|

Dr. Fai Addressed a Forum of Journalists in Washington

WASHINGTON, D.C. June 27, 2012 (APP): Jammu and Kashmir is an internationally recognized disputed territory and has never been an integral part of India, a veteran Kashmiri leader said.

“I want to debunk this myth created by India that Kashmir is an integral part of India —- this is a matter of historical record that India occupied the region on October 27, 1947 when the very first Indian soldier set foot on the soil of Kashmir —- the highest diplomatic forums including the United Nations and the United States have recognized the disputed nature of the region,” Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai told a forum of journalists in Springfield, Virginia.

The Kashmiri-American activist said in the post-9/11 world, New Delhi has tried to weave a smokescreen with some unfounded myths, which seek to discredit the genuine struggle of the people. But these ploys will never be able to cover up the reality and sufferings of people in the Occupied Kashmir, he added.

“India has failingly tried to equate Kashmiri people with terrorists — how can a people, who believe in the UN-mandated right to self-determination and then hold demonstrations to go to the UN office in Srinagar to remind the international community of its pledge, be terrorists? Terrorists don’t believe in the UN system or any other global forum.

“Also, how can an entire population of millions be dubbed as terrorists when they hold peaceful demonstrations for their promised rights?” he questioned.

Dr. Fai also said that India would like you to believe that Kashmir is an issue of fundamentalism. He explained that “the term fundamentalism is quite inapplicable to the Kashmiri society. One of the proud distinctions of Kashmir has been the sustained tradition of tolerance and amity between the members of different religious communities. It has a long tradition of moderation and non-violence. Its culture does not generate extremism or fundamentalism. The fact is that Kashmir conflict was never a fight between Hindus and Muslims. It was never a struggle between theocracy and secularism. Nor was it a border dispute between India and Pakistan. It has always been about the hopes and future of 17 million people of Kashmir, be they Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs or Buddhists.”

Fai, who next month begins a two-year period of incarceration, told journalists that his sentencing pertains to tax-related issues and not as an agent of a foreign government.

“The U.S. government voluntarily withdrew allegations against me that I was an agent of a foreign government,” he clarified.

Fai regretted that despite the US government’s voluntarily dropping the allegations against him, some parts of the media misleadingly tried to give the impression that the sentencing was on account of his being an agent of a foreign government. He said that he pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy and tax violations.

Fai emphasized, “I have never worked for Pakistan. I am not an agent of Pakistan. I dedicated all my effort to the Kashmir cause and for the peace in the region”. Even the federal court judge, Fai explained, who sentenced me called Kashmir a wonderful cause and said: “I don’t doubt your love for Kashmir and its people, and I do not doubt that your mission over the last 25 years has been a mission to bring peace to Kashmir and to try and identify a means to peace between India and Pakistan and Kashmir. You are to be heartily commended for those efforts. But your zealousness overwhelmed your good judgment.”

Dr. Fai quoted his attorney, Ms. Nina Ginsberg who said in the court, “And I will tell you that Dr. Fai absolutely, from the very outset, adamantly denied that he was ever, in Mr. Kromberg’s terms, a shill for the Pakistani government. And this case would have gone to trial had the Government not agreed, for whatever the reasons are– My reasons, my view of their reasons is they couldn’t prove it. They have a lot of words that were captured in intercepts, 20 years of intercepts, hundreds of thousands of interprets, and Mr. Kromberg cannot stand in front of this Court with one example of a statement, a public statement by Dr. Fai, a writing by Dr. Fai, a position taken at a conference that he sponsored, not one, not one word that is anything that could be characterized as propaganda for the Pakistani government.”

Fai said he would continue with his bid to draw world attention to the need to give the Kashmiris their long-denied right to self-determination. The Kashmiri-American community and all those who believe in universal human rights and human dignity will continue to project the Kashmir cause in Washington, he said.

In this respect, he referred to a series of planned conferences and advocacy moves that would highlight to the U.S. administration the need to address the longstanding Kashmir dispute in accordance with will and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

 

{gallery}7{/gallery}

 

Similar Posts

  • Fresh thinking is needed to cut the Gordian knot in Kashmir

    The best way to solve any problem is to remove its cause.” Dr. Martin Luther King

    The Joint Resistance Leadership (JRL) in Kashmir has shown willingness to talk provided the Government of India clarifies the parameters of talks.

    In an interview with The Indian Express, (June 5, 2018) Dineshwar Sharma, the Chief Interlocutor said, “When I talk to the younger generation there (Kashmir), often they confront me with so many questions and even talk about Azaadi… Any rational discussion will be possible when we are able to first address the sentiment of the people…” In this interview, Mr. Sharma has made it clear that the sentiments of the people of Kashmir are for Azaadi.

  • |

    Self-Determination and the Issue of Kashmir

    The evolution of the right of self-determination has been one of the great normative narratives of the twentieth century. It was part of the visionary contributions of President Woodrow Wilson, who despite a deep-seated conservatism, seemed to have an uncontrollable tendency to give credibility to normative ideas that contained implications that carried far, far beyond his intentions. Ever since the words of self-determination left the lips of President Woodrow Wilson, the wider meaning of the words has excited the moral, political and legal imagination of oppressed peoples around the world. Although, self-determination even now, decades later, still seems to be a Pandora’s Box that no one knows how to close, and despite concerted efforts there is little likelihood that the box will be closed anytime soon. 

  • |

    Kashmiris’ Wishes Must Be Respected: Dr. Fai

    Washington, D.C. June 29, 2012. “Any Kashmir solution that fails to command the consensus of the 17 million people of Jammu & Kashmir is doomed to shipwreck moments after launching. Indeed, any process that ignores the wishes of the people of Kashmir will not only prove to be an exercise in futility but can also cause incalculable human and political damage. Thus, it makes no sense to negotiate over their heads. The best that could result from these meaningless negotiations would be sound and fury signifying nothing, as at Tashkent, Simla, Lahore and elsewhere,” said Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai at a reception held in his honor in Darnestown, Maryland.

    Dr. Fai thanked the members of the Kashmiri American community for becoming instrumental in highlighting the issue of Kashmir not only in Washington, D. C. but in New York City as well. He told his well-wishers that the people of the Indian Occupied Kashmir remain indebted to them for their relentless and consistent advocacy for the just cause of Kasshmir.

  • |

    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.