ICC: Muammar Gaddafi wanted for war crimes!

By Vivienne Walt

Muammar Gaddafi faces a potential war crimes trial at The Hague after the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Monday issued arrest warrants for the Libyan leader, along with his son Saif al-Islam and his military intelligence chief General Abdullah al-Sanoussi. The warrants allege that all three men were involved in ordering security forces to open fire on unarmed protesters last February, turning a peaceful protest movement into a four-month civil war.

A woman supporter of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi holds up a picture of Gaddaattend a rally at the green square in Tripoli June 23, 2011.

The arrest warrants turn the regime’s top three figures into fugitives in all of the 150 countries that recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC. The Gaddafi warrant claims that he ordered his security forces to “deter and quell by all means the civilian demonstration against his regime,” while his son Saif – who until last February was trumpeted by Western leaders as Libya’s great reformist hope – is alleged to have managed the logistics of the crackdown, effectively acting as his father’s Prime Minister. “His contributions were essential,” the warrant says of the younger Gaddafi, adding that he was “the most influential person with [Muammar Gaddafi's] inner circle, and as such, he exercised control of crucial parts of the state apparatus”. U.N. investigators believe hundreds of civilians were killed in Benghazi, Misratah, Tripoli and other cities during the second half of February, when security forces fired live ammunition into crowds of demonstrators.

Gaddafi is only the second sitting head of state (after Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir) to be indicted by the ICC since it began operating in 2003. And in theory, the crimes are serious enough to land the Gaddafis and their intelligence chief in prison for the rest of their lives.

In reality, however, the three men are already living as fugitives. Hunkered down in Tripoli, their movements have been drastically curtailed since NATO jets began bombing the capital in mid-March. Until then, Gaddafi retained a swaggering defiance against the rebels and their Western supporters, appearing atop the ramparts of Tripoli’s Red Castle fortress and delivering thundering pep talks on television, vowing to crush his foes. Now, weeks pass without any sign of Gaddafi, who has said he believes NATO forces aim to kill him.

As the NATO air campaign drags into its fourth month, Gaddafi has endured the deepest crisis of his 41-year rule far longer than NATO officials had expected. Still, there are signs that some within Gaddafi’s top ranks are scrambling for a political exit. Three government ministers held talks with foreign envoys on the Tunisian island of Djerba over the weekend, according to a brief picture of the talks shown on Gaddafi’s state-run television. Gaddafi’s envoy to Algeria met with Algerian officials on Monday to discuss the crisis, while African leaders met in South Africa’s capital Pretoria to discuss options to end the war.

It remains unclear whether the ICC warrants will speed an end to the war by accelerating the breakup of the regime, through the isolation of the Gaddafis, or will deepen its defiance by cutting off lines of retreat. Gaddafi spokesman Moussa Ibrahim on Monday shrugged off the arrest warrants, saying, “The ICC has no legitimacy whatsoever. We will deal with it.”

Under the international court’s rules, the Libyan regime is now responsible for rounding up the men and sending them to The Hague for trial. “One does not need to be a law professor to understand the unlikely scenario of the Libyan authorities to act on this,” says Richard Dicker, Human Rights Watch’s international justice program director, who has monitored the International Criminal Court since its inauguration.

Despite billions in funding, the court has failed to convict a single defendant in its eight-year history. Its arrest warrant against Sudan’s President Bashir was issued in March, 2009; more than two years later, the Sudanese leader is still in power and even traveling internationally – albeit only to countries that do not recognize the ICC – and officials in The Hague have appeared powerless to bring him to justice. When people are brought to court, trials can drag on for years.

With no foreign forces in Tripoli, arresting the Libyan leader and his son could require a cataclysmic split in the regime. Many military commanders and politicians have defected since February, but they have fled the capital to the rebel side, rather than moving against Gaddafi and his inner circle in Tripoli itself.

If NATO finally orders in ground forces – which it has, until now, vowed not to do – those forces could be obligated to arrest the three men should they be captured by countries that recognize the ICC. (The U.S. does not recognize the court.) And if Gaddafi finally agrees to exile, he is now barred from going to any country which has ratified the ICC. There are still plenty of destinations which would welcome him, however, including Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Angola and North Korea. And, says Dicker, “He could live in suburban Washington D.C., since the U.S. would have no obligation to arrest him.”

Pendulum of war

IN the past couple of weeks, Al Qaeda and its franchises have come back with a vengeance, attacking Pakistan, its security forces and the public. This also appears to be a prelude to an increase in violence in Afghanistan in the near future.

An important aspect of these new series of attacks is their concentration on Islamabad, Peshawar and locations along the Durand Line. In their latest onslaughts on urban centres, militants have used both improvised explosive devices and suicide bombers. Clearly, the militants are in good health and pose a serious existential threat to Pakistan.

The new attacks are significant in that they convey a message to Pakistan and the combined forces of more than 43 nations deployed in Afghanistan, that the recent loss of Osama bin Laden and one of Al Qaeda`s foremost commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, have not stripped it of its fighting abilities. The attacks also reflect the resilience and institutional capacity of the second tier of the insurgent team which is proving itself adept at meeting new challenges.Another factor that has added significance to the recent militant activity is the capacity of Al Qaeda and its various branches in Pakistan and Afghanistan to carry out multiple border incursions, as seen in Dir, Kurram and South Waziristan, within a short span of time.

