September 11, 2006
Alienation and Violence in Kashmir
Acquiring weapons for the defense of Muslims is a religious duty. If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank God for enabling me to do so. And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty. It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims.
--Osama bin Laden, Time magazine, Dec 1998
We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength; they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.
--George W. Bush, September 7, 2003
If I can have nothing to do with the organized violence of the Government, I can have less to do with the unorganized violence of the people. I would prefer to be crushed between the two.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Alienation breeds terrorism: so say the experts. Poverty, deprivation, subjugation, discrimination, illiteracy provoke alienation and violence. But, is alienation by itself enough prerequisite? From the example below it seems some other factors are at play. Two communities from the same gene pool and same culture have emerged differently after six hundred years of treading different paths in history.
Kashmir acquired its name after a sage Kashyap who reclaimed the water logged land and settled there with his people about 5000 years ago. Over succeeding centuries it evolved into a seat of Buddhist and Hindu learning and by 1300AD it was a place for scholars and not soldiers. The ethos was of compassion, acceptance and spirituality. Intellectual disputes were settles by debates. The sage was revered more than the king. Wise word was more persuasive that the sword.
And then Kashmir confronted its ‘nine-eleven’ in the persona of a brutal king in 1389AD. Sikander, a fundamentalist zealot, adopted the last name of ‘Butshikan’ because he hated idol worship of the Hindus and proceeded to destroy the culture, religion, music, literature and temples with impunity. Two choices on the table were: convert to Islam or die. Many chose death, some escaped and emigrated but the majority converted to Islam. By the time his reign ended in 1413AD -- legend has it-- only eleven Hindu Pundit families had managed to survive in the valley of Kashmir. Trained in the thoughts of Upanishads that, “Truth is one, the wise call it by different names” and hence “The world is one family” they were at a loss to come to terms with the notion that Islam and only Islam provided all the answers.
Over next six hundred years with sporadic exodus and attrition their population declined. Kashmir, which had a hundred percent Hindu and Buddhist population, became predominantly an Islamic state.
The Muslim majority of Kashmir has been ill at ease with the secular Indian constitution and has felt alienated for many genuine and perceived reasons. The corrupt politicians and the Indian security forces have added fuel to the fire. The simmer came to boil and culminated in the second ‘nine-eleven’ in 1989, six hundred years after the first: the start of current Islamic militancy. The choice for the Hindus was the repeat of 1389AD: leave or die. 350,000 Pundits were thrown out in a matter of months. Some, who were naïve enough to ignore history stayed back only to face plunder, brutality and murder. Exiled Hindu Pundits – 350.000 of them - struggled and suffered in refugee camps outside Kashmir.
This was the tragic end of an intellectual culture of 5000 years - but not the value system. Without money, food, housing, medicines, do you think they were alienated enough to become terrorists? Here is the answer: in the last seventeen years, from 1989 to 2006, Kashmiri Pundit community, having lost everything, living in subhuman deprivation has not produced a single terrorist. Not one. In fact, in the last 600 years they have not cultivated a single militant.
Here is the question: how is it, two communities from the same gene pool, same cultural background of 5000 years, both alienated for one reason or the other in the recent past, choose different paths to solve similar problems?
Therein may lay some answer to solve prevailing violent mindset of nations and communities.
Posted by Shiban Ganju at 12:21 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c562c53ef00d834b19e6753ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Alienation and Violence in Kashmir:






















Comments
Thank you for this essay.
Posted by: Robert | Sep 11, 2006 9:56:11 AM
This smacks of propaganda and it's connection to 9/11 seems quite tenuous. For the record, the Pygmies have not produced terrorists but the Irish have.
Posted by: JSB | Sep 11, 2006 10:55:04 AM
JSB,
Thanks for your comments.
I am comparing two almost identical societies with common genes and culture but different approaches to conflict resolution. Your Pygmy and Irish analogy has more rhetoric than substance. However, there are many other societies who resolve conflicts peacefully.Here are some examples: (No propoganda) Amish,Batek, Birhor,Buid, Chewong, Fipa,G/wi,Hutterites,Ifaluk,
Inuit,Ju/'hoansi,Kadar,Ladakhi,Lepchas,Malapandaram,Mbuti,Nubians,pliyans
Piaroa,RuralThai,Semai,Tahitians,TristanIslanders,Yanadi,Zapotec of La Paz.
Muslims have been urging to be heard for the past 60 years but the USA and the world ignored it. Kashmir and 9/11 are manifestaions of the same need. Regarding militant connections between 9/11 and kashmir please see it here.http://www.globalpolicy.org/wtc/analysis/2002/0619kashmir.htm
Posted by: shiban ganju | Sep 11, 2006 7:08:46 PM
kindly forward column to genetically similar but religioulsy dissimilar masses of gujarat.
Posted by: Alex | Sep 11, 2006 10:26:02 PM
Alex,
You are absolutely on target and I agree.
That is the question. How does violence become a problem solving tool in the minds of some while others in the same locality become the victims? Be it Gujarat or Kashmir or NY or Iraq or Rwanda.If we could understand that, may be we will solve the problem and not blame other less important issues. Any Thoughts? I chose kashmir as the heading (after discussing this with close Muslim friends) to attract more readers and discussion. One could write the same essay for many other regions of the world.
Posted by: shiban ganju | Sep 12, 2006 12:18:27 AM
Here is the question: how is it, two communities from the same gene pool, same cultural background of 5000 years, both alienated for one reason or the other in the recent past, choose different paths to solve similar problems?
Shibin, I'm not sure "gene pool" is relevant here, but on the larger question, individuals from agrieved communities choose many different courses of action at any time. To take the Tamils in Sri Lanka, we have witnessed liberal inclusivist solutions pursued through electoral means, part-progressive/part-nationalist federal solutions pursued through militant agitation and extra-institutional organization, nationalist separatism pursued through terrorism and all out war. Why one won out over the other may have has much to do with the winning mode (here terroristic nationalism) violenly supressing the alternatives, and not simply because a community chose among different alternatives. I suppose it's the way in which the question sees differences, in you case simply religion. You could ask why Tamil Indians hostile to the centralizing power of the Indian state opted for the nationalistic but non-terrorist DMK while Tamil Sri Lankans turned to the LTTE, but that still leaves the problem of how we conceive of communities choosing, or "communities" "choosing".
There are the questions of opportunity structures and comparative advantages. The Pandits don't have to resorted to violence in response to being ethnically cleansed in some areas, well, because the Indian army is there to fight for them (and quite often it has fought disgracefully, using torture and rape as instruments of counterinsurgency). This is not to say that they would if the Indian army weren't there. But it is to say that they can "choose" not to because someone else has "chosen" to fight on their behalf (or at least against their enemies--I think the Indian state has been also disgraceful in its response to and exploitation of the Pandit communities) against their opponents.
My general problem with the way that the question is phrased is that it imagines "communities" (I put it in quotes because it is hard to give the term meaning in this context, that is, as a choosing agent) as sealed off and choosing between responses given on a level platter. The arming, financing and promotion of millenarian Islamist movements to fight the Soviets handicapped liberal and progressive movements in societies where their mujahid were drawn from. I am not asserting the idea that Islamism (or whatever phrase you want to use for it) is the invention of the anti-Soviet camp in the Cold War; just that we gave it a leg up vis-a-vis its competitors, which the Islamists also went after. It is in this light, the phrase "choose" in your question seems off, even as many in these communities provide support to Islamist movements.
Posted by: Robin | Sep 12, 2006 1:22:33 AM
Robin,
Thanks for substantive comments full of insight. You have convinced me and I concede that
"choosing" and "communities" are wrong words in this context. But let us not look for externalities to justify violence - both state and individual. Or we will get justifications: Bush blaming Saddam, Israel blaming Hizbullah,Gujarat blaming instigation etc. And the violence will perpetuate on some pretext. We have to start with our own selves and our communities to take the responsiblity for any violence committed by us before looking for external causes.
The purpose of my essay was: non violence is possible. Look at Dalai Lama - how many provocations he has endured and excuses discarded to stay nonviolent.
Regarding the "gene pool" you have to forgive me. I am a "gene fundamentalist" and we "fundamentalists" do get irrational often.
Posted by: shiban ganju | Sep 12, 2006 8:09:16 PM
Dear Dr. Shiban
I recently mentioned to you my ongoing research which included the idea of two politcal systems coming out of the same original root and taking different directions. It seems that you took the idea and used it in a different context. I feel flattered. The rest of the article is of course all yours. Amera`Raza (Bibi)
Posted by: Amera Raza | Sep 12, 2006 10:24:34 PM
Amera,
Of course, it was your original idea that simmered in my mind. Thanks and keep sending me more ideas.
I wanted to suggest that violence and nonviolence are acquired behaviour depending on various external compulsions and internal training. But I think in my example of kashmir the theme got lost.( I fell for the Nielson rating for readership!)
If I had to do it again I probably will write about the Hindu violence against Sikhs in Delhi in 1984. That way the disussion will not drown in passion.
My other information in the essay came from various other sources. NONE WAS MY OWN.
1.Sikandar Butshikan has been described well in Tharik-a-Farishta translated by many Muslim and British historians. I had notes from this out of print book which I read many years ago. For a flavor on this King just check Wikepedia.
2. My allusion to word being more important than sword is from the debates that happened in 8th century AD in Kashmir between Sankara and Madan Mishr.
3.Intellectual ethos of 12th century Kashmir can be had by reading Abhinava Gupt's Spand Yoga and work done at SUNY.
4.The current plight of the pandits is well documented by numerous Human right reports. Check kashmir-information.com
Thanks again.
Posted by: shiban ganju | Sep 13, 2006 8:16:00 PM
shiban it takes a lot to actually absorb what you r saying without resorting to knee jerk reactions of outrage. But having read all your columns one knows that you speak only after contemplation. There is food for thought here.But in these highly inflammotary times it wud b more prudent to refrain from adding insult to the injury the muslim community feels.Is there a monolithic muslim community? I think the pan islamic ummah is a myth.TO compress the entire islamic world into only its religious identity is a faulty analysis.The kashmiri pundits need to be studied in greater detail bcoz they have withstood oppression remarkably. Is this due to their religious teaching or bcoz they r more qualified to find employment begs to b addressed. I do not for a moment doubt your intellectal honesty and wud welcome sane debate on this issue. BAS! this is the first time ive typed n it has taken me forever.. You must carry on writing. I look forward to your musings. MUNNI
Posted by: MUNNI | Oct 1, 2006 11:25:13 AM
Munni,
I am acutely aware of the painful and sensitve times we are passing through and it is almost impossible to do a dispassionate analysis of events without provoking passions.
As I mentioned in my earlier comment I should have chosen another example (Hindu/Sikh violence)to suggest that nonviolence is possible.
Employabilty of kashmiri pandits may be a relevant reason but then Gujarati hindus were well employed when they resorted to violence. Soldiers of all armies are well employed; why do they kill?
Honest contemplation will help us all.
shiban ganju
Posted by: shiban ganju | Oct 1, 2006 12:32:13 PM
I am actually a 4th generation Muslim from Kashmiri Pundit Line. Fundamentaly, Voilance is a the way for Dictatorships/Kings. But the Kashmiri way of life in Hindu/Budhist times at street level was tolerance and harmoneous co-existance which continued even into the early Muslim era when Islam was preached by the Suffis and not the Mullahs and the swordsmen. The introduction of Middle Eastern values in this case "Islam" fundamentaly the way it was used by the barbarian war lord with Muslim Names shattered peace of these beautiful people. Practically, all middle eastern religions have been misused by Tugs to further their hidden but obvious agendas. I must acknowledge that the message of peace, love and forgiveness of the middle eastern religions acts like a fast acting helucinating drug to the average Joe but in actuality its just helucination and nothing more. Sorry, but this something which you can see in the Holly Land and where ever it has its effects.
Posted by: Nader Junaid | Jan 11, 2009 9:55:24 PM
Post a comment