Understanding Sexual Warfare in Kashmir: Prevalence, Consequences

[Asian.Century]

Looking at delluded Indians here, they are defending rape as if the whole world just not aware of the truth, the world is foolish, everyone knows how big rapist india has become. It is a common knowledge Indian army is a rapist army, it has tried its utmost best to subjugate the Kashmirs, you see all sorts of diversionary tactics, blame game on Pakistan, terror strikes in Pakistan, Kashmirs brutally tortured, but one thing is clear 70 years on, Kashmirs are not going surrender themselves to the fascist Delhi regime. It will ensure India is weak, isolated, burdened out, pressure, and bankcrupted.

Kashmir and Kashmiris are here to stay !!

 

[AugenBlick]

@Mugwop ... why the negative rating... Should I post sources for my claim... there are many.

 

[M. Sarmad]

There is no supposedly here, Joseph English's mothers name is Farial Sikander, makes him half Pakistani. Why are you in such denial about his background?

I am not in denial. But You sure are. From the very first post I have been asking the Indians NOT to shoot the messenger (and to respond to the content of the article instead) but it's becoming abundantly clear now that no Indian is willing to do that.

Now you are just being disingenuous.

Refer to Page number 24 of the report where the authors discuss the data collected for the report, second last paragraph. Let me quote it for you again,

Now tell me Einstein if you don't find those two statements contradictory

No, they are not contradictory, Genius.

"For most Kashmiris, sexual violence is considered an inappropriate and difficult to discuss topic. Nevertheless, a rather high percentage of respondents (11.6%)- in comparison to other conflict areas ... "

^^ Read this carefully, and if you don't get it, read it again, and again until you understand. Or better ask someone else who doesn't lack comprehension skills to make you understand that there is no contradiction here.

And what's your point anyway ? Just because you have "discovered" one contradictory statement (thanks to your lack of comprehension skills), you are going to reject the entire report/assessment by a well- reputed international organization ?? How much sense does that make now ?

Once again, that is not a direct quote from a HRW report, just like our Junaid Joseph English, Qadri Inzamam is paraphrasing and making his own assertion, and trying to pass it off as an observation made by HRW!

Making his own "assertions" ?? Not really

A few direct quotes from one of the HRW reports (1999) on IOK:


"The brutal tactics employed resemble those used in the early 1990s in the Kashmir valley-- indiscriminate shootings and assaults, rape, and arson--"

"The Indian security forces also engage in brutal forms of torture which likewise have the sanction of senior officials. The latter privately justify the practice on the grounds that there is no other way to obtain information from a suspect. "

https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/index.htm

What human rights group? This so called latest evidence of yours is quoting unnamed sources and making claims out of thin air, not credible!

Link was provided. You just didn't bother to read it:

A report by the International Peoples’ Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir and the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) has identified more than 900 individuals whom it blames for a range of human rights abuses carried out by Indian security forces between 1990 and 2014. They include 150 officers of the rank of major or above.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-kashmir-accused-human-rights-abuses-coverup

Fact is the OP used an HRW report from 1993, which was based on anecdotal claims from 1989-1990, and tried to pass it off as something that's relevant 25 years on!

It's just your opinion, not a fact. Read the previous posts again.[/QUOTE]

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Not as Joe Shearer. But there is a remarkable woman whose writings you might like. If you mail me, I'll send you her coordinates.

You should receive a mail... please check your inbox.

 

[M. Sarmad]

You do know that this MSF report speaks about atrocities by "all" fighting parties. refer graph 1 Page 14.

"Overview of personal experience of traumatic events inflicted by all fighting parties since the onset of the violence in 1989"

Now, see HRW report to know why people in valley are afraid to report rapes by militants.

You are not the first Indian (and probably not the last one) to have brought that up.

What you, like most of the other Indians here, fail to realize is:

Whether or not militants (too) are involved in similar activities is irrelevant here... As It does not, in any way, absolve the Indian Army of the heinous crimes it has been committing in Occupied Kashmir since 1989.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

From the very first post I have been asking the Indians NOT to shoot the messenger (and to respond to the content of the article instead) but it's becoming abundantly clear now that no Indian is willing to do that

You can't expect a shoddy 'paper' to be considered as a message.

The latest HRW article you quoted is from 1999. What can any Indian say about that?

"For most Kashmiris, sexual violence is considered an inappropriate and difficult to discuss topic. Nevertheless, a rather high percentage of respondents (11.6%)- in comparison to other conflict areas ... "

^^ Read this carefully, and if you don't get it, read it again, and again until you understand. Or better ask someone else who doesn't lack comprehension skills to make you understand that there is no contradiction here.

Logical fallacy.

You make 'Nevertheless' as bold. I can make 'other conflict areas' bold as well. What does it mean by that phrase?
You have to remember the facts on the ground - the pure demographic facts. There are 6 million Kashmiris today in the valley (including those kicked out for belonging to the wrong religion). That means about 5.3 million Muslim Kashmiris.
All districts are not flaring up and many areas are strongly pro India (pockets of Rajouri, Baramulla etc). Let's say 4 million Kashmiri Muslims are totally disenchanted with Indian Secular rule (their demands for Divine Law). Even then for a sexual violence to have weight - you need to see the number of women involved.

The number comes down to 2 million.

Now out of that only 50% will be of young to adult age. Rest will be children or too old to be violated. So that is about 1 million.

Now remember, this is their CURRENT population. In 1999, this number was much less - around 650000.

11% have reported sexual violence. (from a sample of two most violent affected districts - that too 516 families)
Plus, this is done by all parties - not just the 'Indian Armed Forces'.
Let's assume, even in the worst case, Indians account for 70% of the cases - we come to
(11/100) * (70/100) * 650000 = 50050 cases

Now out of these rapes will form a part of the total. Let's assume the worst and consider close to the simple majority ~ 60% or ~30,000 women having been raped by the Indian Army, Police, Paramilitary, Ikhwaan, Village Defense Committees etc.

Now think about the number - 30,000

Now go back to 2010, two girls were missing. The Army was blamed - they must have raped them. The forensic report showed that they fell in the stream and died - no rape was recorded. Yet Kashmir broke down into anarchy - with more violent protests than seen in this latest incident.

And we are talking about the far more turbulent times of 1990s (99 for example). If even 3000 women were raped, Kashmir would have burst like a volcano. And we are talking about 30,000.

You should do a similar analysis and rationally think if this makes sense.

Whether or not militants (too) are involved in similar activities is irrelevant here... As It does not, in any way, absolve the Indian Army of the heinous crimes it has been committing in Occupied Kashmir since 1989.

Irrelevant to you. Not to us.

Inspite of everything, there are so far 70 people who have been killed since July. More people die in Zarb e Azb on any one day in Western Pakistan.

That is the point.

To you Kashmir is a match point. A point to be won. The rapes, the suffering of the people matter little except to further Pakistan's geopolitical designs. Your movement demands martyrs. The greater the protests and the greater the Indian suppression of the same protests - better will be your chances to play kingmaker.

The rapes, the murders, the orphans - they are... collateral damage.

Yet I respect that - from Pakistan's point of view, you should milk this misfortune of India as much as possible. But your behavior betrays an intention to come across as morally superior. That intention is somewhat misplaced.

 

[M. Sarmad]

i disagree with glass house bit.. especially if it is about HR issues... human rights are universal.. we should unearth and expose violence all over the world including balochistan and other places in pakistan just like they should be able to do in kashmir... nothing wrong as long as you are not dishonest or hypocrite(defending at one place and condemning other based on your nationality/political leaning)

Humanity is above all religion. Humanity is above all nations

However

Kashmir is Not India. Pakistanis believe that It is Pakistan's part under illegal Indian Occupation and the Occupying forces are killing Kashmiris because they are Muslims and because they refuse to accept the illegal Indian occupation.

And

Any Indian (not you) talking about Human rights violations in Baluchistan while ignoring what is happening in Indian North East is an act of sheer hypocrisy ...

You can't expect a shoddy 'paper' to be considered as a message.

The latest HRW article you quoted is from 1999. What can any Indian say about that?

Logical fallacy.

