Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Kashmir Issue should not be distorted by party political vote: Emma Nicholson

Baroness Emma Nicholson, the EU special rapporteur on Kashmir, says that her report, "Kashmir—present status and its future prospectus," fully supports the peace process between India and Pakistan. After coming under heavy fire during a debate at the EP's Foreign Affairs Committee in January, the report was adopted with an overwhelming sixty to one vote on March 21, however, many European parliamentarians have vowed that they would seek more changes to report before it is presented to the plenary of the European Parliament in May this year.
In a wide ranging interview with Kashmir Observer's M. Farooq Shah, Emma reflected on the success of her report, refuted the accusations levelled against her, and commented on the role of the European Union in resolving the fifty-nine-year-old conflict she describes a tragedy.

Excerpts of the Interview:

Farooq Shah: Sixty in favour, one against—you must be extremely happy about this outcome. Did you expect that the amended report would be adopted with such a huge margin?

Emma Nicholson: I am delighted and satisfied by the massive majority in favour of my report on Kashmir of sixty colleagues in favour and only one against. I am very grateful to all my colleagues from all sides of the House who supported and helped me in the very difficult subject of the present status of Kashmir and its future prospects. I had confidence that my draft report would gain a large majority, but I did not quite realise the strength of feeling which made it overwhelming.

FS: There are some sections in the draft report that have been strengthened; similarly 28 compromise amendments have been accepted. Could you outline those?

EN: I am delighted that the draft report has been strengthened by the addition of twenty eight compromise amendments that I and the shadow rapporteurs carefully worked out in accordance with Foreign Affairs Committee colleagues' requested amendments. I should add that the European Parliament system differs completely from other parliamentary systems in that it is cooperative and based on compromise rather than adversarial and winner takes all. A fully successful final report (and we have not yet reached that stage with the Kashmir report) will contain thoughts and ideas from the widest possible variety of European parliament colleagues from the twenty seven Member States of the European Union. The word "compromise" is therefore an indicator of success since in the EU as a whole we have built our system upon voluntary agreement bringing together the widest possible selection of views to create what we call a "common position". In contrast, the adversarial system as I experience in the British House of Lords of which I am a member, and earlier experienced in the British House of Commons, relies on an absolute majority where even one vote will swing so that the winning side takes and defeats the loser. In the European Parliament we work hard so that everyone can win to a certain extent. The mechanisms through which we do this are consultation, dialogue and compromise.
A second point is that every rapporteur is wishful of their report stimulating the parliamentary debate so that the topic in hand becomes one of greater familiarity and understanding in Parliament. The underlying concept is that the more we understand the better we can help other nations to enhance their prosperity and to find, where necessary, peaceful solutions to any points of conflict as we have done successfully during the EU's fifty year lifespan. The EU is now a huge potential trading partner for all nations and other trading blocs and our work is based on our common values which are expressed through democracy, the rule of law and the fundamental freedoms of movement, thought, worship, and expression that we enjoy. We are the world's second biggest democracy with a citizenship of nearly half a billion people and wish to share that prosperity and the values that we have created over successive eras of peace and growth with others who invite us to do so. The European Parliament is the directly elected institution of the EU and I return therefore to my earlier comment that the more we understand and issue or a part of the world the better we are able to respond to requests for partnership, trade and association. I attach a copy of all of the amendments that the committee accepted which have enlarged the report and strengthened it.

FS:The most contentious line in the draft report – "calls for plebiscite in Kashmir are wholly out of step" – appears to have been dropped from the amended report. Is it true?

EN: The report has changed the wording on the issue of the plebiscite. Colleagues wished to state more on the UN and I therefore put forward an amendment which was accepted that refers to all the UN resolutions relating to Kashmir. I added a six-page amendment explaining each of the UN Resolutions, but colleagues felt that this took up too much space for the main report and have asked me to add it as an attachment in the explanatory memorandum which I will now therefore redraft. Our comment on the plebiscite is that the conditions have not been met until now, therefore the implication is similar to the original wording.

FS:It's believed that your report goes contrary to the aspirations of Kashmiri people as it is alleged that you didn't go for collecting data from original sources but instead put into writing the views of a group of retired Indian army officials. What've you to say to that?

EN: The report on Kashmir has drawn very firm support from many people in Azad Jammu & Kashmir, in Gilgit and Baltistan and in Jammu & Kashmir, who tell me that they are grateful and delighted that so many of their concerns have been highlighted. I met with and received full briefings from the Pakistani and the Indian armies. I had requested these briefings since the military are so heavily engaged along the line of control and I was grateful to both the Pakistani and the Indian Governments for enabling both the visits and the briefings to take place. However, it is incorrect to say that either current or retired members of either military supplied either the wording or the thoughts for the draft report. The wording, the reasoning and the conclusions were my own and were derived from my earlier work and experiences in south Asia and supplemented by the helpful sequence of meetings in Islamabad and AJK, New Delhi and Jammu & Kashmir, which were mirror images of each other in terms of the politicians, institutions and groups of people with whom I met.

FS:Your report is considered to be in contrast to the European Parliament's Ad hoc Delegation report by the committee on foreign affairs in November 2004 which had accepted Kashmiris as a party to the dispute. That part is deleted in your report, correct?

EN: You claim that my report differs from the ad hoc delegation report to the Foreign Affairs Committee of November 2004 with regard to the people of Kashmir being a party to the dispute. That is not so; this point was made in the UN resolutions from 1948 – 1971 and as such was fully accepted by the Member States of the UN but particularly the Security Council of the day, which included the UK and others who are now members of the EU. It would be improper for the European Parliament to move away from such a position, not only because it was adopted by the UN but because involvement of local people is the foundation stone of the EU's own success. My draft report, the Foreign Affairs Committee current final draft report on Kashmir and the report of the Parliament's ad hoc delegation of November 2004 all embrace that as a given and not a debatable point.

FS: Mr. Richard Howitt on his recent visit to Kashmir had said that his movements had been restricted; obviously hype around your trip with regard to your security must have been made by the Indian government officials, thus limiting your access to people here. Under these circumstances are you still able to gain an accurate picture of the ground realities?

