1.3 Parties’ Stands over Kashmir
Two countries remained on dispute since their independence and have been developing their own way of governmental and foreign policy concerning Kashmir. India takes its stand in line with the ‘instrument of accession’ dated back in 1947 whereas Pakistan takes its stand on the religion being majority of Kashmiris Muslims. Both the nations seem to reject Kashmiris’ right to self determination straight away, though Pakistan, at some point considers. Such divergent policies over Kashmir hold incompatibility of their subject position leading to 63 year’s old unsolved conflict. This conflict, as it is as old as India & Pakistan are today, is very unlikely to settle with simpler attempts. India considers Jammu & Kashmir as its integral part (KashmirLive, 2010), and this may be due to water resources as most of the rivers originate from Jammu & Kashmir and flow towards the West Pakistan. Pakistan will be deprived of these water resources if Jammu & Kashmir is fully adapted by India. Further clarifies each of India and Pakistan’s policy over Kashmir in brief and also includes a very brief US look at the dispute.
1.3.1 India:
-
Significant autonomy provided to the state of Jammu and Kashmir in of the .
- J & K: Integral part of India: due to Hindu Inhabitants & Water resources
- Signed Instrument of Accession as completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act (1935), Indian Independence Act (1947) and international law thereby irrevocable.
- Considers the dispute as a bilateral issue and rejects any third party involvement including the UN.
- Wants Cease fire line or the current Line of Control (LoC) as its international border.
- United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 tacitly accepts India's stand regarding all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan.
-
United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 cannot be implemented: Pakistan’s failure to withdraw its forces from Kashmir, - the first step in implementing the resolution. (The resolution passed by under )
-
India does not accept the two-nation theory as being .
- All differences between India and Pakistan, including Kashmir, to be settled through bilateral negotiations as agreed to & signed by the two countries through the Simla Agreement (MEAIG, 2010).
1.3.2 Pakistan:
- The popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrating the Kashmiri people no longer wish to remain within India.
- Advocates on two-nation theory, the theory that created India and Pakistan. Hennce, Kashmir- as a Muslim majority should have been with Pakistan
- India’s disregard to the resolutions of the UN Security Council and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan by failing to hold a plebiscite to determine the future allegiance of the state.
- India upholding the Kashmiri people‘s right of self-determination through militancy.
- A large number of people to massive rallies opposing Indian control of the state.
- Points to the violence during the elections in Indian Kashmir and the anti Indian sentiments by some people in the state.
- Reports from the United Nations condemning India for its human rights violations against Kashmiri people.
- Rejects accusation of Mumbai attacks 26/11
- Considers the Chenab formula a compromise proposed in the 1960s
1.3.3 Kashmiri People
Kashmiri people as the victims of the dispute also hold stand on the issue. They consider their rright to self determination. They criticize both Pakistan and India for not allowing them their right to decide on their future. Kashmiris have inherently seeking the sooner settlement to the issues but the two governments have been ignoring their interest. Since the 1990s, there were numerous formal and informal talks between the leaders of the two governments and none of these dialogues have given a solution to the problem and hence Kashmiris blame politicians for not being able to come up with the solid agreement that brings peace. So, Kashmiris are outraged by the dialogues between the two nations which does agree nothing but agree to continue talks. (Hardgrave R., 2003)
1.3.4 United States
US’s foreign policy has its stand since 9/11, 2001 and has been more sticking after 26/11/2008, the Mumbai Attack. US urge Pakistan to stop cross border infiltration to India and seeks trail of the Mumbai suspect to be clearly handled (Kashmir Times, 2010). So far, US’s policy over Kashmir has two bulletin points as underlined herewith (Times of India, 2010; Kashmir Times, 2010).
- show program in stopping cross-border infiltration into India.
- Program on the trial of the Mumbai suspects 26/11/2008.
- Calculating the Loss
With reference to both countries’ stand on this issue, this conflict is a sort of loose-loose game. So, having their separate but disjoint Kashmir policies, it is important to analyse who loses more considering that the both sides stick to their respective policies. Pakistani economy is at present in ruins, negligible forex reserves, increasing debt, increasing poverty, frequent natural disasters such as floods, massive populations and many other internal problems, international terrorism and threats. Pakistan has all these internal problems external threats to solve which has hindered Pakistan from speeding its economic growth. The stand at its Kashmir policy affects itself and costs Pakistan more than predicted.
On the other hand, India with stable politics and strong democracy is having substantial economic growth which has been counted among the superpower in the world. Due to such phenomenal growth and increment in GDP, India has gained respect from the international communities in terms of its recent double digit growth. Hence it is very unlikely for India in loosening or re-visiting its domestic and/or foreign policy on Kashmir dispute. If it continues, it is safe to say that India’s Kashmir policy is less harmful to India than is Pakistan’s Kashmir policy to Pakistan.
- Recent Development/ scenario
European parliament held its first ever parliamentary hearing on Kashmir dispute in Brussels on October 13, 2010. EP debates and discusses Kashmir dispute on yearly basis sending its monitoring missions to both parts of Kashmir and publishes yearly reports on Kashmir dispute. This dispute has already been in the agenda of UN Security Council and of the Organisation of Islamic Conference. This heading stressed on the solution to the Kashmir dispute and heightened its seriousness on Kashmir as an unsolved dispute .In the same event, the chair Mr . Chris Danes (active member EP) issued directives to his executive staff to start for which high level contacts with the UNO, OIC inviting them to participate in the next Global Discussion Kashmir that EP is holding on March 14 & 15, 2011 in Brussels. Kashmiris consider this as an important and big success in the sense that it highlights the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir as an unsolved in its agenda remains UNO of its obligation via Kashmir resolution of Aug 13, 1949 and of Jan 5, 1949 (Sananews Online, 2010).
India, Pakistan and Kashmir are the other integral parties concerned with the dispute. More or less China also seems to be concerned with this issue. Since it also holds a tiny part of Kashmir which shows its firm stand on Kashmir ready to recognise Kashmiris’ self determination. In this line, China issues visas to Indian occupied Kashmir via separate staples (Kashmirwatch, 2010).
3.1 Latest in the conflict-zone:
More than 100 people are estimated to have died in violence in the Kashmir valley since June 2010, aimed continuing protests against Indian rule in a territory where many of the Muslims majority favour Independence or a transfer of control to Pakistan. Hundreds of young protestors have been imprisoned in a string of clams with security forces (Tribune, 2010).
Pakistan has said that the ‘Back Channel Diplomacy’ is being conducted with India to resolve the Kashmir issue. Government of India on Wednesday (8 Dec.2010) made similar remarks stating that “track II” talk with Pakistan were on to discuss about the issues (Khan R. & Lambah S., 2010).
3.2 Kashmir 2010
On 11 June, protests erupted when a 17 year old boy died after being hit by a police tear gas canister in the congested old part of the city. A month local journalist joined the calls for freedom, demanding their own liberation. Slowly the country was intense and the authority had to adopt curfew in the region which continued until the end of September. 111 Kashmiris, many of them being teenagers died in several clashes with the police in Indian Administered Kashmir since June, 2010 until the end of November. Valley with Muslims majority (see Table 1 for demographics information) has been under numerous curfews as the authorities seek to curb protests called by separatists.
Police have arrested a prominent separatist leader responsible for the reactionary protest against India in the valley. Indian government have appointed mediators to begin dialogue with people in the valley re-opening all schools and universities which were closed for more than 3 months during unrest and pulling down some security bankers.
Compensation has been arranged from Indian government to the families of those killed during recent violence. Indian government announced majors after delegation of Indian lawmakers visited the region and some separatist leaders. Some separatist leaders even said that the announcement is meaningless. Home Minister P. Chidambaran’s gave a remark on the issue on Thrusday 10th December who announced that there has been considerable improvement in the solution after the recent eight point plan for Jammu & Kashmir (Greater Kashmir, 2010). Despite this announcement smaller protests are on an ongoing basis. India says talk with Pakistan as well as with Kashmiri leaders is ready to be launched.
3.3 Indo-Pak talks: No Substantive Results
India is not going to discuss substantive issues of Kashmir with Pakistan in the proposed round of dialogue but is only attempting to create the “right atmosphere for removing the trust deficit” for a broad dialogue later. Peace Process has been halted after 26/11, Mumbai attack. Prior to Mumbai attack, there were four rounds of composite dialogue between the two government and 5th was on (Daily Pioneer Online, 2010).