Add these capacities to the assumed presence of militant cells within the Pakistani security services and serious questions are raised about whether the strategy followed so far in dealing with the militants is actually effective. The militants` ability to field insurgent groups of up to 300 men, as seen in the two recent attacks on Dir in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, is worrying.

According to local officials, a Taliban force of more than 200 fighters who were armed with light and heavy weapons and some of whom wore military uniforms attacked a police station in Shaldalo village of Upper Dir on June 1. The incursion was resisted by the Pakistani police and paramilitary forces and the engagement lasted several hours. Pakistani helicopter gunships took part in forcing back the militants – 23 security personnel were killed and the Taliban are said to have suffered casualties, but no dead bodies were recovered.

The Taliban had earlier launched a similar attack on April 22, when more than 400 fighters attacked a police post in Kharakhai in Lower Dir district. They overran the outpost while killing 16 Pakistani police personnel. Both attacks originated from across the border in the Afghan province of Kunar, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda have established safe havens after the US forces made a questionable withdrawal from Kunar and Nuristan in March 2010, creating a security hazard for Pakistani forces.

The Taliban have learnt that if they are relentless in their resistance, the US does withdraw. In leaving Kunar and more specifically the strategic Korengal valley, the US followed the path taken by the erstwhile USSR when it too withdrew from this part after the Mujahideen attacks became deadly. This was heralded as the beginning of the end of Soviet presence in Afghanistan. Does the loss of control over Kunar and Nuristan also herald a similar retreat by the US from Afghanistan?

“The withdrawal is a great victory for us,” said Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid in April 2010, when the Taliban forces occupied US posts in Korengal and Pech valleys. “The area is very, very important for us. Its mountains provide a good hideout, it can be used as training ground and lead our operations from the region there.” The severity of attacks on Pakistani territory in 2011 has proved him right.

It is not understood why Isaf commander Gen Petraeus told the US Senate Armed Services Committee on March 15 that the Taliban`s momentum had been reversed in most areas of Afghanistan. At best, the situation is fragile and easily reversible. The situation on the ground seems to contradict the general`s hopeful projection.

Gen Petraeus added that America`s “core objective” was to “ensure that Afghanistan does not once again become a sanctuary for Al Qaeda”. Yet the two attacks on Dir clearly show that Al Qaeda has become a formidable presence in this part of the Hindu Kush and that the US has not been able to deny it this sanctuary.

For Pakistan, the policy options are either to conduct hot pursuit into Afghanistan, or to fence the Durand Line to protect itself against attacks. To do nothing is dangerous.

Due to this security threat from Afghanistan, the recent Pakistani gains in Swat, Buner, Dir, Bajaur and Mohmand appear to be tenuous. It is also clear that the insurgents are now deeply embedded within the region.

So, what next?

The following predictions can be safely made: the gains made by the Pakistan military in Swat, Dir and Bajaur will be tested; it is also clear that while the Pakistani military holds sway in the valleys, the mountains mostly belong to the militants. Yet while the Hindu Kush range provides them with advantages, it also limits the type of war that they can wage: they cannot field large groups. However, the mountains give them the ability to easily change their axis of attack more quickly than the military, which is dependent on a long supply chain.

Furthermore, public opinion in Pakistan that is favourable to the militants allows them to receive a steady supply of volunteers. These factors provide them the ability to conduct a war of attrition against Pakistan for a long time to come. They also have the ability to extend insecurity to other parts of the country to lessen the pressure against them.

AFGHAN STALEMATE

Last week Admiral Michael Mullen made rather blunt remarks in Islamabad that ISI’s continued links with the Haqqani network were at the core of Pakistan’s problematic relations with the United States. “The ISI has a rich history of how they operated in this part of the world, to protect their own country…The Haqqani network had fuelled the Afghan insurgency by supporting, training and funding fighters who were killing American and coalition troops in Afghanistan,” said the Admiral. Jockeying between the conflicting strategies of simultaneously wooing and weakening the Haqqani’s, Admiral is often fatigued enough to relapse into Bush era strategic environment. Dynamics of Afghan conflict have moved to new planes; it is an open secret that Admiral’s boys had been intimately negotiating with Haqqanis, both with and without ISI’s facilitation.

Likewise, recently released biannual report of the White House to Congress on Pakistan and Afghanistan, has cast critical aspersions on Pakistan, both in the domain of governance and counter-insurgency operations. This report is an indictment on Pakistan; and it accepts no responsibility regarding deliberate ambiguities in American policies towards Afghanistan and Pakistan. White House is of the view that “There remains no clear path to defeating the insurgency in Pakistan, despite the unprecedented and sustained deployment of over 147,000 forces”.

The latest phase of the Mohmand operations which concluded in March has been cited as an example of Pakistan’s inability to hold and build areas cleared of militants. The fact that 50,000 internally displaced persons has been able to return to their homes in Mohmand agency as a result of “Operation Brekhna” finds no appreciation. Pakistan’s political and military leadership have been assessed harshly. America expects Pakistan to perform a feat single-handed which Americans could not accomplish with the military might of over 40 countries at their disposal.

