Kuala Lumpur summit points to split in Muslim world

By HASAN ALHASAN

The Kuala Lumpur Summit beginning on Wednesday will bring together the leaders of Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Iran and Qatar with 450 Muslim intellectuals from around the world. It will also raise eyebrows. An initiative of Malaysia’s outspoken prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, the summit’s guest list indicates a clear preference for Muslim states of a certain type: supporters of political Islam who portray themselves as champions of global Muslim causes.

Yet the attempt to consolidate such a group will face stiff resistance from a deeply divided Muslim world. And its credibility as a champion of global Muslim causes ranging from Kashmir in India to Xinjiang in China, especially those that clash with members’ national interests, will be put to the test.

Conceived on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York this year, the summit emerged out of frustration with the underwhelming response to India’s clampdown in Kashmir. When India announced its revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and placed the region under lockdown, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation deplored the move and echoed Pakistan’s call for a UN-supervised plebiscite.

However, the OIC’s criticism was hollowed out by a lack of consensus among its members on how best to deal with the issue. So while Pakistan, Turkey and Malaysia locked horns with India over Kashmir at the UN, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi toured Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, where he was feted. Despite being a core member of the OIC’s contact group on Kashmir, Saudi Arabia took a subdued approach to the issue outside the organization, calling on India and Pakistan to resolve their disputes peacefully. To Pakistan’s dismay, so did the majority of Muslim states.

Beyond the issue of Kashmir, however, the summit also reflects the violent split between supporters and opponents of political Islam across the Muslim world. Muslim-majority states have backed rival sides in civil conflicts that have often pitted Islamists against secular nationalist forces in the Middle East.

In Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia backed the military’s move in 2013 to oust president Mohamed Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader whose government enjoyed Qatar’s and Turkey’s patronage. In Libya, both Egypt and the UAE have lent support to Khalifa Haftar and his Libyan National Army in the onslaught against Qatari/Turkish-backed Islamist groups. Iran has long thrown its weight behind Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and more recently the Houthis in Yemen, while recruiting thousands of young men into Shiite religious militias to wage war on its behalf in Syria and Iraq.

Amid such differences, then, Malaysia’s attempt at rallying the global patrons of political Islam faces a host of challenges.

The gathering cannot claim to be representative of the wider Muslim world. The six states invited to the summit make up a fraction of the 49 states represented at the OIC. They include not a single African or Arab state apart from Qatar

For starters, the gathering cannot claim to be representative of the wider Muslim world. The six states invited to the summit make up a fraction of the 49 states represented at the OIC. They include not a single African or Arab state apart from Qatar. Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim nation, was initially put forward as one of the summit’s key sponsors. However, its name has disappeared from recent press statements, casting doubt on its participation.

In addition, key Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia – which considers itself a natural leader of the Muslim world – Egypt, and others will also view the summit with suspicion. The divisive nature of the summit may eventually temper the enthusiasm of Pakistan, Indonesia and Qatar. All three are likely to want to avoid antagonizing Saudi Arabia.

According to a former senior Pakistani official to whom I spoke, Pakistan felt obliged to honor Malaysia’s invitation after the latter’s vocal stand on Kashmir. Pakistan’s participation, he insisted, is not meant as a challenge to Riyadh, which Islamabad considers a strategic partner. In February, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman visited Islamabad, where he pledged US$20 billion in investments.

Indonesia also is keen on attracting investments from Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has announced plans to invest $6.7 billion, a figure that Jakarta would like to see increase. In a signal of closer ties, the two sides signed in 2014 their first ever defense cooperation agreement. Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz led a delegation of 800 people on a visit in 2017, injecting further momentum into the relationship.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also made progress toward mending ties in recent weeks. Although diplomatic relations remain severed, Qatar’s foreign minister made an unannounced visit to Riyadh in November. Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain have also dispatched teams to the Arabian Gulf Cup soccer tournament in Doha, although a complete resolution to the dispute still seems elusive.

Finally, the summit’s sponsors face a significant test of their credibility. In contrast to its stand on Kashmir, Malaysia has tiptoed around China’s treatment of Uighur Muslims out of fear of drawing Beijing’s ire. During a trip to Xinjiang in July, Malaysia’s Islamic affairs minister, Mujahid Yusuf Rawa, drew criticism for describing China’s controversial re-education facilities as “training centers.” In September, Mahathir admitted that Malaysia could not afford to antagonize China over the Uighurs.

Likewise, Turkey has dialed down its criticism of China after a visit by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Beijing this year. Meanwhile, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan went so far as to deny knowledge of the Xinjiang issue in an interview with the Financial Times in March. Iran has also taken a soft line on both India and China, on which it relies to weather US sanctions.

