The day Maharaja went for Kashmir Accession

Guest Post By: ZAHOOR HUSSAIN BHAT

On October 26, 1947, the State of Jammu and Kashmir acceded to the Dominion of India when its ruler Maharaja Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession and the Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten accepted the instrument. With this Maharaja handed-over the Valley to India. This was the time when thousands of tribal groups had raided the State. By the Instrument of Accession, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir accepted three subjects as ones on which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for the State. They were: Defence, External Affairs and Communication. While accepting the Instrument of Accession Mountbatten put forth the condition that as soon as peace is restored in Kashmir the people of Kashmir should confirm the Accession of the State.

On October 27, 1947 Indian troops were airlifted to Srinagar. The landing of troops in Srinagar was justified by Government of India by stating that troops were sent as was requested by the ruler of the state; and only after he had decided to accede to the Indian Union. However M J Akbar, the author of Nehru’s biography, has expressed doubts about Hari Singh’s formal request for assistance. He writes, “Nehru and Patel were both determined to send the army into Kashmir whether Hari Singh asked for them or not”.

Historians are of the view that the strongly nationalistic Kashmiris were fearful of joining India given the communal holocaust raging elsewhere in India during the Partition. This is clearly articulated in a famous speech by Sheikh Abdullah on October 22, 1947 where he explains the apprehension of the Kashmiri Muslims in joining India, given the massacre of Muslims in Kapurthala and elsewhere in India. However, Abdullah would consent to provisional accession to India on October 27 clearly stating that it was a provisional accession ultimately to be decided by a plebiscite.

The Maharaja made an order on October 30, 1947 appointing Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah as “the Head of the Administration with power to deal with the emergency” and appointed a twenty three member Emergency Council “pending the formation of the Interim Government”. By a proclamation issued on March 5, 1948 the Maharaja decided “to replace the Emergency Administration by a popular interim Government and to provide for its powers, duties and functions, pending the formation of a fully democratic Constitution”.

The State of Jammu and Kashmir was then governed by the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution Act, 1939. Justice Dr. A.S Anand, an eminent judge, opined in his book, ‘The Development of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir’: “The Government of Jammu and Kashmir did not accept the Constitution of India as a Constitution for the State.

Despite the accession, the State was still to be governed by the old Constitution Act, 1939. This was because the Government of India had given an undertaking that the people of Kashmir could frame their own Constitution. The Government of India could not force the State to accept the constitution (of India), for that would violate the agreed terms of the association of Kashmir with India. The State had voluntarily surrendered three matters only (Defence, External Affairs and Communication) and the Government of India could not enlarge the sphere of its jurisdiction at its own discretion”.

On November 2, 1947 speaking on all India Radio Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru said, “Destiny of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people who live in it. We have given this promise not only to people of Kashmir, but to the world. We will not and cannot back out of it”.

On November 25, 1947 Nehru informed the Indian Parliament that we have suggested, “When people of Kashmir are given a chance to decide their future, this should be done under the supervision of an impartial court such as United Nations Organization”.

Nehru in a famous speech at Lal Chowk made it clear that the wishes of Kashmiri’s regarding the State of Jammu and Kashmir would be consulted in a plebiscite or referendum. He would repeat this promise time and again in various speeches from 1947-1951 and the 1948 Indian White Paper clearly records that the accession of Kashmir to India is provisional until such time as the will of the people of the State could be ascertained by a plebiscite.

On November 1, 1947 Mountbatten held a meeting at Lahore with Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah & Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan. Nehru on the justification of illness failed to attend meeting.

Pakistani leaders made it clear that accession was based on fraud and violence and was not genuine.

Nehru approached the UN Security Council to seek its help to settle the issue. On January 1, 1948 the Security Council of United Nations was called upon by India under article 34 and 35 of Chapter VI of the United Nations. In Indian complaint it has been pledged that once the soil of the State had been cleared of the invaders and normal conditions restored its people could be free to decide their future by the democratic method of plebiscite or referendum which in order to ensure complete impartiality might be held under international auspices.

The Security Council met on January 15, 1948. The Indian delegation also included Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, head of Interim Government under Indian occupied Kashmir. The Indian representative referred to note of Mountbatten on instrument of accession that question of State’s final accession should be settled by reference to the people of Kashmir. Pakistan’s representative protested against Indian forces in Kashmir. He said that in the presence of Indian forces people of Kashmir could not express free will. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister made a forceful speech for five hours and made a history in records of United Nations. On January 20, 1948 Security Council by resolution No.39, established the United Nations Commission on India & Pakistan (UNCIP). On February 8, 1948 discussions in the UNO broke down on the question of free administration, as India wanted Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah to continue as head of the administration during plebiscite or referendum.

Negotiations again resumed in March 1948 in UNO and on April 21, 1948 a resolution was passed according to which Government of Pakistan was asked to withdraw from Jammu & Kashmir all its forces, tribal & Government of India was asked to reduce her forces to minimum strength after which plebiscite be held on the question of accession of State to India or Pakistan. The resolution asked for U.N delegation to proceed to sub-continent at-once. It did not condemn Pakistan as aggressor as desired by India nor it touched upon the legal aspect of Kashmir’s accession to India. The UN Security Council resolution of April 21, 1948, clearly states that the final status of Jammu & Kashmir should be decided through an impartial plebiscite held under the auspices of the world body.

The United Nations resolutions of August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, proposed the plebiscite option for resolving the Kashmir dispute. These resolutions laid down the principles and procedures for a free and impartial plebiscite under UN auspices. Both India and Pakistan accepted the United Nations Resolutions. However, later, differences arose over the interpretation of various clauses of the resolutions, especially on the issues of demilitarization and disbandment/ disarming of the “Azad Kashmir” forces. India gave its own interpretation to the agreement and suggested that the Azad Kashmir forces be disbanded and the defence and administrative responsibility of the region be given to India and Indian Kashmiri authorities.

Pakistan, on the other hand, was in favour of a complete and simultaneous withdrawal of forces by both countries. By early 1948 Nehru had developed second thoughts about the plebiscite. The Indian leadership from the very beginning was aware that the majority of Kashmir was against accession with India and after dismissal of Sheikh Abdullah in August 1953 the alienation among Kashmiri people became increased.

Indian Constituent Assembly in 1949 adopted Article 370 of the Constitution, ensuring a special status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir with Indian jurisdiction in Kashmir limited to the three areas: defence, foreign affairs and communications. This was confirmed by Abdullah in 1952 Delhi Agreement and the State was allowed to have its own flag. In reality, Article 370 which was envisioned as a temporary measure till self-determination has been seriously eroded over years with the collusion of local ministers installed in rigged elections, by extending various articles like 356 and 357 to the State, by virtue of which the Centre can assume the government of the State and exercise its legislative powers.

Today, Kashmiri’s are worse off than people in other States in many respects: having been denied rights, Article 370 eroded and repressive acts such as Armed Forces Special Powers Act which lead to arbitrary arrests, torture and killing of thousands of innocent civilians.

What AFSPA & PSA Actually Is?

THE ARMED FORCES (JAMMU & KASHMIR) SPECIAL POWERS ACT, 1990:

The Armed Forces (Jammu & Kashmir) Special Powers Ordinance, introduced in July, 1990,was later enacted by the Parliament of India and enforced on 10th September, 1990. When certain areas are declared to be “disturbed”, the army and paramilitary forces are granted sweeping powers under Section 4 (C) of this Act. The armed forces can be used in aid of civil authorities and even a non commissioned officer can search any place, stop/seize any vehicle, fire at any person (and kill), or arrest him even on the basis of suspicion with no obligation to inform him of the grounds thereof. It gives the Indian security forces sweeping powers that facilitate arbitrary arrests and detention and extra judicial executions as well as destruction of property. The provisions of the black law are further violated in the occupied Kashmir by the security forces. Under the law, an arrested person is to be handed over to the nearest police station. But it is seldom done. Besides, the armed forces personnel are supposed to act as and when requested by the civilian authorities. In other words, the former should work under the direction of the latter. However, factually the security forces are inflicting atrocities on the Kashmiris without informing the civil administration. The State government has proved ineffective in controlling the Indian security forces, who have unleashed a reign of terror in occupied territory. The Act legitimizes barbarism in the State, as under Section 7, the security forces are given an immunity from prosecution for any act committed by them.

JAMMU & KASHMIR PUBLIC SAFETY ACT,1978

The Act promulgated in 1978 (amended in 1987 and1990) empowers the State government to detain a person without trial for two years under the pretext of maintenance of public order. The Act fell short of the recognized norms of justice, such as equality before law, the right of the accused of appearance before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, fair trial in public, access to counsel, cross examination of the witnesses, appeal against conviction, protection from being tried under retrospective application of law, etc. Even the provisions of the Act, though already unsatisfactory, have been consistently violated. The detainees are not informed of the reasons of their arrest and they are kept in custody for a much longer period of time than stipulated in the Act. They are not allowed to meet their relatives and counsels. The amendment of 1990 extended its operation beyond the State, enabling the State machinery to keep the detainees in the jails of India, outside the State. Under Section 22 of the Act, any legal proceeding against officials for acts “done in good faith” are also disallowed.The law has been widely used against the innocent Kashmiris as well as political opponents. Thousands of people have over the years been detained under the Act.

