Judged in this background, sanity overwhelmingly suggests that the dialogue between India and Pakistan should continue and we should address Kashmiri aspirations. A settlement on Kashmir should be the central focus of negotiations while other issues and irritants can also be resolved. All types of disputes are ultimately resolved on the dialogue table. It seems that the radicalised government of Narendra Modi is a proxy government of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. It has decided to pursue a more aggressive policy vis-a-vis Pakistan and use its military muscle to crush the freedom struggle in Kashmir. What Nawaz Sharif might have told the leadership of the countries he visited is that in spite of the public resentment in Pakistan, he tried to extend the hand of friendship to India. He must have pleaded that he nurtures intentions to move forward and start a result-oriented dialogue with India to ensure regional peace and security. It needs to be conceded that peace is the key to prosperity, amelioration of poverty and improving the standard of life of the common man. Mr Sharif must have definitely told these international leaders that his initiative to visit India for participating in the oath-taking ceremony of Mr Modi was well intended. It was a genuine expression to normalise relations. After agreeing to hold foreign secretary-level talks, India’s backing out is just paradoxical.
It seems this after-thought is either a change of strategy or just an assertion of intransigence. Kashmir is not an issue of war between India and Pakistan; it is about the struggle of the Kashmiri people for their basic right of self-determination. A dialogue on Kashmir without the involvement of the people of Jammu and Kashmir is not logical, ethical and is not in consonance with ground realities. The Simla Agreement which is being invoked by India cannot override international law although it does mention the final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir. The people of Jammu and Kashmir are not a party to the Simla Agreement. It is an agreement negotiated under the coercion of circumstances. If India persists on its present narrative, then I suggest that the government of Pakistan revisits the modus operandi of this agreement and rescind it in the interest of the right of self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
We, the people of Jammu and Kashmir, await the support of the international community to intervene for the resolution of this age-old unresolved dispute. The world should focus its attention towards bringing peace and tranquillity in Jammu and Kashmir, which continues to remain torn due to 67 years of conflict.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 2nd, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (51)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732344836-0/BeFunk_§_]__-(37)1732344836-0.jpg "israeli attack targets hospital killing seven medics in lebanon")
Author suggest that Shimla agreement should be rescinded. Why should Indus Water agreement not be rescinded- it does not suit India.
There are are only 2 countries which were formed purely on basis of religion- Pakistan and Israel. It is for all to see how much happiness they have brought all around them. No one in his senses will agree for creation of a third country called Kashmir on basis of religion.
It is a fact that the two countries are incapable of sitting down and solving the problems- so let us live with them OR Pakistan can attack India 5th time to solve the problem (as they have tried in the past).
@Jor El: Thanks for response. Indus Water Treaty is a good example, not of negotiating abilities of these infantile nations but of relevance of Arbitration. Count the number of times International Tribunals have been approached on disputes reg water sharing & then you will know why Kashmir has to be made an issue for arbitration by third party. Secondly, why should I imprison myself in to the straitjackets of BJP/INC/CPM/ML/PPP et al? What is wrong about holding an independent opinion & I certainly will not hold you responsible for that. I didn't say Modi or Sharif are juvenile, they may well be so & not that Singh/Zardari were any great, but I meant the countries, as last 67 years have shown. Not one problem, not Sir Creek, not Siachen, not cross border issues, not trade, not water, nothing these two intellectually challenged Third World countries can resolve. Both only know how to argue endlessly chewing the same cud again & again but producing nothing!
Two nations spending their resources including human one land with the fond hope that it will eventually belong to one of them is foolish.Put kashmir on the backburner for now and allow the rest of the country to develop and become prosperous.Let us get practical and think what we have acheived in the last 67 years...nothing except hatred, suspicion and loss of faith and trust.is it worth all this?
@ask: Hold on buddy ... My reply to Bobby was not about the whether the 2 countries are capable of solving issues thru a dialogue or not, it was about the jurisdiction of the UN. Coming to ur point where u state that india n pakistan do not have the maturity to solve bilateral issues, well we have the indus water treaty between us which has survived since 1960 n still holds gud ... now if its ur assumption is that modi n sharif r juvenile, its ur view n i am not responsible of ur assumptions ... as far as indian view is concerned, a 3rd party has no role in this issue ... n this is not just BJPs or Congress' or CPI(M)'s or SP's or BSP's view but the whole of india's ... u can either accept it or reject it but this is the ground reality ...
"It seems that the radicalised government of Narendra Modi is a proxy government of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. It has decided to pursue a more aggressive policy vis-a-vis Pakistan and use its military muscle to crush the freedom struggle in Kashmir"
...And what is Hafeez Saeed (wanted by India & U.S.) doing by addressing a huge rally tomorrow? Apparently not sharing recipes or knitting patterns with his followers...
