Kashmir Problem: A Must Read

Arundhati Roy's comments has brought out one important question on the general awareness about the whole kashmir problem.There's a gross misunderstanding and confusion on why the conflict happened and how the events unfolded which gave birth to present situation. It is definitely a sensitive issue and people commenting on this issue should be aware about all the aspects.


MSN published this article which is worth a read. This article is written by E Jayakrishnan  


here it is..


********************************************************


Arundhati Roy says Kashmir was never a part of India. We look at why she is wrong & why India’s position is not as vulnerable as it is portrayed to be

Myth-I

"Kashmir has never been an integral part of India": Arundhati Roy

The story

At the time of Indian independence, none of the princely states - Hyderabad, Gwalior, Mysore, Baroda and Kashmir, to name a few - were part of India. They were called princely states - quasi-sovereign states ruled by the Indian princes under the "suzerainty" of the British. There were as many as 568 states in India when the British decided to leave India.

In 1947, under the Mountbatten Plan, they were given two options - either India or Pakistan. Though most of the Princely states thirsted for freedom, that option was closed at the insistence of the Congress party. Though the choice of which entity to join was left to the rulers of the Princely states it was largely understood that religious denomination of the majority of the citizens and geographical contiguities of the states will be preponderant determining criteria.

Kashmir fulfilled both these paramount criteria to join Pakistan - geographical contiguity with the newly-formed state and religious domination of the majority of its citizens.

However, there was a problem. The Hindu ruler of Kashmir Maharaja Hari Singh wanted something which was not on the table, namely azadi, or freedom from both India and Pakistan - to remain independent. In spite of entreaties from various quarters including from the Governor General of India Loius Mountbatten, the Maharaja continued to dither and be non-committal. The situation reached a stalemate.

Jinnah and Pakistan perceived the intransigence of the Maharaja as a clever ploy of the India and Mountbatten to pluck Kashmir surreptiously from Pakistan's grasp. So in an operation that today can be seen as a precursor of the Kargil Operation, Pakistan launched a military invasion of Kashmir on October 22, 1947.

Pashtun tribals and irregulars, morally and logistically supported by the Pakistan army, were sent in to force the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan. The invaders reached the outskirts of Srinagar, the capital. And were threatening to besiege the city.

A frightened and panicky Maharaja radioed Delhi for military help. The Indian leadership argued that it not be legally possible to send in the Indian army unless Kashmir acceded to India formally. After another bout of resistance, the Maharaja finally yielded and Mountbatten's aide V P Menon was sent to Srinagar to secure his signature on the Instrument of Accession. Once signed (on 26 October 1947) the Indian army was airlifted to Srinagar and beat back the Pakistani invaders, but not before they controlled about one-third of Kashmir.

The Reality:

As soon as the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession, Kashmir's accession to India was complete in the legal and formal sense - the same Instrument of Accession that was signed by more than 500 other princely states. That is a fact of history, which cannot be disputed without stretching the truth. It's there is black and white. In fact, it can be argued that it was Pakistan's folly of invading Kashmir to usurp it, overplaying its hand, which sowed the seeds for the Kashmir imbroglio.

Myth-II

India refuses to hold the UN-mandated plebiscite to give the right of self-determination to the Kashmiri people.

The story

When the irregulars from Pakistan invaded India on October 22, 1947, Prime Minister Nehru went to the UN in good faith to call on the world body to intervene and ensure that Pakistan pull back its troops. Based on the Indian complaint and the counter-arguments of Pakistan, the UN Security Council called for not only an immediate ceasefire, but also a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiris.

Ignoring the advice of his Home Minister Sardar Patel and the army commanders that India should not agree to a ceasefire before the area captured by the invaders are reclaimed, Nehru went ahead and not only ordered an immediate ceasefire but also agreed in principle to the plebiscite. A promise that has not been kept.

The reality

This is the instance used to castigate India for not only breaking the spirit of the UN resolutions but also ignoring the legitimate aspirations of the Kashmiri people.

But just look at what UN Resolution 38 of 17 January 1948 actually says about the run-up to the plebiscite--

"The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavours: To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State".

Please read that again.

The much-bandied resolution used to whip India with, by the critics clearly states that Pakistan will "withdraw" all "Pakistani nationals" and "tribesmen" who infiltrated on October 22, 1947 from the soil of the whole of Jammu and Kashmir as it existed then, without exception. This was the UN resolution's 'first condition' for the beginning of the process towards the plebiscite.

Has that condition been fulfilled by Pakistan? Has the land 'occupied' by the Pakistanis and the tribesmen in 1947 been vacated? Isn't the reality that Pakistan occupied and continues to occupy more than one-third of the territory of Kashmir.

As a way to fulfill the mandate and hold the plebiscite, will Pakistan be willing to vacate PoK now; 63 years after the resolution? The answer is written on the wall.

For all intents and purposes the UN resolution on Kashmir is as good as dead.

No wonder then that the wily but pragmatic General Musharraf gave up the usual Pakistani harping on self-determination in Kashmir for a more practical and doable out-of-the-box solution, which unfortunately is being disowned by the present Pakistani government.

Myth-III

Pakistan has always stood by Kashmir, as against the brutality of the Indian security forces in the Indian side of Kashmir

Pakistan in Kashmir

a) Pakistan has carved out the Northern Areas (now called Gilgit-Baltistan, almost 72,971 Sq km) from Kashmir into a separate administrative and political unit. This area which was part of the undivided Kashmir at the time of Pakistan, has been 'annexed' by Pakistan as it where and separated from Kashmir.

b) In 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,800 sq km in the Trans-Karakoram Tract to China. The Tract was part of the original state of Jammu and Kashmir.

c) Pakistan actively encourages "other people" to settle in PoK and have even allowed the Chinese a huge presence in Gilgit-Baltistan, ostensibly for developing the infrastructure of the region.

In contrast:

a) Territorially the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir is the same entity that existed in 1947, except for the portions gobbled-up by Pakistan/China.

b) The Freedom House Report, 2010, on the level of 'freedom' in PoK characterised it as "not free', while the Indian side of Kashmir was defined as "partly free".

d) No non-Kashmiri can buy as much as an inch of land in the state of Jammu & Kashmir. There has been no attempt by India to change the demographics or the state's ethnic character. The only demographic change that has happened in the state has been the "ethnic cleansing" of the Kashmiri pundits from the Valley. A mass exodus which has largely been ignored by the media and the powers-that-be.

Therefore, there is nothing much really that India has to feel defensive about. Whatever Arundhati Roy or others may put out. 

Don't forget the Oats

"An Englishman and a Scotsman were discussing oats. The Englishman, with his nose in the air said "In England we feed oats to our horses, and in Scotland you feed oats to your men...", to which the Scotsman replied "...that's why in England you have such fine horses and in Scotland we have such fine men!"

A Counsel On Oats...

A tough, old cowboy once counseled his grandson that if he wanted to live a long life, the secret was to sprinkle a pinch of gunpowder on his oatmeal every morning.

The grandson did this religiously and lived to the age of 110.

He left four children, 20 grandchildren, 30 great grandchildren, 10
great great grandchildren and a 50 foot hole where the crematorium used to be.

"Don't forget the Oats."

Oats are the fourth most important crop world-wide. They were once considered a weed which grew right with the barley and wheat. One day farmers decided to "join 'em rather than fight 'em," and oats started being planted as a crop by itself. It fares best in cool, moist climates, which is why they are such a popular staple of the British Isles like Scotland, Ireland and Wales. The grain was introduced into the Americas in 1602 by a sea captain who planted them in one of the islands off the coast of Massachusetts. They were a popular grain, but corn had a better yield per acre crop, so their popularity wasn't as great as corn. Today, nearly half of the world's oat crop--more than 4 billion bushels a year--is grown in the United States and Canada.

Nutrient Values and Virtues of Oats

Oat kernels look very much like wheat in structure. They have an outer covering of bran which protects the starchy endosperm and the germ that sits at the bottom of the grain. Because the oat kernel is soft, the nutritious bran is not removed. Whole grain oats contain seven B vitamins, vitamin E, and nine minerals, including iron and calcium. The quality and quantity of the protein in oats is far superior to that of wheat and most other grains. 30 grams of oats has TWICE the protein of wheat or corn flakes. But the most important nutritional advantages are the soluable fiber and the GLA (gamma linoleic acid).The soluable fiber is what gives it the gummy texture, and it helps lower cholesterol levels in the blood. GLA is considered an "activated" essential fatty acid. Very small amounts of it fill the metabolic pipelines and allow the body to make other essential fatty acids, and all this is part of the hormonal control (took this from Harper Collins:).

Forms of Oats

Oat grains are enclosed in two tough husks that must be removed. The grains are cleaned and toasted, husked and scoured, resulting in whole oat kernels called GROATS. These contain nearly all the original nutritional value of the grain. Oat groats are much softer and quicker cooking than wheat berries, and can be used in many other meals that breakfast. They are not refined before or after processing, so they retain most of their nutrients regardless of the form in which they are eaten.

Here's a nice but quick recipe for Oatmeal.

Apricot Honey Oatmeal

• 3-1/2 cups water
• 1/2 cup chopped dried apricots
• 1/3 cup honey
• 2 cups Quaker Oats (quick or old fashioned
• uncooked)
• 1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon
• 1/4 teaspoon salt (optional)

In  saucepan, bring water, apricots, honey, cinnamon and salt to a boil.

Stir in oats; return to a boil.

Reduce heat to medium; cook about 1 minute for quick oats (or 5 minutes for old fashioned oats) or until most of liquid is absorbed, stirring occasionally.