Journalism in Occupied Kashmir

By: Muhammad Daheem

To report human misery without any pressure from any quarter is the basic right of journalists. No body can deny the freedom of expression in the modern age. Nonetheless, journalism is an uphill task in Indian occupied Kashmir. Kashmiris took arms against Indian occupied forces in 1989. Since then several journalists have been harassed, threatened, tortured and severely wounded by the Indian forces and state machinery. Several have survived fatal attacks. Many have lost their lives for the cause of freedom of expression. Even then the Kashmir press does not have the liberty to report facts and realities related to Kashmir issue. Nonetheless, several journalists are struggling to bring into light the realities related to freedom movement in Kashmir.The puppet regime of Indian held Kashmir is actively engaged in the state sponsored terrorism. The curfew passes of journalists are torn or declined or declared faked. The journalists, in such circumstances, find it difficult to reach their offices. Many news and text messages are blocked or banned to curb the rights of journalists in Kashmir.The Valley journalists are not allowed to express their genuine opinion about grim situation in Kashmir. Despite obstacles the scribes, writers and editors are exposing the atrocities of the Indian forces. The voice of the conscientious journalists is the voice of the freedom of expression.Kashmir is a valley of tears, death and cemetery of known and unknown martyrs. It is because of the atrocities of the Indian forces. In such circu
mstances conscientious media plays vital role. It closely watches the grim situation and struggles to portray a true picture of the events.Civilized societies do not tolerate attacks on journalists or arrest of editors and writers serving for the noble cause. The sincere journalists are part and voice of the society and they portray the true picture of the society. Unfortunately Kashmiri journalists have been deprived of presenting true political picture of events in Kashmir. It is one of the most unreported regions of the global world.The number of Indian forces present in the Kashmir region is more than half a million. These forces, a symbol of hatred for the Muslim all over Kashmir, erode media freedom and rights of journalists. The Indian forces try to hush up the damaging details of events from the community of journalists.On Jun. 11, 2010 Indian security forces killed a youth in Srinagar. The schoolboy was returning home from a tuition center. This resulted a series of protests across Kashmir. In consequence 14 more people got killed including several teenagers. A number of Kashmiris were i

njured as a result of police action.It was against this background that press associations met and decided to express their protest by suspending the publication of all local English and Urdu language newspapers in the Indian occupied Kashmir.The newspapers suspended publication from July 8 to 11 in 2010—— a rare example in the history of journalism.They did it as a protest “against the government’s policy on the movement restriction of reporters and technical staff”. Bashir Ahmad Bashir, an editor of an Urdu language daily mourns:“We had to suspend publication of our newspapers for four consecutive days given the restrictions imposed on media personnel. Our curfew passes were cancelled. Reporters and photojournalists were ruthlessly beaten up, while cases were filed against some media persons in an effort to stop them from publishing the reality.”Riyaz Masroor, a senior journalist, was “beaten up ruthlessly by policemen” after he identified himself as a journalist to authorities who stopped him outside his home.Journalists complain of restrictions on scribes, writers, editors and photojournalists by the state-controlled agencies. The media does not have the liberty to report independently.Journalists, in the light of professional journalistic code of ethics, have the right to express their views that come from the core of their heart. But the freedom of expression is still not acknowledged in the occupied Kashmir.Iftikhar Geelani, a journalist, was charged and arrested under the notorious Indian Official Secrets Act, a product of the British Colonial rule. He was accused of “storing information about India ‘s military presence in Kashmir and possessing classified documents prejudicial to the safety and security of the country,” in his laptop computer. Asiya Jeelani, an editor of a human rights group magazine, died of a mine blast while her colleague Khurram Parvez, an activist, lost his leg. The history of Kashmir is replete with atrocities of Indian forces in Kashmir.The Kashmir Press is under pressure. Journalists in Kashmir are struggling to stop violation of basic Human Rights of journalists — the right to express their viewpoint and report the bitter truth without pressure from any quarter.There are no private satellite television channels or private radio stations in Kashmir.Local cable television channels have been forced to cut their evening news bulletins to just 15 minutes. They are not permitted to rebroadcast the news. State-controlled radio and television are the voice of the puppet regime in Kashmir.