@Jor El: It's proved beyond doubt that the two countries are incapable of solving a single issue by talks between themselves. Legalities of UN Resolutions and of Shimla agreement etc can be argued till cows come home but the fact remains these two juveniles need to get their ears boxed by Uncle. Matter is far too serious to be left in the hands of Modis & Sharifs- the best (!) that this Subcontinent can produce. Time for both to approach Her Majesty's Government, caps in hand, and seek help of the great arbiter.
There is a perceptible down slide in the bilateral relationship between the two neighbours The Republic of India and The Islamic Republic of Pakistan during the last few months. There is a visible shift from an ongoing cordial relationship that had been developing during the last couple of years towards a not very cordial direction a not very encouraging indication for not just the two neighbouring countries but the entire South Asia. India and Pakistan are the two major countries of South Asia and the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and their bilateral relationship plays an influential role in this part of the region as well as the SAARC. The geo-political scenario needs to be given due cognisance with the prevailing situations that are not very conducive to peace and the slightest of shift in the paradigm of bilateral relationship can prove detrimental and damaging for South Asia. Therefore the nations of the region especially Pakistan and India must refrain from getting into any sort of jingoism as neighbours as this will benefit those forces that are now threatening the entire world. There is a need for all the nations of South Asia to come together and prepare a strategy to check the growing threats from fundamentalist forces like the ISIS as well as the Taliban. There has been an old practice of pointing fingers at the neighbour that needs to be put an end to and all efforts possible to be made to revert back the relationships that are apparently on a low ebb. The time is not suitable to indulge in any kind of diplomatic moves to negate or prove in poor light the other side. Issues will need to be resolved and old non-issues to be laid to rest for good that alone can bring back the amity and trust that seems to be getting frittered away by the sudden gust of antipathy.
@Bobby: "@Gp65: shimla agreement is a bilateral agreement between india and Pakistan.It cannot override the international agreement reached at UN security council. Moreover the primary party. To Kashmir dispute have not been a party to this agreement as such this agreement is not viable under international law and it cannot supersede the international agreements."
Buddy, r u aware of the UNs jurisdiction ??? It clearly states that in case of a bilateral agreement between the 2 parties, the UN will take into account the agreement n hold it supremee(it doesnt matter when the agreement is reached - past, present or future). This is UNs basic charter. From Kofi Annan to Ban Ki Moon all have asked Pakistan to settle Kashmir via a bilateral dialogue with india. Why ??? Do u know something more that they r perhaps unaware of ???
All out war between India and Pakistan will be our worst nightmare. This article is l balanced no matter what the background of its writer. Kashmiris have been getting the short end of the stick for over 67 years now. It is late but there is still time to find a solution which all three parties can live with.
@Yajnesh: One can dream if one exists. Your assumption is that Pakistan will exist for the next 1000 years?
Pakistan happened for two reasons - 1. Cold war between Angloes & Soviets 2. Islam. Kashmir problem is because of Pakistan. First reason is no more there and India has cold-start response to wake up Pakistan who indulge in dreams of 26/11 type Mumbai attacks. Cold Start will make sure that Pakistan lose lot of territory and armament before Angloes can intervene like 65 & 71. Second reason ie Islam is under threat every where and not so much in India. Islam will slowly vanish starting from China where it will cease to exist in this decade, then in Russia and as Gulf oil disappears then even in India and rest of Asia. Thus kashmir problem will be automatically be solved. At present it is Cash Mere for rulers of Pakistan & few families in Kashmir.
Only 2 countries in the world were created on the basis of religion, Pakistan and Israel. I am not sure world can survive a third one.
u know, i am sick and tired of hearing of kashmir kashmir kashmir. this govt of ours in islamabad. where they get 2/3 of their money from? yes 2/3? karachi. where there is more violence, museebat for the common man? karachi or kashmir? yes. KARACHI. even despite all the jaahil hindus commenting here. by million times, karachi the bullet city has the MORE violence than kashmir. i think that islamabad, with 0 crime rate, plush green developed, like dubai, living on all (karachi) money, should maybe pay more attention to plight of the repressed opressed people of karachi FIRST, then worry about their kashmir.
ET please publish response to someone who has written to me.
@Bobby: "@Gp65: shimla agreement is a bilateral agreement between india and Pakistan.It cannot override the international agreement reached at UN security council. Moreover the primary party. To Kashmir dispute have not been a party to this agreement as such this agreement is not viable under international law and it cannot supersede the international agreements."
