Dear Ms Roy
You are considered to be most vociferous and articulate spokesperson of the oppressed and downtrodden of the world and you can be only compared with likes of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela at least I don't have any doubt about it.
And as you consider yourself global citizen and not the citizen of oppressive and retrograde country like India, I have humble suggestion for you, there is worthy cause waiting for you across our Western border.
And I have all the conviction that, only you can present the case of these oppressed tribals of Balochistan with same eloquence you have presented the case of the poor and oppressed Kashmiris who are crushed under Indian military boots everyday.
Khan of Kalat, ruler of Balochistan at the time of independence which is largest province of pakistan by geographical area wanted to remain independent but he was forced to aceede to Pakistan by Jinha with the thereat of military action and since then at least four to five major upsurges by Baloochi population against Pakistan government have taken place.
The most serious one was between 1973 to 1977 which was crushed with heavy military hand by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The most recent upsurge which started in 2004 was crushed by Gen. Pravez Mushraff by killing Nawab Akbar Bugati by attacking the place of his hiding in 2006 with helicopter gunships.
So once again my earnest appeal to you Ms Roy is please lend your voice to the cause of Baloochis who don't have any English speaking, charming and articulate spokesperson with international reach like you.
And I have full faith in your ability to give justice to oppressed Baloochis.
Sincerly Yours
MacroTheScribe
PS-I given brief hisotry of the Baloochis and their struggle in my letter, so that you should not be accused by your jaundiced critics, who are accusing you of not knowing the history of the country. I hope you will appreciate my feelings for doing so, though I know it unnecessarily increased the length of the letter and wasted your valuable time.
makarand, forget who arundhati roy is what she has to say; let's accept, india itself is responsible for kashmir problem. the government should take extreme measures (the way it took in punjab to crush khalistan movement) - once for all - without bothering about UN or U.S. or pak to crush the rising rebellion in the valley !
ReplyDeleteI think it's a tough bet for Arundhati Roy. Because 'liberals' like her pick and choose their 'causes'. For Roy, a 'cause' in Gujarat is better than a 'cause' in say, West Bengal or Kerala. LIke that, Kashmir is sexier that Balochistan. Can't you get it, it's bloody India and Indians who are involved in Kashmir. I read an editorial in The Hindu, which is a pamphlet for the likes of Roy. It said there is no case for sedition against Roy because first, the act that provides for action against sedition is archaic, and second, Roy has only said what millions of Kashmiris have been saying. Lets accept this argument and apply it elsewhere. The RSS has neverreally accepted the idea of secularism as practised in India. And millions of active RSS workers and their well-wishers share this antipathy to secularism which virtually means cajoling the Muslims and sermonising the Hindus. The question is are we going to accept the RSS version of Hindu Rashtra just because it is supported by millions of Indians? If majority and numbers are going to determine the course of debate, then here is a perfect case of bowing to the popular will. Then, there are millions in Southern States and now in Maharashtra too who do not accept Hindi as Rashtrabhasha or Rajbhasha. Shall we accept this vision? If a Raj Thackeray says he does not accept Hindi as the national language or Marathi (or the local language for that matter) must be given preference over Hindi, there is a demand from the likes of Roy and so called liberals to book Thackeray under the National Security Act. Why? He has said only what millions of Maharashtrians and people owing their cultural allegiance to the Dravidian languages have been saying. If violation of the constitution is considered a subjective matter, then a Raj Thackeray becomes a national threat but Roy does not. What kind of nonsense is this? Sedition is speaking out against the constitutional, federal, and legal structure of Indian state. Whosoever does it must be punished.
ReplyDelete