Posts Tagged ‘Kashmir’

Kashmiri leader: Make October 6 protest march a success

September 27, 2008

Make Lal Chowk march a success: Geelani

Listen Listen Font Size a+ a-

Not Allowed To Offer Friday Prayers Again

Srinagar, Sep 26: Veteran pro-freedom leader and the chairman of Hurriyat Conference (G), Syed Ali Geelani, on Friday urged people to participate in the march to Lal Chowk on October 6 to show the world that Kashmiris were united in their struggle for right to self-determination.

Talking to Greater Kashmir this afternoon, Geelani said, “People from every nook and corner of the Valley should ensure their presence at Lal Chowk on October 6. They should follow the coordination committee’s call as they have been doing so far.”

Geelani stressed that people should be peaceful during the march and only raise the relevant slogans. “The more peaceful people would be, the more world attraction it will evoke,” he said. “It is therefore necessary that people should march peacefully and abandon from provocative sloganeering.”
Geelani was scheduled to offer prayers at Hazratbal, but was not allowed by the police as the leader continues to be under house arrest for the past 19 days.

He said every participant in the march should carry black flags with ‘we want right to self-determination’ written on it. “There should be no banners of any party or any organisation. People must follow the directions in letter and spirit.”

He said the slogans to be raised should be: “Hum Kya Chahtay Azadi, Islam Zindabad, Shohada Kay Waaris Zinday Hai and Awwaz Do Hum Ek Hain.”
Geelani urged people to go for a social boycott of the pro-India leaders who are desperate to see elections taking place in Jammu and Kashmir. “Kashmir is not the issue of elections or governance. It is an internationally recognized dispute which must be resolved as per the wishes and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.

Geelani said it was unfortunate to see some pro-India leaders advocating elections at a time when the whole Valley is up in arms against India. “Kashmir issue is the issue of India’s illegal occupation of Kashmir and not about elections. Kashmir is not a border dispute between India and Pakistan.”

Geelani reiterated that right to self-determination was the only solution to Kashmir dispute. “It is our obligation to free ourselves from the Indian occupation. The recent protests have given a new dimension to the freedom struggle and it is great to observe our youth realizing their insecurity under the Indian occupation,” Geelani said.

Geelani said it was shocking that he was not allowed to offer any Friday prayers during the holy month of Ramadhan. “It is my 20th day under house arrest and it is painful to observe that I am being barred from offering prayers,” Geelani said.

Meanwhile, Hurriyat (G) acting general secretary, Pir Saifullah addressed a mammoth gathering at Hazratbal shrine here, urging people to stand united in the struggle for freedom. “Anything short of self-determination is not acceptable to us as solution to Kashmir dispute. This basic right must be given to the people of Kashmir,” Saifullah said.

Saifuallah urged people to make the march to Lal Chowk on October 6 successful to show the world that Kashmiris were united. Saifullah strongly condemned the house arrest of Syed Ali Geelani, who was scheduled to address people at Hazratbal today.

Flanked by some other Hurriyat (G) leaders, Saifullah asserted that if Geelani was not released from house arrest before Eid-ul-Fitr, lakhs of people would offer themselves for arrest as a mark of protest.

Saifullah condemned what he called the daily police excesses on Kashmiris. “I wonder where these policemen will live when we will achieve freedom. The police excesses on Kashmiris must stop forthwith,” he said.

He said more than 80 Kashmiris have been killed in police action in the past two months. “In Jammu, police uses rubber bullets to break the violent protests, but when it comes to Kashmir, people are ruthlessly killed for holding peaceful protests,” Saifullah said.

He said unity among pro-freedom leaders was the need of the hour.
Later, Saifullah led a peaceful pro-freedom demonstration at Hazratbal. The demonstration was attended by thousands of people who raised pro-freedom and anti-India slogans.

Unarmed Kashmiri freedom fighters

September 19, 2008

Kashmiri Muslims have broken new ground by waging a non-violent separation struggle but the Indian authorities seem unsure how to respond

Flowing black beard, a headband with “Allahu akbar” (God is great) and a fluttering green flag. This has been the trademark picture of the recent azadi (freedom) processions of Kashmir, where hundreds of thousands marched the streets of this disputed Himalayan region seeking a separation from India.

From a distance, it seems as if the past has returned to Kashmir. But the present contains an irrefutable truth: in place of guns, the people carry slogans. The politics of protest this time is not about the argument of power, but about the power of argument.

Kashmir is the first conflict-ridden Muslim region in the world where people have consciously made a transition from violence to non-violence, and this includes the staunch Islamists too. In fact, the wisdom behind the use of arms to fight a political struggle was being silently debated within Kashmir ever since 9/11 blurred the lines dividing terrorism and genuine political movements. The deteriorating situation inside Pakistan too had tilted the balance towards a peaceful struggle.

Thus when Kashmiris decided to come out to demand azadi recently, there were no militant attacks or suicide bombings. It was through massive unarmed processions where people shouted slogans and waved flags. And when the government tried to halt them, the anger was only manifested through stone pelting. Sensing the overwhelming public mood, the militant groups immediately declared a unilateral ceasefire, admitting the insignificance of the gun for an unarmed people’s movement.

This major shift has not been registered even as it has already formed a new discourse for Kashmir’s separatist struggle. New Delhi’s response was usual – it again used its iron fist, killing 38 unarmed protesters and injuring more than a thousand and enforcing a strict curfew with a hope that the people will be ultimately cowed down. The separatist leadership too was rounded up.

This only shows that New Delhi is misreading the script. This time the authorities are not faced with gun-wielding men but unarmed people. A heavy clampdown keeping the population indoors only puts a temporary lid on the seething anger. Instead of a military intervention, New Delhi should have immediately attempted sincere political and democratic means to engage Kashmir and calm the tempers.

New Delhi’s approach to handling Kashmir for past two decades has been simple and straight: militancy is the only problem and that can be sorted out by stringent military measures. Though there have been several rounds of negotiations with a faction of the separatist leadership too, New Delhi used the process more as a photo-op than a serious effort to address the demands of the people. There have been half a dozen occasions when separatist leadership joined a dialogue with New Delhi to resolve the Kashmir problem amicably – only to find the exercise nothing more than a surrender and thus futile.

The distrust towards New Delhi had reached such proportions that when moderate separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq decided to join talks with New Delhi, his uncle was murdered in Kashmir. Despite a serious threat to his life, he joined the talks directly with the prime minister of India. Again, the non-serious approach of New Delhi derailed the process, further eroding the credibility of talks with New Delhi in the eyes of Kashmiris. The public standing of separatist leaders who had agreed to talk to New Delhi also diminished substantially.

The recent protests by hundreds of thousands of unarmed people too don’t seem to have changed the mindset of New Delhi’s ruling elite. Instead of acknowledging the intensity of the uprising and the depth of the sentiment in Kashmir, New Delhi again refuses to face the reality and delays engaging in a sincere dialogue with the separatist leadership. The Kashmiris have overwhelmingly announced that peaceful processions and not guns are now their favoured means of protest. This needs to be encouraged and allowed to take firm roots because it could help to put an end to the bloodshed in Kashmir and make an amicable resolution of the problem easy. The phenomenon could also have a positive influence over a dozen such violent conflicts in other Muslim regions across the world. But if peaceful protests are crushed like armed movements, another wave of violence will take root, reinforcing the idea that the gun is mightier than a slogan.

For Kashmiri Muslims the meaning of independence from Indian occupation of their land

September 14, 2008

Kashmir is in crisis: the region’s Muslims are mounting huge non-violent protests against the Indian government’s rule. But, asks Arundhati Roy, what would independence for the territory mean for its people?

Arundhati Roy| The Guardian, Friday August 22 2008

A Kashmiri Muslim shows a victory sign during a march in Srinagar, India

A Kashmiri Muslim shows a victory sign during a march in Srinagar, India. Photograph: Dar Yasin/AP

For the past 60 days or so, since about the end of June, the people of Kashmir have been free. Free in the most profound sense. They have shrugged off the terror of living their lives in the gun-sights of half a million heavily armed soldiers, in the most densely militarised zone in the world.

After 18 years of administering a military occupation, the Indian government’s worst nightmare has come true. Having declared that the militant movement has been crushed, it is now faced with a non-violent mass protest, but not the kind it knows how to manage. This one is nourished by people’s memory of years of repression in which tens of thousands have been killed, thousands have been “disappeared”, hundreds of thousands tortured, injured, and humiliated. That kind of rage, once it finds utterance, cannot easily be tamed, rebottled and sent back to where it came from.

A sudden twist of fate, an ill-conceived move over the transfer of 100 acres of state forest land to the Amarnath Shrine Board (which manages the annual Hindu pilgrimage to a cave deep in the Kashmir Himalayas) suddenly became the equivalent of tossing a lit match into a barrel of petrol. Until 1989 the Amarnath pilgrimage used to attract about 20,000 people who travelled to the Amarnath cave over a period of about two weeks. In 1990, when the overtly Islamist militant uprising in the valley coincided with the spread of virulent Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) in the Indian plains, the number of pilgrims began to increase exponentially. By 2008 more than 500,000 pilgrims visited the Amarnath cave, in large groups, their passage often sponsored by Indian business houses. To many people in the valley this dramatic increase in numbers was seen as an aggressive political statement by an increasingly Hindu-fundamentalist Indian state. Rightly or wrongly, the land transfer was viewed as the thin edge of the wedge. It triggered an apprehension that it was the beginning of an elaborate plan to build Israeli-style settlements, and change the demography of the valley.

Days of massive protest forced the valley to shut down completely. Within hours the protests spread from the cities to villages. Young stone pelters took to the streets and faced armed police who fired straight at them, killing several. For people as well as the government, it resurrected memories of the uprising in the early 90s. Throughout the weeks of protest, hartal (strikes) and police firing, while the Hindutva publicity machine charged Kashmiris with committing every kind of communal excess, the 500,000 Amarnath pilgrims completed their pilgrimage, not just unhurt, but touched by the hospitality they had been shown by local people.

Eventually, taken completely by surprise at the ferocity of the response, the government revoked the land transfer. But by then the land-transfer had become what Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the most senior and also the most overtly Islamist separatist leader, called a “non-issue”.

Massive protests against the revocation erupted in Jammu. There, too, the issue snowballed into something much bigger. Hindus began to raise issues of neglect and discrimination by the Indian state. (For some odd reason they blamed Kashmiris for that neglect.) The protests led to the blockading of the Jammu-Srinagar highway, the only functional road-link between Kashmir and India. Truckloads of perishable fresh fruit and valley produce began to rot.

The blockade demonstrated in no uncertain terms to people in Kashmir that they lived on sufferance, and that if they didn’t behave themselves they could be put under siege, starved, deprived of essential commodities and medical supplies.

To expect matters to end there was of course absurd. Hadn’t anybody noticed that in Kashmir even minor protests about civic issues like water and electricity inevitably turned into demands for azadi, freedom? To threaten them with mass starvation amounted to committing political suicide.

Not surprisingly, the voice that the government of India has tried so hard to silence in Kashmir has massed into a deafening roar. Raised in a playground of army camps, checkpoints, and bunkers, with screams from torture chambers for a soundtrack, the young generation has suddenly discovered the power of mass protest, and above all, the dignity of being able to straighten their shoulders and speak for themselves, represent themselves. For them it is nothing short of an epiphany. Not even the fear of death seems to hold them back. And once that fear has gone, of what use is the largest or second largest army in the world?

There have been mass rallies in the past, but none in recent memory that have been so sustained and widespread. The mainstream political parties of Kashmir – National Conference and People’s Democratic party – appear dutifully for debates in New Delhi’s TV studios, but can’t muster the courage to appear on the streets of Kashmir. The armed militants who, through the worst years of repression were seen as the only ones carrying the torch of azadi forward, if they are around at all, seem content to take a back seat and let people do the fighting for a change.

The separatist leaders who do appear and speak at the rallies are not leaders so much as followers, being guided by the phenomenal spontaneous energy of a caged, enraged people that has exploded on Kashmir’s streets. Day after day, hundreds of thousands of people swarm around places that hold terrible memories for them. They demolish bunkers, break through cordons of concertina wire and stare straight down the barrels of soldiers’ machine guns, saying what very few in India want to hear. Hum Kya Chahtey? Azadi! (We want freedom.) And, it has to be said, in equal numbers and with equal intensity: Jeevey jeevey Pakistan. (Long live Pakistan.)

That sound reverberates through the valley like the drumbeat of steady rain on a tin roof, like the roll of thunder during an electric storm.

On August 15, India’s independence day, Lal Chowk, the nerve centre of Srinagar, was taken over by thousands of people who hoisted the Pakistani flag and wished each other “happy belated independence day” (Pakistan celebrates independence on August 14) and “happy slavery day”. Humour obviously, has survived India’s many torture centres and Abu Ghraibs in Kashmir.

On August 16 more than 300,000 people marched to Pampore, to the village of the Hurriyat leader, Sheikh Abdul Aziz, who was shot down in cold blood five days earlier.

On the night of August 17 the police sealed the city. Streets were barricaded, thousands of armed police manned the barriers. The roads leading into Srinagar were blocked. On the morning of August 18, people began pouring into Srinagar from villages and towns across the valley. In trucks, tempos, jeeps, buses and on foot. Once again, barriers were broken and people reclaimed their city. The police were faced with a choice of either stepping aside or executing a massacre. They stepped aside. Not a single bullet was fired.

The city floated on a sea of smiles. There was ecstasy in the air. Everyone had a banner; houseboat owners, traders, students, lawyers, doctors. One said: “We are all prisoners, set us free.” Another said: “Democracy without freedom is demon-crazy.” Demon-crazy. That was a good one. Perhaps he was referring to the insanity that permits the world’s largest democracy to administer the world’s largest military occupation and continue to call itself a democracy.

There was a green flag on every lamp post, every roof, every bus stop and on the top of chinar trees. A big one fluttered outside the All India Radio building. Road signs were painted over. Rawalpindi they said. Or simply Pakistan. It would be a mistake to assume that the public expression of affection for Pakistan automatically translates into a desire to accede to Pakistan. Some of it has to do with gratitude for the support – cynical or otherwise – for what Kashmiris see as their freedom struggle, and the Indian state sees as a terrorist campaign. It also has to do with mischief. With saying and doing what galls India most of all. (It’s easy to scoff at the idea of a “freedom struggle” that wishes to distance itself from a country that is supposed to be a democracy and align itself with another that has, for the most part been ruled by military dictators. A country whose army has committed genocide in what is now Bangladesh. A country that is even now being torn apart by its own ethnic war. These are important questions, but right now perhaps it’s more useful to wonder what this so-called democracy did in Kashmir to make people hate it so?)

Everywhere there were Pakistani flags, everywhere the cry Pakistan se rishta kya? La illaha illallah. (What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but Allah.) Azadi ka matlab kya? La illaha illallah. (What does freedom mean? There is no god but Allah.)

For somebody like myself, who is not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hard – if not impossible – to understand. I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman. She shrugged and said “What kind of freedom do we have now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?” Her reply silenced me.

Surrounded by a sea of green flags, it was impossible to doubt or ignore the deeply Islamic fervour of the uprising taking place around me. It was equally impossible to label it a vicious, terrorist jihad. For Kashmiris it was a catharsis. A historical moment in a long and complicated struggle for freedom with all the imperfections, cruelties and confusions that freedom struggles have. This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for, among other things, the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire Hindu community from the Kashmir valley.

As the crowd continued to swell I listened carefully to the slogans, because rhetoric often holds the key to all kinds of understanding. There were plenty of insults and humiliation for India: Ay jabiron ay zalimon, Kashmir hamara chhod do (Oh oppressors, Oh wicked ones, Get out of our Kashmir.) The slogan that cut through me like a knife and clean broke my heart was this one: Nanga bhookha Hindustan, jaan se pyaara Pakistan. (Naked, starving India, More precious than life itself – Pakistan.)

Why was it so galling, so painful to listen to this? I tried to work it out and settled on three reasons. First, because we all know that the first part of the slogan is the embarrassing and unadorned truth about India, the emerging superpower. Second, because all Indians who are not nanga or bhooka are and have been complicit in complex and historical ways with the elaborate cultural and economic systems that make Indian society so cruel, so vulgarly unequal. And third, because it was painful to listen to people who have suffered so much themselves mock others who suffer, in different ways, but no less intensely, under the same oppressor. In that slogan I saw the seeds of how easily victims can become perpetrators.

Syed Ali Shah Geelani began his address with a recitation from the Qur’an. He then said what he has said before, on hundreds of occasions. The only way for the struggle to succeed, he said, was to turn to the Qur’an for guidance. He said Islam would guide the struggle and that it was a complete social and moral code that would govern the people of a free Kashmir. He said Pakistan had been created as the home of Islam, and that that goal should never be subverted. He said just as Pakistan belonged to Kashmir, Kashmir belonged to Pakistan. He said minority communities would have full rights and their places of worship would be safe. Each point he made was applauded.

I imagined myself standing in the heart of a Hindu nationalist rally being addressed by the Bharatiya Janata party’s (BJP) LK Advani. Replace the word Islam with the word Hindutva, replace the word Pakistan with Hindustan, replace the green flags with saffron ones and we would have the BJP’s nightmare vision of an ideal India.

Is that what we should accept as our future? Monolithic religious states handing down a complete social and moral code, “a complete way of life”? Millions of us in India reject the Hindutva project. Our rejection springs from love, from passion, from a kind of idealism, from having enormous emotional stakes in the society in which we live. What our neighbours do, how they choose to handle their affairs does not affect our argument, it only strengthens it.

Arguments that spring from love are also fraught with danger. It is for the people of Kashmir to agree or disagree with the Islamist project (which is as contested, in equally complex ways, all over the world by Muslims, as Hindutva is contested by Hindus). Perhaps now that the threat of violence has receded and there is some space in which to debate views and air ideas, it is time for those who are part of the struggle to outline a vision for what kind of society they are fighting for. Perhaps it is time to offer people something more than martyrs, slogans and vague generalisations. Those who wish to turn to the Qur’an for guidance will no doubt find guidance there. But what of those who do not wish to do that, or for whom the Qur’an does not make place? Do the Hindus of Jammu and other minorities also have the right to self-determination? Will the hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits living in exile, many of them in terrible poverty, have the right to return? Will they be paid reparations for the terrible losses they have suffered? Or will a free Kashmir do to its minorities what India has done to Kashmiris for 61 years? What will happen to homosexuals and adulterers and blasphemers? What of thieves and lafangas and writers who do not agree with the “complete social and moral code”? Will we be put to death as we are in Saudi Arabia? Will the cycle of death, repression and bloodshed continue? History offers many models for Kashmir’s thinkers and intellectuals and politicians to study. What will the Kashmir of their dreams look like? Algeria? Iran? South Africa? Switzerland? Pakistan?

At a crucial time like this, few things are more important than dreams. A lazy utopia and a flawed sense of justice will have consequences that do not bear thinking about. This is not the time for intellectual sloth or a reluctance to assess a situation clearly and honestly.

Already the spectre of partition has reared its head. Hindutva networks are alive with rumours about Hindus in the valley being attacked and forced to flee. In response, phone calls from Jammu reported that an armed Hindu militia was threatening a massacre and that Muslims from the two Hindu majority districts were preparing to flee. Memories of the bloodbath that ensued and claimed the lives of more than a million people when India and Pakistan were partitioned have come flooding back. That nightmare will haunt all of us forever.

However, none of these fears of what the future holds can justify the continued military occupation of a nation and a people. No more than the old colonial argument about how the natives were not ready for freedom justified the colonial project.

Of course there are many ways for the Indian state to continue to hold on to Kashmir. It could do what it does best. Wait. And hope the people’s energy will dissipate in the absence of a concrete plan. It could try and fracture the fragile coalition that is emerging. It could extinguish this non-violent uprising and re-invite armed militancy. It could increase the number of troops from half a million to a whole million. A few strategic massacres, a couple of targeted assassinations, some disappearances and a massive round of arrests should do the trick for a few more years.

The unimaginable sums of public money that are needed to keep the military occupation of Kashmir going is money that ought by right to be spent on schools and hospitals and food for an impoverished, malnutritioned population in India. What kind of government can possibly believe that it has the right to spend it on more weapons, more concertina wire and more prisons in Kashmir?

The Indian military occupation of Kashmir makes monsters of us all. It allows Hindu chauvinists to target and victimise Muslims in India by holding them hostage to the freedom struggle being waged by Muslims in Kashmir.

India needs azadi from Kashmir just as much as – if not more than – Kashmir needs azadi from India.

· Arundhati Roy, 2008. A longer version of this article will be available tomorrow at outlookindia.com.

Peaceful struggle to gain freedom from Indian rule to continue in Kashmir: Yasin Malik

September 13, 2008

Frontpage
Listen Listen Font Size a+ a-

Srinagar, Sep 12: Chairman Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, Muhammad Yasin Malik on Friday said the ongoing peaceful struggle would continue till Kashmir gets “Azadi.”

Addressing a pro-freedom rally at historic Ghanta Ghar (Clock Tower) here after he was bought out by the people from his residence where he was under house arrest since September 1, Malik said, “Our ongoing freedom struggle would continue till Kashmir achieves freedom.”

He said more than 50 people including youth were killed by the paramilitary CRPF troopers and police since the recent pro-freedom uprising in Kashmir. “These and thousands of Kashmir people have offered sacrifices to achieve freedom. We can’t betray our people. We would fight till we achieve our goal,” said Malik.

Malik accused paramilitary troopers and police of “unleashing reign of terror” on people to suppress the ongoing struggle. “A reign of terror has been let loose by Indian agencies that have started intimidating, arresting and harassing Kashmir people especially youth and government employees. This is a new tactic used by the government to harass the people and suppress the freedom struggle,” Malik said.

The government, Malik accused, has re-activated the Ikhwanis and SOG personnel in many parts of the Kashmir especially south Kashmiri’s Islamabad to harass the people.

“Such repressive tactics can’t suppress our will to seek Azadi. The more New Delhi and the state government would use force to silent the Kashmiri people, more would the determination among the Kashmiri people to seek their right of freedom,” Malik said, moments before he was injured when police fired teargas canisters and resorted to baton charging to disperse hundreds of protesters who had again thronged the Ghanta Ghar seeking Azadi.

Talking to Greater Kashmir, Malik said the recent economic blockade enforced by some extremist groups in Jammu to Kashmir “has only resolved the determination of Kashmiris to get freedom. It infused new blood to the ongoing freedom struggle and the turn out of lakhs of people for an attempted march to Muzaffarabad, and march to Pampore, TRC ground and Eidgah should be a clear message for India that Kashmir wants freedom.”

Malik urged people to follow the program by Coordination Committee and hold peaceful protests.

Earlier, Moulvi Showkat Ahmad, senior leader Jamiat-e-Ahlehadees and Mushtaq-ul-Islam also addressed the rallies.

Danger in South Asia

September 13, 2008

Conn Hallinan | Foreign Policy In Focus, September 10, 2008

If most Americans think Iran and Georgia are the two most volatile flashpoints in the world, one can hardly blame them. The possibility that the Bush administration might strike at Tehran’s nuclear facilities has been hinted about for the past two years, and the White House’s pronouncements on Russia seem like Cold War déjà vu.

But accelerating tensions between India and Pakistan, coupled with Washington’s increasing focus on Afghanistan, might just make South Asia the most dangerous place in the world right now, a region where entirely too many people are thinking the unthinkable.

Pakistan in the Middle

At the heart of this crisis is a beleaguered Pakistan, wracked internally by economic crisis and deep political divisions. Islamabad is simultaneously fearful of New Dehli’s burgeoning military power and pressured by Washington’s growing alarm over the deteriorating situation in Kabul.

When the Indian government accused Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) of being behind the recent bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, it revealed what journalist J. Sri Raman calls a “secret war” between the two nations’ intelligence agencies. The Indians charge the ISI with being behind a string of bombings in Mumbai, Ahmedabad, and Jaipur, while the Pakistanis accuse India’s intelligence agency, the Research and Intelligence Wing (RAW), of encouraging a separatist movement in Baluchistan and undermining Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan.

The two countries have fought three wars since the 1947 partition, and came perilously close to going nuclear during the Kargil incident in 1999. In the latter flare-up, separatist guerrillas backed by the Pakistani Army attacked Indian troops in Kashmir, leading to a bitter 11-week war.

Elements in both countries have long considered “the unthinkable” — nuclear war — quite thinkable. When Pakistan-sponsored Kashmiri separatists attacked the Indian parliament in December 2001, it set off a round of Armageddon saber-rattling.

Pakistan’s General Mirza Aslam Beg, former Pakistani army chief, said that Pakistan “can make a first strike, and a second strike, or even a third.”

The talk on the Indian side was no less hair-raising. George Fernandes, India’s defense minister at the time, said that “India can survive a nuclear attack, but Pakistan cannot.”
A U.S. intelligence analysis of a war between India and Pakistan found it would kill up to 12 million people immediately and injure seven million more.

Deal, No Deal

The Bush administration has ratcheted up the tension with its proposed nuclear deal with India. Under the so-called 1-2-3 Agreement, the United States would supply India with nuclear fuel for its civilian program, although India refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The deal would allow India to divert its own meager domestic uranium supplies to its nuclear weapons industry. Although civilian factories in this industry will be open to inspections, the ones that India deems “military” would remain off-limits.

In a July letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency and the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group, Pakistan warned that the 1-2-3 Agreement “threatens to increase the chances of a nuclear arms race in the subcontinent.” It would also likely unravel the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

India has a “no first-use” policy. But Pakistan refuses to sign such a pledge, in large part due to the superiority of the Indian military, a superiority that grows day by day. India will import over $30 billion in arms over the next five years, including modern fighter planes, helicopters, tanks, and warships. The Indian air force is currently the world’s fourth largest.

Pakistan simply can’t match those figures. Its economy is smaller, and it has been hard hit by rising fuel and food prices.

Afghan Challenge

Pakistan’s newly elected and deeply divided government is also confronting intense U.S. pressure to halt the cross-border movement of Taliban fighters into Afghanistan.

“The situation on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border presents a clear and present danger to Afghanistan, Pakistan, the West in general, and the United States in particular,” U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael Hayden told Congress in March.

But Islamabad has been increasingly unwilling to play spear-carrier for the Bush administration’s “war on terror.” Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif told the Guardian that it is “unacceptable that while giving peace to the world we make our own country into a killing field.”

The United States has sent dozens of armed robots across the Pakistan border to attack Taliban leaders, many times killing civilians in the process. According to Pakistani officials, U.S. helicopter-borne commandos crossed the border on September 3 and killed up to 20 people.
The current Pakistani government was elected on a platform of making peace with the Taliban, and, in any case, attempts by the Pakistani army to occupy the frontier have failed disastrously. That is hardly surprising. As British General Andrew Skeen noted during the colonial period, “When planning a military expedition into Pashtun tribal areas, the first thing you must plan is your retreat.”

Even Washington’s allies recognize that the increasingly strident calls by Washington and the Afghan government to close off infiltration from Pakistan are impossible. “You cannot seal borders,” says British Defense Minister Des Browne. “We could not seal 26 miles of border between the north and south of Ireland with 40,000 troops.” The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is over 1,000 miles, much of it consisting of formidable mountains.

While the White House and NATO are pushing for a military solution in Afghanistan, a recent study by the RAND Corporation, a think tank associated with the U.S. Navy, found “There is no battlefield solution to terrorism. Military force usually has the opposite effect from what is intended.”

Some in Pakistan’s current government seem to have reached the same conclusion. “We have to talk to the Taliban,” says Asif Ahmed, a member of parliament from the secular Pakistan People’s Party, the largest vote getter in the last election. “There is no peace in Pakistan or Afghanistan without it.”

Many Pakistanis worry that war in the tribal areas could ignite a movement among Pashtuns on both sides of the border for an independent “Pashtunistan.” Pashtuns make up 15%-20% of Pakistan’s 165 million people.

Islamabad also worries about increasing Indian influence among Afghanistan’s non-Pashtun groups, and the possibility that Pakistan could lose its “strategic depth” in the region, a place to fall back to if they are overwhelmed by an Indian conventional attack.

Kashmir Flashpoint

The United States has long tried to rope India into its efforts to offset growing Chinese power in Asia. Washington has stepped up arms sales to New Delhi, increased joint military training, and is willing to help India increase its stockpile of nuclear weapons. But an India powerful enough to help offset China looks very threatening from Islamabad’s point of view.

The most immediate flashpoint is Kashmir, where Indian troops have killed more than two dozen people and injured hundreds. A miscalculation by either side could be disastrous. The flight time for nuclear-armed missiles between the two countries is from three to five minutes.

Every few years the U.S. military conducts “war games” that play out a war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. Every game ends the same: nuclear war. “It is a scary scenario,” Col. Mike Pasquarett, who runs the games at the U.S. War College, told the Wall Street Journal.

Rather than escalating another war, arming India, and pressuring Pakistan, the United States should be pushing for the de-nuclearization of South Asia, peace talks with the Taliban, and a stand-down in Afghanistan.

Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist.

Anatomy of the Kashmir crisis

September 8, 2008

Interview: Sanjay Kak

A humanitarian crisis is unfolding in Kashmir as Indian security forces impose a round-the-clock curfew across the valley.

More than 30 unarmed Kashmiri protesters have been killed by Indian forces in the last few weeks in an effort to stamp out mass demonstrations that have shaken the disputed region, which is partitioned by India and Pakistan, and where India has maintained a military occupation in the section it controls.

The demonstrations were sparked by the announcement of the transfer of 100 acres of public land to the Amarnath Shrine Board, but have since snowballed into a province-wide revolt. Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children have taken to the streets demanding “azadi” (freedom) and their right to self-determination. In response, Indian military and paramilitary forces imposed a curfew and media blackout, and have fired on large, unarmed rallies, killing dozens and injuring hundreds.

Sanjay Kak is a filmmaker whose recently completed documentary, Jashn-e-Azadi (How We Celebrate Freedom) was made over a period of several years in Kashmir. On August 16, days after the mass protests erupted, he spoke with Nagesh Rao.

Protesters demanding "azadi" confront riot police on the streets of Jammu in KashmirProtesters demanding “azadi” confront riot police on the streets of Jammu in Kashmir

WHAT IS the significance of the Kashmiri uprising?

I THINK part of the problem is that in India, our attention always comes in at the tail end of the story. Here it comes in when there is an explosion of resentment against the granting of lands to the Amarnath Shrine Board, and then we all act mystified: “How can there be so much resentment against something so small?”

That’s because no one paid attention to what’s been happening in the year prior, or the five years prior or, indeed, 18 years prior to this event. So there’s a kind of structured amnesia about what events bring us to this place.

And this is not an accident. Particularly when it comes to Kashmir, in India, it is a structured amnesia.

You’ve got more than 500,000 Indian soldiers in Kashmir. They are sitting in literally every street and village and by-lane and crossing and water-point, and then you begin thinking that peace has returned to Kashmir. But it hasn’t. You’re just sitting on top of people.

Then the media dutifully starts wheeling out the spin, and you’re told, “Oh, tourists are returning to Kashmir, all is well, the militancy is gone.” And everybody begins to believe it.

I once had a conversation with an army officer, and he said, “Things are very peaceful here now. As a Kashmiri, you should come and visit, as often as you like.” “Peaceful” is not a word I would use to describe what was around us, even where were sitting, in the officers’ mess, with a breathtaking view of the grand Wular Lake.

“But colonel, there’s a soldier with an AK-47 every 30 feet,” I said.

“No, no,” he said, “we’ve got the situation under control.”

“So when will you leave?” I said, “You know, troop reductions–cut by, say, 20 percent?”

“No, no, that’s out of the question,” he replied. “Everybody would be out on the streets, there would be an uprising.”

On the ground, that colonel commanding a military unit in Kashmir knows the score. The Indian security apparatus has taken 18 years to build a stranglehold on Kashmir, to control every aspect of daily life over there. That is the kind of “peace” that they hammered onto Kashmir.

In the wake of the armed uprising of the 1990s, which was represented as “terrorism” and an “Islamic jihad,” they managed to do what they had to do, because Indians–and the rest of the world–were a little confused about what was happening. But what are they going to do now, when there are no weapons in this uprising? There are just hundreds of thousands of people out on the streets. What are they going to do? Are they going to just start firing? And how many will they kill?

This is the real significance of what we are seeing. Until now, even ostensibly sympathetic Indians would throw the question at the Kashmiris: “Why did you take to the gun? You took to the gun, and you alienated the Indian people.”

This time around, they haven’t brought the gun out. They are coming out in vast numbers and demonstrating for what they believe in. They are coming out in the ways that Indian democracy ought to believe in. Only this time, the same liberal intelligentsia who wanted them to give up the gun are now calling these vast assemblies “violent mobs” of “extremists”!

In a sense, the Indian state is hoisted on its own petard, flummoxed. [Indian rulers] do not know how to react to this situation.

Continued . . .

PROTESTS, SIT-IN ON FRIDAY IN KASHMIR: COORDINATION COMMITTEE

September 4, 2008
Listen Listen Font Size a+ a-


‘Lal Chowk Chalo stands’

Srinagar, Sep 3: The Coordination Committee – an amalgam of various pro-freedom parties, traders, lawyers and members of the civil society – on Wednesday called for peaceful protests on Friday after the Zuhr prayers and complete shutdown on Saturday.
After more than three hour marathon meeting at Mirwaiz Manzil, Fazl Haq Qureshi, who presided over the meeting, told media persons that the Committee appealed to the people all over the Valley to hold peaceful sit-in protests outside mosques after the prayers. “The protests would remain peaceful. People have been asked to raise slogans seeking freedom and right to self determination during the protests,” Qureshi said.
For rest of the day, Qureshi said, life would continue to be normal, as per the earlier  announcements of the Co-ordination Committee. “Business establishments, education institutions and offices would remain open and transport would ply normallys`,” he said.
The meeting, Qureshi said, decided that complete shutdown would be observed in the Valley on Saturday. “But it decided against the shutdown on Sunday. All the shops and offices would remain open on Sunday and transport would ply normally till 4 p.m. as per the program given by the Committee during last meeting,” he said.
Talking to Greater Kashmir, Qureshi said the “Lal Chowk Chalo” program remained unchanged. However, the Committee would decide on its new date later, he said.
The chairman of Hurriyat Conference (M), Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, and the chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, Muhammad Yasin Malik, could not attend the meeting because both were under house arrest. The chairman of Hurriyat Conference (G), Syed Ali Shah Geelani, too could not attend due to ill health.
Among others present were: Dr Ghulam Muhammad Hubbi, (Hurriyat-M), Showkat Ahmad Bakshi, Bashir Ahmad Bhat (JKLF), Ghulam Muhammad Bhat (AAC), Khursheed Alam (EJAC), Nahida Akhtar (Dukhtaran-e-Millat), Jan Muhammad Koul (KTMF), Lateef Ahmad (HCBA), Dr Mubeen Shah (KCCI), Shakeel Qalander (FCIK), Ghulam Muhammad Bhat (KMDA), Muhammad Shafi Khan (CCIK), Muhammad Azim Tuman (HBOA), Bashir Ahmad (Fruit Growers Association) and a representative of EJAC (Q).
However no one from the Geelani faction of the Hurriyat Conference participated in the meeting. Asked about their absence, Qureshi said the Committee had earlier decided the venue for the meeting. After the meeting, however, a delegation of the Committee led by Dr Hubi, went to Geelani’s residence and informed him about the decisions taken.
Earlier, the Mirwaiz faction of Hurriyat Conference convened a meeting of its party leadership at the Nigeen residence of Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who is under house arrest since his release.

MEDIA-INDIA: Columnists Support Kashmir’s Secession

September 4, 2008

Analysis by Rita Manchanda | Independent Press Service,

NEW DELHI, Sep 4  – “Anti-national” is the charge hurled in India at the usual radical suspects who argue for the right to self-determination of the Kashmiri people.

