Land and Freedom
Kashmir is in crisis: the region's Muslims are mounting huge
non-violent protests against the Indian government's rule. But,
asks Arundhati Roy, what would independence for the territory
mean for its people?
By Arundhati Roy
22/08/08 " The
Guardian" -- - For the past 60 days or so, since
about the end of June, the people of Kashmir have been free.
Free in the most profound sense. They have shrugged off the
terror of living their lives in the gun-sights of half a million
heavily armed soldiers, in the most densely militarised zone in
the world.
After 18 years of administering
a military occupation, the Indian government's worst nightmare
has come true. Having declared that the militant movement has
been crushed, it is now faced with a non-violent mass protest,
but not the kind it knows how to manage. This one is nourished
by people's memory of years of repression in which tens of
thousands have been killed, thousands have been "disappeared",
hundreds of thousands tortured, injured, and humiliated. That
kind of rage, once it finds utterance, cannot easily be tamed,
rebottled and sent back to where it came from.
A sudden twist of fate, an
ill-conceived move over the transfer of 100 acres of state
forest land to the Amarnath Shrine Board (which manages the
annual Hindu pilgrimage to a cave deep in the Kashmir Himalayas)
suddenly became the equivalent of tossing a lit match into a
barrel of petrol. Until 1989 the Amarnath pilgrimage used to
attract about 20,000 people who travelled to the Amarnath cave
over a period of about two weeks. In 1990, when the overtly
Islamist militant uprising in the valley coincided with the
spread of virulent Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) in the Indian
plains, the number of pilgrims began to increase exponentially.
By 2008 more than 500,000 pilgrims visited the Amarnath cave, in
large groups, their passage often sponsored by Indian business
houses. To many people in the valley this dramatic increase in
numbers was seen as an aggressive political statement by an
increasingly Hindu-fundamentalist Indian state. Rightly or
wrongly, the land transfer was viewed as the thin edge of the
wedge. It triggered an apprehension that it was the beginning of
an elaborate plan to build Israeli-style settlements, and change
the demography of the valley.
Days of massive protest forced
the valley to shut down completely. Within hours the protests
spread from the cities to villages. Young stone pelters took to
the streets and faced armed police who fired straight at them,
killing several. For people as well as the government, it
resurrected memories of the uprising in the early 90s.
Throughout the weeks of protest, hartal (strikes) and police
firing, while the Hindutva publicity machine charged Kashmiris
with committing every kind of communal excess, the 500,000
Amarnath pilgrims completed their pilgrimage, not just unhurt,
but touched by the hospitality they had been shown by local
people.
Eventually, taken completely by
surprise at the ferocity of the response, the government revoked
the land transfer. But by then the land-transfer had become what
Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the most senior and also the most overtly
Islamist separatist leader, called a "non-issue".
Massive protests against the
revocation erupted in Jammu. There, too, the issue snowballed
into something much bigger. Hindus began to raise issues of
neglect and discrimination by the Indian state. (For some odd
reason they blamed Kashmiris for that neglect.) The protests led
to the blockading of the Jammu-Srinagar highway, the only
functional road-link between Kashmir and India. Truckloads of
perishable fresh fruit and valley produce began to rot.
The blockade demonstrated in no
uncertain terms to people in Kashmir that they lived on
sufferance, and that if they didn't behave themselves they could
be put under siege, starved, deprived of essential commodities
and medical supplies.
To expect matters to end there
was of course absurd. Hadn't anybody noticed that in Kashmir
even minor protests about civic issues like water and
electricity inevitably turned into demands for azadi, freedom?
To threaten them with mass starvation amounted to committing
political suicide.
Not surprisingly, the voice that
the government of India has tried so hard to silence in Kashmir
has massed into a deafening roar. Raised in a playground of army
camps, checkpoints, and bunkers, with screams from torture
chambers for a soundtrack, the young generation has suddenly
discovered the power of mass protest, and above all, the dignity
of being able to straighten their shoulders and speak for
themselves, represent themselves. For them it is nothing short
of an epiphany. Not even the fear of death seems to hold them
back. And once that fear has gone, of what use is the largest or
second largest army in the world?
There have been mass rallies in
the past, but none in recent memory that have been so sustained
and widespread. The mainstream political parties of Kashmir -
National Conference and People's Democratic party - appear
dutifully for debates in New Delhi's TV studios, but can't
muster the courage to appear on the streets of Kashmir. The
armed militants who, through the worst years of repression were
seen as the only ones carrying the torch of azadi forward, if
they are around at all, seem content to take a back seat and let
people do the fighting for a change.
The separatist leaders who do
appear and speak at the rallies are not leaders so much as
followers, being guided by the phenomenal spontaneous energy of
a caged, enraged people that has exploded on Kashmir's streets.
