Connect with us

Opinion

Looking the other way on Myanmar

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

🕒

on

IST

By Bertil Linter Chiang Mai

While the West moves to re-isolate Myanmar after a short period of re-engagement, neighboring India is taking a more realpolitik approach to reports of massive rights abuses by the nation’s security forces.

Indeed, India is doing its utmost to improve relations while the United States and European Union impose new sanctions aimed specifically at Myanmar’s military, including top soldiers involved in the abuses.

 

It is by now evident that Myanmar’s treatment of its Muslim Rohingya population and crackdown on the media — major concerns in the West — will be subordinated to New Delhi’s broader policy aims for Myanmar and the wider region.

There are several intertwined reasons for India’s pragmatic approach. First, India’s eastern neighbor is a vital link in its commercially driven “Act East” policy, a gambit aimed at expanding trade and investment through better linkages with Southeast Asia’s booming economies.

India’s fast-expanding economy needs fuel to grow, and New Delhi has shown strong interest in importing oil and gas from Myanmar. Meanwhile, long-decrepit roads to the Myanmar border are being upgraded to facilitate faster bilateral trade.

An agreement signed in May paved the way for entry-exit points at the border towns of Moreh in India and Tamu in Myanmar, as well as at the Rihkhawdar-Zowkhawtar at the border between India’s Mizoram and Myanmar’s Chin state.

Second, India has stayed fully engaged with Naypyidaw to prevent China from stealing a march in yet another neighboring country after Beijing has made strong advances in Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Maldives, including through its global infrastructure-building program.

Just as significantly, New Delhi’s security planners want to ensure that Assamese, Naga and Manipuri ethnic insurgents based in remote areas of northwestern Myanmar are deprived of their sanctuaries.

Insurgents often launch lethal raids into India’s northeast from those camps and then retreat across the border into Myanmar, beyond the reach of the Indian army.

In June 2015, India’s security authorities ran out of patience and sent commandoes across the border to attack rebel camps. Myanmar authorities denied any such attack took place and have always claimed their are no rebel bases on their territory.

Still, the insurgent issue created new headlines in the Indian media when Myanmar’s Deputy Home Minister Major General Aung Thu met with India’s Home Secretary Rajiv Gauba in New Delhi in late October.

Reports said the two senior officials held talks on a range of issues, with the local The Sentinel newspaper proclaiming in a headline that “India, Myanmar to jointly strike against Northeast rebels.”

The Business Standard, meanwhile, announced that “India, Myanmar agree to act against insurgent groups operating within their territories.” LiveMint, an Indian news website, reported that India and Myanmar are going to “draw up [a] counter-insurgency cooperation plan.”

If all true, the bilateral meeting would have represented a major breakthrough in security cooperation between India and Myanmar.

Ethnic insurgents opposed to New Delhi’s rule have maintained cross-border sanctuaries in Myanmar since the late 1960s, and India has tried as long to persuade the Myanmar army to take action against them – preferably through the kind of joint operations that The Sentinel mentioned in its commentary.

Despite the sensational headlines, nothing of the sort was agreed upon during Aung Thu’s visit. Myanmar and India only agreed to work together to prevent smuggling of wildlife and narcotics, and vaguely increase “security cooperation” along their common border, which is nothing new.

Indeed, any joint counterinsurgency operation by Indian and Myanmar militaries would be impossible under Myanmar’s 2008 constitution, which clearly states that “no foreign troops shall be permitted to be deployed in the territory of the Union.”

It is widely known that the main bases of India’s northeastern rebels are located in and around Taga north of Singkaling Hkamti — miles away from the Indian border and at least a week’s trek over mountainous terrain — where they appear to have a cozy relationship with nearby Myanmar army camps.

Naga rebel leaders from the Indian side are known to have invested in gold mining and other lucrative business ventures in Myanmar’s upper Sagaing Region, where they are based.

Assamese and Manipuri rebels are able to move more or less freely from the Taga camps across northern Myanmar to Ruili in China’s southern Yunnan province, where they buy military supplies and other necessities.

The strategic reality is that Myanmar’s army is now fully occupied with fighting its own domestic insurgencies in Kachin and Shan states and cannot be bothered with the presence of rebel groups from India’s northeast who are actually good for the region’s local economies.

It is also now apparent that India’s “Act East” policy, previously known as “Look East” until rechristened and ramped up in 2014 under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, is focused in part on stabilizing its long volatile eastern border.

Still, India is lagging far behind China in terms of accessing Myanmar’s markets and resources. Bilateral trade between China and Myanmar amounted to nearly US$6 billion in fiscal 2016-2017 and US$7.42 billion in the first eight months of 2017-2018.

China has built new dual-carriage motorways connecting Kunming, the provincial capital of Yunnan, with Ruili and other towns on the Myanmar border.

China has also agreed to build a railway from Muse to Mandalay on the Myanmar side, which eventually will link up with a proposed railroad down to Myanmar’s port town of Kyaukpyu on the Bay of Bengal, giving China strategic access to the Indian Ocean.

China’s fast-growing trade with Myanmar is also spilling over to northeastern India. Chinese-produced electronics, clothes, bags, household utensils and other cheap manufactures are transported across Myanmar and can be found in abundance in northeast Indian market places.

By comparison, annual trade between India and Myanmar is only around US$2 billion, and the roads from the Indian side to the Myanmar border are still rough and nowhere near of the standard and quality of the infrastructure in China’s southern Yunnan province that borders on Myanmar.

But Modi wants to change all that. In September 2017, he visited Myanmar just weeks after several hundred thousand Rohingya had been driven across Myanmar’s border into Bangladesh, causing an outcry in the West.

In July that same year, India rolled out the red carpet for Myanmar’s military chief Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, who paid an eight-day visit to the country. Min Aung Hlaing now stands accused of crimes against humanity and even potentially genocide for the “clearance operations” he commanded against the Rohingya.

India’s media got it right that time by reporting that India was ready to ramp up military supplies to Myanmar “to counter Chinese strategic inroads into the country,” as The Times of India reported on July 8. China has been a major arms supplier to the Myanmar military and India apparently aims to provide it with a competing source of hardware.

Building on the trend, Myanmar’s state counselor and nominal head of government Aung San Suu Kyi paid a visit to India in January. Shunned by the West, Suu Kyi has moved closer to China, Japan and Myanmar’s partners in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

However, it is Suu Kyi’s newfound friendship with China that has likely prompted India to cultivate stronger relations with the now embattled leader.

While any joint action against the insurgents from India’s northeast encamped on Myanmar territory may be a pipe dream, and bilateral trade has a long way to go before it catches up with the fast flows across the Sino-Myanmar border, India’s objectives are clear.

Concerns about Chinese expansion rather than human rights or the plight of the Rohingya is clearly the overriding impetus behind Modi’s “Act East” policy towards Myanmar. Indeed, with the US and EU replacing its engagement overtures with new sanctions, an East-West divide is emerging on how to respond to Myanmar’s latest round of rights abuses.

Japan’s Myanmar ambassador, Ichiro Maruyama, said in an October 19 interview with The Irrawaddy, a Myanmar website, that “Japan is completely opposed to efforts by some countries to impose trade sanctions against Myanmar over the Rohingya issue.”

Although Maruyama did not say it, it is plausible to assume — given Tokyo’s policy of providing an alternative to China’s US$1 trillion Belt and Road Initiative and a recent warming trend in their bilateral relations— that he shares India’s view that it is more important to counter Beijing’s rising clout in Myanmar.


The Kashmir Monitor is the fastest growing newspaper as well as digitial platform covering news from all angles.

Advertisement
Loading...
Comments

Opinion

Time to rebuild India’s secularism

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By Harsh Mander

There is much that lies badly broken in India today. The economy desperately needs to be repaired, as do rural distress, the job crisis and the free-falling rupee. The country’s institutions demand urgently to be rebuilt — the media, police, judiciary, universities, the planning process, the Election Commission of India. But above all, if there is one thing that stands most dangerously damaged, it is our constitutional pledge of a secular democracy. What are the prospects of rebuilding this?

Listen carefully to the speeches in the shrill summer election campaign which has just come to a halt. From their podiums, Opposition leaders spoke of everything else — the agony of farmers, unemployed youth, suspect defence deals, crony capitalism and indeed crony institutions. But rarely did they speak of lynching, of violence against Muslims, Christians and Dalits, of the fear which has become normalised in their daily lives, of our wrecked social contract of equality and harmony. And never did they speak of secularism.

 

The imagination of secularism in the Indian Republic was rooted in its singularly pluralist civilisational ethos, in the lives and work of Ashoka and Akbar, in the teachings of Buddha, Kabir and Nanak. It was illuminated by our struggle for freedom, in the humanist and egalitarian convictions of Gandhi and Ambedkar, Maulana Azad and Nehru. It was the central iridescent idea: that this newly-freed country would belong equally to all its people. People of no religion, no language, no caste, no ethnicity, no gender, no class would be entitled to lay claim to the country more than any other.

Secularism is the soul of India’s Constitution. Today the letter of this Constitution still remains unaltered, but its soul is mangled and choked. Not just the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP); even Opposition parties seem to have accepted that India is no longer the secular country born of the legacy of India’s freedom struggle, but a majoritarian Hindu country. In this new India, people of minority religions, castes and gender are second-class. Their safety and well-being are dependent now on the consent and will of the majority upper-caste, patriarchal Hindu, and the dictates of this Hindu are interpreted and violently mediated by the ideology of Hindutva.

It is a grave mistake to frame the 2019 general election as a battle of Narendra Modi against the rest. This is how Prime Minister Modi, referring to himself repeatedly in the third person, has framed this bitter electoral contest. This is how the Opposition has fought the electoral battle, of Mr. Modi versus the rest. This is how the majority of Indian voters view this combat.

However, the electoral battle waged around the country is truly a different one. On one side stands the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and on the other is the secular idea of the Indian Constitution. Mr. Modi is a formidable, pugnacious, tireless and immensely popular mascot of the Hindu supremacist ideology of the RSS; and his image is powerfully buttressed by a pliant corporate media and dizzying levels of spending on a public relations blitz to manufacture consent. But the central danger to secular India is not the personality of Mr. Modi. It is the penetration of the RSS into every institution of the country, into every political party, the media, the university, the judiciary, the civil services, and most dangerously into mainstream everyday social life of every ordinary Indian.

In the RSS worldview, Muslims and Christians are not authentically Indian, their loyalty to the Indian nation is and will always remain suspect; therefore, they need to be tamed, to be continuously shown their subordinate status in the Indian polity and society. It is for this reason that virulent hate speech was so central to this election campaign, with Mr. Modi mocking his rival, Congress president Rahul Gandhi, for seeking election in a constituency in which he would have to depend in part on Muslim and Christian voters; and other BJP leaders and candidates raging against the threats of the ‘green virus’ and ‘termites’. It is for this reason that BJP president Amit Shah pledges to extend the National Register of Citizens to all parts of India, while ensuring citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists from other parts of the subcontinent; in this way brazenly turning on its head the core constitutional idea that a person’s religion is irrelevant to her rights to equal citizenship. And it is for this reason that lynching of Muslims and attacks on Christian places of worship, openly valorised by ruling party leaders, became the overarching symbols of the newly forged relationship of the majoritarian Hindu state with its now inferior religious minorities.

If Mr. Modi is returned with an emphatic majority when ballots are counted on May 23, as many exit polls predict, this will herald that India has fallen deep into a cold hard place of hate and fear. It will signal that a significant majority of Hindus endorse the Hindu supremacist ideology of the RSS. It will indicate the popular abandonment of the secular and humane vision of India’s Constitution, and its replacement by a violent and chauvinist majoritarian Hindu nationalism, which is suspicious and hateful in its relations with people who follow minority religious faiths. This outcome would also further imperil all left, liberal and democratic dissenting voices, in civil society, in the media, in universities, and in letters and the arts.

A second scenario, anticipated by a much smaller number of political commentators, is of reduced support for the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), its tally falling short of the half-way mark. In such a situation, they anticipate the possibility that many regional parties could be persuaded to support an NDA government only if it is led by a less belligerent leader than Mr. Modi, possibly Nitin Gadkari or Rajnath Singh. Many are relieved by the possibility of such an outcome: anyone other than Mr. Modi would be welcome, they reason. But it would be a dangerous mistake to believe that such a choice would pull India out of the dark abyss into which it has slipped. Even with a more acceptable face, as with Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the RSS would use political power to further penetrate all institutions, and enfeeble what survives of secular practice.

