The Government of India just repealed Articles 370 and 35A. This decisive and momentous action holds the promise of finally bringing peace and prosperity to Kashmir.
But click on most major international news outlet, and it’s honestly hard to tell fact from fiction when it comes to reporting on Kashmir, especially if you’re unfamiliar with the region and its history.
Here are 6 common questions that haven’t been answered correctly, and answers that set the record straight.
Why did the Government of India not consult the people of Jammu & Kashmir before repealing Article 370?
Technically, it did. Representatives for Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh participated in the vote in the Indian Parliament to remove Article 370. Some voted in favor. Some didn’t. That’s democracy in action for you.
Article 370 states in part: “(3) …the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative…”
And so, the President of India removed Article 370 in a public declaration and the Parliament overwhelmingly voted in support of it — 351 to 72 in the lower house and 125 to 61 in the upper.
There’s also a small survey covering all but one part of the state conducted by CNN News 18 survey. It shows 84% of the residents of Jammu and Kashmir supporting the decision to remove Article 370.
You also can’t overlook the fact that the people of Ladakh — a mostly tribal population of Buddhists, Shia Muslims, and Hindus — have not had their needs met by the dominant politicians in the Kashmir Valley. They have wanted to become a Union Territory for years.
Why are the residents of Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh being denied their fundamental rights?
Though they were citizens of India, residents of Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh actually lived under a separate set of laws, and many of the protections afforded by the Indian Constitution and other laws didn’t apply them.
Repealing Articles 370 and 35A has in effect removed their status as second-class citizens.
Who’s going to benefit? All Kashmiris and Ladakhis, but particularly women, children, and minority groups.
Kashmiri women will now enjoy the same rights as other Indian women — children, Dalits, and LGBT people too.
If you were a Kashmiri woman living in the state, but married someone from outside the state, guess what? You and your children lost any right to own property in Kashmir. If you were a Kashmiri man, you’d be in luck. You could marry a non-Kashmiri and still retain your right to own property and inheritance. That’s all changed now. Kashmiri women can marry whomever they want from wherever and still keep their land and pass it on.
If you’re a Muslim woman in Kashmir, your husband could simply utter, “talaq talaq talaq” and you would be instantaneously divorced. Indian Muslim women are protected against this form of automatic divorce. Now Kashmiri Muslim women are protected too.
Children in India have a fundamental right to education under the Right to Education Act. They’re also protected against child marriage. Now Kashmiri children have both.
Scheduled Castes (groups who have been historically marginalized) have access to one of the largest affirmative action programs in the world, opening opportunities to educational, economic, and social empowerment. These programs didn’t extend to Kashmir, but now they do.
India has made a lot of progress in the realm of LGBT rights over the past few years. In fact, non-binary gender is legally recognized and being homosexual is not illegal. In Kashmir, Indian gay rights protections didn’t apply. They do now.
Didn’t Article 370 protect Kashmir’s autonomy?
Not really. It was a compromise that was meant to be temporary.
Here’s a short history lesson.
When the British partitioned India into two countries — the democratic Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan — princely states had the option of choosing one of the two. Kashmir’s Hindu king couldn’t decide which country he’d join — his state had a rich Hindu legacy and a Muslim-majority. While he deliberated, Pakistan invaded Kashmir leading the king to seek India’s immediate assistance. With the support of other Kashmiri political leaders, he legally acceded the state to India. Pakistan did not accept the decision. The whole while, the British were manipulating events in the hopes that Kashmir would accede to Pakistan to protect their own interests and influence in the region.
India’s Prime Minister Nehru went to the UN to help resolve the dispute. The UN called for plebiscite to determine the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. But there was one major condition: Pakistan would have to withdraw its military forces from Kashmir. Pakistan didn’t and so the plebiscite never happened. That was nearly 70 years ago, and Pakistan has not withdrawn, and actually has continued to foment unrest, violence, and terrorism in Kashmir since.
After the state’s legal accession to India in 1947, Kashmiri political leader Sheikh Abdullah pressured Nehru to confer special status on the state and give local politicians more power. In an effort to appease him, Nehru agreed to a temporary and transient provision of Article 370 in 1949. Article 370 limited the Indian Parliament’s control over many legislative issues in Kashmir, and a few years later, Article 35A, which took away residency and property rights from many residents of Jammu and Kashmir, including women, children, and minorities, and of course, non-residents of Jammu and Kashmir, even though these provisions violated the Indian Constitution.
Why are Kashmiris not being allowed to protest? Don’t they just want freedom?
Take a close look at the images and videos of protests that have made it out. What are the protestors waving? They’re flags representing the Pakistan-sponsored terrorist group, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and others from the so-called Islamic State.
These protestors and the groups they support aren’t advocating for the creation of a secular, pluralistic, liberal democracy in Kashmir. Rather, they are seeking a hardline Islamist theocratic state in Kashmir where women, religous minorities, and ordinary, moderate Muslims would suffer horribly. We’re already seen the devastation that results from this ideology in Syria. Do we really need to see it in more places to be convinced of its danger?
More importantly, any framing of protests as being “for freedom” by major media outlets ignores the civilizational and historical fact that Kashmir was and is an integral part of India.
Indeed, the telecommunications blackout and travel restrictions imposed on the region have amplified grievances many Kashmiris hold against the Government. And, in attempting to root out insurgents over the past several years, ordinary Kashmiris have been caught in the middle, further aggravating some local sentiments .
Who are the Kashmiri Pandits? And why is no one talking about them?
Kashmiri Pandits are Hindus indigenous to the region.
Between 1989–90 approximately 95% of the Kashmiri Hindu population living in the Kashmir Valley were forced to leave in one of the world’s least known ethnic cleansings.
Conducted by Pakistan-sponsored insurgents through a violent campaign of terror, thousands of Hindus were killed, more than 30,000 homes, businesses, and places of worship destroyed or occupied. Approximately 350,000 Hindus (some say more) — the ancestors of whom had lived in the region for thousands of years without major communal conflict — were forced out of the region on threats of rape, torture, physical attack, and death. They have yet to be able to return to their ancestral homeland.
Any articles suggesting that the repeal of Articles 370/35 may contribute to potential demographic shifts in Kashmir that don’t acknowledge the ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pandits just 30 years ago — which itself was the last of many such forced exoduses resulting in major demographic shifts — are dishonest, and willfully so.
https://medium.com/@SuhagShukla/6-questions-that-wont-be-answered-correctly-if-you-re-reading-the-new-york-times-bbc-or-other-e127ea7aa77f
Read this before you decide you're "woke" about Kashmir
2087
theartofmadeline
yousharknotpass
pixelskylines
gracieabrams
