Sunday, September 29, 2019

Imran Khan's UNGA Speech on Hindutva, Islamophobia and Kashmir (Urdu)

How was Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan's UN General Assembly speech received? Was he right to tell the audience that Prime Minister Narendra Modi belongs to RSS, the right-wing Hindu Supremacist organization whose member killed Mahatma Gandhi? Does the world know that RSS founders were inspired by Nazism and Fascism? And the RSS members admire Gandhi's murderer Nathuram Godse? Is it hypocritical of Modi to exploit Gandhi's name in his UNGA speech and elsewhere in the West? Do Hindutva followers want to have it both ways? Benefit from Gandhi's name in the West while destroying Gandhi's legacy in India?



Why did Imran Khan talk about the connection between US war on terror after 911 and the rise of Islamophobia? How have countries like India exploited the war on terror to defame genuine Kashmiri resistance movement as terrorism?

What will happen when Modi lifts restrictions on 8 million Kashmiris living under total lock-down since August 5, 2019? Is Modi riding the tiger and afraid of getting off of it? Is Imran Khan right to fear a massacre by nearly million-strong Indian forces? Will India call it "cross-border terrorism" and blame it on Pakistan? Will Modi again try to pull a Balakot? Could it start India-Pakistan war? Would it escalate into a nuclear conflict killing billions around the world?

ALKS host Faraz Darvesh discusses these questions with Sabahat Ashraf (ifaqeer) and Riaz Haq (www.riazhaq.com)

https://youtu.be/Kz8S8z-ax1o




Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Rape as a Political Weapon Used By Hindutva

Hindu Nationalism Inspired By Nazism, Fascism

Rise of Islamophobia After Sept 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks

700,000 Indian Soldiers Versus 7 Million Kashmiris

Modi's Kashmir Blunder and India-Pakistan Nuclear Conflict

Is India a Paper Elephant? 

Howdy Modi Rally Exposes Indian-Americans to Charges of Hypocrisy

Modi's Extended Lockdown in Indian Occupied Kashmir

Hinduization of India

Brievik's Hindutva Rhetoric

Indian Textbooks

India's RAW's Successes in Pakistan

Riaz Haq Youtube Channel

VPOS Youtube Channel

12 comments:

Riaz Haq said...

Indian Analyst Pratap Bhanu Mehta: Winning #Kashmir and Losing #India. How #Modi Is Gutting Indian #Democracy. Triumphalism in #India is the final blow in a long series of betrayals and humiliations meted out to #Muslims in Kashmir https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/2019-09-20/winning-kashmir-and-losing-india

The abrogation of Article 370 has worrying consequences beyond Kashmir, revealing a country where there are fewer and fewer checks on the writ of the prime minister. The BJP government claims that the move represents the will of Parliament, since it was confirmed through bills in both the upper and lower houses of the legislature. But that formalism cannot hide two dangerous trends: the weakening of all independent institutions in India and the marginalization of Indian Muslims.

Indian democracy has always been messy, but the fragmentation of power across political parties and institutions has helped provide checks and balances against untrammelled executive might. Recent years have witnessed a troubling consolidation of power. Politically, the opposition is weak and divided. Modi and the Hindu nationalist BJP face no strong challenge from their political rivals. The rudderless Congress Party—the center-left, secular party that has ruled India for most of its existence—is mired in an internal leadership battle and is divided on the issue of Article 370, unable to mount an effective ideological resistance to Modi. Many regional parties, such as the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party in Uttar Pradesh, were decimated in the last election; the Trinamool Congress, which holds sway over West Bengal, also suffered surprising defeats to the BJP. Enfeebled and embattled, regional parties cannot provide a much-needed check on central power.

More tellingly, the opposition doesn’t have the intellectual self-confidence to take on the rising tide of nationalism stoked by the BJP, even when that ideology threatens core constitutional values. Nothing exemplifies this failure better than the hypocritical conduct of the Aam Admi Party, which rules in the capital city of Delhi and sits with the opposition in Parliament. This party had no compunctions in signing off on Modi’s plan to downgrade Kashmir from a state to a union territory even as the party campaigns for Delhi to be transformed from a union territory to a state. Modi’s nationalism has thrown the entire opposition into a kind of intellectual stupor, in which it is unable to defend democratic values.

