People in Kashmir and journalist fraternity world-wide have been shocked at the assassination of Shujaat Bukhari, a veteran journalist and the editor of Rising Kashmir, the Kashmir based newspaper. He was killed by ‘unknown gunmen’ on June 14 evening as he was coming out of his office in Press Enclave, at the heart of Srinagar in Jammu and Kashmir. Two of his security guards were also killed in the same incident.

So far no militant organisation has claimed responsibility for his death.

He was killed merely hours after the UN’s human rights office announced the findings of a first ever human rights reports on the state of Jammu and Kashmir, in which the UN called for an independent inquiry into human rights violations in both parts of Kashmir, administered respectively by India and Pakistan. Analysts, including Shujaat Bukhari believed and expressed on various platforms that the report had significant implications for human rights conditions in the valley as it was for the first time an international body had recognised the deep distress within the valley and recommended the independent investigation.

A journalist of the people

As the news of his death was confirmed last evening, personal narratives of friends and well-wishers haven’t stopped flowing. The Indian Express, in its piece said “Shujaat Bukhari, perhaps embarrassed about his tall and distinct demeanour, hunched just a wee bit to make his friends comfortable. His two children, before they were five, would walk with their head distinctly bent to the right, as that was a good imitation of Abba, always on the cellphone, trying to be hands-free”

Intimate anecdotes flowed on Facebook as some recalled him for his quick response to new writers, while some regretted not having met him just a few hours ago. Another person recollected that he recently sent a message to Farooq Abdullah congratulating him on wearing jeans.

The shock and grief expressed across platforms and in Kashmir are truly indicative of one fact.

Shujaat Bukhari was not merely a name. He was the embodiment of a voice of sanity, reason and human rights in the turbulent Kashmir valley, marked by too frequent episodes of violence, impunity and unaccountability.
 
A sketch of Shujaat Bukhari

Bukhari himself belonged to an illustrious family with the father as a journalist and elder brother Basharat Bukhari, a PDP leader and an MLA from the Sangrama constituency in North Kashmir.
However, Bukhari didn’t merely rest on the laurels of his family, but used the power of his pen to bring to light the most inconvenient truth. Bukhari consistently spoke truth to power and was recognised across the world as the leading and most rational voice speaking on Kashmir
Bukhari was The Hindu bureau chief for Jammu and Kashmir from 1997 to 2012 and a contributor to Frontline magazine. He was based in Srinagar and was running Rising Kashmir for over a decade. Bukhari wrote fluently in English, Urdu and Kashmiri. He was also the president of Adbee Markaz Kamraz, the biggest and oldest cultural and literary organisation of the valley.
 
A martyr for truth

Ironically, just three months ago, Bukhari wrote in an editorial in Rising Kashmir on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of his newspaper, “Survival is the first challenge for any journalism venture in Kashmir.”

Shujaat Bukhari was the missing link between the outside world and the dark alleys of Kashmir clouded with tales of atrocities and human rights violations, reporting from where is an both an act of courage and defiance. After Burhan Wani, the Hijb Mujahiddeen commander was killed in July 2016 and curfew followed along with snapping of mobile and internet connection in the valley, he wrote for the BBC, “But when I called the office, one of our employees confirmed that our printing press had been raided, staff held and printed copies of the newspaper seized.”

Not only 2016, the Rising Kashmir newspaper faced challenges in 2008 and 2010 as well, when armed struggle in Kashmir was on a rise owing to India’s failing political interventions in the region. Shujaat Bukhaari highlighted, “Authorities had forced us to suspend publication during the protests against Indian rule in 2008 and 2010 as well.” Further, in 2013 when Afzal Guru was hanged under mysterious circumstances in India, Bukhari wrote, “When Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri separatist convicted over the 2001 Indian parliament attack was hanged in 2013, copies of newspapers were seized from the press and the stands. I remember my newspaper ceased publication for four days. During the 2010 agitation, we were forced to stop publishing for 10 days.”

