|

There is youth-led resistance in Kashmir: Barrister Sultan

Articles, Uncategorised

Washington, D.C. August 21, 2017. “The conflict in Indian Occupied Kashmir has acquired a new dimension. Since, July of last year, Kashmiri youth have taken the lead to press for their inalienable right to self-determination, a right guaranteed by the United Nations. The youth has taken to streets, paralyzing the unlawful local administration. They have made it abundantly clear that there is no turning back – this is a do or die phase of the long struggle for “Azadi” (freedom) after decades of the oppressive Indian rule,” said Barrister Sultan Mehmood Choudhry, the former Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir during a press conference in Washington Metro-Politian area.

Barrister warned that the deadly silence of the world powers over gruesome human rights abuses by the occupation forces in Kashmir has given India a virtual license to kill innocent Kashmiris. He insisted that Kashmiris are not opposed to bilateral India‑Pakistani talks if they advance the cause of peace, international law, and human rights. What is outrageous about asking that these talks be made meaningful by including the Kashmiri leadership?

Barrister Choudhary added that it was high time the government of India realizes that such a huge movement that has been there since 1947 and especially after 1990 is a peoples struggle. The government of India has to stop people viewing Kashmir from the prism of Pakistan. Pointing out that hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, tortured, jailed, and are missing, Barrister said that no struggle of such magnitude could be sponsored by an external party.

Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai, Secretary General, World Kashmir Awareness Forum said that peace between India and Pakistan could help unlock another conflict with even higher stakes for the United States: the war in Afghanistan. Indeed, a growing chorus of experts has begun arguing that the road to Kabul runs through Kashmir — (The Road to Kabul Runs Through Kashmir, Jonathan Tepperman, Newsweek, February 10, 2010.) that the U.S. will never stabilize the former without peace in the latter. Suddenly, bringing India and Pakistan together seems to be very much in America’s interest. Which makes the Trump administration’s determination to avoid the issue increasingly hard to fathom.

The people of Kashmir do not wish anybody to take a partisan side. Kashmiris are convinced, nevertheless, that impartial observers would support the Kashmir cause based on universal principles, democratic values, rule of law and international justice. It is high time that all concerned parties — India, Pakistan and the Kashmiri leadership — sit together and chalk out a strategy for the sake of peace and stability in the region of South Asia. Because ultimately, the negotiations, not violence, is the only way to resolve the Kashmir conflict, and that Kashmiris cannot be excluded from the negotiating table if a peace process is to be serious, meaningful and result-oriented.

The event was sponsored by Sardar Zulfiqar Roshan Khan, Irfan Tassaduq Khan and Sardar Zubair Khan.

Similar Posts

  • |

    The UN and Kashmir: Where Do We Go From Here?

    If we were to judge the UN based upon its history of involvement in efforts to resolve international conflicts, the simplest answer is that it has been an enormous failure. The UN of course is a far more complex organization whose work covers such a wide range of activities that conflict resolution is really only a small aspect of its work. Nevertheless, if we consider the fact that its fundamental mission in being created was to be a means of preventing global catastrophes like the Second World War, then conflict resolution would have to be considered Job One. In addition, the word “conflict” in the phrase “conflict resolution” was defined as conflict among or between sovereign nations. As Chapter I, Article 2, stipulates, ” Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter;”

  • |

    Kashmir: Urgency in dialogue process

    “All of us remain concerned that the issue of Jammu and Kashmir should be solved through peaceful negotiations and should be willing to lend all the strength we have to the resolution of this matter.” President Nelson Mandela at the NAM Summit – September 2, 1998

    In matters of international conflict resolution, that can only imply the involvement of a third party mediator or facilitator. If Ashok and Ahmad can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together because they can’t agree on where the pieces go, then Sam, a specialist in eggshell reconstruction, should be called upon in order for differences to be resolved. Most importantly, without a third party’s impartial diligence in pursuing a settlement, breakdowns in lines of communication or other disputes that may arise will inevitably create barriers to resolution, and the process will fail. The side in the dispute which offers initiatives will always be seen as weak when both are out rattling their sabres; hence no progress can be made.

  • |

    United Nation must fulfill Kashmir obligation

    Washington, January 5, 2104. Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai, lamented today’s 65th anniversary of the non‑implementation of the January 5, 1949, United Nations resolution which says that the future of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite; there shall be no threat, coercion or intimidation, bribery or other undue influence on the voters in the plebiscite; no restrictions should be placed on legitimate political activity throughout the State; all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste or party, shall be safe and free in expressing their views; and there shall be freedom of the Press, speech and assembly.

  • |

    Kashmir: Restoring the Vision

    There is something very high schoolish and unsophisticated about the barbs and threats being traded between Pakistan and India, where fully grown men given the responsibility to manage nations shout at one another like two boys in a park squabbling over some Barbie Doll standing on the sidelines, who invariably has a look of disgust on her face. Think Kashmir. Yes, there have been two wars between the two over Kashmir, but too much is at stake. The statesmanship dictates that neither of these two countries should go to war, not nuclear war, because that might prove devastating to both countries. But they’ve got to beat their chests , behaving as though they’ve got something to prove.  
  • |

    Kashmir’s Jalil Andrabi and China’s Chen Guangcheng: A Similar Path, but a Fork in the Road

    One of the darkest chapters of Indian judicial partiality was left hanging half closed and banging in the wind when Major Avtar Singh, the killer of internationally known human rights activist and Chairman of Kashmir Commission of Jurists, Advocate Jalil Andrabi, was found dead after he killed his wife and two children, and finally himself this past Saturday morning, June 9, 2012, in Selma, California. Avtar Singh, a fugitive from justice, who lived in the hot dry central California community, a suburb of Fresno, was clearly haunted by his past, a past that had seen the blood spilled of more than one man by his own hands. He had killed four others to hide the murder of Andrabi, and now he had killed his own family.  

    In killing Jalil Andrabi, Avtar Singh certainly did not act on his own volition. He was only a major.   His act was no doubt a response to orders from above and occurred in a longstanding climate of impunity that the Indian army enjoys in Kashmir.   The Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which gives any Indian soldier the right in Kashmir to take a Kashmiri’s life under any circumstance, has enabled such a climate for decades.  And Jalil Andrabi had become a hated, despised man by the Army, a man dangerous to the status quo of continued murder and torture that had been taking place in Kashmir’s jails, interrogation centers and detention facilities for many years.