There is a particular pattern that after every incident of terror that has its origins in Kashmir, a certain narrative is built up, either portraying Kashmiris as not part of it or presenting them as victims of persecution. This happened after the Pahalgam terror attack when Kashmiris were shown “mourning” over the killings, when they were feeling about the loss of their business. While it is wrong to assume that all Kashmiris are supporters of terror incidents, equally wrong is crying and creating an imaginary victimhood, in characteristic Kashmiri ‘daamb’ (crying over imaginary persecution) style.
Deliberately a different narrative is built up to counter the real issue. Same thing has been happening after the Ref Fort blast, which left 13 people dead. Obviously there has been widespread anger and outrage all over the country over the blast. Particularly after it was revealed that the masterminds and executors of the blast were well-qualified professionals doing well in their lives having got the best of education and jobs. It was obvious that radicalisation has nothing to do with economic or social deprivation. In fact, their designs were more serious had they not been found out on time.
There has been no incident of violence or harassment anywhere in the country against any Kashmiri, including students. Yet, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah came out with a statement that all Kashmiris are not terrorists, calling upon people in rest of India not to harass them, when there was none. Of course, all Kashmiris are not terrorists. Nobody says it either.
But why does someone like the Chief Minister need to come out with such a statement suggesting that the Kashmiri students were under attack all over India. Omar Abdullah’s situation is understandable. Not only has he to be politically correct, he has also to show himself as the saviour of Kashmiris having come to their defence when they needed it, although there was actually no need for it.
The issue of the ‘so called’ harassment was raked up by self-proclaimed student leader Nasir Khuehami, and self-appointed president of the Jammu and Kashmir Students’ Association. He addressed a press conference in Srinagar crying “harassment” of the Kashmiri students in different parts of the country. He even sought the intervention of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to prevent “this harassment”.
It is natural for the investigating agencies to verify the credentials of everybody once an incident like the Red Fort blast took place. Apparently, people like Khuehami want complete immunity from law so that none of the students should be asked any questions. What these apologists call “harassment” is verification of their credentials or monitoring of their social media profiles. That is natural for the investigators, particularly when the culprits in the Red Fort blast surprised everyone as they looked like common medical professionals and teachers.
Also read: Making sense of Red Fort blast and thereafter
There is a deliberate design behind these cries of “persecution and victimisation”. Every time such a terror incident takes place in or outside Kashmir, the “overground sympathisers and supporters” of terrorists come out with such claims that students outside Kashmir are being harassed, when nobody is. This is actually aimed at building up a particular kind of narrative that the Kashmiri students are being harassed and painting the people of the rest of the country in a bad light as if all of them are hostile towards the Kashmiris.
The Government of India must call the bluff of all such people and ask them to specifically quote the incidents where any such harassment has taken place. Failing which, such people should be duly prosecuted under law.
There is a particular pattern about these incidents. The culprits are glorified in a subtle way. Media reports are generated suggesting that a particular terrorist was “a great human being”, quoting unnamed “class fellows”, “neighbours” and others that he was a very caring person, a loving father and a loving son and a great colleague and so on. This is obviously to suggest that the mastermind/ culprit was feeling “victimised and persecuted” and hence, was driven to such an extreme step.
Even a newspaper like The Telegraph published from Kolkata carried out a lead story in a recent edition, “not so black & white (collar)”, while referring to “white collar terror”. The story seeks to defend the mastermind and his supporters, suggesting that there was “a feeling of siege and subjugation many Kashmiris feel, not mere radicalisation.”
The government, security and intelligence agencies will have to necessarily take a serious note of such narratives, whose obvious aim is to deflect attention from every act of terror, justify it in a subtle way and project the victims as culprits by way of accusing them of “harassment”. Till such people are not taken to task and held accountable, every act of terror would be made to look justified and every victim, who resists or protests, would be made to look like a culprit of violence against the “innocent people”.
Follow us