These are not considered to be authentic or reliable sources by the public.The Kashmir Press Association, Press Guild of Kashmir, Kashmir journalists’ Corporation, Kashmir Press Photographers Associations and Kashmir Video Journalists Associations are the voices of journalists.These voices are protesting against the government’s stern policy towards journalists and journalism. Daily Kashmir Express, the most circulated newspaper of the state, advocates the right of self- determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. This newspaper also highlights their respective problems that people of Kashmir are facing all over the world. Journalists are trying their best to support the voice of the people of Kashmir.A London-based think-tank survey shows that 75 to 95 percent Kashmiris want independence from the yoke of Indian slavery. The people are in favour of freedom of press. Unfortunately the photojournalists and video journalists opt for self-censorship in case of protest demonstration. This is because they are under pressure and working in difficult times. They are the daily victims of injustice and cruelty of Indian imperialism. From time to time they express their anger against Indian forces. The international community and Human Rights organizations should focus on the fate of journalism in Indian held Kashmir.Violation of Human Rights is common as unidentified gunmen abduct, humiliate and beat up journalists for performing their duty honestly. The reporters, photojournalists and their family members are arrested under the emergency public security law. The police refuses to release them despite logical protests made by the public. The conflict is escalating and even going to be out of control.Violation of basic rights of journalists is the root cause of many problems. When journalists are denied to reveal the truth to the public it becomes the cause of social unrest in the society. Journalists demand that their basic needs to be met without any foul play. Newspapers are largely dependent on politically controlled advertisements. These newspapers are blackmailed as their payments are withheld for publishing “objectionable material”.It is very difficult for genuine journalists to perform their duty in Held Kashmir. To ensure safety and security of journalists to perform their duties freely seems to be impossible in present circumstances. Moreover, threats to human rights defenders are common. Even the organizations seeking justice for journalists are considered dangerous and hushed up to talk of human rights in Kashmir.The journalists seek life saving methods while reaching the place of accident or clash between the Indian forces and the freedom fighters. The fear of death haunts them while covering the important events. In the unpredictable scenario, the future of journalism seems to be bleak in Kashmir unless occupied forces leave this beautiful valley.The journalists are the torchbearers for press freedom. They know peace cannot be achieved by brutal use of force. It can be achieved through justice and fair play for all.

27th October to be observed as "YOUM-E-SIYAH"(Black Day) : Syed Ali Geelani

India’s 'strong-arm tactics' had failed to subdue the 'freedom struggle' of Kashmiris, Hurriyat Conference chairman, Syed Ali Geelani, Monday said policy makers in New Delhi should do 'a post-mortem of their country’s failed Kashmir policy'.

Geelani said for the past over six decades, Kashmiris have continued their "struggle against Indian occupation despite all odds even as Indian forces have killed lakhs of Kashmiris during this time.”

“India has failed to subdue Kashmiris through force, and the time has come for policy makers in New Delhi to do a post-mortem of their Kashmir policy to see whether they have achieved anything in Kashmir,” he said.

“Have they succeeded in changing the hearts of Kashmiris, or strengthening their constituency here? The truth is that nothing of this sort has happened and, in fact, the freedom sentiment of the new generation has only gotten stronger by Delhi’s iron-fist policy,” Geelani said in a statement.

“Actually, the freedom sentiment is a natural sentiment, which cannot be suppressed, and the sooner India realizes this reality the better it is for the crores of people living in the sub-continent,” he added.

Geelani said Jammu and Kashmir is the world’s most militarized zone and the presence of armed forces in civil areas is a cause of huge inconvenience for locals.

Terming October 27, 1947, as the “blackest day” in history of Kashmir, Geelani reiterated his appeal to Kashmiris living in Pakistan administered Kashmir, Pakistan, Britain, and other countries to stage peaceful rallies and protests against “Indian occupation” of Kashmir and draw world attention towards the “threats to lives and properties of Kashmiris posed by the ten-lakh presence of Indian armed forces.”

He said Jammu and Kashmir was an independent and sovereign state until 1947 , and was bound to become a part of Pakistan as per the conditions of partition of the sub-continent. “ But India in a brazen display of aggressiveness landed its troops on October 27,1947, and occupied the region against the wishes of people,” he said.

Geelani said Kashmiris had been continuously “fighting against this illegal occupation but India has held on due to its military power.”

He said the Indian leaders had backtracked from the promises made to Kashmiris and also refused to implement the UN resolution granting Kashmiris their right to self determination.

He said human rights violations would continue to take place as long as Indian forces are present in Kashmir. “Therefore, people should observe a complete shutdown on October 27 in favour of complete demilitrisation of Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.

