Resume the Pakistan-India dialogue
We, the people of Jammu and Kashmir, await support of international community to intervene and resolve this dispute
Today, when I am reflecting on the suspended dialogue between India and Pakistan I am reminded of the deliberations of a conference in Islamabad in 1994. One of the participants was the famous writer, intellectual and journalist Khuswant Singh. He uttered some historic words, “We have to try and avoid a fourth India-Pakistan war. We have to take good steps because with the armies facing each other almost eye ball to eye ball and border incidents taking place, we have to resolve this problem without the danger coming to pass … We have also to advert to, and which I think is the crux, how do we honour the right of the Kashmiri people, their right to decide their own destiny?”
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.
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.