But the recent outcrop of media columnists asking Indians to, “think the unthinkable”, “let Kashmir go” and “we’d be better off”, are respected mainstream editors of leading national dailies and top columnists. They include Vir Sanghvi of the mass-circulation the Hindustan Times, Jug Suraiya of the Times of India, popular columnist Swaminathan A. Aiyar and activist-writer Arundhati Roy.

Moreover, according to a recent public opinion survey, these writers are reflecting growing popular sentiment. A Times of India survey of young professionals conducted across nine cities revealed a sizeable 30 percent polled feeling that if the economic and human costs were so high, India should not hold on to the Kashmir, though 59 percent felt they should hold on at any cost.

Some two-thirds of those polled said ‘No’ to the question whether the state of Jammu and Kashmir [or part of it] should be allowed to secede. Poll analysts explained that contradiction as indicating that, while thinking on Kashmir remains unclear, Kashmir’s possible secession has, for the first time in years, ‘’become a matter of common debate.”

What has produced this unsettling in the public perception of restored normalcy in the insurgency-wracked Himalayan valley? Kashmiris are back on streets in tumultuous numbers, defiantly chanting “We want freedom” and with equal intensity, “Long live Pakistan”.

The crisis which began two months ago over the proposed transfer of 100 acres forest land in the Muslim-dominated Kashmir valley to a Hindu religious Board based in Jammu has shattered the myth of Kashmiris being reconciled to integrating with India. A new twist is the communalisation of the intra-state Jammu- Kashmir divide posited as Hindu nationalists v/s Islamist separatists. It has buried faith in ‘Kashmiriyat’ (or Kashmiriness), the cultural syncretism of the Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists of Kashmir.

Indian administered Kashmir consists of three distinct regions: Hindu dominated Jammu, the Muslim majority Kashmir valley and Ladakh, which is largely Buddhist. Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas are administered by Pakistan.

Muslim Pakistan and largely-Hindu but constitutionally secular India have, ever since they were created by the 1947 partition of the subcontinent on religious grounds, been in dispute over the possession of Kashmir. Three wars fought over the issue have not succeeded in altering the fact that two-thirds of the territory is administered by India and one third by Pakistan.

‘Kashmir fatigue’ appears to be driving the new sentiment behind the emerging public debate. “It is not being driven by the recognition of the legitimacy of the Kashmiri people’s right to decide, but by a sense of exasperation at pampered and mollycoddled Kashmiris remaining anti-Indian,’’ says leading Kashmir human rights campaigner Tapan Bose. “Shining India does not want to have the blot of coercively holding onto resentful and alienated Kashmiris,’’ he added.

Sanghvi’s article on Aug. 16 succinctly strikes these several chords — “What does the Centre get in return for the special favours and billions of dollars spent?” ‘’Far from gratitude, there is active hatred of India. Pakistan, a small, second-rate country that has been left far behind by India, suddenly acts as though it is on par with us, lecturing India in human rights”. “We have the world to conquer, and the means to do it. Kashmir is a 20th century problem. We cannot let it drag us down and bleed us as we assume our rightful place in the world.”

Swaminathan Aiyar and Jug Suraiya have a more liberal perspective. Aiyar acknowledges that “democracy (in Kashmir) has been a farce for almost six decades”. There are uncomfortable parallels with colonial rule over British India and the quasi colonialism of India’s rule “over those who resent it” in Kashmir. Suraiya tweaks the argument of Kashmir’s secession fatally wounding the idea of India as a pluralist polity and democratic society. “India can survive without Kashmir, if it has to; it can’t survive without the idea of India, central to which is the idea of democratic dissent and the free association of people”. This is being eroded in holding Kashmiris against their will.

Arundhati Roy, writing in the ‘Guardian’ on Aug. 22, gives it a radical twist: “India needs azadi (freedom) from Kashmir as much as Kashmir needs azadi from India”. Roy asserts, that “the non-violent people’s protest is nourished by people’s memory of years of repression”. Drawing a wider frame, she warns that “Indian military occupation makes monsters of us and allows Hindu chauvinists to target and victimise Muslims in India by holding them hostage to the freedom struggle being waged in Kashmir’’.

Expressing surprise at such articles by people who (except Roy) have never campaigned for azadi, Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal, executive editor of the respected ‘Kashmir Times’ newspaper said: “We have always campaigned for ‘azadi’. This is just the wrong time. Nobody thinks about the repercussions of the disintegration of the state on communal lines (especially, Doda, Rajouri and Poonch). Whose azadi are they talking about? The need is to douse the fires and begin dialogue at different levels.”

Among the flurry of reactive articles, representative of the national security line is strategic analyst K. Subrahmanyam writing in the Times of India on Aug. 22 is adamant against any redrawing of borders. Subrahmanyam, a known nationalist, warns that if Kashmiris are allowed to secede, ‘’there would be consequences that have to be anticipated’’.

‘’During the partition of the subcontinent in 1947-48, such consequences were not foreseen and the result was a bloodbath resulting the death of a million people and ethnic cleansing involving 15 million,’’ Subrahmanyam argues.

Appealing for greater responsibility and efforts to retrieve ‘Kashmiriyat’, eminent journalist Kuldip Nayar warned in the ‘Deccan Herald’ on Aug. 29 that the independence of Kashmir would mean a takeover of the territory by the Taliban or terrorists. Political editor of ‘The Hindu,’ Harish Khare, has on Aug. 28 cautioned against “over reacting to provocative slogans in Lal Chowk’’ and said there is ‘’no need to be apologetic about our democratic values and practices”. Kashmir society could still be “weaned away from violence, distrust and suspicion.”

Sultan Shaheen, editor of the website ‘New Age Islam’, has decried the ‘irresponsibility’ of public intellectuals arguing for letting Kashmir go. “What about the nationalist Muslims of Kashmir? It was the vision of secularism and pluralism that had brought them to India in the first place. Kashmir is important for common Indians because Kashmiriyat is a prototype for Hindustaniyat — a unique blend of unity in ideological diversity.”

