The Relationship between Hinduism and Islam over India’s Position on the Kashmir Region
Bakshi (2013) highlights that Kashmir is a location in the Himalayas, which borders Pakistan, India, and China and has a marvelous and magnificent landscape. Some would describe the region as “earth’s paradise.” The place has always featured in the history books of India and largely, the world even. Before the Kashmir revolt, people from all walks of life flocked in for vacations (Bakshi, 2013). Besides, the filming of the Bollywood movies took place in Kashmir, speaking volumes of the majesty of the region. On the side of Pakistan, Kashmir is formed by the parts- Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir. Even so, the part under unceasing conflict lies in the area of Kashmir valley- India. The Line of Control divides this region from Pakistan. Besides, Kashmir is a place where the northern Indian states of Kashmir and Jammu lie. To this effect, the Indian Kashmir is predominantly Muslim while Jammu is mostly Hindu (Fayaz, 2016). Therefore, this paper examines the relationship between Hinduism and Islam in the conflict over India’s position over the Kashmir region.
According to Bakshi (2013), the conflict in Kashmir is deeply rooted in the abominable nascence of India and Pakistan (South Asian nations). Relevantly, Bhat (2013) notes that in 1947, as an anchorage to independence, a Muslim Homeland was requested by the then Muslim leader of India. The British gave up their hold on India, welcoming a mainly Muslim Pakistan and a predominantly Hindu India. Consequently, this territory was free to buckle under either of the countries. Initially, the then ruler of the kingdom- Maharaja Hari Singh chose independence over acceding (Bakshi, 2013). Later on, he decided to subscribe to India. Relevantly, he handed over his key powers to the central government of India. As an exchange, the central government affirmed Maharaja of protection. On the matter, it also promised to hold a popular vote; however, this region has been a bitter disagreement between India and Pakistan (de Jong et al., 2008).
Muslim’s Take on India’s Position in the Kashmir Region
Scholars from the Islam Society have suggested that the solution to the complex and confusing interpersonal and political situation in Kashmir is autonomy (Pramanik & Roy, 2014). Recent killings in the region by military forces have sparked turmoil, resulting in mass public demonstrations. The central government of India ordered a vicious crackdown that has since left people dead and more injured. Pakistan condemned the actions by the government of India. On the other hand, India accuses Islamabad of fuelling protestation in the Indian-controlled region of Kashmir (Pramanik & Roy, 2014). High tension has been running between India and Pakistan especially after recent announcements by the government of India, which the Pakistani government carried out surgical strikes on the militant camps in the sectional area bordering its side. A military attack on the camps left many Indian soldiers dead. Pakistan disowned the claims reiterating its commitment to fight for freedom in the region continually. As of 2013, there was a regular exchange of fire across the Line of Control, a violation of the 2003 ceasefire (Bouzas, 2017).
Jauhari (2012) posits that the Muslims hold the thought that autonomy is the best solution to this effect. Both India and Pakistan are shooting irritable rhetoric. Still, amid these emanations, Muslims insist that withdrawal of Kashmir from India is not a good enough solution. According to the Islam group, autonomy is the answer. Another solution that they suggest is softer borders for the Kashmiris (Jauhari, 2012). To this regard, the central government of India ought to demonstrate high statesmanship. Chowdhary (2009) believes that a solution that is politically viable need be sought.
Even Hill and Mowani (2017) also hold the thought that intellectuals from the Islam group think that merging of Pakistan with Kashmir is not a lasting solution out of the stale. Neither the hold-down by the Indian forces too. For too long, the Kashmiris have lived under the shadow of nothing but the gun. They have seen more destruction and death in a period of more than 25 years. The Islam community thinks; it is time that the government found viable solutions. Relevantly, autonomy. Earlier on, in the year 2007, a settlement of the conflict was somewhat found (Dwivedi, 2008; but, the answer appeared to be in the reach of both nations; Pakistan and India. However, in the end, this solution fell out fell through. At the time, Pervez Musharraf- the then President, suggested that if India came to an agreement of a self-government approach, the Islamabad was willingly dropping its claim of the conflicted Himalayan area (Dwivedi, 2008). On both sides of the Line of control, the president recommended open borders while to Kashmir and Jammu; he posited an independent position. Again, he put forward a phased withdrawal of troops from the two nations from the conflicted region.
For many years, the people of Kashmir have borne the brunt of incessant violence. As an important element of India, the Kashmiris merit autonomy. These individuals can hitherto no longer be subjects of the military force of the central government of India. The Islam community presupposes that it is time the territorial compaction came to an end. The Kashmiris should no longer be at odds with the government of India. So far, the Indian crackdown and the subsequent military uprising have claimed more than 68,000 lives (Jauhari, 2012). Over the last 69 or so years, both nations have failed to come up with an operable solution to the disagreement in Kashmir (Jauhari, 2012). Looming large and full is a growing dark suspicion and top-notch mutual mistrust regarding the relationship between India and Pakistan. Since independence, these states have fought over the Kashmir, and while most people in the region favor independence or a merger with Pakistan, the Islam society feels that the answer to this is autonomy (Jauhari, 2012).