Timidity and weakness are not the opposition’s only problems; it also lacks credibility. Several major opposition figures face corruption charges, notably the former finance minister and Congress Party leader P. Chidambaram, who was arrested in August under suspicion of embezzlement and money laundering. Security agencies like the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation were never entirely impartial under previous governments, but Modi’s government uses them to target political opponents at an unprecedented level. The public sees these prosecutions not as malicious abuses of state power but as part of the prime minister’s drive to create a new India by uprooting the corrupt old order—in other words, as of a piece with his actions in Kashmir. By ensnaring the opposition in a discourse of corruption, Modi has effectively blunted its voice. As a result, many opposition leaders feel compelled to redeem themselves by taking strongly nationalist positions.

The decimation of the political opposition has been accompanied by the erosion of independent institutions. Many Indians are fond of describing the country’s Supreme Court as “the most powerful court in the world” because of its independence and authority; K. K. Venugopal, the attorney general, praised the relationship of the court to the state in 2017, insisting that “the government of the day has always shown respect to this institution.”

Riaz Haq said...

Indian Analyst Pratap Bhanu Mehta: Winning #Kashmir and Losing #India. How #Modi Is Gutting Indian #Democracy. Triumphalism in #India is the final blow in a long series of betrayals and humiliations meted out to #Muslims in Kashmir https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/2019-09-20/winning-kashmir-and-losing-india


The decimation of the political opposition has been accompanied by the erosion of independent institutions. Many Indians are fond of describing the country’s Supreme Court as “the most powerful court in the world” because of its independence and authority; K. K. Venugopal, the attorney general, praised the relationship of the court to the state in 2017, insisting that “the government of the day has always shown respect to this institution.” But it increasingly seems that the Supreme Court and other high courts, in their deference to the state’s executive power, have virtually abdicated their responsibilities to defend core constitutional values. The courts have delayed hearings on habeas corpus cases in Kashmir and declined to scrutinize the government’s mass detentions in the recently downgraded territory. The courts have also denied opposition leaders the same protocols of bail that would have been granted to normal citizens.

The weakening of judicial independence stems from the government’s attempt to enlist all of the country’s independent institutions in the project of Hindu nationalism. In addition to the courts, the government has sought to exercise more direct control over public universities, where it has become routine for critics of the BJP to be disinvited or “deplatformed.” In some cases, the government has even delayed the publication of economic data to muzzle talk of the country’s slowdown. Owners of media companies and editors critical of the government fear being targeted by the state. In short, the “integration of Kashmir” is happening against the wider backdrop of Modi’s push for nationalist conformity, his attempt to create a nation marching to one tune and one purpose. But beneath the symbolic shows of unity is the fearful vision of a republic where dissenters are at risk, where the opposition and media are gagged, and where normal institutional protections are fast vanishing.

Converting Kashmir into a union territory was a show of brute majoritarianism, a demonstration that India can downgrade its only Muslim-majority state. As such, it fits a pattern of the further marginalization of Muslims under the current government. In recent years, there has been a spike in religious hate crimes, including the lynching of Muslims by vigilante Hindu mobs for the alleged sin of possessing and eating beef. In a pending court case that could add to the tensions, the Supreme Court may very well allow the construction of a temple on the supposed birthplace of the Hindu holy figure Ram, where in 1992 Hindu nationalists demolished a mosque and sparked communal riots across the country. The government correctly outlawed the Muslim practice of triple talaq, in which men could divorce their wives by simply repeating the word for “divorce” three times, but that move may presage the abolition of Muslim Personal Law, India’s separate civil code for Muslims that governs marriage, divorce, and inheritance in accordance with some aspects of Islamic law.

Away from Kashmir, another case of state power threatens to upend hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives. In the eastern state of Assam, the government, acting in accordance with a Supreme Court order, has identified nearly two million residents as foreigners, not listing them in the National Register of Citizens. This immense cataloguing effort began four decades ago as part of an attempt to track illegal migration into India from what is now Bangladesh. Though both Hindus and Muslims have been stripped of citizenship, Hindu nationalist groups have asked the Modi government to restore the citizenship of the Hindus swept up in this process. Many Muslims may remain excluded from citizenship, rendered stateless, and forced into detention camps.

Anonymous said...

