![]() |
| Reading Comprehension |
On Jammu and Kashmir post Pahalgam terror attack
New Delhi must act in concert with Srinagar to isolate terrorists
In the aftermath (आफ्टरमैथ – परिणाम) of the gruesome (ग्रूसम – भयानक) terror incident in Pahalgam, India must hear clearly the message emanating (एमनेटिंग – निकलने वाला) from those who committed the heinous (हेनस – जघन्य) crimes.
By targeting tourists by religion and killing them in cold blood, the terrorists have sought to undermine (अंडरमाइन – कमजोर करना) India's plurality (प्लूरैलिटी – बहुलता) and what the country stands for.
By killing a local Kashmiri who tried to help the hapless (हैप्लेस – असहाय) tourists, and by targeting people in a popular location that benefits the Kashmiri economy, the attackers have grievously (ग्रीवसली – गंभीर रूप से) harmed the livelihoods of thousands of Kashmiris dependent on tourism.
By choosing to attack unarmed tourists at a time when the U.S. Vice-President was visiting India, they have also sought to undermine the perception (परसेप्शन – धारणा) that economic activities had returned to normalcy (नॉर्मलसी – सामान्य स्थिति) after the tumultuous (ट्युमल्चुअस – उथल-पुथल वाला) period following the abrogation (एब्रोगेशन – समाप्ति) of special status for Jammu and Kashmir.
The tragic by-product of the killings is now fear of the possibility that such attacks on tourists may recur (रिकर – फिर से होना), and of the economic pain that this would cause ordinary Kashmiris.
New Delhi's and Srinagar's responses must keep these in mind and work towards the mitigation (मिटिगेशन – शमन) of fear and send a clear message — the people of India, including Kashmiris, are united against terror.
Following the attacks, New Delhi has sought to use strong diplomatic (डिप्लोमैटिक – कूटनीतिक) measures available in its arsenal (आर्सनल – शस्त्रागार) against Pakistan, as it is well known that such terror attacks are almost always carried out by radicalised (रैडिकलाइज़्ड – कट्टरपंथी बनाए गए) elements who are trained by Islamabad's covert (कोवर्ट – गुप्त) agencies.
As it turns out, the mere absence of spectacular (स्पेक्टैकुलर – भव्य) violence cannot be termed normalcy. Normalcy is a relative term and it is better experienced than announced.
While the large-scale violence and militancy (मिलिटेंसी – उग्रवाद) that was seen in the 1990s never happened despite the unpopularity of these decisions, the uneasy calm was reflected in the sporadic (स्पोरैडिक – छिटपुट) incidents of terrorism targeting Kashmiri Pandits, migrants, and security forces in new areas that were hitherto (हिथरटो – अब तक) bereft (बेरफ्त – विहीन) of militancy.
With significant curbs (कर्ब्स – प्रतिबंध) on political activity, there was little outlet even for demands related to governance for the citizenry (सिटिजनरी – नागरिक वर्ग).
The conduct of Lok Sabha elections and the Supreme Court-mandated Assembly election process allowed for some expression of voices in the Valley, but it is a stretch (स्ट्रेच – अतिशयोक्ति) to say that this was "normalcy".
The Union government must work in concert with the Jammu and Kashmir government, empower (एमपावर – सशक्त बनाना) Jammu and Kashmir by restoring Statehood, and assert (असर्ट – दृढ़ता से स्थापित करना) this cohesion (कोहीज़न – एकजुटता) to isolate radical and violent elements threatening the livelihoods of Kashmiris and the lives of tourists visiting the serene (सरीन – शांतिपूर्ण) valley.
1x







0 Comments