The Kashmir question is key to South Asia’s future
At the time of partition in 1947, the State of Jammu & Kashmir was one of the about 562 princely states which enjoyed full legislative and jurisdictional powers. The rulers of these princely states accepted being part of the British Indian empire. However, when the British Indian empire drew curtains in the Sub-continent, the princely rulers had the option to join the new states of Pakistan or India, taking geographical, religious and cultural factors into account. The State of Jammu & Kashmir, being a Muslim majority state, logically should have joined Pakistan. However, the Maharaja of Kashmir, who was a Hindu, was manipulated into signing an instrument of accession to join India.
Professor Alastair Lamb, a noted historian, in his seminal work ‘Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1846-1990’ gives out the following argument as to why the State of Jammu & Kashmir should have acceded to Pakistan:
- The State of Jammu & Kashmir was a region with an overwhelming Muslim majority contiguous to the Muslim majority province of Punjab in Pakistan.
- The economy of the State of Jammu & Kashmir was bound up with Pakistan. Its best communication with the outside world lay through Pakistan. The easiest route between Jammu (the winter capital of the State) with Srinagar (the summer capital) was through Sialkot and Rawalpindi in Pakistan’s Punjab and not through the only road that linked Jammu with Srinagar via Pir Panjal range, over 9000 feet high, with snow throughout the winter. The only railway link in the State of Jammu & Kashmir in 1947 was between Sialkot in Pakistan’s Punjab and Jammu city.
- The waters of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers, all of which flowed through Jammu & Kashmir territory, were essential for the prosperity of agriculture of Pakistan. (As per the Indus Waters Treaty signed by India and Pakistan on September 19, 1960 under the auspices of World Bank, the rights and obligations of both countries on the use of the waters of the Indus Basin were fixed. The Western rivers of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab were allocated to Pakistan. The Treaty is regarded as a high point in India-Pakistan’s otherwise fraught relationship. The government of Prime Minister Modi has given indications to reopen the Indus Waters Treaty, which could be a serious blow to peace in South Asia).
Professor Alastair Lamb concludes that, “ from a strictly rational point of view, based on a study of the culture and the economy of the region, there can be little doubt that a scheme for the partition of the Indian Sub-continent such as was devised in 1947 should have awarded the greater part of the State of Jammu & Kashmir to Pakistan”.
It is a fact of history that not only Jammu & Kashmir was illegally occupied by India; also the States of Junagarh and Hyderabad were coerced into the Indian Union. For instance, the Muslim ruler of Junagarh acceded to Pakistan on 15 August 1947 but in November 1947, India sent its troops and occupied the State.
On 27 October 1947, the Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru in a telegram to Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan of Pakistan stated, “ The question of accession in any disputed territory or State must be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people and we adhere to this view.”
In another telegram on 3 November 1947, Nehru told Liaqat, “ We have agreed to an impartial international agency like the United Nations supervising any referendum (Jammu & Kashmir).”
These are only the two examples of India’s subterfuge. After partition, India blocked Pakistan’s financial and military assets and obstructed river water flows in order to strangulate newly independent Republic. Indian leaders predicted that Pakistan would soon cease to exist. This animosity seems still prevalent in Indian psyche and has been amply manifested in anti- Pakistan, anti-Muslim utterances of BJP leaders, including Prime Minister Modi.
Over the decades, Pakistan has engaged with India to resolve its issues including the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the UN Security Council Resolutions granting the right of self-determination to the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. Nehru - Liaqat, Bhutto - Swaran Singh, Musharraf-Vajpayee parleys, the bilateral Composite Dialogue as well as international mediation like the McNaughton Plan, Dixon Report, Graham Mission failed to make any progress due to Indians reneging on their commitments. India was never serious in settling its disputes with Pakistan. Indian leadership knows clearly that their stance on Kashmir is not tenable on legal, moral, political or human grounds, and is not accepted by the international community, yet it persists in pursuing a policy that imperils regional peace.
