|

Dr. Fai Welcomed Talks Between India and Pakistan

Washington, D.C. July 6, 2012. Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai has welcomed the foreign secretaries’ talks between New Delhi & Islamabad on July 4 – 5, 2012 where they exchanged views on the issue of Jammu & Kashmir and agreed ‘to continue discussions in a purposeful and forward looking manner with the view to finding a peaceful solution by narrowing divergences and building convergences.’ “These talks offer hope for peace in South Asia if the course of justice is followed and both parties undertake to abide by their commitments. The continuance of talks can only be useful if they reflect a sense of urgency and prepare the ground for an earnest effort at the highest level to frame a step-by-step plan of settlement of the Kashmir dispute. Mere persistence of talks at a level lower than political leadership of the two countries – and that too at a leisurely pace – will in no way defuse the situation. Unintentionally though, it will mock the agony of the people of Kashmir rather than assuage it,” Fai added.

Dr. Fai cautioned that “the present situation inside Kashmir makes it clear that, if talks between the Governments of India and Pakistan are to mean anything, they must be accompanied by practical measures to restore an environment of non-violence, free from coercion and external intimidation. Secondly, Fai underscored that bilateral talks have proven barren for more than 65 years; they have lacked a sense of urgency because Kashmir has been denigrated to a pawn on the foreign policy chessboards. The lion’s share of suffering fell on Kashmiris, not Indians or Pakistanis. Therefore, Kashmiri leadership must be included in all future negotiations over Kashmir. Even putting aside law and morals, no solution to the Kashmiri conflict will endure which does not command the consent of the 17 million people of Kashmir. Thus, it makes no sense to negotiate over their heads. The best that could result would be sound and fury signifying nothing, as at Tashkent, Simla, Lahore and elsewhere.”

Dr. Fai urged the world powers including the United States and the Secretary General of the United Nations to maintain, indeed to intensify, their watch over the situation in Kashmir and not be lulled into the belief that the dialogue between India and Pakistan, in the form and at the level it appears to be contemplated at present will soften the conflict or lessen the urgent need for mediatory initiatives. The policy that aims at merely defusing the situation, whatever that may mean, and not encouraging a credible settlement has not paid in the past. It is likely to do even less now.

“Kashmir is not beyond a solution if all involved parties show some flexibility: Pakistan, India, and Kashmiris. The next step is not to craft a solution, but to set the stage for crafting a solution. Key to that objective is the appointment of a person of international stature like Bishop Desmond Tutu to mediate these negotiations,” Fai reiterated.

“Liberty, dignity and self-determination pulsate in the breasts of the Kashmiri people. That innate craving for justice is no different from the people of other countries, like Southern Sudan. All the brutalities and suffering inflicted by alien power have proven impotent in seeking to extinguish that popular demand. Might will never make right in the eyes of Kashmiris, and we hope the Secretary General of the UN as the custodian of the human rights can enlighten the world powers to this elemental lesson,” Fai concluded.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Preventive Diplomacy: Successes & Failures

    “It is also true that there is no peace and sustainable development without respect for human rights.” Antonio Guterres, Secretary General- elect of the United Nations

    Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.” President John F. Kennedy

    It has always been a challenge to exchange views on conflict prevention and the summoning into being a peaceful and prosperous world. The intellectual debate is great, but the stakes are even greater. Men and women have yearned for peace and prosperity for ages. President Abraham Lincoln in his second inaugural address declared, “Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away.” Winston Churchill brilliantly recognized that it is invariably better to jaw-jaw than to war-war.

  • |

    Is dislocation of UN Office a path to ‘Insaniat” (Humanity) or a broken promise?

    Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai
    Secretary General
    World Kashmir Awareness

    Washington, D.C.
    July 10, 2014

    On July 8, 2014, the Spokesman of Indian Ministry of External Affairs made a formal statement saying, “As far as we (India) are concerned the UNMOGIP (United Nations Military Observer Group in India & Pakistan) has outlived its relevance. This is a consistent stance that we have articulated on several occasions since the Shimla accord.”

    What is the legal ground of the spokesman’s pronouncement? Christopher Hitchens has made it easy to understand when he said; “”Perhaps you notice how the denial is so often the preface to the justification.” And George R.R. Martin confirms it by saying “Most men would rather deny a hard truth than face it.”

    The spokesman has conveniently forgotten that India and Pakistan are signatories to various United Nations Security Council resolutions. These resolutions constitute an agreement because, unlike most resolutions of the Security Council, their provisions were first negotiated with the parties and, it was only after their written consent was obtained that they were adopted by the Security Council.

  • 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,

  • |

    Observance of October 27th as Day of Occupation in Kashmir

    Cumberland, Maryland. October 27, 2012. “The international community must intervene on humanitarian grounds to ease the suffering of the innocent and unarmed Kashmiri population. The suffering and abuses are so pervasive as to extend beyond those directly affected. The pattern of abuses reaches every man, woman and child in the Valley of Kashmir. The people live under the constant threat of the abuses. The prevalence of military personnel and bunkers serve as a constant reminder to Kashmiris of the potential for them to fall victim to such a horrible occurrences,” this was stated by Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai from Cumberland Prison Camp in Maryland, USA. Fai warned that India may be the largest democracy but its policies in Kashmir has been uniformly brutal and deceitful.

  • |

    Ufa: Another Opportunity Lost

    One thing is very clear. The statement issued by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif representing some kind of agreement at the Russian city of Ufa on July 10, 2015 seems on its face to be conspicuously duplicitous. One wonders if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had some subordinate prepare it, trusting him to convey the intent, but never actually read what was published before it was published.

    Here’s the thing. There are two distinct parts to the Ufa agreement as it is explicitly written. First, It is prefaced with the general policy statement:

    They agreed that India and Pakistan have a collective responsibility to ensure peace and promote development. To do so, they are prepared to discuss all outstanding issues.
    Both leaders condemned terrorism in all its forms and agreed to cooperate with each other to eliminate this menace from South Asia.

    “they are prepared to discuss all outstanding issues.”