What India must do to Kashmir-

Very sad news emerging out of Kashmir.

Vidhi was saying that India should retaliate whereas I think it should be a more subtle response along the Israeli lines in the West Bank.

(1.) Everytime there are protests in the Valley, India should randomly select a sample of the protestors (maybe a third or so), strip them of their citizenship and bus them to the border so they can join Pakistan. Continue ad nauseam which will help demographics and instil enough fear to dampen potential rioters.

(2.) Abolish Section 377 and bring only the Valley under Central Rule (keep Jammu & Ladakh as it is). India should actively encourage Hindu (not just KP) immigration into Srinagir. Encourage KPs (who are India’s most endangered minority not the Parsis) to breed like rabbits (or like Muslims) and make them agents of the Indian state. Both the tepid tweets by Mehbooba Mufti & Omar Abdullah show the huge disconnect Muslim Kashmiris have with the rest of the Indian State.

(3.) India should begin to demilitarise in Kashmir and retreat to defensible borders on the LOC. With an effective and ongoing occupying force it can keep the Valley sedated with only a fifth of its standing army instead of the current million strong component. The geographic trade of Pakistan conquering Srinagir is losing half of Sindh so Pak won’t engage in conventional warfare.

(4.) BJP’s shameful backtracking on the Citizenship amendment shows the bankruptcy of democracy. The BJP should simply not allow the “new citizens” to settle in NE states, which understandably want to opt out. The “new citizens” should be redirected towards Kashmir & other sensitive regions of India, one million Bangladeshi Hindus in Srinagir will help sort things out.

No one will cry for the Muslim Kashmiris; their cause isn’t as emotive as the Palestinian one. I personally can’t understand the Kashmiri Muslim problem; they are one of the few people in India lucky enough to have Urdu as the official language of their state. They have the unique position of being cultural Pakistanis who have access to the Indian economy so they should buckle down and stop making a fuss.

It is obvious that it’s the Cult of the Holy Pedophile, also known as Muslim menace, behind it all and why it’s so important that Bharat use sickle & all to castrate Islam & its sick ideology once & for all.

The immense success Israel has had in the past two decades demonstrates that tough actions bear fruit and it’s time for the Muslim Kashmiris to step up. The Palestinian cause is far more secular (much less Muslim) than the Kashmiri one and therefore much more worthy.

40 thoughts on “What India must do to Kashmir-”

  1. What fascist recommendations. Indian citizens cannot be deported to Pakistan. Abolishing article 370 is also extremely problematic. I find it extremely bizarre that you would encourage India to act like Israel does in the occupied West Bank. Israel’s actions break international law and the country rightly deserves the criticism it gets in most of the world.
    I condemn all acts of terrorism. Kashmir is a political conflict and the only solution is a negotiated settlement taking all stakeholders on board. Retaliating against Pakistan risks escalation, which is not in the interest of any sensible person.

      1. I have never supported any kind of terrorism. Loss of life is tragic, whether it is of a kashmiri or of an Indian soldier.

  2. The irony of Zach complaining about imperialism and its atrocities from the British, only to advocate for same (if not worse) to be done to the Kashmirs. I suppose only white people are worthy of being held to such lofty standards. Brown people ravaging other brown people is fine, as long as its the team Zach likes who’s doing it.

    Another option for India that wasn’t listed above, that seems the most common sense, is to do what they were advise to do in 1947, and hold a vote in J&K. The areas that want to be part of India can vote to stay, and the areas that want to leave can vote to leave.

    Otherwise we’ve seen this story before (British in Ireland, French in Algeria, Israelis in Palestine). You can’t maintain indefinite military control of a people who don’t want you there, without incurring blow-back.

      1. Many Kashmiris would disagree with you about what is or is not imperialism. Delhi is viewed as an Occupier by many people in the Valley.

