Indian Muslims need to float Islamic party to protect genuine interests of Muslims!

Indian Muslims need to float Islamic party to protect genuine interests of Muslims!

India is undergoing a serious intellectual crisis almost for nothing good and unfortunately, Muslims are the target. .

Congress and BJP are the two sides of the same old Hindutva coin. As BJP is overtaking the Congress now after playing Hindutva politics to trap, weaken and destroy Congress.

World is looking forward to witnessing the scenario of Congress burial. It is time Congress let the BJP to play the Congress style of politics, including an element of secularism to assure the minorities of their safety in an emerging Hindutva nation.
Reviving Hindutva honor was the agenda not only of RSS and its political outfits like BJP but even the Congress party which claims to be secular.
Muslims should stop looking to Congress for safely and security against the will of the BJP. They will have to find their own means and ways to serve themselves.

Indian Muslims need their own Islamic political parties to safeguard their genuine interests no matter who rules India.
Kerala Muslims have got their own party called Muslim League (IUML) to protect themselves from the any onslaught on them. In Hyderabad, the Majlis party (AIMIM) remains the main source of protection and inspiration for Muslims.
Instead of depending entirely on Hindu parties, like Congress or SP, BSP, etc, it is all ways beneficial for Muslims to join Muslim league or float their own version of Islamic party that should care for all Muslims in the state or nation or localities.
Muslims now know that Congress and SP etc are using the BJP as a powerful tool to threaten the Muslims and take away their votes free of cost. It is the ruling SP in UP that is responsible for crimes against Muslims in Muzzafarnagar and elsewhere.
Congress and other so-called secular parties have exploited Muslims, misusing their ill-fate in Hindu dominated areas.
These parties, apart from other political outfits, led by the ruling Congress party, have a common agenda for Hindus and against Muslims. Ever since independence Hindu politicians have made secret decisions to make Muslims plight weak so that they are totally dependable on Hindus for existence and sustenance. The regime practiced norms to inform the Muslims, indirectly, that they are not equal to Hindus.
Hindus have been facing an unknown crisis and they hate Muslims for that. The open Hindutva parties exploit that mentality of Hindus but Congress also tactfully plays its Hindutva card, ably concealed from Muslims.
At higher level, Hindus suffer from intellectual insecurity, inferiority complex and confusion, resulting in aggressiveness. They raise victimhood but express it through ultra chauvinism.
Indian regime executed two major milestones to showcase the fast rising power of Hindutva. An apocalyptic modern Indian official imagination has been enriched, especially in the post Nehru era when fanatic Hindus came to dominate the Congress party, by the exploits of Hindu nationalists.
The destruction in 1992 of the 16th-century Babri Mosque (December 06), and the nuclear tests of 1998 are viewed by Indian regime – both Congress and BJP – not just as revenge for an imagined occurrence in the past, but as the most effective show of the new Hindutva power. BJP and Congress share that false prestige.
Modi and other anti-Muslim ideologues perhaps do not seem to know that India’s reputation as a “golden bird” flourished during the long centuries of Islamic rule. Islam gave India new culture, new music, new architecture, new language and literature and new cuisine and new safe dress code. If a few fanatic Hindus feel inferior standing in front of world famous Taj Mahal, who is at fault? If biriyani is the most popular food in India why blame Muslims?
It is said inferiority complex has no cure.
It appears, India now seeks to promote Hindu religious-racial supremacy in trying to catch up with the modern West. Like during the Peter the great, the semi-Westernized Russian elite’s tormented search for a native identity to uphold against the West, and failed, India is now attempting the same afresh. Russia in the post revolutionary era finally wanted to combat evil influences from the immoral West but collapsed all together. Today, Vladimir Putin quotes “The Russian Idea” aand blames the West for the collapse says the west is intent upon humiliating Russia with the help of spies, NGOs, journalists, and Pussy Riot. The wounded mindset of Indian elite is dragging the Hindus to permanent communal war.
Indian regime seems to use Muslims as its prime target in order to unite Hindu castes.
Many Congress people wanted get the party close to BJP and if that happens now or later, Muslims who trust the soft Hindutva Congress would be left on the streets.
Instead of waiting for that to happen eventuality, Muslims should hurry up to form their party to serve both Islam and Muslims.
One expects a full length debate on the issue so that safety, security and well being of Muslims are legally ensured.
Time never waited for others, and now not for the Muslims to decide too long their destiny.


*د. عبد راف *

Educationist, Prolific writer, Specialist on State Terrorism; Chronicler of Foreign occupations &
Freedom movements (Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc.) Chancellor-Founder of Centor for International
Affairs(CIA); Commentator on world affairs & sport fixings, Expert on
Mideast Affairs, university teacher; Author of books/ebooks; Editor.

Unfortunately, today there is not even one Muslim nation
today practicing truly Islamic faith and life.
(Account: No 62310377429* -* CIF No:
78215311481- State Bank of Hyderabad, India) Phone: 91-8129081217



Indian Communist parties to merge with Congress?