EN: I am sorry to learn that Mr Howitt's movements were apparently restricted on his recent visit. I am happy to confirm that my own movements were unrestricted on both sides of the LoC and I am grateful to all concerned in Pakistan and India for this.

FS: You've criticized Pakistan over its human rights record particularly in the Northern Areas, while Amnesty International and other human rights watchdogs have time and time again criticized India over its human rights record in Kashmir. This seems to reflect a bias on your part.

EN: The report does indeed draw attention to Human Rights abuses in AJK and Gilgit & Baltistan, but it also draws attention to reports flowing from Amnesty International, Freedom House and Human Rights Watch of other abuses in Jammu & Kashmir. We therefore recommend that both Governments allow those three human rights organisations and perhaps others like them free access so that a realistic assessment of the situation can be established and monitored.

FS: Fifty eight years to the conflict—Italian Ambassador describes the conflict as longest standing dispute since the end of WWII—Your colleague Richard Howitt says European Union wants to come clean on Kashmir. It is a real pity that European Union is still debating over Kashmir when the International Community knows that there's something terribly wrong going on in Kashmir. Fifty eight years is a hell of a long time, isn't it?

EN: In my view the continuing conflict in Jammu and Kashmir is a tragedy, and I am pleased that the EU is wishful of helping in a region that is well outside our geographical boundaries. I am grateful to the European Parliament for giving me the opportunity for something that I hope will be constructive despite the fact that the EU has not been invited to mediate by either side and is highly unlikely to be called upon to do so.

FS: It is alleged that you've betrayed your position and mandate as EU rapporteur on Kashmir by falling in line with the Indian government because it had bribed you. How do you react to these allegations?

EN: The huge majority in favour of my report has proven that remarks such as these have not stood up to scrutiny in the European Parliament. I would be delighted to examine any evidence that gives credibility to these allegations.

FS:Mr. Richard Howitt has rejected your report saying liberal democrats should be ashamed of publishing what he calls it 'an appallingly prejudiced report'. He had said of the report if passed would be counter productive in holding back the peace process between India and Pakistan. How would those suspicions be laid to rest?

EN: Mr Richard Howitt's comments that the draft report would prejudice the peace process between India and Pakistan gives an unwarranted status to the European Parliament to which we can lay no claim. The report firmly and squarely supports the peace process as its basic premise; why would we say otherwise in the same report? That would be self contradictory which is not the case.

FS: On February 26, the debate on the draft report led to an acrimonious exchange between you and some Pakistani members of the European Parliament, with Mr. Sajjad Karim shouting that the report was an insulting piece of work. Why was the reaction of Pakistan so outrageous in the first place?

EN: There was no acrimonious exchange between myself and other members of the parliament on 26 February. Several British members used highly emotional terminology but I responded in the normal European Parliament way which is more harmonious.

FS: When James Elles, co-founder of the All Party Group on Kashmir, described the report as unbalanced and biased, calling for its amendment, you were quoted as saying: "It is a pity that the British are washing their dirty linen in public." What did you refer the dirty linen to?

EN: I responded to James Elles, Sajjad Karim and Richard Howitt as well as to Philip Bushill Matthews, who all used British style House of Commons language on the 26 February by commenting that the British should not wash their dirty linen in public. I was referring to the fact that their reaction was heavily linked into a drive for Pakistani British votes in certain constituencies for which they were campaigning for the local elections due to be held in early May. I did not and do not believe that the issue of Kashmir should be distorted by party political vote grabbing in the UK. It is too important for that.

FS: Your credentials in child health and development, as former Director of Save the Children speak very of high of your concern for the children. How did you miss to make a mention of some hundred thousand orphans of Kashmir in your report?

EN: I have a large and continuing concern for children and families in distress. I have tried hard to put as much as possible in the report on Kashmir on the many thousands of Kashmiri children orphaned by the earthquakes and on the hundreds of thousands of families deprived of basic needs provision in terms of health and education. I have been dismayed by those same British colleagues who voted to delete parts of the report that highlighted the plight of hundreds of thousands of orphans, women and earthquake victims. Their thinking on the whole report has simply not been rational and for them to vote as they did on these human rights issues prove my point beyond doubt. Now that the voting storm has passed and we have a clear and powerful report from the Committee very much along the lines I have recommended, I very much hope that these colleagues will assume a more balanced position.

FS: How do you view the situation of Kashmir say ten years from now? Is there a hope of a lasting solution to the problem? Are there any guarantees from the international community, particularly the EU?

EN: I hope and believe that in ten years time, the issue of Kashmir will be resolved and families can cross the border peacefully. Trade can be resumed and the people once again can be prosperous and well cared for.

I think the time is right for a permanent Kashmir solution: Italian Ambassador


Antonio Armellini, the Italian Ambassador to India, who's on a 5-day official visit to Kashmir to assess the situation in the backdrop of the recent developments that have generated some hope of a lasting settlement to what he described as the longest standing conflict since the end of the World War II. In an interview with Kashmir Observer, the ambassador says that there's a misperception that the west has launched a war on Islam and terms the theory of 'clash of civilizations' as an intelligent- intellectual construction, which does not automatically apply to the reality. The interview was conducted by M Farooq Shah.

● Is this your first visit to Kashmir? What's your first impression?

Yes, I've never been here before. My first impression is that of a beautiful city and what I've seen a beautiful land. It is a very very pleasant place indeed. I can now understand why so many people in India and elsewhere in the world see it as a prime tourist destination.

● The people of Kashmir who've suffered immensely during the past 15 years or so, obviously for no fault of theirs, have a grudge that the Western world has remained a mute spectator to their ordeal. What do you say to that?

I don't think that the Western world or the world in general has remained a mute spectator. The Western world, EU in particular, has always promoted the peace process in Kashmir. The settlement to the issue is something that pertains to the parties directly involved and we certainly don't wish to interfere in this process but we follow and pay attention and we encourage any positive steps such as the ones which have been taken recently.

● Not long ago, Kashmir was referred to as a nuclear flash point. Given the semblance of normalcy in Kashmir, the people are sceptical whether this could lead to a lasting peace. Are there any guarantees from the International community?

Again this is something for the people of Kashmir to act upon or decide upon and see to the ways that could turn into a permanent solution. What strikes me is that the situation in Kashmir's difficulty as a dispute is the longest standing disputes since the end of the IInd world war. Looking at the time frame, I think the time is more than right for positive developments and for a permanent solution.

● What role do you think the International Community, particularly the EU, play to dispel those fears?

Antonio Armellini: The International community should on the one hand not interfere in the process which has to be left with its direct actors because it's only them who'll be able to solve the problem and on the other should encourage any positive development and be ready to provide whatever assistance is required and may be necessary at the time. I believe this is the position which the Eropean Union has taken constantly. We've welcomed regularly all the positive steps that have been taken. We've always expressed our willingness to be of help whenever required or needed.

● Your itinerary includes a visit to UNMOGIP office here, which is headed by an Italian Major General. Given the present scenario, do you not think that this force has lost its relevance?

I think this is the matter for the Security Council to decide upon.

● There's a so-called theory, 'the clash of civilisations' being floated in the West, especially after 9/11 and a widespread belief in the Muslim world that West has launched some kind of a war on Islam. How do you react to that?

I think that's a basic misperception. I'm not aware of the fact that there's such a widespread belief in the Muslim world. What I'm aware of is the fact that there're some people in the West who feel that the Muslim world and Islam has launched a war on the West and this I think proves that both sides are wrong in their perceptions. Clash of civilisations is a very intelligent-intellectual construction, which does not automatically apply to the reality. It's a key to interpret phenomena. It's not an explanation of the phenomena itself.

● Again there're accusations that the West is deliberately indifferent to the issues pertaining to the Muslim world, which fans the extremist tendencies there and eventually deepens the East-West gulf. Are these accusations true in the first place?

I think not. Let me just give you a very small example as far as my country is concerned. Italy for a number of reasons is a predominantly catholic country but Islam has become the second largest religion and has been growing very fast. This has happened without any problem whatsoever. We believe that anyone's entitled to his beliefs and understandings and within the framework of the laws of the land in which he lives. I think that extremists on all sides can lead to warped interpretations. If you look at the western societies on the whole, you'll see that they're the most inclusive societies which civilisations have produced so far and that I think would tend to disprove the idea of automatic exclusions of anyone particular group. Extremists, terrorists— that's something else but that's not Islamic terrorism. It's an international phenomenon, which has all sorts of connotations.

● Besides the denial of political rights the lack of economic opportunities is believed to be a major cause of extremism and terrorism from which now no country is immune. What can your country do to help build the shattered economy of Kashmir that is being considered a breeding ground of extremism and terrorism?

We are certainly looking forward to the developing co-operation with India and all its components. On the Kashmiri side in particular, some work needs to be done to develop an economic community which can interact with foreign players as well. Lot of trade is going on already in handicrafts and a number of areas between Kashmiri traders and Italian traders, but I think we could do much more. I feel that perhaps a little more work should be done on this.

● How the Kashmir conflict is included in the EU agenda? Are you optimistic that a lasting solution to the problem can be worked out in some time to come?

We're all following very closely the recent developments and the peace process and composite dialogue has been moving ahead at a very swift pace and we very much hope that this will be a forebearer to permanent solution.

● The leverage of power in the World today rests with the United States, ever since USSR collapsed. Has the European Union consolidated itself as a counterpart to the US?


Antonio Armellini: The European Union was formed in 1952 way before the collapse of the Soviet Union and the purpose was entirely different; that of bringing together the countries of Europe that had fought with each other for over a thousand years and turn that age long conflict into a period of cooperation and friendship. That's what EU is all about.

H E Italian High Commissioner, Antonio Armellini visited Kashmir in 2005.

Kashmir belongs more to Central Asia: Prof Gregory Gleason

Professor Gregory Gleason, visiting Kashmir as part of the International Conference on Central Asia currently underway at Kashmir University, says that Kashmir belongs more to Central Asia than to South Asia, owing to its glorious ties with the region in terms of culture, traditions, religion, etc. Professor Gleason, who teaches political science at the University of New Mexico in the U.S., describes the efforts made by India and Pakistan on Kashmir as insufficient as he discusses the pros and cons of Kashmir being the venue of an International Conference on Central Asia with Kashmir Observer Chief Correspondent M Farooq Shah.

Excerpts of the Interview:

You've been one of the special invitees to the International Conference on Central Asia. What does this conference mean to you?

The Conference is an important turning point, I believe, for the studies on Central Asia, in the United States but also in other countries around the world, particularly the European Countries and the countries of Central Asia. Previously, we thought of Central Asia primarily as the countries of the former Soviet Union. Increasingly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we began to think more broadly about Central Asia. And then, of course, after the events of September 11, American involvement in the coalition for operation "Enduring Freedom" in Afghanistan, we began to realise that there are cultural, linguistic and close potential trade relations among all the countries of the region. So most of the scholars have now begun to think of Central Asia in terms of an historical and broader definition.

• Why wasn't this conference, which has been described as of 'Unprecedented significance', held somewhere else, Delhi for instance?

Well, I think the important aspect of the venue in Kashmir is that Kashmir is very clearly a Central Asian region. It is a region that has close associations with other cultures in Central Asia, in particular Uzbek culture, culture of Tajikistan, culture in Turkmenistan. The idea of holding the conference in Kashmir is the idea of bringing to the attention of scholars and policy makers and journalists and hopefully eventually the general public that there are close connections in the region.

• Could you say a little more on that when you say Kashmir is very clearly a Central Asian region?

To be honest with you, when I arrived in Kashmir, I immediately recognised the kind of kindred relationship with the Central Asian Countries. There are cultural features and characteristics in Kashmir that remind me very much of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and other countries we've traditionally regarded as the central Asian countries. I have to say that is not the same feeling that one feels when one arrives for instance in Delhi.

• Could you outline the significance of holding a conference of this scale in Kashmir a little more explicitly?

I think one of the important aspects of holding the Conference in Kashmir is that many of the scholars in the outside world who've worked on issues of economics, politics, government, international relations, history and cultural studies in the region have not themselves focussed on the regions around Jammu and Kashmir. Therefore, this is an important re-orientation of the work in the interests of many scholars around the world. I think it is important because it highlights the connectedness of Kashmir with other countries of the region. It's not enough, I would say because very little is known about Kashmir and its relationship with other countries in the neighbouring Central Asia. It is the first major effort to bring to attention of the International scholarly community and the professional organisations in the outside world such as the Central Eurasian Studies Society based in Harvard University that Kashmir belongs more to Central Asia.

• Kashmir, you know is a landlocked territory where a conflict is raging and with an uncertain political future. How are ordinary Kashmiris going to benefit from this conference?

I think scholarship is always to the benefit of ordinary citizens in all the regions of the world. Scholarship in the long run will have an influence but scholarship is not politics and policy making itself. It does not have the direct impact. It rather is a way of accumulating knowledge and understanding that can lend the policy makers more wisdom to do decisions about policies. Its immediate effect is, I think, to be understood in terms of the long-term affect of increasing human understanding of that region.

• As far the human understanding you're talking about, Kashmiris are unable to move freely between its own divided parts. How do you view that?

That's certainly a human tragedy. But it is not a unique situation, there're similar situations in many regions of the world. These kinds of issues certainly have to be resolved in a way that is equitable for all the interested and involved parties.

• India and Pakistan have embarked on certain measures with regard to the connectedness of the divided parts of Jammu and Kashmir. Do you think that suffices the requirement given the level of sentiment involved among the peoples of the divided parts?

I don't think that those particular steps themselves suffice the requirement but I do think the confidence building measures are an important sequence that would be necessary for any kind of unification of the divided groups of people. In this particular case, it seems to me that what we can hope for is a more extensive set of measures taken to improve relationships between the countries to reduce the amount of tension that has been created by disagreements in the past.

• How does Kashmir figure in what you've described as 'The idea of Greater Central Asia'?

Kashmir is a natural corridor between India and other parts of the Asia, Europe and other parts of the Eurasian landmass. I think it can play a very important role in the idea of Greater Central Asia. Most important aspect of that idea is it is not just a concept or a geographical description rather it is an idea of the importance of maintaining close ties between people who've kindred interests and more pragmatically people who've economic mutual interests in trade and greater economic development.

• You've said that there's a greater need for inter-state co-operation without changing of borders or reorganising institutions. What exactly do you mean by that?

We live in a globalized world today. It is a powerful force today and is primarily driven by technology not by the intentions of the people in Berlin or Moscow or Washington. In this globalized world however, the unsettling aspect is of changes in the existing border situations. That however, does not mean that there can't be mobility of capital, movement of people, or movement of ideas across those borders. I'm very much in favour of the idea of trans-border or cross border communication between the countries.

• As an expert, do you think there's a need for a third party mediation on Kashmir?

To be honest with you, I'm still at the point of gathering information on the subject. It is not clear to me how a third party mediation on Kashmir would differ from present circumstances but what I can promise with you is to reflect on the question, think about the question and gather more information to get an idea what would be the international theory given the interests of the various actors involved.

• But both India and Pakistan have failed to resolve their differences on Kashmir for well over five decades now. Do you, as a political science teacher not think that it is the right time for the international community to tell them that enough is enough?

I certainly think that this is the right time for India and Pakistan to think seriously about their differences on Kashmir and hammer out an equitable solution acceptable to the all actors involved in the region. The International community certainly has a role to play but the responsibility ultimately lies with the actors directly involved in the conflict.

• As an expert from outside, how do you visualise Kashmir 10 years from now?

I see a prosperous Kashmir 10 years from now where human rights are protected; where people are free to speak their minds; where people are tolerant; where businesses are protected through legal a regulatory system that allows for open businesses but not frequented by monopolies or economic dominations.

Prof Gregor Gleason visited Kashmir in 2005 and I interviewed him for Kashmir Observer.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Beslan Tragedy 2004

People holding extreme views need to understand that terrorism is a shortsighted approach that triggers an unending chain of actions and reactions. Attackers who take innocent people hostage must learn that violence against civilians only undermines their credibility, even when world opinion supports their cause. International organizations such as the U.N. and the European Union have condemned Russia, India and Israel for their actions. Tragedies like the Beslan killings should bring all nations together to root out terrorism. No country should be allowed to harbor terrorists.

M. Farooq Shah
Srinagar, Kashmir

The letter appeared in TIME megazine in October, 2004
(http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,702214,00.html)

Thursday, December 4, 2008

"Liberal Democrats should be ashamed to have published such prejudiced report"

European Union parliamentarian Richard Howitt visited Kashmir this week to investigate the findings of EU rapporteur Emma Nicholson's report "Kashmir: present situation and future prospects," which had been released in December. Raising questions about the democratic credentials of the Pakistani government and its commitment to the people and institutions in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, the report generated considerable heat both here in Kashmir as well as across the border. In a wide-ranging interview with Kashmir Observer correspondent M Farooq Shah at the Grand Palace Hotel, Mr. Howitt reflected on the failures of colonial powers, considered the effectiveness of Europe's liberal democrats, and commented on the progress of the Indo-Pak peace process.

Farooq Shah: How concerned is the European Union about the problem of Kashmir?

Richard Howitt: The European Union is very much concerned about the problem of Kashmir and it's resolution. The EU has over a period of time been actively engaged in trying to work out what exactly is happening on the ground in Kashmir, which is why I'm here on a fact-finding mission: so that we're able to frame a Kashmir policy.

Farooq Shah: A few years ago in an interview with a British Magazine, the former British Foreign Secretary said, I quote: "The British Government had been complacent about Kashmir at the time of Indian independence, when it quickly became the most contentious issue between India and Pakistan." Do you also believe that Kashmir problem has its genesis rooted in the British Colonial Rule?

Richard Howitt: I've no problems in confessing that a lot of the problems we have to deal with now are a consequence of our colonial past and due to some serious mistakes especially during the last decades of the British Empire. Many territorial disputes that exist today are on the illogical borders created by colonial powers. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 - in which Britain pledged support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine - and the contradictory assurances given to Palestinians were not entirely moral.

