Ban on Hizb

The declaration by the US State Department of Kashmiri separatist group Hizbul Mujahideen as a foreign terrorist organisation would appear to have very little to do with combating terrorism, and a lot to do with strengthening its links to India. The timing of the move, under which properties and assets falling under US jurisdiction cannot be accessed by the Hizb, appears to have coincided with India’s independence day and comes only months after the US declared the leader of the organisation, Syed Salahuddin, a global terrorist in June (coinciding with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington). The US has traditionally posed as a neutral actor in the dispute between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, with occasional offers of mediation – which India has always turned down. And, considering that HM has been operating in Indian-held Kashmir since 1989, Washington could not suddenly have discovered any dangers presented by it. Given that the group is primarily active in Kashmir, the ban on assets is also likely to have no more than a symbolic impact. The move is widely seen even within the Indian media as the clearest indication so far provided by Washington that it is aligning itself with India as far as the Kashmiri struggle goes. This is clearly very bad news for the people of Kashmir, and also for Pakistan which has been attempting with only limited success to draw attention to the atrocities being committed in the Valley.

Islamabad needs to act quickly, establish contact with Washington and do whatever it can to persuade the Trump administration that the protests in Kashmir are a spontaneous outpouring by the ordinary people of Kashmir against the oppression and violence they have been subjected to for seven decades under Indian control. The killing of freedom fighter Burhan Wani in July last year acted to ignite the most recent unrest in Kashmir and the resultant violent response by the Modi administration. The Trump administration’s declaration of the Hizb as a terrorist organisation also ties in to increased ministerial level contacts with India, recently agreed upon by both countries, and also increasing attempts to bolster India’s position in the region. This is directed primarily against China but inevitably also has an impact on Pakistan. Most significantly of all it underscores more strongly than ever before that the US stands squarely with India in its stance on Kashmir. It has also become obvious that the rhetoric of the global war on terror has become an easy tool to silence legitimate voices for freedom and self-determination from around the world. Such a narrative then becomes an excuse for human rights abuses, as has been seen in Kashmir where the people have fought valiantly since the 1990s for their right to self-determination. Washington’s support for New Delhi will make the brave battle a harder one. The denial of democratic rights, dignity, life and liberty has pushed many young Kashmiris to align more with the armed struggle for freedom. Instead of banning groups and declaring them terrorists, it is important to restore democratic rights in Kashmir and respect the sentiments of the Kashmiris – which would mean allowing them to exercise their right to self-determination.