Kashmir matters to both India and Pakistan, as per their own justifications. The people of the occupied Kashmir, however, want the autonomy to decide for themselves. Pakistan has been the biggest advocate for the rights of the Kashmiri people and has even expressed on several occasions that Kashmiris must have the right to self-determination. India, on the other hand, seems to have an authoritarian approach which is evident from its treatment of the people in the valley. Who will decide the fate of Kashmir?
Kashmir has been the root cause of the decades-old conflict between India and Pakistan. Pakistan commemorates Kashmir Solidarity Day on February 5 to show solidarity with people of Indian Occupied Kashmir and pay homage to the martyrs who have died in the conflict. Every year, solidarity rallies are held all over Pakistan. This February 5, let’s have a look at developments on the conflict since 1947 and how the two nuclear-armed states have responded during the dissension:
A Brief History Of The Conflict
Kashmir has been a hotbed of conflict since the partition of the sub-continent. It was decided in the Radcliffe Award (17 August 1947) that Kashmir and princely states were free to choose whether they wanted to stay independent or merge with India/Pakistan. Kashmir was a muslim-majority state and the people had wanted to go with Pakistan at the time of the partition. The ruler of Kashmir, Raja Hari Singh, however, did not want that, and hence the people revolted against him. Hari sought India’s help. India sent its army while Baloch and Pushtun soldiers fought on behalf of Pakistan. Most of the areas were captured by the muslims. India approached the United Nations asking it to intervene. The United Nations recommended holding a plebiscite to settle the question of whether the state would join India or Pakistan. However, the two countries could not agree to a deal to demilitarise the region before the referendum could be held. In July 1949, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to establish a ceasefire line as recommended by the UN and the region became divided. Another war was fought in 1965 and then in 1999. By that time, both countries became nuclear powers, which in the long run proved to be a great tool (deterrent) to prevent war. Today, both countries claim Kashmir but control only parts of it – territories recognised internationally as “Indian-administered Kashmir” also called “Indian Occupied Kashmir” and “Pakistan-administered Kashmir”.
Why Kashmir Matters:
Kashmir is a significant and disputed territory because of certain intricacies: Jammu is a hindu-majority area, Ladakh is buddhist, while the valley of Jammu Kashmir is a muslim-majority area. State of Azad Kashmir has a separate status and is administered by Pakistan. The people of the valley are pro-independence because of the Indian atrocities in the region. They were initially pro-Pakistan but now they want to be an independent state. If a plebiscite is held and Kashmir chooses independence, Pakistan is likely to lose Azad Kashmir and part of Gilgit Baltistan (our major land link with the strongest ally, China).
Indian Atrocities and the Status Quo:
On 5th August 2019, India revoked articles 370 and 35A and announced a complete lockdown enforced by over 900,000 troops. The whole valley was militarized. The Indian security forces arrested political leaders, rights activists, lawyers, including Indian collaborators. Women and children were not spared either. The revoking of article 35A was the Modi government’s tactful move to systematically change the valley’s demographic, cultural, linguistic, and religious identity and convert it into a hindu-mjaority area. As a result of that, 4.2 million non-Kashmiri Hindus have been given residency certificates and can now acquire property in the valley. These moves not only violate the international law and UN’s resolutions but the Indian constitution itself.
Where does Pakistan stand?
Recently, Pakistan presented a dossier on human rights violations in occupied Kashmir to the UN, the European Union and the Organization of Islamic Countries. The dossier depicts details on violations which include war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and genocide. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also presented evidence in this regard.
Since day one, Pakistan has categorically denounced the occupation of the valley by the Indian Security Forces, and believes that the people have the right to self-determination. Pakistan’s National Security Advisor, Moeed Yusuf, recently said in an interview that Pakistan is willing to sit and talk but the ‘enabling’ attitude has to come from the Indian side. The incumbent also said that India’s headstrong and irrational approach makes it difficult for both sides to initiate dialogue.
PM Khan presented Pakistan’s National Security Policy a few weeks ago and unveiled that Pakistan does not want hostility with India for the next 100 years. Such statements from Pakistan seem welcoming and auspicious but the fate of Indo-Pak relations is chiefly contingent upon the status of IOC. Unless India shows flexibility, it is impossible for Pakistan to extend an olive branch as the latter has already shown willingness to talk. India must decide whether it would continue committing heinous violations in IOK while claiming itself as one of the largest democracies in the world or choose dialogue and let the people of Kashmir decide for themselves.
