Kashmir: Islamic Territory Vs Democracy (By V.M.Tiwari)


Condemnation of Kashmiri Muslims by Muslims

Mirza Haider wrote in his ‘Tarikh-i-Rashidi’2 : “The Sufis have legitimized so many heresies that they know nothing of what is wrongful …They are forever interpreting dreams, displaying miracles and obtaining from the unseen, information regarding either the future or the past. Nowhere else is such a band of heretics to be found….. (They) consider the Holy Law (Shari at) second in importance to the True Way (tariqat, tradition) and that; in consequence, the people of the Way have nothing to do with the Holy Law.” (Quoted in Sufi 1947-8, pages 19-20). The famous traveler Lawrence in 1895 ascribed the delightful tolerance between Hinduism and Islam to “chiefly the fact that the Kashmiri Musalmans never really gave up the Hindu religion…. I do not base my ideas as to laxness of Kashmiris in religious duties merely on my observations. Holy men of Arabia have spoken to me with contempt of the feeble flame of Islam which burns in Kashmir and the local mullas talk with indignation of the apathy of the people. Again the Kashmiri Muslim historian G.M.D. Sufi writes in ‘Sufi 1947-8, p688’: A number of practices of Kashmiri Musalman are un- Islamic….The Buddhist worship of relics has insidiously crept into India’s Islam….The Kashmiri Muslim has transferred reverence from Hindu stones to Muslim relics”.

Though it may sound incomprehensible, by and large Sufis are not considered true Muslims, by other groups esp. Sunnis. Kashmiri Muslims who follow the ‘Rishis’ tradition are certainly considered misguided and untrue Muslims.

Traditionally, Kashmiri Muslims worship a hair of the Prophet Muhammad, as a sacred relic. Some years ago it was stolen from the ‘Hazaratbal’ mosque, and there was violence directed mainly against Hindus, and the Government. It appears logical that neither the J&K government nor Hindus but recently infiltrated terrorists from Pakistan had carried out this sacrilege not only to malign Hindus, but also to teach a lesson in purification to Sufi Muslims.

Majority of Muslims Are Against Separatist Movement

In India also many Muslim rulers persecuted Sufis along with Hindus. Therefore it should not be surprising to find that neither Shias nor Sufis want to have a truck with the orthodox and intolerant Sunnis, as is the reality in J&K. But a small group of terrorists can force the entire group to tow its line, as has happened in Afghanistan, and appears to be happening in Indonesia and is certainly happening in J&K. In reality Shias and Sufis have openly declared3, at the risk of their lives, that they are not with the demand of separatists, who are mainly Sunnis influenced and joined by the terrorists from Pakistan. Similarly, Vice President of J&K Congress, a highly revered leader of the Gujjar and Bakerwal communities, Mian Basheer has strongly urged the Prime Minister to “use force to crush the Jamait-e-Islami, a Sunni organization, which wants to have a stranglehold on the minorities by terrorizing them”. Therefore it is mainly Sunnis of Kashmir (valley) who are influenced by terrorists, that are terrorizing and fomenting trouble in J&K and beyond in India.

In the Valley, which has 99% Muslims, Sunnis constitute only 23 % of the population4, and yet they call the shots. Even if we were to include the other Sunnis of J&K, Sunnis are not more than 30 % of all the Muslims in J&K. Further not all Sunnis have the same goal. Some want to join Pakistan, and some want an independent Kashmir, and yet some, more autonomy within India. It may be relevant to note here that high corruption in the Sunni dominated Government of J&K, has also been one of the reasons for a feeling of frustration in all Kashmiris. And as war feeds on war, the long unsettled conditions also cause slowing of development and lack of job opportunities. Thus it is clear that a minority, and not a homogeneous minority at that, of less than 30% is terrorizing the whole of J&K, the whole of India, indeed the whole world, and there is a genuine fear of a nuclear war in the region.

India has no need to use nuclear weapons because it is strong enough to frustrate any conventional aggression from Pakistan, and defeat it. The aggressive Pakistan is likely to use its nuclear arsenal in frustration of defeat and for saving its face. Pakistan could be sure to launch the nuclear attack first and thus gain a definite superiority, and may cripple India’s capability to retaliate with nuclear weapons; and also may hope that by that time the world community would manage to impose a ceasefire. Therefore the fear of a nuclear war is rather real, and is staring at us unless we can do something now to prevent it. Therefore it is necessary for the world to understand the reality of the Kashmiris who are suffering an unending misery at the hands of terrorists.