Farooq Shah: Kashmiri families have been divided by a ceasefire line for 57 years, one of the longest standing disputes since the end of the WWII. How do you view this situation from a human angle that loved ones cannot meet freely amongst themselves?

Richard Howitt:I've been trying to meet a maximum number of people directly or indirectly affected by the conflict. From individuals, lawyers, victims of violence and statistics gathered from different sources - including different human-rights bodies such as Amnesty International, etc. - suggest quite an appalling human tragedy as far as the LoC is concerned. Behind these statistics are people with thousands of stories to tell of the tragedy that has come to symbolize the line of control that runs over hundreds of kilometres of forested hill and inhospitable terrain, defying logic in some places as it splits families and divides villages. From any angle, not to talk of a human one, the LoC is some thing that touches my heart.

Farooq Shah: Of late, the EU has been having a proactive role in international affairs, specifically in conflict areas. However, Kashmiris feel let down that EU could have played a more meaningful role in having the conflict resolved. How do you react to that?

Richard Howitt: Traditionally any suggestions with regard to Kashmir dispute is not accepted by the two sides and so the important thing for the international community is that any problem that we undertake - that includes my own visit to Kashmir - is undertaken with a due humility, with a respect to the sovereignty of the countries involved and with a motivation of friendship and working constructively to bring positive influence to the problem. However, it is right that we are all subject to international law, to international human rights standards and humanitarian laws and it is essential that international visitors to Kashmir and to any conflict in the world ask hard questions about the observance of human rights and advocate for the strongest compliance with international law. I want to express my profound concerns about the consequences of the conflict. I met victims of violence who've told me heartfelt stories about how they have lost their loved ones and it is important that each of them is given justice. There can be no compromise ever in complying with international standards of human rights.

Farooq Shah: Emma Nicholson's report on Kashmir is in sharp contrast to the European Parliament's Adhoc Delegation Report adopted by the committee on foreign affairs in November 2004 which accepted Kashmiris were a party to the dispute. That seems nowhere in the Emma's report?

Richard Howitt: I'm here because of the European Parliament to debate about the future policy of Kashmir. The report that has been drafted is the work of one person that has never been subject to any vote of European parliament. I understand and I know that that report does not reflect the ground realities in Kashmir. I know from very many consultations that have taken place with international organisations and with governmental sources, but I felt that this issue is so important that I did not want to rely on second-hand sources before we undertake our debate and that is why I'm here and although my own movements have been restricted, I've met with victims, lawyers, NGOs, government and the army and I'll be meeting with politicians across the political spectrum and I believe that I would be able to go back to the European Parliament and to engage in debate and help shape the European Parliament policy that does reflect the ground realities and the proper aspirations of the Kashmiri people. We want to come clean on the Kashmir issue and address what is actually happening on ground.

Farooq Shah: You've rejected Emma's report, saying: "The Liberal Democrats should be ashamed to have published such an appallingly prejudiced report that, if passed by the European Parliament, would actually be counterproductive in holding back the peace process currently underway between the governments of India and Pakistan."

Richard Howitt: I stand by all of those words. I'm on an international visit here not to criticise another political party or politician individually during this visit. I can do that in European Parliament and it would not be appropriate for me to do that here in Kashmir but I do not believe that the draft report produced is fair or accurate or unbiased and that is one of the reasons that I'm here to make sure that I understand the ground reality.

Farooq Shah: It's believed that her report goes contrary to the aspirations of Kashmiri people as it is alleged that she didn't go for collecting her data from original sources and put into words whatever was told to her by a group of retired officials of Indian Army. What've you to say to that?

Richard Howitt: I can't comment on what her sources are but I've met representatives today from civil society and members of the legal community who wanted to see her but did not.

Farooq Shah: Europe is emerging as a super-market which has its stakes in India as far as trade goes. How do you think this should affect EU's intervention in Kashmir vis-à-vis Indian standpoint considering Emma's report which is believed more in favour of India than Pakistan?

Richard Howitt: Of course, we want trade to flourish between Europe and the rest of the world. We want tourism, environmental changes but having said that Europe is foremost in the world holding principles of democracy and justice but we would never compromise on the principles of human rights and the international law.

Farooq Shah: As a result of the conflict, the collateral damage to the environment, ecology, wildlife, education, healthcare in Kashmir etc has been phenomenal. Do you take up these issues with Indian officials at any level?

Richard Howitt: Our concern at Europe about environmental issues is very much real. We've not talked about it as yet with the local or the Delhi government. We're very passionately concerned about the humanitarian aspect of the conflict. First of all my concern is motivated by promotion of peace and conflict resolution. Nevertheless, this morning I'll be looking at the Dal Lake project and I think it'll give us the idea about the environmental destruction here.

Farooq Shah: India has time and time again shown its unwillingness to engage international mediation on Kashmir. Do you think that international intervention could have facilitated a speedy resolution to the conflict?

Richard Howitt: I believe that international engagement is one of the confidence building measures that should take place that people like me visiting out of friendship and supporting the principles of peace, a conflict resolution and human rights that can only be a positive influence in the Kashmir dispute. We are not seeking to preach or to determine or to interfere. We're seeking to foster friendship and reflect our own experiences, including my own country experiences of Northern Ireland, where we had a deep and difficult dispute over many years, and I hope in the next period it would be possible for European and international NGOs to work more freely across Jammu and Kashmir and for international visitors like myself to be able to travel and work more freely. We respect the security threats locally. We respect the challenges that exist for the state and I believe the international engagement can help be a part of the solution.

Farooq Shah There're several options being discussed with regard to the Kashmir conflict. As you've mentioned your experiences of Northern Ireland, do you think some thing close to that could be worked out here?

Richard Howitt: Each conflict is individual and there's no readymade solution and I certainly don't suggest that Northern Ireland nor any other conflict in the world can provide an intermit answer to the problems in Kashmir. But I do believe that our experiences in Northern Ireland can assist people here in moving towards conflict resolution. In that arena the border has been made less significant. There's been significant joint working between two sovereign governments. We've seen a process of demilitarisation take place slowly, reduced terrorist violence, reduced army presence step by step and we've seen former terrorists ultimately disarm and join the democratic process and if any of those things were to take place here then I think Northern Ireland can be one example that can help find a solution.