It is a pertinent question to ask. Why India, which claims to be the largest democracy, is let scot free despite being in clear violation of the UN Charter and Resolutions of the very body, which it wants to join as a permanent member? What is the justification of over half a million Indian troops deployed in the disputed territory? What is the justification for keeping Kashmiri leaders like Yasin Malik and others in indefinite incarceration? What is the justification for draconian laws like the Public Safety Act, TADA, and POTA etc. if Kashmiris are “ happy” with the Indian rule? What is the justification for denying the access of independent bodies like OIC, HR Watch, Amnesty International and media outfits into the Indian occupied territory? Why are the Kashmiris denied the right of free worship, especially on occasions like Ramadan? Why is India changing the demographics of the region? Above all, why is India shy of holding a dialogue with the true representatives of Kashmiri people?
Arundhati Roy, a famous Indian writer who is now being prosecuted for her views, had this to say in 2006, “ The biggest myth of all times is that India is a democracy. In reality, it is not. Several states in India are on the verge of civil war…In the Kashmir valley alone, some 80,000 people have been killed. In Iraq, there are 1,50,000 military personnel whereas in Kashmir valley there are some 7,00,000.”
Indian leaders claim that Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India. They have threatened to occupy Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistani jurisdiction. The abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A of the Indian Constitution in August 2019, resulting in annexation of the disputed territory into the Indian Union, followed by mass arrests, house searches, false flag operations, demographic changes, electoral gerrymandering— have created a new dynamic not only in the context of the disputed territory but also in bilateral relations between India and Pakistan. The Kashmiri population is now totally alienated and revolting against India. Kashmiri youth are the flag bearers of new resistance movement against oppressive Indian rule. The heroic struggle of the people in Gaza has encouraged the Kashmiri youth to wage a similar struggle in the occupied territory. They know that it is a testing time for them with the ongoing demographic changes, whereby their Muslim majority may be converted into a minority, and a plebiscite subsequently staged to endorse the Indian rule. That would seal the fate of Kashmiris forever.
Indian policies in occupied Jammu & Kashmir have pushed South Asia on the edge of a precipice. India’s relations with Pakistan face a stalemate; a border stand off with China persists and India’s relations with other South Asian neighbours also leave much to be desired as they feel intimidated by Indian expansionist designs. SAARC has been rendered dysfunctional since India declined to let Pakistan host the summit, as per her turn, in 2016.Today, South Asia is economically the least integrated region due to tensions arising from Indian actions vis a vis Pakistan, China and its smaller regional neighbours.
Pakistan believes in regional peace and stability. It desires to resolve its issues, including the Kashmir issue, with India through peaceful means. Pakistan would like South Asia to catch up with other regions in terms of development and prosperity. For that, peace is a pre- requisite. As the biggest country of South Asia, it is India’s responsibility to partner with regional countries in promoting peace and development of the area and to seriously work for creating an enabling environment.
Apart from Kashmir, there are other bilateral issues between India and Pakistan like the Siachin, Sir Creek, release of prisoners, visa facilitation, exchange of religious pilgrims, adherence to Indus Waters Treaty, which have either not been settled or face problems. For example, both countries had agreed to conclude an agreement on Siachin in 1988 during the visit of late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to Pakistan. However, at the last minute, India backed out.
Pakistan has consistently called for a meaningful dialogue to settle its issues with India. The imperative of dialogue between two nuclear weapon states cannot be overemphasised. Pakistan has advocated confidence building and de-escalation. It believes that the Kashmir issue cannot be wished away as it involves the future of nine million Kashmiris. It is a dispute duly recognised by the UN. Were it not so, the UN Security Council would not have convened three meetings after India’s change of occupied territory’s status in August 2019. India has been trying to delete the agenda item of Kashmir from UN deliberations but Pakistan has foiled these attempts. India has used the bogey of Pakistan-inspired terrorism in occupied Kashmir but these allegations have found no basis in reality. On the other hand, India has been found sponsoring targeted killings of Sikh dissidents in USA and Canada. The Government of Pakistan has presented evidence of the killings of Pakistani citizens by Indian agents in its territory. The Indian leaders have even confessed of their involvement in such assassinations.
It is obvious that South Asia cannot remain mired in perpetual tensions and endless conflicts. Formidable challenges of poverty, underdevelopment, climate change, water security, transnational terrorism, warrant a cooperative approach amongst all regional neighbours and a commonly agreed strategy. The region has to move onto the path of reconciliation, common development through greater integration and connectivity. International community should also lend its powerful voice in favour of peace in South Asia and resolution of outstanding disputes like Kashmir.
Masood Khalid is a former diplomat from the Foreign Service of Pakistan
All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author