One thing is clear, IK is not a mere politician but a statesman. While the other side was busy advertising their country and telling the world about toilet success, IK was talking about the issues facing the world today.
Zamir

samir sardana said...

Rajnath Singh says that Hindooosthan will rescind its commitment to NFU.

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/rajnath-singh-sparks-debate-on-no-first-use-nuclear-doctrine-1565978545173.html

1st these Hindoos alomgwith Mossad and CIA bombed Pakistani Military institutions and bases,defamed Pakistani N- Scientists etc., to convince the world about the rogue nukes theory (like a no brain Bollywood Movie).When all that failed - id.est.,the P-Nukes are safe in Pakistani hands - these Hindoos have dropped out of NFU or are looking for an excuse to do so.

Is that a surprise ?

Nein ! The word Hindoo means liar,cheater and thief ! dindooohindoo

https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Y-Educate-Cheats.htm

The wisdom of the "children of Cyrus,Darius and Xerxes",encapsulates the "transcendence of Human thought", the "Deuterosis of the Dindoo", as under:

A "Persian dictionary",titled "Lughet-e-Kishwari",published in Lucknow in 1964,gives the meaning of the word Hindu as “chore [thief], dakoo [dacoit],raahzan [waylayer], and ghulam [slave].

The white man needs to understand the psyche of the Hindooo !

Their Hero is a man called Rama,who was called an impotent gay pansy,by his wife Seeta !

This man Rama who Hindoos consider as a God used an army of apes to make a bridge to Lanka which took 12 years to make !(Rama did not use Hindos or Humans)

This man Rama,used an army of millions of apes to rescue his wife from Lanka (Rama did not use Hindos or Humans) !

This man Rama,whose wife was airlifted by a Lankan King and taken to Lanka in a few minutes - could not fly to Lanka (although he was a God) for 12 years !

This man Rama,could not make a ship for 12 years (when his wife was in the custody of a Lanka King) to transport his army of apes and rescue his wife !

The Hindoos are a race of cowards,and it is cowards which use Nukes as a 1st use option.

These Hindoos are a threat to the world !

The UN and G-7 have to control these apes !

Riaz Haq said...

Has #Modi's trip to #UnitedStates and #UnitedNations internationalized #Kashmir issue? Watch Karan Thapar discuss it. https://youtu.be/mBraz4BYMhs

Riaz Haq said...

No #trade deal, no #Kashmir win, no #investment in #India but #BJP celebrating #Modi return from #UnitedStates https://theprint.in/opinion/no-trade-deal-no-kashmir-win-no-investment-but-bjp-celebrating-modi-return-from-us/298552/ via @ThePrintIndia

rime Minister Narendra Modi Saturday returned home to a rousing welcome from BJP party workers and supporters despite not having secured the much-touted trade deal with the US. Also, the issue of Kashmir became further complicated between him and US President Donald Trump despite a massive spectacle of bonhomie between the two leaders at ‘Howdy, Modi!’.

Prime Minister Modi scored clear nil in the most contentious issue of trade during his weeklong trip to America. Trade has undoubtedly become an unavoidable stumbling block in the relationship, even as both sides continue to fiercely fight out trade disputes at the World Trade Organization (WTO).

While it is true that Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal continues to brainstorm along with US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer in Washington DC, a so-called ‘limited’ trade deal remains as elusive as it was before Modi’s visit.


When the Modi government came back to power for the second time with a landslide victory earlier this year, the US was clearly not amused. Within days of the government settling into office, the Trump administration cracked the whip on India in May and revoked the trade benefits given under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) programme. The US was threatening to do so since before the elections. This was an unprecedented act on US’ part because ever since the GSP programme started in 1974, it was never taken away from India.

It is true that previous US administrations, particularly the Barack Obama administration, did threaten to revoke it, but in reality, it never walked the talk much to India’s relief.

India, on the other hand, whether it was under former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh or under Prime Minister Modi, has always claimed, rather arrogantly, that the withdrawal of GSP did not impact India’s foreign trade much. New Delhi’s public posturing has always been that the GSP, or tariff-free access to US markets for Indian goods, is not really needed as India is not an underdeveloped country anymore.

Indian shipments under GSP programme get a benefit of around $6.4 billion, which is now gone. It was widely expected that the GSP would be restored during Prime Minister Modi’s trip, and it seemed all the more plausible after ‘Howdy, Modi!’, but eventually it turned out to be a damp squib.

