by Sadiq Ali 4 June 2020
Pakistan and India Share a complex history; seven decades of hostile and volatile relations characterized by periodic ups and downs .There have been rare moments when dialogue process appeared to move in the right direction. The historic strained relations between the two is due to multipronged conundrums but the disputed issue of Kashmir ,universally recognized as the nuclear flashpoint and a serious international security issue –has always been bon eof contention and at the centre of bilateral dialogues .
The Kashmir conflict started after the partition of India in 1947 as a dispute over the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and escalated into three wars between India and Pakistan and several other armed skirmishes. China has also been involved in the Kashmir problem in a third-party role. Both India and Pakistan claim the entirety of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. India controls approximately 55% of the land area of the region and 70% of its population; Pakistan controls approximately 30% of the land, while China controls the remaining 15%. India administers Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier. Pakistan administers Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. China administers the mostly uninhabited Shaksgam Valley, and the Aksai Chin region.
On 5th August 2019, both houses of the Parliament of India passed resolutions to abrogate Article 370 and extend the Constitution of India in its entirety to the state of Kashmir, which was implemented as a constitutional order by the President of India. At the same time, the parliament also passed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, which would dismiss the state of Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcate it into union territories: the eponymous union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, and that of Ladakh. The re-organization act was passed by both houses of parliament and was assented by the President of India, and will come into effect on 31st October 2019. Prior to these measures, the union government locked down the Kashmir Valley, increased security forces, imposed Section 144 that prevented assembly, and placed political leaders such as former Jammu and Kashmir chief ministers Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti under house arrest. Internet and phone services were also blocked. The people of Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir are isolated by the Indian regime from the rest of the world. This curfew, whose end nobody knows, is the longest curfew in the history of Indian occupied Kashmir; the 2nd lasted for fifty-three days after the death of Kashmiri freedom fighter Burhan Wani. These acts of the Narendra Modi regime has transformed Kashmir into a place worse than a prison and a concentration camp, where at least the prisoners have access to food, water, and movement.
Article 370 of the Indian constitution gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, which has been the subject of dispute between India, Pakistan, and China since 1947 conferring it with the power to have a separate constitution, a state flag, and autonomy over the internal administration of the state.
Article 35-A protects the demographic status of the Jammu and Kashmir state in its prescribed constitutional form, which means that a person from other parts of India cannot purchase property in Kashmir.
The prevailing situation in Kashmir has exposed the duplicity and hypocrisy of not only the defenders of human rights across the globe, but it also has unearthed the underlying indifference of the brotherly Muslim countries for the people of Indian occupied Jammu Kashmir. In this emerging scenario, only Pakistan came forward as the only nation that is making every possible
effort to end the miseries of the people of Kashmir. With so many economic and social problems at home and persistent security problems at two of its borders, Pakistan is brilliantly fighting for the Kashmir cause in its own capacity. Although, there are some shortcomings after the Indian
Unconstitutional actions of August 5th’, but Pakistan exponentially increased its diplomatic offensive against the illegal abrogation of articles of 370 and 35A and intense human rights violations.
Pakistan’s Response
Pakistan responded with a diplomatic offensive in response to the Indian unconstitutional aggression on its jugular vein. In the beginning, the diplomatic efforts were just limited to the telephone diplomacy, but the two visits of the prime minister to the United States brought the Kashmir issue to the international front. In the United Nations General Assembly speech the Pakistani premier spoken eloquently on the Kashmir dispute. Along with that, his engagements with the world representatives on the sidelines of the General assembly session contributed positively to the Kashmir cause. The prime minister of Malaysia, president of Turkey and the foreign minister of China condemned the Indian atrocities and called for the peaceful resolution
of the issue. These condemnations from a couple of world leaders, the United Nations, the United Nations commission for human rights and its council though contribute to the general debate of solution of Kashmir dispute, but they have not given any concrete roadmap for the peaceful resolution of Kashmir dispute. The gravity of the situation demands the state of Pakistan to move beyond extracting verbal statements from the world community, it is the high time for improving bilateral relations with all possible partners in the international community.