Day after day, hundreds of thousands of people swarm around
places that hold terrible memories for them. They demolish
bunkers, break through cordons of concertina wire and stare
straight down the barrels of soldiers' machine guns, saying what
very few in India want to hear. Hum Kya Chahtey? Azadi! (We want
freedom.) And, it has to be said, in equal numbers and with
equal intensity: Jeevey jeevey Pakistan. (Long live Pakistan.)
That sound reverberates through
the valley like the drumbeat of steady rain on a tin roof, like
the roll of thunder during an electric storm.
On August 15, India's
independence day, Lal Chowk, the nerve centre of Srinagar, was
taken over by thousands of people who hoisted the Pakistani flag
and wished each other "happy belated independence day" (Pakistan
celebrates independence on August 14) and "happy slavery day".
Humour obviously, has survived India's many torture centres and
Abu Ghraibs in Kashmir.
On August 16 more than 300,000
people marched to Pampore, to the village of the Hurriyat
leader, Sheikh Abdul Aziz, who was shot down in cold blood five
days earlier.
On the night of August 17 the
police sealed the city. Streets were barricaded, thousands of
armed police manned the barriers. The roads leading into
Srinagar were blocked. On the morning of August 18, people began
pouring into Srinagar from villages and towns across the valley.
In trucks, tempos, jeeps, buses and on foot. Once again,
barriers were broken and people reclaimed their city. The police
were faced with a choice of either stepping aside or executing a
massacre. They stepped aside. Not a single bullet was fired.
The city floated on a sea of
smiles. There was ecstasy in the air. Everyone had a banner;
houseboat owners, traders, students, lawyers, doctors. One said:
"We are all prisoners, set us free." Another said: "Democracy
without freedom is demon-crazy." Demon-crazy. That was a good
one. Perhaps he was referring to the insanity that permits the
world's largest democracy to administer the world's largest
military occupation and continue to call itself a democracy.
There was a green flag on every
lamp post, every roof, every bus stop and on the top of chinar
trees. A big one fluttered outside the All India Radio building.
Road signs were painted over. Rawalpindi they said. Or simply
Pakistan. It would be a mistake to assume that the public
expression of affection for Pakistan automatically translates
into a desire to accede to Pakistan. Some of it has to do with
gratitude for the support - cynical or otherwise - for what
Kashmiris see as their freedom struggle, and the Indian state
sees as a terrorist campaign. It also has to do with mischief.
With saying and doing what galls India most of all. (It's easy
to scoff at the idea of a "freedom struggle" that wishes to
distance itself from a country that is supposed to be a
democracy and align itself with another that has, for the most
part been ruled by military dictators. A country whose army has
committed genocide in what is now Bangladesh. A country that is
even now being torn apart by its own ethnic war. These are
important questions, but right now perhaps it's more useful to
wonder what this so-called democracy did in Kashmir to make
people hate it so?)
Everywhere there were Pakistani
flags, everywhere the cry Pakistan se rishta kya? La illaha
illallah. (What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but
Allah.) Azadi ka matlab kya? La illaha illallah. (What does
freedom mean? There is no god but Allah.)
For somebody like myself, who is
not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hard - if not
impossible - to understand. I asked a young woman whether
freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a
woman. She shrugged and said "What kind of freedom do we have
now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?" Her reply
silenced me.
Surrounded by a sea of green
flags, it was impossible to doubt or ignore the deeply Islamic
fervour of the uprising taking place around me. It was equally
impossible to label it a vicious, terrorist jihad. For Kashmiris
it was a catharsis. A historical moment in a long and
complicated struggle for freedom with all the imperfections,
cruelties and confusions that freedom struggles have. This one
cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be
stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for,
among other things, the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in
the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of
almost the entire Hindu community from the Kashmir valley.
As the crowd continued to swell
I listened carefully to the slogans, because rhetoric often
holds the key to all kinds of understanding. There were plenty
of insults and humiliation for India: Ay jabiron ay zalimon,
Kashmir hamara chhod do (Oh oppressors, Oh wicked ones, Get out
of our Kashmir.) The slogan that cut through me like a knife and
clean broke my heart was this one: Nanga bhookha Hindustan, jaan
se pyaara Pakistan. (Naked, starving India, More precious than
life itself - Pakistan.)
Why was it so galling, so
painful to listen to this? I tried to work it out and settled on
three reasons. First, because we all know that the first part of
the slogan is the embarrassing and unadorned truth about India,
the emerging superpower. Second, because all Indians who are not
nanga or bhooka are and have been complicit in complex and
historical ways with the elaborate cultural and economic systems
that make Indian society so cruel, so vulgarly unequal. And
third, because it was painful to listen to people who have
suffered so much themselves mock others who suffer, in different
ways, but no less intensely, under the same oppressor. In that
slogan I saw the seeds of how easily victims can become
perpetrators.