Who refused to honor the UN resolution? Pakistan. How? By not withdrawing its army from Kashmir as mandated by he resolution as well as by altering demographics of the Kashmir it occupied. Handing over a part of Kashmir to China, as Pakistan did was also non-compliant with UN resolution.
Secondly, Kashmiris were not part of UN resolution either and it only allows two options - India or Pakistan. So in that sense Simla agreement is no different.
Anyway you are just providing your opinion of why Simla agreement is inconsistent with international law. You have not provided the opinion of any international legal expert who has that opinion.
How far back in history do you have to go to decide who the real heirs of Kashmir truly are? Should invaders have the same rights as the indigenous people whose lands were plundered and their lands desecrated? I know one thing for sure. India will not let go of one inch of Kashmir. India has been at the receiving end of invasions at the hands of Muslims and the English. For the first time in her history she has the power to assert herself and assert she shall.
@Gp65: shimla agreement is a bilateral agreement between india and Pakistan.It cannot override the international agreement reached at UN security council. Moreover the primary party. To Kashmir dispute have not been a party to this agreement as such this agreement is not viable under international law and it cannot supersede the international agreements.
@Saif: Re. Plebiscite And also NWFP/KP where no one recognizes the Durand Line.
Whom the God wishes to destroy,HE first turns them Mad. Wake up my Brothers in Pakland before it becomes too late. Ordinairy Indian people have nothing against you, they wish you well.
@PakIPower: Yeah we know it. The way you are shredding Pakistan to pieces.
All opinion makers use the phrase 'Result Oriented'. What result do they have in mind? I suspect they all think India should hand over Kashmir to Pakistan. End of. None of them has in mind to give Baltistan to India as a result oriented dialogue. Wake up people.
Very negative article. Simla agreement or any agreement cannot be rescinded unilaterally without justification. Like elsewhere in the world, a subsequent agreement invalidates previous agreements. Kashmiris are not a party since ruler Hari Singh mandated India take over.
As per Pakistan,solving Kashmir issue means India handing it over to them on a platter. This is not going to happen in the short term or medium term. No Indian government will agree for another partition. As for the long term,who knows. Any thing could happen. Spain has been demanding Gibraltar from Britain for 400 years and so has Argentina been demanding Falklands for 300 years. So Pakistan has to show patience and wait. And in the interim solve other "unimportant" issues like polio,water scarcity, power outages, inter provincial disputes on dams, sectarianism etc. And of course the elephant in the room Terrorism.
@BabesInTheWoods:
Thanks for highlighting the writer's true nature.
ET, when you introduce your writers, be honest.
"The writer is a London-based writer, poet and columnist."
That's his introduction? Why didn't you say that he is a separatist. At least use Pakistani narrative to claim that he's a freedom fighter. That would have been more honest.
However, by hiding the true nature of the author you have exposed your own and completely discredited the author. Now, even valid arguments in his writing will be discredited based on his background, because you tried to hide it.
These separatists have failed in whipping up religious sentiments and hatred in the valley to a great degree. They have succeeded in doing the same to some degree.
These people know that the only argument they have for separation of Kashmir fro India is on the basis of religion.
Nothing else. Absolutely nothing else works for them. Culture, history, destiny and everything else ties Kashmir with India. If anything, these things can only exclude Kashmiri Muslims, for they're occupying forces.
In fact, the Hindu holy land, ravaged by Muslim invaders cannot be separated from India. Imagine taking out Al Aqsa from Musims, because Jews outnumber the Muslims.
And now that elections are successfully going on in Indian side of Kashmir, these people have lost all ground to stand upon and resorting to the old nonsense of UN resolution without understanding the implications or the preconditions.
His argument that Shimla agreement did not include Kashmiriss as a party is true. But he must also know that according to UN resolution, Kashmiris can only choose to live with India or Pakistan. There is no third option. The possibility of freedom doesn't exist.
In other words, he is a Pro Pakistani, Kashmri separatist who wants to merge Kashmir with Pakistan solely on the basis of religion.
And in India we don't credit with people with honesty.
Another Dr(!) Fai in the making. (Now that Dr Fai has been exposed)
I wonder why a London based writer is suddenly interested in resolving the Kashmir issue. The world does not need another Ghulam Nabi Fai to give us a biased view, in the garb of an artificial neutrality. Your arguments can be punctured point by point along with the neutrality.
