9.8.10

Geelani saab, keep your Black Day to yourself

The Hurriyat’s Syed Ali Shah Geelani is right in refusing one more dialogue with home minister P. Chidambaram. This is not the time for it. But he is mucking up the case by asking the people in the state to observe August 15 as a "black day" and Pakistan's foundation day as "a day of solidarity" on August 14.

Not only does it go against his own statement about self-determination – and the reality – that "Pandit Nehru promised Kashmiris the chance to decide their fate in 1948, but never fulfilled the promise", it also demeans the current crisis in Kashmir.


The Kashmir issue has escalated beyond a border dispute. All we are hearing are pathetic noises from almost everyone and long feature articles discussing ‘housewives’ coming out in the street, revealing chauvinism and a lack of understanding of insurgency. We won’t even go into the sad attempts at religious history being touted out that are not only invalid but also factually incorrect.

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has joined forces against a dialogue, but he should most certainly not agree to be a part of this Black day and Solidarity Day tamasha. He at least seems to have his ideas verbatim, even if he might himself create hurdles to realising them later:

The 37-year-old Mirwaiz said he had proposed specific measures like demilitarisation, revocation of repressive laws and release of political prisoners to build trust to take the dialogue process forward and provide much-needed relief to the people. "But, unfortunately, these demands were not heeded," he said.

Meanwhile, Geelani is acting cute when he met a delegation of Kashmiri Pandits. According to Srinagar-based Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti leader Sanjay Tickoo:

"Geelani became emotional and told us that we're a part of Kashmir and our safety is the majority's community's primary duty. Geelani told us that if anything happens to us, it would be like a wound inflicted on his body.”

Again, this is not the time. The kids coming out in the streets are not Kashmiri Pandits. Their concerns are different. He is sending out so many different signals. I think he should himself offer to take house arrest.

- - -

The other case of getting all cute is our Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao. She has said that India understands Pakistan best. It is such a lover-like comment that it was a dampener to know that in her interview to IBNlive all she was referring to was the Wikileaks and we knew it before it all came out. These darned foreigners. Should we not at least patent our knowledge, since we don’t seem to be acting upon it?

6 comments:

  1. "Not only does it go against his own statement about self-determination – and the reality – that "Pandit Nehru promised Kashmiris the chance to decide their fate in 1948, but never fulfilled the promise", it also demeans the current crisis in Kashmir."


    Hopefully, you have read the UN resolutions that Nehru was referring to and never mind that J&K was not Nehru's to "give away" to anyone, though the joker arrogated himself to that position pretending to speak for all of India before getting egg on his face and rightfully dying with shame at the ruin he caused India due to his pompousness and stupidity.

    The reason the resolutions cannot be implemented is because the Pakistanis refused to remove the troops from Pakistani Occupied Kashmir, ensuring that a referendum could never be held, making the UN resolutions on J&K irrelevant.

    Seeing as you support Kashmiri separatism from India, you do not have the right call yourself an Indian or a patriot -- a patriot will not actively support damage to India's territorial integrity like you are. Yes, yes, I know you will have a lot of justifications for your worthless behaviour, so go ahead and trot them out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous - please know that it is a privilege to use my name here and so a wee bit of common sense and respect for this blog and the name is not too much to ask, or is it? I hate to point out, that you seem to speak from both sides of your mouth, if you don't mind my saying so. UN resolutions call for a plebiscite and in not-so-many-words, regard Kashmir as a disputed territory, hoping that such a plebecite will allow Kashmiris to decide their own fate. So the question of separatism is not-so-relevant, unless of course you have already determined that Kashmir is a part of India, if you don't mind my saying so. Since like you said earlier the "J&K was not Nehru's to 'give away' to anyone" - which I whole heatedly agree with, to which I will only add "give away or keep". Whether Panditji pass on with an egg on his face, he being not a strict vegetarian, I suspect, you may be right. Having said that, Shri Jaswant Singh might be the person ask, if you don't mind my saying so.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I hate to point out, that you seem to speak from both sides of your mouth, if you don't mind my saying so."


    Riight, as you have so amply demonstrated, you have not read the UN resolutions while you sit here and whine about the injustice of it all.



    "UN resolutions call for a plebiscite and in not-so-many-words, regard Kashmir as a disputed territory, hoping that such a plebecite will allow Kashmiris to decide their own fate. "

    Let me repeat it a little more slowly since you seem to slow on the uptake:

    The plebiscite requires troops to be out of the territory before any plebiscite can be held -- no troops were removed and hence the precondition to conduct the plebiscite. Did that sink into your thick skull now?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "...blah blah.,..y add "give away or keep"."


    Keeping is India's collective decision, as is giving away, not an individual's decision to make -- ALL of India has a part in this decision seeing as taxpayers have been supporting that state for decades now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Now now now, like I said, use of the name is a privilege here, and than on top, being referred to as thick skull, I'd rather you called me "Cool hand Luke" for than I'd quote "What we have here is failure to communicate", at the risk of losing a perfectly good reference.

    And as for the plebiscite, well that's the Hanuman on a hot tin roof in the sweltering afternoon (I never metaphor, I didn't like), if you don't mind my saying so - now you see him, now you don't. Reason to bring it up,every now and than, is because Pakistani's didn't pull out, which left Kashmir pregnant with ISF and the Indian taxpayer with a hefty tab. But than comes the collective decision part, which is the flip side of the plebiscite debacle, and brings me back to speaking from both sides of the mouth, if you don't mind my saying so. I tried it this morning before the mirror, I could only muster a few puffs of hot air, if you don't mind my saying so.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon 1:

    The last thing I need is a certificate from anyone, especially one who does not even read the whole blogpost and what it says. And I will not explain myself…except hope that at least you are a worthy citizen of India.

    Anon 2:

    There is a difference between separatism and autonomy, which I support. Incidentally, even the maharaja of Kashmir did not wish to join either Pakistan or India during the independence confabulations. It was the tribals who occupied the territory that constitutes PoK. The current need for plebiscite is not that but about Kashmir as it is NOW. That is what Geelani as well as others should think about. It is not India’s collective decision, but those of the Valley. The whole of India did not decide about the separation of Chhatisgarh. Only because the dynamics include another country, politically, does not make it the business of all of India, because all of India has not given a damn for that state and neither has Pakistan.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.