A key point that Bukhaari highlighted about the state’s measure to quell protests when discontent in the valley rose to uncontrollable proportions, “Imposing an information blockade had been part of the state “strategy” in 2010 as well and the scene is rewinding this time.”

Bukhaari was a living testimony to the transition that media went through after the outbreak of armed rebellion in Kashmir in the 1990s. He said that the media had to work on a razor’s edge and that journalists typically faced “threats to life, intimidation, assault, arrest and censorship have been part of the life of a typical local journalist.”
Bukhari survived three assassination attempts on previous occasions.

The last time a journalist was killed in Kashmir was over a decade ago. Srinagar saw killings in 2003, Parvez Muhammad Sultan, a reporter for a local news agency, was shot by gunmen in his office and August 2000, when a bomb blast killed Pradeep Bhatia, a photographer

Awards and accolades

Bukhaari was the recipient of World Press Institute USA fellowship. He had earlier pursued his Masters in Journalism from Ateneo de Manila University, Manila as a fellow of Asian Centre for Journalism. He was also a fellow at east West Centre at USA’s Hawaii.

He had just returned from Lisbon where he participated as a speaker during the Global Editors Network summit.

Bukhari was part of India’s delegation for ‘informal’ peace talks on Kashmir with Pakistani representatives held in Dubai last year.

Astute political analysis and commentary on recent events

Bukhari was consistently writing, calling an end to the cross-border firing along the Line of Control (LoC). He emphasised on the need for a Standard Operating Procedure in an article on March 3, a time when it was witnessing massive cross border firing, “As things have gone from bad to worse what is missing is a Standard Operating Procedure that could be followed in a ceasefire. A mechanism is also missing and nearly no contact between the two countries is adding to the woes of the people,”

Criticising Modi government’s policies at the center, Bukhari said, “New Delhi’s Kashmir policy since the beginning had not been based on justice and fairness while the Modi government had pushed them to the wall.”

Bukhari had commented on the recent ceasefire in J&K for Ramzaan, a holy month for Muslims across the world, saying, “Despite the scepticism from various quarters and even outright rejection, the announcement came as a glimmer of hope for the common people who have been suffering due to the continuous grind of violence. Death of both the militants who have joined the ranks in past few years and the civilians who become the collateral damage has become unbearable.”

Bukhaari’s writings, apart from giving a deep insight into the “sharp degeneration of politics in the state” were an indictment that the Indian government’s policies in Kashmir had not worked. He also wrote stories highlighting why Kashmiri youth were drawn towards militancy.
 
“Psychological war” of Indian media on Kashmir

In an opinion piece titled, “Prime Time Propaganda“, published exactly an year before, Bukhari once again exposed the hyper-nationalist and jingoist Indian media which, rather than investigating the allegations of human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir believes in shrill high pitched rhetoric to further its propaganda. He said, “The comments made almost every day by hired panelists are part of a psychological war that has been unfolding to make the people submit”

In the same piece, he drew attention to the shallowness of the Indian media, here I quote him verbatim, “In recent days, two comments made by panelists on a TV channel enraged people but in one case there was much amusement and social media was full of jokes. The one comment which evoked a sharp reaction was made by one RSN Singh, a retired Colonel who was briefly with Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) official and has been engaged by a newly launched TV channel as its contributor. His disgraceful comment insinuated that Kashmiri youngsters were the ‘illegitimate offspring’ of foreign militants and that is why they were valiantly taking on government forces. When Singh was making this uncouth remark, the anchor was clearly enjoying it. This demonstrated the depths that such debate has sunk to and become the hallmark of these channels. No one intervened as the panelist abused Kashmiris and that is how the response of the government is also shaped.”
 
His staff and journalists from Rising Kashmir gave him a befitting tribute, saying, “You left all too sudden but you will always be our leading light with your professional conviction and exemplary courage. We wont be cowed down by the cowards who snatched you from us. We will uphold your principle of telling the truth howsoever unpleasant it may be”

The post Thousand Tears, not Enough appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To stop the VHP’s ‘Ayodhya March’ and ‘Sankalp Abhiyan’, the UP State Road Transport Corporation suspended its bus service and UP’s chief minister Mulayam Singh appealed to the central government to suspend trains passing through the temple town. Roadblocks were set up in many districts throughout the state and section 144 was imposed on Ayodhya and Faizabad towns. Still, over 35,000 people were arrested for defying the prohibitory orders.