Farooq Shah: Isn't it possible for the European Union to get people holding different views on Kashmir on board to work for a lasting solution to the problem?

Richard Howitt: I've discussed ways as how to get people on board representing different thoughts on Kashmir. I'm not suggesting in any sense that there'll be any formal European mediation in this regard but what I do know as far as my work on Israeli- Palestinian conflict is that the European Parliament, European research bodies and non-governmental organisations have been instrumental in getting people on both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian divide to gather in private--sometimes unofficially, sometimes with people who've recently retired but still have good links and contacts with their respective governments and just as that the back channel or the track-II diplomacy in the Indo-Pak peace process and dialogue, and may be these sort of informal gatherings can take place in Europe or facilitated by Europe which will then play a more formal role that can perhaps increase the mutual understanding in the dialogue process.

Farooq Shah: European Union is well aware of the unprecedented build-up of armies on both sides of the line of control. Among several confidence building measures being discussed and implemented, demilitarisation is one tricky issue. How does European Union understand demilitarization?

Richard Howitt: First of all I don't believe to the best of knowledge that there's any official position of the European Union on that. India is a sovereign country, whatever grievances and aspirations people have in Kashmir, India has a right to protect itself as all sovereign countries. However, I'm going to discus all these issues in private, not least with the army but with the Indian government through the course of my visit. Some of these questions are best addressed in private. There're are large armies on both sides of the line of control and I'm not saying that their activities are the same or the numbers are the same either absolutely or relatively, but clearly having and maintaining large military forces on both sides of the line of control is a big drain economically to the government of both sides and most of the people have told me while I've been here that the very presence of the military itself produces all sorts of problems. So clearly, if it is possible to create an atmosphere of peace, trust and confidence to enable troops to be withdrawn from both sides, that is some thing that I'd be discussing with the Indian government.

Farooq Shah: Are you aware of the human rights situation in Kashmir? How do you see it?

Richard Howitt: I want to express that I'm profoundly concerned by what I've heard about the human rights record here based on meeting victims of violence here. As vice-president of the European parliament human rights sub-committee, I've gathered a lot of valuable data and statistics, individual stories and testimonies that I'll be taking back with me to Brussels to ensure that all of this is heard in the highest echelons of the European decision making bodies.

Farooq Shah: There's a travel advisory against visiting Kashmir. The government of Jammu and Kashmir has been trying hard to have the advisory lifted, though without success. What role can you play as an important member of the EU in this regard?

Richard Howitt: Well the travel advisory is a statute order by individual governments including my own government in United Kingdom for some one who informally came to Srinagar as tourist. What I've experienced is that Kashmir is a very beautiful place in the whole world as I took a walk around without anybody with me. If you're successful - which I really hope you are - in restoring peace to your society, I'm sure that European visitors would come and that would definitely help in the economic reconstruction of Kashmir after years of conflict.

The interview appeared in Kashmir Observer

Violence in Muslim Societies


‘Look before you leap: Mufti Nazir’


The recent London bombings are aimed at smearing the beauty of Islam, says Mufti Nazir Ahmad
, a young Kashmiri Muslim cleric who is acknowledged as one of the most credible scholars issuing religious decrees. He teaches religion to young boys at Darul-ul-Aloom Rahimia at Bandipore, a town to the northwest of Srinagar. Mufti, who is a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board for the past six years, has studied religion at Dar-ul- Aloom, Deoband, a premier seat of Islamic learning in India, besides having done master's in Urdu. He says, the Islam he was acquainted with, taught him the respect of life and that if anyone killed an innocent person, it was tantamount to killing the entire mankind as he threw light on the issues concerning the world at present in a interview with Farooq Shah of Kashmir Observer. Excerpts:

MF: Violence and Muslims have become sort of synonymous these days. Non-Muslims say that there's a special emphasis on the use of violence in Islam. What's the real picture?

Mufi Nazir : The literal meaning of Islam is peace. How can a religion, from whose very literal meaning emanates a feeling of peace and security be an advocate of violence? The entire meaning of Islam can be summed up in one Qur'anic verse: An innocent killing is tantamount to the killing of all the humanity. Islam goes to this extent as well that if a man helps another even with half a word in abetting a killing, he too is involved in the entire crime. Killing of innocents has nothing to do with the religion of peace.

MF: Islamic history is replete with wars and Muslims have taken pride in glorifying these. Is it so that war is necessary for establishing peace?

Mufti Nazir: If you look at the history, most wars at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were thrust upon them and Muslims reacted only in self-defence. Islam has reached various places, including Kashmir, without the influence of sword. Islam authorises war in extraordinary situations only, for example, if they meet a violent uprising and the use of force becomes the only alternative.

MF: Making a mention of Kashmir, do you think that some people here have distanced themselves from the age-old teachings and traditions of Sufis and other saints whose message was subtle and that of peace and in accordance with the principles of Islam that some of them have drifted from the real path? Do you think, there's need to inculcate those teachings afresh?

Mufti Nazir: There's no denying that the present generation has distanced itself from the traditions, teachings and ways of life of the Sufi saints who have left an indelible mark on the culture of Kashmir. The subtleties that they taught are completely missing in today's generation. Their character and behavior was so strong that people would automatically embrace Islam and I'm sorry to say that if the people are disillusioned with Islam today, it is because of our bad character and bad behaviour. The only way out from this situation is to respect other people and save oneself from inflicting harm upon another.

MF: Day in and day out, we hear of bomb blasts, killings, kidnappings etc-claiming hundreds of lives every day. It's no coincidence that a number of these take place in Muslim nations or Muslims themselves carry out most of these. How would the order be set right?

Mufti Nazir: If a particular mode of procedure has more disadvantages than advantages, I say however justified a cause, one must refrain from it especially when it brings a bad name to Islam. To me these acts do not conform to the teachings of Islam at all.

MF: There're some clerics who preach extremism in the name of Islam. As an example, one Sheikh living in exile in London, reportedly receiving 300 pounds a month from British government approves the use of violence against England and America. How do you react to such clerics in the first place?