 

Kashmir: Islamic Territory
Vs Democracy – 2

Historical Background

5000 years of Recorded History. Let us understand the historical position of Islam in U. Kashmir a little more.

Mahabharata epic is one of the two greatest epics of Hindus, and it describes a great war that took place around 3000 BC. In this epic there is a mention of Kashmir’s Kings, the contemporary King was Gonand II. Raj Tarangini is the authoritative history of Kashmir written by the famous author Kalhan. Names of various dynasties who ruled Kashmir then onwards is also available5; e.g. Sandiman, Sunder Sen, Nara etc. Emperor Ashok, who ruled from Afghanistan to the Eastern India, and south up to Deccan, established in 250 B.C. the capital of Kashmir ‘Shrinagari’, very near present day ‘Srinagar’. King Kanishka also ruled Kashmir along with major portions of India, during 1st century A.D. He organized a world conference on Buddhism, which has been reported later by the Chinese traveler Hien-Tsang who came in the seventh century A.D. During 724 – 761 A.D. Lalitaditya established another great empire like that of Ashok. He built the famous Martanda (Sun) Temple, ruins of which can still be seen. Ajaatapeeda ruled during 813 – 850 A.D., and the city Pompore famous for Saffron was founded,. Awantiwarman ruled during 855 – 883 A.D., and founded the city Awantipur. Shankarwarman ruled during 883 – 902 A.D., and founded ‘Shankarpura – Pattan’ (now known as Pattan). Chenghis Khan, the well known Mongol warrior during 13th century attacked Central Asia up to Iran, and thus created havoc in those areas because of his brutality. Thousands of Muslim refugees escaped to peaceful Kashmir, and the era of Islamic invasion began. Muslim invaders started attacking Kashmir one after another. In 1320, on the death of King Suhadeva, a Tibetan prince Rinchana, who was given a jaageer, (an area) to rule by the King, became the King by intrigue and sought conversion to Hinduism. When refused, in anger he got converted to Islam and ruled for three years. After his death in 1323, the Hindu Queen Kota Rani (wife of King Suhadeva; the fourth woman in Kashmir to become a Queen) ruled till 1338, when Shah Mir seized the power by defeating the Queen. Shah Mir, who had also been given a Jaageer by the King Suhadeva, established the first Muslim dynasty; and Islam spread quickly.

Muslim Rule (1389 – 1819)

In 1389, came even more brutal King Sikandar6 who was so ruthless that all Hindus either got converted or left Kashmir. But during the reign of his son Zain-ul-Abidin (1420 – 1470), who realized his father’s folly, became liberal, and many Hindu families returned. But after him, the persecution continued, sometimes very severe and at others somewhat liberal. According to a tradition, 24000 Brahmin families were converted by the power of sword during one of the proselytizing mission of one of such brutes viz. Mir Shams-ud-din Iraqi in 1492. The Mughal emperor Akbar in 1587 won Kashmir and then it remained with Mughals till 1752, when Afghans won it. Afghans were very inhuman in their proselytizing mission. There 67 years rule was the most tyrannical of all the Muslim rules.

Muslim Rishis : A Unique Blend

While these atrocities, persecution and forced conversions of Hindus in to Islam were going on for 500 years, a unique blend of Hinduism and Sufism was under development in the same Kashmir. In the mid 14th century, a woman saint Lalleshwari (1335-1376) arises from the swamp of persecution, violence and hatred, and sings –

“Shiva7 pervades the world
Hindu and Muslim are the same.
If you are wise know your Self8
Then you will know the Supreme One

She says that the Supreme One is present in every atom of this world. There is nothing without Him. Therefore Hindus and Muslims are the same as they all are pervaded by the same Supreme. If you want the supreme wisdom, then know who you are, know your Self, which is beyond this mind and body. Once you know your Self, then you will know the Supreme, for then you will realize that the Supreme is nothing else but the same as your Self.

People believed the truth in what she had said –

“I saw my Self in all things
I saw the Supreme shining in everything.
You have heard, stop! See Shiva
The house is His, who am I, Lalla! 9

She says, “I have seen mine Self and also seen that Self of mine is in everything. That Self of mine is the Supreme One who is shining in everything”. Then she tells herself, “You have heard what was just said! Then stop, remain still, realize the Supreme One. This house i.e. this mind and body, is His, for He, the Supreme One, lives in this. Who am I? I am not this mind and body; I am the Supreme One living in this mind and body!”