Indian Communist parties to merge with Congress?
In India today, the communist parties perhaps are the most confused ones because of their wrong policies and political practices.
It is only a speculative exercise to argue for the merger of communist parties with Congress to save the oldest Indian political party form eventual extinction, the begins have already been made by the BJP’s emergence of the only national party today to stay in power both at the centre and states.
In fact, it appears many communist leaders want to save the Congress party than their own parties in India.
Congress party leaders comprehending the dichotomy in the left circles have, on their own, expressed their cumulative desire to make Congress-communist front against the BJP communal allies to stay strong contenders for power in future. And, Congress party is more than sure about the possibility of a joint front to face the BJP threat to secular foundations of the nation. In fact some Congress sources have already asked the support of the Left parties.
However, many Communist leaders, cutting across the division of left movement in India, seem to be thinking even in terms of merging their communist parties with “progressive” Congress to make a formidable alliance to face polls in future.
In view of the fact that over years of colossal experience as ruling coalition of three states, viz, Kerala, West Bengal and Tripura and serving the rich and corporates, the communist parties have also conveniently dropped their goal of serving the cause of common people and switched over to protect the rich and corporate in exchange for “funds” from them. The Indian communist mindset has got reformed in a such extend that in West Bengal, the they took away the agricultural lands from the peasants and gave them to the corporate bosses, obviously for extra generous funds.
But the people of Bengal did not excuse the communists for their crimes against the common people and used the first available opportunity to sack the government w and favored a Mamata Banerjee as the new CM, who even claimed to be the real communist for her genuine concern for common people.
Communist leaders, like Congress party, have taken the support of common people for granted and thought no matter what leftists do or don’t do, the people would vote for the left parties because they are real committed and obeying communists.
No, people no more trust the communists for their declarations and mere protest gimmicks.
Today, the communist parties prefer close nexus with Congress party and making the Congress party return o power sooner than later seem be their ideological motto, while people are mere votes for them.
Both Congress and communist parties think a joint front by them would be relevant and is the only way forward to save the nation from further suffronization of India. Earlier in 70s many communists quit their parties to join the Congress party to make the party genuinely secular but that has not happened. Many Congress leaders across the nation are Hindutva minded and RSS members and sympathizers and they fool the Muslim members of the party, making them to be pro-Hindu people. For many Congress Muslims, this corrupt and essentially anti-Muslim party is more important than Babri Mosque. That is the Muslim mindset created very carefully by the Congress regime over decades o fits misrule. So much so, Muslims do not mind the hell by working for Congress and other anti-Muslim parties against the Islamic interests. .
For a joint Congress-communist front to happen, first the Congress party should severe its secret nexus with BJP and RSS. Congress cannot promote Hindutva agenda of RSS when the communists expected to promote the Congress misrule again in the country.
Obviously the Muslims in the country have abandoned the pro-Hindutva Congress party but have not found credible alternative to post their valuable votes for.

Indian politics: Communist leaders betrayed Left movement!

Indian politics: Communist leaders betrayed Left movement!


By supporting the Congress led UPA government, the Indian communist leaders have indeed been promoting the Congress party interests while Congress party itself is promoting the Hindutva forces for special “national” reasons.

World over, the communist movement has been dying a slow death as leaders promote corporate interests and consider the rich class as their trusted allies because they are funded by the corporates lords and rich guys.

With the strongest former communist leader Russian power now being far away from communist concerns and China is trying to be close ally of an unwilling America, Indian communists who had always looked to both Moscow and Beijing for guidance and help are the distressed and disappointed parties and they have no serious interests left for working class politics.

Promoted by the Congress government and the Indian communal system established by it, the Hindutva parties led by BJP became a serious threat to peace and harmony in the country as they incite violence though their public -hate speeches plus anti-secular literature.

In fact, the Communists and socialists in India also play a kind of tactic used by mafia in joint cricket exercises.

Leftist movement in India, led by the CPM, found the emergence of Hindutva communal politics a serious threat not only to them but also to the nation at large in due course as the BJP allies are trying to dismantle the secular democratic fabric of India. This predicament forced the Left forces to support the Congress party at the centre and kept the minority regime in power for a long time. In exchange for these gestures, Congress party had offered the Speakership to the CPM.

When the Congress party faced problems in the parliament, the leftists willingly rescued the Congress government and it supported the infamous “Profit Bill” in order to save communist Speaker of Lok Sabha –parliament.

Communists face problems in their backyards like Kerala, West Bengal where Congress party is their main opponent. However, the communists lost West Bengal when a strong Bengali leader Mamata Banerjee emerged the popular leader in the state to defeat both Congress and communists. Her image as the common people’s pleaders also did not let the BJP to make its presence felt among Bengalis.

That the continued support of Communist parties to the Congress party in parliament has made them unpopular in Kerala and West Bengal and Tripura has now become the topic of heated debate in Left circles. In the absence of a leader like Mamata can help the communists in the pools to some extent.

Despite all their efforts to keep BJP out and Congress in, the BJP and other Hindutva parties have become the most formidable political outfits of India today.

It is not that communists are unaware of hidden secret nexus between Congress and Hindutva parties but the communists preferred to ignore that though indirect promotion of Hindutva parties to control Muslims in India has made India a seriously wounded fanatic nation. Maybe, communists had expected huge gains from Congress party but failed and now found themselves in the crossroads.

Moreover, the CPM and allies refused to form a third front to take both the congress and BJP on their horns. In fact they created obstacles in the formation of a credible third front, leaving wide open the poll scenario to BJP. AAP also has similar weaknesses.

However, true to their credentials, the CPM refuses to admit its folly of supporting the fast sinking Congress party, thereby harming their own prospects. Not only that. The Communists never criticized the corrupt policies of the Congress government. Some communists blame not their policies or tactics but the implementation part of them. So funny!