You make 'Nevertheless' as bold. I can make 'other conflict areas' bold as well. What does it mean by that phrase?
You have to remember the facts on the ground - the pure demographic facts. There are 6 million Kashmiris today in the valley (including those kicked out for belonging to the wrong religion). That means about 5.3 million Muslim Kashmiris.
All districts are not flaring up and many areas are strongly pro India (pockets of Rajouri, Baramulla etc). Let's say 4 million Kashmiri Muslims are totally disenchanted with Indian Secular rule (their demands for Divine Law). Even then for a sexual violence to have weight - you need to see the number of women involved.

The number comes down to 2 million.

Now out of that only 50% will be of young to adult age. Rest will be children or too old to be violated. So that is about 1 million.

Now remember, this is their CURRENT population. In 1999, this number was much less - around 650000.

11% have reported sexual violence. (from a sample of two most violent affected districts - that too 516 families)
Plus, this is done by all parties - not just the 'Indian Armed Forces'.
Let's assume, even in the worst case, Indians account for 70% of the cases - we come to
(11/100) * (70/100) * 650000 = 50050 cases

Now out of these rapes will form a part of the total. Let's assume the worst and consider close to the simple majority ~ 60% or ~30,000 women having been raped by the Indian Army, Police, Paramilitary, Ikhwaan, Village Defense Committees etc.

Now think about the number - 30,000

Now go back to 2010, two girls were missing. The Army was blamed - they must have raped them. The forensic report showed that they fell in the stream and died - no rape was recorded. Yet Kashmir broke down into anarchy - with more violent protests than seen in this latest incident.

And we are talking about the far more turbulent times of 1990s (99 for example). If even 3000 women were raped, Kashmir would have burst like a volcano. And we are talking about 30,000.

You should do a similar analysis and rationally think if this makes sense.


Irrelevant to you. Not to us.

Inspite of everything, there are so far 70 people who have been killed since July. More people die in Zarb e Azb on any one day in Western Pakistan.

That is the point.

To you Kashmir is a match point. A point to be won. The rapes, the suffering of the people matter little except to further Pakistan's geopolitical designs. Your movement demands martyrs. The greater the protests and the greater the Indian suppression of the same protests - better will be your chances to play kingmaker.

The rapes, the murders, the orphans - they are... collateral damage.

Yet I respect that - from Pakistan's point of view, you should milk this misfortune of India as much as possible. But your behavior betrays an intention to come across as morally superior. That intention is somewhat misplaced.

This is the second time You have jumped into an ongoing discussion ...

And you are not making any sense

So please don't quote me

Educating Ignorant Indians is not my job

Thanks

 

[SarthakGanguly]

This is the second time You have jumped into an ongoing discussion ...

And you are not making any sense

So please don't quote me

Educating Ignorant Indians is not my job

Thanks

It is not possible to have skimmed through my entire post in this short a time. I expected a knee jerk reaction and that's what I got. I probably had my expectations set too high. My bad.

 

[Roybot]

I am not in denial. But You sure are. From the very first post I have been asking the Indians NOT to shoot the messenger (and to respond to the content of the article instead) but it's becoming abundantly clear now that no Indian is willing to do that.

Critical Analysis 101

When critiquing an article, its important to research the background of the author, because the authors background can, as it does in this case, have implications on the arguments made. Infact that's the very first thing you should do when writing a review otherwise you d be just wasting your time!

Are there indications of bias? Does the author mention all sides of an issue, or does he or she leave out important counter-arguments? What do you know about the author? Is there anything in the author’s background that might have caused bias? iv

Answering the above questions, Yes, Yes and Hell Yes!

So whether you like it or not, we can and must talk about the author's background, we can highlight the fact that this Joseph English is half Pakistani, and if you think its shooting the messenger then so be it.

No, they are not contradictory, Genius.

"For most Kashmiris, sexual violence is considered an inappropriate and difficult to discuss topic. Nevertheless, a rather high percentage of respondents (11.6%)- in comparison to other conflict areas ... "

^^ Read this carefully, and if you don't get it, read it again, and again until you understand. Or better ask someone else who doesn't lack comprehension skills to make you understand that there is no contradiction here.

And what's your point anyway ? Just because you have "discovered" one contradictory statement (thanks to your lack of comprehension skills), you are going to reject the entire report/assessment by a well- reputed international organization ?? How much sense does that make now ?