America’s policy of measured vagueness in the context of troops’ pullout from Afghanistan has begun to haunt it; indeed the bluff has been called. Though tempo of the events in Libya has eclipsed the Afghan issue, it will soon reoccupy the centre stage. Libyan conflict cannot be resolved inline with American blueprints without inducting a large number of land forces into the North African theatre; and such numbers would only be available if and when troops could be de-inducted from Afghanistan, and Iraq.

Though, Defence Secretary Robert Gates had told a recent West Point audience that “any future defence secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should have his head examined”, he may already be busy in a number crunching exercise; challenges of extricating over 100,000 American troops from Afghanistan without a clear victory are indeed phenomenal.

Morale of the American troops is marred by fatigue, homesickness, weariness and mental disorders. Suicide rate among the American soldiers is on the rise; there were 252 cases in 2010. This trend is linked to drug abuse, brain injuries, depression and back home worries. Apart from numerous cases of indiscipline in Iraq and Afghanistan, several cases of shootings within military establishments have also occurred inside American mainland.

President Karzai has announced the start of the transition process in Afghanistan. Going by the numbers, recruitment of Afghan security forces is expected to achieve its target figure of around 300,000 Afghans by coming October. However, infiltration of security forces by the Taliban is out of the ordinary. There have been a number of recent cases of Afghan security personnel killing foreign soldiers. Earlier this month, two American soldiers on a training mission were killed by a policeman.

Representation of Pushtuns in the security forces remains a challenge. Only 3.7 per cent of recruited Pushtuns are from southern Afghanistan against a target figure of 10 per cent. Tajiks are over represented in the Afghan National Army by about 8 per cent and by more than 15 per cent in the police. With these compositional and Psychological issues at hand, Afghan security forces represent a ticking bomb.

Reconstitution of the upgraded ‘Peace Commission’ radiates a ray of hope. President Karzai has announced that the upgraded commission also enjoyed US support. However, track record of such earlier efforts is not quite enviable. Moreover any concept or terminology that originates from America is not likely to sell well amongst the masses of Afghanistan. Any solution that is not owned and led by Afghans is destined to doom.

Turkey has since long been sincerely trying to play its role to sort out Afghanistan problem and for this purpose it has hosted several rounds of talks between Pakistani and Afghan leadership. Turkish initiative of allowing Taliban to set up their liaison office in Turkey is a positive development. This would bring various factions of Taliban closer to each other; and existence of a formal office would give legitimacy to an otherwise established reality of the political clout of Taliban. It would be appropriate if other countries as well as OIC, NAM, SAARC and the UN also allow such representation to Taliban. However, once again the fundamental error is exclusion of Iran from this process. Sustainable peace cannot be achieved in Afghanistan without taking Iran on board.

If anything could restore normalcy in today’s troubled Afghanistan, it is a comprehensive national reconciliation in which all Afghan have a stake. Fast emerging unfavourable security situation has compelled the US to negotiate with Taliban for a political settlement. Strenuous efforts (read machinations) are being made by the USA to win over Taliban. Initially these contacts were made secretly with India as behind the door facilitator. Later on, secrecy had to be abandoned when the US as well as President Karzai concluded that without active participation of Pakistan no headway could be made. Main stream Taliban entities are still united under Mullah Omar and have rejected pre-conditions of USA. They are aware that the US is no longer in a position to call the shots. Despite two troop surges the balance remains tilted in favour of Taliban. Taliban could not be split up. They are convinced that they have already won the war, and the countdown has started. Hence they are in no mood to compromise on American terms. For them, the US is now like a wounded animal which has transformed from a hunter into a hunted prey.

There are test balloons indicating an American stay up to 2024. President Karzai has recently stated that America intends to establish permanent military bases in Afghanistan. The US has for long been eying on Kabul, Baghram, Kandahar, Shindad and Herat as its military bases. These places are being speedily fortified and modernised. However, resurgence of Taliban, war weariness, haywire economy and uprisings in Middle East and Africa are compelling America to call it a day. Though Lisbon summit extended the tenure of this dead-ended war till 2014, a speedy withdrawal may be in the offing.

Syrian forces shoot protesters, kill 6 in mosque

Syrian forces killed six people on Wednesday in an attack on protesters in a mosque complex in the southern city of Deraa, and later opened fire on hundreds of youths marching in solidarity, witnesses said.

At least four youths were killed when the security forces intercepted them at the northern entrance of Deraa, witnesses said. Their bodies were seen at a clinic in the city.

There were unconfirmed reports that dozens more bodies were taken to Tafas hospital outside the city, they added.

“Bodies fell in the streets. We do not know how many died,” one witness said.

“You didn’t know where the bullets were coming from. No one could carry away any of the fallen,” another resident said.

The 10 people residents said were killed in the two attacks brought to 14 the number of civilians killed by Syrian forces in six days of demonstrations for political freedom and an end to corruption in the country of 20 million.

Snipers wearing black masks were seen on rooftops. Parents were seen crying in the streets during the evening, and loudspeakers from mosques around Deraa called on those whose relatives had died to go to clinics to collect the bodies.

