CRITICIZING THE INDIAN ARMY IN KASHMIR MEANS YOU ARE SUPPORTING ANTI-NATIONALS/PRO PAKISTAN ELEMENTS

1.         At the time of independence India was a loose association of states including those ruled by monarchs like Maharaja Hari Singh in Kashmir. Like other princely states e.g. Hyderabad and Junagarh, Kashmir was included into the union of India through an instrument of accession. The reasons and backgrounds for various monarchs opting to join India as a nation were varied including the one of military threat by Tribals backed by Pakistan Army in 1947 in Kashmir. As per constitution of India all states are integral part of the nation and therefore must follow the constitution in letter and spirit. Some concessions were granted through Article 370 to Jammu and Kashmir which do not dilute the fact that Kashmir is an integral part of India as a nation.

2.         Pakistan however has continued to forment trouble in Kashmir through direct and indirect actions. Part of its actions emerge from its own insecurities and part from urge to avenge humiliating defeats in 1947, 1965, 1971 and 1999. The main tool opted by Pakistan to counter India’s military and economic superiority is by waging a proxy war using terrorists. These trained and supported terrorists carry out acts of terror in hinterland while Pakistan army engages India army on Line of Control (LOC). The intent of Pakistani establishments is to continuously drain Indian resources and create a situation where it is able to usurp complete Kashmir to add to the area it is illegally occupying or has ceded to China. It is most unfortunate that the evil designs of Pakistan in Kashmir have been aided and abetted by Indian citizens, political parties and independent organisations for their vested interests. 

3.         The situation in Kashmir worsened over a period of time to a level where Indian Govt had to invoke Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and call Indian Army to restore normalcy in the state. In any area where AFSPA is invoked typically undergoes following cycle:-

Mis-Governance / Poor Governance -> Unrest in Civil Society -> Insurgency (involves police actions to tackle) -> Militancy (involves para military forces action) -> Terrorism (Armed Forces are called)

4.         It follows logically therefore that once the situation goes out of control of elected Govt, civil administration, police and para military forces, then only army is requisitioned to carry out operations in aid to civil authorities. The mandate is to bring down the escalated level of unrest and armed struggle to a level where elected Govt / Civil Administration is able to regain control and resolve the fundamental issues of governance through redressal of genuine grievances of local population.

5.         On part of Army it is a tricky operation where they have to carry out violent actions in asymmetric civil areas unlike clear cut border / LOC in a conventional war with the danger of innocents getting hurt due to guerrilla tactics adopted by terrorists. While Army has to operate as per the rules of engagement terrorists do not have any such restriction and they often take advantage of this mismatch taking cowardly covering action behind the shield of innocent civilians. Army has to operate in areas inhabited by civilians some of whom may be compassionate to the cause of unrest and thus overtly or covertly support the militants/ terrorists. It is obvious that there would be some collateral damage in the army operations in such conditions. Some so called “excesses” and “human rights violations” may also occur in such operations characterized by fluid, unclear, speedy and violent actions.

6.         Apropos any one criticising Indian Army in Kashmir is indirectly supporting anti national and pro Pakistan elements because any true Indian national would understand that Army is there doing its job only because others failed to do theirs. If the situation is to be resolved through talks or welfare measures then the armed struggle has to end for which army actions are inescapable. Pseudo intellectuals, anti- national elements, Pro-Pakistan lobby and unscrupulous politicians with hidden agenda will always obviously criticize army in Kashmir because it suits them to keep the issue alive. By criticizing army and its actions they are able to create a negative image domestically and internationally of Indian Nation which further alienates the civil population. So, the situation rather than getting resolved gets further complicated. Horrendous actions like rapes, mass murders and burning of institutions by terrorists wearing army uniforms is a common methodology to malign army and create adverse situation.    

7.         Nationalism and patriotism are two different things but mostly misunderstood or confused with each other. Definition of a nation is as given in the constitution of the nation and is rigid, well defined and non-negotiable thus making nationalism an uncompromising duty towards the nation. Patriotism however is a feeling and a sense of belonging to the nation as an idea which is not only felt but is demonstrated through various actions. If people could differentiate between the two and show their patriotism by supporting the actions by Indian Army as their bonafied duty as Nationalists the situation in Kashmir can be brought down by Army to a level where genuine issues of common man can be addressed by Civil Agencies.