This despite Trump being a “true, warm, friendly and accessible” friend of Modi’s.

Prime Minister Modi was not even able to restore a waiver from US’ high duties on Indian shipments of steel and aluminium during his mega visit.

Riaz Haq said...

What is the view of the Pakistan Army about the possibility of a nuclear war with India?
An excerpt from Shuja Nawaz ‘The Battle for Pakistan’ examining the strategic thinking about a potential war.


https://scroll.in/article/939003/what-is-the-view-of-the-pakistan-army-about-the-possibility-of-a-nuclear-war-with-india


India continues to publicly disavow the premise of Cold Start, that its forward-deployed Integrated Battle Groups could move rapidly into Pakistani territory, capture key cities and territory and make Pakistan sue for terms. Pakistan continues to see this as an emerging threat and considers the 1980s thinking that led to the Brasstacks exercise as a testing of the idea of such rapid combined manoeuvres designed to hit Pakistan at multiple points of vulnerability in a modern version of the German blitzkrieg.

It countered with an offensive-defensive approach that was based on hitting India in response with a counter-strike and capturing key territory for itself. Its conventional riposte, based on a net-centric doctrine of well-planned counterattacks, was bolstered over time by the testing and development of a tactical nuclear capability by Pakistan (countered by India). This took the form of short-range so-called tactical weapons mounted on ballistic and cruise missiles, adding to the potential for a nuclear holocaust in the region with global consequences.

---------------

Loosely translated, this means that Pakistani forces can blunt any conventional Indian attack and respond effectively by undertaking its own offensive actions into Indian territory. All under a nuclear overhang.

Pakistan’s new army doctrine recognises a wider spectrum of conflict that includes sub-conventional warfare in addition to conventional warfare that, in turn, includes low-intensity operations, conventional war and nuclear warfare. The latter is aimed at complementing comprehensive deterrence and adding to the combat potential of the regular forces, leading to a potentially heavy cost for any aggressor. Nuclear war is seen “only as a last resort”.

Moreover, while conventional warfare is to be conducted under the devolved authority given by the National Command Authority to the military high command, the decision to go to nuclear war can only be initiated by the civilian authority under “the exclusive right of the NCA headed by the prime minister”. But no one has any doubts that should India launch a serious and deep conventional strike into Pakistan, the army would take the lead in deciding how to respond rapidly, with or without formal approval by the NCA.


Increasingly, Pakistan sees itself subject to potentially hostile activity from India, under the assumption that a sort of nuclear parity has led to maintenance of the status quo.
So, it expects India (the unnamed South Asian foe in its new Army doctrine) to synchronise activities at various levels to: “subtly erode [Pakistan’s]...national resilience and force compliance”. India’s willingness to bear the cost of war will help define the intensity, scale and nature of any future conflict, according to this view.

At the same time, Pakistan’s own calculations rest on the intensity of a nuclear exchange that would be Counter Value in nature rather than Counter Force. Potentially, ten major Indian urban centres and all seven of Pakistan’s major cities might be the targets in a nuclear exchange. The end result would be the destruction of large tracts of India and most of Pakistani territory, and the release of dust and debris into the atmosphere that would travel eastwards, eventually covering the entire Northern Hemisphere. In effect, Nuclear Winter could descend on the northern half of the globe for as much as six months. India’s own calculations may well mirror those of Pakistan.

Riaz Haq said...

In #Indian Occupied #Kashmir, #ImranKhan’s #UNGA speech was welcomed with processions, pro-azadi songs. “Imran Khan has hit six sixes on six balls,” said an elderly resident of Srinagar’s Saida Kadal locality. https://scroll.in/article/939128/kashmir-imran-khans-un-speech-was-welcomed-with-processions-pro-azadi-songs via @scroll_in

He was referring to Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 27. In a 50-minute-long speech, the Pakistan cricketer-turned-politician had segued from climate change to Islamophobia and then dwelt at length on the situation in Kashmir. He spoke of the detentions and clampdown in Kashmir after August 5, when the Indian government revoked special status under Article 370 and split the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. He also warned of war between India and Pakistan should the current tensions escalate.

For weeks, residents of the Kashmir Valley had eagerly anticipated Khan’s speech. Days after it was delivered, a spokesman for the Jammu and Kashmir administration dismissed it as a “story of falsehoods”. But for most audiences in the Valley, the speech was a hit.

“He exposed India to the world,” said Ghulam Mohammad, a cleric from the northern district of Baramulla. “The way he spoke of Kashmir and the situation here, it just struck a chord with every Kashmiri. For around two months, Kashmiris had found themselves buried in a blackhole. They were dejected. When Khan spoke, Kashmiris felt there’s someone to talk about them.”

He also welcomed Khan’s attempt to explain the message of Islam. “The issue of Islamophobia needed to be addressed by Muslim leaders and Khan’s use of the UN general assembly to send a message to the world was very smart,” he said.

For a moment on the night of September 27, downtown Srinagar looked as though it was celebrating the victory of the Pakistan cricket team: residents had poured out into the streets to celebrate Khan’s speech. Mosques in Central Kashmir’s Ganderbal district and North Kashmir’s Sopore town also reportedly rang with slogans in support of Khan and pro-azadi songs.

---------------

Two days after Khan’s speech, the administration announced block development council polls would take place on October 24, although it has shown no signs of restoring mobile and internet connectivity or of releasing political leaders and other detainees.

“The coming month will see a lot of critical changes in the state’s administrative and political architecture,” said a senior lawyer in Srinagar. These would give rise to a number of challenges for the government, on the security front as well as in the law and order situation, he predicted.

“Kashmiris will not take these changes at face value,” he said. “There will be a reaction but we don’t know when. Khan’s speech might have hastened that reaction.”

Riaz Haq said...

#Kashmir is a nuclear flashpoint between #India and #Pakistan. #UnitedNations can’t ignore it anymore. UN’s lack of resolve is a sad sign of dysfunction in #international #diplomacy as #American leadership declines and divisions among world powers grow. https://nyti.ms/2nJsLXQ


NY Times Editorial.

Pakistan’s prime minister, Imran Khan, was a man on a mission at the United Nations, imploring members last week to persuade India to lift its siege of Kashmir, a longtime flash point between the two nations, which both have nuclear weapons.

Failure to do so, he warned in a speech before the General Assembly on Friday, could result in war between the neighbors if Kashmiris push back against the suffocating presence of thousands of Indian troops.

Since Narendra Modi, the Hindu nationalist prime minister of India, revoked the semiautonomous status of the Muslim-majority state on Aug. 5, his government has imposed a curfew and detained nearly 4,000 people, including lawyers and journalists. There have been serious allegations of torture and beatings. India cut phone and internet service, leaving millions of people isolated.

While Mr. Modi didn’t address the issue in his United Nations speech, at a rally in Houston a few days earlier he said that revoking the constitutional clause on Kashmiri autonomy meant “people there have got equal rights” with other Indians now. That’s an absurd assertion to make about a state in the world’s largest democracy that’s essentially under martial law.

“If the U.N. doesn’t speak about it,” Mr. Khan told The Times editorial board the day before his speech, “who is going to speak about it?”

He may need to keep looking. Resting any hopes on the United Nations seems futile, given the approach it has taken to the dispute in recent decades.

At one time, the United Nations made an effort to play peacekeeper in Kashmir. The Security Council tried to mediate tensions between India and Pakistan within months of their independence and partition in 1947.

While the United Nations still has an observer group to report on cease-fire violations in Kashmir, it has stepped back since the 1970s, when, after the two nations went to war, they agreed to take care of future differences through bilateral negotiations.

Pressure from India — which has long resisted outside intervention in Kashmir — helped keep Kashmir off the Security Council’s agenda until August, when China backed Pakistan‘s request for a discussion of Mr. Modi’s power grab. The session, held out of view of the media and public, accomplished little, though. The Council couldn’t even agree afterward on a common message.

---

Countries are unwilling to risk crossing Mr. Modi and losing access to India’s huge market. Pakistan is economically weak. It also damaged its standing, and its position on Kashmir, by supporting militant groups that have attacked Indian troops, stirring a conflict that has torn Kashmir apart for decades.

Mr. Modi claims his clampdown would resolve that conflict and bring normality and development to Kashmir. But it seems more likely that it will only heighten tensions and make life more miserable for Kashmiris.

He could avoid disaster by lifting the siege, relaxing movement across the border between zones of the Kashmiri region that are held by India and Pakistan, releasing political prisoners and allowing independent investigators to look into alleged human rights abuses. Perhaps India’s Supreme Court, responding to various legal petitions, could even order him to reinstitute autonomy.

Those hopes are almost certainly in vain.

At least, in their last few crises, India and Pakistan demonstrated restraint. But it is easy to see how tit-for-tat actions can begin to escalate.

The Security Council should make clear that it opposes Mr. Modi’s brutal tightening of India’s control on Kashmir. While Mr. Modi may think he can control this volatile conflict on his own, he almost certainly cannot.

Riaz Haq said...

#Rutgers U. stands behind professor who said Hindutva was "inspired by #Nazism" amid backlash. During the rally at #UnitedNations, @AudreyTruschke criticized #BJP, which #Modi is a member of, for adhering to #Hindutva, a form of #Hindu nationalism. https://www.newsweek.com/rutgers-newark-audrey-truschke-hindutva-nazism-1463069

Hindutva, she claimed, was inspired by Nazism. At a time when people often hear the term Nazi, which she credited with being used loosely, Truschke clarified that when she said Nazism, she was talking about "real, actual, historical Nazis."

"Early Hindutva founders openly admired [Nazi Party leader Adolf] Hitler," she said. "They praised Hitler's treatment of the Jewish people in Germany as a good model for dealing with India's Muslim minority."

Ads by scrollerads.com
People criticized Truschke for her comments, saying they were anti-Hindu and Pakistani propaganda. Several people called for her to not be permitted to visit India and more than 8,000 people signed an online petition to have Rutgers investigate her. Newsweek reached out to the petition creators but did not receive a response in time for publication.

However, Rutgers stood by the professor. The public New Jersey university told Newsweek that Truschke had a long track record of welcoming "reasoned debate" about the cultural, imperial and intellectual history of early-modern and modern India. So, the university supported her remarks.

"The Rutgers-Newark administration is standing strong behind me," Truschke told Newsweek. "I am privileged to be part of a scholarly community that values both accurate history and public-facing scholarship."

She called her comments outside the United Nations "well-established historical fact" and said the pushback was designed to "intimidate and silence scholars." Instead, she claimed, it showed a need for professors to work harder to educate non-academic audiences about Indian history.

The assistant professor identified two types of people who were attacking her: those who appeared to be ill-informed about Indian history and those who made ad hominem attacks in bad faith. For those who were ill-informed, she advised them not to "shoot the messenger."

"It is understandably upsetting to learn about the troublesome roots of a political ideology to which you may adhere, but I am not the appropriate target for your anger," Truschke said.

Truschke described Hindutva as being a political ideology and Hinduism as being a "diverse set of religious traditions." While speaking at India Today Conclave, a global thought platform in India, Indian Parliament Member Shashi Tharoor said the Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the founder of Hindutva, saw it as being about cultural and racial identity.

Vinay Sahasrabuddhe, a member of India's parliament and National Vice President of BJP, Modi's political party, argued that the BJP took Savarkar's comments "much more ahead" and described Hindutva as "spiritual democracy" and the "call of everything that is Hindu."

"Unfortunately Hindutva has become a favorite ripping point for people like Shashi Tharoor," Sahasrabuddhe said.

In an effort to deflect criticism from Hindutva, Truschke accused people of conflating it with Hinduism, which she characterized as being "inaccurate and highly offensive." However, others claimed it was Truschke who was inaccurate in labeling Hindutva fascist.

Riaz Haq said...

#Pakistan PM #ImranKhan blasts #media 'double standard' over #HongKong protests. #HK "is a part of #China, but this (#Kashmir) is a disputed territory". "The story of barbarism (in Kashmir) hardly gets reported in international media,"
https://news.yahoo.com/pakistans-khan-blasts-media-double-standard-over-hong-142323183.html?soc_src=hl-viewer&soc_trk=tw via @Yahoo

Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan accused international media Friday of a "double standard", saying news outlets give more prominence to the ongoing protests in Hong Kong than to the situation in disputed Kashmir.

Khan, who returned this week from a trip to Beijing, also told a crowd of roughly 300 people at a rally in Islamabad that Hong Kong "is a part of China, but this (Kashmir) is a disputed territory".

