Your Search Results

Day of the ‘mujahid’

Comment first! »

By K.N. Pandita, Published first on Communalism Combat, November 1999, Special Report:

Pakistan’s prime concern is not the annexation of the Valley but the converting of the liberal-minded Kashmiri Muslims into ‘pucca Mussalmans’.

Annexation of Kashmir through sponsored, armed insurgency is not the final goal of Pakistan. The final goal is the transfermation of Kashmiri Muslim society from its somewhat liberal outlook and life style to an absolutely conservative and orthodox Muslim society.

The model of this type of society is of the Taliban in Afghanistan. This model is being thrust on Kashmiri Muslims, and to an extent against their free will.

In the process, foreign Islamists — whom the Kashmiris call ‘guest mujahids’ — sponsored by Pakistan-based religious militia organisations, have two specific roles in the Valley. Firstly, as the soldiers of Allah, they fight a jihad against the Indian infidels, a duty, they say, is enjoined upon every pure Musalman. Secondly, they carry on a well-organised indoctrination programme aiming at converting local Muslim youth from a liberal to a conservative ideology, or from Kashmiriyat to pure faith.

Continue Reading…

Letter to the Editor, Times of India

Comment first! »

by K.N. Pandita, New Delhi

“Coexistence” – new vision

Dear Sir,

Facts of history can be interpreted variously  to suit ones point of view. The examples of a new vision of “coexistence” cited in Salaam Ganga (ToI Jan 8 Editorial) do support your view point.   However,  you could  have made your point more effective by a reference to the killing of 2000 innocent Pandits by Kashmiri “freedom fighters” in 1990 followed by five intermittent pogroms  till recent days, and the resultant ethnic cleansing of the entire minuscule religious minority of 300,000 in the only Muslim majority state of the Indian Union. You could have reinforced your argument by remarking that despite what befell the Pandits of Kashmir,  the Indian Hindu majority made no massive public protests, sections of India gullible press hushed up the story, Indian political leadership thought it sacrilege to speak of the grisly deeds and the Indian Muslims never felt it their moral responsibility to  open their mouth against the ghastly acts. Had you even hinted at that, it would have made your new theory of “coexistence” forceful and persuasive.

Letter to the Editor, The Times of India

Comment first! »

by K.N. Pandita, New Delhi

Indefencible acts

Sir,

Apropos of Bachpan Bachao (ToI 7 Jan), kudos to Shobha for her defence of the undefended.  That is her port. Three instances of grisly and barbaric acts mentioned by her are a reflection on our political class. There are much more grisly and barbaric acts to which she could have alluded in order to substantiate her point. Nearly 2,000 innocent Kashmir Pandits were selectively killed by their compatriots turned “freedom fighters” in 1990.To quote only one example: Sarla, a young woman teacher traveled to Kupwara to collect her salary. She was kidnapped as soon as she came out of the office, gang raped and then put under machine saw and cut alive into several pieces. . Nobody has been arrested so far. No paper wrote a word, no political leader‘s hair was touched and no humanist or human rights activist beat his eyelid. Another example: Bitta Karate, a captured cold blooded Kashmiri “freedom fighter”  said in a national telecast that he lost the count of his Kashmiri Pandit victims after 22. The Kashmir trial court has given him parole. Come on Shobha ji, make your humanism universal. Have the courage to take the lid off the  Kashmir Pandora’s box.

Letter to the Editor, The Tribune, Chandigarah

Comment first! »

by Prof. K.N. Pandita, New Delhi

Sir,

Apropos the news item What’s behind Azad’s U-turn on joint control? ( 6 Jan 2007) , it is time both India and Pakistan change stance on Kashmir and come to grips with ground realities. A workable formula should be evolved within the broad frame of respective national interests giving and receiving as much as is reasonable. An understanding between the two countries would make the Kashmiris agree to be a party to the deal. Of course, a workable deal is to be predicated by two pre-requisites: One is that the deal between the two countries and with the agreement of Kashmiri pro and anti groups, should receive endorsement from the UN, the EU, the OIC and the SCO. Secondly the deal should encompass safe return to valley, concentrated rehabilitation and qualitative sustenance arrangement for the exiled Pandit community of Kashmir Valley under the provisions of the UN and UN Human Rights Charters.