Firstly, the Partition of India agreed on was only a two way bifurcation without possibility of a third country, ruling out scope for self determination or whatever it may mean. By not vacating Kashmir the Pakistani Military did not fulfill conditions for a plebiscite. If the author wanted even a fig leaf of neutrality he would have firstly before starting his diatribe questioned the perfidy of Pakistan ceding parts of Kashmir to China without the permission of Kashmiri's, India or the UN. If Simla agreement does not superceed earlier UN resolution, there is no validity for any Agreement signed between India and Pakistan, including the Indus Water Treaty. There is nothing honorable in cutting ones own feet and source of food.
If the grievance of the author was unbiased he would have applauded Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, there being no such parallel in Pakistan which has flooded Kashmir with people of other ethnicities reducing indigenous people there to a minority. Why was no comparison made ? Why is there no comment on the role played by terrorists infiltrated by Pakistan, who are wreaking violence in Kashmir, none of whom are Kashmiri. Once violence has been introduced by Pakistan in Kashmir, it bears all responsibility for the situation spinning out of control, If India follows the same example, the existence of Pakistan will be at peril. Wisdom demands that those unhappy with democratic rule by Kashmiri's in Indian Kashmir cross the border and go to the other side. In return those unhappy with Pakistani rule or passport in POK should be welcomed on the other side. India will not concede an inch of land in Kashmir or elsewhere, under any circumstances, today or in future. Keep playing your flute in London, else come settle in POK and then comment.
Pakistan lost its chance by not following on UN resolution immediately,and withdraw under the auspices of UN.Plebiscite would have been a real possibility then.The time is past now,and Pakistan should not torture itself by its misadventures.No use fighting for a lost cause.
Pakistan had only one chance to snatch some territory of Kashmir from India and that was in 1962. At that time, India was getting badly beaten by China in the India - China war. China at that time specifically asked Pakistan not to take advantage of the situation and open a front in Kashmir as this would internationalize India - China war. So, Pakistan kept quiet but that itch remained for Pakistan and we saw the 1965 India - Pakistan war. Relative to all other wars with India, Pakistan fared better in the 1965 war as India was just recovering after its war with China but had not fully recovered. Then we was the birth of Bangladesh in 1971.
Today, no country in the world wants India cede even an inch of its Kashmir region to Pakistan, nor does anyone support an independent Kashmir. India ceding territory to Pakistan is seen as encouraging islamic terrorists and Independent Kashmir is seen as sure to become safe haven for islamic terrorists of all kinds like Al Quaida, Talibans and ISIS. Even China, after so many islamic terrorist attacks, will not support an independent Kashmir.
The only government that supports Pakistan's views on Kashmir is the Taliban government in exile in Pakistan
@3rdRock, GP65, Yajnesh and other Indian excoriators...
Your responses to the article suggest you are under the impression the author has a lop-sided perspective due to any lack of information on the issue, and plying him with information will lead to any sort of correction of perspective.
I'd urge you to disabuse yourself of that risibily naive notion by looking up British newspaper articles of mid-2011 vintage about information swapped between FBI and MI5 on the author's organization, Justice Foundation, and his co-founder, an American-Indian Kashmiri named Ghulam Nabi Fai, who I hope you are familiar with.
Never forget and ignore Kashmir whatever has to be done to resolve the burning and core issues between Pakistan and India.....................
A very interesting article. Except that Mr Shawl is wrapping facts with fiction. One should remember that India returned close to 90,000 prisoners of war, and the land which it had occupied during the 1971 war in good faith. The havoc wreaked by the extremists is so heartrending in Kashmir that, India is one country where people have been made refugees in their own land -- the pundits. One may, of course, equate Kashmiri -- with Kashmiri Muslims - but that is not acceptable to the secular India, and of course to the secular Muslim in India, be it in Kashmir or elsewhere. I write this not to trivialize the problem and claim unilateral solution, but to make an appeal that we do not start with incorrect premises. Peace be upon us ALL.
This is all raw propaganda. We will not let kashmir be at peace until it becomes part of pakistan. Else we will shred it to pieces.
For lasting peace, Pakistan have to be prepared that Kashmir is to remain as it is i.e. divided. No Govt. in India can give even an inch of land which is presently with India and Pakistan is not in any position to force India to do so. Pakistan is hoping that foreign powers can help in this. But in the present world, even it is not possible. The economic condition of Pakistan is going from bad to worse. I recently visited Pakistan and was disappointed to see the condition of Pakistan especially the railway and the country side. If comparing the two Punjab, I may tell that each village of Indian Punjab is connected with mettalled roads and electricity and the electricity is given free for agriculture whereas the rates of electricity in Pakistan Punjab is very high.
I was born in Chak 472 of Samundari tehsil and sincerely wish that two countries become friends and I am able to visit my birth place which I could not do in my visit.