Congress party, in further pursuing the BJP economic policies snot, promotes corporatist interests and sacrificing the genuine interests of common people. Obviously, BJP has no concerns for common people, nor is working to remove corruption as it also opposed the Anna Hazare’s (and Arvind Kejriwal’s) anti-corruption movement. Price rises and extra taxes the Congress party introduced are the BJP agenda but the communist parties did not oppose them.

In fact, over years of passive approach to problems of common people with full commitment and sincere concern for them has generated a deformed leftist movement.

And, worse, there are no indications that the communist leaders will change their petrified mindset in the near future.

Dr. Abdul Ruff, Specialist on State Terrorism; Educationalist;Chancellor-Founder of Centor for International Affairs(CIA); Independent Analyst-columnist;Chronicler of Foreign occupations & Freedom movements(Palestine,Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc)

Kerala remembers C. H. Mohammed Koya – Great Son of India, former and only Muslim Chief minister of Kerala!

Kerala remembers C. H. Mohammed Koya – Great Son of India, former and only Muslim Chief minister of Kerala!



Life and work of former Kerala chief minister C. H. Mohammed Koya, who worked to give Kerala Muslims a status as equal citizens that made them in due course stand with some prestige that they enjoy today, should help Indian Muslims to live with honour in India.

Muslims of Kerala state marked with profound sense of respect and admiration the 35th anniversary of C.H. Mohammed Koya assuming power as Kerala’s Chief Minister on 12th October 1979. C.H. Mohammed Koya was the first and only Muslim chief minister Kerala state has seen and contribution to the state he had made during his brief period of CM position as well as a minister for long period has been admired by one all.

A simple function was organized in Thiruvananthapuram on 20th October as part of the anniversary programme at Trivandrum Press Club in which many important persons praised the simple person C.H. Mohammed Koya that he was but highly productive nature of work done by Koya for the people of Kerala. Prominent people of Kerala who had personal experience with Koya also dwelt about this infallible character and concern for the backward Malappuram region with poor people which he developed as new district. Today Malappuram is no less important than other districts. Educational and economic levels of the region have improved stead fast, especially with Gulf jobs for them.

Among the speakers, M.M Hassan, the Vice President of Kerala state Congress party, Onakkur Joseph, Abdul Wahab, among others detailed their experiences with Koya, detailing his qualities as minister and human. Shockingly, the Muslim league leaders like E.H. Ahmad, former central minister, M.K. Muneer, son of CH Muhammad Koya and a minister in the UDF ministry of state, did not attend the meeting, citing some vague reasons. The electricity was cut a few times in the hall during the meeting for no specified reasons, though the state secretariat is just nearby. In fact, the electric problem started when the Imam of Palayam mosque began reciting relevant verses from Holy Quran. Maybe, that is only a coincidence and not a deliberate attempt to disrupt the meeting.

As the chief architect of modern Malabar and the force behind the establishment of University of Calicut, CH Muhammed Koya has done maximum for the uplift the region and people. One of most sincere statesmen in Kerala, C.H. Mohammed Koya was born on July 15 1927 at Attoli of Calicut district as the son of Ahmed Musliyar and Mariyumma. His father was a countryside doctor and a specialist in Yunani Medicine. The family had to face many hardships in their life. At high School was his primary experience of politics. His child education from his father and mother and the primary education passes at Kongannur Aided Elementary School and next stage education was at Velur Mappila Elementary School and Quilandi Board High School. He was the one of the great and unmemorable leader in the Kerala Political History.

C.H. Mohammed Koya was an Indian politician and the tenth Chief Minister of Kerala. He served from October 12, 1979 to December 1, 1979. His term of just 54 days is the shortest term ever by a Chief Minister to this date. He experienced his first taste of politics right from his high school. He was actively involved with the IUML. In his early years, he served a short term in the Kurumpranad District Muslim League committee and later in the Municipal Office in Calicut. In 1951, he was elected to the National Executive of the IUML and shortly afterwards, was elected the Councilor of Calicut Municipality. Mohammed Koya was elected into the Kerala Legislative Assembly from the Tanur constituency in 1960. C.H. Mohammed Koya defeated K.P. Kuttikrishnan Nair of the Indian National Congress.

Seethi Sahib guided CH to this path, it was. He would do nothing without consulting him. Of course there is no doubt that it was Syed Abdur Rahman Bafaqi who raised CH giving him all the necessary essential of life. But who influenced CH intellectually was Seethi Sahib, besides Ismail Sahib (one of the founding members of Indian Union Muslim League). His chief mentor, both in personal life and political career, was Syed Abdur Rahman Bafaqi Thangal, to whom he was indebted for all his achievements.

Despite being one of the youngest members in the Assembly, he was known for his charisma and the flair with which he discharged his duties. When Muslim league quit the political alliance at State level, Mohammed Koya resigned Speakership and contested the ensuing Parliamentary Poll successfully from the Calicut constituency. Again, in the State Assembly elections held in 1967, he won by a vast majority, contesting from Mankada constituency. He was the Education Minister in the cabinet headed by Shri E.M.S. Namboodiripad. He continued to retain his Education portfolio in succeeding ministries headed by C. Achutha Menon, K. Karunakaran, A.K. Antony till the Ninth ministry headed by P.K. Vasudevan Nair. As Education minister he was instrumental in formulating many plans that has helped Kerala reach the forefront in the education sector in India. On June 9, 1961 he became the Speaker of the Kerala Legislative Assembly after the sudden demise of K.M. Seethi Sahib. He took oath in the name of Allah at the legislative assembly.