Judging by these criteria, one would have to conclude that even today the VHP is a major force to control, for which the state must combine tact along with the deployment of its coercive machinery. It has a nationwide presence, enjoying the protection of the RSS and the indulgence of the BJP. This is not surprising for the BJP alone reaps the full political benefits accruing from the VHP’s activities. That is why the Prime Minister and the deputy prime minister felt the need to appeal to the UP government to trust the VHP’s assurances of peace.

Why do the PM and the DyPM have such faith in the VHP, specially considering that VHP leaders Ashok Singhal, Praveen Togadia and Giriraj Kishore keep putting them and their government constantly in the dock, criticising and condemning them much of the time? Does their faith in the VHP stem from the latter’s written assurances to the UP government in 1989 to keep their shilanyas programme peaceful and to abide by the court verdict? But do those promises have any meaning today? In 1992, the VHP promised that its proposed kar seva would only be a symbolic one.

But the entire world knows what it actually did in Ayodhya on December 6. Is it not the case that along with leaders of the VHP, even deputy prime minister LK Advani and minister for human resources development Murli Manohar Joshi are among the accused, facing trial for criminal offences?

The PM and the DyPM must also know that in swearing by Ram all the time you destroy the solemnity and seriousness of that pledge. When the BJP formed a government in UP for the first time in 1991, chief minister Kalyan Singh and his entire cabinet had visited the disputed spot in Ayodhya and pledged: “We swear by Ram, this is where we will build the temple.”

Even today, Vajpayee continues to swear that he is a swayamsevak above all else. But now, even VHP leaders accuse the man who has been in the PM’s chair for over six years of being unreliable, a breacher of faith and an opportunist who uses Ram’s name purely for political gain.

Whatever Vajpayee and Advani might say about the VHP, if popular enthusiasm for its public meetings, processions, demonstrations and other such activities are taken as the yardstick, one would be forced to conclude that the popularity of the VHP is on the decline. Arguably, the only purpose of its public shows now is to regain public confidence for its own political ends.

Let’s take a closer look at the recently concluded/aborted ‘Ayodhya March’ and the ‘Sankalp Abhiyan’. In 1992, there were far greater impediments placed in the way of kar sevaks trying to reach Ayodhya. All train and bus services to Ayodhya were suspended, all roads leading to the town were blockaded and the number of those arrested ran into lakhs. Despite all this, over 26,000 made it to Ayodhya. But this time the story was different.

When Ashok Singhal and other kar sevaks were being arrested at Karsevakpuram, not a single sadhu or sant from Ayodhya was to be seen with them, nor could one find even one of their names in the list of those detained. Could it be that the sadhus and sants of Ayodhya have become disenchanted by the VHP? If the print and the electronic media are anything to go by, even those sants and mahants whom the VHP claimed as its own are now issuing anti-VHP statements. Many even categorically asserted that they are now in no doubt about the game the VHP is playing.
This is the sole reason why, despite being present in Ayodhya, the president of the Ramjanmabhoomi Nyas stayed away from the “do or die” action of the VHP. His participation in the next day’s token protest rally was also mere tokenism, for he had already opposed the Bharat Bandh call given by the VHP and had also stated that the kar sevaks, too, were to be blamed for the police lathi-charge on them.

The VHP leadership is unable to explain why the sants who were with their movement earlier have now started deserting it. The basic reason is that people now clearly recognise that the temple movement is not a religious but a political movement. So much so that even some VHP leaders today feel the need to distance themselves from the agitation. People like Mahant Nrityagopal Das and Mahant Avaidyanath criticised the decision to stage a Sankalp Sabha at Karsevakpuram when such programmes had already been conducted in the national and state capitals.