    1. \ what they were advise to do in 1947, and hold a vote in J&K. \

      Who advised India ? You have not read history or UN Resolutions . Please read UN Resolutions before commenting like this

    2. “Otherwise we’ve seen this story before (British in Ireland, French in Algeria, Israelis in Palestine). ”

      Well Han Chinese (in Tibet and Xiangyang) would disagree 😛

  3. The Israelis have not had immense success. But I don’t want to get side tracked by elaborating.

    For part 2, Kashmiri Hindus, Buddhist, Sikhs, Sufis, Shiites, Christians should all be treated this way. It is sad that so many Shiites and Sufis have had to flee Kashmir. They use to be a larger percentage of the population. Otherwise I mostly agree.

    Part 3 is impractical. This appears to be a Taliban attack. India needs to continue population centric COIN with a heavy emphasis on surging police capacity.

    Part 1 is inconsistent with Bharatiya Hindustani cultures and values. There is no precedent for this in any Shastras or Itihasas that I am aware of. India is also a free democracy.

    Kashmiri people are not responsible for the actions of the Taliban, which threaten them more than anyone else.

    Most pro independence Kashmiris do not like international Jihadis who want to establish a global Caliphate. Kashmiris would be slaughtered by them without the Indian army to protect them.

    In 51 months proxies of the Pakistani Army and Daesh have killed over 45,000 brave Afghan Army and Police soldiers. The Afghan National Army is a very tough force. The Kashmiri people and their own native army would not stand a chance.

    Kashmiris also do not want to lose large scale transfer grants from the center to the state government.

    Kashmir has internal challenges between different groups of Kashmiris, with Indians and with Pakistanis. The solution is loving respectful dialogue. Dialogue melts hearts. Where the heart goes the mind can follow.

    Indians should be proud of being Indians and follow apologetically follow Indian values.

  4. Although I can very much relate to the anger you must be feeling in suggesting such solutions, I can’t help but agree with Kabir — they’re kinda fascist. Israel (and for the record, I tend pro-Israeli) is not an example to emulate in the long run for India, even if the short term benefits are tempting. This if from a purely utilitarian perspective — it’s not clear if the Israeli experiment is sustainable in the long run.

    I wonder if something like the following tweaks to your suggestions might result in more of a win-win situation? As in 2), trifurcate J&K, incorporating Ladakh and Jammu as new Indian states. For the rest of Kashmir, unilaterally declare the LOC an international border and give Kashmir nominal independence, with India keeping control of defense, foreign policy, and control of the borders (as in suggestion 3), sort of like a Hong Kong or Macau sort of one country/two systems arrangement, or perhaps more like a scaled up San Marino or Monaco type arrangement if one wants to bestow it with a greater notion of sovereignty. Heavily initial investment as per some sort of a Marshall-type plan in education, transportation and telecommuications infrastructure so that whatever economy and polity that may develop in Kashmir will by its own self interest, integrate into the Indian sphere. India wins some sort of moral high ground, Pakistan end up looking like occupiers of `Azad Kashmir’, maybe even allowing for family reunification from `Azad’ to `Independent’ Kashmir. Kashmiriyat has the possibility of flowering again since much of the oxygen for the perceived grievances fueling the insurgency will have vanished.

    1989 was only a generation ago, so the damage of the insurgency can be undone. This is not to say that military effort will not be required, as you suggested: withdraw paramilitaries and armed forces to the LOC, and empower them to inflict as much punitive damage as the armed forces would view an incursion at the international border in the Punjab or Rajasthan.

    The typical argument one might level against this solution is: whats then to stop other restive Indian regions for demanding the same (e.g. in the NE, or perhaps in the future, the South)? This argument is based on outdated insecurities. The Indian republic is strong enough to give Kashmir (minus Jammu and Ladakh) nominal independence as an Indian protectorate, and still move inexorably onwards.

    1. If India succumbs to weakness, it will be an irreversible loss of prestige.

      Pakistan is pretty fascist so why shouldn’t India play by the rules of its neighbourhood..

  5. “I wonder if something like the following tweaks…” (Some suggestions).

    Why will any of these result in fewer terrorist incidents ?