Geopolitical realities impose considerable costs on would-be champions of global Muslim causes. The Muslim world is split, often violently, on the question of political Islam. The exclusion of Muslim heavyweights such as Saudi Arabia will inevitably dampen the summit group’s leadership claims, while Muslim-majority states keen on standing up to India over Kashmir, or China over Uighur Muslims, face the prospect of serious repercussions.

Lies Which the West Manufactures and then Consumes

Andre Vltchek

After my work in the Middle East had finished, at least for the time being, I was waiting for my flight to Santiago de Chile. In Paris. I could count on a few ‘free’ days, processing what I had heard and witnessed in Beirut. Day after day, for long hours, I sat in a lounge, typing and typing; reflecting and typing.

As I was working, above me, France 24 television news channel was on, beaming from a flat screen.

The people around me were coming and going: West African elites on their wild shopping sprees, shouting unceremoniously into their mobile phones. Koreans and Japanese doing Paris. Rude German and North American beefy types, discussing business, laughing vulgarly, disregarding ‘lower beings’, in fact everyone in their immediate radius.

No matter what was happening in my hotel, France 24 was on, and on, and on. Yes, precisely; for 24 hours, recycling for days and nights the same stories, once in a while updating news, with a slightly arrogant air of superiority. Here, France was judging the world; teaching Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, about themselves.

In front of my eyes, above me, on that screen, the world was changing. For many months I had been covering the nightmarish riots of the treasonous violent ninjas in Hong Kong. I was all over the Middle East, particularly Lebanon, and now I was on my way to my second home, Latin America, where socialism has kept winning elections, but was getting beaten, even terrorized, by the corrupt and crooked Western empire.

All that France 24 kept showing, I have been habitually witnessing with my own eyes. And more, much more, from many different angles. I have filmed it, written about it, and analyzed it.

In many countries, all over the world, people have been sharing their stories with me. I have seen barricades, photographed and filmed injured bodies, as well as tremendous revolutionary enthusiasm and excitement. I have also witnessed betrayals, treasons, cowardice.

But in the lounge, in front of the television set, everything appeared pretty groovy, very classy, and comforting. The blood looked like a well-mixed color, the barricades like a stage of the latest Broadway musical.

People were dying beautifully, their shouts muted, theatrical. The elegant anchor in a designer dress was beaming benevolently, whenever people on the screen dared to show some powerful emotions, or were grimacing in pain. She was in charge, and she was above all of this. In Paris, London and New York, powerful emotions, political commitments and grand ideological gestures, were made outdated, already a long time ago.

During just the few days that I spent in Paris, many things have changed, on all the continents.

The Hong Kong rioters were evolving; beginning to set on fire their compatriots simply because they dared to pledge their allegiance to Beijing. Women were unceremoniously beaten, with metal bars, until their faces were covered in blood.

In Lebanon, the big clenched fists of the pro-Western regime-change Otpor were suddenly at the center of the anti-government demonstrations. The economy of the country was collapsing. But the Lebanese ‘elites’ were burning money, all around me, all around Paris and all around the world. Poor Lebanese Misérables, as well as the impoverished middle class, were demanding social justice. But the rich of Lebanon were mocking them, showing. They had it all figured out: they have robbed their own country, then left it behind, and now were having a great ball here, in the “City of Lights”.

But to criticize them in the West has been taboo; forbidden. Political correctness, the mighty Western weapon used to uphold the status quo, has made them untouchable. Because they are Lebanese; from the Middle East. A good arrangement, isn’t it? They are robbing their fellow Middle Easterners, on behalf of their foreign masters in Paris and Washington, but in Paris or London, it is taboo to expose their ‘culture’ of debauchery.

In Iraq, the anti-Shi’a and therefore anti-Iranian sentiments have been dispersed, powerfully and clearly, from abroad. The second big episode of the so-called Arab Spring.

Chileans have been fighting and dying, trying to depose a neo-liberal system, forced down their throats ever since 1973 by the Los Chicago Boys.

The Bolivian socialist government, successful, democratic and racially inclusive, has been overthrown, by Washington and Bolivian treasonous cadres. People have been dying there, too, on the streets of El Alto, La Paz, and Cochabamba.

Israel was at it again, in Gaza. Full force.

Damascus was bombed.

I went to film the Algerians, Lebanese and Bolivians; people who were pushing for their agendas at the Place de la Republique.

I anticipated the horrors that were waiting for me, soon; in Chile, Bolivia and Hong Kong.

I was writing, feverishly.

While the television set was humming.

People were entering and leaving the lounge, meeting and separating, laughing, shouting, crying and making up.

Nothing to do with the world.

The outbursts of indecent laugher erupted periodically, even as the bombs were exploding on the screen, even as the people were charging against the police and the military.

***

Then, one day, I realized that nobody really gives a damn. Like that; so simple.

