Shimla Agreement: impediment to Kashmir settlement

Following India’s revocation of the special status of IIJOK, many in Pakistan asked Islamabad to abrogate the 1972 Shimla Agreement unilaterally. The then government didn’t find the proposition worth considering. However, some quarters contended that since the agreement clearly bound the two countries to settle the Jammu and Kashmir dispute peacefully, it was still worth preserving. No matter what India did, it could not arguably escape the reality of the Kashmir dispute. Sooner or later, India would realise the necessity of settling the dispute; the Shimla Agreement would thus come in handy.

Be that as it may, the ground realities do not inspire much hope. During the last fifty years, India had clearly used the Shimla Agreement to prevaricate and procrastinate on Kashmir. And finally, it almost crossed the Rubicon on August 5, 2019, rendering the Shimla Agreement literally nugatory.

India would always fume whenever Pakistan raised Kashmir at different international fora, berating the latter for violating the Shimla Agreement. It is, therefore, important to revisit the agreement itself and set the recurring controversies at rest.

Article 1 (1) of the agreement binds the two countries to conduct their bilateral relations in accordance with the principles and purposes of the UN Charter. Article 1 (2) states that the two countries should express their “resolve to settle their disputes peacefully through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.”

Article 4 (2) of the agreement says, “In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control, resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this Line.”

It goes without saying that Pakistan has always abided by its part of the deal.

First, India’s claim that Pakistan could not even raise the “K” word at international forums is misleading, to put it mildly. By agreeing to settle the dispute bilaterally, Pakistan never forfeited its right to reach out to the international community and keep the world au currant with the developments taking place bilaterally and in IIOJK. There is nothing in the agreement that bars Pakistan from doing this.

Second, it is India that aggressively altered the on-ground situation in 1984 by capturing the Siachen Glacier. That was in total violation of the relevant provision of the agreement as referred to above. The Indian side could rebut by reminding Pakistan of the Kargil conflict in 1999. However, the fact remains it was Siachen that triggered Kargil, however belatedly. Had the late Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi been able to prevail over his military establishment in 1989, the Siachen issue would have been resolved peacefully and there would have been no Kargil. Subsequently, India would also hubristically jettison Pakistan’s oft-repeated proposal to turn the Siachen Glacier into a “peace park”.

Third, India yet again breached the Shimla Agreement by not only stripping IIOJK of its special status but also by splitting the region into two Union Territories. Not only that, New Delhi is also taking measures aimed at changing the demographic composition of the region in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. If not stopped now, we may see the Muslim majority of IIOJK turn into a minority in their own land. Reportedly, close to 4 million Indians have so far been issued domiciles to settle down in the disputed region.

In view of the foregoing, there is nothing really left in the Shimla Agreement to count on. India is surely guilty of defenestrating sanity lock, stock and barrel when it comes to Kashmir. The fact of the matter is that India has itself turned the clock back to July 27, 1949. On this day, India and Pakistan signed the Karachi Agreement establishing the “ceasefire line” between the two sides of Kashmir. The “ceasefire line” became “the Line of Control” in the Shimla Agreement.

It is high time for Pakistan to change the discourse on Kashmir. The last fifty years have shown how the Shimla Agreement proved to be an impediment to bringing about peace in the region. As Pakistan’s former High Commissioner to India, I do not see how, without a sustained sub-rosa third-party mediation, the Jammu and Kashmir dispute could be settled in conformity with the political aspirations of Kashmiris.

As India is rising economically, it is also getting increasingly intransigent on Kashmir. Pakistan is no doubt treading warily. It remains to be seen if Islamabad is able to get its act together in building enough pressure on India to settle Kashmir. Days for candy-floss diplomacy and playing possum on Kashmir have long gone.

Pakistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir need to take the following three steps immediately:

i) Islamabad should appoint a Special Envoy on Jammu and Kashmir with a clear mandate to prepare a comprehensive plan of action aimed at building pressure on India to settle the dispute once and for all. ii) Article 2 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir interim constitution needs be amended to broaden Muzaffarabad’s bailiwick to include IIOJK. iii) The President of Azad Kashmir Jammu and Kashmir should immediately appoint as a ‘Plebiscite Advisor’ as provided for under Article 11 of the interim constitution. This would not be unprecedented. In 1990, a Plebiscite Advisor was appointed during the government of Raja Mumtaz Hussain Rathore.

These three steps, I am confident, would go a long way in taking the Kashmir cause forward. Islamabad and the Kashmiris must roll up their sleeves. We cannot expect the world to stand with us on Kashmir if we ourselves remain reluctant to make a difference. We must not let pessimism permeate our Kashmir diplomacy. Despite heavy odds we can still do many things on different fronts, pressing India to come to the negotiating table to settle Kashmir upfront. A Swedish proverb says, “Those who wish to sing will always find a song.”

Published in The Express Tribune, July 21^st, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.