‘K’ is for Kashmir
Dawn
August 20, 2017
WHILE celebrating the
nation’s 70th independence anniversary, we cannot forget that the ‘K’ in
Pakistan’s name — Kashmir — is not (yet) part of our country. The men, women
and children of India-held Kashmir (IHK) are even now engaged in a heroic David
and Goliath struggle for freedom from India’s brutal occupation and oppression.
Pakistan has done very little to support them.
An equitable solution
to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute will not be easy. However, for political,
strategic, moral and legal reasons, Pakistan cannot resile from its position on
Kashmir.
By any objective
criteria, Kashmir should have been part of Pakistan. The Kashmiris demonstrate
each day their desire for integration with Pakistan. Pakistan has a political
and moral obligation to support their aspirations and the political vision that
inspired its own creation.
Some among Pakistan’s elites appear to have lost the will to support
the occupied territory’s struggle.
Pakistan is a party
to the UN Security Council resolutions prescribing a UN-supervised plebiscite
to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to exercise their right to
self-determination. It is thus legally bound by this commitment.
Kashmir is the source
of the rivers that feed the Indus Valley. Water is an existential issue.
Control over this life source cannot be legally surrendered to India.
Kashmir is India’s
Achilles heel. Its massive military deployment in Kashmir diminishes India’s
capacity for aggression against Pakistan. Its brutal suppression of the
Kashmiris erodes India’s moral and political claim to regional domination and
great power status. The leverage which Kashmir provides Pakistan to achieve an
‘equal’ relationship with India should not be unilaterally discarded.
Unfortunately, in the
face of India’s growing power and the pressure exerted on Pakistan through the
campaign against ‘Islamic terrorism’, some among Pakistan’s elites appear to
have lost the will to support Kashmir’s struggle for self-determination and
seem ready to accept the status quo in Kashmir.
The much-touted peace
plan negotiated with India during the latter years of the Musharraf government
was no more than a dressed-up acceptance of the status quo. It may have proved
to be even worse since it envisaged joint India-Pakistan ‘administration’ of
both sides of Jammu and Kashmir, thus conceding that India has a legitimate
presence in Kashmir. Moreover, since the ‘problem’ — insurgency and resistance
— is in Indian-occupied Kashmir, why would Pakistan give India an
‘administrative’ role in Azad Jammu and Kashmir? The mischief that India could
play there is not difficult to imagine. New Delhi could insist that the
northern territories be included as part of the area being jointly administered.
It could seek a role in the management of the Karakoram Highway and attempt to
disrupt this sole and strategic road link between Pakistan and China. (It is
not surprising that the plan was rejected by Syed Geelani, the one Kashmiri
leader who has been the most vigorous and consistent in his support for
Kashmir’s integration with Pakistan.)
Unfortunately,
intimidated by the US and India, the succeeding PPP and PML-N governments shied
away from actively supporting the Kashmir cause.
However, in a welcome
signal, both the new prime minister and foreign minister have expressed support
for the Kashmiri cause in their maiden statements to the media.
Indeed, the present
moment, when regional power equations are in flux and the Kashmiris have
launched a popular indigenous struggle for freedom, may be opportune for
Pakistan to promote a coherent strategy designed to halt India’s oppression,
reassert the legitimacy of the Kashmiri freedom struggle, and intensify
international pressure on India to accommodate Kashmiri rights and aspirations.
Pakistan should
firstly support several objectives which the Kashmiris themselves need to
achieve: reunification and rejuvenation of the Hurriyat parties; selection of a
deserving successor to the indomitable but aging Syed Geelani; delegitimising
the puppet government in Srinagar; possible formation of a ‘shadow’ government;
organisation of an ‘independent’ referendum (like the Iraqi Kurds) in Kashmir
pending the UN plebiscite.
Second, to regain
legitimacy, the composition and profile of the Kashmiri resistance has to
change. Its leadership must come mainly from new and younger Kashmiris
untainted by association with any proscribed terrorist group.
Third, the projection
of the Kashmiri struggle and India’s oppression must be significantly improved
in the mainstream and social media. This is vital to achieving the strategy’s
objectives.
Pakistan should
initiate an active and sustained diplomatic campaign to exert international
pressure on India. This campaign could include:
One, formal
submission of the proposal to send a UN commission to investigate human rights
violations in IHK. If India blocks a visit, Pakistan can ask for an offsite
report. Concurrently, Pakistan should seek endorsement for a UN resolution
calling for an end to Indian firing on peaceful demonstrators; inhuman
treatment of Kashmiri children and youth and women; curfews; media blackouts;
emergency laws; and the arbitrary detention of Kashmiri leaders.
Two, a formal
proposal in the UN Security Council and General Assembly to adopt measures to
prevent another Pakistan-India war, including: formalisation of the 2003 LoC
ceasefire; expansion of the UNMOGIP and its deployment on both sides for
comprehensive monitoring of the ceasefire; withdrawal of heavy artillery from
LoC positions; exchange of solemn mutual assurances by Pakistan and India not
to resort to force and not to interfere and intervene against each other,
including through the sponsorship of terrorism.
Three, a complaint to
the International Court of Justice accusing India of violating the Genocide
Convention.
Four, approach the UN
Security Council to implement its resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir by
appointing a special envoy to promote demilitarisation of both sides of Jammu
and Kashmir and to review and update the modalities for the organisation of a
UN-supervised plebiscite there.
Pakistan’s active
promotion of the Kashmir cause will not provoke a war, and it need not divert
Pakistan from economic development. Even if Pakistan’s proposals are not adopted
in UN forums, their submission and discussion will exert diplomatic pressure on
India and ease the suffering of the Kashmiri people. It may even convince India
to seek a dialogue and a modicum of normalisation with Pakistan.
Reference-https://www.dawn.com/news/1352648/
Comments
Post a Comment