On October 12, 1979 C.H.Mohammed Koya became the Chief Minister of Kerala and his term continued to December 1, 1979. He was the Deputy Chief Minister in the next United Democratic Front (UDF) ministry headed by K. Karunakaran. Continuing in the seat even after the ministry was re-constituted in 1982, after the General Election, Koya stayed there till his untimely demise in the ensuing year, but could not become CM again.

CH Muhammed Koya was a good leader among minority Muslims in Kerala. C.H was the main architect cum founder of Calicut University. Northern Kerala was very backward in the educational field. The university was established to uplift its people and make them capable of facing the challenges of the modern life. C.H.Mohammed Koya Library is an Academic library, affiliated with Calicut University has a collection of 95000 volumes, promoting quality research. The C H Mohammed Koya Library in the campus of the University of Calicut and the Haji C.H. Mohamed Koya College for Advanced Studies under the University of Kerala at Thiruvananthapuram are named in his honour.

CH maintained good ties with the Arab leaders as well. It was following C.H.’s efforts that Arabic teachers in Kerala began to enjoy equal opportunities as their colleagues in government run schools and colleges. Former chief of Sharia Court, Sharjah said: “The history of Indian Muslims is incomplete without the name of Muhammad Koya” It is impossible to speak of CH without a personal touch because it was he who led me to active politics. I had never cherished a dream to enter politics. The only ambition in life was to become a lawyer. I would not say that he disliked me becoming lawyer, but he disallowed me. Whenever I would enter court, he would send for me. Once during a conversation, he asked me to enter the ‘Court of people’ than the ‘Court of law’. Some elders disliked the youthful fervor put forward by people like CH and me. We were trying to infuse new ideas and tactics. When criticism would take serious turn, I used to say to CH “why to enter these quarrels. Why not pursue a career in academics or profession?” CH replied, “My friend, tomorrow we are the ones to lead. How will that happen if we fear these old ones?” He was a true leader forever!

After the partition, many leading Muslim personalities, fearing Hindu fanaticism and anti-Muslim crimes, left for Pakistan. It was iron-willed choice of Seethi Sahib to stay back on his motherland that later paved a path for a political leadership for Muslims in India. Later when Jawaharlal Nehru asked him to dismiss the League, he replied in a convincing tone “I have no authority to do so” referring to the trust that the community had put in him. “Let us have a mainstream of our community and let us also have to merge that mainstream with the national mainstream, keeping the identity of our community as enshrined in the constitution” wrote CH when he was at Delhi. ‘What a quotable quote has Ch written’ exclaimed the colleague who read the letter. Once when he was the chief minister, the opposition leader said in protest, “Chief Minister, you should understand that we are sitting here as opposition”. CH replied, “Honorable opposition leader, I understand what you mean by ‘opposition’. But it is not right to say ‘sitting’ opposition because you are always ‘standing opposition’. The assembly burst in laughter. CH gave instant replies that sealed the lips of his opponents. Although many had differences political differences with him, everyone around him enjoyed his sense of humor.

Satire was the domain special to CH. His literary reviews were also full of humor. He brought to life the characters in the novels of Vaikom Mohammed Basheer- the legendary novelist of Kerala whose works have been translated to several European languages.

Unlike the hypocritical attitude of other political parties, Indian Union Muslim League never hesitated in declaring that it stood for the interest of its community. C.H was bold enough to declare this even in his short-lived Chief Ministry. He spoke thus while being the Chief Minister of Kerala in the assembly, “I am a sincere Muslim. I will not compromise on the privileges of my community. Nor will I snatch the rights of other communities.’

CH was persistent in fighting for the rights of his community. But at the same time he would not snatch what was due to other community. This is what CH taught us. He had to face great criticism even from his own circles. But at the same time he had a sense humor even while facing hardships. He would not leave anyone from criticism. Once there were rumors in the press about differences between him and then chief minister, K. Karunakaran. While talking to the press reporters, he said, “It is true that there are differences between me and chief minister. When having tea, he drinks it with sugar while I have without it.”

Whenever his community’s prestige was questioned, CH fought back with this pen and tongue. Once when he was the Minster of Public works, the opposition raised questions about the lack of construction of roads and bridges. CH gave a ‘befitting excuse’ to them saying, “I like to build them as soon as possible. But the honorable Chief Minister seated here does not require roads and bridges to travel. His car can go over any marshy paddy fields. But my fellow MLAs cannot do so” joked CH while hinting to the chief minister to speed up the concerned files. Even his own colleagues could not escape his criticism. The political sincerity that CH held was the path that Syed PMSA Pookoya followed, what Syed Bafaqi led and what Seethi Sahib preached. When the Communists government came to power in Kerala, the Vasudevan Nayar, the then Chief Minister, tried to lure to CH saying “CH! How long will you sit there in opposition?” He responded immediately saying “As long as you sit there (as ruling party), I will be seated here”!

Some Muslim leaders from Kerala had gone to Delhi accepting the invitation of Ms Indira Gandhi, the then Indian prime Minister. As they reached her home, they had to wait for some time. When they saw the children playing in the compound, CH intended to play with them. When others refused, he convinced them saying “My dear friends! They are the future prime Ministers of India”. How can we forget that simplicity of CH?