  6. Well, the presupposition is that solving the Kashmir issue to some standard of satisfaction for all the stakeholders will end the insurgency. One could argue against that premise, as well as the fact that it doesn’t necessarily mean that terrorist incidents will end, especially if that form of asymmetric warfare will always appeal to those who lack real power, but these are separate discussions.

    Compromising your core values, giving in to your worst fears and reactionary tendencies are among the very the reactions terrorists wish to provoke. Countries like Israel may be playing the civilizational long game, but they’re playing with fire and it’s not clear they’ll prevail in the long run*.

    I believe it is possible to be ruthless and hard headed in one’s response without resorting to collective punishment. I have higher aspirations for India’s future as a geopolitical and a civilization entity than that.

    * Here’s an Israeli voice on that matter —


  7. It sounds like a Tibet or Rakhine or Israel or a USA solution but the author surely forgot to take into consideration, “human suffering”.

  8. One interesting thing from the whole issue from Uri–> Pulwama is this genuine belief that India WILL retaliate back. By talking to Friends and family back in India(of different political bent) i would say i am genuinely surprised. Considering more often than not India has not retaliated. Retaliation has been an exception not the rule. The current right wing Govt has even heightened the expectation of the liberals, who would earlier talk about peace /restraint/helpless-ness. Its interesting considering liberals did not have the same expectation from their own Government (Congress) but have this “retaliation” expectation from the Govt they oppose. LOL.





  9. I think whats frustrating Indians is our inability to do sufficient damage to the interests of Pakistani elites, despite our superiority in economic and military terms.

    I think long term Pakistan has little chance of being a viable state. Its primary economic assets, arable land and fresh water have been neutralized by unchecked population growth and climate change. Its other assets, a young workforce and English proficiency have been constrained by its isolation.

    Right now, Pakistan is afloat because of Chinese and Gulf state strategic interests. India has to keep building strength to muscle Pakistan out of the Gulf completely. We are also not far away from being able to carry out targeted strikes against Pakistani generals and other elites.

    But the country India has to think seriously about is China. They know exactly what they are doing by helping keep Pakistan afloat. Hurting China will be much more difficult than Pakistan. This is the real problem we need to think about.

  10. I’m cynical about the Kashmir question. Putting aside simplistic Hindu-Muslim, Indian-Pakistani tribal loyalties, on close examination, it is an issue being used to fool the people.

    In Bihar, our people used to be caught up in nationalist zeal, to the extent that the states own identity and interests were brutally suppressed. Supposedly, Bihar was the first state to adopt Hindi as the official language even though at the time it was not the language of 99% of the people in the state. The people of Bihar supported the “Green Revolution” in Punjab (and paid for it with their taxes), which ensured that within a few years every square inch of the state was irrigated and every Punjabi farmer was prosperous. 50 years later, barely half of Bihar is irrigated.

    In the last 15 years though, there has been a sharp emergence of sub-national identity in the state. This was driven by a series of lynchings that occurred around that time of migrant workers from Bihar in states such as Maharashtra by ethnic gangs/political parties in those states. The new thinking on all issues has been, “Is it good for the Bihari people?” And with this, the state has been growing at a rapid clip, double digits each year.

    The Kashmir question is used to divert resources and attention towards Western India to the detriment of other parts of the country, especially Eastern India. For example, military expenditures are used to deploy advanced installations, technologies and industries in Western India. Whereas in Bihar, the only small expenditure is to recruit men to die as cannon fodder in senseless adventures. The soldiers from Bihar killed in this attack have died in vain. It pains to me think what else they could have achieved in life. And so too must we apply the same logic to this question. The people of Bihar do not have permanent allies, only permanent interests.

    Getting back to this terror attack, I cannot believe that immediately after it happened the government was so quick to start blaming Pakistan. It reminds me after 9/11 how George W. Bush and the Neocons started looking for “evidence” to blame Saddam Hussein. Now I don’t doubt the Pakistanis had some hand in this, just like I don’t doubt Saddam Hussein met with some and support some Taliban/Al Qaeda or whatever. But the lead bomber in all this was a local fellow, an Indian by nationality. It seems like they lack the vocabulary to describe this event, making it seem like it’s a war between two nation-states for territory rather than the latest skirmish in the Islamic jihad that’s been going on in the subcontinent for the past thousand years. India’s also desperately trying to get the USA and China to condemn and take action against Pakistan, but from their perspective why should they?