“Peaceful, peaceful,” the loudspeakers echoed — a cry taken up by protesters across the Arab world to emphasize the peaceful nature of their demonstrations against entrenched and undemocratic rulers and corruption, and their demands for freedom.

Another witness saw 20 army trucks carrying soldiers heading to the city.

Deraa, on the Jordanian border, has long been a stronghold of the ruling Baath Party, which recruits cadres from the region. But in recent days it has become a focus of unprecedented protests against President Bashar al-Assad’s rule.

The shooting on Wednesday began just after midnight, when security forces attacked protesters in the vicinity of the Omari mosque in the city’s old quarter, the focal point of the Deraa protests, residents said.

Electricity was cut off and telephone services were severed. Cries of “Allahu Akbar (God is greatest)” erupted in one quarter after another as the shooting at the mosque began.

The bodies of two people killed in the mosque attack, a man and a woman called Ibtissam Masalmeh, where buried in Deraa on Wednesday. Thousands marched in the funeral chanting calls for freedom, and — for the first time since protests broke on Friday — slogans against Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah

“Honorable Syrians don’t rely on Iran or Hezbollah,” they chanted, breaking a taboo of criticizing Syrian foreign policy, which is largely built on an alliance with the Shi’ite Islamic Republic and the armed Shi’ite movement.

YouTube footage showed what was purported to be the street in front of the mosque before the attack, with the sound of gunfire audible and a person inside the mosque grounds yelling: “Brother don’t shoot. This country is big enough for me and you.”

The United Nations, France and the United States condemned the violence. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for a “transparent investigation” into the killings and for those responsible to be held accountable.

“We are deeply concerned by the Syrian government’s use of violence, intimidation and arbitrary arrests to hinder the ability of its people to freely exercise their universal rights,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We call on the Syrian government to exercise restraint and refrain from violence against these peaceful protesters.”

“ARMED GANG KILLED DOCTOR”

Those killed included Ali Ghassab al-Mahamid, a doctor from a prominent Deraa family who went to the Omari mosque to help victims of the attack.

An official Syrian statement said: “Outside parties are transmitting lies about the situation in Deraa,” blaming what it described as armed gangs for the violence.

It said they had “stocked weapons and ammunition in the mosque and kidnapped children and used them as human shields.” State television showed guns, grenades and ammunition it said were found in the mosque, but activists said the protest was peaceful and there had been no weapons.

An official statement said later that Assad had sacked Deraa governor Faisal Kalthoum. But a main demand of the protesters is an end to what they term as repression by the secret police, headed in Deraa province by a cousin of Assad.

The Baath Party has banned opposition and enforced emergency laws since 1963. But the wave of Arab unrest which has toppled leaders in Tunisia and Egypt presents Assad with the biggest challenge to his rule since he succeeded his father Hafez al-Assad, who ruled Syria for 30 years until his death in 2000.

Assad, a close ally of Iran, a key player in neighboring Lebanon and supporter of militant groups opposed to Israel, has dismissed rising demands for fundamental reform in Syria where his Baath Party has held a monopoly on power for 48 years.

Former colonial power France urged Damascus to carry out political reforms without delay and respect its commitment to human rights.

REFORM PLEDGE

On Tuesday, Vice President Farouq al-Shara said Assad was committed to “continue the path of reform and modernization in Syria,” Lebanon’s al-Manar television reported.

Authorities arrested a leading campaigner who had supported the protesters, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Tuesday. It said Loay Hussein, a political prisoner from 1984 to 1991, was taken from his home near Damascus.

In Damascus, authorities released six female protesters on Wednesday who took part in a silent demonstration last week supporting the release of political prisoners, lawyers said.

Assad has lifted some bans on private enterprise but ignored calls to end emergency law, curb a pervasive security apparatus, develop rule of law and freedom of expression, free political prisoners and reveal the fate of tens of thousands of dissidents who disappeared in the 1980s.

Harrowing tale of Pakistani policemen lynched in Bahrain

KARACHI: Kashif Mehmood joined the Bahraini police force soon after he graduated from the Pakistani school in Bahrain.

Bahraini protesters wave their national flag.

He wanted to follow in his father’s footsteps who joined the Bahraini police after migrating from Gujranwala’s Mandi Bahauddin area, some 30 years ago.

No one from Kashif’s family of four siblings and parents could imagine that one day the 20-year-old’s life would be cut short as brutally as it was last Wednesday.

Kashif was lynched and murdered by an angry mob when a police unit, which Kashif was a part of, was ordered to move in against protesters gathered at Pearl Square in Manama.

The nightmare for Kashif’s family, however, did not end at his death. Gruesome images and videos of his death have appeared all over the internet. Many have also posted hateful and racist slogans under them, against the Pakistani community in Bahrain.

“I haven’t slept in days,” says Ali, Kashif’s 18-year-old brother, while speaking over the phone as he emailed video links of his brother’s murder.

He sounded horrified when he said that houses of Pakistanis, especially those employed with the security forces, were being marked by protesters, to be attacked later.

Kashif, and another Bahraini policeman of Pakistani origin, Farooq Baloch, were on duty together on Wednesday, when an operation against the protesters was launched. Amid the chaos, the two young policemen, armed just with sticks, broke away from their unit and sought help from an approaching ambulance. Little did they know that the rescue van was actually loaded with protestors.

