Why You Should Be Wary of Pakistan’s State Propaganda About Kashmir

Source: Dawn

Following the shocking move of the revocation of Article 370 that grants special autonomous status to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Central Government in India has cracked down on civil liberties. The state has been in a virtual state of a shutdown for more than 10 days and restrictions such as suspension of landline are recently being eased.

The Central Government in India has incarcerated the major political leaders including former Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, his son Umer Abdullah, and Mehbooba Mufti. The Hurriyet leaders are a no-brainer. The state is under a communication blackout to this day and only one major protest has been tolerated to date. Anyone within India and outside with concern about democracy and human rights was appalled by the situation. However, the malicious Indian right-wing in their urge for greatness have sadly turned a blind eye to this coercion.

Of course, this sudden and shocking development slowly provoked a negative reaction in Pakistan. The country’s ruling party PTI came back with a Modi/Hitler and BJP/RSS/Nazi Party analogy campaign. They and the Prime Minister are still going in full flow against the Modi administration. This came after a rather mellow speech from the Prime Minister in the joint session of the parliament, in which he criticized the “fascism” of the Indian government and for locking up the entire opposition. This immediately attracted criticism and right after the speech, the PML-N leader of opposition Shahbaz Sharif accused him of being a worse oppressor of the opposition than the Indian government.

However, many commentators did not take a lot of time to point out that Pakistan had little credibility to lecture India on violation of democracy and human rights, thanks to its own dismal record at home. Currently, Pakistan is making headlines around the world on curbing the press while jailing the entire opposition and other dissenting activists. Designed to appeal to its global audience, the bombardment of tweets of its social media team of copywriters and graphic designers on overtime were particularly embarrassing and disconnected to history.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

While there is little doubt about the fascism of BJP, it is more comparable to that of the Pakistani Islamist nationalists supportive of the Pakistani military and the PTI itself instead of Nazis in Germany. And if we are at comparisons of Nazi’s treatment of the Jews, the treatment of Ahmedis in Pakistan strikes an eerie similarity. Furthermore, Pakistan has done far worse in East Pakistan, tribal areas, and Baluchistan than what India can ever hope to do in Kashmir. The following tweet is actually more accurately reflective of how the right-wingers on both sides are indeed coming together to validate the two-nation theory.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
There are a couple of reasons why the Pakistani administration’s official narrative reeks of intellectual dishonesty. Pakistan does not recognize the problem created by the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits (Native Hindus) from the valley. Furthermore, analysts such as Tariq Pirzada are openly inciting violence or genocide against any Hindu citizens that settle in Kashmir. Aren’t elements of Pakistan promoting communal supremacy in the State too? And if that is not the case, why is the mention of Hindu Pandits absent from the communication of Pakistani propaganda.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Now you can dismiss this as an opinion of an individual but the Pakistani state has backed Islamist militancy in the State for a long time. Not only this influence has resulted in the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from the State but has also seriously hampered the legitimacy of the Kashmiri struggle for autonomy.

Some of the Kashmiri Pandit opinion leaders on social media, especially the notable actor Anupam Kher, often sound bitter and quite a few of them have been cheerleading the draconian measures of the BJP government in Kashmir. However, such voices should not mislead the focus on the need to rehabilitate Kashmiri Pandits in the valley. Any political resolution in the valley is incomplete without their voices.

Pakistan’s so-called moral case of Kashmir on the international forum is plagued with its own share of hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty. The following tweet of the Pakistan Ambassador to the UN, Maleeha Lodhi, lauds China, Pakistan’s usual partner on the Security Council forum, for “as always standing up firmly on principles and upholding international law.” Though you can be pretty sure that Madame Ambassador would never have bothered to call China out on the treatment of Uighur Muslims (something where PTI’s Nazism and “Final Solution” analogies are conveniently missing) since she is such a huge proponent of principles and upholding international law. Even though some people would be laughing at a Pakistani diplomat invoking principles and international law.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Pakistan would like you to believe that India is already committing. There is some degree of truth to the targeting of Kashmiri Muslims by the Indian state in recent years, well before the Modi administration, but the Islamist trends in the Kashmir separatist movement are the major reason behind them. To this date, the Prime Minister is continuing his tweets to condemn Narendra Modi as Hitler and his party as Nazis. That also raises questions about the maturity of this narrative. Does this mean that Pakistan has rejected the Indian administration and will not engage in talks with them for peace in the future?

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Pakistan has already taken the issue with the United Nations, which has disapproved of India changing the status of Kashmir. But that is where its influence ends for now. While it is positive to see that India is being held accountable at some kind of international platform for its recklessness but that still does not legitimize the reckless misrepresentation of facts and intellectual dishonesty of the Pakistani Prime Minister and the ruling party who could themselves be criticized for their own fascism any given day.

Legitimizing the Drone

Source: thenewstribe.com

Source: thenewstribe.com

Would you believe that the drone is a divisive issue? But what isn’t.

A recent Amnesty International report with a rather emotional title was widely hailed by anti-drone activists, and locally by staunch anti-war parties such as the PTI. However, at the same time the report was criticized by people who think the weapon was doing a great job in firing terrorists. The accuracy of the report has also been questioned, although by some who have a history of defending drone strikes.

Obviously, you cannot expect the US government to concede that drones violate international law. However, I believe that when international human rights watchdogs are disapproving of drones and if the UN considers their use a violation of international law, there is no real need to go out of your way to defend the US drone campaign. Amusingly, a lot of commentators have been doing precisely that to justify the US government and military.

This does not mean that they do not have valid reasons to do that. Drone warfare is not any worse than conventional warfare, except for the fact that it is a constant threat looming on the heads of certain civilian populations, where militants are present. I think relatively safer populations cannot understand how a threatened population may see drone strikes.

The usual response to criticism of drones is that jet bombing kills more if not the equal number of people, can be as terrible for the people suffering the bombing and human rights, and that conventional bombing is more erratic than the drones. All these points are valid.

Whoever is opposing drones but advocating jet or artillery fire is not understanding the benefit of the technology. Pakistani nationalists opposing drones because they violate the sovereignty of the country is merely a nationalistic political viewpoint and has nothing to do with the human loss.

Drone technology is superior, indeed. But if the UN and other international and nonpartisan bodies are maintaining that US drone strikes violate international law, there is no sense in persisting with the support of an illegal device of war.

However, this does not mean that the use of this particular technology is condemned, even though it is a violation of people’s privacy and safety in any case. I do not see the reports criticizing drones and the civilian deaths caused by them as an attack on the technology, but one on the political force controlling these drones.

The drone can be legitimized. The US should stop carrying out drone strikes unilaterally and, since the technology is so accurate and helps minimize losses, the United Nations Security Council should be authorizing and supervising drone strikes when and where needed.

This does not necessarily have to require the US giving up the drone technology to the UNSC, but the UN body would only supervise the US strikes, as in UN Peacekeeping Missions. In this way, drone strikes would at least not violate the international law and the instances of possible abuse can be minimized. Critics may question the feasibility of this proposal, but the viewpoint of defending violation of international law is unreasonable.

Maybe all the criticism on the drone strikes is more about the distrust of the invader, instead of the weapon.

It’s not the drone that kills, but the people behind it.