PROPAGANDA DICTATORS AND VIOLENT MUSLIMS

“Muslims are violent”. “Islam is a barbaric religion”. “Muslims are Terrorists”. These are most commonly heard sentences on social networking sites, blogs and TV debates. Muslims do little to counter these allegations as Muslim voice is muzzled in the ‘Free world’. Who will give platform to a Muslims in this ‘Free world’ where all the platforms are owned by those who are interested in portraying Muslims as killers? Anyone trying to do that finds himself shouted down and silenced. Muslims have been made to believe that whatever the Western and Pro – Western media tells, is true. When non – Muslims commentators claim that “All Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims”, a gloomy silence is observed by those who know that whatever is being claimed is not true. This is unfortunate that world is experiencing the worst kinds of dictatorships at present. This dictatorship is a manifestation of propaganda unleashed the world over against the followers of Islam. Western media outfits and its puppets in the non – Western world have become demons of falsehood. When Hitler claimed that if a lie is spoken quite often, it becomes the truth, he gave a biggest key for the successful propaganda to the world. This false notion, “Muslims are killers” has been converted into the truth by using the same Hitler method by those who play as the worst victims of Nazi Holocaust. So who is following Hitler and his doctrines? It is a paradox that the method of Hitler’s propaganda war is still relevant today and has been adopted by the victims of Hitler’s holocaust in letter and spirit.

It is painful to flip through the pages of history and find that whatever is being said about Muslims and Islam does not hold any ground. It is equally painful that Muslims themselves do not come up with figures of worst genocides with names of architects of those genocides in front of the ‘Free Media’. It may be history but whatever is happening today is all because of the past. Why should these lies against Muslims and Islam be allowed to be replicated endlessly?

It will not help Muslims to stay silent. Remaining silent makes one think that ‘silence is acceptance of the guilt’. But silence here is not the acceptance of guilt but suppression of voice. Will Fox TV or CNN ever allow a Muslim to come out with right figures? It is not any secret that most of the media sells today because of lies which they have been telling the world. Who will follow them if they start showing the true picture to their gullible audience now? Media which created all the hype against Islam and Muslims can’t tell the world that, “ Hold on ! We have been wrong, please hear the truth now”. This will dent their interests and intrigues. Dictatorships of Falsehood through Media is such a potent tool that lot of Muslims have started to accept their imaginary guilt. I being a Muslims, a peaceful one throughout my life am being told that, I am the follower of a violent ‘cult’. I am unable to find my guilt but still I am forced to accept my undone sin. Is not this the worst kinds of tyrannies? When I want to ask them few questions or want to question their claim, I am being told to stay quiet. This is hurting my soul and killing the prospects of peaceful co existence. I then think, “Since I am being considered as a radicalized follower of a violent ‘cult’ without any reason whatsoever, what is the fun of staying peaceful then. ?”

This is what ‘Propaganda Dictators” cash in on, thus get their stories developed and manufactured . It is a continuing manufacturing process. More the propaganda, more stories they get. And Media sells, intrigues become successful, occupations become ‘peace keeping interventions’, and atrocities on innocents become ‘War on Terrorism’. Civilian deaths become ‘inevitable co lateral damage’ and superpowers remain as superpowers at the expense of Innocents and their natural resources.

I believe that these ‘Propaganda Dictators’ are tools of hegemonic powers. But letting them carry on with their propaganda is equally deplorable. We should do our best to counter their offensive with whatever tools available with us. Let us fight them with their own weapons. Let us bust their myths without being hysterical. I want to put some figures before ‘propaganda dictators’ and want them to identify my guilt in these figures. I have compiled an account of some notable genocide which happened in this world since 1900 till 2011. Let us see how many people Muslims have killed in these 111 years and how many humans have been slaughtered by non – Muslims. I hope these figures shall enlighten you. Let us see how barbaric Muslims are and how peaceful non – Muslims are.

HUMAN FATALITIES EXCLUDING CASUALITIES IN WARS

Mao Ze-Dong, Non - Muslim (1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50): 78 Million

Jozef Stalin, Non - Muslim (USSR, 1932-39): 23 Million

Adolf Hitler, Non - Muslim (Germany, 1939-1945): 12 Million (concentration camps and civilians WWII)

Leopold II of Belgium, Non - Muslim (Congo, 1886-1908): 8 Million

Hideki Tojo, Non - Muslim (Japan, 1941-44): 5 Million (civilians in WWII)

Ismail Enver, Muslim (Turkey, 1915-20): 1.6 Million Armenians and others (1915)

