Kashmir
dispute - way forward
Speech of Dr Shabir
Choudhry delivered in a Kashmir Conference held in the British Parliament on 24
April 2013.
Mr Chairman, friends
and colleagues aslamo alaikam and good evening
I want to thank Mr
Mushtaq Lashari and the Third World Solidarity for providing this opportunity
to me to express my views to this august gathering.
Title of this
Conference is, ‘Kashmir: past, present-
way forward’. In my opinion, before we discuss what the way forward on
Kashmir is, we need to establish what we mean by Kashmir.
By Kashmir, I mean the
State of Jammu and Kashmir that existed on 15 August 1947; which includes areas
known as Azad Kashmir, Gilgit Baltistan, Ladakh, Jammu and the Valley. It is
important to point out that all areas of the State are disputed.
Those who claim that
the Kashmir dispute is easy to resolve are wrong. It is very complex dispute
with many dimensions; and before we propose any solution to this dispute we
need to comprehend all dimensions of the dispute.
Jammu and Kashmir is
multi religious and multi ethnic State; and there is no danger to Islam or any
other religion. So the Kashmir dispute is not religious in nature. It is a
political dispute and requires a political solution.
The Two Nations Theory
was only applicable to the British India and did not apply to the Princely
States, including Kashmir. This fact was acknowledged by the founder of
Pakistan Mohammed Ali Jinnah as well. In a statement issued on 17 June 1947
Mohammed Ali Jinnah said, and I quote:
‘That after
the lapse of Paramountcy the Indian States would be constitutionally and
legally sovereign states and free to adopt for themselves any course they
wished. It is open to States to join Hindustan Constituent Assembly or Pakistan
Constituent Assembly or to decide to remain independent’. Unquote
This clearly
means that the State of Jammu and Kashmir had three options, namely accession
to India, accession to Pakistan or to become independent. This fact was also
acknowledged by the UNCIP Resolution of 13 August 1948, which stated, and I
quote:
‘The Government of India and the
Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State
of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the
people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments
agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and
equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.’ Unquote
It
is sad that the Kashmiri peoples right of self - determination was curtailed in
the next UNCIP Resolution that was passed on 5 January 1949, which stated, and
I quote:
‘The question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India
and Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a free and
impartial plebiscite.' Unquote
This meant both India
and Pakistan were prepared to grant people of Jammu and Kashmir a right of
accession; and not a right of self – determination; as a right of
self-determination must include a right to independence.
Since the Simla
Agreement of 1972, both India and Pakistan have transformed the Kashmir dispute
as a bilateral dispute, just like many other disputes they have; and all the
talks they had on Kashmir always ensured that the people of Jammu and Kashmir
were not part of the dialogue.
Mr
Chairman
There are many reasons
why the Kashmir dispute is not resolved. Among them is disunity of the people
of Jammu and Kashmir; and their inability to decide what they want, as some
want to accede to Pakistan, some want to accede to India and some want to
become independent country. Apart from that some want to make Kashmir dispute a
Muslim dispute and impose Islamic laws; and others want to have democratic
system.
Furthermore, many of us
do not recognise this fact that Jammu and Kashmir is occupied by three
countries, yet the practical struggle is against only one country – India. If
India bashing helps to promote the cause of Jammu and Kashmir, then I will be
the first one to do that. However, I know for sure that it would be detrimental
to the cause of Kashmir because when people only attack India and remain quiet
on wrong doings of Pakistan then the international community take us as
‘proxies of Pakistan who are promoting a Pakistani agenda on Kashmir.
By all mean criticise
India where India is wrong; but don’t shy away to criticise Pakistan when
Pakistan is wrong on Kashmir. For example, we hear all the time that India did
not implement the UN Resolutions on Kashmir; but we know for fact that it was
Pakistan which refused to withdraw its troops from the territory of Jammu and
Kashmir as demanded by the UNCIP Resolution passed on 13 August 1948. Part 2, Section
1 of this Resolution states, and I quote:
- (l) ‘As the presence of
troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir
constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by
the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of
Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State’.
- (2) ‘The Government of
Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the
State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not
normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of
fighting’. Unquote
It must be pointed out
that India was only asked to withdraw ‘bulk’ of its troops after Pakistan had
completed its withdrawal; but since Pakistan did not withdraw its troops there
was no question of India either withdrawing or holding any kind of plebiscite.
Mr
Chairman
Kashmir is not only a
political dispute, it is also human issue. People are suffering because of the
Kashmir dispute. As a way forward, I
propose the following:
1.
Resolution of the Kashmir dispute is essential for
the peace and stability of the entire region. It is, therefore, imperative that
the Kashmir dispute is resolved in accordance with the wishes of the people.
2.
As the people of Jammu and Kashmir are the principal
party in the Kashmir dispute, we must be part of the dialogue process on
Kashmir, as we cannot allow bureaucrats of New Delhi and Islamabad to tell us
what is good for us, and decide our future. We are mature and sensible people
and know what is good for us.
3.
Until such time that the Kashmir dispute is
resolved, both India and Pakistan should take more Kashmir centric Confidence
Building Measures; and open all traditional routes linking all parts of the
Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir.
4.
Both countries should make easier the travelling
process that people of the divided State could meet, socialise and trade with
each other.
5.
Life, liberty and fundamental rights of all citizens
of Jammu and Kashmir must be respected; and all political prisoners must be
released and those uprooted by the militancy must be rehabilitated.
6.
All parties to the Kashmir dispute should agree that
there is no military solution to the Kashmir dispute; and make serious efforts
to control and disband all those groups that promote religious hatred,
intolerance, violence and terrorism.
7.
Both India and Pakistan must show flexibility in
their approach to solving the Kashmir dispute; and Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan
should also be part of the future negotiations.
8.
Both countries should allow people to hold regional
conferences that the people of Jammu and Kashmir could promote peace and
tolerance, and build bridges of confidence and understanding.
9.
Until such time that the Kashmir dispute is
resolved, Pakistan should discard Act 74 and Gilgit Baltistan self - empowerment
package 2009; and allow Azad
Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan to merge and establish a united government that
people of Jammu and Kashmir on this side of the LOC could manage their own
affairs.
Mr Chairman, I
thank you for your patience.
Writer is a political analyst and
author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir
Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment