Sunday, August 18, 2019
Kashmir: A dispute that won't go away!
Kashmir is a dispute not between India and Pakistan alone, but a dispute that concerns the people of Kashmir more than anyone else. In this sense we talk of Kashmir as the entire territory of Kashmir. India, under the Modi government, earlier this month, by revoking the special status of its side of Kashmir, while hoping to resolve the issue, actually has brought the dispute back to the center stage. So much so that after almost 50 years the UN Security Council held a closed door discussion on the issue, and while typically, closed door sessions do not end in a resolution or even a press statement, the concern of the international community over peace in the region was visibly apparent.
In the last blog I looked at the legal aspects of the Modi governments actions, now lets see the over all situation of Kashmir, (the entire Kashmir). To suddenly assert that there is no issue now that Article 370 has been modified is willful thinking on the part of India. The fact that since 1947 there is a consensus in the UN and in bilateral talks, between both India and Pakistan, that there is a dispute over Kashmir is fact and not fiction. The issue should not be, and in a sense is not, that who is right in either Indian held Kashmir or the Pakistan side Azad Kashmir. (Free Kashmir). The issue goes back to the basic recognition by the UN that the people of Kashmir should determine their own future.
India this week has tried to throw a curve ball by saying they are willing to speak to Pakistan on Kashmir but only the part they see as occupied by Pakistan (Azad Kashmir). This is a narrative that deflects the issue because curfews, arrests, and a lock down of the area is not on the Pakistan side of Kashmir but in Jammu and Kashmir that India occupies. From Amnesty International to Asia Watch, and independent news channels, there is no denying that India has locked down their side of Kashmir. Public assembly is forbidden, internet and phone services either totally blocked or limited coverage, and close to a million Indian troops and paramilitary forces in Jammu and Kashmir clearly testify that the discussion should be on their actions.
One of the weakest aspects of India's argument is that they ignore the fact that there is a UN military observation detachment in Srinagar with the sole purpose of ensuring that Indian and Pakistani military actions do not result in an all out war. If the region was not disputed why would such a UN presence be there in the first place. To suddenly feel that the integration of Jammu and Kashmir has been completed thus India can ignore there were was an issue is much like the proverbial ostrich with his head in the sand.
On the Pakistan side there is a need for understanding that the world community and leadership is tired of this conflict; there is a fatigue in the portals of diplomacy when it comes to discussion on Kashmir. Indeed, over the past three decades India has invested rather well in their diplomatic efforts with Pakistan's allies, even in the Muslim world, to the extent that the outcry over the Indian 'take over' of Jammu and Kashmir has been muted. Few diplomats in Washington, London, Paris, or Moscow see that India's move to remove the special status of Jammu and Kashmir is a precursor for actions that will follow and will have far reaching consequences within India's demographic set up and also on the region.
There is a valid concern that spurned by the recent actions of the Modi government a comprehensive plan of resettling mostly Hindus into the Muslim majority Jammu and Kashmir (something that was not allowed under article 370 before) will commence. To that extent Modi would take a page from the Israeli approach to Palestinian lands and kibbutz style settlements would begin to dot the Indian side of the Kashmir valley. In the long run this will increase communal tensions and reinforce the view that Modi's vision of India is really a vision of a Hindu India.
A good friend of mine from Hyderabad (India) who is a Muslim recently told me that the Modi government now is requiring Muslims (only Muslims one might emphasize) to prove that they are Indian by showing proof of their family being settled in India prior to 1951. My initial reaction was to say to him that this is perhaps fear mongering, till I researched the matter at some length myself. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/india-muslim-residents-citizenship-assam-modi-hindu-nationalism-a9064096.html). While currently four million Muslims in Assam and adjoining areas are affected, it is clear that Modi's government wants to expand this 'foreigner tribunals' across the nation and only to affect Muslims.
There is little doubt that Modi's own heritage of being nurtured through the ranks of the ultra Hindu nationalist RSS and then into the leadership of the BJP is pivotal in his mind set of how he sees India. While without openly discarding India's secularism, which is enshrined in its constitution, Modi's actions in his second term in office clearly suggest his redefinition of India as mainly for Hindus is underway. This has put him in direct clash with India's Congress Party, who in a sense guided India through the formative, and difficult, years towards a secular India. The pro BJP media is quick to pounce on the Congress and vilify them as 'anti Indian' in their opposition to the way the Modi government is charting the course for India.
On the regional front there is a need for the major powers to understand that by India, or Pakistan or for that matter anyone saying there is no problem in Kashmir it does not mean the problem will go away. In the long term perhaps if Modi had not taken the action he did the Kashmir issue would have remained dormant on the pile of failed diplomacy and conflict resolution. India in that sense has reignited the ambers of a flickering dispute into a fire again. Side by side there is much noise within the BJP ranks to turn the pressure on Pakistan by questions of its own relationship with its four provinces and some political commentators have even suggested to 'again do a Bangladesh on Pakistan'.
Both India and Pakistan have played the 'division card' on each other, perhaps India more successfully. Yet India has to be careful that in projecting its current policies, as shown in Jammu and Kashmir, it can open a can of worms for itself as it is a deeply fragment country based on language, religion, and more importantly a sense of exclusion that exists in many of India's southern states. Pakistan for its side must also understand that it needs to put its own house in order, especially in respect of provinces that have felt neglected by previous governments. In addition, while Pakistan has a smaller population of minorities, in the light of the events in Jammu and Kashmir, it is all the more important that every effort be taken to protect the minorities within Pakistan. If Pakistan wishes to take the moral high ground on this dispute then it has to be more than just words.
For the moment, the worrying aspect of how Modi is shaping the face of India would suggest that 300 million Muslims within India would become more restive as they feel more cornered and boxed in. In so far as Jammu and Kashmir is concerned we will not really know how the people there have accepted or not the Modi decision only after curfews and restrictions are removed. India cannot continue to argue that its million man army presence is to 'stop miscreants' from taking advantage of the situation and causing trouble. The longer the lock down and restrictions continue the weaker the moral argument of Modi's actions becomes. But then as my friend for Hyderabad said 'Modi does not care'.
No comments:
Post a Comment