The least expected scenario, of the victory of the United Progressive Alliance or a federal front of regional parties, cannot be ruled out yet. After all, the BJP has lost no exit polls since 2004, but it lost many elections. However, even with such an outcome, the crusade against secular democracy waged with such vigour by the RSS will not be won. The appetite and moral courage to fight majoritarian politics head-on stands perilously weakened among Opposition political parties. Whatever the final outcome, this fight to salvage, defend and fortify secularism will have to be fought by the Indian people. India is today a wasteland of compassion. It will take generations to clean out the toxins of hate from Indian society. It is a battle that must be waged with courage, with perseverance and with love. History in the end is on our side.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The politician and the machine

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By  SY Quraishi

The general elections 2019 is moving towards closure, with six out of seven phases already over. All eyes are now on the counting.

It is not surprising that the issue of counting of Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) has become hot once again.

 

The decision to introduce VVPATs as a measure to make electronic voting machines (EVMs) transparent was taken in 2010 when a meeting of all political parties arrived at a consensus that this was the ultimate answer.

Finding the suggestion reasonable, the Election Commission (EC) immediately accepted it and asked the two EVM manufacturers, BEL and ECIL, to design the VVPAT machines. An independent committee of experts consisting of five professors from different IITs was tasked to oversee the design and the manufacturing process.

A series of trials were held, followed by a full-day election simulation in July 2011 in five climatically diverse cities– namely Cherrapunji, Delhi, Jaisalmer, Leh, and Thiruvananthapuram.

Since many bugs were noticed, the trial was repeated after addressing them in July 2012 at exactly the same places. Only after making sure that they were technologically sound and climatically dependable, were the VVPATs initially deployed in 20,000 polling booths successfully. Subsequently, all constituencies were equipped with VVPATs.

In 2013, the Supreme Court also lauded the EC’s decision to use VVPATs and directed the government to release adequate funds for their procurement for the 2019 elections. The machines that kept coming in were randomly deployed. From 2017 onwards, all state elections have been conducted with EVMs attached with VVPATs.

What was the counting procedure? Slips generated by one VVPAT in each assembly constituency were counted. Of the 1,500 machines counted so far, according to the EC, not a single mismatch was found.

In various elections, however, many VVPAT machines malfunctioned. The chief election commissioner (CEC) righty clarified that malfunctioning is different from rigging.

During the by-elections in Bihar and UP, and the Karnataka assembly elections last year, VVPAT glitches resulted in machine replacement rates of 4 to 20 per cent.

These were largely due to issues in the print unit, which is sensitive to weather. With hardware changes introduced in the machines, the glitches came down to 2 per cent for the Chhattisgarh Assembly elections.

While the debate is going on, I had offered an out-of-the-box solution: Let the top two runners up in every constituency choose any two VVPATs to be counted. As they have the highest stake in the results, they will choose the ones they are most suspicious about.

This is analogous to the Decision Review System in the game of cricket, in which two referrals are allowed for each team. Ever since its introduction, violent disputes about the controversial decisions taken by the umpire have all but disappeared.

This would do away with a large random sample being demanded at present, as only four machines will have to be counted per constituency. In case any mismatch is detected, all machines in the constituency must be counted.

In March, as many as 21 opposition parties moved the Supreme Court demanding that 50 per cent of the total slips be tallied. The SC asked the Commission to increase the sample size of the tally from one booth per assembly constituency to five assembly segments of each Lok Sabha constituency “for better voter confidence and credibility of electoral process”.

The court said that the move will ensure the “greatest degree of accuracy and satisfaction” in the electoral process.

On April 24, the same 21 parties approached the SC again with a review petition, citing concerns related to the first two phases of polling and the “unreliability” of the EVMs.

On May 7, it was turned down with the court saying that “we are not inclined to modify our order”.

I wonder how these parties expected the apex to review its decision, which was taken after great deliberation, when no new facts had emerged justifying the return to the court.

Surprisingly, the issue which should have been discussed and debated is still unattended: What happens if the VVPAT count doesn’t match the EVM count? Even one mismatch is enough to create doubts about the other machines as well.

The current provision is that if there is a mismatch, the VVPAT will prevail. This is fine if the mismatch corresponds to the figures of the mock poll, which have not been deleted.