You can replace apricot with any other dry fruit you like.

What a mess..Arundhati Roy !!!

There's one thing in india, which is worth noting..You get absolute freedom of speech. I know that many countries have freedom of speech but they also have some strings attached to that right. You cannot contempt or insult the country. But in india people generally get away with these kinds of irresponsible use of the basic right. 


Arundhati Roy's comment on Kashmir created a lot of spark and fire. It came at a time when the violence and unrest in the state is at an alarming stage and armed forces are worried about the ongoing discussions to soften the armed forces special power act in the state. The booker prize winner has a track record of some high voltage human right activism. But generally human right activists are zero on political and practical situational awareness. Arundhati says that "What I say comes from love and pride. It comes from not wanting people to be killed, raped, imprisoned or have their fingernails pulled out in order to force them to say they are Indians."  Now three things can be done here


1) Let go kashmir and merge with Pakistan: What!!...Last time i heard pakistan is slowly moving towards becoming a failed state. Pakistan's political system, economic system and social system are all screwed up. The country is totally overwhelmed with it's own problem and is totally confused about it's own future. I seriously don't think that kashmiris have any future there.


2) A seperate autonomous state: Oh my god! quite an imagination but how 's this seperate state gonna live. No industry, no employment, no education. Think that azaad kashmir can manage all those things seperately. I don't think that hurriyat leaders and people like Geelani have the balls to do those kinda things. Seems like a pretty bad option


3) Integrate it more with rest of India: Uh..what good that gonna do. India is prosperous, mighty and a growing economic, cultural and military giant. India can provide right enviroment.. a hope and a chance of better survival and life to normal kashmiris. Trust me! their life would be much more pathetic in above two situations. 


To me the third option seems the best. The state is burning but why? I don't remember the separatists doing anything to bridge the gab between government and kashmiris. I find them agenda-less. Who are these jokers? Are they the chosen representatives of kashmiris. Nope! I don't think so. The state has been under a state of conflict for almost 4 decades. People have died saving that piece of land which is PART OF INDIA. So stop jerking around and stop promoting yourself a  messiah of people. We have enough of them. Instead use your grey material  to write another book. I think your grey matter is depleting..fast. Put it in some good and meaningful work. Or is it your publishers are not happy with you and you want to get your share of pulicity. Oh ..is it that? You are then probably suffering from Rakhi Sawant Syndrome.


To be honest..Arundhati..I really liked your interview with Christopher Lyden but your comment on kashmir utterly disappoints me.

Lemon Chicken Tikka

Happy Dussehra to alll... and Subho Bijoya to all bong souls!!!!

The festival is the mark of good's win over evil and is celebrated with great joy and warmth. One of the most joyous moment is that of entire family feasting on delicious bengali delicacies. Infact bijoya dashami has always been an excuse to gorge on delicious bengali dishes. I always liked lemon chicken with strong tastes of wine and tangy taste of lemon. There are different ways of cooking lemon chicken and that makes huge differences. Ask any punjabi and he will say that add lemon in the tomato rich gravy and that's lemon chicken( ya! that's absurd)..I know! punjabis are not good with non veg food. They can eat but they cannot cook a "tasteful" non-veg dish.

Well, to be honest i also used to cook that way. But i guess i have evolved a lot. There's a more elegant and tasteful way of cooking lemon chicken. Here's the way out

Ingredients

• 1/3 cup cornflour
• 1/4 cup cold water
• 750g chicken thigh fillets, cut into 2cm-thick slices
• 1 tsp salt2 Tbsp Chinese rice wine
• 1 cup salt-reduced chicken stock
• Extra 1 Tbsp Chinese rice wine
• 1 Tbsp hoisin sauce
• 2 tsp oyster sauce
• 2 tsp salt-reduced soy sauce
• 3 tsp caster sugar
• 2 lemons
• 2 Tbsp plain flour
• Oil(mustard), for deep-frying

• Put 2 tablespoons of cornflour in a large mixing bowl, add water and stir until smooth. Add chicken slices, egg yolks, Chinese rice wine and salt and stir to combine. Cover with plastic wrap and refrigerate for 1 hour.
•  Put chicken stock, extra wine, sauces and caster sugar in a medium heavy-based pan and stir to combine. Bring slowly to

the boil and simmer for 10 minutes or

until slightly reduced. Juice 1 lemon and add 1/4 cup juice. Thinly slice remaining lemon and add to sauce. Simmer for

2 minutes. Remove from heat.

• Add remaining cornflour and flour to chicken and stir until well combined. Heat oil in a wok or medium, deep pan. When hot, add one-quarter chicken slices and cook for 3 minutes or until golden. Transfer to a large plate covered with paper towel. Repeat with remaining batches of chicken. Serve chicken with lemon sauce.

Corn flour really tastes well with chicken and than it gives that rusty and crispy feeling to the pieces.

Enjoy the meal and enjoy the day with your family!!!