- Future of Kashmir Dispute
Future is unpredictable ever. Many agree that the dispute of Jammu & Kashmir is never-ending. Such an old age dispute is hard to be settled. Even if the two governments agreed to settle the dispute, some groups may be dissatisfied with the decision and protest again. While analysing this conflict, it is wise to see all the possible future that might be a part of the solution. Only for this attempt seven scenarios plus an alternative way to settle the dispute have been mentioned briefly here under in Table 2.
- Conclusion:
No problems remain ever as a problem. Every problem has solution and so does a dispute. Studying the underlying causes of the conflict and understanding the incompatibility of their subject position, one could draw a line which gives the best possible solution. However, this conflict seems as if it is never-ending dispute in the region. Kashmir was a political issue and political solution must be found but peace and good governance were pre-requisite. Pakistan is unable to load the peace in the region as it has problems elsewhere. India can, but there lies great difficulty as it has committed many humanitarian mistakes and casualties in JK area. Again, India providing good governance and creating high employment opportunities, engaging youths in the job market can reduce the tension. Pakistan has to be liberal and has to liberalise its stand on Kashmir. Mutual understanding, respect and trust is required between the two nations and this is at a very distance until today.
It is recommended that Kashmiris should be given at least one chance to decide their own future. India & Pakistan have together deprived Kashmiris of their right of self determination. Neither politics nor religion has right to claim the lives of thousands of people for a decades in an ongoing manner; both the sides should stop, sit in a table and agree in some specific and major topics; only agreeing to hold next negotiation will do nothing. No more wars, International communities should warn the notion of ‘No More Wars’ to the concerned authorities, and initiate in a long-lasting peace establishment. Someone has to take a serious and effective initiation to resolve this dispute, but WHO???
Bibliography:
BBC Online. (2010).‘TIMELINE: Kashmir Conflict’ retrieved from accessed on 10 December, 2010, 14:45
BBC Online. (2010a). ‘Kashmir Demographics’ retrieved from accessed on 13 December , 2010 13:45.
Daily Pioneer Online. (2010). ‘Indo-Pak talks: No substantive issues’ retrieved from accessed on 06 December, 2010, 14:45
Greater Kashmir English Daily Newspaper retrieved from accessed on 13, December, 2010, 14:45
Hardgrave, R.(2003). "India: The Dilemmas of Diversity”, Journal of Democracy, pp. 54–65
Kashmir Times.(2010). ‘Kashmir is for India: Pak to settle’. Kashmirtimes published on 27 Oct, 2010 Retrieved from accessed on 09 December, 2010, 14:45
KashmirLive.(2010a). ‘Four Indo-Pak wars’ retrieved from accessed on 11 December, 2010, 14:45
Kashmirwatch.(2010).‘Policy on Kashmir Visa Unchanged: China’ retrieved from accessed on 13 December, 2010, 14:45
KasmirLive.(2010). ‘Pacts & Agreement’ retrieved from accessed on 11 November, 2010, 14:45
MEAI.(2010). ‘Kasmir: the True Story’, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, India retrieved from accessed on 11 November, 2010, 14:45
MEAIG, (2010). Ministry of External Affairs, India Government, Simla Agreement retrieved from accessed on 06 December, 2010, 14:45
Khan F &, Lambah S. (2010). ‘Back channels working on Kashmir: Pak’ retrieved from accessed on 13 December, 2010, 14:45
Sananews Online.(2010). ‘Hearings on Kashmir Held in European Parliament’ retrieved from accessed on 12 December, 2010, 14:45
Telegraph. (2010).‘A Brief History of the Kashmir Conflict’ retrieved from accessed on 01 December, 2010, 14:45
Times of India .(2010). ‘US to Pak: Stop India infiltration, try 26/11 suspects’ retrieved from accessed on 10 December, 2010, 14:45
Tribune. (2010).‘Kashmir Unrest’ retrieved from accessed on 13 December, 2010, 14:45
UN. (2010). ‘UN PRESENCE IN JAMMU & KASMIR: Observing the ceasefire in Jammu and Kashmir’ retrieved from accessed on 01 December, 2010, 14:45
