included former INA general Kayani, Colonel Dara and Taj Khanzada in this expedition.”

(Gum Gashta Qaum, p.278)

“ Taj Khanzada was appointed Commander of Baramulla and General Kayani was entrusted with the job of breaching Kathua road, so that Akhnoor be taken over and the land link between India and Kashmir snapped.

“At this time Ghulam Mohammed, the Finance Minister of Pakistan, recommended the inclusion of a relative of his in the High Command. This was Major Khurshid Anwar, a reserve officer of the Railway Battalion who had – during the time of the referendum in NorthWest Frontier Province – played truant as the Commander of Muslim League National Guard. His sole qualification was that he and Ghulam Mohammed were cousins. I rejected this recommendation on the grounds that I could not entrust military command to a non-military person. But Ghulam Mohammed (Finance Minister) and Liaqat Ali Khan insisted that his inclusion be accepted to make the National Guard happy.

(ibid, p.218)

“We selected the tribes near the Black Mountains of Swat to occupy the frontier mountain ranges of Kashmir. We also decided to keep tribes of other areas out of this war to maintain the element of a surprise, sudden attack and the secrecy required for the same.”

“We had decided upon a date in September as the D-Day. It came to be known that Khurshid Anwar had gone missing. He had married a Muslim League woman worker in Peshawar and disappeared for his honeymoon.”

“I reached the Muzaffarabad border, beyond which I did no have permission to go lest a Pakistani Minister be arrested in Kashmir. This war had to be seen as a popular uprising.”

“At Baramulla, the tribals refused to take orders from Khurshid Anwar. The tribals started treating the three lakh rupees from the treasury as their own ….. during this time they started looting the locals. The lockets and collars of the nuns of Baramulla Convent were snatched. The tribals went on a looting spree in the market. Thus, precious time was lost.

We lost Kashmir due to our own follies.”

(ibid, p.280)

Sardar Shoukat Hayat Khan makes a surprising revelation in his book. Lord Mountbatten had come to Lahore for a meeting with Liaqat Ali Khan. After dinner Mountbatten told Liaqat Ali Khan that he was carrying the message from the Iron Man of India, Sardar Patel, that Pakistan should get out of Hyderabad and Junagarh since both were Hindu majority states and had no overland link with Pakistan. In return India would withdraw its forces from Kashmir which could then accede to Pakistan.

Shoukat Hayat says that after conveying this message, Mountbatten retired for the night to the Government House, while two or three of us colleagues stayed back. We went up to Liaqat Ali Khan and said to him that we may consider Patel’s proposal regarding the exchange of Hyderabad in lieu of Kashmir, since we did not have a just claim on Hyderabad in any case.

Turning to me, Liaqat Ali Khan replied: Sardar Sahib, do you think I have lost my mind to accept the proposal and give up Hyderabad, which is bigger than Punjab province, for a few mountains of Kashmir?

(ibid, p. 280, 281)

Stating the reasons for the tribal incursion into Kashmir, Sardar Shoukat Hayat Khan writes:

“India accepted the Security Council resolution as per which the decision about Kashmir had to be arrived at through a referendum. It kept on putting off this referendum on one or the other pretext. Even after assuring the United Nations on oath, it reneged on its decision to hold a plebiscite. We saw through the deceit of India and the Maharaja and decided to enter Kashmir.”

(ibid, p.278)

Subroto Roy Mr Kaul, thank you *very much* for this addition. Akbar Khan's *Raiders in Kashmir* needs to be uploaded onto the Internet for all too. The attack changed everything in Kashmir; it was because of the attack that Hari Singh and Sh Abdullah came together and allied themselves with one another and with India; it is because of the attack that the history and present of Kashmir has been what it is. The Hurriyat's denial of it is therefore their central falsehood, since that is the basis for India and Pakistan carving up by military contest the ownerless anarchic territory that Dogra J&K had become.

US senator McCain arrives in Kashmir - Hindustan Times

US senator McCain arrives in Kashmir - Hindustan Times

US senator John McCain arrived in Kashmir on Tuesday just two days after visiting Pakistan and meeting its top political leadership, including Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari. McCain, who was a presidential candidate in the previous US polls, arrived in Srinagar in a special US plan

on Tuesday. The US senator's visit has come as a shot in the arm of the chief minister Omar Abdullah-led J-K government as the republican leader avoided meeting any separatist leaders, including moderate Hurriyat chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq.

The Mirwaiz, who seeks the US intervention in the Kashmir problem, has been for years now harping on "use of US good offices to push India into a dialogue to resolve the problem". The Mirwaiz was unavailable for his comments.

McCain, at present a member of the US Senate Armed Services Committee and ardent opponent of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, met governor NN Vohra earlier in the day.

"During the wide ranging discussions lasting for about two hours, McCain and the state governor exchanged views on various important issues of mutual interest," said a Raj Bhawan spokesman without divulging details of the contents of the discussion.