The ambulance ran them over, killing Baloch who had married three months ago and the sole breadwinner for his family.

Kashif, who barely survived the first onslaught, was kidnapped and taken to an empty ground.

Videos posted online show that groups of young men then took turns in kicking and clobbering with sticks Kashif’s lifeless body.

Even though it was apparent that he was dead, the protesters proceeded to mutilate his body, with groups of young men in their SUVs repeatedly running over the corpse.

The incident bore an eerie resemblance to the Sialkot lynching incident, where the onlookers cheered on as the victim was tortured.

Ali says his father sent his mother back to Gujranwala a few days ago. They have yet to tell her that her son died in such a horrific manner.

Both Kashif and Farooq were buried in Bahrain.

Another victim of the protestors’ wrath was the 54-year-old Saifullah Mohammad Ibrahim, who remains in critical condition after being severely injured in the attacks.

He worked in the police department and moved from Punjab decades ago, to settle in Bahrain.

“When [the protestors] took my uncle to the Lulu roundabout, they not only tortured him, but also heckled him for being a Pakistani,” said Maheen, a relative of Saifullah.

While humiliating him, the protesters chanted “Down down Pakistan, go back to your country,” Maheen added.

At least four Bahrainis of Pakistani origin have been reportedly killed and several dozens injured in the on-going crisis.

The security situation in the country remains volatile even though the state claimed that the protest was successfully being put down by Arab League-backed troops.

The main worry, however, for the Pakistani expatriates, is that the friction that this crisis has created in the Bahraini society will take years to repair.

When asked whether his family was considering leaving Bahrain for good, Ali said that although they were in shock, no one is thinking about leaving Bahrain or going back to Pakistan.

We were born and brought up in Bahrain, how could we just leave our home like that, he said.

“I’m going nowhere. I will join the police force like Kashif,” he added.

Occupied Kashmir under literary spotlight

By Beatrice Le Bohec

JAIPUR, India – Asia’s biggest literary festival, in India’s “pink city” Jaipur, has given pride of place to troubled Indian Kashmir, whose literature has been marked by more than two decades of rebel violence.

In recent years, the Jaipur festival has become the literary event not to be missed in India

Muslim-majority Kashmir has a rich literary tradition dating back to the 14th century, but few outside readers are familiar with its beauty because little has been translated.

But now a growing number of Kashmiri works are appearing in English as reader interest in a region beset by a separatist insurgency since 1989 is growing, festival organisers said.

Invited to appear at the five-day Jaipur Literary Festival, which began on Friday and is billed by organisers as the biggest in Asia, poet Naseem Shafaie read her work to a mainly English-speaking audience at a seminar.

Her translator Neerja Mattoo then took the floor to render the rhythm and words of Shafaie’s verse in English.

Shafaie’s haunting poetry evokes the pain she felt when her husband, a journalist, was the victim of an attack, and the distress of dispatching her son to New Delhi to keep him safe from the unrest in Kashmir.

Shafaie is the first woman to have published a book of poems in Kashmiri, entitled “Open Windows”.

“I see a growing interest in Kashmir because of the political situation. People want to read to learn,” Shafaie said through her translator.

The insurgency against Indian rule in Kashmir has claimed more than 47,000 lives, and the presence of hundreds of thousands of security forces in one of the most militarised regions in the world has fuelled the anger of residents, especially among jobless youth.

Last summer more than 100 people were shot dead by security forces during a wave of demonstrations triggered when a teenager was killed by a police tear gas bullet.

The Himalayan region is held in part by nuclear-armed India and Pakistan but claimed in full by both.

“In Kashmir, politics is inseparable from everyday life. No family was spared by the violence,” said Indian journalist Rahul Pandita, who originally hailed from the area and has reported in conflict zones such as Iraq.

“But it takes time for problems to find a place in the local literature, and it takes even more time for them to be translated into English.”

Kashmiri literature translated into English will develop in the next five years, he predicted, especially as “poetic expression grows in certain forms of misfortune.”

Mattoo, who has translated three books of Kashmiri short stories and poetry into English, said there were limits on the number of English versions that can can appear because of a simple lack of translators.

In recent years, the Jaipur festival, which began in 2006 with a handful of authors and participants, has become the literary event not to be missed in India.

More than 200 authors were invited this year and organisers expect more than 50,000 people to attend the event, which offers discussions, readings and concerts in the scenic setting of a 19th-century hotel in Jaipur known as the “Pink City” because of its rose-coloured buildings.

Border troops exchange sweets instead of fire

In a display of border bonhomie, officials from India’s Border Security Force (BSF) exchanged sweets with Pakistan Rangers to mark the Hindu festival of Diwali. The gesture was made at the RS Pura post of Kashmir.

Indian Border Security Force officials greet DG Pakistan Rangers Maj Gen Mohammad Yaqub Khan by offering him sweets at Wagah border.

Continuing the yearly tradition, BSF officials presented sweets, wishes and gifts to the Pakistan Rangers to celebrate the ‘Festival of Lights’.

BSF Commander Vinit Kumar presented the gifts while Pakistan’s Wing Commander Zulfikar Ali returned the gesture. The officials hoped peace and love would prevail between the two countries.