You witness what happens, all over the world; you document it. You are risking your life. You are getting engaged. You get injured. Sometimes you come close, extremely close, to death.

You do not watch TV. Never, or almost never. You appear on the television, yes; you supply stories and images. But you never watch the results; what emotions your work, your words and images, truly evoke. Or do they evoke any emotions at all? You only work for the anti-imperialist media outlets, never for the mainstream. But for whomever you work for, you have no clue what the facial expressions your reports from the war zones are arousing. Or what emotions any war zone reports stir.

And then, you are in Paris, and you have some time to watch your readers, and suddenly you understand.

You get it: why so few are writing to you, support your struggle, or even fight for the countries being destroyed, decimated by the empire.

When you look around, observing people who are sitting in a hotel lounge, you clearly realize: they feel nothing. They want to see nothing. They understand nothing. France 24 is on, but it is not a news channel, which it was intended to be, many years ago. It is entertainment stuff, which is supposed to produce sophisticated background noise. And it does. Precisely that.

Same as the BBC, CNN, Fox and Deutsche Welle.

***

As the legitimately elected socialist President of Bolivia was being forced into exile, tears in his eyes, I got hold of the remote control, and switched channel to some bizarre and primitive cartoon network.

Nothing changed. The expressions on the faces of some twenty people around me did not change.

If a nuclear bomb would have exploded on the screen, somewhere in the Sub-Continent, no one would pay any attention.

Some people were taking selfies. While I was describing the collapse of the Western culture on my MacBook. All of us were busy, in our own way.

Kashmir, West Papua, Iraq, Lebanon, Hong Kong, Palestine, Bolivia and Chile were on fire.

So, what?

Ten meters away from me, an American businessman was shouting into his phone:

“Are you going to invite me back to Paris in December? Yes? We have to discuss details. How much am I getting per day?”

Coups, uprisings, riots, all over the world.

And that plastic, professional smile of the lady, the news announcer, in her blue and white retro designer dress; so confident, so French, and so endlessly fake.

***

Lately, I keep wondering whether the inhabitants of Europe and North America have any moral right to control the world.

My conclusion is: definitely not!

They do not know, and they do not want to know. Those who have power are obliged to know.

In Paris, Berlin, London, New York, individuals are too busy admiring themselves, or ‘suffering’ from their little, selfish problems.

They are too busy taking selfies, or being preoccupied with their sexual orientation. And of course, with their ‘business’.

That is why I prefer to write for Russian and Chinese outlets, to address people who are scared like myself, anxious about the future of the world.

The editors of this magazine, in faraway Moscow, are; they are anxious and passionate at the same time. I know they are. I, and my reports, are not some ‘business’ for them. People whose cities are smashed, ruined, are not some sort of entertainment in the editorial room of NEO.

In many Western countries, people have lost their ability to feel, to get engaged, and to fight for a better world.

Because of this loss, they should be forced to give up their power over the world.

Our world is damaged, scarred, but is tremendously beautiful and precious.

It is not a business, to work for its improvement and survival.

Only great dreamers, poets and thinkers can be trusted, fighting for it, steering it forward.

Are there many poets and dreamers amongst my readers? Or do they look, do they behave, as those guests in the hotel lounge in Paris, in front of the screen beaming France 24?

Andre Vltchek is philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He’s a creator of Vltchek’s World in Word and Images, and a writer that penned a number of books, including China and Ecological Civilization. He writes especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Pakistan welcomes Rouhani’s HOPE initiative: Fakhar Imam

By Mohammad Homaeefar

TEHRAN – Chairman of Pakistan’s parliamentary committee on Kashmir says his country welcomes Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s initiative for securing the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, called “Hormuz Peace Endeavor (HOPE)”.

“I think in principle President Rouhani’s proposal is a very constructive one,” Syed Fakhar Imam said in an interview with the Tehran Times.

During his speech at the 74th UN General Assembly in late September, President Rouhani said, “Based upon the historical responsibility of my country in maintaining security, peace, stability and progress in the Persian Gulf region and Strait of Hormuz, I would like to invite all the countries directly affected by the developments in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz to the ‘Coalition for Hope’, meaning Hormuz Peace Endeavor.”

Mr. Imam pointed to the HOPE initiative, saying, “Wherever there’s peace and order, the citizens of all countries benefit, and wherever there’s war, ultimately the citizens suffer.”

Mr. Imam who had visited Tehran along with a parliamentary delegation also said President Rouhani’s initiative could play a positive role to bring about peaceful negotiations between regional countries based on mutual respect.

“If some kind of formula can be evolved, I think it’ll benefit the whole region,” he added.