People had tremendous faith in her; they had veneration for her because they could see from her behavior that she had realized the Supreme One. No wonder she had both Hindus and Muslims as her disciples. One of her Muslim disciple Sheikh-ul-Alam became the most revered Rishi for all. Another famous disciple Nur-ud-din (1377-1438) says –

“That Lalla of Padmaapore, she drank
Her fill of divine nectar;
She was indeed an awataar10 of His
O Supreme One , grant me the same boon!11

He says, “Lalleshwari of Padmaapore had realized the Supreme One and had enjoyed the divine Bliss. She was, no doubt, a realized person who had become the Supreme One herself. O God grant me the same Bliss, same realization.”

People saw that Sheikh-ul-Alam and Nur-ud-din were realized persons, and they had high reverence for them. They had both Hindus and Muslims as disciples. They were given the title of a ‘Rishi’ which means a sage of as high a status as those of Vedas, the ancient Hindu scriptures. And thus started the ‘Islamic Rishi’ tradition in Kashmir. The well known poets who followed in this Rishi tradition are Mali, Habba Khatun (16th century), Rupas Bhawani (1621- 1721), Arnimal (d.1800), Mahmud Gami (1765 – 1855), Rasul Mir (d. 1870), Paramaanand (1791 – 1864), Ghulam Ahmad Mahjur (1885 – 1952), Abdul Ahad Aazaad (1903 – 1948), and Zindaa Kaul (1884 – 1965) etc. The Rishi tradition, despite persecution by Muslim rulers, was followed by Kashmiris for 500 years. Now the intolerance of Sunni-ism is being spread with the weapon of terrorism. Though feeble and mute, Rishi tradition is still surviving now, but is under grave danger of extinction. However it may revive if the terrorism is stopped soon enough. Genocide, though of a different kind, is going on in Kashmir.

Birth of original J&K

In 1819 Ranjit Singh, the Sikh ruler, won Kashmir from Afghans and appointed Gulaab Singh, the Dogra ruler of Jammu as his representative for Kashmir. Gulaab Singh won Ladaakh, Baltistan etc and by mid nineteenth century enlarged his Kingdom to that of the pre-partition days (U. Kashmir). British defeated the Sikhs in 1845. In a treaty signed in 1846, the British recognized Gulab Singh as the independent ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. Gulaab Singh had to accept their ‘paramountcy’ and had to pay them 7.5 million rupees (probably annually), for his recognition as the Ruler. That boundary is the boundary of undivided J&K.

Genesis of Kashmir Problem

During the British rule, U. Kashmir was ruled by Gulaab Singh like any other princely state those days. On independence of India, a group of Muslims, under the leadership of Jinnah, with British support, got Pakistan carved out of India. On 15th August 1947, in the British ruled portion of India, Muslim majority areas with contiguity with each other went to Pakistan. The rulers of erstwhile States had to choose between India and Pakistan, subject to contiguity, or independence. All the states chose to join India or Pakistan but not Hari Singh, the then ruler of U. Kashmir. He had full faith on his very small and mostly Muslim army. He obviously was totally out of touch with reality when he dreamt about remaining independent. When he delayed his decision, Pakistan first stopped the route for essential supplies to U. Kashmir, for then main supply routes were in their areas. This was the first violation of the ‘Agreement’ on ‘Partition’ by Pakistan. Then on 22nd October 1947 came the second violation, a disastrous one, which shattered Hari Singh’s dream when a large number of tribals armed and supported by Pakistan Army attacked U. Kashmir. The impractical Maharaja Hari Singh even then delayed his choice, and signed the stipulated, and now famous, ‘Instrument of Accession’ only when the invaders reached close to Srinagar, on 26th October. This signing of the Instrument was supported by Sheikh Abdullah, the leader of the people of Kashmir.

The Governor General of India, Lord Mount Batten accepted the ‘Instrument of Accession’, thus making it legally binding. It is only then that the Indian Forces entered U. Kashmir and, firstly, saved Srinagar and then started driving the invaders back. The Indian Forces got total support of the local people, without which they could not have defended because only a small army could be taken to the airport of Srinagar by air in such a short time, as no proper land route was then existing between J&K and (newly divided) India. The earlier route had been through Lahore which with hair-line-thin majority of Muslim population had gone to Pakistan.

