Article 370: Let’s Not Give in Anymore to Islamic Exclusionism and Separatism

Note: The following article is in response to the article 'Lets not turn Kashmir into another Gaza' by two Pakistani authors, and the same should be kept in mind. 

Authors: Prabhat Shankar, Geetanjali Yadav

The world cannot afford to turn a blind eye anymore to an ideology which is in dire need of immediate reform to make it compatible to the universally acceptable and moral ethos of mutual acceptance, peaceful coexistence, gender equality and secularism.

The iconic Sharda Peeth was one of the greatest temples of learning for Kashmiri Hindus. Unfortunately it went to the side of Pakistan, and lies in tatters. With a government antithetical to minorities and only for Islam, the minorities have only the option to leave Pakistan.

History

Seventy-three years ago, the prolonged war of independence of India against its British occupation, saw fruition on 15 August 1947. Inspired by its century’s old civilizational ethos, and led by Mahatma Gandhi, the movement was seeped into non-violence, peace, equality and brotherhood. Subsequently, this Indian struggle of Independence inspired many such other movements world-wide and was emulated by the likes of Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela.

Ironically, this unifying theme of equality and peaceful co-existence could not appeal enough to a section of people with vested interests. Inspired in the name of Islam and Muslim brotherhood, a movement led by Mohammad Ali Jinnah arose to demand a separate country, exclusively for Muslims. Rooted in the supremacist ideology of Islamic superiority, it negated the principles of co-existence and acceptance of personal choice. This idea was naturally resisted, as the same Hindus and Muslims had been co-existing from centuries. But the attempts of keeping the country unified were met with the calls of direct action day. To force their demand of the new country, the same mob perpetuated violence and massacre of the unsuspecting population. Thus, the nation of Pakistan was born by rejecting the principles of peaceful co-existence.

Unification of the States

The undivided India consisted of British occupied India, and 565 princely states. In the ensuing partition, the princely states were given a chance to join either of the two newborn nations. Despite Pakistan forcing itself as a nation exclusively for Muslims, India instead of giving in to this madness, chose to remain a secular nation which would accept one and all religions. This allowed India to gain the trust of many princely states. 

Jammu and Kashmir has been one of the holiest places of the Indian civilization since centuries. It has been the seat of a number of holy places, shrines, places of learning. During the time of partition, this state was ruled by Maharaj Hari Singh. The state had a majority Buddhist population in the area of Ladakh, majority Hindu population in the area of Jammu, and a majority Muslim population in the area of Kashmir. Thus, the king took his own time in deciding matters. After due negotiations on both sides of the new-born nations, he chose to join the Indian federation on 26 October 1947, and signed the instrument of ascension for this. When this news reached Islamabad, unable to digested this decision, Pakistan chose to send its forces towards Kashmir for a forceful annexation. India responded promptly, and the attacking forces were quickly pushed back. Unfortunately, before the invading forces could be flushed out completely, a premature ceasefire was declared. The land thus occupied was Pakistani forces came to be known as ‘Pakistan Occupied Kashmir’. In search of peace, this area thus came under the forceful and illegal occupation of Pakistan. The other half constitutionally became the part of Indian federation.

Fast-forward to the Present Era

Since 1948, the above status quo was maintained, despite the fact that in 1971 Indo-Pakistani war, 72,000 Pakistani solders had to surrender to the Indian forces after a humiliating defeat, and which saw the birth of Bangladesh. On the other front, what happened to the trajectory of the two new-born nations where one chose to follow a secular constitution, the other choosing to put Islam above everything else?

Islamic State of Pakistan

Pakistan was born by placing Islam superior to everything else and imagined it to be its binding glue. With that attitude, it forgot the principles of natural justice. No wonder, it started to unravel faster than a pack of cards.

• According to the Pakistani constitution, only and only a Muslim can occupy the top post of the country. Non-Muslims don’t have this right.
• Taking it further, Muslim faiths like Ahmadiyya’s have been proclaimed as non-Muslims by constitutional declaration. Their first Muslim Nobel laureate in Physics, Abdus Salam, finds no mention as he was an Ahmadiyya.
• The two-nation theory was debunked in 1971, when eastern Pakistan chose to dissociate itself from the western Pakistan, and thus a new nation of Bangladesh was born.
• The population of all minority reduced to an insignificant amount of less than 1% in Pakistan.
•  Any remaining minority population is forcibly converted, and under laws like Sec 295, where offering even a rational critic of Islam, Prophet or the Quran needs to be punished by Capital Punishment.
• Pakistan has been internationally recognized as the epicenter of terrorism. Almost all terrorist events have some Pakistani connection to itself. Osama Bin laden was found living close to Army headquarters for over a decade. The government supported Taliban in Afghanistan for a long time.
• After three military defeats against India (1965,1971,1999), Pakistani government is openly harboring global terrorists as Hafiz Saeed. Its efforts to promote terrorism have been rewarded by a FATF blacklist recently.
• In pursuit of terrorism, the country is on a verge of bankruptcy, and surviving on doles of China and USA.
•  Despite fashioning itself as ‘champions of Muslims’, it is forced to remain silent at the treatment of Uighur Muslims inChina, where more than a million of them have been put in several internment camps.

