Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Communications Government Network

India Shut Down Kashmir's Internet Access (nytimes.com) 40

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: Masroor Nazir, a pharmacist in Kashmir's biggest city, Srinagar, has some advice for people in the region: Do not get sick, because he may not have any medicine left to help. "We used the internet for everything," said Mr. Nazir, 28, whose pharmacy is near the city's famed clock tower. He said he normally went online to order new drugs and to fulfill requests from other pharmacies in more rural parts of Kashmir Valley. But now, "we cannot do anything." As the Indian government's shutdown of internet and phone service in the contested region enters its 11th day, Kashmir has become paralyzed.

Shopkeepers said that vital supplies like insulin and baby food, which they typically ordered online, were running out. Cash was scarce, as metal shutters covered the doors and windows of banks and A.T.M.s, which relied on the internet for every transaction. Doctors said they could not communicate with their patients. Only a few government locations with landlines have been available for the public to make phone calls, with long waits to get a few minutes of access. The information blockade was an integral part of India's unilateral decision last week to wipe out the autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, an area of 12.5 million people that is claimed by both India and Pakistan and has long been a source of tension. That has brought everyday transactions, family communications, online entertainment and the flow of money and information to a halt.
According to Access Now, a global digital rights group, India is the world leader in shutting down the internet. The country has blocked the internet 134 times, compared with 12 shutdowns in Pakistan, the No. 2 country.

"Shutting down the internet has become the first go-to the moment the police think there will be any kind of disturbance," said Mishi Choudhary, founder of SFLC.in, a legal advocacy group in New Delhi that has tracked the sharp rise in web shutdowns in India since 2012.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

India Shut Down Kashmir's Internet Access

Comments Filter:
  • So...doesn't this kind of answer the question of sovereignty in the area? Would Pakistan have been able to shut down the internet to Kashmir? Can Pakistan provide Internet to Kashmir? They say it's a contested area, but if Pakistan provides no services and has no infrastructure there, how contested is it really?
    I can see that Pakistan might want it, but I can't see how they have a claim that they already own it.

    (I don't live there...maybe India is sitting there with their tanks and their guns and cu

    • Car Analogy: You can say you own a car, but that doesn't prevent a thief from driving it.
    • The shutdown only affects Indian-controlled Kashmir.
      Indian-controlled Kashmir however has a large amount of Muslims (About 66% of the population) and a very large separatist movement.
    • by _merlin ( 160982 )

      There's a history there. Pakistan was formed when the predominantly Muslim states of India seceded. What's now Bangladesh was formed when the geographically separate East Pakistan subsequently seceded from Pakistan.

      There was some dispute over what constituted a "predominately Muslim" state. States with majority Hindu population and Muslim leadership remained part of India. Kashmir had majority Muslim population and Hindu leadership. The Muslim states argued that it should join the secession, but India

    • by mccrew ( 62494 )

      Well it does answer the question, but not in the direction that you are going.

      When you have to station heavily-armed troops every 100 yards, when you shoot out the eyes of children who dare to venture out of their homes, you don't have sovereignty. Holding a population hostage under threat of violence screams "Illegitimacy".

  • water dispute (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Shompol ( 1690084 ) on Thursday August 15, 2019 @05:35PM (#59091764)
    Kashmir is a very valuable source of water. They have wars over water in that region already. Imagine what will happen when global warming sets in.
  • Not that a decades-long dispute between two nuclear powers isn't enough drama, the elephant in the room is that China borders both India-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir.

    Beijing has already gone on record urging its usual ally Pakistan to resolve the dispute peacefully. Perhaps the emerging Indian market and the tedious squabbling has tipped the scales?

    • If India and Pakistan have a nuclear war the survivors will head for China (or Tibet).
      • Damn! It would take a nuclear war to turn China into a nation-state with immigration problems... Europe and the US must be doing something right.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ghoul ( 157158 )

      China is holding on to one third of J&K. its called Aksai Chin. Its a desolate desert with hardly any population but the main highway from Tibet to Xinjiang passes through the area. India has never recognized the claim. India also happens to have local superiority as the main Chinese population centers on the East coast are 2000 miles away whereas Indian population centers and military bases are only 200 miles away. Anytime India wants it can take Aksai Chin, heck it can liberate Tibet. India hosts the

      • India also happens to have local superiority as the main Chinese population centers on the East coast are 2000 miles away whereas Indian population centers and military bases are only 200 miles away. Anytime India wants it can take Aksai Chin, heck it can liberate Tibet. India hosts the Dalai Lama and keeps a Tibetan govt in Exile active to take over after any such liberation.