“Mr. Modi has gone against all canons of justice, law and basic human rights of Kashmiri citizens,” Syed Fakhar Imam told the Tehran Times.The Pakistani parliamentarian referred to Prime Minister Imran Khan’s visits to Tehran and Riyadh, saying, “Mr. Imran Khan visited both Tehran and Riyadh recently. He was asked obviously by Mr. Trump and the Saudi king and the crown prince to be the facilitator.”

“They asked him obviously,” he reiterated. “He wouldn’t have come on his own.”

PM Imran Khan visited Tehran last month for talks with Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Rouhani. Khan then visited Riyadh afterwards. His visits were aimed at playing a mediatory role to reduce tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Imam went on to say that the visits were a “very positive step” by the Pakistani prime minister and it was the first time any Pakistani leader was asked to play an intermediary role.

“I’m not sure what talks took place, I’m not familiar with the content of the talks, but I think in principle it’s a very good thing, especially if something can be resolved peacefully between these two countries,” he added.

‘U.S. JCPOA withdrawal was very unfortunate’

Asked to comment on the prospects of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, Mr. Imam said it was unfortunate that the United States unilaterally withdrew from the historic agreement.

U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew Washington in May 2018 from the JCPOA, which was reached between Iran and six world powers in 2015, and imposed sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Iran and the remaining parties launched talks to save the JCPOA after the U.S. withdrawal, but the three EU parties to the deal (France, Britain, and Germany) have failed to ensure Iran’s economic interests.

The Pakistani lawmaker described the JCPOA as a “very positive, excellent, constructive” agreement.

“Mr. Trump since last year, 2018, decided to unilaterally opt out. Now, in the last few weeks Iran has started enriching its uranium. First it gave notice to the European countries that if you do not do A, B and C, we will do it, so they started doing it,” he stated.

Following the U.S. withdrawal, Iran remained fully committed to the JCPOA for a year, but announced on the anniversary of Washington’s bellicose move that its “strategic patience” is over and would gradually reduce its commitments to the deal at 60-day intervals, which were designed as deadlines for Europe to protect Tehran’s interests under the deal.

“I think for world peace, world order, and world’s political stability, the JCPOA was an excellent arrangement if America had not gone on its own,” the top Pakistani lawmaker said.

“It’s what the Americans have done vis-a-vis Iran. I think it’s very unfortunate,” he added.

India after changing Kashmir’s demographics by letting more Hindus in: Pakistani MP

Asked about the Kashmir crisis, the Pakistani parliamentarian said there have been eleven UN Security Council resolutions according to which Jammu and Kashmir were recognized as disputed territory.

“After August 5, when Mr. Modi decided to set aside which was an internal arrangement on Indian-occupied Kashmir and article 370 of India’s constitution which said that Kashmir is special status, they have downgraded the status of Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories, which is against their own arrangement and agreement with the leadership of Indian-occupied Kashmir,” he explained.

“The Indian government has downgraded the state into two union territories to be controlled directly by New Delhi ... Now they’ll be directly controlled by New Delhi,” he said. “It’s a very major thing. We don’t recognize any of that.”

He said the Indian government has gone into the disputed territory and deployed 900,000 troops there, and 180,000 troops moved in after August 5.

The UN Security Council established that “the world recognizes Kashmir as disputed area, which is very important, and that the future of Kashmir under the UN Security Council will be decided by plebiscite through vote of the Kashmiris,” he pointed out.

Mr. Imam stated that over 100,000 Kashmiris have been killed since 1987.

He also criticized the Indian government for ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiris and trying to change the demographics of Kashmir by allowing more Hindus in.

“There’s been a UN human rights council report, condemning all of India’s atrocities,” he said, adding that the Indian government does not allow anyone, including reporters, to go into the disputed area.

“Mr. Modi has gone against all canons of justice, law and basic human rights of Kashmiri citizens,” he concluded.

India Set to Discover the Law of Unintended Consequences

Wayne MADSEN

By abrogating the autonomous status of the now-former state of Jammu and Kashmir and transforming it into two direct rule territories, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi may have set in motion forces that could result in challenges to its control of portions of the Himalayan region.

On October 31, the new Indian union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh were officially bifurcated. Neither enjoy the autonomous self-governing status as that of the former State of Jammu and Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir became the first Indian state to be reduced from a state to a union territory, something that has alarmed other states that have had a contentious relationship with New Delhi. During her time as prime minister, Indira Gandhi often dismissed the governments of various states and imposed direct rule from New Delhi, however, she never downgraded the status of an Indian state.

