news details |
|
|
| Omar can't take unilateral decision, says Manish | | NDTV Debate On AFSPA | | Rustam
JAMMU, Oct 30: Once again on Sunday, Barkha Dutt of NDTV 24X7 organized a motivated discussion on Jammu and Kashmir. This time, it was on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). The programme was, as everyone knows, "we the people". She ensured the maximum participation of the critics of the AFSPA and they included the clueless and confused NC MP Mehboob Beg, senior Supreme Court lawyer and human rights activist Colin Gonsalves, Meenakshi Ganguli of the Human Rights Watch (HRW), human rights activist Babloo from Manipur and a number of young Kashmiris, including Muslims and Kashmiri Hindus, all perverted. To strike a balance, she ensured the participation of Lt General (Retd) BS Jaswal, Major General (Retd) GD Bakshi and senior Supreme Court lawyer KTS Tulsi. It was her compulsion. Congress national spokesperson Manish Tiwari was also one of the panelists.
The interventions of the retired Army generals and Tulsi were highly inspiring. Each one of them opposed tooth and nail the Omar Abdullah's move on the AFSPA, saying its revocation even from certain selected districts like Srinagar, Gandarbal and Budgam would mean creating safe heavens for the Islamabad-sponsored terrorists. Each one of them asserted that there were external factors which could not be overlooked and added that overlooking these factors would mean creating an environment in the already restive Kashmir Valley that would ultimately jeopardize the paramount national interests and compromise our national security concerns. You cannot expect the Army to fight insurgency with their hands tied was one of the upshots of their arguments. Yet another upshot of their argument was that the Indian Army is highly professional and disciplined and that they know how to operate in a hostile environment, as also they know what the rule of law is and means. Yet another refrain of theirs' was that out of 1,500 cases of the alleged human rights violations in Kashmir during all these more than 22 years of secessionist violence only in 35 cases some soldiers were found guilty and prompt action against them was taken. Yet another upshot of theirs' argument was that it is necessary to separate hype from the ground reality and that the security forces are not canon-fodder. "Fix them, prosecute them and punish them, if the soldiers deliberately commit human rights violations," they repeatedly suggested, and added that the situation in Kashmir is extraordinary that could be tackled only through an instrument that empowers the Army to deal with the situation as it emerges. Indeed, they presented the case in support of the AFSPA meticulously, convincingly and the manner it should have been. "The AFSPA is a holy book. Don't abuse it; take action if there is any aberration," was their loud message.
Equally significant were the interventions of the otherwise uncouth and controversial Congress national spokesperson Manish Tiwari. He comprehensively defeated Beg with his convincing arguments and told the NC that it couldn't take a unilateral decision. He, like the ex-Army generals and Tulsi, talked of external dimension and suggested in no uncertain terms that our approach needed to be holistic. He, in fact, said we can tread the soft path provided we have already treaded the hard path. You cannot think in terms of "ending alienation in Kashmir" by airing views on the AFSPA the NC had been airing, he suggested. It was indeed a great argument. The most significant aspect his intervention was his unstinted and unqualified support to the stand JKPCC chief Prof Saif-ud-Din Soz has taken on the AFSPA and issues relating to national security and it established that Prof Soz and the Congress high command are on same wavelength. He did talk of a middle path but, at the same time, suggested that it was a very difficult proposition. He countered the visibly upset and out-on-the-limb Beg and asked: "Is the AFSPA an instrument of oppression?" He himself answered the question and emphatically said "no".
As for Beg, Gonsalves, Meenakshi and a few Kashmiri youth, all perhaps Delhi-based girls, they denounced the AFSPA. It is not used against the terrorists; it is ruthlessly used against the civilians" was their argument. "We should reach out to the alienated people of Kashmir" was yet another argument of theirs' and one method they suggested was revocation of what they called draconian AFSPA. The "AFSPA has been grossly misused, women in Kashmir are raped and there is gross violation of human rights in the Valley" was one more argument they advanced and said the Army and paramilitary forces were very cruel.
Beg, who had no logical and cogent argument to present his case, again and again and again said "but the alienation of Kashmiris has to be addressed"; "but Kashmir has internal and external dimensions which must be addressed"; "but Kashmir is a political problem that needs to be addressed politically"; "but Union Home Minister P Chidambaram also had said that Kashmir is a unique problem that needs a unique solution"; but we the Kashmiri need to be given an opportunity to breathe in free atmosphere"; but…; but…"
And as for the anchor, she talked what about she called "political alienation in Kashmir". She forgot that it is the people of Kashmir who have been ruling the state since 1947 and exploiting all others in the state; she forgot that the Kashmiri leadership enjoys extraordinary legislative and executive powers; and she forgot that those who have been in the movement in Kashmir are those already well-entrenched and exceptionally powerful and rich. She also forgot that the problem in Kashmir is not political and that what the Kashmiri leadership is demanding is not empowerment but separation. The anchor must not forget that the problem in Kashmir is fundamentally psychological. They have created a conception of nationalism which is partly religious , partly territorial (all the Muslim-majority areas of the state, including Kashmir, must form Greater Kashmir to be administered as per the Shri laws) and completely psychological (we believe that we are a nation, which cannot co-exist with others in India). However, the people know the anchor has been a votary of two-nation theory in the past, she preaches perverted views today and she would again and again sing the pro-separatist song.
It was a different matter that she had to cut a sorry figure in the programme she organized with a motive because the ex-Army Generals, Tulsi and Manish called her bluff as well as the bluff of Beg and others of his ilk. But the most significant aspect of the whole debate was the realization on the part of the Congress that Omar Abdullah and his NC have crossed the line and that time has come for it to intervene and avert the impending disaster. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