Continu

Kashmir: Islamic Territory
Vs Democracy – 3

An Idealist’s Solution

As Indian Armed Forces were driving the invaders out, the idealist Nehru, the then Prime Minister, in consultation with the Governor General Lord Mount Batten, decided to take the matter to the UNO. On 31st December 1947 he, in his idealism, also offered plebiscite in the U. Kashmir; although legally and morally India was not bound to do so. Believing in the ideals of democracy, Nehru had offered this so that the people of Kashmir could decide their destiny themselves. Other nations and people may find it difficult to believe that how could a nation ever be so unselfish (foolish?) so as to leave a ‘heaven on earth’ for the sake of an abstract ideal.

As a proof of India’s faith in idealism, may I offer the example of Bangladesh? India sacrificed heavily, both men and material, in getting Bangladesh liberated from the fanatic Pakistan; and then left it entirely free for Bangladeshis to rule their country. As it turned out, this was not in the interest of liberal Bangladeshis because soon the fanatic elements murdered the Father of Bangladesh, and militarily took control of the new-born nation.

Bringing the subject back to Kashmir, on 1st January 1948 Nehru unilaterally declared ceasefire, which was not reciprocated by Pakistan. All such actions should leave no doubt in any body’s mind about India’s intention which was and is that Kashmir should have genuine democracy. But POK continues to be occupied by Pakistan, and J&K is trembling under Pak supported terrorism.

Non-violence : Still An Impracticality?

Today we can easily blame Nehru for being impractical, but let us see the psychological environment at that time in India. India was feeling highly elated for having earned its freedom through non-violence, though at the cost of immense sacrifice of human lives and suffering perpetrated by British Power. This was the first successful major non-violent revolution in the world. It may be worth noting that Jinnah and his Party ‘Muslim League’ had not sacrificed anything, thus they got Pakistan for nothing. At the time of partition, while the populations were transferring themselves from one to the other nation, there was terrible violence almost all over the undivided India. In this inhuman massacre of innocent peoples, Hindus had suffered very much more than the Muslims. This was so because a significant number of Hindus were influenced by the principle of non-violence; and Gandhi went to areas, where Muslims were getting the bad taste of their own medicine, and pacified violent Hindus. Nothing like this happened in Pakistan, on the contrary Pak Government helped the violent Muslims who were killing Hindus. The Muslim League had asked for a separate Muslim nation from secular India, because they were driven by hatred for Hindus. Hindus did not hate Muslims otherwise how could they welcome and invite Muslims to join the non-violent ‘Freedom Movement’ led by Mahatma Gandhi. Obviously a large portion of Muslims had faith in the Hindu’s ‘tolerance’ and in the secularism of India, and they preferred to stay in India rather than go to Pakistan. India has the second largest Muslim population in the world. Nehru thought that both legally and morally Kashmir belongs to India, therefore UNO would do the justice, and another major problem would be solved non-violently. And thus India would set an example for promoting non-violence in the violent world.

Vested Interest of Britain and USA

Obviously Nehru had not understood British machinations against India. British were extremely unhappy to leave their mine of gold – India – and naturally were not friendly to India. They had no desire that India should make technological progress for they very badly needed India to remain a market for British goods, without which they would lose the economic leadership of the world. Unfortunately, in the Kashmir crisis, the US not only supported its long time ally Britain but also had an axe to grind itself. It needed a useful base for its forces against USSR, and Pakistan was suitable from all angles for the purpose. Some flimsy mistakes like dotting of i’s and cutting of t’s etc were found in the ‘Instrument of Accession’ which was signed by Hari Singh, and already accepted by the legal authority – Governor General of India – Lord Mount Batten. Consequently U. Kashmir was not accepted as a part of India although, based on its confession, Pakistan was declared an aggressor by the UNCIP, and was asked to vacate its aggression on 13th August 194812 . Pakistan has never complied with that resolution and yet has continuously got support of the UK and the USA.  After a long time, on 1st January 1949 a formal ceasefire was signed between Pakistan and India.

