|
Vajpayee's Sadistic Rhetoric - An Icon of India's Belligerent Mind-Set
by
Mumtaz Hamid Rao
Typical of the Indian
antagonistic mind-set, Atal Behari Vajpayee has come out with yet another
frivolous outburst vis-à-vis the most perilous global issue – the Kashmir
dispute -- by setting aside all potential catastrophic scenarios which can
set - off any moment – only due to supercilious attitude of the New Delhi
warlords – posing a grave threat to peace all around. It appears that
Vajpayee & his colleagues are bent upon aggravating the situation in
South Asia with the culpable ploy of so-called ‘elections’ in the India
held-Kashmir with a singular approach to hoodwink the world – neglecting
the reality that India stands fully exposed before the pragmatic nations
who have been—via their emissaries—making desperate shuttles to this
region ‘just to ensure that a lasting peace is established not only in the
best interest of this region but also for the security of the mankind,
living beyond oceanic.
The frail and ill in bed
Vajpayee has come out with yet another malevolent assail vis-à-vis
Pakistan. At a time when the two countries are in the process of pulling
back their troops to the peacetime locations—prima facie—in a bid ‘to ease
tension’ the Indian leader has—paradoxically—accused Pakistan of
sponsoring State terrorism and vowed to destroy “the demon of terrorism.”
With a misdemeanour loom,
Vajpayee has viciously ignored what his country is pursuing as a State
policy ever since the partition of the subcontinent. Frank historians
stand witness to the veracity that India has—in effect—seized economic and
political autonomy of its wee neighbours like Bhutan and Nepal shaped all
brands of troubles in Sri Lanka and Maldives and above all flattened
sovereignty of Sikkim. Its vile job in dismemberment of Pakistan
is—equally—known to all. At the same time the free world is fully
acquainted with New Delhi’s acts of brutalities towards the freedom
movement of Sikhs just for echoing their voice for an autonomous homeland—Khalistan.
This chivalrous set has lost thousands of precious lives at the hands of
the pitiless armed-men only because they are convinced that their bona
fide rights cannot be protected under Brahmin rule. It’s now crystal
clear—all around—the India has martyred about one hundred thousand
Kashmiris just to perpetu! ate its illegitimate and illegal occupation of
Jammu and Kashmir. Despite all this India still has the audacity to
declare others as terrorists or sponsors of terrorism. If struggle against
alien rule and right of self-determination is to be interpreted as
‘terrorism’ then in what type the names like Gandhi and Nehru would fit
in? Indian allusions against Pakistan are nothing new. In fact, these are
medley of the post Nine/Eleven wicked strategy of New Delhi to blot
Pakistan for its justifiable support to the lawful cause of Kashmiris.
Pakistan’s role in the war against terrorism plus its desire to find
peaceful resolution of the conflicts stands fully vindicated. With this
perception withdrawal of Indian forces is—of course—a moral victory for
Pakistan and we hope Indians would adopt a reasonable policy by entering
into a dialogue to resolve the root cause of the tension between the two
nuke states instead of resorting to tricks like sham polls in Indian Held
Ka! shmir or via the callous charge like the one Vajpayee has now opted
for.
New Delhi fully knows that the
valiant people of Jammu and Kashmir have lashed out such tactics —terming
as a hoax — and are fully determined to do so even in times ahead as this
is not the sensible course to solve the Kashmir issue in line with the
commitments made to the people of this dazzling Himalayan state by the
community of nations for well over a dozen time. It is a unanimous resolve
of Kashmiris that such steps can in no way be a substitute to the UN
commitments for the right of self-determination—explicitly — in the light
of the guarantees given emphatically by UN reps. like Gen MacNaughton, Sir
Oven Dixon and Gunner Jarring and the proclamation of the UN security
council, which had unequivocally resolved twice in 1951 and 1957 that
“Srinagar ‘Assembly’ has no authority to decide about the future status of
the whole or part of the State (of Jammu & Kashmir) and any decision to
this effect will be ineffective and void.”
Each and every peace-loving
and realistic nation – certainly draws only one conclusion from the nasty
rhetoric like the one made by Vajpayee this weekend that such a reckless
depiction is nothing except a flagrant violation of the UN resolutions on
Kashmir and it is obligatory on the World Body – specifically the United
States – to take instant cognizance of such a monstrous impend ‘to save
the global peace from awful perils’. To refresh the stained memory of the
Indian belligerents, let me quote here a few resolutions of the United
Nations – which may serve as an eye-opener – to coerce India to accept the
ground realities – at least for its own billion-plus populace, the
majority of which is eagerly looking for a loaf of bread to survive
instead of dens of arsenals being collected hysterically by their ruthless
rulers.
