Would Abolishing Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir lead to a greater Demographic imbalance than it can correct?

Standard

Yes, I am afraid it would. Those Indians who support the idea of Abolishing the Article 370 of the Constitution of India, and demand its immediate implementation, think that because India is a nation with Hindu majority, the opening of the doors of the State of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh will be followed by a rush of mostly Hindus into all the Provinces that will ‘correct’ the demographic balance towards making it a Hindu majority State, as the Kingdom of Jammu was, Once Upon A Time, before it came under the British rule and got possession of the Muslim majority Kashmir Valley in 1846 AD through them, which has become a ” ‘Chhachhundar’ stuck in the throat” of the earlier Jammu state and now of India too.

It would have been better if Raja Gulab Singh who was the Maharajah of Jammu then, had kept Kashmir as the separate princely state as it was earlier, simply annexed to Jammu, instead of merging it with Jammu and making Srinagar its winter capital, thereby converting his Hindu majority state into a Muslim majority one. For the Muslim population in the Kashmir Valley in 1846 AD was 94-95% of the total population in the Valley, and overwhelmingly more than the Hindus in Jammu and Ladakh put together, as a result of which the combined state became an overall Muslim majority state, with only the Jammu province left with Hindu majority.

What Raja Gulab Singh, who thus became the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir (generally addressed as the Maharajah of Kashmir) should have done then was (1) to merge only the part on the East and North of the Jhelum river in the Kashmir valley, including Srinagar district, housing the religious and pilgrimage sites of importance to Hindus, that is being demanded now by the Kashmiri Pandits for the formation of an enclave for their resettlement, namely ‘Panun Kashmir’; and the KPs and other residents of the area alone should have been made the citizens of the Princely State. (2) The rest of the valley of Kashmir should have been maintained and ruled as an Annexure of the State of Jammu without merger.

This would have facilitated the division of the state into (1) a Hindu majority state of Jammu and Panun Kashmir with Ladakh, which could have been merged later without dispute with India, after Independence, While (2) the Muslim majority remainder of the valley could have logically gone to Pakistan without war or plebiscite after the Independence of Jammu and Kashmir at the same time as India and Pakistan, in August 1947, wherefrom the dispute over the right over Kashmir started.

However, Kashmir was a prime property that Raja Gulab Singh did not want to keep as a separate property that could break loose anytime, so He merged it with Jammu to make it an integral part of His State despite the protests of the Kashmiri Muslims who wanted it to remain their ‘Independent Kashmir’, and free of Jammu. Also, in 1846, when the Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was under the powerful British sovereignty, He may not have imagined the subsequent events and problems that were to occur a century later that his descendent Raja Hari Singh would have to encounter.

The attempt to correct the distorted demography of the State of Jammu and Kashmir at this stage by abolition of the Article 370 could backfire on India, especially on Jammu and Ladakh. Because it can happen, contrary to the beliefs of Hindu Indians, that people of other religious communities (not ruling out even more Muslims in addition to the Rohingyas already in Jammu – outnumbering the Kashmiri Pundits, Dogras and other Hindus as always Buddhists of Tibetan origin) may storm into the State, which will be impossible to prevent, once the ‘Lock’ of the Special Status of the State is opened by scrapping the Article 370 from the Indian Constitution.

Things were different during the strict and powerful British Sovereign Rule, who could quash all rebellion from the Kashmiri Muslims and their supporters or other insurgent groups with an iron hand; but we know the mettle of our post Freedom politicians and their parties who are unrealistically and exasperatingly committed to the ideology of pacification of their enemy nations even in the face of attacks.

Even in the case of former PM Lal Bahadur Shastri, who is regarded by many Indians as the Best PM India has had so far, it is said that he made the Indian Forces retreat and return to India after they had reached as far as Lahore during the Indo Pak War over Kashmir in 1965, because it was violative of India’s policy of Peace and Non-aggression (not meaning absolute nonviolence or passive resistance like Satyagraha in the event of actual wars initiated by the enemy) but not to transgress into or invade the enemy’s territory, though it may have been done by our Army for defence purpose. That is, wage war only to save our country’s territory from invasion and illegal occupation, just to make the enemy nation realise that we cannot be conquered easily. That’s all. Not to ‘Crush the Enemy’s Head in His Burrow’ for good, so that it may not raise its ugly head again!