Plebiscite : Pakistan’s Phobia

Almost one year after Nehru’s offer of plebiscite, the UNCIP, on 5th January 1949 passed a resolution which stated : “The question of accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided by the democratic method of free and impartial plebiscite.” Pakistan did not vacate its aggression as agreed by it (Pakistan) and also as stipulated in the UN Resolution of 13th August, 1948. This would have then enabled India to vacate its forces to permit free and impartial plebiscite. As Pakistan was deliberately violating the said UN Resolution, the hope for the plebiscite was diminishing. Therefore in June 1949 Sheikh Abdullah13, the most popular and important leader of J&K, declared that, “We the people of J&K have thrown our lot with Indian people not in the heat of passion or a moment of despair, but by a deliberate choice. The union of our people has been fused by the community of ideals and common sufferings in the cause of freedom.”

Pakistan attacks India

In 1961-62 India had suffered heavily with a war against China. Pakistan thought that it could take advantage of this weakness. Despite the mutually agreed ceasefire under the auspices of UNO, Pakistan attacked India in winter of 1965, but got beaten. (As per the Agreement of Tashkent (1962), Pakistan got all its territories inclusive of POK back which were won by India in the war.) In 1971 West Pakistan not only refused the legal and moral right to democratically elected Mujib-ur-Rahman of East Pakistan to become the President of Pakistan but also attacked it and committed most inhuman atrocities on citizens of East Pakistan. As a result East Pakistan rebelled, and with the help from India became a new Nation – Bangladesh. (India not only defeated Pakistan badly but also arrested 91000 Pakistani soldiers.) It should be noted that Pakistan was formed on the basis of hatred against Hindus, and on the faith that their religion would keep them united. Result is there for every one to see. In 1972, an agreement was signed between India and Pakistan, in which both nations agreed to respect the line of ceasefire till the issue gets finally resolved. Having lost three wars to India, Pakistan, from early eighties, started sending terrorists in to Kashmir and brain washing the tolerant Kashmiri Muslims, and murdering Hindus, destroying Hindu temples, killing soldiers and police personnel of J&K. Aircrafts were hijacked. Innocent people all over India were killed by the terrorists – some of the terrorists are Kashmiri, some Pakistani and some even from other Islamic countries.

Brilliant But Foolhardy Attack on Kargil

During winter land around most of the ‘Line of Control’ (LOC) gets buried under heavy snow. After Simala Agreement it was expected that Pakistan would respect the LOC, and for many years Pakistan did appear to be doing so. In winters extremely harsh conditions prevail in LOC areas; e.g. Dras near Kargil is the second coldest inhabited place in the world with temperatures going below -50 degrees C. Therefore, normally, in winters the surveillance on LOC is reduced to minimal, by either side. Taking advantage of this fact, Pakistan made a brilliant plan to attack Kargil with maximum surprise. In a few winters they entered the area beyond the LOC in to India, near Kargil, and built bunkers, stored arms and ammunitions, and other logistics materials. And when they thought they could win Kargil they attacked in April-May 1999, before the summer working conditions. Indian side was really caught napping in their blankets. Indian Forces also could not have come in numbers because the only road to Kargil should have remained snow bound, but for an early summer. A question naturally arises as to how Indian Intelligence could fail so miserably! This question is relevant to understand the Kashmir Problem.

Indian Intelligence Failure

During winter, apart from radio and air reconnaissance, the main source of intelligence is Bakerwals and Gujjars living in those areas. They gladly convey the news of Pak infiltration. To counter this, first, the dominating and separatist Sunni Muslims of Kargil area convinced the Governments of J&K and India that they be separated from the Buddhist-dominated Ladaakh administrative control, and be made an administrative region under Kashmir. In Ladaakh area Muslims are not in majority, but in Kargil they are in absolute majority. Then Pakistan deliberately increased bombing in that area, and at the same time the local Sunnis increased persecuting the non-Muslims and non-sympathetic Bakerwals and Gujjars etc to drive them away from that area. So almost no Bakerwals and Buddhists were there to inform about the infiltration, and thus total surprise could be achieved. That is why this plan was brilliant. It is another story as to how bravery, strategy and superior tactics of Indian Defence Forces could repulse the brilliant attack, albeit at a great sacrifice of both man and material. Here again the impractical idealism of Government of India could be seen in their order to the Defence Forces to not cross the LOC, even while defending their area. The impractical strain of idealism in Indians costs them heavily, every time. The surreptitious attack on Kargil Sector beyond the ‘Line of Control’, which was accepted in the 1971 Simala Agreement by Pakistan as inviolable, again confirms that promises made by and agreements accepted by Pakistan are unreliable.

Islamic Terrorism

After fighting three wars, Pakistan has realized that they cannot win a war with India. Therefore they have chosen the most inhuman way – terrorism with support from international Islamic terrorist organizations. This terrorism has not only caused heavy losses to material, military personnel but also more importantly it has dented the tolerant psyche of Hindus. All Hindus have been driven out from Kashmir after a planned chain of murders of many prominent Hindus. This low intensity war is causing a very heavy financial burden to Indian exchequer and thus obstructing the progress that India, specially J&K, could otherwise make. The Hindu-Muslim riots are increasing in India in frequency and intensity. Now Hindus react very sharply and violently to a riot started by Muslims. Gujarat is a case in example. But what is still remarkable is that burning of Hindus at Godara in Gujarat has resulted in a violent reaction in Gujarat only, the rest of India not only maintained its peace but also condemned the violent reaction. Earlier in History, by and large Hindus had not been reacting in such a rage lasting for so long. Now the trend of intolerance is such that even Hindus feel sad.

Security Personnel Vs Terrorists

The fate of military and police personnel safeguarding lives of Kashmiris, and maintaining law and order there would elicit sympathy from any human being. Though armed, they are easily visible and are easy victims. Terrorists are also armed but are not visible for they do not look different from the locals; therefore they always manage a surprise attack. At the same time security personnel are expected to be protecting the locals and not shoot unless reasonably sure of the terrorists. They cannot be trigger happy, and the terrorists can be as trigger happy as they like. The terrorists also kill the locals in sufficient numbers to terrify them in to co-operation. Can the Human rights Commission not see that the dice is heavily loaded against the Security Forces.? They invariably had been blaming Indian security, and seldom Pakistan Government and its terrorists. The loading of the dice can be easily seen in the ratio of terrorists killed to the security personnel killed. This ratio was very disappointing for a long time – about 1 security personnel for 3 terrorists. Since 9.11 this has improved slightly14 to 1 to 4.

It is beyond my comprehension as to why western media is so sympathetic to Pakistan. Is it because media is not serving the truth but its own agenda, whatever it may be? Then should media command the high respect that it gets? Or is truth so difficult to judge? And, why does Pakistan invariably gain by a third party intervention. Is it because of under-dog sympathy syndrome? Not really, because even when the democracy in East Pakistan was being trampled under the military boots of West Pakistan, the US was sympathetic to West Pakistan. (After every war Pakistan did not have to pay any penalty for its aggression. It got back money and equipment in aid from oil rich nations, and USA etc.) Ultimately despite being an aggressor, it is illegally occupying a third of the U. Kashmir. Was the idealism practiced by Nehru therefore impractical?

What conclusions can be drawn?

  1. The U.N. has proved incompetent in finding a solution to the Kashmir problem. The UN has, inadvertently, encouraged terrorism. Terrorism and drug trafficking help each other in increasing misery in the world.
  2. The problem of J&K is religious expansionism through terrorism, and not the so called, rebellion against an oppressive and occupational Government. Whereas the reverse may be true in POK.
  3. Ideal of non-violence is not yet practicable in the world.
  4. Religion does not guarantee unity of any nation, unless the religion is liberal.
  5. In a democratic nation terrorism should have no place, but in an open and democratic world terrorism still works. Terrorism can kill a long established culture of harmony and love among people of different religions as in J&K. Having suffered firsthand, the most powerful nation USA is now trying its best to eradicate terrorism, and it may or may not succeed. Successful fight against terrorism demands international cooperation, which US is in a position to get.
  6. India is unable to stop terrorism in J&K so long as it is being supported to the hilt by Pakistan through money, arms and ammunition, military training and the most prolific and cheap breeding ground for terrorists viz. madarasaas.
  7. Terrorism will not give Pakistan what it wants but will continue to increase misery and losses of innocent humans in J&K. This frustration may make Pakistan bold to wage a full fledged nuclear war. If terrorism is not stopped in J&K, danger of a nuclear war is very real and imminent.

Vishwa Mohan Tiwari, Air Vice Marshal (Retd)
May 14, 2002

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in kashmir and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Kashmir: Islamic Territory Vs Democracy (By V.M.Tiwari)

  1. Shankar swami says:

    this is really infirmative and eye opening article….

  2. masahira says:

    i agreed with author. thanksqz

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s