Isn’t it a fact, Vajpayee-n-Advani
that on 17 January 1948—through its resolution on 38 – the Security
Council – during its 229th meeting – while acknowledging with anxiety had
unanimously stressed the need ‘for immediate measures to improve the
situation, and to refrain from making any statements and from doing or
causing to be done or permitting any acts which might aggravate the
situation’? Again on 20 January 1948 – at the 230th meeting, it had
constituted a 3-member commission ‘for the maintenance of international
peace and security (facing risks due to the Kashmir dispute). Now have a
look on Resolution no.47, adopted on 21 April 1948 at the 286th meeting of
the Security Council, wherein it was observed ‘being strongly of opinion
that the early restoration of peace and order in Jammu and Kashmir is
essential -- and noting with satisfaction that both India and Pakistan
desire that the question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or
Pakistan should be! decided through the democratic method of a free and
impartial plebiscite -- considering that the continuation of the dispute
is likely to endanger international peace and security, reaffirms its
resolution 38 (1948) of 17 January 1948 and instructs the Commission to
proceed at once—with a view to facilitating the taking of the necessary
measures, both with respect to the restoration of peace and order and to
the holding of a plebiscite ---- to make known to all concerned that the
measures provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of
creed, caste, or party, to express their views and to vote on the question
of the accession of the State.’
Probably anticipating the
hostilities of the Indian mindset, the resolutions had – not only listed
the responsibilities of the Plebiscite Administrator but had
simultaneously warned India ‘to give full support to the Administrator and
his staff and prevent any threat, coercion or intimidation, bribery or
other undue influence on the voters in the plebiscite --- as an
international obligation binding’. It also asked India ‘declare and make
known that all subjects of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, regardless of
creed, caste or party, will be safe and free in expressing their views and
in voting on the question of the accession of the State and that there
will be freedom of the Press, speech and assembly and freedom of travel in
the State, including freedom of lawful entry and exit.’
This resolution added, ’the
Government of India should use and should ensure that the Government of
the State also use their best endeavour to effect the withdrawal from the
State of all Indian nationals other than those who are normally resident
therein or who on or since 15th August 1947 have entered it for a lawful
purpose.’
‘The Commission of the
Security Council should at the end of the plebiscite certify to the
Council whether the plebiscite has or has not been really free and
impartial’, the resolution said by adding.
The Security Council
Commission should carry out the tasks assigned to it.’ This too was a
unanimous adoption – Okayed-- with one voice even by the USA, UK, China,
Canada, France, Argentina and Syria. This was re-affirmed through
Resolution 51 – approved on 3 June 1948 at the 312th meting of the
Security Council again on 13 August 1948 by the United Nations Commission
for India and Pakistan, which re-iterated the resolve that ‘the future
status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance
with the will of the people’ (of the State). Next came the resolution of
5th January 1949, which said ‘The question of the accession of the State
of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the
democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite;’ Similar commitments
were given by the United Nations on 10 November 1951 and at the 765th
meeting of the Security Council 24 January 1957 which re-affirmed that
‘the final disposition of the State o! f Jammu and Kashmir will be made in
accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic
method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of
the United Nations.’
It also stressed the need ‘to
refrain from any action which may aggravate the situation in the
sub-continent or endanger international peace; With all these facts –
narrated very briefly, how can Vajpayee and his terrorist-cum-extremist
‘advisor’—Advani—can deceive the world by ignoring the reality-reality and
reality that Kashmir shall continue to remain an international issue until
it is resolved in line with the UN pledges – reflecting the aspirations of
the people of the Jammu and Kashmir State.
New Delhi shall have to accept
-- in totality – that the eyeball-to-eyeball standoff along the borders –
which has been ascending due to – the perfidious approach of India, shall
continue to keep the peace in South Asia in jeopardy. No doubt, it is a
hub of anguish for peaceable nations, around the globe, which are making
resolute efforts for a way out for the settlement of all the pending
issues -between India and Pakistan—with the Kashmir dispute atop—through a
mode of dialogue. Contrary to the Indian chauvinistic and intransigent
tendency, Pakistan has – time and again—explicitly highlighted the impact
of talks, anywhere, anytime and at any levels, which have by now been
eschewed by the New Delhi rulers, overlooking the echelon of the cataclysm
that may ignite because of the importunate tension in the region.
One hopes that when a
‘sagacity of sanity’ is switching on the Indian leadership—through the
withdrawal troops from the borders, they would bend before the ground
realities – in the best interest of peace – instead of shutting their
eyes, as such an outlook will serve no purpose. It is therefore imperative
that all the nations of the world should step in and compel India to
respond to the honest efforts of Pakistan in an assenting way instead of
passing frolicsome annotations—an attitude—which is in fact evaporating
ever since the advent of the new millennium, in which every erudite soul
adores peace and hates catastrophe.
The author is a noted journalist, political analyst and ex-Director News Pakistan TV.
Source:
by courtesy & © 2002 Mumtaz Hamid Rao
by the same
author:
|