    I know these sentiments will be unpopular, but tough questions have to be asked. Despite 70 years of secularism, there’s a large domestic Muslim population in India that doesn’t want to be there and no one has any good ideas about how to deal with this, short of giving away vast tracts of territory.

    It’s said that the British looted India, then after independence, India looted the state of Bihar. I just don’t want to see my people who are poor and need to look after their own livelihoods and development die needlessly for this battle which does not concern them.

    1. I am somewhat sympathetic to this view; issues such as the need to maintain Kashmir, and punish Pakistan (?) are used by the ruling elite to maintain a sense of unity, while keeping the states poor by diverting little of national resources that are available to creating the state.

      However, the newer rulers in UP, Bihar and Bengal, Nitish, Yadavs, Mayawathi, and Didi are no longer willing to suppress the state interests to fulfill a national destine. Their interests is their people. However, they are being cast as OBCs and Harijans more responsive to caste interests. In the meanwhile, the idiot Yogi spend his time talking about changing the name of Hyderabad!

      The minute the states of UP, Bihar and Rajasthan revolt against this will be the end of this attempt to create a Hindu India versus Muslim Pakistan narrative. They may choose to forget Kashmir. Then, none of this matters. The only thing that stands in way is desperate attempts by BJP and congress to saffronize the OBC anbd Harijans to keep their power and fake notions of Unity against common Muslim enemy.

      1. @Vijay
        Nitish Kumar has my respect because he took the hugely un-popular decision of ditching RJD for BJP. That cost him his PM ambitions but it was the morally correct step as far as his constituents are concerned. (And I am not a BJP supporter)

        He does fall into the centralisation folly from time-to-time like asking for national alcohol ban.

        For some reason Indian leftists from outside Bihar have a very fond view of Lalu as a true bringer of social justice and secularism and whatnot. I find that laughable. He wrecked the state for everyone.

        I had a teacher in school (an SC if I remember correctly) in Patna who was shot dead in broad daylight while he waited to board the morning bus. This happened right in front of my school friends, who were kids. All because he was apparently dating a girl of some other caste.

        Many more such incidents from my 1st degree circle. And I was better off than 99.9% of the people in the state.

        Mayawati shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same breathe as the Yadavs. She is far more capable.
        She is also the only one who has actively brought up the topic of splitting UP.

        IMO breaking UP into 3-4 is the best thing that can happen to the state as well as to the rest of the country and maybe even the subcontinent.

        1. I meant the father-son Yadav team, not that they are rocket scientists, but not quite the clown show of the Yogi, and will be quite willing to not focus on Pakistan and Kashmir vis-a-vis local issues.

          Lallu is the continuation of the long line of comedy starting with Charan Singh, Raj narayan, Jagjivan Ram, etc.

          The fact that caste and anti-SC fervor in Bihar and UP is a major drag on the nation, is well established.

          1. I was also referring to the father-son duo. Rank incompetence.
            The crime rate shot through the roof once they took over from Mayawati. Local MLA’s son beating medical students and that kind of shit.

            Yogi cannot possibly be worse than them.

      2. “The minute the states of UP, Bihar and Rajasthan revolt against this will be the end of this attempt to create a Hindu India versus Muslim Pakistan narrative. They may choose to forget Kashmir.’

        LOL. Lemurians and their delusions.

    2. @Raj

      Agree 100% with the sentiment.
      Biharis voluntarily gave up on their identities for the cause of ‘national integration’. Now the only identity they have is the derogatory one given to them by outsiders based on interaction with migrant workers or political buffoons like Lalu.

    3. “Despite 70 years of secularism, there’s a large domestic Muslim population in India that doesn’t want to be there and no one has any good ideas about how to deal with this, short of giving away vast tracts of territory.”