Leh, the capital of Ladakh, which is largely Buddhist, was generally happy about its separation from Muslim-dominated Jammu and Kashmir. However, that was not the case in Ladakh’s district of Kargil, which has a majority Muslim population. Most of the Muslims of the district are Shi’as, who have their own grievances with the Sunnis of the rest of Kashmir, as well as those in Pakistan. Residents and members of the Kargil Hill Development Council observed their new status with an October 30th “Black Day,” with protesters hitting the streets of Kargil to decry their downgraded status. The protests followed a four-day general strike that shut down business in the district. The bifurcation and restlessness in Kargil have some quarters in New Delhi concerned. The Buddhists in Leh and the Shi’as in Kargil have actually managed to coexist amicably in recent years. Both have reasons to be suspicious of Sunni troublemaking in the region spurred on by the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency and Wahhabist Sunni provocateurs funded by Saudi Arabia.

In 1999, Kargil was ground zero for deadly Sunni Islamist terrorist actions and an Indian-Pakistani military conflict. The Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and Al-Faran Islamist terrorist groups, backed by ISI, had previously conducted attacks against foreign tourists, including the beheadings of foreign hostages. Faced with the threat posed by Wahhabi-influenced terrorists, the Buddhists of Ladakh and Shi’a majority in Kargil have formed a somewhat united front. One point of contention arose in the 1990s in Leh, when the Sunni mosque in the town center began issuing forth incendiary anti-Buddhist messages from the loudspeaker normally used for the Muslim calls to prayer.

Neither the Ladakh Union Territory nor the new Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory have elected legislatures. Instead both have Lieutenant Governors answerable only to the Modi government. The new Lieutenant Governors — Radha Krishna Mathur in Ladakh and Girish Murmu in Jammu and Kashmir – are retired officers of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) – India’s own version of the “deep state,” a permanent civil service bureaucracy left over from the British colonial era. Mathur is also the former Indian Chief Information Commissioner, a post he left in 2018. He also served as the central government’s Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Secretary and Defense Production Secretary. With his experience in the defense sector, there was no surprise when Murmu said his main focus will be on “sensitive border areas.” That equates to keeping a close watch on China and Pakistan in the mountainous region.

The Member of the Lok Sabha who represents Ladakh, Jamyang Tsering Namgyal, called the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir and the creation of the Ladakh Union Territory an “inclusive development plan” for the region. Under the previous state administration in Srinagar, the Buddhists of Ladakh felt left without a voice in local government. Although Namgyal is a member of Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the political alignment was for convenience, since the Buddhists of Ladakh did not have the political pull to engineer its separation from the former Jammu and Kashmir state. Previous alignment of Ladakh Buddhists with the Indian Congress Party of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and other Congress prime ministers never yielded any final agreement to separate Ladakh from the rest of Jammu and Kashmir.

Now that the Buddhists of Ladakh have a separate political voice, they are using it to their advantage. Former Buddhist members from Ladakh in the now-defunct Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly are demanding that they be included in the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, which ensures cultural and economic protections for India’s tribal peoples.

Modi may have ignited long suppressed Buddhist nationalist resentment that extends from Ladakh in the western Himalayas to Sikkim in the central Himalayas and into Arunachal Pradesh in the east. China, ostensibly on behalf of the Tibetan Autonomous Region, has land claims along the entire Indian frontier. Another factor is the Dalai Lama of Tibet, whose Tibetan government-in-exile makes Dharamsala in India its home.

Now that Ladakh has a separate identity from Jammu and Kashmir, albeit a territorial one without representation in the former Legislative Assembly in Srinagar, Buddhist identity movements, such as the Ladakh Buddhist Association (LBA) and the Ladakh Union Territory Front (LUTF), feel emboldened to stake their political, cultural, and economic claims. The LBA believed the former Muslim-dominated state government of Jammu and Kashmir was hostile to Buddhist interests in Ladakh. Because of its distrust of the state government, the LBA was always in favor of bifurcation of Ladakh from Jammu and Kashmir and even trifurcation of Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh, into majority Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhist states, respectively.

Ladakh only had four seats in the former Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly. It continues to retain its one seat in the Lok Sabha, currently filled by the BJP’s Jamyang Tsering Namgyal. Although the Buddhist Ladakhis have been given a respite from the Muslim political interests that had a monopoly of power in the old Jammu and Kashmir, they also fear being overrun by Hindus desiring to escape the increasingly hotter temperatures of the Indian coast and Deccan Plateau for the cooler climes of the Himalayan region.

With Ladakhis now free of control from Srinagar and the old Jammu and Kashmir state, they may begin, as a cohesive unit, to reach out to fellow Buddhists in other parts of India. The Buddhist Bhutias and Lepchas of Sikkim, an Indian state wedged between Nepal and Bhutan – the latter a Buddhist kingdom — long for the era of Sikkim’s independence under a Buddhist king or “Chogyal.” Sikkim lost its independence in 1975 after the Indian army invaded the kingdom, deposed the Chogyal, and presided over the annexation of Sikkim to India as a state. There is not only an increasing nostalgia for the kingdom among the Buddhists, but some of the majority Nepalese Hindus have also displayed a yearning for the lost kingdom.

