|

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

  • |

    ‘Global partnership for sustainable development in the context of the post-2015 development agenda’

     
    I am honored by the opportunity to share my views with such an esteemed audience who are participating in the ‘United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’ at UN headquarters in New York. The issue of global sustainable development is the issue of the twenty-first century. Never before have so many suffered amidst liberty and luxury for the few. The wealth of single individuals exceeds the wealth of many nations. In highly developed countries, the number of persons living past 80 years is soaring. 
  • |

    Kashmir Dispute: A Way Forward

    The dispute over the status of Kashmir can be settled only in accordance with the will of the people which can be ascertained through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite, internationally supervised. This was the common ground taken by all the three parties to the dispute – viz.: the people of Kashmir, India and Pakistan. It was supported without any dissent by the United Nations Security Council – and prominently championed by the United States, Britain and France.

  • |

    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.”

  • |

    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.”

  • |

    Global Donors Forum, 2014

    Global Donors Forum, 2014

    Gaylord National Convention Center, National Harbor, Maryland
    April 13-16, 2014

    International Conflicts & the Role of Media

    Cihangir Isbilir
    Coordinator, UNIW & International Rabaa Platform, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen. I greet you all respectfully. I hope and pray for the success of the Global Donors Forum of 2014.

    Syria: I was at the Turkey-Syrian border last week. I wanted to make an assessment of the life condition of the people in the region. Especially, I wanted to observe personally the situation of Turkmens and Armenians who have been the subject of the media recently. I was deeply moved during my visit to the area. The people there are asking: “How can this happen in today’s World and that too in 2014?” Why the death of one hundred sixty thousand innocent people cannot shake the conscience of the humanity? Millions of people had to abandon their country because of the grim condition. The World powers have remained passive to this barbaric situation. They ask, why?

  • |

    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.