Secular Republic of India

The mother country, though stabbed by the deep wounds at this betrayal, chose to gather itself, and refused to fall prey to this madness. Let’s look at its present state:

• India is a Secular republic, agnostic to the personal beliefs of its citizens.
• Union of more than 30 states, which has many Hindu majority, Sikh majority in Punjab, Christianity Majority in North east, Muslim majority in the Kashmir section of J&K.
• The Muslim population itself has ballooned from 5%in 1947 to more than 15% at present. Equality of opportunity has seen them occupying top-most post in every sphere of life.
• The Sikh, Jain, Parsi minorities count as the richest and most influential section of the society. The secular, plural and accepting all nature of Indian constitution has allowed this.
• The Indian democracy is well known for its elections, where more than a billion people participate in franchise. Never ever a military coup happened here.

·         This unifying approach has placed India in the comity of nations which are developing fast, are preferred destination of investment, and more than that, are loved and trusted by almost all nations for its humanitarian, compassionate and bipartisan approach.

Article 370 and its repulsion

Now let’s come to the matter of Article 370. While J&K became a part of India in 1947, a Presidential notification in 1954 inserted the Article 370 in the constitution. It allowed for some special provisions in the form of special powers to frame its laws, and was meant to be a temporary provision to facilitate smooth integration. Let’s see how this special feature impacted the polity of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. 

Salient Features of Article 370        

• The law was discriminatory against the citizens of India, where the cardinal principle of equality before the law was not being followed.
• The central laws to improve the life of the people, like right to education, right to information, reservation to the backward classes, anti-corruption laws: none of them were applicable in J&K, and the state politicians were hardly bothered.
• The law was blatantly discriminatory to the women of J&K, as if they chose to marry outside the state, they lost all their property rights due to this!
•  The article denied rights to its refugees, who had escaped the massacre of partition and chose to come to this state, as they were denied any job opportunities.
• The word ‘secularism’ was not included in the constitution of J&K, unlike the Indian constitution.

Does any state of India, which has a Jain, Sikh, Christian majority population need special privilege? Why does a single Muslim majority state need that special privilege? Are we not equals, not part of the same constitution? India has provided a level playing game to each section of society in the form of supportive policies. If an outsider buying land in J&K is a threat to the demography of Kashmir, then are such people arguing that rise of Muslim population in India from 5% to 15% is a threat to India? Equality is a two way street, and must be respected both the ways. 

Eviction of Kashmiri Hindus

In this entire episode, one aspect which is always blatantly overlooked is the forced exodus of more than 1 million Kashmiri Hindus, who were the inhabitants of Kashmir Valley. Though the original inhabitants of Kashmir, these Kashmiri Hindus were over-numbered as Islam spread and multiplied in demography. Taking advantage of demographic superiority, these Kashmiri Hindus were threatened and forced to evict the valley in January 1989, rendering them penniless and homeless. Till date, they have remained like that, with no efforts on anyone’s part to make them return. Their homes are deserted or forcibly occupied. This is what is the actual legacy of article 370. The abrogation of 370 is just a small solace to these displaced millions, with no hope of return in sight as yet.

Advice to Pakistan

Pakistan has failed to learn the values of pluralism, secularism and equality before law, irrespective of religious identities. In the pursuit of Islamic supremacy, it is destroying itself by radicalizing own citizens. In their article, when the authors are reminding us of Gaza, they are following the same course of threatening terrorism and violence to meet their objective. They should remember that the world has become much wiser, has seen the Twin-tower attacks of 2001, French london terror attacks, and has refused to bow down to any form of terrorism. Such scorched earth policy will only hasten and expose the true nature of their threat.

It would be well advised for Pakistan to accept that multi-religious states exist which don’t discriminate between its citizens based on religions. The difference between India and Pakistan is too glaring for the world to miss it. Kashmir is just one shining example of that. While it can keep fooling its own impoverished citizens in the name of Darul-Islam for some more time, but its citizens are already paying a very heavy price for that.

We urge the authors to wake up to the reality of the new world which refuses to judge a citizen based on their religious identity. We have a couple of amazing friends in Pakistan, and it would be a travesty if their country is ruined in the name of antiquated ideas. For the beginners, can we urge the authors to acknowledge and start a movement for constitutional amendment of Pakistan, where a non-Muslim too can reach its top position? For a Pakistan where an Ahmediyya too can be embraced by them? The world is waiting for an answer, alas, without much of a hope!


Prabhat Shankar is a Senior Research Engineer in Industry
Geetanjali Yadav is a Fullbright scholar, working in an Academic Institution