Who Killed the Western Hostages?

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Almost six years have passed since a mysterious group called Al-Faran kidnapped the several western tourists during the first ten days of July 1995 in and around Pahalgam area. Pahalgam with its famous ski slopes and beautiful valleys has always attracted a large number of tourists both in winter as well as in summer. Not many details about this particular group were known though some Indian writers tried to paint it as a well organized large group with its tentacles spread to Srinagar airport, bus stands, the tourists offices, hotels, taxi drivers, house-boat owners, pony owners and even the shepherds. A group with such a large reach would indeed be pretty well known.

The intriguing aspect of the hostage drama is that after the first round of kidnapping on 4th July, which included two British and one American, no extra vigil was mounted in the trekking areas of Pahalgam. Had the extra precautionary measures taken following the initial kidnappings, the chances for subsequent kidnapping would have considerably reduced. Consequently the group took many more hostages in the following few days. While many were released because of their ill health, six were ultimately retained. On 9th July 1995 an American hostage John Childs escaped who was rescued by a reconnaissance helicopter. The rest of the hostages included Hans Ostro from Norway, Paul Wells and Keith Mangan from Britain, Donald Fred Hutchings from America and Dirk Hasert from Germany.

It was reported at the time that the group demanded the release of some prisoners and threatened to kill the hostage if its demand were not met. The Indian government refused to accede to group's demand and embarked upon its usual ploy of accusing Pakistani intelligence agencies of planning this particular operation. For most Pakistanis the Indian tactics are not much of a surprise. It has been and still continues to be a common practice among the Indians to place the blame of all unsolved mysteries and unexplained development. To demonstrate ability and quick grasp of unexplained event, the concept of 'foreign hand' has been frequently employed by the concerned Indian authorities.

Following the refusal of the Indian authorities to release the desired prisoners, the group appeared to have beheaded the Norwegian hostage Hans Ostro whose decapitated body was discovered on 13th August. Not only this brutal act invoked strong sympathetic responces among people all over the world, it also galvanized the Indian government to step up its negotiation as well as propaganda efforts. Compared to the Indians, the All Parties Hurriat Conference (APHC) and most Pakistanis were genuine in condemning the act. The APHC not only strongly condemned the killing but also called for complete strike in Kashmir. It appears only logical to assume that such acts of brutalities could only bring a bad name to the APHC. A tarnished image of movement struggling to secure freedom could effectively impede the process.

An interesting aspect of the whole drama was that after the failure in negotiations and the killing of Ostro, Al-Faran virtually disappeared from the scene. Few months later the Indians began to publicly express doubts regarding the possibility of that the kidnappers could have kept the hostage alive while on the run. It needs to be mentioned here that sighting of the hostages in a Kashmiri village was reported in December 1995. The witness also stated that the hostages were wearing warm clothes and looked healthy. With a further passage of few more months, the Indian authorities began to inject the notion that hostages were presumed to be dead.

Why would the Indian authorities give such public pronouncements? Perhaps the answer lies in examining the question that who could have benefited from the kidnappings. Suspicion focused on four likely entities or groups. Among the list of potential beneficiaries, the freedom fighters, the APHC, the state government and the Indian security forces were included. First let us look at the freedom fighters or as the Indians prefer to call them as militants. Assuming that the kidnappers were all Muslim, such acts would be repugnant to their Islamic teachings and therefore unlikely to be pursued. The fierce debate that was generated by the kidnapping of Rabia Saeed did leave a lasting impact on all those engaged in military struggle. The other reason that could have influenced the group to opt for such acts is to secure the release of their group members who were captured by the Indian security forces. All the initial reports clearly reflected that the group wanted to secure the release of some of its members. But once it became clear to them that the Indians were not going to play, the group seems to have moved back and eventually drifted into oblivion. The killing of western tourists could only tarnish the image of a Muslim freedom fighter.

The APHC was also viewed by some as the possible beneficiary. The APHC openly condemned the kidnapping and demanded immediate release of the hostages. Following the killing of Ostro, an important APHC leader openly dubbed the act as inhuman and forcefully stressed; " This is against the people of Kashmir. If the killers are found to be Kashmiri, we will spare no effort to hang them". Besides the APHC called for a complete strike in order to communicate a message to the kidnappers that such act could irreparably damage the cause of the Kashmiris.

The third candidate that could have benefited from hostage drama is the state government. One need not to go into the details of the repeatedly rigged state elections, the respect of the successive state government and the popularity of the incumbent chief minister. Any event or development of high visibility would shift the focus of attention from the incompetent and pronounced inefficient existing government. Thus it could provide a welcome relief or at least provide the much needed respite.

The fourth beneficiary could be the Indian security forces in Kashmir. The alleged Al Faran's brutal act temporarily took the attention away from the systematic human rights violations and inhuman brutalities so regularly perpetrated against the innocent Kashmiri men, women and children. The burning of shops and houses at will, arbitrary arrests, and systematic torture are just some of tools that are regularly employed by Indian security forces with a view to dampen the spirit of the Kashmiris and suppress the freedom movement. Secondly such acts of brutalities could not only badly tarnish the image of the movement but could also invoke adverse reactions among many sympathetic countries.

The recent revelation by a German investigator Julius Angel clearly puts the entire blame of killing the western hostages on the Indian security forces. According to report the Indians security forces gunned down the hostages during an armed clash with the Mujahideen and later dumped the corpses to unknown and far off places. Consulting the neutral and independent sources the reporter further stated that instead of helping to secure the release of the hostages, the Indian authorities made every effort to obstruct the process. This is not the first time that sources have come forward to tell the truth about what is happening in the Indian occupied Kashmir. However what is somewhat intriguing and worth subjecting to serious considerations is that how quickly countries that claim to play the role of guardian of the world peace accept the one-sided heavily biased interpretation of the Indian security forces and join the chorus of condemning the innocents.