Anti-Islamic Hindus, among others who could not stand a Muslim becoming CM, had accused him of being a communalist. But the same accusers addressed him as the greatest nationalist when he died. Those who called him a radical later called praised him as a broad -minded politician.

Now the Muslim League functions as a subordinate party of the Congress party.

In pursuing as a national policy of secular, democratic India to deny Muslims any chances for becoming Premier and Chief-ministers, Kerala political parties and leaders promote only non-Muslims to become chief ministers of the state, while they deliberately and very tactfully oppose any Muslim leaders becoming chief minister.

Koya’s help made Muslims deserving dignity and his good intentions and best wishes have kept the Muslims in Kerala in good stead, though prospering in Mideast and in turn making Kerala economically strong. His Honesty and Public awareness is very popular and well known to all Kerala. He was the representative of the Indian Union Muslim League.

Today, Muslim leaders are available in the ruling Congress party to be considered for promotion as chief minister but for some bogus and vague Hindutva reasons the party leadership refuses any senior Muslim leader to assume chief-minstership. Besides, the Muslim League (AIML) which is a collation partner of ruling UDF with second largest MLAs to sustain the government against the LDFs rigorous efforts to win over a couple of MLAs to pull down the Congress led government. However, the Muslim League does not resort to blackmail tactics to get from UDF at least Deputy CM post which legitimately deserves.

it is really Indian absurdity that even though Muslims in Kerala constitute about 30% of the population, Muslims are denied their right to become the CM of the state. By appeasing anti-Muslim forces in the country, the Congress party has deliberately kept the Muslim leadership in its control, not allowing them to become really genuine leaders of the community and state and country. As a result, Muslim leaders just work as paid vote bank agents and are deceiving the community.

Indian Parliament could pass a law to make a minority member Deputy CM, if Hindu leader is the CM so that Muslim leaders also get a chance to become CM in due course. Secular democracy is not joke.

H. Mohammed Koya who did everything possible to uplift his community and region, apart from working for the Kerala state, died on September 28 at the Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad in 1983.

Before death, Mohammed Koya served the cause of Kerala state, its poor people, development of backward regions. Muslims in the state gradually got empowered by his compassion towards the poor. By founding Calicut University in Malappuram, he helped the poor Muslims also to get educated in order to make a better living.

Kerala Muslim leaders have lessons to learn from Koya’s illustrated life.

A great son of India. May Allah enlighten his grave!
*د. عبد راف *

Educationist, Prolific writer, Specialist on State Terrorism; Chronicler of Foreign occupations &
Freedom movements (Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc.) Chancellor-Founder of Centor for International
Affairs(CIA); Commentator on world affairs & sport fixings, Expert on
Mideast Affairs, university teacher; Author of books/ebooks; Editor.


Jammu Kashmir cannot be resolved without China


Jammu Kashmir cannot be resolved without China

(A free Kashmir: Random Thoughts- 200)




A genuine and credible resolution of Jammu Kashmir issue cannot be solved properly without involving China which also has been occupying a part of Jammu Kashmir.

Interestingly, China has not made any statement regarding its occupation of Jammu Kashmir apart from India and Pakistan.  China’s continued silence on the complicated issue even when Kashmiri Muslims are targeted by Indian forces and when India and Pakistani forces blast each other at the LOC, makes the resolution more difficult than we can imagine.

Interestingly, again, neither India nor Pakistan even mention about China’s part in the resolution of the conflict.  That is because, obviously, both these occupiers do not want to resolve the Kashmir problem by surrendering the parts of Kashmir they have.

When the occupying nations are silent about China, not even the Kashmiris raise the issue anywhere.

Does it means, China can occupy the part of Kashmir It has while Indian must return the part of Jammu Kashmir it occupies

That Kashmiris never asked Pakistan also to return the lands they captured from Kashmir only indicates they do not want Pakistan to return Azad Kashmir to Kashmiris in order to make an independent Kashmir.  Rather, they want to make Kashmir a part of a destabilized Pakistan.  Already, Pakistan ahs incorporated part of Jammu Kashmir in Pakistan and when India quits Kashmir under its occupation, Pakistan wants to take that as well as Azad Kashmir to make totally destabilized weak Pakistan.

India and Pakistan keep cross-firing at each other to terrorize Kashmiris but interestingly Kashmiris do not find anything wrong with Pakistan’s efforts to terrorize the Kashmiris.

Even USA knows India would not quit Kashmir just like that and it can kill every Kashmiri Muslim if they want to cede from India to switch sides and become Pakistanis.

Any dialogue in future should be represented by India, Pakistan, China and Kashmir so that a clear cut message could be delivered from the meeting avenue.

It looks Kashmiri mindset devoids of logic.

Why should  Kashmiris who are being  killed day in and day out not ask China to end occupation of  Kashmir by its military?

Kashmiris must give up hypocrisy and pretensions. They should realize and admit that China, India and Pakistan are certainly guilty of occupational crimes in Jammu Kashmir. Kashmiris should now ask all these occupying nations to leave Jammu Kashmir to peace.

In case, Kashmiris do not have the strength to do so, then, they should accept the current position as people under permanent occupation as their fate and end hostilities with India and begin living in peaceful manner to improve the quality of their lives. .