Hindu’s Take on India’s Position over the Kashmir Region
In 2015, the Indian government announced plans to assist many Kashmiri Hindus to return home (valley of Kashmir); the home from which they had fled close to 25 years ago (Hill & Motwani, 2017). These plans come after a break of an armed refusal to accept the convention against the rule by New Delhi. However, pro-independent persons expressed opposition to the plans outlined by the Indian government to help the individuals who had fled home return (Hill & Motwani, 2017). Additionally, some Kashmiri Hindus, particularly those in the region of the Muslim majority saw the plans as a repeat of what happened during the settlement of the Jewish inhabitants of Israel. The move by the government stimulated objection in the streets of Kashmir. It was not clear that these plans by the government only benefitted the pandits or if they included members of all religions (Fayaz, 2016).
For centuries, Kashmiri Pandits (the upper castle Hindus) lived together with the Islam Society, the region’s majority members. According to Dwivedi (2008), the two groups shared traditions such as food and poetry. They lived in harmony, visiting each other’s domiciles and celebrating marriages together. In 1989, Islam militants started an insurgency against the government of India (Bakshi, 2013). The Kashmiri Pandits became their easy targets. During the weekly prayers of the Islam militants, anti-Hindu magniloquence was promulgated. They murdered many, resulting in most of the pandits fleeing away to Jammu- a town dominated by the Hindu. While they fled, they only locked their houses hoping against hope that they would return soon. However, years passed, and the violence continued. Initially, the government put effort to return the Pandits but often, these efforts were met with violent resistance. Still, the Indian government is again trying to return them. By the year 2013, Kashmir attacks became infrequent, and tourism started booming. According to Bhat (2013), this was a right period for things to be put right, especially for the Pandits.
In 2008, Manmohan Singh- the then prime minister of India, together with the administration of Kashmiri made an announcement that in the valley, approximately 6,000 jobs were available for the Pandit migrants particularly (Jauhari, 2012). However, by 2010, only around 1500 posts had been filled by the people of the valley. For years, the Kashmiri pandits missed their homelands, have mixed feelings on whether to return home or not. Nonetheless, despite fear of a renewed brutality, undeterred by painful memories, the Kashmiri Hindus were much eager to take advantage of the package offered to them by the then Indian prime minister. All the same, before returning home (to the valley), some of them held positions in the private sector. To them, their eagerness to returning was based on the fact that in the Indian-administered Kashmir, the work offered by the government brought about unheard of stability, including free holidays, fixed hours, job security, and retirement benefits. All these advantages are especially worthwhile to Kashmiri pandits who lost almost everything. Nevertheless, returning home was not easy (Bhat, 2013).
Conclusion
In summary, both India and Pakistan have perennially fought over the territorial matter. The third conflict broke out in 1999 when forces backed by Pakistani infiltrated the Indian-administered part of Kashmir, particularly in Kargil. Severally, the two countries have taken part in fierce crossfire in the Line of Control. Moreover, in 1998, there was successful testing of the nuclear weapons by the two nations. The stakes rose concerning the Kashmir dispute shaking the security of the region and that of the world. However, India has since renounced entry into the territory of Pakistan. Therefore, there is a need for a consensus between the Hindus and Islamic sides to find a solution to this conflict and avoid its escalation to other sides.
References
Bakshi, S. (2013). A historical analysis of Kashmir issue: Genesis to present. EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies, 3(1), 177-186.
Bhat, S. (2013). Political dynamics of identity politics in Jammu and Kashmir. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(1), 64-66.
Bouzas, A. M. (2017). Ordering and the politics of belonging. St Antony’s International Review, 12(2), 114-135.
Chowdhary, R. (2009). Electoral politics in the context of separatism and political divergence: An analysis of 2009 Parliamentary elections in Jammu & Kashmir. South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, (3).
de Jong, K., Ford, N., van de Kam, S., Lokuge, K., Fromm, S., van Galen, R., … & Kleber, R. (2008). Conflict in the Indian Kashmir Valley I: Exposure to violence. Conflict and health, 2(1), 10.
Dwivedi, S. S. (2008). India as a dominant security concern to Pakistan (1947-1980). The Indian Journal of Political Science, 889-896.
Fayaz, S. (2016). Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India: The Way Out. The Dialogue, 11(1).
Hill, M., & Motwani, N. (2017). Language, identity, and (in) security in India–Pakistan relations: The case of Kashmir. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 40(1), 123-145.
Jauhari, A. (2012). India-Pakistan relations: International implications. Asian Social Science, 9(1), 42.
Pramanik, S., & Roy, T. K. (2014). Neutrosophic game theoretic approach to Indo-Pak conflict over Jammu-Kashmir. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 2, 82-101.