The troops exchange sweets on several festivals and the Independence Days of both the nations. On August 15, BSF guards offered sweets to their Pakistan counterparts at the Wagah border check post on the occasion of India’s 64th Independence Day celebration.

The Hindu community will celebrate Diwali on November 5 across Pakistan.

The ministry of minorities has announced it will celebrate this festival officially to bring the minorities into the national mainstream. It is part of an effort to promote tolerance, dialogue and remove misunderstandings among different faiths.

The ministry will hold some programmes, but the events will be simple in view of the devastation caused by recent floods.

Last week, on the request of the BSF, Punjab Rangers decided to discontinue the aggressive marching approach during the flag march ceremony at the Wagah border.

During a strategic meeting between top officials of the border forces of the two countries, discussions were also held on cross-border firing incidents.

Tension between border security forces of both countries remains high, as both India and Pakistan have on many occasions accused each other violating the LoC.

Last week the Indian military accused Islamabad of “major ceasefire violation”, alleging that Pakistani troops opened fire across the de facto border dividing Kashmir, killing one Indian soldier.

Arundhati Roy and Kashmir’s struggle for justice

Murtaza Shibli

The news that the prize-winning Indian author Arundhati Roy may be arrested for her remarks about Kashmir is not surprising. It is a sign of growing Indian intolerance towards the issue. During the current phase of the Kashmiri intifada, the only Indian response to Kashmiri demands for justice and self-determination has been the use of overwhelming military force. More than 112 civilians – mostly youths – have been killed and several thousand injured, mainly by the Indian military and paramilitary.

The current unrest in Kashmir has met with an increasingly brutal response from the Indian military.

In the absence of strong international criticism, the Indian state has been emboldened to crush any dissent or demands of justice ferociously. Intimidating Kashmiri civil society has always been part of the standard Indian response, but it has grown exponentially over the last few months. In early July, the police arrested Mian Qayoom, president of the Kashmir Bar Association (the main lawyers’ body), for protesting against human rights violations. He was arrested under the draconian Public Safety Act, which authorises incarceration for up to two years if the authorities feel that the detainee may disturb peace and order or threaten the security of the state.

Several other human rights activists, such as Ghulam Nabi Shaheen and political workers remain behind bars, along with hundreds of Kashmiri youths who have been detained for offences such as throwing stones at gun-toting Indian armed forces.

Frustrated by having to treat the mounting casualties amid curfew restrictions and with dwindling medical supplies, a group of doctors at the government medical college in Srinagar staged a peaceful sit-in – only to be accused by the police of various “offences” including rioting and “disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant”. The police also accused them of inciting people and using “anti-national slogans”. The largest local newspaper, Greater Kashmir, lamented that creating an atmosphere of intimidation in this way “speaks of the mindset that always contributed to the worsening of the situation”. It continued: “Rather than establishing a connect with its people and knowing from them what has gone wrong and how can it be corrected, government, by initiating such actions against people, is only pushing the situation towards worse.”

From the very beginning of the current unrest, the government adopted the policy of restricting journalists reporting on demonstrations and brutal government responses. The Indian army and paramilitary forces beat several journalists, refused to respect their curfew passes and even forced closure of leading newspapers as their offices remained locked and the journalists were denied access. In one such incident in July this year, 12 photojournalists working for local, national and international publications suffered serious injuries from security forces trying to stop them recording the demonstrations. One of the BBC’s Urdu service journalists, Riaz Masroor, was stopped and beaten by police as he went to collect his curfew pass on 9 July. According the BBC, he suffered a fractured arm.

In September, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) renewed its call to allow Kashmiri journalists to cover the unrest. This is how Anuradha Bhasin, the executive editor of the Kashmir Times, described the situation to me in an email in September: “The level of intimidation is so high that many reporters have been forcibly doing table [desk-based] stories, mainly operating from the homes. And as an editor, sometimes, even I find that a safer arrangement, given the vulnerability of the reporters in simply stepping out of their homes”.

The current phase of intifada has deeply exposed Indian vulnerability in Kashmir. In absence of any Pakistani support to the new generation of Kashmiris, Indian claims to blame Pakistan, Islamic terrorism and Lashkar-e-Taiba have lost credibility even among its own population.

This has provoked several newspaper reports and opinion articles by Indian journalists and commentators that not only question India’s brutal tactics but also have shown sympathy to Kashmiri demands. It has created what Roy rightly describes as “panic about many voices”, and the threat of charging her with sedition, she says, “is meant to frighten the civil rights groups and young journalists into keeping quiet”.

As the “ISI or Laskhar-e-Taiba” theory of the protests becomes increasingly untenable, Kashmiri demands are finding greater resonance within Indian civil society. The threat to Roy may be a crude attempt to prevent such criticism from gathering momentum at a time when Barack Obama is planning a visit to India next month. India is determined to keep Kashmir out of the picture and, to achieve this, intimidation and terror against Kashmiris has already entered another phase.