Regimes of India, China and Pakistan should know that Kashmiri children also deserve to live  happily and play as free children.  .


*د. عبد راف *

Educationist, Prolific writer, Specialist on State Terrorism; Chronicler of Foreign occupations &
Freedom movements (Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc.) Chancellor-Founder of Centor for International
Affairs(CIA);  Commentator  on world affairs & sport fixings, Expert on
Mideast Affairs, university teacher; Author of books/ebooks; Editor.

Fragile Denuclearization: Russia steps up arsenal build ups

Fragile Denuclearization: Russia steps up arsenal build ups

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal







Denuclearization has remained a useless myth since it is purely utopian to expect the big nuke powers USA and Russia to renounce their arms arsenals, especially the weapons of mass destitution (WMD). While arms race is being propelled by these powers, the arms limitation talks are also going on, achieving literally nothing, while more and more nukes are being manufactured to terrorize the humanity on permanent basis.


Even arms control mechanisms evolved by nuclear powers are in fact meant to get rid of only the outdated or those reached the acutely dangerous level without having used them for too long.



Notwithstanding all treaties between USA and Russia, missile arsenals kept increasing in both countries, giving no chances for world peace. USA tops in warheads with 45000 warheads while Russia is second with about 40000 warheads and these arsenals are sufficient enough to destroy entire world in hours.


Americans also make Israel a nuke power by adding it more arsenals. Israel is now self proclaimed super power of Mideast, threatening the Arab nations and Iran.


Though both former Cold War adversaries have massively cut their nuclear arsenals since 1991, the data shows that over the past six months — a period that has seen Russia-West relations dive bomb over the crisis in Ukraine — both nations have boosted their nuclear forces. Although both nations increased their deployments this year, over the past three years they have moved in different directions: In 2011, Russia had 1537 warheads deployed — 106 less than now. The USA claims three years ago it had 1,800 warheads deployed, meaning it has decommissioned 158.


Since March this year, when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine, Moscow has upped the ante in both regards, increasing the number of launchers from 906 to 911 and its arsenal of warheads deployed from 1,512 to 1,643.  According to US State Department report, with 1,643 nuclear warheads deployed, Moscow has now reversed 14 years of US superiority, and now has one more warhead in the field than the Pentagon. The report, which is released annually to monitor arms control efforts, has two key metrics — the number of individual nuclear warheads deployed, and the number of launchers and vehicles to deliver those warheads, such as intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) systems, submarines and bomber planes.

This has allowed Russia to achieve parity with the USA, which has showed less zeal in deploying new weaponry, growing its deployment of its nuclear warheads from 1,585 to 1,642 since March. Washington has reduced the number of its launchers from 952 to 912.




That is to say, maintaining the nukes for a long period of time is a big task.


The veto nations, having amassed huge piles of conventional and nuclear weapons do not want to disarm themselves but expect other powers to give up their nukes.


On the other hand, those emerging nations that want to go nuclear are eager to somehow enter the veto regime so that they can share the global wealth.


Nevertheless, not many nations   ask for dismantle the veto regime of UNSC so that credible peace could prevailed on earth.


Every nation is fearful of other nations having nukes in their arsenals.  Several treaties have been signed by nuke powers, especially by former super powers USA and Russia , but have never been implemented.


The ever-growing rift between the USA and Russia is a concern throughout the foreign policy community.



Arms controlling mechanisms evolved so far by big powers have only promoted the powers concerned and not worked to advantage of the humanity since no nuclear power is interested in really give up its nuclear and conventional arsenals.  In 1968, the USA and the Soviet Union hashed out their first arms control measures at the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT), freezing the number of missiles in their arsenals.  At that time, the USA had 1,710 missiles, and the Soviet Union had 2,347.

Although SALT attempted to curb the arms race, it did not address limitations on warheads. Both sides quickly realized that they could outfit their limited missile arsenals with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), allowing a single missile to deploy many nuclear warheads after launching. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev met in Reykjavik to talk arms reduction. On the table was a 50 percent reduction in nuclear arsenals and at one point Gorbachev even told Reagan he would eliminate all of the weapons if the USA were to ditch its missile defense plans. Reagan refused, and the arsenals survived, but the conference produced the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, which was the first to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons. Today, the INF treaty is under fire, with U.S. officials accusing Putin’s Russia of violating the treaty, and senior Russian officials openly mulling pulling out of the agreement.

In 1991, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed, limiting nuclear arsenals to 1,600 delivery vehicles and 6,000 warheads.  Over the next two decades, attempts to work out a START II and III treaty never panned out, but in 2002 Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin agreed to reduce warhead arsenals to 2000 warheads under the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT, which is also known as the Treaty of Moscow). New START brought the cap down by a further 450.

However, these treaties have only applied to deployed weapons, and as such mask the still massive arsenals both sides have shacked up in storage. According to data from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, a global nuclear watchdog, the total size of the US strategic nuclear arsenal peaked at 32,000 warheads in 1966. The Soviet Union surpassed the US in 1978 and hit a high of 45,000 warheads by 1986. It should however be noted that these figures ignore technical capabilities and differences and don’t say much about the actual strength of each side. Russia still has 8,000 nuclear weapons, and the USA — 7,000.