Mufti Nazir: Islam rejects people with double standards, as does the humanity. If the learned men of religious authority are victim of this double-standard syndrome, I don't think Islam acknowledges such behaviours. I've not heard of the Sheikh and I don't know his viewpoint whatsoever, and I don't think I would be able to comment on this gentleman.

MF: Jihad is the probably the most contentious issue of discussion in Islam. What's the theory behind it and who's qualified to give an edict in this regard? Can anybody act on ones own and wage a jihad?

Mufti Nazir: There're issues in Islam where a single person is not qualified to give opinion regarding something contentious, which might lead to ambiguity or indecisiveness. In such cases, a team of highly qualified and learned men of religious authority sit together and analyse the pros and cons of an issue vis-à-vis Islamic teachings and after careful thought issue a combined decision. A person in his individual capacity pursuing anything of his own has nothing to do with Islam.

MF: Islam in the West is the second largest religion after Christianity and still growing. People in the west have been more inclusive and tolerant in many ways and have allowed the spread of Islam happily. Do you not think, the recent spate of violent acts in US and Europe, such as Madrid and London, is harming the cause of Islam?

Mufti Nazir: There's no doubt that acts such as these harm the Muslims' interests in general and Islam in particular. Such acts do tarnish the beauty of Islam.

MF: September 11, Madrid Bombings, Beslan killings, London bombings and now the recent Egypt bombings. How far is it justified to see Muslims' hands in these acts?

Mufti Nazir: The first and foremost thing is to establish whether those responsible are Muslims in the first place. Even if some Muslims are supposed to be involved, it has to be seen whether they act on their own or are used as tools in some kind of a ploy by different agencies to carry out these heinous acts. In the latter case, it is not the Islam that is to be blamed. There's no room for extremism in Islam. If someone thinks that Islam teaches him to do so, I think it does not conform to the principles of Islam. Islamic Fiqah Academy of India organised a seminar on it titled Islam-global peace and security - in which certain resolutions were adopted such as the definition of terrorism, relations with other communities and forbidding of the use of violence against innocent people etc. In Islam there is no justification to violence, whosoever the perpetrator is.

MF: What exactly do you teach at the Madrasa you're engaged in as a religious teacher? What do you stress at? Do you inform the students about the violent acts that mar the day-to-day life today?

Mufti Nazir: Our main focus lies on the real teachings of Islam which should enable the students to uphold the lost traditions of the learned men of the bygone era of Kashmir, Hazrat Anwar Shah, Sheikh Yaqoob Sarfi,-just to name a few. Ours is a simple endeavour to make them good human beings who would be able to differentiate between good and evil for themselves. Violence is something we prefer to keep at bay.

The interview appeared in Kashmir Observer after 7/7 London Bombings.

UK supports Kashmir resolution as per peoples’ wishes: British High Commissioner

Sir Richard Stagg, British High Commissioner to India, visited Kashmir recently and met with several mainstream and separatist leaders. He said the visit allowed him to see for himself the reality of life here and opines that the present situation was clearly a major impediment to exploiting opportunities of the region in full. The High Commissioner said that he was buoyed with the developments that took place in Islamabad on May 20-21 wherein the two countries underlined political will and determination to resolve all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir. He hoped the confidence building measures between the two countries would lead to concrete improvements in the lives of people on either side of the line of control. He said though United Kingdom remained committed to engagements in Kashmir in a very practical way through his government’s Conflict Prevention Pool, it was for the parties directly involved to determine the future course.In an interview with M Farooq Shah of the Greater Kashmir, Richard said that dialogue remained the best way option to solve Kashmir issue. Experts:

Was your recent visit to Kashmir the first and what was your impression?

Yes, it was my first visit to Kashmir. It allowed me to see for myself the reality of life for the people of Kashmir. The present situation is clearly a major impediment to exploiting the opportunities of the region to the full. My visit has, however, brought home to me how much could be achieved if the underlying difficulties are resolved.

What was the purpose of your sudden visit to Kashmir?

The visit has been on the cards since I took over about six months back, and took a lot of planning. The purpose was educational – to meet different political and social leaders from across the State and to gain a first hand impression of the people, culture, politics and issues in the conflict. I found it very helpful, and enjoyed meeting people very much.

The British Foreign & Commonwealth Office maintains that Kashmir remains an issue of importance to the United Kingdom, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. How concerned is the United Kingdom over Kashmir?

India-Pakistan relations and the issue of Kashmir remain of direct importance for the UK. But it is not for the UK to prescribe a solution. It is for the parties directly involved to determine through dialogue. We fully support the ongoing discussions between India and Pakistan and continue to urge both countries to seek a lasting resolution to the issue of Kashmir, one that reflects the wishes of Kashmir’s people.We are encouraged by the recent Composite Dialogue talks on 20-21 May in Islamabad. We hope that confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan will build on progress to date, and lead to concrete improvements in the lives of those on either side of the Line of Control.

The United Kingdom is supporting India and Pakistan to address the causes and impact of conflict in the region. Could you elaborate a little on that?

We remain committed to our engagement in Kashmir in a very practical way through the UK Government’s Conflict Prevention Pool. This continues to fund a number of projects which help those in India, Pakistan and on both sides of the Line of Control with their efforts to facilitate dialogue and address the causes and impact of conflict in the region.

World powers, your country included, have shrugged off their responsibilities on the pretext that Kashmir problem is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, letting the people here suffer in the tussle between the two elephants. Do you not think a more pragmatic approach could have assisted in hammering out a solution long back?

Dialogue remains the best option to solve the issue. A solution can be found only through dialogue: no other country can prescribe a solution. The UK supports the ongoing dialogue process between India and Pakistan, and a solution that takes into account the wishes of the people of Kashmir.

Situation in J&K 10 years from now on - is there hope for a solution and what guarantees can United Kingdom give?

I’m afraid that the United Kingdom cannot give any guarantees on what will happen in 10 years time! But we continue to urge India and Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir issue through dialogue. We were encouraged to hear the remarks of Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, during his visit to Indian-Administered Kashmir in April, when he said that he hoped to put the past behind us, and to move forward with a sense of urgency, not inhibited by false fears or narrow agendas. I remember that he also said that he had been heartened by the very positive statements made by the Pakistani Government. We have also heard positive messages from Pakistani Prime Minister, Syed Gillani, who said that that he would promote “peace and brotherhood" with India. The Composite Dialogue talks on 20-21 May in Islamabad were encouraging, and we hope India and Pakistan will continue to build on this progress.