"use its military muscle to crush the freedom struggle in Kashmir" How can holding elections in kashmir crush kashmir? Maybe it may crush the reams of some people rooting to turn kashmir into another failed theocratic state.
Let Pakistan try rescinding the Shimla agreement - and then face the consequences.You will be taught a lesson you will never forget. We have had enough of this nonsense from Pakistan.
What is so special about Kashmir? Is Punjab or Bengal are not divided during Partition? Further the writer is living in London ..... what right he is having to talk about PHK or IHK?
Pakistan can live with this dream for another 1000 years. It is very simple as long as India is there Kashmir is integral part of India. The sooner Pakistanis understand the better. The politicians, media are misguiding you. Ask them a simple question what is the strategy to get it from India?
"We have to try and avoid a fourth India-Pakistan war"
That war came and went, it was known as Kargil. And no, the nuclear umbrella didn't help.
Kashmiri people have shown their resolve by unprecedented voting in ongoing election.While Pakistani sponsored terrorist are on killing spree.Kashmir is not humanitarian but territorial issue for Pakistan, as such It has been trying to snatch it by sending army in grab of non-state actors in 1948 , 1965 and 1999.This shows Pakistan has never cared for UN Resolution, which was basically to ask Pakistan to vacate illegal occupation of part of Kashmir.Indian stand on Kashmir is clear no adjustment on border, now Pakistan has to decide.
The will of the people of J&K will be known after the elections . When are the elections going to be held in POK , do they have elections ?
A very sensibly written article but may one ask the author why must the Pakistan Government have a dialogue with India on behalf of the people of Jammu and Kashmir?
Rex Minor
The people of Jammu and Kashmir are not a party to the Simla Agreement. If that is the case, India need not talk to Pakistan at all. And as regards J&K, full democracy is practiced there. During recent election voter turnout was more than 70% which means majority of the people prefer India alone. Matter ends there. There need not be any talk with anybody.
It is true that Kashmir dispute must be solved according to the wishes of the Kashmiris.
But who are Kashmiris?
Is it the Muslims of Kashmir who have occupied Hindu land and committed a genocie of Hindus?
If a plebiscite is held in Kashmir, only Kashmiri Pundits must be allowed to vote.
Understand that Kashmir was a Hindu land even before the word Islam came into existence.
Pakistan always speaks with a forked tongue to use a cliche. The author seems to have for the duplicitous pakistan. While outwardly showing reasonableness Pakistan keeps sending terrorists to create murder and mayhem in India. Pakistani leaders and citizens must realize the reality that neither India nor Pakistan can give up the part of Kashmir they currently control. Pakistani Muslims should realize that they are not the rulers any more of India but are citizens of another country and behave accordingly.
Pakistan should rescind Simla agreement? Simla agreement is not a Pakistani law which can be rescinded. It is an agreement between 2 countries which cannot be unilaterally rescinded. Yes, Pakistan has chosen to not comply with it on various occassions including Kargill when it tried to snatch Kashmir by force and also more recently when Nawaz Sharif has been trying to internationalise Kashmir. It can do this but consequence is India will not negotiate other than the framework of Simla agreement.
As far as international support- even OIC supports Indian viewpoint i.e. Kashmir should be resolved bilaterally. Same is true about P-5 nations whose envoys Pakistan tried to drag into the Kashmir issue. UN stand is no different.
First of all 72% of people of J&K voting in the first phase of election shows that Hurriyat does ot represent people of J&K.
Secondly, if Modi is the terrile ogre that you think he is, exactly who do you think is going to represent India in these talks you refer to!
Finally, please provide a reliale reference to any international legal opinion which says that Simla agreement is not consistent with international laws as you claim.
Indians also want to talk but not on Kashmir like a broken record...first get plebicite on Baloochistan ,Gligit Balistan and Azad Kashmir then talk about Kashmir !
The demanders of 'azaadi' for Kashmir, must realize, that there will never be real 'azaadi' - since 'azaadi' as per Pakistan, is merger with Pakistan. So essentially, there are only two options, India or Pakistan.
And more impostantly; no matter whichever party is in power in Delhi; there will be no re-drawing of the borders.
So by default - the only option is status quo. The faster all realize this, the faster all of them can progress. The option to that is to get mired in a never ending low intensity conflict - which India in its current form can afford to ride out, but the other parties in the mix cannot.
We don't listen to world yet insist on world to listen to us why?. We kick our assets Abdus salam Malala out of our land and embrace terrorists.World community sends experts to train our soldiers and we kick them out lamenting charges as foreign spies.Nobody will come unless there is a positive change within.
I want my country too, it is my basic right to self-determination. I am waiting for India-Pakistan to negotiate with me.