The fact is that terms such as Ram mandir, Ayodhya, kar seva, kar sevaks, Ram bhakt and Ram sevaks have all been coined in recent years with the sole intent of generating mass appeal. The problem is that the VHP is now finding it difficult to regain mass confidence in the authenticity of its agenda. And sensing the public mood, even sants and mahants whom the VHP had relied on to gain legitimacy for its agenda are now deserting its bandwagon.

(The writer is editor of the Hindi daily, Jan Morcha, published from Faizabad).

Archived from Communalism Combat, October 2003 Year 10   No. 92, Ayodhya

The post Ram, Ram’ to VHP now? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The voice of dissent has probably never been louder. There is now significant disillusionment with the VHP’s temple construction movement among the mahants in Ayodhya. In an important meeting held on October 7 in Tulsi Chaura mandir of Ayodhya, it was decided to oppose the VHP’s programme on October 17 and ask the administration to ban it.

The meeting was chaired by Mahant Bhavnath Das, the president of the Samajwadi Sant Sabha and coordinated by Jugal Kishore Shashtri, the convenor of a newly-formed forum called ‘Ayodhya ki Awaz’, to work towards preserving peace and harmony in Ayodhya.

Prominent among the 150-200 people who attended this meeting were mahants Saryu Das, Janmejaya Sharan, Madhavacharya, Avadh Ram Das, Kaushal Kishore, Srinarayanachari, Jai Ram Das, Bal Vyas Bharat Das, Sadiq Ali ‘Babu Tailor’, and corporators Asad Ahmad and Madhuwan Das.

Madhavacharyaji revealed that Ashok Singhal was telling a complete lie when he said that the decision to organise a programme in Ayodhya on October 17 was taken by sants. He said he was present at the meeting and almost every sant opposed it. The sants were questioning the propriety of organising such programmes in Ayodhya repeatedly. When no consensus could be reached, the meeting was adjourned and VHP office bearers later decided the programme on their own and were now imposing it upon people.

Srinarayanachariji said that the VHP decision smacked of politics. Why did the VHP not organise any programmes for temple construction when there were favourable governments in UP? They want to create a situation of confrontation with the present government so that the resulting tension can polarise the Hindu votes.

The mahants were critical of the VHP for having abused the Hindu religion for political purposes. They said that they would welcome anybody in Ayodhya who genuinely came for darshan but would not welcome people like Singhal and Togadia who make a living out of the Ayodhya-Ramjanmabhoomi movement themselves but create a situation in Ayodhya from time to time where the people of Ayodhya have to starve.

Only in March last year, during the VHP’s shila pujan programme, a 17-day curfew was imposed, creating a great deal of inconvenience for the residents of Ayodhya. The Ram temple construction movement of the VHP has taken a heavy toll on the Ayodhya economy and people are now getting irritated with the gimmicks of the VHP.

Srinarayanchariji advised Singhal to move elsewhere for his agitation for the Ram temple movement and leave Ayodhya alone. He said that the Hindus and Muslims of Ayodhya were perfectly capable of solving the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute and knew how to live in peace with each other.

He recalled how in 1983, Singhal, who used to move around in a rickshaw at the time, would plead with the sants of Ayodhya to allow him to join the Ramjanmabhoomi movement. Today he is enjoying VIP status while the sants of Ayodhya have been marginalised.

Volunteers of ‘Ayodhya ki Awaz’ wanted to burn an effigy of Singhal and Togadia at the end of the meeting but the administration prevented them from doing so. The station officer of Ayodhya kotwali picked up the effigy and took it away to his police station.

It is noteworthy that since the BJP-led government came to power at the Centre, the only organisation that has been allowed to hold its programmes in Ayodhya is the VHP. Other organisations are prevented from holding their programmes.

(The above report was filed by Asha Ashram, a Lucknow-Faizabad based NGO run by Sandeep Pandey and Arundhati Dhuru).

The post Ayodhya ki Awaz appeared first on SabrangIndia.