In all other mismatch cases, perhaps all machines in the constituency should then be counted. The apex court has called for “better voter confidence and credibility of the electoral process.”

If it takes time, so be it. After all, that was the purpose behind the introduction of VVPATs. This can be tried out on a pilot basis. There may not be many such cases, if at all, as evident from the experience of 1,500 machines, which didn’t throw up any mismatches, but public confidence will be ensured.

The Commission may convene an all-party meeting, yet again, as concerns are serious and the stakes extremely high. My experience in dealing with political parties is that with open-minded dialogue, consensus does emerge. Clarity of procedures is required before the counting day approaches. Time is running out.

(Writer is former chief election commissioner of India and the author of An Undocumented Wonder- the Making of the Great Indian Election.)

Continue Reading

Opinion

Main Hoon Na!

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By  Chitra Padmanabhan

Clacking away at the computer keyboard, I heard a tapping sound on the window. It was good old Birdie looking as if she was bursting to tell me something. “I have flown all the way from the abode of Shiva in the Himalayas,” she said, “to tell you about the drama that unfolded there yesterday.”

Curbing my curiosity – it was a long way off from the Garhwal Himalayas to Delhi – I placed a bowl of water and a plate of millets before her. Atithi devo bhava (the visitor is like god), after all.

 

After a few minutes during which she gave the refreshments her undivided attention, Birdie began chirping: “A few nights ago there was frenetic activity in the forest. It was not the harbinger of an earthquake to come, just the anticipation of an exciting event to liven things up. News had filtered in that there was going to be a full-fledged film shooting around the temple of Shiva. None other than the great actor of Bharatvarsha was scheduled to come and deliver the performance of a lifetime.”

“So, what happened?” I asked breathlessly.

Birdie warbled: “It was fascinating. Total pro that he is, actor saheb kept experimenting with different face angles to see which one the camera liked the most. People call Aamir Khan a method actor, but yeh to uska bhi baap nikla (he was miles ahead of Aamir). It was not just face angles that he focused on; he went down to the last detail, such as what should be the exact set of his shoulders as he walked towards the shrine. In fact, he told the unit to do some seriously complex calculations to arrive at the exact angle.”

But why, I wanted to know.

In an awed tone Birdie recited word for word what actor saheb said: “I should be seen to be somewhat humble as I approach the god but not so humble as to appear like the indistinguishable mass of pleading supplicants. I am the best, after all, and I have my image to consider. I need to look like a realised soul who has been on a spiritual journey for decades to be the saintly actor that I am, capable of making the masses and classes forget their troubles with just a sideway glance.”

According to what Birdie told me, the entire unit, from the director to the humble gofer, speechlessly nodded. They had been witness to his temper – he had entered his vanity van for a makeover and had come out holding the make-up artiste by the scruff of his neck, saying, “Do I pay you to show the shadows under my eyes?” On top of that it seems he had given explicit instructions that he should be shown as taller than the mountains in every frame.

I was impatient to know about the scene that the actor was going to shoot but I bided my time as Birdie nibbled on some biscuit crumbs.

Fortified, she continued: “Do you remember the film Main Hoon Na in which Shah Rukh Khan starts hearing violins every time his eyes alight on Sushmita Sen? Well, they were preparing for a similar scene here. The actor was wearing the ochre/saffron costume of an ascetic for the shot. The director went through the details with his team one last time: ‘As saheb starts walking towards the shrine, the entire area will come alive with a song sung to the lord, Rang de tu mohe gerua (drench me in ochre/saffron), the colour symbolising asceticism and devotion of the highest kind.’” Apparently, the actor told the unit to do what it had to do to ensure that his head and the shikhar of the temple were at the same level.

There was a long pause, as if Birdie was playing the scene in her mind, and not liking it too much. I, on the other hand, was agog to know more.

Finally Birdie spoke in a small voice: There was a terrible mix-up and the wrong song was played. It was not the sonorous ‘Rang de tu mohe gerua’ that reverberated through the Himalayas but the following lines:

Raja ho ya rank

Yahan to sab hain chowkidar

Kuch to aa kar chale gaye

Kuch jaane ko tayyar

Khabardar, Khabardar!