Unforgivable

Asif Ezdi

The current wave of pro-Azadi demonstrations which began in Occupied Kashmir on June 11 with the death of a teenage boy at the hands of the Indian forces entered its 100th day on Saturday. Nearly a hundred young Kashmiris have been killed by the occupation forces during this period for daring to raise their voice against Indian rule. More than a thousand have been injured, some maimed and disabled for life. Yet, in spite of the use of brute force to suppress it, the “Quit Jammu and Kashmir” movement has been growing and has gripped not only the major urban centres but also remote towns and villages of the Kashmir Valley. It has also spread to some of the Muslim-majority areas of Jammu. Eidul Fitr, and especially the following day, saw an explosion of popular anger against Indian occupation on a scale not seen since the nineties.

What began as a largely spontaneous and sporadic outburst of popular anger at the highhandedness of the occupation forces has now assumed the proportion of a mass rebellion. It has knocked the bottom out of the Indian case that the freedom movement is fed and instigated by Pakistan and that, by participating in the State Assembly election of December 2008-in which India claims that a phenomenal 65 per cent of the electorate took part-the Kashmiri people rejected the “hardliners” who demand Azadi. As APHC chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has said, the protests are a form of referendum showing that the Kashmiris want freedom from India.

Another reason for Indian concern is that the “Quit Jammu and Kashmir” movement is a resounding rejection by the Kashmiri people of the “settlement” that Musharraf was negotiating with Manmohan Singh through the backchannel, which would have sanctified the division of the state along the Line of Control and given India permanent control over the occupied part. According to former foreign minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, most of the APHC leadership had been on board and the only significant opposition had come from Tehreek-e-Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani. His lieutenants are now spearheading the current movement and setting the pace of the protests, with the “moderate” faction of the APHC mostly playing catch-up.

The reactivation of the backchannel negotiations has been a key element of Delhi’s Kashmir policy and it has been working quietly with Washington’s discreet support for this purpose. But the Zardari government has been dithering, not so much by design as by default. Kashmir is not on its radar screen because its main preoccupation is to hold on to power and save Zardari from corruption charges. With the upsurge in the Azadi movement, a return to the backchannel will become even more difficult to sell to the Pakistani public. Even Kasuri, the most persistent and ardent advocate of the backchannel in Pakistan, has fallen silent on this issue.

The popular rebellion in Kashmir has upset also the “domestic” part of Delhi’s Kashmir agenda which is focused on engaging the “moderate” APHC faction led by the Mirwaiz in talks on some form of autonomy within the scope of the Indian constitution. On Aug 25, Indian home minister P Chidambaram expressed the hope that in the next few days Delhi would be able to “restart the process of dialogue that will lead to a solution.” In response, Geelani laid down five conditions, which have been endorsed by the Mirwaiz. These include terms that are totally unacceptable to Delhi, like acceptance of Kashmir as an international dispute and the commencement of complete demilitarisation of the state. This has pushed back the prospects of the internal dialogue with Kashmiri parties sought by Delhi, especially after the massacre of a score of peaceful demonstrators in one day last week.

In short, the Kashmiri intifada has wrecked, or at least severely compromised, three main elements of Manmohan Singh’s Kashmir policy: the showcasing of the election to the State Assembly as an endorsement of Indian rule; the resuscitation of the backchannel deal; and the activation of the “internal” track of dialogue with the “moderates.” Besides, this summer’s popular uprising shows once again that even six decades of repressive Indian rule have not succeeded in suppressing the freedom movement. The baton has now been taken up by a new generation of Kashmiris. Instead of the armed struggle of the nineties, they have turned to mass street protests, often organised by educated young men through Facebook and mobile phones. It is no wonder that the Indian establishment and political parties of all hues have been unnerved.

There is every indication that in its desperation, Delhi will resort to even more violence to quell the popular agitation. This was signalled also by the deliberations of the all-parties meeting called by Manmohan Singh last week. All that the meeting decided was to send a delegation of politicians to Kashmir to meet all sections of the people and assess the ground situation. The meeting could not agree even on a token relaxation of India’s iron grip, such as a proposal by Omar Abdullah, the state’s beleaguered chief minister, for a dilution in the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFPSA). Nobody imagines that a change in the law would ease Indian repression in Kashmir, but even such a purely cosmetic measure was vetoed by the Indian armed forces.

An even harsher crackdown against the civilian population is now imminent. The Indian authorities have begun deploying the army to support the state police in enforcing the curfew and to prevent popular protests against the Indian occupation. Large numbers of “miscreants” are being rounded up and a manhunt has been launched to arrest Masarrat Alam Bhat, deputy leader of Tehreek-e-Hurriyat, who has played a key part in organising anti-India protests.

The international community has been a silent spectator to the reign of terror unleashed by India. One reason is to be found in the geopolitical plans or strategic interests of the US and other countries of the West. The last time Obama uttered the K-word was nearly two years ago. The Indian reaction was immediate. Since then the US president has carefully steered clear of Kashmir.

Another reason, one even more deplorable, for the indifference of the international community to India’s brutal repression of the Kashmiris, is the failure of the Pakistani government to raise the issue at the international level. In his recently published memoirs, former British prime minister Tony Blair recalls his surprise when during his visit to Pakistan after the 9/11 attacks Musharraf asked him to resolve Palestine rather than the Kashmir issue. The present government has also given the same low priority to Kashmir. In fact it is doubtful if it has a Kashmir policy. Its only response to the recent earth-shaking developments has been to issue two blandly worded statements. One of them calls for “restraint” by the Indian government, suggesting that if less force were used Pakistan would have no objection. The other statement refers to the occupation forces as “security forces” as if they were engaged in a legitimate activity to provide security.