        There are several ways to fight a war, including militarily and economically. It is not at all clear than India has superiority in any of these dimensions. China has a larger, better equipped military, not to mention more nuclear weapons. Civilians don't fight wars, so large population centers are not helpful in a war and instead are just targets. China has more economic international soft power than India and has built up more economic allies in the area. China has a stronger manufacturing base for w

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • China and India both have nearby enemies. The difference is that China, in contrast to India, has been executing a deliberate strategy of economic bribery, indentureship via loans, and economic domination to gain partners who are not necessarily friends but at least will not stand in their way. For example, China got the Philippines to back off their South China Sea territorial claims even after China lost at the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) tribunal. China has been playing this

            • by Whibla ( 210729 )

              China and India both have nearby enemies. The difference is that China, in contrast to India, has been executing a deliberate strategy of economic bribery, indentureship via loans, and economic domination to gain partners who are not necessarily friends but at least will not stand in their way. For example, China got the Philippines to back off their South China Sea territorial claims even after China lost at the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) tribunal. China has been playing this soft power game much better than India.

              So what you're saying is that all those countries that 'owe' China, either actual hard currency or for past slights, will somehow side with China or remain neutral in the event of a war with a nuclear armed India?

              An alternate point of view might be that, like China has demonstrated it's only too happy to do, they will tear up any existing agreements and default on any debts they have and side with China's enemies in the hope of getting a better deal down the line.

              Not saying you're wrong, but sometimes payba

  • by Chromal ( 56550 ) on Thursday August 15, 2019 @05:53PM (#59091812)
    Modi is a sectarian tyrant tearing apart India's social fabric and destabilizing the region. The only reason it's barely remarked upon is because a dark tide of these monsters are rising everywhere.
    • Well more than a third of over a billion Indians have democratically _elected_ him to be their - as you put their "tyrant" to do just that - "destabilize the region", because clearly they are all mad.
      • by Chromal ( 56550 )
        Democracy is about a lot more than casting ballots. It's also about preserving equality and justice, and it seems that the over two-hundred million Muslim Indian citizens are not getting their fair share of either. And illiberal democracy isn't really a democracy at all. It's a politically dystopian civilization for those who aren't in power, and those who are in power rule arbitrarily and capriciously and with a contemptuous disregard for sacrosanct universal human rights.
        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by hoofie ( 201045 )

          Considering the bankrupt, dysfunctional and corrupt mess that is Pakistan, Muslims citizens of India can experience a better life than they would have in the Islamic paradise that is Pakistan.

          • by Chromal ( 56550 )
            You claim Indian rights are better than Pakistani, and yet cited right above in this article it still says "(India) has blocked the internet 134 times, compared with 12 shutdowns in Pakistan, the No. 2 country." Something isn't adding up here.
        • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          Where is the "equality and justice" is further dividing up India?
          The gov of India can do what it wants in any part of India.
          The "universal human rights" does not give extra rights to a part of a nation...
          • by Chromal ( 56550 )
            No government has the right to do anything it wants, anywhere. Universal human rights aren't a gift, they're a birthright, and I think you need to brush up on your understanding of what equality means. It means if you're free to choose your religion, so are they. It means if your interests are protected, so are theirs. Fairness is integral to and essential for justice be it social, legal, economic, or political.
        • by ghoul ( 157158 )

          The BJP got more votes than it could if Muslims were not voting for it. Many muslims voted for the BJP as modern muslims are fed up with bullshit like triple talaq.

    • Can they? I mean that as a serious question as I don't know.

      I am sure they can in the same way they can do Tibet, North Korea, or Vietnam. But I think HK is fairly independent from China in terms of infra and social support. Other than with military, I don't think China can bring HK to a standstill.

      • by ghoul ( 157158 )

        There is no comparison between HK and Kashmir. A more suitable comparison would be Xinjiang and China is definitely doing much worse there with no consequences.

      • Other than with military, I don't think China can bring HK to a standstill.

        Yeah, it's not like China is massing its military next to HK. Oh wait...

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...