By Rahul Tumma:
What is the relevance of a war? Doesn’t it seem absurd? Every recognizable country has a government with a set of rules to govern us, written by some individuals, who claimed to represent us all in history at one point of time or another.
Kingdoms waged wars on other kingdoms to grab their land, resources and everything owned by kings and whatever came under their jurisdiction. Now, empires, even though a few exist today, transitioned from kingdoms ruling their subjects to governments again ruling their subjects. So what has changed from the atrocities committed in wars then and now? I say, nothing.
That should make us question what the relevance of governments are, if they can’t stay out of each other’s business? That should lead us to Jammu and Kashmir, as the prime example – a child state tormented between two nations and governments, where innocents and civilians become victims of wars from both the Indian Army and Pakistan’s ISI and their trained mercenaries.
A law passed called the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), which most of the the general populace seem not to be aware about until Irom Sharmila came into light again, who is probably undertook the greatest and the longest fasting unto death to get AFSPA repealed in the North East. She broke her fast recently and decided to run for office to remove AFSPA. We can only imagine the scores of victims who have mercilessly suffered between the armies, mercenaries and AFSPA.
I cannot digest the fact that those in uniform who are supposed to protect the people of their country, rape and kill them instead, in the name of defending the country from its foreign enemies. There cannot be more of a grave injustice than this. Of course, we all know what the politician class is made of, but this is outrageous and unacceptable and must be severely punished by law against the perpetrators of these crimes, who wear the uniforms and do these heinous crimes.
What is frightening is that we can fight terrorists without uniform and die trying, but we are not afforded the right to protest and oppose anyone in uniform, irrespective of whether or not he commits a crime in AFSPA-ruled states. That is insane.
Does anybody have the exact statistics of how many people were killed in Jammu and Kashmir just because they protested their right to live in peace. What can anyone do, in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK), when every terrorist threatens to rape and kill the inhabitants of an area, if they don’t provide shelter and food to them? What can be worse if the Army resorts to the same sexual violence and killings on these helpless innocent families, who are held hostage by terrorists on all sides?
But today, it’s unbelievable that small children and youth are wounded for life due to the usage of pellet guns, causing severe injuries to eyes.
What is it that distinguishes a terrorist from a man in uniform or what is it that differentiates a terrorist from a terrorist in uniform? The difference separating them is getting thinner and thinner.
The first step to solve a problem is recognising and acknowledging that there is a problem, however harsh the reality is and we should not run away and turn a blind eye to that problem because this society cannot thrive and be completely safe with peace until we feel the same pain as those who are unrelated to us and yet suffer for no crime of their own doing.
This is the harsh reality and Burhan Wani is one such manifestation of that reality among thousands of others, whom we don’t know. He must have definitely thought he is fighting to liberate the people of Kashmir from the Indian Armed Forces and AFSPA, or why would he want to become a militant?
You apparently have the freedom to think and express yourselves, as per the Indian constitution but that freedom is clearly limited with so many sedition charges against various personalities and organisations for voicing their opinions, for reasons they thought were correct. We cannot tell a person how to think and teach them what is correct or wrong, but we can definitely engage in a discussion and voice our perspectives on it.
When we can’t delete one single line in an absurd law of a constitution, formed by few individuals, enforced with paper agreements from imperial and colonial empires, that looted, raped and made people kill each other in the longest running war in the last century then I can’t tell what democracy and government is all about.
There is no universal definition and world wide acceptance of a single definition of ‘terrorism’. When we don’t even have a single definition for terrorism, on what basis do governments wage wars and kill innocents and make them homeless, orphaned victims in the name of wars against terrorism. The Jammu and Kashmir problem can’t even be properly defined, because it’s so complicated, where after being granted independence, it had to form a pact with the Indian government to be merged with India.
My question is simple. What would you all do if official government designated Indian/Pakistani Armed forces injure, rape and kill a larger populace of a state in the name of patriotism just like militants and terrorists have been doing for many decades against everyone who opposes them.
Should the wars continue or should they be settled with dialogue? Should disputed areas form new countries just like how the British divided us into India and Pakistan with signed agreements and form constitutions that legally bind everyone not to harm each other?
This article was originally published on the author’s personal blog.