Kashmir being the Juglar vein of Pakistan needs a serious, unambiguous, apolitical, practical and astute national strategy for its resolution. This window of opportunity provided to Pakistan by the extremist ideologues in New Delhi needed to be capitalized for Kashmir and for the larger national interests of the state of Pakistan.
Reasons of Indifference of the international community to our Diplomatic
Efforts.
In the realms of international relations, importance and attention to the efforts of an individual nation-state are given on the basis of its bilateral relations with other nation-states of the global community. Pakistan’s diplomatic overtures after the illegal annexation of Kashmir by India on August 5th has not made any considerable progress either in the organizations under the control of the United Nations neither in those that are outside UN control. One of the main reasons for this inaction is the lack of substance in Pakistan relations with countries other than known world players. There is an urgent need for improvement and reinvigoration of Pakistan’s bilateral relations with the members of the world community, particularly those countries which give immense importance to human rights and trade.
India being the adversary and the aggressor of Pakistan is extremely active in pursuing its bilateral relations before and after its unilateral actions in occupied Kashmir. The foreign minister of India Mr. Jay Shankar not only visited several countries after their annexation of Kashmir, but he also stayed back at the United States after the General Assembly session and engaged many think tanks and media organizations. The Indian foreign minister is leaving no stone unturned in setting a narrative against Pakistan. There has to be some mechanisms and efforts in place to counter the Indian mantra of connecting Pakistan to terrorism and stabilization of its position in Occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
The foreign office of Pakistan and the diplomatic core around the world need necessary stimulation and reformation for this purpose. The future possibility of passing a resolution on Kashmir in the United Nations and other world bodies will hugely depend on this pre-requisite of improved relations with the world.
Indian Fascism and Hindutva Doctrine
India through its cunning diplomatic strategy and tactics is trying to divert the attention of the international community, but the world community is observing a new face of the Indian regime, the side of India which the world never saw. The global community no longer knows India because of international personalities like Gandhi and Nehru. India is now in the news as it is taken over by religious and racial extremists. Narendra Modi, the man who as a Chief Minister oversight the Pogrom in Gujarat, was barred from entering the United States and United Kingdom for almost 10 years. This Indian regime obsessed with racial superiority looks beyond its own borders due to the doctrines and ideologies enshrined in their so-called religious texts and it is trying to expand its territory accordingly. The Indian state has annexed states like Assam, Tripura, and Manipur after 1947. In 1961, it also captured Goa. Similarly, in 1971, it also tried to absorb the then East Pakistan into its own territory. The latest example is that of Jammu and Kashmir.
It must be noted that no matter whether the Congress is ruling in India or the Bharatiya Janata Party, their state policy does not change. So, there must clarity among the masses and the state of Pakistan about the Indian designs regarding Muslims and Kashmir. This BJP regime has openly admitted its involvement in the breaking of Pakistan, Pakistan though pursuing its interests through diplomatic means should also be prepared for any confrontation after the post-curfew situation in Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. Prior to that these expansionist designs with extremist doctrinal grounds should be exposed and identified to the international community with all available means. Nothing productive should be expected from the current Modi regime and appropriate diplomatic, kinetic and political response should be given to any miscalculations.
Pakistan’s Precarious Internal Situation
India is being taken over by the far-right and its intentions, actions and statements depict its seriousness in harming Pakistan and its interests, the internal situation and dynamics in Pakistan also seem volatile. In this precarious situation, the people who were once responsible for defending and fighting for the Kashmir Cause are diverting the attention from Kashmir to their pity politics. Blames and allegations are being made to implicate the Government of Pakistan for compromising on the Kashmir Cause. The ethnic and subnational movements owing to their threatening and maligning language are also supported by the mainstream political players. Apart from that, the fragile economy is also diverting attention from the Kashmir dispute.
