HVK Archives: Kashmir: Terrorism too is a violation of human rights
Kashmir: Terrorism too is a violation of human rights - The Times of India
Claire Galez
()
19 August 1997
Title: Kashmir: Terrorism too is a violation of human rights
Author: Claire Galez
Publication: The Times of India
Date: August 19, 1997
Visiting Kashmir after a long break, one notices obvious signs that the
society is in the process of recovering after these very trying eight
years. In sharp contrast with 1994, the first scenes one enjoys of the
Kashmir Valley, right out of the Srinagar airport, are children playing and
laughing, men and women attending to their daily occupations or sitting and
chatting on their doorstep. All the signs of a dynamic society are on
display and to my great surprise, the frightening scene of tens of
truckloads of security are no where to he seen these days. Most of the
makeshift Army barracks have been removed and it is not unusual to witness
the locals shaking hands and having a chat with a soldier.
In the rural areas (I went to Pahalgam and other places in the vicinity),
there is still some pressure. However, the presence of Mujahideen armed
groups and Hikhwans (groups of surrendered militants) is strongly resented
by the population. This generates a very peculiar feeling amongst the
people - a combination of fear, anger and helplessness. With an elected
government in the state, they now want their lives to be protected. They
are awaiting the restoration of their socio-economic life and development.
The answers to all these issues lie in the proper functioning of the civil
administration.
It is acknowledged by a wide range of people in Kashmir (from the common
man to the political leadership), that the process of elections has opened
avenues for a dialogue between the leadership of Kashmir and the Central
government. It is after the elections that even the APHC began to open up
to such dialogue. Moreover, it is in post-elections times that the scale of
militant operations and individual killings and intimidation by the
militants, has gone down.
It is also widely acknowledged that the factors which contributed to making
the society porous and allowed the past years of disturbances in Kashmir,
were basically socio-economic frustrations (similar to those faced by many
communities in the South Asian region) for which people blamed the
state-Centre political set-up. It would be erroneous to describe it as a
straightforward 'anti-India feeling'. Nonetheless brainwashing campaigns
and deceitful promises had been made to the youth of the Valley, by Zia-ul
Haq and Benazir Bhutto's first regime. This resulted in an elaborate
spider's web that developed in the society, allowing militancy to pick up
in the early '90s. But people soon became the victims of militancy rather
than its actors. There was a very clear turning point in the people's minds
in 1994, after the killing of Qazi Nisar by Hizbul Mujahideen.
In the early stage of militancy, thousands of young Kashmiris crossed the
border to receive training and equipment in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan and
Afghanistan. In 1997, less than a hundred are believed to have done so.
The pattern of militancy today is clearly on the basis of infiltration of
foreign mercenaries rather than exfiltration-infiltration of the locals (as
it was in early 90s).
Regarding the issue of human rights, let me convey something I believe is
very important. For the last ten years and especially after the end of the
Cold War the issue has gained momentum. More and more competent
professionals are dedicating themselves to human rights. However, I see a
danger that human rights may be used (or misused) when it becomes a popular
expression and an instrument of exploitation of the masses' emotions and a
weapon to fuel political debates.
Human rights, in their present form, are the fruits of decades of social
consciousness and countless efforts. They are defined in several
instruments (the Charter, Protocols, Covenants, etc.) that bear high moral
values and are relevant in terms of International Law. One cannot use
human rights as a dustbin for pernicious political games. That distorts the
whole purpose of having such instruments.
In this regard, I am very firm on the fact that monitoring of human rights
violations is important but it should not preclude the assessment of the
root causes that allow these violations to happen. Terrorism is a
relatively new phenomenon (throughout the world) that has emerged in the
early '70s and became widespread in the post Cold War times. Though
terrorism is now considered a serious issue at international level and
acknowledged as a major cause for violations of fundamental human rights,
the problem it poses has not been articulated in any Convention - I insist,
human rights are not simply principles but instruments of international
law. In areas affected by terrorism and political violence, there are no
references applicable in the international law. There is an inherent
imbalance in the debate. On the one hand, we have formulated instruments
which regulate the ethics and behaviour of states and armies, on the other
there are no instruments that condemn human rights violations by terrorist
groups.
When we talk about the human rights situation in Kashmir, a large number of
people miss out the true dimension of the problem. If the Kashmiris
(mainly in the Valley) are at the receiving end of violence perpetrated by
terrorist groups and human rights violations committed by the security
forces, the issue itself is not confined to the triangular equation of
Kashmiris-armed-groups-security forces. It involves high level security
issues where India perceives a threat to its territorial integrity and
Pakistan justifies a US $4 billion (1 996) defence expenditure by fostering
the psychosis of 'an army' mainly focused on India.
One should not lose sight of the fact that using the tools of human rights
is an exercise meant for solving the issues and not inflaming them.
When we talk about Kashmir, first and foremost, violence and aggression
against the common citizen must stop. The right to life is the
unconditional and basic universal fundamental right for the implementation
of all other rights.
(Claire Galez is director, International Relations and Human Rights
Research Centre, Geneva.)
Back
Top
|
