A quick look into the human rights situation in Kashmir through the eyes of a distressed observer is analytic of the degree of human suffering. In an age when world bodies such as the United Nations seek to infuse guidelines of human rights into the sphere of global politics and commemorate the advancements made since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Kashmir has endured an unswerving attrition of rights, from the autocratic rule of an occupying power to the unending cruel treatment of Kashmiri civilians.
In light of the situation in Kashmir , the international community propels itself to question if the Universal Declaration of Human Rights requires rewording.
If law and order correlated to human rights, might severe treatment of civilians still be justified? Defenders of the dogmatic rule declare force is employed to look after the innocent, in the clichéd name of sectarian politics and purported national security interests. Yet, is this the truthful image?
What laws, exactly, direct the governing measures in Kashmir ? If we venerate the ideals of Gandhi or Jefferson, it is an appalling spectacle that in Kashmir the fundamental right to life is an uncertainty upon every person’s existence. Clearly there exists a disjuncture amid assumption and application of international law.
Evidently these laws may have the sophistication of judicial terminology and legislative conjecture, but they have minute relevance to the day-to-day happenings in the boulevards of Kashmir . These days in Kashmir, those who decide to be a part of the political order are punished, those who challenge the political order are punished, those who value human rights are punished, and those who are candid onlookers also get punished either in crossfire or in scheme. That of course does not explain the armed participants from all sides, who die daily in great numbers and may receive a mention in the media as an article of everyday information. Has Kashmir become a human butchery and a stadium for self misery?
"All human beings, whatever their cultural or historical background, suffer when they are intimidated, imprisoned or tortured . . . We must, therefore, insist on a global consensus, not only on the need to respect human rights worldwide, but also on the definition of these rights . . . for it is the inherent nature of all human beings to yearn for freedom, equality and dignity, and they have an equal right to achieve that."
-The Dalai Lama
-The Dalai Lama
That’s a great picture, and I appreciate your quote. I also liked your comment, “Those who decide to be a part of the political order are punished, those who challenge the political order are punished, those who value human rights are punished, and those who are candid onlookers also get punished…”. I too, question why the issue of human rights was not “allowed” to remain an issue in places like East Timor, but why human rights continues to remain an issue in Kashmir. What makes Kashmir different from any other place in the world where people simply desire the freedom to live in peace and have their fundamental rights protected by their government? I am appalled by the extent of hypocrisy in the political realm; there truly needs to be more accountability on part of the global actors, like United Nations, involved in Kashmir. I hate to say it but perhaps nothing gets resolved in Kashmir by the UN because Kashmir is not seen as “critical” to Western interests (and the UN is largely funded by the West), therefore why Kashmir should deserve the attention of the UN remains in question. However, I completely disagree with this view; injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, no matter whom that injustice affects, and the UN needs to recognize this reality.
ReplyDelete