|

Kashmir Dispute: A Way Forward

The dispute over the status of Kashmir can be settled only in accordance with the will of the people which can be ascertained through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite, internationally supervised. This was the common ground taken by all the three parties to the dispute – viz.: the people of Kashmir, India and Pakistan. It was supported without any dissent by the United Nations Security Council – and prominently championed by the United States, Britain and France.

It became a matter of controversy only after India realized that she could not win the peoples’ vote and, in conditions of the cold war procured the support of the Soviet Union for its obstructionist strategy. Therefore, any progress towards a solution was blocked by India’s refusal to accept that the withdrawal of forces on the two sides should be balanced and synchronized. When President Truman and Prime Minister Attlee (of Britain) appealed that the points at issue be submitted to arbitration by the Plebiscite Administrator designate and India turn down the appeal, the Commission terminated its mediatory mission. From 1950 to 1957, a succession of Presidents of the Security Council or the United Nations representatives — General McNaughton (Canada), Owen Dixon (Australia), Frank Graham (United States) and Gunnar Jarring (Sweden) made intense efforts to secure India’s agreement to stage-by- stage demilitarization of the State so that a free Plebiscite could be held. They all failed, as did informal mediators like the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth countries.

Since then the Kashmir situation has been met with studied unconcern by the United Nations. This has given a sense of total impunity to occupation authority. It has also created the impression that the United Nations is invidiously selective about the application of the principles of human rights and democracy and will condone even a blatant breach of these principles when it wishes not to displease the offending party. There is a glaring contrast between the outcry over the massacre in Tiananmen Square, on the one side, and the official silence (barring the faint murmurs of disapproval) over the killing and maiming of a vastly greater number of human beings in Kashmir, through repetitious acts. The systematic violations of the 1949 Geneva Conventions have evoked no official international censure. Reliable estimates of civilian causalities put the number around 100,000 since 1990. Women and children are particular targets of the organized sadism of the occupation forces in Kashmir.

But the potential elements of a peaceful solution have been in place for nearly 67 years. The key principle that the people of Kashmir have the right, and should be provided the opportunity to decide the status of their land is laid out in the international agreements embodied in the United Nations Security Council resolutions and not only the governments of India and Pakistan, but the United Nations itself is committed to it. While alternative modalities can be subject of negotiations, the principle has no substitute as the basis for an enduring settlement – the principle that the wishes and aspirations of the people of Kashmir must be ascertained in seeking any final settlement.

We welcome the confidence building measures both for reducing the human carnage in the 67-year-old Kashmir conflict and for setting a constructive tone for peace talks. However, the dispute will not, and cannot, be solved bilaterally by the two countries. The so-called dialogue now going on between them is a mere charade which is deluding no one. This is only consistent with the whole history of the dispute.

We urge the United Nations to maintain, indeed to intensify, its watch over the situation in Kashmir and not to 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, and without the participation of the accredited leadership of the people of Kashmir, 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 have not paid in the past. It is likely to do even less now.

The Kashmiri leadership is mindful of the urgings by the United States that India and Pakistan keep talking to each other. It would be perverse on the part of anyone to oppose that course of action. But to expect a breakthrough in talks is to ask for miracles. We do not believe that all that the United States desires is to lend a veneer of peace and normalcy to a situation which in reality destroys the roots of peace and is strikingly abnormal. It would be irresponsible on our part to encourage the hope that if the Governments of India and Pakistan are willing to depart from the stand of principle, the compromise will be endorsed by the people of Kashmir and by the elements sympathetic to them and thus generate peace. We hope that the world powers, including the United States will persuade the two governments to engage in focused negotiations with the APHC about the procedures to be set in motion to bring about a settlement of the dispute. Despite the grief and suffering of the people of Kashmir, they are prepared to make constructive contributions to that end.

The present situation inside Kashmir makes it clear that, if talks between the New Delhi & Islamabad are to mean anything, they must be accompanied by practical measures to restore an environment of non-violence. The future talks at the official level can 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. Mere continuance of talks 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.

The global involvement in Kashmir will not only end the bloodshed and suffering in Kashmir, but also will have a direct positive effect on international security by eliminating regional fighting, national tensions, and the risk of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. It is in everyone’s interest to settle the Kashmir conflict peacefully without further delay. We don’t want to see the horrific nightly scenes from Kosovo and Bosnia replaced by an even greater catastrophe in Kashmir.

The global community has a long and proud tradition of upholding the causes of human freedom and dignity. Kashmir calls urgently for initiatives in accordance with that tradition.

Dr. Fai can be reached on: gnfai2003@yahoo.com or ghulamnabifai@gmail.com

Similar Posts

  • |

    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.

  • |

    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.

  • |

    Why does India have a hard time to accept the disputed nature of Kashmir?

    “Kashmir is an integral part of India, constitutionally, legally and morally something that is non-negotiable.” Ram Jethmalani, Outlook Magazine, October 8, 2016.

    “Let me state unequivocally that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and will always remain so.’ Sushma Swaraj September 26, 2016

    The fallacy advocated by the most celebrated Indian jurist and the Indian foreign minister deserves some clarification.

    The people of Jammu & Kashmir who number more than 129 other existing independent nations individually and have a defined historical identity, are at present engaged in a mass struggle to win freedom and release from the foreign occupation of their land. This struggle is motivated by no bigotry or ethnic prejudice; its aim is nothing but the exercise of the right of self-determination explicitly agreed by both India and Pakistan.

    To the horrors of the repression from which they suffer are added two other circumstances, each cruelly adverse. One is the apathy of the world outside, including the United States that otherwise are justly proud of their championship of democracy and human rights. The second is the fog of myths and evasive arguments, like Kashmir being an integral part of India. It is my modest attempt to help mitigate these two circumstances. My appeal is directed neither to the religious or ideological sympathies of Indian Public Square nor to their leanings towards any particular political party but solely to their conscience and human concern.

  • |

    Governor McAuliffe Kicks Off Pakistan Independence Day Festival in Washington, DC.

    September 1, 2015. We are proud of the achievements of the Pakistani Americans not only in Virginia but also in the United States. Pakistani culture is a beautiful culture, said Hon. Terri McAuliffe, Governor of the State of Virginia who was the Chief Guest to kick off Pakistani Independence day Festival at Fairfax, Virginia which was attended by several thousand people.

  • |

    Global Donors Forum, 2014

    Global Donors Forum, 2014

    Gaylord National Convention Center, National Harbor, Maryland
    April 13-16, 2014

    International Conflicts & the Role of Media

    Cihangir Isbilir
    Coordinator, UNIW & International Rabaa Platform, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen. I greet you all respectfully. I hope and pray for the success of the Global Donors Forum of 2014.

    Syria: I was at the Turkey-Syrian border last week. I wanted to make an assessment of the life condition of the people in the region. Especially, I wanted to observe personally the situation of Turkmens and Armenians who have been the subject of the media recently. I was deeply moved during my visit to the area. The people there are asking: “How can this happen in today’s World and that too in 2014?” Why the death of one hundred sixty thousand innocent people cannot shake the conscience of the humanity? Millions of people had to abandon their country because of the grim condition. The World powers have remained passive to this barbaric situation. They ask, why?