Book Excerpt| Blood Censored: When Kashmiris Become the ‘Enemy'

The Human Shield

On 9 April 2017, a 26-year-old shawl weaver, Dar, was one of the few who challenged the militant call for election boycott and left the safety of his home to vote in the by-electionfor the Srinagar-Budgam parliamentary constituency. Later that morning, Dar was riding his bike to attend a condolence meeting when he was picked up by the army. He told The Wire that he was stopped by the forces a few kilometres before Gampora village, where some women were protesting against the elections. ‘They damaged my bike, thrashed me severely with gun butts and wooden sticks and in an almost unconscious state tied me to the front of the jeep and paraded me through 10 to 20 villages.'A video shows him tied to the bonnet of the moving army jeep followed by an anti-mine vehicle and a bus with soldiers. ‘There was no stone-pelting going on in the area when the army men picked me up and neither did any stonepelting take place on the [army] vehicles when I was being paraded,’ Dar told The Wire, adding ‘I have never ever in my life hurled stones on forces. But I am not able to understand why I was beaten ruthlessly and then tied to the vehicle. What was my crime? I thought all my bones have been broken as my entire body was in pain due to the ruthless beating. I was in shock, not able to understand what do to as the forces kept threatening me in case I spoke to anybody moving on the road. I was pleading with them to let me go, but they wouldn’t listen.’ He was first taken to a CRPF camp and then to a local army unit.

In deploying an unarmed citizen, the Indian Army crossed a red line,resorting to a strategy that even the Israeli army avoids. The Indian Express reports that even the Supreme Court in Israel has banned the use of human shields. ‘In February 2007, AP TV released footage of a 24-year-old Palestinian, Sameh Amira, being used as a human shield by Israeli soldiers in Nablus, also in the West Bank. The Israeli Army, after an investigation, suspended the commander whose unit was involved in the act. Then, in 2010, the Israeli Defence Forces prosecuted and convicted two staff sergeants for using civilians as human shields, and handed them 18-month sentences--- which HRW criticised for being “excessively lenient’’.

As Siddharth Varadarajan observes, the use of a civilian as a hostage, or ‘human shield’, was a violation of the right to life and liberty enshrined in the Indian constitution. It was also a violation of international law, since India is a party to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which prohibits the targeting of civilians in conflicts that are ‘not of an international character.’

Despite widespread criticism, the Chief of Army Staff General Bipin Rawat onspicuously awarded Major Leetul Gogoi, the officer who tied Dar to the bonnet, with a Chief of Army Staff Commendation Card for ‘sustained efforts in Counter-insurgency operations’. Sources in the army told NDTV that these operations include the use of a local as a ‘human shield’. The BJP spokesperson Rao averred, ‘Everyone talks about the human rights of terrorists, separatists and disruptive elements. It is high time everyone realize that the security forces, fighting in tough conditions braving all odds, are also humans and have human rights. They have been highly professional and restrained even in some highly provocative situations.' Paresh Rawal, BJP MP, tweeted that he wished to see writer and outspoken critic of the government라이브 바카라 human Arundhati Roy, used as a human shield in Kashmir.He later complained that the Twitter management had bullied him into withdrawing his tweet. Shivam Vij observed, ‘So Rawal thinks it라이브 바카라 patriotic to invite such violence against people. This is the new normal in an India where lynching is as common as outrage on Twitter.’ ‘The question nobody will ask’, he goes on, ‘is why India needs the army, and the army needs to use human shields, against what it calls its own people? What can we do to change the situation? It must be a lot of people pelting stones, and doing so with great ferocity, that one of the world라이브 바카라 largest armies needs to take the extreme and unlawful measure of using human shield

In an interview, Army Chief General Bipin Rawat defended and praised Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi라이브 바카라 action as a warning to stone-pelters. As the Indian Express observed editorially, ‘By doing this, and by his implied support or the short-circuiting of the army라이브 바카라 internal due process vis a vis Major Gogoi라이브 바카라 actions—the army commended the major even as a court of inquiry was finalising its probe into the incident—General Rawat risks hurting reiteration that Major Gogoi라이브 바카라 conduct was a violation of the constitutional promise of due process, and of the fundamental rights enshrined in the

Constitution for every citizen, and that it is the army라이브 바카라 duty to uphold both.’The editorial further comments that, ‘the army chief treads even further on dangerous ground’ with his statements. He declares, “This is a proxy war and proxy war is a dirty war…You fight a dirty war with innovations.”He even suggests that it would have been easier for the armed forces if the protestors were firing weapons instead of throwing stones: “Then I could do what I [want to do].” In effect, General Rawat said that he wished the protestors used bullets instead of stones so he could kill them, because that is what he wished to do! ‘But can he afford to lose sight of a fundamental distinction—between armed militants and civilian protestors?’He even further completely steps out of line by expressing his opposition to engaging the protestors through dialogue. ‘Has political initiative not been taken in the past? What was the result, you had Kargil….’ As the Indian Express editorial puts it, ‘As General Rawat라이브 바카라 responsibility is to guard the nation라이브 바카라 physical frontiers from enemies; it is not to draw red lines for political actors in the system.’

It is intensely troubling that not only are we seeing for the first time in independent India an army chief who while in service is openly expressing his political opinions about how he feels governments should treat Indian citizens, but that his politics are so far to the extreme right. It has to be said, however that his views reflect the current hard line. No talks if protests continue. Prime Minister Modi, with his inexhaustible fondness for alliteration, asks Kashmiris to choose between tourism and terrorism. The penalty for not choosing ‘tourism’, he does not add, is the bullet and pellet.All these activities of stone-pelting have to stop. Then will the government consider talking,’ said K.S. Dhatwalia, a home ministry spokesman, according to a report by Reuters.

(Excerpted from Blood Censored: When Kashmiris Become the ‘Enemy' with permission from Yoda Press)