Pol Pot, Non - Muslim (Cambodia, 1975-79): 1.7 Million

India, Non - Muslim ( Jammu and Kashmir 1947 - 2011): 0.7 Million

Israel, Non - Muslim (Palestine, 1947 - 2011): 0.4 Million

Palestine, Muslim ( Israel, 1947 – 2011): 12 Thousand

George W Bush, Non - Muslim ( Iraq 2003 - 2008): 1.1 Million

George W Bush, Non - Muslim (Afganistan 2002 – 2008): 1 Million

Kim Il Sung, Non - Muslim (North Korea, 1948-94): 1.6 Million (purges and concentration camps)

Menghistu, Non - Muslim (Ethiopia, 1975-78): 1.5 Million

Yakubu Gowon, Non - Muslim (Biafra, 1967-1970): 1 Million

Leonid Brezhnev, Non - Muslims (Afghanistan, 1979-1982): 1 Million

Jean Kambanda, Non - Muslim (Rwanda, 1994):0.80 Million

Saddam Hussein, Muslim Communist (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88): 0.5 Million

Tito, Non - Muslim (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987): 0.6 Million

Sukarno (Communists 1965-66): 0.5 Million

Fumimaro Konoe, Non - Muslim (Japan, 1937-39): 0.5 Million (Chinese civilians)

Jonas Savimbi, Non - Muslim (Angola, 1975-2002): 0.4 Million

Idi Amin, Muslim (Uganda, 1969-1979): 0.3 Million

Yahya Khan, Muslim (Pakistan, 1970-71): 0.1 Million (Bangladesh)

Mukti Bahini, Muslims supported by India (East – Pakistan 1970 – 71): 35 Thousand ( Urdu speaking Pakistanis)

Benito Mussolini, Non - Muslim (Ethiopia, 1936; Libya, 1934-45; Yugoslavia, WWII): 0.4 Million

Mobutu Sese Seko, Non - Muslim (Zaire, 1965-97): 0.3 Million

Charles Taylor, Non - Muslim (Liberia, 1989-1996): 0.22 Million

Foday Sankoh, Non - Muslim (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000): 0.2 Million

Suharto, Muslim (Aceh, East Timor, New Guinea, 1975-98): 50 Thousand

Ho Chi Min, Non - Muslim (Vietnam, 1953-56): 0.2 Million

Michel Micombero, Non - Muslim (Burundi, 1972): 0.2 Million

Slobodan Milosevic, Non - Muslim (Yugoslavia, 1992-99): 0.1 Million

Richard Nixon, Non - Muslim (Vietnam, 1969-1974): 0.1 Million (Vietnamese and Cambodian civilians)

Efrain Rios Montt, Non - Muslims (Guatemala, 1982-83): 70 Thousand

Papa Doc Duvalier, Non - Muslim (Haiti, 1957-71): 60 Thousand

Rafael Trujillo, Non - Muslim (Dominican Republic, 1930-61): 50 Thousand

Hissene Habre, Muslim (Chad, 1982-1990): 40 Thousand

Chiang Kai-shek, Non - Muslim (Taiwan, 1947): 30 Thousand (popular uprising)

Vladimir Ilich Lenin, Non - Muslim (USSR, 1917-20): 30 Thousand (dissidents executed)

Francisco Franco, Non - Muslim (Spain) : 30 Thousand (dissidents executed after the civil war)

Anti Sikh Riots, Non – Muslim ( India, 1984 - 1986): 10 Thousand

Fidel Castro, Non - Muslim (Cuba, 1959-1999): 30 Thousand

Lyndon Johnson, Non - Muslim (Vietnam, 1963-1968): 30 Thousand

Hafez Al-Assad and Bashar Al - Assad, Muslim (Syria, 1980-2011): 26 Thousand

Reza Shah, Muslim (Iran, 1979): 20 Thousand

Robert Mugabe, Non - Muslim (Zimbabwe, 1982-87, Ndebele minority): 25 Thousand

Rafael Videla, Non - Muslim (Argentina, 1976-83): 13 Thousand

Guy Mollet, Non - Muslim (France, 1956-1957): 10 Thousand (aggression on Algeria)

Harold McMillans, Non - Muslim (Britain, 1952-56, Kenya's Mau-Mau rebellion): 10 Thousand

Paul Koroma, Non - Muslim (Sierra Leone, 1997): 6 Thousand

Osama Bin Laden, Muslim (worldwide, 1993-2001): 4 Thousand

Augusto Pinochet, Non - Muslim (Chile, 1973): 3 Thousand

Al Zarqawi, Muslim (Iraq, 2004-06): 2 Thousand

TTP and other Groups, Muslim ( Pakistan, 2003 – 2011): 15 Thousand

Note: (I have not included the figures of people killed in different communal riots in India since 1947 as I could not find reliable figures for it on the net or other sources. But still as per the vague estimates nearly 1.1 million people have died in communal riots in India since 1947. Most of the casualties (85 %) happened during the partition of 1947. About 80 % people killed in these communal riots were Muslims.)