Issuing statements from Islamabad will not be enough. The government must also devise a proactive policy to mobilise international support for the peaceful Azadi movement in the occupied state. Its failure to do so is unforgivable. As an immediate step, the government must forcefully take up the issue at international fora and bilaterally with Washington and other key countries. The prime minister (but please not Zardari) should address the UN General Assembly during the general debate beginning this Thursday and urge the international community to take steps to safeguard the human rights of the Kashmiris. The prime minister should also write letters to key heads of government. In addition, the foreign minister should address the Human Rights Council meeting currently in Geneva. Like the government, our parliament and political parties should also wake up to their responsibility to the people of Kashmir as they face the onslaught of the 700,000-strong Indian occupation force in the state.

Kashmir Chief Becomes Target of Mounting Public Frustration

CNN

The Kashmiri capital has been dominated by news of stone-throwing protests this summer, but on India’s Independence Day, Aug. 15, it was a shoe – not a stone – that grabbed the headlines. During the morning’s flag-raising ceremony, a police sub-inspector threw his shoe at Omar Abdullah, the state’s embattled chief minister, while Abdullah stood at attention before the Indian tri-color. The shoe didn’t come close to its target, and the policeman was immediately arrested, but the damage to Abdullah’s already battered reputation was done. Abdul Ahad Jan, the shoe-pelter, meanwhile, became an instant hero, as hundreds later gathered outside his house in support.

A shoe is hurled towards Jammu and Kashmir state Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, right, during Independence Day celebration in Srinagar on Aug. 15, 2010

In an interview with TIME a few hours after the incident, Abdullah brushed it aside. “It was a shoe,” he said. “If it had hit me, it probably would have caused a bruise, but that’s about it.” The police claim that Jan was mentally unstable and had been suspended previously, but so far they have been unable to explain how, in that case, he was allowed into the VIP seating area. “I would obviously like to know how somebody got into the main enclosure who clearly had no business being there,” Abdullah said. “But that’s a job for the police and the investigating agencies.”

The brown leather brogue was only the latest indignity for a man with one of the world’s most thankless jobs: as chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Abdullah must try both to sell the Indian government’s policies to Kashmiris, many of whom would like to be rid of India, and to uphold the interests of Kashmiris in the Indian government. The region has endured decades of conflict, not only between India and Pakistan, whose talks over Kashmir have been stalled for nearly two years, but also between Indian forces and an armed militancy, which was put down after 20 years of brutal conflict.

Still, the dream of “azadi,” or freedom, has never quite died, and Kashmiris’ unresolved issues against India have taken a new form: a mass protest movement against the Indian military presence, symbolized by young “stone-pelters.” Over the last two months, they have been in almost daily conflict, and nearly 60 people have been killed since June 11, most of them shot by security forces. As the death toll has risen, so has public criticism of the official response to the riots, but Abdullah’s pleas for calm have been ignored by protestors, and his calls for restraint have not changed the troops’ tactics.

Every death fuels a new round of protests, and the security forces continue to use live ammunition to fire on protestors armed only with stones. “How do we deal with these protests, and deal with them in a way that we don’t lose more lives?” Abdullah said. “Obviously the security forces need to be as restrained as possible.” But as a state official, Abdullah does not have ultimate control over the central government’s security forces, and Kashmiris complain that he seems powerless to control the forces, let alone address protestors’ demands for a withdrawal of troops, the removal of bunkers and the repeal of draconian security measures that have oppressed day to day life in Kashmir for years. “He will not dare to take any step,” says Rashid, a regular among the stone-pelting protestors. “He cannot.”

Central government officials recently advised Abdullah to go out more among the people and show them that he feels their pain. Like his friend Rahul Gandhi, Abdullah is the scion of a powerful political dynasty, the son and grandson of Kashmiri chief ministers. And like Gandhi, Abdullah faces the widespread perception that he is out of touch with the common man. He has tried to reach out. Abdullah went to console families of the injured last week at Srinagar’s largest hospital, where one angry mother caught him by the collar and berated him. The father of the youngest victim, 8-year-old Sameer Ahmad Rah, when asked whether he would want the Indian Prime Minister to visit, said: “Even Omar Abdullah does not bother about us. So how can you talk about Manmohan Singh?” Abdullah insists that he has tried to help this family but acknowledges that he has not met all of them. “Some I’ve done, some I haven’t,” he says. “At this point, my primary focus is trying to normalize things.”

With another week of protests beginning, that seems like a distant goal, and Srinagar is full of speculation about whether Abdullah may soon resign. He insists that he has not considered it. “It’s my responsibility to bring this state as close to normalcy as possible and that’s my immediate priority,” he says. Even if he does step down, at this point, it may have no impact on Kashmiri anger, which is much bigger than just one man. “New Delhi and the media are very keen to put Omar Abdullah on trial,” says Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, leader of a moderate separatist faction. “People know that our problem is not Omar Abdullah; our problem is New Delhi.”