Under the New START arms control treaty, which was signed into force in 2011 by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, the size of each nation’s nuclear arsenal is reported every six months. Although the treaty sets a cap of 1,550 nuclear warheads, it counts weapons on bomber aircraft as being a single warhead — meaning that each side may have a few hundred warheads over the limit. That cap is a fraction of what Russia and the US once aimed at one another.



Last month, Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Rogozin said Russia’s nuclear forces — the backbone of its military might — would receive a complete overhaul by 2020 as part of the nation’s massive $700 billion rearmament campaign.  Moscow is pressing forward with its troubled Bulava (Mace) submarine-launched missiles, and new Yars land based intercontinental ballistic missiles and the uptick in Russian deployment mirrors advances in weapons delivery systems.

The dominant US narratives tend to stress the anti-democratic features of Russian politics, Vladimir Putin’s so-called dictatorship, his heavy-handed leadership, and aggressive foreign policy. The picture drawn has hardened during the Ukrainian crisis. The narratives point to a Russia that stands apart from the international community and to a president who cares little about this isolation and its political, security, and economic ramifications for his country.

However, US specialists do not compare Russian position as being very much equal to isolated Israeli position.

The current state of affairs in US-Russia relations is as distressing as it is alarming. By all accounts, this critical relationship has reached a point of rupture. In the United States, much of the discourse is centered on how to push back against Russia and President Vladimir Putin in light of what is happening in Ukraine. The answers stem from a set of narratives about Russia’s domestic trajectory, foreign policy objectives, and Putin’s personality.

Are dominant US narratives about Russia and Putin accurate, sufficient, and useful for guiding policy toward Russia? What are Putin’s objectives toward Ukraine and other post-Soviet states? What interests and assumptions are driving Russia’s policies toward the region?  Are there ideas that would help end the crisis that have been obscured by a hardening of attitudes in Russia and the USA?

Ukraine is only the recent issue between the Americans and Russians but there have been similar issues over which both reacted aggressively. Without  effective  denuclearization   or  verifiable  arms control mechanisms,  not only Ukraine  issue cannot be resolved but  more  complex issues would crop up in future too.

The dire consequences of an escalation of conflict between the US and its allies and Russia call for a debate in the USA that examines the basic assumptions that shape American super power  ideas about, and policies toward, Russia. It is no less important that Russians examine the assumptions that underlie their views about the West.

There is no commitment to improving the US ability to understand Russia and interpret its policies. Because prevailing narratives impact foreign policies, it is imperative to get the basic narratives right and subject them to continued scrutiny.

There is also no real US commitment to denuclearization globally. This is because neither USA nor Russia is keen to dismantle all its nuke arsenals.  USA wants all other powers to sacrifice their nukes and obey Washington.

Most Russians know that dismantling fo the mighty Soviet Russia was the work of USA and its  imperialist allies and  they don’t want  Russia to  be ready to be fooled by Washington again. Under the US command circumstances, Russia needs to worry about US intentions and secret operations targeting the Kremlin.


American Agenda for Mideast

American Agenda for Mideast

When egoistic super power status of USA was being crushed by Russian smartness in Ukraine, Israel came to its rescue, attacking the besieged Palestinians in Gaza strip, thereby diverting the terrible scenario in Ukraine, also shaking the foundations of US imperialism.

However, Israel overdid the terror operations in Gaza killing even little children, generating global outcry. So, the USA has restarted the its Mideast war by feeding the ISIS with terror goods one the one hand and also attacking it, on the other, thereby confusing the general masse of the world which takes media reports from the western terrocracies as god’s final words.

USA has decided to prolong its Mideast war to gain complete control of Arab resources which might take years. ISIS is the key tool the Pentagon-CIA twins use for destabilizing both Syria and Ira by bringing ISIS to the doors of Iran. Saudi Arabia is fully satisfied with US efforts to disturb both Syria and Iran and the techniques adopted and implemented to remove Syrian regime of Assad.

Instead of the usual NATO, President Barack Obama has touted as an international coalition to battle the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria in a new US war in the Middle East, launched without the approval of either the United Nations or the US Congress. US warplanes have stepped up their bombing of ISIS positions around the beleaguered city , and the airstrikes seem to have at least temporarily slowed the advance of ISIS forces, which control about one-third of the enclave.

Revealed are the contradictory and conflicting interests of the various elements making up Obama’s supposed coalition, including Turkey, the monarchical Sunni Arab despots of the Gulf States, France, Germany, a few lesser European powers and Washington’s closest allies, Canada and Australia. Both Canada and Australia are making strenuous efforts to be seen as important terrocracies on earth, almost at part with USA.
White House, controlled by a black President pursuing whitish polices of Neocons, is under increasing pressure, from the military-intelligence apparatus, from its Kurdish allies in northern Iraq, and from warmongering critics in both the Republican and Democratic parties, to intervene more aggressively in Syria.
Both Washington and Turkey backed the war for regime change in Syria, in which ISIS emerged as the strongest armed anti-government group among a collection of largely Sunni Islamist militias. While the Obama regime is now using the campaign against ISIS as a means of reasserting US hegemony over the region, including through regime change in Damascus, it is at odds with Turkey over the tactics and timing of this campaign.

Washington and Ankara agree on the ultimate goal of overthrowing Assad, but they have sharp differences over the means to accomplish this as both have got their own individual agenda for Mideast. The Obama administration is pressing the Turkish government either to send ground troops across the border to break the siege of Kobani, or to allow armed Turkish, Syrian and Iraqi Kurds to come to the defense of the town. The government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has so far refused, demanding a public US commitment to the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the establishment of a no-fly zone in Syria and a US-protected buffer zone along the Syria-Turkish border.

