Secession Dreams

As with the recent political huff in this country against Russia over the South Ossetia situation, it seems we Americans, in our growing commitment to empire-building and nationalism, have forgotten our founders' struggle with an oppressive parent nation over the rights of the people to self-determination and self-government. If nations' territorial and economic greed did not rule this world the people of South Ossetia and Kashmir could live in peace.

Absolutely biased article! Authors have intentionally not mentioned that overwhelming majority of Kashmirs considers presence of 700,000 Indian army and security forces as an ''OCCUPYING FORCE" who have murdered over 70,000 people, raped thousands of Kashmiri women and wrecked death and destruction on the Kashmiri people. The widespread human rights' violations perpetrated by the Indian security forces have been extensively documented by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and UN. They also didn't mention that the 700,000 Indian security forces are among the HIGHEST CONCENTRATION of military presence in any part of the world to break the movement of Kashmiris against Indian occupation. Most importantly, they conveniently forgot to mention that Kashmir is considered a disputed region (and not part of India) according to UN resolutions which bind India to hold an open plebiscite /referendum to allow Kashmiris to decide their future i.e. whether they want to formally become part of India or Pakistan.

A typical Western biase in favour of the currently favoured-son status India occupies in the Western geopolitical/strategic narratives. All the Indian misdeeds, genocides against the local population, wanton abuse of the so-called democratic principles, disrespect ful of the sacred entitlement to self determination as a basic human right charter, blatant Indian colonialism of minority communities, religious persecution of the Islamic faith etc........all these are utterly non existent or simply transparent to the West's human right crusaders because India happens to serve their stategic interest at this crucial historical juncture. Compare this scenario to the vehement Western reactions almost bordering on senseless hysteria on similar issues in Tibet, Xinjiang & Georgia when the actors are China & Russia. The West is nothing but a bunch of hypocrites & therefore rightly be thrown aside in Chinese/Russian calculations.

Chinese would like to extend our whole-hearted support to the Kashmeris to have their own independent state come what may! We also rejoice at your determination & steadfastness in your struggle against the Indian Govt & wish you every success!

I am a Hindu Indian. That does not stop me from believing that Kashmiries ( of both POK and Indian Kashmir) should be given a chance of self determination and deciding if they want to be independent or join Pakistan or join India. I still vividly remember a classmate (in a college in south India) of mine from Kashmir during 1980-84. he would always refer to his homeland as Kashmir and never as India. Would say things like.. Your India is soo developed! He would never relate welll with even Indian Muslims . Yif some does not belive he is an indian in his heart no matter what force or delaying tactics you use he would never ever belong. What happenes to them after a seperation is their fate. When british were ruling even hey said things like white mans burden.. what would happen ifif we leave.. Indian can not rule themselves. what did we tell them? why we get upset if Kashmirires tell us the same?

This article is biased at best and dangerously misleading at worst. The Kashmir problem cannot be described as a secession issue because the UN does not accept Kashmir to be a legitimate part of India. As for the Indian efforts to placate Kashmiris, do visit the "Martyr's graveyard" in Srinagar.

f

If Kashmir should part from India, then this is a desicion that should be made and negitiated by India, Pakistan and the people in Kashmir...
Last time US made such a desicion (Kosovo), America guaranteed "independence" from the beginning and therefore was no need for the Albanians to negotiate with the Serbs. Thus, US got their will, but that does not mean peace or justice (like any other american peace mission)

What about the simply reason that they want to govern themselves? Obviously they feel strongly enough about their culture and their desire to live seperately with their own rules and customs. Why should they need any other reason besides this? Because this might disturb global politics? Well global politics is already oppressing this cultural minority. Of course India would lose power, perhaps this move would increase the number of populations wanting self-governance, this would in turn decrease the power of nation states as a whole. Of course this is "bad" if you look at it from the side of those states in power now that would "suffer" but just as equal is the "goodness" of self-governance that will result. I find it hard to believe that you are suggesting that although the state of India (or the individuals that make up that state) have caused atrocities and death for the population of kashmir that they should somehow accept this or appease this for some *possible* future that has improved relations. This is a horrible suggestion as it is, that it is not *enough* killing yet to warrant self-governance, perhaps this type of thinking would have worked in the beginings of the holocaust? Oh no, not enough Jewish people, "lower" races, and disabled people have been killed yet, therefore it is not a genocide, therefore there requires no action. How many people have to be killed to warrant the label "genocide"? More than one thousand? Two thousand? Please specify becaue you seem to "know" that there is no chance of a genocide of Kashimir. Your approach seems to be a rationalization of killing, trying to systematize a reaction to violence. This seems improbably if not downright inhuman, would you accpet such conditions yourself? If your family and friends were killed would this not be "enough" to warrant reaction? I find that hard to believe. That being said, why shouldn't every population have the right to self-governance? It seems to be an inherent right of all people by natural disposition (if it is not then what basis is our nation-state, is ANY conceivable nation-state as it is in the westernized world)? The real question is why the countries care so much about not letting populations govern themselves, why is this? Why does Georgia swear that the breakaway regions are somehow "theirs" and "rightfully" no less. This seems basis if not a convention of imperialism still existing. The answer I believe is that it removes power and territory, and a modern nation-state is more or less defined by these attributes. This is not abotu peace and security for all, do you really believe that? This is about power and manipulation like it always has been.

ah, who cares i hope kashmir becomes independent. maybe that way it would stop three countries trying to claim it as their territory.

sreddivari - secular india? you're kidding right? tell this repeated lie to thousands of muslims killed in Gujrat, Christians in Assam and sikh in golden temple.

if india is secular then saudi arabia is budhist.

India and Pakistan became independent from Britain back in 1947. During the past six decadesIndia has prospered as a democracy where as Pakistan remained unstable with several coups by the military. Terrorista in Pakistan will destabilize a Kashmir as soon as it becomes independent and turn it into another Afghanistan. The people of Kashmir , both Hindus and Muslims has a chance to prosper only if Kashmir remains a part of secular India.

Mr. gangily, you are in USA not in India. So do n't try to be an expert of Indian affairs. Now a days in western
countries so many pandits and experts like crows in big cities in Subcontinent. Bottom line INDIA is a
secular contry in name only.

To both writers, Russia didn't start this secessionist movements..it was us that started it by recognizing the independence of Kosovo..Russia followed suit..