• Killed by Non - Muslims: Nearly 141 Million i.e., more than 14 Crore people.
• Killed by Muslims: Nearly 2.7 Million i.e., 27.5 Lac people.

Non – Muslims have killed 53 times more people than Muslims without wars.

These people were not killed in Wars but were killings during peace. These killings happened as a result of aggression; crack down on uprisings, silencing of political and ideological opponents, crushing of freedom struggles, regional hegemony and ethnic as well as religious cleansing.

Now let me give you figures of Two World Wars fought by Non Muslims with each other:

World War I ( 1914 - 1918) : 37.5 Million people (Three Crore and Seventy Lac)

World War II ( 1939 – 1945) : 55. 5 Million (Five Crore and Fifty Five Lac) including Nuclear Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Japan) by President Truman of United States of America. (President Trueman, sounds funny as well as silly).

Total Casualities in Two World Wars : 93 Million i.e., 9 Crore 30 Lac people + unspecified number of people who died due to Hunger, Illness, Poverty and Radiation after these gruesome wars fought by the civilized and peaceful Non Muslims with each other.

Let us forget other wars. Just sum up with this only.

Total people killed by Non Muslims in 111 Years : 141 Million + 93 Million = 234 Million

Total people killed by Muslims in 111 Years: 2.7 Million

Killings by Non Muslims every year : 21,00,000 (Twenty One Lac) people.

Killings by Muslims every year: 24,000 (Twenty Four Thousand) people.

Non – Muslims have killed nearly Hundred times more people than Muslims in the last 111 years and still Muslims are Barbaric.

Open up your eyes and minds and hurl the truth on their faces.

“Waqul jaa alhaqqu wazahaqa albatiluinna albatila kana zahooqa”

And say: "Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished, for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish."

Koshur Mazloom © 2011

Syed Ali Geelani a person, non-corrupt and upright. with conviction

Dr Sameer Kaul, a Kashmiri Pandit and Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani's personal physician, speaks about the other side of the hardline separatist.

Two men at the heart of Kashmiri separatism -- hardliner Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Yasin Malik, leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front -- are alive today thanks to doctors from the Kashmiri Pandit community, which was forced to flee the valley with the onslaught of militancy in 1989.Some years ago, a team of three doctors performed life-saving surgery on Geelani, now 81, in Mumbai after he was diagnosed with cancer Geelani survives on three-fourth of a kidney, and one of the doctors is now his personal physician.As someone who interacts with Geelani regularly

, Dr Sameer Kaul is probably better placed than anyone else to observe the real man behind the stubborn politician we know about.Speaking to Rediff.com's Krishnakumar Padmanabhan, not only does Dr Kaul give us an intimate view of Geelani, he also provides valuable insights into the current unrest, and how Delhi can rectify mistakes of the past.I am quite close to Geelanisaab, as a doctor should be. But my interaction with him is mostly restricted to medical discourse.As a person, he is non-corrupt and upright. He has conviction.He is disciplined and is a very meagre eater. He doesn't follow the philosophy of consumption in life. He is satisfied with the basic things.That must have helped him in becoming incorruptible.I didn't know him personally before the surgery.In my childhood, I used to ask my father who he was. My father used to say he is the man who says 'Kashmir banega Pakistan.' Such a man is anathema for me.But when I saw that even after 20 years he had not changed his stand and said the same thing, I respect that. When we met he started by offering me my fee.I reminded him about this and told him that I respect him for his steadfastness though I did not agree with his philosophy.He just had a smile and kept quiet.He was called for a interview before that for a US visa. When he was asked questions about his political beliefs, he said he is against American policy. He was very forthright.What does that tell you? He didn't lie for the sake of going to the US. He is beyond that.There are very few things you can hide from your doctor. So I can vouch that he lives a spartan life and so does his family.After an operation in Delhi, he was living in a cramped quarters with his daughter in Malviya Nagar. I warned him he might get an infection.But he told me that if he shifted, his daughter might be heartbroken that her house was not good enough for her father and he stayed put.Such a fellow has to be humane.Things like this is why I find a large part of his public image discordant. He is always with a smile. He is not a wimpy patient.I do not concern myself with his political affiliation and ideology, but I find him to be an honest and sincere man to his people, which is a far cry from what we get these days.Eighty per cent of Kashmiris will not agree with his ideology, but they respect him for being non-corrupt.They have seen all their other leaders get corrupted at some point or the other. In these two decades of strife, he is the only guy whose influence and respect among the people has only increased.I have seen all the chief ministers of the state in recent times and interacted with almost every other politician.I think a major reason for that is that he is not concerned with petty politicking and doesn't get down to the nitty-gritty.He keeps reading and writing books, and is busy translating Islamic texts.He lives in a spartan home. A lot of people put up spartan exteriors, but are quite different on the inside. But in his case, having been close to him for two decades, he is nothing like that. And you can't hide those things forever.I think he is a man of convictions who has been forced into a particular situation. I admire him for sticking to it. I don't know too many politicians who stick to their convictions for long.To top that, he is extremely humble and not greedy.He is not into dynastics and does not seek any favours for his children or sons-in-law. Neither is he into shady deals nor does he have any secret benami property.

