|

Human Rights: Are They Universal?

Only on paper has humanity yet achieved glory, beauty, truth, knowledge, virtue, and abiding love.” George Bernard Shaw

It is tragic that civilized nations have fallen from their lofty calling: namely, human rights for all mankind. There is a sad commentary on the state of human rights all over the globe. It seems to me that until there evolves a generally accepted moral duty among peoples and nations to assist all victims of widespread human rights violations by force or other stiff retaliation, human rights enforcement mechanisms will operate haphazardly and whimsically for reasons unrelated to the harm to the victims or the villainy of the perpetrators. It is the job of all human rights defenders to jump-start that moral evolution.

It might be said that never have so many human rights been proclaimed yet been so routinely violated. Think of the ongoing human rights atrocities at present that are going unsanctioned. Myanmar, where civilians are routinely driven from homes and cities are consistently destroyed. Tragic genocide in Syria. Kashmiris brutalized by 700,000 Indian military and paramilitary forces. The list goes on and on.

The life for Kashmiris has oscillated between grisly and gruesome. Human rights violations are frightful: extrajudicial killings, torture, rape, abductions, arson, and arbitrary detentions. Since 1989, more than 100,000 Kashmiris have been killed. Indian forces routinely commit war crimes with impunity under emergency laws. They do so because the likelihood of punishment by the Indian government is slim to none. The scale of gripping wrongdoing in Kashmir dwarfed what was witnessed in Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor and Southern Sudan prior to international intervention, yet the United States and the United Nations have watched the Kashmiris suffer like spectators at the Roman Coliseum.

Apart from the magnitude of violence unleashed by the Indian military forces against peaceful protesters in Kashmir, the most poignant aspect of the situation is the acute suffering of the whole population caused by the frequent curfews, disregard of normal life, arrests, detentions and sometimes disappearances of innocent civilians by the authorities. This is a situation without precedent in the south Asian subcontinent and with few parallels in the world today. That complacency gives at least the impression that Kashmiri lives and hopes are worth less than those of others. If India believed its rule in Kashmir was by consent rather than by coercion, it would hold a plebiscite with alacrity, just as the Great Britain routinely permits the Scotland to vote for independence

If, however, the world powers and the United Nations are unmoved by international law and moral justice to act, then Kashmiris will be forced to organize their own referendum like in Catalonia, Spain with the assistance of eminent persons of international standing and NGOs to decide their future. If that last alternative is forced upon them, Kashmiris hope that India, with the urging and moral suasion of the international community, will put no obstacles in the way and that the world will honor the results of the free and fair vote.

It is universally acknowledged that Kashmir is a global danger because of spiraling nuclear and missile proliferation in both India and Pakistan, coupled with their respective domestic political instabilities and historical animosities. A similar consensus agrees that the bilateral India-Pakistan formula for resolving the 70-year-old Kashmir conflict has proven empty, achieving no progress during those long years. For the Kashmir conflict to end, authentic representatives of the Kashmiri people – All Parties Hurriyet Conference — must be senior partners at the negotiating table along with India and Pakistan. No solution will endure without their consent voiced in a referendum.

The gruesome status quo in Kashmir is both legally and morally unacceptable and militarily and economically frightening. There is no time for further complacency.

In sum, the ingredients of a Kashmir solution are there. What remains are healthy doses of statesmanship and magnanimity of world powers including United States.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Dr. Ayub Thakur: Friend, Colleague and Visionary Leader

     

    Dr. Muhammad Ayyub Thakur, the first of four children, was born in 1948 in Pudsoo village near Shopian, in the Pulwama district of Kashmir.

    It was 1973 when I first heard that Dr. Ayub Thakur was active in raising the awareness about the Kashmir dispute at Kashmir University and was the President of Kashmir University Research Scholar’s Association. One fine morning I went to see him along with a family friend, Jinab Aashiq Kashmiri, then the Editor of Daily Azan. We just knocked on the door at his university apartment and went in. I had never met Dr. Thakur until that time. After greeting us, he went out and in few minutes brought a cook and told him to prepare the lunch for us. We told him that we did not want to eat. It is customary in Kashmir to say that even if you are hungry. He did not listen to us and the cook prepared the lunch and we had a delicious meal.

  • |

    Kashmir Event Held in Washington, D.C.

    Washington, D.C. February 15, 2104. “Our efforts should be to persuade the world community including the United States to urge both India and Pakistan to include the leadership of the people of Jammu & Kashmir in the negotiations to peacefully resolve the dispute over Kashmir. When we talk of Kashmir, we talk of the sentiments and enormous sacrifices made by the Kashmiri people during the past 67 years for a cause dear to all inhabitants, be they Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists. It is time that both India and Pakistan realize that until the Kashmiri leadership is included in the peace process, these negotiations between India and Pakistan may not lead them to any logical conclusion,” said Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai at a seminar, held at Holiday Inn Hotel and organized by Kashmir Form, Washington, D.C.

  • |

    Kashmiri Wishes Must be Respected: Sardar Qayyum Niazi

    Washington, D.C. April 11, 2015. “Kashmir is the longest running dispute on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council. The cause of the people of Jammu & Kashmir is sacred and the people of Azad Kashmir and Pakistan will never let the people of Kashmir down,” this was stated by Sardar Qayyum Niazi, former minister of Azad Kashmir and the chief guest of the occasion that was attended by friends of Kashmir. Mr. Niazi said that India and Pakistan must accept the solution of the dispute according to the wishes and aspirations of the people of Kashmir. He quoted Daniel S. Markey of Council of Foreign Relatiosn who said “There is little doubt that normalized relations between India and Pakistan, including a regionally acceptable settlement on Kashmir, would offer tremendous benefits to the United States.”

  • |

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ Needs to be Applauded: Dr. Fai

    Washington, D.C. December 10, 2013. 

     

    “We need to applaud the 1948 ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, which stands as a moral reproach to wrongdoing nations that may facilitate reforms, even though its lofty provisions safeguarding fundamental human rights remain dishonored in many parts of the world,” said Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai on the occasion of the 65th anniversary of the United Nations Human Rights Day.

  • |

    Why does India have a hard time to accept the disputed nature of Kashmir?

    “Kashmir is an integral part of India, constitutionally, legally and morally something that is non-negotiable.” Ram Jethmalani, Outlook Magazine, October 8, 2016.

    “Let me state unequivocally that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and will always remain so.’ Sushma Swaraj September 26, 2016

    The fallacy advocated by the most celebrated Indian jurist and the Indian foreign minister deserves some clarification.

    The people of Jammu & Kashmir who number more than 129 other existing independent nations individually and have a defined historical identity, are at present engaged in a mass struggle to win freedom and release from the foreign occupation of their land. This struggle is motivated by no bigotry or ethnic prejudice; its aim is nothing but the exercise of the right of self-determination explicitly agreed by both India and Pakistan.

    To the horrors of the repression from which they suffer are added two other circumstances, each cruelly adverse. One is the apathy of the world outside, including the United States that otherwise are justly proud of their championship of democracy and human rights. The second is the fog of myths and evasive arguments, like Kashmir being an integral part of India. It is my modest attempt to help mitigate these two circumstances. My appeal is directed neither to the religious or ideological sympathies of Indian Public Square nor to their leanings towards any particular political party but solely to their conscience and human concern.