(King or pauper,

Everyone’s just a caretaker in this world, keeping time

Some have come and gone

And some are on the verge of going

Be mindful!)

As the philosophical song played in those pristine environs, all hell broke loose. The spiritual expression that the actor had mustered with great effort came apart at the seams. In its place emerged the ugly face of hubris that he, a king among men, should be told, albeit mistakenly, that his reign was coming to an end. The line between the actor and the role had completely blurred. Maybe his reaction had something to do with the fact that there were new actors on the block.

Meanwhile the unit members took shelter behind any rock they could find and waited for saheb to cool down. After making doubly sure that they had the right soundtrack the director prepared to shoot the scene again. This time it was indeed the mellifluous Rang de tu mohe gerua that brought the place alive.

I asked Birdie about the expression on the actor’s face.

She was thoughtful: “People say a good actor is aware of the camera but knows that it is his conviction about the role and his craft that sees him through. He is oblivious of the camera at that time. That day I realised that the camera is ruthless; it is quick to smoke out any false note.”

I broke the flow of her reverie: “Are you saying the great actor lacked the skill?”

Birdie hummed and hawed: “Listen, I don’t want this story coming back to bite me. Let me just say that for all his ‘I am the lion of the jungle’ demeanour, actor saheb was so conscious of who he was and of the camera that he ended up playing an actor trying to be humble in the most arrogant manner. Moreover, the state-of-the-art cameras are so cruel that let alone trace the slightest ripple of tension in the muscles, they can even capture the anxiety flowing in the actor’s blood.

I asked: “Is that what the camera showed that day?”

Birdie nodded: “The camera showed an actor so loath to free himself of his grandiose image, so stressed out at the thought that he would be judged by the audience that he lost his nerve. So he abandoned the fiction genre and decided to shoot a documentary. He had the camera follow him, the great actor, or abhineta, on a personal journey the likes of which were undertaken by the ancient rishis of Bharatvarsha. “

I consoled Birdie, saying that there would be other film shootings, other actors.

She said: “All that is fine, but it seemed to me that the ‘documentary’ made by actor saheb was far more fictitious than any fiction film could have been. Give me Shah Rukh Khan any day!”

Continue Reading

Latest News

Latest News3 hours ago

BJP wins Jammu, Udhampur, Ladakh LS seats

Jammu, May 23: Bhartiya Janta Party has won Jammu, Udhampur and Ladakh Lok Sabbha seats. Dr. Jitendra Singh has won...

Latest News3 hours ago

NC wins all three LS seats in Kashmir

Farooq wins Srinagar, Akbar Lone Baramulla, Hasnain Masoodi Anantnag

Latest News3 hours ago

Accept People’s verdict with humility: Mehbooba

Srinagar, May 23 : PDP president Mehbooba Mufti congratulated Narendra Modi for the “historic” mandate in the Parliamentary elections whose...

Latest News3 hours ago

Congratulate BJP for a stellar performance, all credits to Modi, Shah: Omar Abdullah

National Conference (NC) leader Omar Abdullah on Thursday congratulated Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP president Amit Shah for an...

Latest News5 hours ago

NC leads in all three seats in Kashmir

National Conference candidates are leading from all the three Parliamentary seats in Kashmir, with Farooq Abdullah and Hasnain Masoodi close...

Latest News5 hours ago

Sensex zooms past 40k mark as NDA takes healthy lead

MUMBAI: The BSE Sensex hit another lifetime high of 40,030.86 on Thursday as the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) was...

Latest News6 hours ago

Dead body of active militant’s brother found in Pulwama

Pulwama, May 23 : Dead body of active militants brother has been found in his native village on Thursday morning....

Latest News6 hours ago

BJP leading in 288 seats, may get majority on its own

Counting of votes to decide the fate of 8,049 candidates is underway. Going by the early leads, Prime Minister Narendra...

Latest News6 hours ago

Abdullah, Mir, Jitendra Singh leading in early trends

Srinagar, May 23: National Conference president Farooq Abdullah, BJP leader Jitendra Singh and Congress state president GA Mir were leading...

Subscribe to The Kashmir Monitor via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to The Kashmir Monitor and receive notifications of new stories by email.

Join 1,010,748 other subscribers

Archives

May 2019
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
Advertisement