One thing I have always thought is that he was never handled well. He was just labeled as an anti-India hawk and thus, he continues to be called so.In reality he is quite a soft guy. I do not agree with the picture that is being painted about him.I think he has always been put in a reactionary situation -- you do something and he has no way else but to react to it.He has always been pushed to a corner, where the only thing that he can do is react in the way he has.He has been demonised throughout. I don't think he had any option.There is also the angle that he is the only one who did not bend and dance to your (New Delhi's) tunes.I have so many patients who have seen him and they can't believe he is the same guy they see and hear about in the news.

am basically a Sufi at heart. Which is not what he adheres to, and I don't mix two things together.We disagreed only once. There was a Sufi saint who died three months ago. They used to call him the naked fakir. Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs throng to his place. I visited him often.Once he (Geelani) tried to tell me that it was not right. I told him it was my philosophy and was best left alone. After that, not once did he ever touch that topic.Among his greatest strengths are that he is humble, sober, incorruptible, and a man of principles, convictions and discipline.In the last 18 years, I have been doing a free (medical) camp in Srinagar .I don't think even a Muslim politician can venture out today. If you go on to the roads, you can be pulled out and skinned.For a Kashmiri Pandit to tell you that, it has a big meaning. A part of it is that what you give is what comes back to you.When I conduct my camps -- I don't take any security with me as I have never perceived a threat -- never do I get the feeling of not being wanted.I think it is because I do not believe Kashmiris are fundamentalists. Only 10 to 15 per cent are.What is actually happening on the ground is that a sustained class war is going on there.Simultaneously, there is also the phenomenon of one kind of Islam trying to overtake another kind of Sufi Islam.In the last 15 days I have heard from many Kashmiri friends that their houses are being targeted.What is happening is that a frustrated section is taking out its anger on a well-off section. He doesn't like what he sees, and so sets out to destroy it.What worries me is that it is now even worse than 1989. Then, a lot of people got into it because there was a romanticism associated with it.

Today, what you see is extreme anger.The central political system was in deep slumber. Everything was going on under the surface and nobody woke up to it.Regarding Geelani's role in the current unrest, I am sure a lot of what is happening outside is beyond his control.He wouldn't get children out (on the streets of Kashmir), that is absolutely not on in his book. I can't believe that. I don't think that can be true.He appealed for calm and there was a lot of dissent against that. I can't speak about where is it coming from and who is supporting that.I still maintain my home in Srinagar. I have not moved out. I am part of that society.As to whether he had a role in the persecution of Pandits, when there is a mass exodus, massive things happen on a large scale, you can't single out things. You have to rise above these things.And if he was so anti-Pandit he wouldn't have come to me. I am a neutral Sufi.I believe he probably participated in the movement against the Pandits because his philosophy is fundamentalist.But there is an action-reaction situation also.The Pandits, while they were there, did not exactly have a positive disposition towards him ever.When you get relegated to a corner, you realise there is only one place open. You stay alive and occupy the space.Regarding the way he was treated he speaks about past experiences when he says he was approached, but things never happened.Had he been approached and accommodated, we would not be here today. All the time that the valley was fine, the government did nothing.We are only worried when the house catches fire. And people also realise that to get your attention, they have to burn something.This is the same story in the Maoist belt also if I am not mistaken.When it comes to Kashmir, I believe in soft power, which is the non-political space. It is non-utilised in Kashmir.We have only shown the hard face of India ] to the Kashmiris.If you realise the way our government functions it is not exactly a straightforward situation.As a nation -- this is my personal view -- we have never had a comprehensive and continuous policy towards Kashmir. It changes with various desks that handle Kashmir, and has always been discontinuous.If you talk about indoctrination, that starts at the age of 4 in rural schools. But we have never had a comprehensive group of dedicated people whose only motive is to keep Kashmir with the Union.Had that happened, would we be in this situation today after 63 years?