A NYT report on the recent murders of 35 Hindus in Kashmir draws parallels to an infamous massacre of Sikh men six years ago:
Thirty five Hindus were killed in recent days in two separate incidents in the Indian-administered portion of the disputed Kashmir province… They are particularly worrisome because they are so plainly designed to fuel Hindu-Muslim tensions…Killings targeting Hindu and Sikh villagers had become a routine form of terror some years ago when relations between India and Pakistan were at their worst. The most infamous of these massacres came in March 2000, on the eve of President Bill Clinton’s state visit to India, when 37 Sikhs were murdered in Chattisinghpora village… killings, blamed on both security forces and militants, have hardly vanished. [Link]
But it doesn’t get into the horrific fact that the perps are sometimes from the Indian army. An Indian government report issued last week says that after the Chattisinghpora massacre, Indian army personnel allegedly killed five innocent people in a fake encounter because they were trying to meet a quota for dead militants:
After three years of probe into the killing of innocent civilians on suspicion of being involved in Chattisinghpora massacre of 36 Sikhs in Jammu and Kashmir, the CBI indicted five army personnel for staging a fake encounter to kill the civilians…The 18-page CBI chargesheet said that after the gunning down of Sikh community members, the army unit operating in the area was under “tremendous [psychological] pressure” to show results because there was allegation of inefficiency and ineffectiveness on their part.
The CBI alleged the army personnel entered into a criminal conspiracy to pick up the some innocent persons and stage-manage an encounter to create the impression that the militants responsible for the Chittisinghpora killings had been neutralised. The accused army men also showed fake recovery of arms and ammunition from the five deceased after obtaining signatures of two witnesses on blank papers. [Link]
And in a protest after these staged killings, nine more civilians were killed by live fire. There’s an old saying in business: be careful in choosing what to measure. In the former USSR, numerical quotas alone led to shoddy quality. In this case, a poorly-thought-out work quota, combined with other, more significant factors, may have contributed to egregious civilian murders by the state.
Can you quantify ‘often’? You’re specifically referring to the killing of Sikhs and Hindus, so I’d genuinely like to know what proportion of the killing of Hindus and Sikhs you think is due to the Indian army.
I had already changed it to ‘sometimes,’ and no, I can’t quantify. But to me anything above zero is morally reprehensible — the state should not be executing innocents, and that too without trial.
Manish…you are one of those “LEFT” leaning psuedo-intellectual a***hole.
i thought this was a ‘conservative’ weblog??? 🙂
and yes manish, you are WRONG! brown-does-not-kill-brown! (unless it is mohametons vs. idolaters)
So your response to the news of the slaughter of 35 Hindus is to point to a six year old fake encounter ? Never mind the fact that the fake encounter itself was in response to another massacre of 36 Sikhs ? Why on earth should the NYT mention the Chhatisinghpora fake encounter in this case ? This is a news report not a thesis on the Kashmir militancy. I’m so disappointed that you don’t have the balls to condemn the killing without scrambling for some moral equivalence.
Manish, Thanks for implying that Indian Army and the Pakistani Supported Terrorist ( or should I say suspected terrorist or Indian Army personel deployed by L K Advani to spring Hindu Muslim Riots) are equal.
On 2nd thought, I don’t know where to even began further criticizing this post … this post is just wrong on so many levels. I am just trying to think as what would prompt a person like you to equate thousands of senseless killing by terrorist to few person killed by Indian army. I am afraid now you are going to close this comments on this post very soon and people won’t really have chance to correct the “ultra-left” brainwashed ideology bredding in ABCDs.
Wait, I don’t see what’s wrong with this post.
The stuff about the army quotas for dead militants is real, and it is extremely troubling. We don’t need to get into “equivalences,” and I don’t think Manish has done that. We just need to recognize that the army has a bad strategy, one that is both ineffective and morally unsound.
The focus should be on getting them to change their policies (I think they can), not on name-calling.
“but it doesnÂ’t mention the horrific fact that the perps are sometimes from the Indian army.
isn’t that what the NYT is implying in this sentence: “killings, blamed on both security forces and militants, have hardly vanished?”
also, the location of your ellipses kind of distorts the NYT piece. They weren’t linking the Sikh killings specifically to the phrase “killings, blamed on both security forces and militants.” although, in the aftermath of the Sikh massacre, there were those who rushed to blame the massacre on RAW and Indian security forces.
there’s no doubt that it’s a vicious circle in Kashmir and Indian security forces have committed abuses. what’s good is that these are being dealt with by the law. it would also help if the vocal anti-security forces people like Roy, who call for their withdrawal from Kashmir (but then during the earthquake aftermath the same people scream that the Indian security forces are not doing enough in Kashmir) would also at least come across as somewhat sympathetic and one-hundredth as vocal about the people who are murdered by terrorists/militants and who have been condemned to living their lives in refugee camps inside and outside of their home Kashmir. Some Pandits have even been forced to sell their young daughters or hire them out as laborers.
i see where you guys are coming from…but i didn’t see the moral equivalence because knowing manish (since he has a long track record posting stuff) i simply assumed that there is a background assumption that of course the scale of islamic militant terrorism is horrible and worst than what the indian gov. does on absolute grounds. but, the key is that criminals, gangsters and terrorists do what they do and though we are appalled, it is unfortunately the way of the world. on the other hand, when we find out that the “good guys” engage in this sort of behavior i think it does often merit particular attention because civilized people are held to different standards. in other words, here in the USA a rash of killings perpetrated by police officers warrants greater notice than greater numbers perpetrated by gangsters, and no one is making a moral equivalence, only that when those who should protect turn into the devil than we really have issues….
Manish Sir, By the virtue of you being a partner on this blog, you are able to write such nonsense that people feel compelled to respond. You know you went over the line. Might as well close this to comments unless your aim was to enflame. Indian Army may sometimes be on the other side of human rights lakshman rekha but this is a wrong event for this point to be made.
Razib: I do agree with you 100%. If those that are there to ‘protect’ you acfttually turn ‘against’ you then it is a point of note. BUT…
The point is that an Army is there to do a job and the jawans and troops are generally young. All armies are like this. They do crazy things. They are also taught to kill.
I’m not suggesting the Indian Army are angles but they are protecting 1.2 billion people from possible attack, invasion and terrorism on a daily basis. They have done this under very tough conditions – made worse by political agendas and corruption.
In short, the Indian army protects our freedom to express our dissent against it.
manish, your comparison is mistaken.
Razib – man you have to bend over backwards to rationalize Manish’s response and even then your defense doesn’t make sense. Sure the custodians of law are to be held to a higher standard but can you explain why we are talking about that now ? Where is the fake encounter/human rights violation in this case ? This looks like a clear attempt to hijack the discussion from a condemnation of heinous massacre to a more general true-for-all-times platitudinous agonizing of the ‘who among us has not sinned’ kind.
Kyon re Manish, abhi do phahar mein bhi peene laga 🙂
It seems to have escaped some commenters that this post is about the CBI report about the killings allegedly conducted by the Indian army. Indian voters have far more control over the actions of its government than the actions of terrorists.
Demanding that any post about one party’s wrongdoings also include the disclaimer that ‘terrorists are evil’ is both banal and creates a false moral equivalence– I hold elected governments to higher standards than murderous criminals.