The imagery behind this is constructed through the mythology of two mothers whose fables came to be adopted and championed as the epitome of motherly sacrifice in Kashmir. The story of the mothers of Aka-nandun spins a folktale that idealizes the sacrifice and selflessness of women despite the torment she faces on losing her child. The other tale of Lalded is based on a woman who evoked mysticism in the land of clashing belief systems and spoke the language of the changing Kashmiri ethos. She didn’t give birth to a child, rather, became the symbol of motherhood, guiding the wayward souls by breaking free from the patriarchal bounds and donning the armor of maternal spirit to transform and challenge the notions of the faltering Kashmiri society.
The Indian former Intelligence Bureau Director A. S. Dulat warned, “The calm appears deceptive.” This seasonal expert was veracious in sensing the emerging trend of militancy in Kashmir followed the decrease in 2013. There was a turning situation where a unique form of militant insurgency emerged after the evocation of autonomy provisions by abrogating Article 370 and 35A. It seriously triggered the concern of India regarding the new form of militancy.
The gendered lens is one that can be employed to understand the conflict in Kashmir and its relationship to national identities. The Indian nationalist imagination views the state as a patriarchal and masculine figure that must exert control over its feminine counterpart, Kashmir, in order to coerce it into submission. Similarly, feminists have understood violence to be perceived as masculine, whereas, peace is viewed as devalued and feminine leading to the use of gender relations as the basis of fueling violence. A key factor in the propagation of gender-based violence lies in the foundations of the nation-state building process.
An informative session with Hassan Aslam Shad on The Kashmir Issue and its various dimensions in International Law along with the assessment of the stances of both parties.
On October 26, the Indian ministry of home affairs introduced sweeping changes to land laws in Jammu and Kashmir which would enable any Indian citizen to buy property in the territory. Residents fear laws are aimed at a ‘land grab’ to dilute the Muslim-majority character of the disputed region, now directly under New Delhi’s control. Kashmiris see this as a double assault: on history as well as the future.
The recent development in making Gilgit-Baltistan a province is a faint ray of hope for the 2 million population of Gilgit Baltistan. It has been the misfortune of Gilgit-Baltistan that the educated young generation here is still unable to think of the homeland. If the nation’s youth are deprived of the ability to think, and the purpose of education is only part of the employment. It is useless to pin hopes on the future of this nation. But even today, there is no shortage of people in this nation who have pain for the region who can play a savior role in the region’s future deprivations.
The Indian attack on Jammu and Kashmir on Wednesday, October 27, 1947, was the most horrific event in the history of Indian colonialism, which has left the region in a state of perpetual instability and violence. On this day in 1947, the leaders of so-called secular India rushed their troops to Srinagar at night, trampling under their hats the fundamental political and democratic rights of the Kashmiri people for which the Indigenous people themselves fought together, over the years, against the British rule.
The most notable feature of the Gupkar resolution was the union of all major political parties in J&K which was a rare and unprecedented event. The revocation of Article 370 had united the parties for a singular cause. However, this sentiment has been put into jeopardy due to Farooq Abdullah’s inability to speak of the declaration in the parliament.