Am confused, are you deliberately trying to overlook the point that I made or you genuinely this daft?
Am quoting it once again, this makes it the third time btw, hope you get it this time around.

The respondents reported suffering direct violations of their modesty and/or the witnessing of such acts since 1989. It is possible that the actual prevalence is higher as many people regard it as inappropriate to talk about sex-related issues.

On one hand they are saying that the numbers could be higher because people don't like to talk about sexual violence,

This may be due to the fact that people in Kashmir feel freer to discuss a “violation of their modesty” than civilians living in those other contexts.

And in the very next sentence, they say that numbers are so much more than other conflict zones is because in Kashmir people feel freer to talk about such issues!

If you still can't see the contradiction, then I give up on you. And as I said earlier, just because it is a report by MSF or HRW or published in an undergraduate university journal doesn't make it the absolute truth. Institutions and organizations don't matter, its the content of the paper that matters. In the MSF report, the authors themselves are doubting the integrity of the data collected, and the questionnaire used, so others will obviously question it!

Making his own "assertions" ?? Not really

A few direct quotes from one of the HRW reports (1999) on IOK:

"The brutal tactics employed resemble those used in the early 1990s in the Kashmir valley-- indiscriminate shootings and assaults, rape, and arson--"

"The Indian security forces also engage in brutal forms of torture which likewise have the sanction of senior officials. The latter privately justify the practice on the grounds that there is no other way to obtain information from a suspect. "

https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/index.htm

See now that's quite different than the statement by Joseph English in his essay, where he claims

An extensive Human Rights Watch (HRW) report argues that the Indian army’s sexual violence is aorganized tactic, endorsed (privately, if not publicly) by military higher-ups.

Show me where does this 1999 or the 1993 HRW report says that. It talks about Senior officials sanctioning torture of suspected militants, not sexual violence as was claimed by the Joseph English.

Further, you just like the author, tried to pull a fast one by only quoting parts of the sentence which suited your agenda and omitting the ones that didn't. Allow me quote the full sentence for you,

The Kashmir conflict not only continues to raise the spectre of war between India and Pakistan, but it also continues to produce serious human rights violations: summary executions, rape, and torture by both sides.​

And then it goes on to say,

Significantly, army authorities have demonstrated some concern about rape and have initiated a number of courts-martial of soldiers for rape.​

If rape was such an organized tactic of the Indian Army as claimed by this Joseph English, why would it be court-martialing the culprits?​

Link was provided. You just didn't bother to read it:

A report by the International Peoples’ Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir and the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) has identified more than 900 individuals whom it blames for a range of human rights abuses carried out by Indian security forces between 1990 and 2014. They include 150 officers of the rank of major or above.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-kashmir-accused-human-rights-abuses-coverup

Except that this "International People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir" is not HRW or a credible agency! Far from it and there is nothing international about it! Its run by one Kashmiri Lawyer, whose credibility, agenda and survey methods are very much questionable.

I asked for a more recent, more relevant report from a reputed organization, and this is all you could come up with. The best Joseph English could do was cite a HRW report from the early 1990s, making it irrelevant in the present context.

 

[M. Sarmad]

@Roybot


You can keep trying to shoot the messenger. Contrary to what you believe, such fallacies are defects which only weaken your argument.


You had made 3 points:


1) You tried to reject the entire MSF report/assessment because you believed that you had 'discovered' a contradictory statement in the report. But As already shown, there is no contradiction in the report and it's just your own lack of comprehension skills.


2) You made a claim that the 1993 HRW report made no such inference that rape was an organized tactic employed by the Indian Army and the author was making a baseless allegation. It was pointed out to you that the author didn't say that the 1993 HRW said so. The extensive HRW report the author was referring to was the 1999 HRW report and it indeed "argues" what the author was saying. Link to that report has already been provided. It's there for everyone to see


3) You rejected all other sources as "leftist propaganda" and evil work of "Western" NGO's. You are entitled to your opinion, but we have no reason to agree with you when you have no arguments to back up your position.


There is no point in going around in circles now. Your arguments have been thoroughly discussed and summarily refuted.

Do you have anything else to say on the topic ?