|

Modi – Sharif Meeting Offers Hope for Peace In South Asia: Dr. Fai

Articles, Uncategorised
Washington, D.C. May 28, 2014. “The meeting between Mr. Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India and Mian Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of Pakistan in New Delhi on May 27, 2014 offers hope for peace in South Asia if the course of justice is followed and both leaders undertake to abide by their international commitments.  The people of Kashmir want the people of India and Pakistan to live in peace and prosperity.  That is why they believe that Kashmir conflict has to be resolved not through military means but through peaceful tripartite negotiations between Governments of India and Pakistan & the people of Kashmir, stated Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai, Secretary General, World Kashmir Awareness at Baltimore Convention Center.
 
Speaking on the topic of ‘Kashmir Dispute: Opportunities and Challenges “ to a large gathering during the 39th Annual Convention of ICNA-MAS, Fai said that this change in atmosphere will lead to the use of friendlier language in relations between the two governments.  The change reflects only partly the warm, spontaneous exchanges at the popular level which have blown away the perverse thesis, sometimes muttered even by foreign powers, that hostility between the two peoples is innate and can never be eradicated.
 
It is a fact that peace, amity, and harmony between India and Pakistan will open vistas of opportunities to shift resources to domestic development.  It is also a fact that the nuclear capabilities of the South Asian nations heighten their responsibility to avoid conflict that could conclude with a gruesome mushroom cloud.
 
The persistence of Kashmir problem has been a source of weakness for both India and Pakistan.  It has diminished both these neighboring countries. So long as Kashmir is in turmoil, India and Pakistan will be at loggerheads and economic investment and trade relations will be inconsequential.
 
Fai proposed that now is an opportune moment for both India and Pakistan  to defuse the present situation and promote stability throughout the region.  Both prime Ministers should understand that any attempt to strike a deal between two without the association of the third, will fail to yield a credible settlement.  The contemporary history of South Asia is abundantly clear that bilateral efforts have never met with success. Both leaders should take an active role in finding a lasting settlement on Kashmir.  It is obvious that no settlement can last if it is not based on justice to the people of Kashmir and recognition of their inherent rights.  Only then can the crisis in South Asia and the possible disastrous consequences be averted.
      
The essential guiding principles of the negotiating process must be not to answer what is the correct or best solution of the Kashmir problem but how that solution can be arrived at.  In other words, it should by itself neither promote nor preclude any rational settlement of the dispute, be it accession to India or Pakistan or independence.  Rather than seek to impose a settlement on Kashmir, it should engage the peoples of each region of the former State of Jammu and Kashmir to work out a settlement themselves without any external constraint.
   
We do not need to invoke principles because principles will not help us launch a peace process.  Principles can be easily twisted and the principles can lend themselves to different interpretations.  But the principles that are involved in the Kashmir dispute should remain the guiding force in any final settlement. What are these principles?  There are two: It is the inherent right of the people of all zones of the State of Jammu & Kashmir to decide their future according to their own free will and second principle is that it is impossible to ascertain that will except through a vote under impartial supervision in conditions which are free from external coercion, intimidation and compulsion.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Is Kashmir an Issue of Election of Self-determination?

    This is an opportunity to explore a vexing but significant topic in the field of human rights: self-determination. The right of self-determination has been celebrated for ages. It is a basic principle of the United Nation Charter which has been reaffirmed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and applied countless times to the settlement of international disputes. The concept played a significant part in the post-world war I settlement, leading for example to plebiscite in a number of disputed border areas, even though no reference was made to self-determination in the League of Nations Covenant.

  • |

    Kashmir Dispute: Legacy of Great Britain: Barrister Sultan Mahmood Chaudhary

    Springfield, Virginia. May 9 2015. “The United States Administration should persuade both India and Pakistan to settle the Kashmir conflict through tripartite and purposeful dialogue.” This was stated by the former Prime Minister of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader, Barrister Sultan Mehmood Chaudhry, while addressing a public gathering in Washington, D.C. He emphasized that  Kashmir  is the flash point between the two nuclear countries of India and Pakistan which deserves the attention of the world powers.

  • |

    Self-Determination and the Issue of Kashmir

    The evolution of the right of self-determination has been one of the great normative narratives of the twentieth century. It was part of the visionary contributions of President Woodrow Wilson, who despite a deep-seated conservatism, seemed to have an uncontrollable tendency to give credibility to normative ideas that contained implications that carried far, far beyond his intentions. Ever since the words of self-determination left the lips of President Woodrow Wilson, the wider meaning of the words has excited the moral, political and legal imagination of oppressed peoples around the world. Although, self-determination even now, decades later, still seems to be a Pandora’s Box that no one knows how to close, and despite concerted efforts there is little likelihood that the box will be closed anytime soon. 

  • Kashmiri aspirations must be respected

    “If parties (India & Pakistan) come here and both of them call upon the Security Council to make recommendations for the solution of their (Kashmir) dispute, ought they not in advance agree to abide by it? They are not bound to ask the Security Council to make such recommendations, but if they do, I ask the Committee of Experts if they have not thereby implied that they will conform or try to conform to them.” Ambassador Warren Austin of the United States at the Security Council on May 26, 1948.

    If promises are made to be broken, then Kashmir may be summoned to prove the treacherous proposition. Broken promises haunt Kashmir’s history, and explain its tragedy.

    The Kashmir issue is simply this: the people of a large territory which is not part of any existing sovereign state were assured by the entire international community represented by the United Nations that they would be enabled to decide their future by a free vote. Until now, this assurance has not been honored.

    With the lapse of British paramountcy on August 15, 1947, broken promises over Kashmir came not like single spies but in battalions, to borrow from Hamlet. Princely states enjoyed three options: accession to India, accession to Pakistan, or independence. But the choice, according to India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and tacitly endorsed by the British,

  • |

    Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai Expressed Sympathy, Condolences and Solidarity with the bereaved families in Peshawar

    Washington, D.C. December 16, 2104. These cowardly contemptible murders of 141 people, including 132 children, mostly under 16, in Peshawar, Pakistan are condemnable no matter what the motivation of the terrorists. This massacres is unmitigated evil, an earmark of barbarism contemptuous of civilization. We must understand that terrorism is never acceptable no matter how seemingly urgent the political objective or how evil the opposition. Terrorism at anytime, any place, and by anyone can never be and must not be tolerated in a civilized society. Terrorism invariably corrupts the culprits and the common human rights of mankind.

  • |

    Human Rights Are Universal and No Longer Accepted as Domestic Jurisdiction: Dr. Fai

    Washington, D.C. July 8, 2012. “No human rights are self-executing. Thus, everyone who participates in raising the issues of civil and political rights does yeoman’s service on behalf of the oppressed. What is even more impressive is the willingness to invite risks to life, liberty, and property by those who would speak in the name of civil and political rights against autocratic or cruel regimes. How many unknown champions lie unremembered and unheralded in graves?” said Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai on the eve of the 105th session of the United Nations, Human Rights Committee which will be meeting in Geneva between July 9 – 27, 2012. The Human Rights Committee is the body of internationally known 18 independent experts who are elected for a term of four years. Currently, Dr. Zonke Zanele Majodina of South Africa is the Chairman of the Committee. The Committee monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights all over the world.