"The story of barbarism (in Kashmir) hardly gets reported in international media," Khan said.

"So I want to put this double standard in front of the world."

Hong Kong has been battered by 18 consecutive weekends of unrest, fanned by widespread public anger over Chinese rule and the police response to protests.

While for more than two months now Indian-held Kashmir has been under a security lockdown after New Delhi scrapped the region's semi-autonomous status.

The move has angered nuclear arch-rival Pakistan, which also administers part of the territory and, like India, claims it in full.

Khan appeared to minimise the impact of the Hong Kong protests.

"As far as I know, till now only a few people have been injured, maybe two or three people have been killed due to accidents" in the strife-torn city, he said.

But in Kashmir, he said, "eight million" people were living under curfew, while "100,000" have been killed in the past three decades.

Hundreds have been wounded in the four months of clashes in Hong Kong. One death has been linked to the unrest, when a demonstrator protesting on the side of a building fell during a botched rescue attempt.

Tens of thousands of people are believed to have been killed since the Kashmir insurgency erupted in the 1980s. New Delhi puts the toll at 47,000, while rights groups hover around 70,000.

The curfew is no longer in place there, though tens of thousands of extra security forces are still in place, some restrictions on movement remain and communications are still largely blacked out.

Khan, whose government has been criticised for shrinking press freedoms in recent months, also expressed his frustration with the global community, which has historically stayed out of Kashmir.

"I regret that the world only sees that (India) is a country with one billion (people), so they can trade and make money from them, and money is more important for these countries then humans," he said.

Riaz Haq said...

#India’s repression in #Kashmir is not compatible with #democracy. Ajit Doval says it would depend on “how Pakistan behaves.” In other words, the freedoms of millions of Indian citizens are linked to the actions of a foreign government. #Pakistan #Modi https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/indias-repression-in-kashmir-is-not-compatible-with-democracy/2019/10/13/31b5af60-eaba-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.html

WHEN INDIA’S Parliament abruptly stripped the state of Jammu and Kashmir of its autonomy on Aug. 5, the government of Narendra Modi claimed it was a prelude to a new era of economic development and expanded civil liberties for a region that for decades has been torn by sectarian violence. The harsh, repressive measures that were imposed were only temporary , authorities said. These included the detention without charge of thousands of Kashmiri politicians and other leading public figures, and suspension of Internet and phone services.

More than two months later, the crackdown continues. Hundreds of politicians, academics and activists are still being held, including the state’s top elected leaders. Though some restrictions on movement have been lifted and the restoration of phone landlines is to be followed by the resumption of mobile services Monday, the Internet is still inaccessible.

Meanwhile, there are persistent reports of indiscriminate detentions, beatings and torture by security forces, including of children as young as 13. The Post interviewed 19 people in 13 villages who said they had been abused in the days after Aug. 5; they recounted “beatings with rods, sticks and cables, electric shocks, and being hung upside down for long periods.”


The government denies the allegations of abuse, but it has refused to allow foreign journalists and other independent observers to travel to the region. Among those refused access was U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).

India prides itself on being the world’s largest democracy, but these are not the actions of a democratic regime. Many of those detained are being held without due process. India’s courts, including the Supreme Court, have stalled on considering habeas corpus appeals and challenges to the emergency measures. Any court decision about whether the conversion of Jammu and Kashmir from a state to two federal territories was constitutional has been postponed until after the change is due to take effect, on Oct. 31.

Officials have refused to give straight answers about when the repression will end. Ajit Doval, the government’s head of national security, recently said it would depend on “how Pakistan behaves.” In other words, the freedoms of millions of Indian citizens are linked to the actions of a foreign government.

Pakistan, which claims Kashmir, has sponsored terrorism there in the past. But its elected civilian government has so far confined itself to rhetoric about the Indian crackdown, along with fruitless appeals to the United Nations. Prime Minister Imran Khan asked President Trump to intervene, and Mr. Trump expressed interest in mediating. But that was before Mr. Trump traveled to Houston last month for what amounted to a joint political rally with Mr. Modi.

India has become a close ally of the United States, but that is only more reason for Washington to press Mr. Modi to end the crackdown in Kashmir, including by releasing all political detainees. Sadly, Mr. Trump has no understanding of such imperatives — which, no doubt, is one reason the supposedly temporary measures of Aug. 5 remain in place.