[I call this policy set by Jawaharlal Nehru the ‘Dharmaraj Yudhishthira’ Policy, or the ‘Policy of Yama’ (said to be his father or presiding deity) in the sense of rigid Self- Restraint(संयम) even at the cost of victory, which subdued the valiant spirit of our first Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and thereafter stifles the Indian Army, representing Arjun, the brave warrior of the Pandavas (who was supposed to be the son of Indra, the Commander in Chief of the Gods). Dr.Bhimrao Ambedkar was the Bhim of the first Independent Indian Government Cabinet, and Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee was Karna, their dissident brother who, like Ambedkar, was against the addition of the Article 370 to the Indian Constitution, which was one of the reasons for his resignation from Nehru’s government and from the Indian National Congress. (Nehru accepted that demand of SheikhAbdullah and the Maharajah of Kashmir because he wanted them to accede Kashmir to India with any terms and conditions). Nakul and Sahadev were just the followers of the elder four Pandavas. Deplorably, there has been No wise Guide like Krishna in Free India till now, due to which there is no end in sight for this ‘Mahabharata’ in ‘Mera Bharat Mahaan’. Perhaps, Subramanian Swamy who has joined BJP to be its MP, without becoming a minister can be compared to Sri Krishna, as the ‘Parthasarathy’ to Narendra Modi, but unfortunately, his advice is not taken seriously or followed by the Modi Government until very late!

In short, the result of the revocation of Article 370, and with it Article 35-A, may well turn out to be an irreversible ‘ANTICLIMAX ‘, or a disgraceful ‘Fall On The Face’ for Hindus. For Hindus(barring exceptions like Punjabis, Jats, Rajputs and some others like the Marathas and Kshatriyas of Coorg as well as certain tribes of North East), particularly Kashmiri Pundits, are really no match in pugnacity and aggressiveness to the fiery Muslims and Sikhs!

Hence, the Best Option to my mind under the present circumstances, is to let the Article 370 remain(at least in the Kashmir valley and Ladakh to retain their ethnic and cultural identity but with the two kept separate under different leaders), and the whole State (or Kashmir and Ladakh) be placed under Central Rule as a Union Territory with its Special Status, but with a strong and wise Governor posted there with full powers for its Rule, with military help to be taken only as and when, and where required- until the law and order situation in the state is fully under control.

Regarding the question of desirability and feasibility of maintenance of Article 370 in Jammu province, or making it a full fledged state under the Indian Union as its people desire, much discussion is required between the people of Jammu and the Central Government, in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Legislature, to take the right decision.

Once the law and order situation is under control, however, an effort should be made to find out how many Kashmiri Muslims are in league with the separatists, and then talk with those who are not, to understand their needs, and with the separatists too about why they are dissatisfied with the Indian government, and what the Govt. can do for them(except grant separation from India). As for those who wish to separate to become Independent or citizens of Pakistan, they should be told that they can be transferred to ‘Azad Jammu-Kashmir’ if they want, and if Pakistan Government is willing to accept them.

Advertisements

ARE RAPE CRIMES RELATED TO PROVOCATIVE DRESS AND FREEDOM OF WOMEN? It is believed by many that Rapes on women occur because of the Revealing and Sexy dresses of Modern Women or due to Unbridled Mixing of Girls with Boys nowadays, as Orthodox,Tradition-al Thinkers say. Can These Self-righteous people explain, (a)Why do Rapes Occur on Nuns of different religions;(b) on Very Young Girls And (c)ALSO On Boys in Schools, Religious Places and even at Home at times? This means that Rape is Not Just a Sudden Unplanned Acting Out of The Sexual Urge Arising at the Sight of a Provocatively dressed and Seductive Female, BUT, The Desire To Wield Power Over Physically and Socially Weaker Persons of Both Sexes of Any Age, in the Society or Family, To Keep Them Under Constant Fear and thereby under Their Subjugation as Slaves. Otherwise, (d)Why is it that Rape Victims belong to the Poor or Middle Class and Backward Sections of Society? (e)Likewise, Why are Women of Conquered Nations Sexually Ravished En Masse by the Victors as Booty following Wars? Are Those Women All Sexily Dressed and Immoral? (f)Finally, Why Is It That Daughters of Socially Prominent and Powerful Families rarely become the Victims of Rape, No Matter How They Dress or Behave, Or Even If They Venture Out Drunk On The Streets at Late Nights? Men with the Worst Sex Crime Record do Not Dare Molest or Rape Them. (UNLESS Someone of Their Own Family Members or Close Family Friends Betrays Them). These Highly Placed Women enjoy an Immunity from Sexual Assaults, Not So Much because of Moral Superiority, but because of The Powerfulness of Their Guardians, and the AWE they command over other persons by virtue of the Social Eminence of their Familial back- ground. The women from a common background people do not have that strong backing, because of which the offences against them are not registered by the Police or not processed promptly by the Police and Courts. Even our Political leaders and Ministers are not serious about sexual offences, and neglect rape or even cases of. rape accompanied by murder as something that happens off and on, which is difficult to control e.g Mulayam Singh Yadav saying “Ladke Aksar Aisi Galti Karte Hain”, which emboldens their abusers and perpetuates the social menace.

Standard

Is the Aggressive Nature and Proclivity towards Violence of some Ferocious and Invasive clans rooted in their Harsh and Inhospitable Climatic Environment?