      Well what does it say more about? Our ” 70 years of secularism” or “large domestic Muslim population in India that doesn’t want to be there”

      Exhibit A

      “I just don’t want to see my people who are poor and need to look after their own livelihoods and development die needlessly for this battle which does not concern them.”

      Exhibit B

      “However, the newer rulers in UP, Bihar and Bengal, Nitish, Yadavs, Mayawathi, and Didi are no longer willing to suppress the state interests to fulfill a national destine.”

      As i have said earlier in the thread India is neither that strong nor “United” to take on Pakistan

      1. “There is a large domestic Muslim population in India that doesn’t want to be there”– Asides from Kashmir, how true is this statement about India proper? I haven’t heard a lot of clamour for secession from Indian Muslims. Kashmir is a disputed territory and the situation there is unique.

        1. LOL. As i said put a “true” choice to Indian muslims (the one which Kashmiri muslims have / the one put to Indian Muslims in 1946) and see what they choose, and the answer wont be the liking of many, just like it wasn;t to Nehru and Gandhi. But some time living in a delusion is comforting so there is that.

        2. I believe that while this is a throwaway statement in that comment, but is taken to be an article of faith by some, without any evidence. I do not have the ability to comment on this regarding, say UP, but in the south, and including a large swath of Maharashtra, for the Muslims, Pakistan is never a country of consideration even, mainly because it is associated with “North”, Urdu and different dietary habits. The automatic mental association of “Indian Muslim” with “pakistan” is, I think, a Northie and upper caste hindu/diaspora concept.

          And I say this as a guy who spent years in the gulf where this split is clear, Indian (particularly south Indian) Muslims view themselves and are viewed as Indian; Pakistani Muslims associate with a global Muslim identity. It is the second that I believe the “Northie” and upper caste diaspora is afraid of. The upper class will readily throw the 1946 election results (the Muslims voted for the IML) back in our faces when confronted with this, but all these people voted for US and UK when they got a chance.

          1. Not sure how many Indian Muslims have an affinity to Pakistan. But many Muslims worldwide harbor a hankering after a worldwide Muslim identity – in stark contrast to most other religions (with the possible exception of Judaism). This leads for instance to British and European young people who have never seen the middle East to run off and join ISIS and for people who have never seen a Jew to wish harm upon them. Even supposedly liberal – even leftwing – minded Muslims see nothing wrong in groupings like “Muslim writers/intellectuals” etc.

            (LOL at this being a concern specifically of “Northie” and upper caste Indians.)

          2. Arjun, Arya Varsha muslims are a bit different in this regard (SAARC minus Pakistan, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turin, Iran) in that they honor and revere their pre Islamic culture.

            Afghanistan’s largest airline is Ariana Afghan Airlines as a friend recently reminded me. Ariana is Dari or Pharsi for Aryan or Arya.

            Many American, Canadian and European soldiers who went to Afghanistan after 9/11 were shocked to learn that Afghans identified with Aryans and wanted to name their largest airline after them.

          3. @Arjun
            Very true. It is visible in Europe, too. Muslim (e.g. Bosniacs) do not recognize the nation, everything is the religion. They consider closer a Muslim from Middle East than neighbors they grew up with, who are the same blood and known relatives of their fathers because they are Christians. Anytime we see news from Muslim regions we can see thousands of people screaming and behaving as a horde. There are never one individual who can use facts to express his individual opinion. There is no any so-called Muslim intellectual or religious leader who publicly condemned ISIS practices or jihad as a extremely primitive concept. The term Muslim-intellectual sometimes sounds as an oxymoron. It is a long list but burqa (which I was told is not original Islamic practice) is a symbol of primitivity and treating women as animals. One Western educated (and live there) ‘Muslim-intellectual’ woman, who leads worldwide organisation dedicated to women’s issues, was on TV panel i said that Islam is ‘the most feminine religion’.

  11. Vijay the same is true of Ajmer. The prospect of Rajastani muslims being forced to move to Pakistan would scare them.

    Most Indian muslims prefer India to Kashmir. Having said this, a question for everyone. Have you met conservative Indian non Sufi Sunni muslims who identify with or like Pakistan?

Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits