https://www.indiatoday.in/india/jammu-and-kashmir/story/sout...
They just banned internet for million or so people in Kashmir.
Outright internet vban, twitter ban is nothing
They just banned internet for million or so people in Kashmir.
Outright internet vban, twitter ban is nothing
Being running a purely internet business I can completely understand the pain and frustration it would have caused. However, if I see the bigger picture, Lack of ban would have caused hundred of lives in the aftermath of change in constitutional status of the J&K. It's like lockdown that we all had to endure to save lives.
You have the right to your opinion but this is how I see it.
Take Care
0: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/kashmir-internet-4g-...
Your words sound like you support implementing laws, then clamping down on any avenues of dissent until things cool down aka people get tired and carry on all the while the motive behind laws is achieved, people be damned? that so? is that what is meant by "democracy" in 2021 ?
My impression of Kashmir is that the situation hasn’t been positive for a very long time, and all the other factors are either less true or don’t apply.
It is quite a controversial topic and when someone looking from outside can't even gauge the recent issue at hand correctly[1], you can't expect them to have the context of Kashmir issue.
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/rihanna-rallies-to-the-wrong-ca...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_guerrilla_movements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_rebel_groups
kashmir has been fighting against both india and pakistan on many fronts ever since this issue began. the state of kashmir has been essentially fighting war of independence against foreign oppressive rule for the past 500 years.
so what 30 years ago pakistan convinced and managed to turn thousands of kashmiris as pawns in a proxy war with india. that doesnt mean kashmir is with pakistan, on the contrary, people in pakistan occupied kashmir protest against their oppression daily.
why do you think just because someone picked a gun that they have muddied the waters and only way out is to surrender because you cannot do an armed struggle?
> the state of kashmir has been essentially fighting war of independence against foreign oppressive rule for the past 500 years.
But what constitutes foreign rule. If I move before 500 years, we have Mauryas or Karkotas ruling Kashmir with Srinagar being an important city to them, which are pan North Indian empires.
> why do you think just because someone picked a gun that they have muddied the waters and only way out is to surrender because you cannot do an armed struggle?
Well, I think once a struggle turns violent, the issue becomes emotive on both sides as there is blood shed. For people in Kashmir, it has been since 1947, wounds of which keep opening up again. For people in rest of India, the narrative and the blood of the people from RoI which has been spent in keeping Kashmir has been huge as well.
No one would want to back down, the armed insurgent movement is never going to succeed.
My second point was, some of the groups are motivated on religious lines and want a country based on a religion which makes it extremely hard for others to sympathise for them.
Also, you are talking about the same person who gave away land in other states, even the Himalayan ones to the community. They had very limited presence there before.
If you read the history of the religion and subcontinent, there is no reason he would even want to weaken them as well. Leaving the small separatist voices aside, the vast majority is so intermingled with the dominant religion in North India, that there is no reason to do this.
Anyway, it seems you are even less aware about this topic than most people are. I am not sure where you are getting your information from, but reading from your charged language I can only ask you to not fall for hyperbole and look at things pragmatically.
>Punjab and Haryana have different dominant languages
A lot of Punjabi-speaking Hindus "chose" Hindi for that to be true IIRC.
It is not like any land exchange happened. Sure, some resources got divided but I wouldn't see it as settling. If you read analysis about management of big states, even now a lot of analysts believe some of the other big states should be split up.
> What I will say is that Sikhs I met in USA were not happy with say splitting Chandigarh.
Well, that's not representative of them, no? I have also met people who are not happy with that decision and also people who are indifferent to it.
> A lot of Punjabi-speaking Hindus "chose" Hindi for that to be true IIRC.
Not really, look at any language census from before as well in the districts that became the new state.
But the linguistic issue is not just limited to that state. Look at the northern Himalayan states and look at what has happened to their languages. Hindi has just subsumed their languages with its words and now most people speak Hindi only. This situation is made worse because of the necessity of English as a language, their own mother tongue kind of becomes third in the priority list.
>an estimated 20,000–100,000 Muslims were massacred.
yes. you are right. i do remember displacement but it does not hold a candle to 1947 jammu massacres. what do you think? who are more important? 100k deaths or 219?
https://www.thehindu.com/news/ldquo219-Kashmiri-Pandits-kill...
https://theprint.in/pageturner/excerpt/right-wing-exaggerate...
this article in the print literally says the figures are exaggerated
> the Jammu province which was contiguous to Punjab, experienced mass migration that led to violent inter-religious activity. Large numbers of Hindus and Sikhs from Rawalpindi and Sialkot started arriving since March 1947, bringing "harrowing stories of Muslim atrocities in West Punjab". According to scholar Ilyas Chattha, this provoked counter-violence on Jammu Muslims, which had "many parallels with that in Sialkot". He writes, "the Kashmiri Muslims were to pay a heavy price in September–October 1947 for the earlier violence of West Punjab."
Additionally, Pandits have been on the receiving end - once a majority of the Kashmiri population about 600 years ago. Seven times at least they've been forced to exit, countless killed or forcefully converted to Islam https://www.quora.com/What-atrocities-were-committed-on-Kash... But despite all this, Pandits have never opted for taking arms in hands and become terrorist killing civilians.
You made my point.
India’s democratically elected govt has the legal right to block the internet to prevent such massacres in the future.
https://theprint.in/india/governance/4g-mobile-internet-serv...