This emerging internal situation will not only seriously impede the state’s progress but will also create considerable problems for effective pursual of the Kashmir cause. The state must act to create a national consensus on major political differences along with providing space and careful attention to the expanding narratives of the so-called human rights movements. Internal impediments like these undermine the national interests and provide favorable ambiance to the enemy of the state to carry out its subversive activities, so along with other efforts, it is indeed an urgent matter for the Government of Pakistan to stabilize its precarious internal political and
Economic situation.
Recommendations and options for Pakistan
Along with diplomatic strategies, several non-military and non-diplomatic options are available for Islamabad to tackle the Kashmir issue these options are related to non- kinetic warfare including usage of media and gain the world’s support. There should be visits of international experts and human rights bodies to Azad Jammu & Kashmir, they should be encouraged to make unbiased report on Human rights violations in Kashmir, their research will play a role in exposing Indian state terrorism in Kashmir. There should also be the visits of representatives of regional and international organizations in AJK to seek evidence of Indian violation of International Law and Human Rights.
When we study the history of states during peace and war times, we can conclude that Confidence Building Measures (CBMS) has been proved as a tool to normalize the situation and to prevent escalation of issues between the states. “CBMS can be understood as a series of actions that are designed, agreed, initiated and implemented by the conflict parties to open ways for negotiations. In the India-Pakistan context, CBMS should be initiated by even one side to build trust between the leadership of both countries. After Feb 27, 2019 strike of Pakistan, pilot of MiG-20 was Pakistan, but Islamabad decided to send him back as a peace juster. Islamabad also offered the project of Kartarpur Corridor for Sikh community of the world in general and for Indian Sikhs in particular. Ignorant and extremist behavior of Indian government toward initiatives of Islamabad is a justified reason behind understanding the importance of CBMS between two countries. All these peace justers and initiatives were not satisfied nor appreciated by New Delhi. One can suggest that CBMS should be understood seriously by both nuclear countries for peace and prosperity.
The researcher would like to remember that the Jordan-Israeli treaty was signed after the initiation of few CBMS, and after the treaty, both countries had established diplomatic relations and living with peace. There was another issue between China and Russia named “Sino-Soviet split” that was reproached by the United States in this reproachment process CBMS had played an important role. By keeping these landmarks in mind we can pose a question that “Why Indo-Pak situation cannot be better with CBMS?
Another non-military and the non-diplomatic option for Pakistan is to encourage Muslim countries to pressure India to normalize the situation in Kashmir with peace. In case of failure of strategy, Muslim countries can suspend their trade with India to oppress her to cancel the abrogation of article 370 and 35A. This situation would be ideal in practicality because India is the largest market any country would not be ready to suspend trade with India in favor of Kashmir and Pakistan.
Military options as well as availability of military options is concerned, should be regarded as a response to Indian military action. The initial attack of Pakistan without the mandate of the United Nations would result in loss of all global support of Pakistan. It means that military options against India should not be taken in the first place without the support of UN.
- Nuclear Deterrence:
Historically, the threat of use of nuclear force remained a powerful war prevention tool, it also worked for Israel; after the development of nuclear weapons, Arab states limited their operations and attacks in the disputed territories. A historical and evidence of the success of Nuclear Deterrence is the Cold War, which remained COLD only due to the existence of nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence is the strongest military option for Pakistan to prevent Indian first attack. There are various dynamics of nuclear deterrence which can be adopted by Islamabad.
- Ensuring Security Building Measures:
There is confusion in public about the understanding of confidence and security-building measures at many times both words (confidence & security building measures) are regarded as collectively. But the reality is different, CBMS are in order to build trust by initiatives between conflicting parties but in contrast, security building measure are in order to ensure the advancement of both conventional and non-conventional weapons as a form of parity for deterring an adversary. Sometimes SBMs are regarded as non-nuclear deterrence. Islamabad can adopt this strategy, by enhancing both conventional and non-conventional weapons.
Practical steps needed and the Way Forward for Pakistan.