Buddhist national identity has taken on violent excesses in countries like Myanmar and Sri Lanka. But in the Himalayas, which is the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, Buddhism is attempting to make a resurgence in a political sense. Had the region not fallen prey to the Cold War interests of India, China, and the United States, a region of independent Buddhist states – Ladakh, Sikkim, and Bhutan – and semi-independent Buddhist principalities – Mustang in Nepal and Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh – may have emerged to provide a neutral buffer between India and China. With recent developments in Ladakh and Sikkim, such a future outcome may not be totally out of the question.

Wayne MADSEN

Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. A member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club

Unending Agony of the Kashmiris

Editor

The eight million people of Jammu and Kashmir continue to suffer under a brutal Indian colonial occupation and almost continuous lockdown since August 4. Kashmiris residing outside the imprisoned state who have managed to speak to loved ones through infrequently available cell phone connections have learnt of horrifying tales. Relatives have died and they did not know. They could not even mourn their dead together.

There are other horrors inflicted on the Kashmiris. The nearly three-month long lockdown is taking its toll. How are people surviving without food, and more critically without medicines, especially those suffering from heart or kidney diseases? How are cancer patients coping? Hospitals are either shut or inaccessible because of barbed wires blocking streets and the huge military presence augmented by Hindu fascist thugs who have swarmed the state.

In mid-September, a group of five Indian women traveled to Srinagar to investigate. The group comprised three Hindu lawyers, one retired Sikh professor, and a Muslim social activist. Upon returning to Delhi, they held a press conference at which Poonam Kaushik, a lawyer at the Delhi High Court, spoke to the media and answered questions.

She recounted horrific tales of suffering. The Indian army raid people’s homes in the middle of the night. Kashmiris live in fear of the dreaded midnight knock. It only means trouble. The occupiers come looking for Kashmiri youth to drag them to unknown locations. If they cannot find the youth, they drag the father to prison. At least 13,000 Kashmiri youth have been taken away and locked up somewhere. Other sources say the total number is as high as 25,000.

Additionally, RSS thugs have swarmed the state, hunting for Kashmiri girls. These two-legged beasts have been given a license to do what they like to Kashmiri girls and women. Given that more than 11,100 Kashmiri women and girls have been raped since 1989, there are grave fears for the abducted Kashmiri girls.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his equally fascist henchmen shamelessly claim there is “calm” in Kashmir. This is the calm of the graveyard. India’s 900,000 colonial troops have been given carte blanche under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to shoot on mere suspicion. While not new — this act has been in force in Kashmir since 1990 — the latest crisis has further emboldened the unruly occupation troops.

In another twist, the colonizers have issued orders to families not to reinforce their house front doors. The thugs in uniform would like to break down doors with a single kick. People who have installed strong doors or gates also face imprisonment.

On the rare occasion when families are able to venture out to seek information about their sons or daughters, army and police personnel demand bribes. That, however, is no guarantee that they would get accurate information. Fear and uncertainty are pervasive.

October 27 has been historically observed as “Black Day” in Kashmir. This year, it assumed added significance. It was on this day in 1947 that the Hindu ruler of Kashmir supposedly signed the provisional instrument of accession to India. He had already fled the state as the masses rose up against him. The instrument of accession was signed under duress. India demanded it before agreeing to send troops although there is evidence that Indian troops were already in Srinagar on October 1.

This year’s Black Day evoked even more anger among the Kashmiris and their friends and allies worldwide. In the wake of India’s August 5 revocation of Kashmir’s special status pending its resolution through a referendum, the legal situation has been radically altered. The instrument of accession was signed between two states: Kashmir and India. Only Kashmir was legally entitled to abrogate this unilaterally, not India.

It is quite revealing that in Britain where there is a large Kashmiri community, the British government warned protesters not to go near the Indian high commission to protest. The police as well as London’s “Muslim” mayor first demanded that no protests should be allowed and then put restrictions on the demonstrators. The “mother of all democracies” has strange habits. The Kashmiris’ rights and legitimate anger are being sacrificed at the altar of trade relations.

Claims to democracy are meaningless phrases that remain subservient to the interests of big business and concentrated power. So long as they define it, democracy can be whatever they want it to be (except for a representative system reflecting the popular will): an ethnocracy in Israel and India, a special interest paradise in America, etc. The Kashmiris will have to be excused if they can’t wait for their basic rights forever.

If Pakistan Wants To "Fight" for "La illaha illallah," It Must Figure Out Which Side Allah Is On

 by Salina Khan

Despite their bravado, Pakistani officials seem scared out of their minds of an impending nuclear war with their arch enemy India.

"It's a fear, worry, that where are we headed?" Pakistan's Prime Minister told the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). "If a conventional war starts between two countries, nuclear countries, anything could happen."

Stress of going up against another nuclear country Khan described as "seven times" bigger than itself is forcing Pakistan to make fear-based decisions that are getting in the way of helping free Kashmir from Indian occupation. In fact, Pakistan has yet to announce a clear Kashmir policy other than to "raise the issue of Kashmir at every global forum."

To avoid being "blamed" for "another Pulwama incident," the Pakistani government says it has "disbanded all militant groups," forbidden its people to "cross the border to join the Kashmiris," and limited protests to thirty minutes of standing in "solidarity with the Kashmiri people."

"Eventually, even speaking out for the Kashmiris will be illegal [in Pakistan]," Syed Jawad Naqvi, chancellor of the Islamic university Jamia Urwa-tul-Wusqa in Lahore, predicted in his September 27 Friday sermon.

To allay their fears, Khan and other policymakers who feel they are "sitting on a hot plate" need to review the inspiring Quranic story of Prophet David (A) and Goliath (Jalut). A small contingency of obedient soldiers defeated the tyrannical army of strongman Goliath after young and slender David (A) took out Goliath with a fatal slingshot aimed at the bright red ruby in the middle of the crown on his forehead.

Quran: "But those who were certain that they would meet Allah said, 'How many a small company has overcome a large company by permission of Allah. And Allah is with the patient.'" (2:249)

This scenario should be familiar to Pakistanis who are witnessing up-close-and-personal the defeat of another modern-day Goliath Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman at the hands of the poor and malnourished Yemenis. In this battlefield, unfortunately, Pakistani soldiers are on the side of the Saudi Goliath, who is armed to the teeth and supported by the U.S. Israel, and a coalition of 30+ Muslim countries led by retired Pakistani General Raheel Sharif. In a devastating attack this past weekend, the Yemenis reclaimed territory, seized armed vehicles and weapons, and captured thousands of troops in Saudi Arabia. Pakistani soldiers under the command of Sharif were among those captured by the Yemenis, according to Al Jazeera.

If the Pakistani government is set to fight in the name of "La illaha illallah" as Khan told UNGA, it needs to first figure out which side Allah is on.

Quran: "Certainly, your guardian (Vali) is Allah and His Messenger and those who believe who establish prayer and give charity while they bow. And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as his guardian (Vali), so surely the party of Allah will be victorious." (5:55)

The Yemenis recognized that the Guardian jurist (Vali Faqih) of our time is Imam Syed Ali Khamanei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and have achieved miraculous success by following his guidance and advice just like David (A) attained astounding victory after obeying his leader Saul (Talut), even if it entailed only drinking a sip of water from the river and enduring other hardships and sacrifices. If Pakistanis want to defeat Goliath Modi, they must turn away from other Goliaths of our time and seek out and follow Imam Khamanei's political advice, which has been rooted in the Quran and Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (S) for the past thirty years.

Khan, who has rushed to hold meetings with U.S. Saudi, and Emirati rulers to resolve the Kashmiri issue, should pay attention to what Yemeni leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi proclaimed to the Saudis:  If the US, Israel, and the Arab nations are on your side and you are still not winning, know that God is not on your side!

Indeed, Pakistanis must join the path of Vilayat to defeat Goliath Modi!

Courtesy: 

ThePerfectionistas

Crimea and Kashmir Viewed Through a Western Prism of Hypocrisy

Brian CLOUGHLEY

In early August India deployed 38,000 troops in Indian-administered Kashmir to join the half-million already there. (There are two Kashmirs, administered respectively by India and Pakistan, following post-colonial dissent concerning accession of the territory.) There was then a massive clamp-down after a decree of 5 August annulled Article 370 of India’s Constitution which guaranteed the rights of Kashmiris to freedom under local laws. The region was subjected to military occupation, with central rule imposing unprecedented restrictions on movement and banning communication with the outside world. These have been enforced for over six weeks.

Associated Press managed to report some incidents, however, including one when “Indian soldiers descended on Bashir Ahmed Dar’s house in southern Kashmir on August 10… Over the next 48 hours, the 50-year-old plumber said he was subjected to two separate rounds of beatings by soldiers. They demanded that he find his younger brother, who had joined rebels opposing India’s presence in the Muslim-majority region… In a second beating at a military camp, Dar said he was struck with sticks by three soldiers until he was unconscious.” They released him but “on August 14, soldiers returned to his house… and destroyed his family’s supply of rice and other foodstuffs by mixing it with fertiliser and kerosene.”

Although there was a petition on 12 September to President Trump by four US Senators “to immediately facilitate an end to the current humanitarian crisis” in Indian-administered Kashmir, there has not been one syllable of condemnation by the administration in Washington. London remained silent also. These energetically vociferous supporters of human rights have voiced not the slightest criticism of India for its persecution and imprisonment of innocent Kashmiris.

Why?

If this sort of thing had happened in Crimea there would have been massive coverage in the Western media and loud and penetrating censure and denunciation of Moscow by politicians, pundits and the ever-attentive US military.

Western media always refer to the 2014 accession by Crimea to Russia as ‘annexation’ by Russia of the land that is historically Russian, whose citizens are predominantly Russian-speaking and Russian-cultured, and whose government held a referendum which overwhelmingly indicated preference for accession to Russia. One would not know it from Western media, but the referendum was witnessed by 135 international observers from 23 countries, including the Austrian MP Johannes Hübner who said that “The view we get from the American and European media is very distorted. You get no objective information. So we decided to come here to have a look at what’s really going on and see if this referendum is credible”. Which it was.

In contradistinction, there has been no referendum in Kashmir, as required by international legislature. In January 1949 the UN Commission for India and Pakistan announced that “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” and the BBC notes that “in three resolutions, the UN Security Council and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan recommended that as already agreed by Indian and Pakistani leaders, a plebiscite should be held to determine the future allegiance of the entire state.”

But it seems that Western governments are given to condemning referendums when they don’t suit their purpose and ignoring UN Resolutions to hold them when that action would be embarrassingly inconvenient for the country involved.

There’s no freedom in Kashmir, and instead of enjoying a modicum of self-governance and being permitted a referendum on its future, Indian-administered Kashmir is subjected to what is called ‘lockdown’. Mobile phone networks and access to the internet have been blocked for over six weeks — and there hasn’t been an official syllable of disapproval in Washington or London. Certainly, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, said on 9 September that she is “deeply concerned about the impact of recent actions by the government of India on the human rights of Kashmiris” and also “alarmed” about “restrictions on internet communications and peaceful assembly, and the detention of local political leaders and activists” — but no Western government paid the slightest attention. Nor did the freedom-loving Western mainstream media, which is always alert for violations of human rights around the world. Well — in some parts of the world.

They ignore the savagery of Indian troops and the denial of basic freedoms in Indian-occupied Kashmir, but would they do that if such excesses were evident elsewhere? Imagine the uproar, the feverish surge of self-righteous passion, the fiercely critical condemnation of brutality and suppression of democracy if anything like this occurred in Crimea. The US and Britain would go berserk with sanctimony.

On 12 September Reuters reported that “Authorities in Indian Kashmir have arrested nearly 4,000 people since the scrapping of its special status last month, government data shows, the most clear evidence yet of the scale of one of the disputed region’s biggest crackdowns… More than 200 politicians, including two former chief ministers of the state were arrested.”

But Mr Trump didn’t say a word. He was otherwise occupied, tweeting insults, and while repression was surging in Kashmir was at a G-7 meeting in Biarritz where he referred to Egypt’s tyrannical Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as “my favourite dictator” which tells us a great deal about the outlook of the US President. It is not surprising that Trump doesn’t want to criticise Indian Prime Minister Modi, the director of despotism in Kashmir, as he considers that “Prime Minister Modi and I are world leaders in social media.” His final G-7 tweet was that he had “Just wrapped up a great meeting with my friend Prime Minister Modi of India at the G-7 Summit in Biarritz, France!” so it seems that the twitter soul mates approve of ultra-authoritarianism and that Trump isn’t going near the Kashmir human rights’ button anytime.

Britain’s Prime Minister Johnson is desperately trying to avoid the catastrophic outcome of quitting the European Union and has little time for wider affairs, so cannot be expected to say anything definitive about the atrocities in Kashmir other than his pronouncement of 9 August that the situation was “serious.” His stance on Crimea is set in the Western mould of ‘annexation’ and he is rabidly anti-Russia, so there is no chance of a movement to dialogue by the United Kingdom. The rest of Europe just wishes the Kashmir crisis would go away, and hangs on to the ‘annexation’ story about Crimea, where there was no ‘lockdown’, persecution or detention of innocent civilians at accession time. Imagine the furore if there had been use of pellet guns in Sevastopol.

Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Kumi Naidoo, urged the Indian government “to act in accordance with international human rights law and standards towards people living in Jammu and Kashmir, including in relation to arrests and detentions of political opponents, and the rights to liberty and freedom of movement” and pointed out that “The actions of the Indian government have thrown ordinary people’s lives into turmoil, subjecting them to unnecessary pain and distress on top of the years of human rights violations they have already endured.”

Will there be any action at all by Washington and London? No: not a hope. They’ll continue to bounce up and down about Crimea, where there is liberty and freedom of movement, while keeping silent about persecution in Kashmir.

They are looking at the world through a prism of hypocrisy.

Brian CLOUGHLEY

British and Australian armies’ veteran, former deputy head of the UN military mission in Kashmir and Australian defense attaché in Pakistan