Kashmir colluded to recognise terror, glorify terrorism


JAMMU: With Kashmir terrorism entering into fourth decade, certain questions continue to remain shrouded in mystery. The answers lie with the police, the civil administration, the politicians who have been holding executive and constitutional positions and the media-both official and the independent one.
On intermittent intervals, the police and the security forces have been placing the number of terrorists between 200 and 300, quite often at staggering number of 250. Last month, the statistics were shown below 200, claiming these to be lowest for the first time since the inception of terrorism. Why doesn’t the number show decline with almost two to three terrorists getting eliminated on daily or alternate basis. Most of those neutralised are officially categorized as ‘top’, ‘district’ and ‘divisional commanders’. Obviously, with their departure to so-called ‘Jannat of 72 Hoors with tons of liquor (which is otherwise prohibited on earth)’, how are these slots filled up? By direct recruitment or by way of promotion! Promotions in the civil departments from Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant, Under Secretary to Deputy Secretary and so on or in the police organization from Constable to Head Constable, SI to Inspector or Dy SP to SP are earned on the basis performance and experience but in the case of terrorists, it appears that the rank promotion is based on number of innocents killed or attacks committed on security forces. This is a million dollar question for the police, who attribute titles (ranks) to ultras. And how is it that the police get intimated about the ‘rank’ of the eliminated terrorist? In its press release on December 19 last year, Zonal Police Headquarter has headlined its story ‘Pakistani Terrorist Saifulla @Abu Khalid of LeT killed in Srinagar’ in which it refers the neutralised ultra as Group Commander, Srinagar. Doesn’t this amount recognition and respectability to the terrorist?
In the first phase of Kashmir terrorism in nineties, terrorists were fancied to decorate themselves with highest military ranks and the supportive media, thriving on the Government advertisements, used to glorify them as ‘Air Marshal Noor Khan’ , ‘General Moosa’. Now the common ranks being affixed to Pak sponsored terrorists are ‘Top Commander’, ‘District Commander’ and ‘Divisional Commander’. The media attention for terrorists too has been selective. The Kashmir media including some premier national news agencies would never describe ultras as terrorists; they call them militants. Similarly, they will never write terrorism, instead they will use the term militancy. They will mention ‘subversive act’ and not ‘terror act’. This is being done deliberately, not out of fear but for love of the cause, the inhuman and barbaric terrorists pursue at the behest of rogue nation of Pakistan.
Most of the newspapers, magazines, and other information sources in the Valley deem militant a neutral term, whereas terrorist conventionally indicates disapproval of the behavior of the individual or organization so labeled, regardless of the motivations for such behavior. Obviously, they would go for a milder term.
At the administrative level too, there is tendency to dilute terrorism by mild versions, as is evident by the scheme launched by Jammu and Kashmir Government as State Rehabilitation Council for Militancy Victims and not ‘Terror Victims’. Such a mindset, in fact, has been guiding force in devising policies and programmes in Jammu and Kashmir, which is why during the so-called popular governments or the Kashmir centric political dispensations, amnesty to stone pelters received official patronage. Then the arch rivals and now the allies-National Conference and the Peoples’ Democratic Party-remained in fierce competition in announcing amnesties to the stone pelters-soft version of terrorists, who pursued their ‘Mission Stone Throwing’ as an inspiration drawn from Intifaada. Instead of tackling them with iron fists, surprisingly rules and guidelines were framed to have them in the government service as part of their rehabilitation under the guise of mainstreaming the ‘misguided youth’. Ironically, the misguided youth of the so-called Kashmir mainstream got best of both the worlds in terms of withdrawal of cases against them, amnesty, rehabilitation and even jobs? The successive governments went out of way to placate them by compromising the national interest and sentiment. ‘Raise voice in revolt and get concessions’, had become a norm in the Valley. There were whole lot of packages for ‘misguided’ youth, who never felt remorse for burning and trampling the national flag under their feet, during Ragdo Ragdo agitations, or raising pro-Pakistan slogans, or burning schools and government property, or attacking security forces with stones, or create obstacles during encounters against terrorists, or glamourising terror, or indulging in sedition, or looting ATMs, or mocking at the symbols and signs of India, or hounding out peaceful citizens from their homes and hearths, or indulging in selective killings, or desecrating places of worship, or encroach upon state lands etc. How could the patronage givers, therefore, be expected to call spade a spade?