There's a travel advisory against visiting Kashmir. The government of Jammu and Kashmir has been trying hard to have it lifted, though without success. Do you not think the time's ripe to lift it?

The UK Government advises against all travel to or through rural areas of Jammu and Kashmir (other than Ladakh), and against all but essential travel to Srinagar. We advise British nationals intending to travel to Srinagar to do so only by air. The Indian Government clearly remains concerned about the security situation in Indian-administered Kashmir. The UK Government has a consular responsibility towards its citizens to provide them with the most accurate and current advice on the risks of travel to a particular region. We keep our travel advice under constant review.


The interview was published in Greater Kashmir, on July 5, 2008.

AIDS bomb ticking in Kashmir

M FAROOQ SHAH
Srinagar, Dec 1: If the figures projected by the National Aids Control Organisation are taken seriously, the HIV/AIDS scenario of Jammu and Kashmir looks pretty grim. Officially, there have been 78 deaths since 2000 and there are 1594 confirmed cases of HIV/AIDS in the state, but many dispute these numbers and claim that the actual figures are much higher. “I’d say the number of deaths could be more,” said Dr Mushtaq Siddiqui, who heads the Immunology Department at the state’s premier healthcare facility, SKIMS, Srinagar. He said the stigma attached with the disease has made it all the more difficult to make a correct estimation. The NACO projects 40,000 Kashmiris infected with HIV/AIDS by the end of 2010, and warns that the disease could kill 20,000 people by the end of 2015. Records available with the State Aids Control Society put the number of persons having contracted the infection at 1594 compared to 1999, when only two HIV positive cases were reported. Many questioned whether the state was sleeping over a heap of dynamite. Dr. M A Wani, Project Director State Aids Control Society was not one of them, saying that in light of the recently conducted sentinel survey which indicated a zero prevalence of HIV/AIDS in the valley, there was nothing to worry about. “As compared to the 1.5 in 2003, the HIV/AIDS prevalence in the state has come down to 0.3 in 2008.” About the NACO’s figures, Dr Wani said those were only projected figures. “If we do nothing to thwart the advances of the disease, the figures could go as projected.” “The figures are a result of hypothetical, scientific and mathematical model projections,” head of Social and Preventive Medicine at Government Medical College, Srinagar, Dr Muneer Ahmad Masoodi said. Dr Wani said the SACS has been on the forefront of the battle against HIV/AIDS in the state. “Our educational programmes have been highly successful and there’s nothing to worry about,” Dr Wani said. “It, however, does not mean that we should sit back and relax. HIV/AIDS has the menacing potential of popping its head out of nowhere.” Dr. Siddiqui also warned against complacency, as according to him the sentinel survey ‘suffers’ from certain inherent flaws and the 0.3 prevalence’ could be quite misleading. Dr. Wani disagrees. “Fortunately, ours is a low profile state in terms of HIV infections,” he said. “When I say low profile, what I mean is that the percentage of cases is less than one per cent in antenatal women and less that five percent in high-risk groups.” In spite of being a low prevalence risk zone, with an infection rate among high-risk groups standing at 0.3 per cent, the statistics in Kashmir are fast changing. The shifting demographics are the most significant factor in transmitting the virus, and it has wreaked real havoc. Concentrations of migrant labourers, truck drivers, security personnel and the influx of tourists, yatris invariably pose a serious threat. If the survey of the SACS revealing 400 active homosexuals in the state is taken for granted, the scenario may assume a dangerous proposition. With over half a million security forces stationed in Jammu and Kashmir, the figures indicate a dangerous trend among security personnel. The increased presence of police, military and paramilitary forces in the state has added to the risk because of the frequency of HIV/AIDS among security personnel. Border Security Force (BSF) and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel are among the majority of cases detected in the SKIMS. “Since the inception of the AIDS centre at SKIMS in 1986, we’ve screened almost 20728 people here, of which 193 were found HIV positive,” said Dr. Siddiqui. “It’s worthwhile to note that most of them belonged to security forces, mainly the CRPF and the BSF who had readied for a voluntary testing.” “One of the locals from Uri had contracted the virus after he disclosed that he and several army personnel had had sex with the same woman,” a doctor in the SKIMS said. “Only last month, a patient died of AIDS in Kashmir taking the toll to 8.” According to the SKIMS sources, a villager contracted the disease after he visited a chemist shop which was frequented by army personnel. “The chemist might have given the poor fellow some injection with the same syringe and needle he might have used for the army personnel,” said the doctor. It is practically difficult to determine the number of army and security personnel infected with HIV/AIDS. “They’re not sharing information with the local organisations here,” Dr Muneer said. He expressed satisfaction over the present HIV scenario of Kashmir. “Traditionally, free mixing of sexes is not encouraged in Muslim societies, hence the prevalence is low among them the world over.” The SACS has been active in the state since 1999, spending millions annually with separate allocation for a multitude of peripheral activities such as School AIDS, a student awareness programme. The society is financed by NACO and the World Bank. Their awareness programmes extended to security agencies including CRPF, BSF, and the army, have to a large extent helped keep the disease from assuming dangerous propositions, according to SACS. “Over 34,000 people volunteered for the testing which shows the level of awareness in the state.” Dr Wani said. “This is also one of the successful parameters of AIDS control programme.” However, J&K lags far behind Himachal Pradesh, a neighbouring state with a smaller population. According to reports, HP has 33 Integrated Counselling and Testing Centres (ICTC), against only 22 in Jammu and Kashmir, exposing the state to considerable risk. “There’s no need to set up more ICTCs in the state,” Dr Wani said. “Whether the scenario takes a turn for the worse,” warned Dr. Muneer Ahmad Masoodi, “depends on whether the local populace is able to appreciate and respond to the considerable dangers AIDS continues to pose.
Appeared in Greater Kashmir, December 2, 2008