If the Government of Pakistan intends to obtain tangible results regarding Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir, it is suggested to consider the following steps:
1. The Government of Pakistan must appoint a competent serving or a retired career diplomat, who possess knowledge and experience over Kashmir to head the Kashmir cell.
This cell should clearly define its roadmap on an immediate basis and start engaging the international community. The Kashmir Cell should invite international media and other members of Parliaments of various countries to the Azad Jammu and Kashmir and gave them detail briefings on the situation in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir. It should be made responsible to collect instances of violence in Indian Occupied Jammu & Kashmir after August 5th and send to the legal divisions of various responsible states.
2. Owing to the evolving internal political situation of the country, the government engagement in local political strife will visibly damage the current debate about Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir. The ambiance thus created will also provide ample opportunity to the hostile forces for
Destabilization. For this purpose, The Government of Pakistan must also convey the expected agitating forces to avoid the politicization of the Kashmir issue for local political consumption.
The state should support and initiate steps for creating a national consensus over the Kashmir issue. For this purpose, a national dialogue conference for all the political forces, the executive and the judiciary should arrange to obtain valuable inputs.
3. As there were visible shortcomings and a sense of ambiguity in the Government’s initial response to the Indian abrogation of articles 370 and 35A, therefore, learned diplomats suggest that:
The Government of Pakistan must also move beyond the telephone diplomacy and just like the Indian Foreign Office, initiate practical steps to put forward the perspective of Pakistan to the World. The gravity of the situation requires the presence of best diplomatic minds in the Foreign Office of Pakistan. For this purpose, competent officers from the diplomatic core should be transferred to important nations with the objective of improving Pakistan’s bilateral relations with the target nations.
4. Due to the emerging norm among masses of putting the blame of all foreign policy failures on state institutions, the Government of Pakistan while taking future policy decisions on Indian occupied Jammu Kashmir, neighboring and Islamic countries, should :
a. Include all the relevant stakeholders in the policymaking process. For this purpose, the inputs from academic experts and students of International relations and Political sciences should be taken.
b. Similarly, foreign policy decisions regarding Iran, India, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia must be taken in consultation with the parliament and all the necessary stakeholders.
c. For this purpose, it is suggested to organize seminars, conferences, and national debates to apprise the upcoming generations of the facts of history. Through these conferences and seminars, the youth must also be informed about the difficulties that the state of Pakistan faced
In the realms of its security and how the state successfully averted these threats.
5. The momentum that the Kashmir dispute got in the international arena after the Prime Minister visit to the annual session of the United Nations General Assembly should be maintained by taking the following steps
a. The foreign office on a priority basis should plan more visits for the prime minister of Pakistan to important world capitals specifically for Kashmir. The suggested capitals should include Moscow, London, Paris, Berlin, Ottawa, Ankara, Kuala Lumpur, Cairo, and other important European States.
b. The foreign minister of Pakistan should make the necessary arrangements for these important visits as soon as possible. He should approach the foreign ministries of these countries and make arrangements for the visit of Prime Minister of Pakistan.
c. Similarly, some high-level delegations from the parliament, the senate, and former ambassadors of Pakistan should visit important states and play their role in opinion making for the right to self-determination of the people of Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
d. Likewise, these high-level delegations should visit parliamentary and senate’s foreign relations committees of the United Kingdom, United States, France, and Germany. These foreign affairs committees play an important role in the foreign policy of these big powers. Only Through aggressive diplomacy could India be compelled to meaningful dialogue over Kashmir.
Conclusions
Of course, Kashmir is blooding and burning, there are multiple options for New Delhi & Islamabad to strategize the situation. There are diplomatic and non-diplomatic non-military options for Pakistan. But there is also the availability of military options, waging war on India should not be materialized at first place by Islamabad, it can harm international support for Pakistan. Nuclear deterrence can also be an effective tool to manage the situation; there should also be the use of confidence-building measures and tangible steps to be taken to materialize the needed results for negotiations on Kashmir issue.