Significantly, the meeting was attended by top army official, including Northern Army Commander Lt General K. T. Parnaik and Corps Commander, XV Corps Lt. General SA Hasnain.

The Republican leader, who went for sightseeing on the banks of Dal Lake, also met Abdullah in the afternoon at his residence. Both engaged in a discussion about the prevailing ground situation in Kashmir and the security scenario.

Hardline Hurriyat chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani downplayed the US senator's decision not meet separatists. "India is trying to use its influence over the US. The senator visiting Kashmir and not meeting freedom fighters is not bothering. Our struggle is just and for the basic right to self-determination, which has been snatched and suppressed at the gun point by India," said Geelani.

Geelani said "it's moral responsibility upon the US to support genuine people's movement and the majority sentiment of the people of Kashmir if it claims to be a democracy". "Whether the US support us or not, we will continue our struggle for justice and for right to self determination," said Geelani.

McCain is scheduled to visit a temple tomorrow in Srinagar and will leave thereafter.

How fair Is PDP a “mainstream party” posing to compete with NC’s Greater Autonomy in the name of Self Rule ? By *Daya Sagar

A Look Through the Mist

No one appears to be serious for immediate settlement of J&K turmoil

How fair Is PDP a “mainstream party” posing to compete with NC’s Greater Autonomy in the name of Self Rule ? By *Daya Sagar

In Jammu and Kashmir Mufti Mohd Sayeed has the first rival in National Conference. No

doubt so far NC has held firm to 1947 accession of J&K with India. No doubt NC has been expressing

reservations regarding the Center State relations. Mirza Afzal Baig had lead the Plebiscite Front that was

later disbanded after 1975 Indira Sheikh Accord. Confusions and anti India concepts did nurish more

further since even after 1990 no sincere efforts were made by New Delhi and local political cadres in

Kashmir valley to check the separatist ideologists. Governments have not been able to reverse the

1989/ 90 mass migration from Kashmir valley Due to this the local information bank of the people

left back in Kashmir valley has surely moved some distance from oneness with India. Rather it could

also be inferred that some so called mainstream elements too advocate separatist view points /

demands. National Conference had already passed a “Greater Autonomy Resolution in 1994’ . Later NC

lead government had got a resolution on similar lines passed by J&K Assembly in 2000. In simple words

the June 2000 Autonomy Resolution of JK Legislative Assembly is more understood by common man as

moving to pre 1953 constitutional position. Under the circumstances the separatists/ those who talked of

referendum or plebiscite did not have much opposition to face.

So Mufti Mohd Sayeed too found it saleable for coming up with “Self Rule promise”. Some people

named PDP Self Rule as replica of the formulae that Pak President Parvez Musharraf is said to have

suggested . Mufti Mohd Sayeed has not so far out rightly rejected such allegations.

Congress lead Government at New Delhi too did not distance from PDP and kept on sharing power

in JK with PDP till 200 8. It was here that PDP got encouraged and to out beat National Conference it

suggested that (i) the currencies of both India and Pakistan should be used in J&K and PAK ( POK) (ii)

there should be common control of Indian and Pakistan on certain subjects as would pertain to J&K and

PAK (POK). PDP even used the term Pakistan Administered Kashmir in place of Pakistan Occupied

Kashmir and New Delhi still “recognizes “ PDP as main stream political party. May be now need has

arisen to even rework the definition of a main stream political party.

In Kashmir Valley PDP did succeed in sentimentally exploiting the innocent Kashmiri masses in particular

and in 2008 assembly elections proved tough on Congress & NC. PDP did not dare to adopt openly

anti accession approach like JKLF / Hurriyat since that way it would lose chances of power rides. PDP did

not refute accession in plain words but it asked some thing like joint control of India & Pakistan

over J&K well knowing that it was not possible without out undoing 1947 accession with India.

After having established some roots in Kashmir, PDP leaders understood that to remain in the political

power race ( local) PDP has to make its stand on the 1947 Accession clear so that even the “blunt”

sword of New Delhi does not fall on its head. So it was after more than 5 years that Mehbooba Mufti

Create PDF with PDF4U. If you wish to remove this line, please click here to purchase the full version

tried to introduce PDP Self Rule with in the scope of 1947 Instrument of Accession and the

Constitution of India. But still to people of J&K ( Kashmir Valley in particular ) PDP has introduced

Self Rule more a personal rule of Kashmiries than the Greater autonomy of National Conference.

PDP has very cleverly taken to with 1947 Accession talk track after having sufficiently exploited the

sentiments / emotions of innocent Kashmiri around Pakistan/ Two Nation theory. PDP has even succeeded

in setting some working roots in Jammu region. Under the circumstances to compete with Mehbooba

Mufti politically now Omar Abdullah too is playing soft on the separatists and separatist

ideologies .

The Mehbooba Mufti and Mufti Mohd Sayeed have been wisely changing tracks to retain the

goodwill of the common Kashmiri masses as well as those at New Delhi. PDP leadership also wants

to remain at the international scene not much behind the separatists and hence occasionally also

advocates early settlement of Kashmir issue (dispute ).

It was on 9th July2009 that Peoples Democratic Party in a special meeting where Party Patron Mufti

Mohammad Sayeed, Party presidentMehbooba Mufti and Muzaffar Hussain Baig were present

expressed that PDP Self Rule flows through Article 370 and Instrument of Accession.

Introducing the Self Rule Muzaffar Hussain Baig said

 (i) “Self rule was provided to the State in Instrument of Accession but later on it was snatched and taken back from Jammu Kashmir by the Government of India, 

(ii) PDP now wants it to be back ,

 (iii) even the sovereignty of the State was maintained in Delhi agreement made

between Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and GOI (Jawahar Lal Nehru ) and

 (iv) it was agreed by GOI that

the controversial Article 356 of Indian Constitution won’t be applicable to JK by which New Delhi has the

powers to dismiss an elected State government”. As regards some constitutional roll backs demanded by

PDP ( Article 356, application of Article 357 by which New Delhi has powers to make legislation in place of State legislature, Article 249 of Indian Constitution (by which New-Delhi can legislate on JK, Constitutional Order 101 was promulgated by the President under Article 370 adding Clause 4 in Article 368 prohibiting JK from changing the powers or privileges of Governor , Article 312 dealing with ‘All India Services’ , deletion of words ‘temporary’ from Article 370, and like ) a legitimate debate could be allowed with out

any questions on the Accession 1947 and Nationality of Kashmiri being India. But the style of references

made to 1947 Accession , Pakistan Occupied Kashmir as Pak Administered Kashmir , use of both Indo Pak

currencies in only J&K and dual Indo Pak control on some local matters pertaining to J&K and Pak held

part of J&K no where qualify to be within the scope of 1947 Accession and article 370 of constitution of

India . Such demands and explanations for Self Rule surely push PDP out of the scope to qualify as

a mainstream political party of India ( While talking to newsmen M. H Baig had said “Self Rule addresses the problem of JK in four different dimensions, which includes New Delhi-State relations; relations between the two divided parts of JK, resource sharing including trade, transport and other issues; relations between Pakistan and PaK and Inter-regional and sub-regional issues” ) .

( PDP claims that in 1947 it was envisioned that the final decision regarding accession has to be reached by the State Constituent Assembly and later on Constituent Assembly ratified Instrument of Accession, so now there is no need to have the word ‘temporary’ along with Article 370 ).

.No doubt National Conference did ask for Greater Autonomy but never went for a mass agitation

movement. So , Kashmir today is disturbed not for implementation of autonomy resolution2000. Neither

NC did much of work to carry the message of greater autonomy to ground level masses , particularly in

Jammu and Ladakh Regions. The same has been the case with the Self Rule of PDP. Kashmiries are not

agitating and protesting demanding PDP Self Rule . PDP well knows that t its Self Rule Road map

for peace would not fit in the frame 1947 accession and Indian constitution. But surely with such

approach PDP has created some extra pressures on NC in Kashmir valley.

Now PDP has started comparing its Self Rule with Greater Autonomy of NC.. People in Kashmir valley

are too simple to understand the technicalities and rhetoric.

The separatist ideologies are being carried ( though mildly) by PDP vociferously indirectly taking

Create PDF with PDF4U. If you wish to remove this line, please click here to purchase the full version

support from slogans of Kashmiriat / erosion of autonomy, 1952 Delhi Agreement, 1975 Indira Sheikh

accord and 1987 Rajiv Farooq Accord. Kashmiries have also seen Farooq (Abdullah) &. ( 0mar ) Farooq accord.

Experiences have shown that some Kashmiri leaders will do their best to keep New Delhi under pressure

for money and power. Separatists too need some social survival and the pro separatist actions of

some ‘main stream” parties would surely allow them to defer violent protests/ approach. In case

PDP is so loyal to the cause of the people of J&K ( Kashmiries ) why does not it work for an “alloy” of

Greater Autonomy and Self Rule with in the provisions of only Indian Constitution? Any how Kashmiri

leaders will keep on saying that India and Pakistan should settle the Kashmir ( J&K) affairs with due

participation of Kashmiries including separatists. In principle they keep their priority only on Kashmir Valley centric requirements . No doubt they do pose looking for some solution for governance taking the people of all the regions of J&K in confidence. So ,on the face of it they do not appear to be serious for any immediate solution since to majority of Kashmiri leaders more benefit appears in continuing confusions / uncertainty and not in settlement of any doubts /

confusions. 

*( Daya Sagar is social activist and leading scribe on Kashmir affairs)