Standard

The Original Communities that hailed from the region of the Arabian desert and Iran, as also from the formidable mountainous region of Afghanistan, have been the target of much criticism and swearing for their apparently aggressive nature and infliction of violence on other races and nations. However, very few critics consider the angle that most of these clans have lived in a very harsh climatic environment and scarcity of resources in their land of origin, which has influenced their mindset and culture.

There are Four Main Types of Habitat, influenced by One of the Four Main Natural Elements, namely, (a) FIRE- (Heat of the Sun)- Deserts and Regions close to the Equator; (b) WATER – Coasts of Seas, Rivers and Large Lakes; (c) AIR – Mountainous areas and Hill Stations, Polar Regions and (d) EARTH- Inland Plains, Mines etc. The Realms of Fire are the hottest and most uncomfortable for living.

Not only the Muslims, but if one goes into the pre-Islamic history of the Arabian Desert region- say of the Biblical times- the ASSYRIANS , an Arab tribe, who were the same as the Asuras mentioned in the Hindu texts, were also a fiery lot, and have been described by an English historian as “Breaking loose on the occupants of the valley of Mesopotamia like a pack of wolves, who were ruthless in killing the conquered people, and are said to have been dismembering their enemies after assassinating them!” They ruled the area from Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean Coast upto the Aral Sea on the East of the Caspian Sea from around 1320-612 BC, after which they were in turn defeated by the Persians.

Likewise, the Moguls invading India from the time of Babur, also came from Mongolia, which is a partly desert, party steppe, and partly mountainous area; but it is pertinent to mention here that warring and invading tribes existed in Central Asia even before Babur and his forefathers Timur and Genghiz Khan. Examples are of the ‘WHITE HUN’ (or Ephthalite, as the tribe has been named by anthropologists) TORAMAN and his son Mihirgul who invaded (and established their clan in) India, from their homeland in Central Asia in the 5th century AD, and ATTILA, the HUN who invaded and ravished and terrorised Germany and the surrounding parts of Europe around the same time. The religion of Islam did not exist then, as it was founded by Mohammed Paigambar in the latter half of the 6th century AD.

In Europe also, it was the races of Northern European origin, like the GERMANS, CELTS and SCYTHIANS who invaded and conquered the Southern and Mediterranean seaside countries like Bulgaria, France and Italy. In Greece, the original Greeks named the ‘Mukes'(short form of Mycenae) or ‘Black Greeks’, as they were a mixture of European and the dark Hamitic races, were overthrown by the Nordic tribe of Dorians to which Alexander belonged, from 1100-1000 BC.

In India too, it is observed that the people of Rajasthan which is a desert state and of Punjab which has extremely hot summers and extremely cold winters, including Hindus, tend to be more easily provoked and aggressive than the residents of the temperate coastal regions.

This indicates that ferociousness or aggressiveness and irritability tending to spark violence of at least some communities like the Muslims and the other communities mentioned above is related significantly to the intensity of heat or other intemperate and unsuitable climatic environmental factors like very frosty areas, as of the people living in the Arctic region, or rough mountainous regions like the Ural-Altai mountains on the northwest border of Mongolia with very high altitude and thin air. The relation of extreme climate, especially hot climate, to aggressiveness and violence in populations chronically exposed to it, has been recognised by Ecologists and Environmental Biologists.

Hence, most long past and recent invasions and wars have been initiated by the tribes or clans belonging to the countries with harsh environment against, and than the people blessed by nature with temperate or soothing climate, as around seas, major rivers or water beds like large lakes, that is bountiful human and animal resources, which those belonging to the hostile equatorial and polar regions eye with envy and covet to conquer, as a FIGHT FOR SURVIVAL! The aggressive writings of such people, like Jihad, are also probably prompted by and a reflection of their envy and resentment against those who are environmentally better placed, which arouses the urge to defeat the latter and seize their land and resources. So Perhaps, improving their own environment may bring real Peace to them(and to others)!

For Why is it that all sections of Muslims are not as intolerant to people of other religions as the Sunnis , that is, if the apparent hatred and destructiveness of some of their members are due to their religion?

One important ‘KEY’, though not the only one, for augmenting equanimity and BRINGING DOWN the occurrence, if not ending, of the bitter and fierce WARS waged by one nation against another for possession of the gifted and alluring lands around the world, is by making the regions with unmerciful weather or other severe environmental flaws ON THIS EARTH more bearable for habitation, that is, ENVIRONMENTAL UPGRADATION, which the MODERN, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY invented by Mankind, CAN certainly ENABLE it to do, if only Humanity would realise the pressing importance and need of such a mission (more than exploring the possibility of finding some OTHER planets like Mars, which can, perhaps(?) sustain life) ! CAN WE ?