Turkish policy has been to promote ISIS as part of the anti-Assad campaign in Syria. Obviously on concurrence with Washington, Turkey has allowed thousands of ISIS recruits to pass through its territory to Syria to join the Islamist group. This triggered a political upheaval in the Kurdish-populated region in Turkey, with anti-government rioting in which at least 22 people were killed. Turkish government had decreed a state of emergency in six provinces in southeastern Turkey.
Turkey has an army of nearly 700,000, the sixth largest in the world and by far the largest in the Middle East, heavily equipped with US and European-made weaponry, including a large air force. Nonetheless, NATO secretary-general Stoltenberg was at pains to suggest that a few thousand ISIS fighters on the Turkish border constituted a threat that could justify military intervention under Article Five of the NATO charter.

While Washington and NATO have been prodding Turkey to intervene, the government of Iran condemned the Turkish parliament’s action last week, giving Erdogan authority to send Turkish troops across the border. Iran warned of “irreparable consequences” if Turkey violated the sovereignty of Syria, which is Iran’s sole ally among the Arab states of the Middle East.
The Turkish government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has demanded that Washington agree to establish a no-fly zone over Syria and a buffer zone inside Syrian territory as conditions for its participation in the US-led war. These proposals are aimed, in the first instance, at crushing the autonomous region carved out along the border by Syrian Kurds, who are allied with Turkey’s Kurdish nationalist movement, the PKK, and at quickly turning the US war into a direct drive to overthrow the Assad government.
Washington has insisted that it is pursuing an “Iraq first” strategy, centering its intervention on “degrading” and “destroying” the ISIS forces inside Iraq, and has carried out its limited operations in Syria with the approval of the Assad regime, even as it insists that the government in Damascus is not “legitimate.”
Erdogan drove home the depth of the disagreements, ordering Turkish warplanes to carry out air strikes, not against ISIS in Syria, but against the PKK, whose fighters, alongside Iraqi and Syrian Kurdish militias, have been the sole ground forces to effectively challenge the advance of ISIS in either country. In Iraq, they have operated in tacit coordination with US military “advisers,” despite being on a State Department list of foreign terrorist organizations.
Turkey claimed that the air strikes in southeastern Turkey were in retaliation for PKK attacks on Turkish military bases, which was denied by the PKK itself. The attacks, the first in nearly two years of peace negotiations between the government and the PKK, follow a week of violent clashes across Turkey that left at least 35 people dead, as Turkish Kurds, who make up close to 20 percent of the population, took to the street to protest Ankara’s blockade of the besieged city of Kobani.
The Turkish press reported this week that Turkish forces have not only blocked Kurdish fighters, arms and ammunition from reaching Kobani, but have even refused entry to wounded Kurdish fighters from the city, leaving them to bleed to death on the border. The latest air strikes threaten to upend the peace talks between Ankara and the PKK, reigniting a civil war that claimed some 40,000 lives over the course of three decades.

The carve-up that Erdogan fears most is the emergence of an independent Kurdistan, which is why his regime has sought to seal off Kobani and allow ISIS to pummel its Kurdish defenders. His answer appears to be the revival of Turkish hegemony over the region, beginning with the installation of a Sunni Islamist regime in Damascus. Erdogan also used a speech at Marmara University in Istanbul Monday to declare that the greatest threat facing Turkey was that “new Lawrence of Arabias” is destabilizing the region.

The conflicting reports are not merely mixed messaging, but reflect the actual incoherence of both US and Turkish policy on the Syrian crisis. Both Washington and Ankara seek the removal of Assad, but the Turkish government regards the Kurdish separatists as a more immediate target, while the Obama administration seeks to use ISIS as its pretext for escalating military operations in the region.
While the American media has give nonstop saturation coverage to atrocities like the ISIS beheading of captured journalists and aid workers, the portrayal of the group as a major threat to the population of the NATO countries is ludicrous.

However, Iran has warned about the irreparable consequences of US move to contain Iran by extending the ISIS war to Iranian borders. Iran has already suggested it would send troops across the border into Iraq to fight ISIS if the Sunni Islamist group approached too closely to Iranian territory.
Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African affairs Hossein Amir-Abdollahian charged that the Erdogan government was pursuing a policy of “neo-Ottomanism” in the Middle East and vowed that Tehran would not allow the Syrian government, its sole Arab ally, to be overthrown by outside powers.
While the US-led war has registered no discernible advances against ISIS in either Iraq or Syria, it is already creating sharp tensions that can erupt into a conflict that could engulf the entire region and beyond.

Eventually, all this would lead to a possible direct war between Sunni and Shi’a nations that the sworn enemies of Islam in the West and East look forward at the earliest.


*د. عبد راف *

Educationist, Prolific writer, Specialist on State Terrorism; Chronicler of Foreign occupations &
Freedom movements (Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc.) Chancellor-Founder of Centor for International
Affairs(CIA); Commentator on world affairs & sport fixings, Expert on
Mideast Affairs, university teacher; Author of books/ebooks; Editor.

Unfortunately, today there is not even one Muslim nation
today practicing truly Islamic faith and life.
(Account: No 62310377429* -* CIF No:
78215311481- State Bank of Hyderabad, India) Phone: 91-8129081217