(END/2008)

Yasin Malik, Geelani, Mirwaiz salute people of Kashmir

September 3, 2008
Listen Listen Font Size a+ a-

Srinagar, Sept 2: A day after their release, senior pro-freedom leaders, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Muhammad Yasin Malik and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, on Tuesday saluted the people of Kashmir for remaining firm on their resolve and for showing tremendous resilience.
Geelani, who was admitted in SK Institute of Medical Sciences here after his release on Monday, said, “India, by using force to crush the popular movement, has been exposed before the international community.”
He lauded the people for remaining firm on their resolve and not succumbing to pressure. “We’ve to carry forward our movement peacefully. India has lost its credibility by using excessive force to crush the movement.”
The veteran leader urged the people to follow the programs given by the Coordination Committee, an amalgam of pro-freedom groups, traders, transporters, lawyers and members of the civil society, spearheading the present movement in Kashmir. “Future course of action will be decided in the next meeting of the Coordination Committee.”
Geelani said, adding that all the aspects would be taken into consideration before finalizing the next program. “We don’t want people to suffer. Life and movement have to move on together.”
Geelani outrightly rejected the recent agreement between the government and Amarnath Yatra Sangharsh Samiti over land row. “For us 800 kanals of land is no issue, we are fighting for a bigger cause of freedom,” he said.
Urging pro-freedom leadership to unite and fight collectively for the cause, Geelani said, “Unity among the pro-freedom leadership is the need of the hour. We’ve to remain united at this crucial juncture.”
Talking to Greater Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front chairman, Muhammad Yasin Malik, said, “People of Kashmir have won. They have proved it to the world that their movement is indigenous and it’s non-violent.”
“Entire leadership salutes the brave people of Kashmir for remaining firm on their resolve and for showing tremendous resilience,” said Malik.
The JKLF chairman said that till now international community was under the impression that Kashmiris were “terrorists” but by holding peaceful demonstrations they had proved that they are not for violence. “Kashmiris have sent a clear message to the international community and they have won millions of supporters. People in India too have realized that voice of Kashmiris cannot be muzzled through force. It’s heartening to see that Indian media too is giving space to the feelings of Kashmiris,” Malik said, adding, “I’m happy that entire leadership has agreed upon carrying forward the struggle peacefully.”
Malik said that he laid the foundation of peaceful Kashmir struggle by first carrying out the signature campaign and then Safar-e-Azadi (Journey for freedom) across the Valley.
The chairman of Hurriyat (M) Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said that use of force against peaceful demonstrators and confining people within the four walls of their houses was not going to help India’s cause. “By doing so they (New Delhi) made the resolve of Kashmiris stronger. New Delhi cannot keep on resorting to violence against the non-violent people. I salute the people of Kashmir for showing tremendous resilience and courage.”
Mirwaiz reiterated that peaceful movement will continue and mission of martyrs will be taken to its logical end.
“New Delhi cannot frighten us by arresting and intimidating us. Kashmiri leadership is committed to the people of Kashmir and will never let them down,” said Mirwaiz.
He said that pro-freedom leadership will interact with cross section of the society and will take everyone into confidence before deciding the future course of action.

Where are pro-freedom Kashmiri leaders?

August 31, 2008

Listen Listen Font Size a+ a-

Geelani’s Son-In-Law Seeks ICRC’s Intervention

JAVAID MALIK | Greater Kashmir, August 31, 2008

Srinagar, Aug 30: The continuous detention of pro-freedom leaders in Kashmir has left their families and general public worried as they want to know their fate.

Even their families have been denied access to meet them.

At least 100 pro-freedom leaders including chairmen of both the Hurriyat factions, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front Muhammad Yasin Malik, senior Hurriyat leader Shabir Ahmed Shah, chairperson of Dukhtarn-e-Millat, Asiya Andrabi and others have been arrested since Sunday, a day before scheduled Lal Chowk chalo march.
Altaf Ahmed Shah, son in law of ailing Hurriyat (G) chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani told Greater Kashmir, “We’ve not been allowed to meet him since the day he was arrested. There were rumors about Geelani sahib not feeling well and he being admitted in SKIMS. There were even rumors about he was shifted to New Delhi for treatment.”

Shah said that after these rumors they approached the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Budgam and asked him to provide the whereabouts of the ailing leader. “He avoided us and refused to divulge the details,” he said.

Shah said that Syed Ali Geelani 78, is suffering from more than one serious ailments including cardiac problem, have only three fourth of kidney function and is asthmatic. He needs thorough medical check up on daily basis. “The criminal silence maintained by the authorities about his whereabouts and health has caused lots of worries to the family members and his party rank and file,” Shah said.
He said that he has filed a petition with head of the delegation of International Community of the Red Cross (ICRC) and has sought his intervention.

The secretary to Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Shahid-ul-Islam said that since Mirwaiz’s arrest authorities have not provided his whereabouts. “We’ve been running from pillar to post for knowing where he has been lodged but till now officials have not responded,” he said.

Islam said that authorities’ remaining tightlipped on Mirwaiz’s whereabouts is making party cadres and family members apprehensive about his safety. “All of us including people want to know where is Mirwaiz and how is he fearing,” Islam said.

Residents of Rajouri Kadal and other areas of Shehar-e-Khaas too seemed worried about the fate of Mirwaiz. “ What have they done to him?” asked Farooq Ahmed of Rajouri Kadal. “ If whereabouts of Mirwiaz, Geelani sahib and other leaders are not provided we will defy the curfew and take to the roads.”

Sister of the JKLF chairman Muhammad Yasin Malik said that after Malik was arrested policemen from Maisuma Police Station approached them and asked for his medicines.  “We asked them where has he been lodged, but they didn’t divulge any details.” “He is very much safe and sound. Don’t worry about him,” Malik’s sister quoted policemen as saying.

Residents of Maisuma expressed concern over authorities not providing the whereabouts of Malik and other pro-freedom leaders. “Why is Government maintaining silence?,” a  group residents asked.

Wife of senior Hurriyat leader Shabir Ahmed Shah said, “ After he was arrested cops came here and told us to hand over his clothes and medicines.”

She said that policemen told her that they cannot disclose his whereabouts. “We’ve got directions from New Delhi not to disclose where he has been lodged,” she said, adding,  “I hope he is fine. He is suffering from various ailments.”

However, daughter of Hurriyat (G) spokesman Ayaz Akbar said that they were allowed to meet him and he has been lodged in Sumbal Police Station. “We asked the policemen under which section has he been booked, but they refused to divulge the details.”