Syed Ali Shah Geelani began his
address with a recitation from the Qur'an. He then said what he
has said before, on hundreds of occasions. The only way for the
struggle to succeed, he said, was to turn to the Qur'an for
guidance. He said Islam would guide the struggle and that it was
a complete social and moral code that would govern the people of
a free Kashmir. He said Pakistan had been created as the home of
Islam, and that that goal should never be subverted. He said
just as Pakistan belonged to Kashmir, Kashmir belonged to
Pakistan. He said minority communities would have full rights
and their places of worship would be safe. Each point he made
was applauded.
I imagined myself standing in
the heart of a Hindu nationalist rally being addressed by the
Bharatiya Janata party's (BJP) LK Advani. Replace the word Islam
with the word Hindutva, replace the word Pakistan with
Hindustan, replace the green flags with saffron ones and we
would have the BJP's nightmare vision of an ideal India.
Is that what we should accept as
our future? Monolithic religious states handing down a complete
social and moral code, "a complete way of life"? Millions of us
in India reject the Hindutva project. Our rejection springs from
love, from passion, from a kind of idealism, from having
enormous emotional stakes in the society in which we live. What
our neighbours do, how they choose to handle their affairs does
not affect our argument, it only strengthens it.
Arguments that spring from love
are also fraught with danger. It is for the people of Kashmir to
agree or disagree with the Islamist project (which is as
contested, in equally complex ways, all over the world by
Muslims, as Hindutva is contested by Hindus). Perhaps now that
the threat of violence has receded and there is some space in
which to debate views and air ideas, it is time for those who
are part of the struggle to outline a vision for what kind of
society they are fighting for. Perhaps it is time to offer
people something more than martyrs, slogans and vague
generalisations. Those who wish to turn to the Qur'an for
guidance will no doubt find guidance there. But what of those
who do not wish to do that, or for whom the Qur'an does not make
place? Do the Hindus of Jammu and other minorities also have the
right to self-determination? Will the hundreds of thousands of
Kashmiri Pandits living in exile, many of them in terrible
poverty, have the right to return? Will they be paid reparations
for the terrible losses they have suffered? Or will a free
Kashmir do to its minorities what India has done to Kashmiris
for 61 years? What will happen to homosexuals and adulterers and
blasphemers? What of thieves and lafangas and writers who do not
agree with the "complete social and moral code"? Will we be put
to death as we are in Saudi Arabia? Will the cycle of death,
repression and bloodshed continue? History offers many models
for Kashmir's thinkers and intellectuals and politicians to
study. What will the Kashmir of their dreams look like? Algeria?
Iran? South Africa? Switzerland? Pakistan?
At a crucial time like this, few
things are more important than dreams. A lazy utopia and a
flawed sense of justice will have consequences that do not bear
thinking about. This is not the time for intellectual sloth or a
reluctance to assess a situation clearly and honestly.
Already the spectre of partition
has reared its head. Hindutva networks are alive with rumours
about Hindus in the valley being attacked and forced to flee. In
response, phone calls from Jammu reported that an armed Hindu
militia was threatening a massacre and that Muslims from the two
Hindu majority districts were preparing to flee. Memories of the
bloodbath that ensued and claimed the lives of more than a
million people when India and Pakistan were partitioned have
come flooding back. That nightmare will haunt all of us forever.
However, none of these fears of
what the future holds can justify the continued military
occupation of a nation and a people. No more than the old
colonial argument about how the natives were not ready for
freedom justified the colonial project.
Of course there are many ways
for the Indian state to continue to hold on to Kashmir. It could
do what it does best. Wait. And hope the people's energy will
dissipate in the absence of a concrete plan. It could try and
fracture the fragile coalition that is emerging. It could
extinguish this non-violent uprising and re-invite armed
militancy. It could increase the number of troops from half a
million to a whole million. A few strategic massacres, a couple
of targeted assassinations, some disappearances and a massive
round of arrests should do the trick for a few more years.
The unimaginable sums of public
money that are needed to keep the military occupation of Kashmir
going is money that ought by right to be spent on schools and
hospitals and food for an impoverished, malnutritioned
population in India. What kind of government can possibly
believe that it has the right to spend it on more weapons, more
concertina wire and more prisons in Kashmir?
The Indian military occupation
of Kashmir makes monsters of us all. It allows Hindu chauvinists
to target and victimise Muslims in India by holding them hostage
to the freedom struggle being waged by Muslims in Kashmir.
India needs azadi from Kashmir
just as much as - if not more than - Kashmir needs azadi from
India.
· Arundhati
Roy, 2008. A longer version of this article will be available
tomorrow at outlookindia.com .
Click on
"comments" below to read or post comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary.
Do not include personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our
guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity –
are not permitted.
See our complete
Comment
Policy and use this link
to notify us if you have concerns about a
comment. We’ll promptly
review and remove any inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and
educational purposes. Information Clearing House
has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator
of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|