Pakistan running out of options on Kashmir The Statesman 10 Sep 19
Article Read Time
https://epaper.thestatesman.com/2321238/Kolkata-The-Statesman/10TH-SEPTEMBER-2019#page/7
Pakistan running out of options on Kashmir 10 Sep 19
The Indian decision to abrogate Article 370 shook the Pak leadership. Most Pak leaders, uneducated on the manner Article 370 was introduced into the Indian constitution, and its international legal ramifications, began accusing India of diluting UNSC resolutions on Kashmir.
Article 370 was included in the Indian constitution in 1954, as a temporary provision, while UNSC resolution No 47, concerning the Kashmir conflict is of 21 Apr 1948. The two are neither linked nor was the UNSC resolution considered when India included Article 370 into its constitution.
Hence, Indian decision to revoke it, neither impinges on its bilateral relations nor does it threaten international peace and security. Rightly, Pak’s claims on Indian actions were ignored internationally. Pak on the other hand has violated the UNSC resolution by changing the status of POK on multiple occasions.
It enacted the Interim Constitution Act, 1974; the Gilgit Baltistan (Empowerment & Self-governance) Order, 2009 (amended in 2018); separated it from POK and abolished the ‘state-subject’ stipulation in 1974. It illegally ceded 5,180 KM of POK to China in 1963. Legally therefore, it is India which can take Pak to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Pak legal expert to the ICJ, Khawar Qureshi, mentioned in his advice to the Pak government, ‘anybody looking at India and Pakistani and what is going on in Kashmir, sitting elsewhere, may have a different view and consider J and K as an inalienable part of India.’ He advised Pak against approaching the ICJ. This led to Pak adopting different strategies. Pak remains aware that it has no military option.
Pak commenced its anti-India campaign, claiming India is changing demography of the valley and acting against UNSC resolutions. It howled abrogating Article 370 could impact the Muslim majority status of Kashmir and hence plebiscite under the UNSC resolution. It sought international mediation on Kashmir based on the UN resolution, ignoring the fact that the resolution was overridden by the Shimla Agreement and Lahore Declaration, making the issue bilateral. None of these agreements could be abrogated by Pak alone. Pakistan was ignored.
Pak then changed tack and began projecting possible Indian genocide in the state. It claimed Indian closure of Kashmir and induction of security forces was an indicator of India attempting a genocide. This was also ignored as unlike Baluchistan where mass graves and tortured bulled ridden bodies are discovered daily, there are none in Kashmir.
Realization dawned on Pak that unless there is violence and bloodshed in the valley, it would never gain international support. It recommenced infiltrating terrorists with the aim of targeting security forces or even civilians, hoping for casualties. Presently, terrorists are targeting civilians as recent incidents indicate. In case of a major strike, India would retaliate, as it did post Uri and Pulwama. This was projected as an Indian false-flag operation, leading to a nuclear war.
Imran began writing, tweeting and speaking on this scenario. His ministers and army spokespersons raised bogeys of a nuclear conflict. The world ignored this call. India and the world called the Pak bluff, though Pak continues hyping it as a face saver, in case India acts on a terrorist strike. When it received no support, Pak accused OIC nations as being anti-Muslim.
It recently played on vote bank politics in Britain, which is on the verge of elections. The two gatherings of Pak nationals and Khalistan supporters leading to attacks on the Indian High Commission bear witness. It aims to convey its control over Muslim and Sikh votes.
Simultaneously, it began accusing India of Human Rights (HR) violations by closing mobile services and imposing restrictions. It ignores its own actions in POK, Baluchistan and Waziristan. For its selfish need of spreading fake information and fermenting violence, Pak needs mobile connectivity in the valley. This is Pak’s current state of accusations and on this step, it has received some support.
The Saudi Times of 31st Aug states, ‘General Secretariat (OIC) reiterated its solidarity with the people of Jammu and Kashmir. It calls for the immediate lifting of the curfew, restoration of communication and respect for fundamental rights of Kashmiris.’ It added, ‘resumption of dialogue process between Pakistan and India is essential.’
The US stated, it was, ‘concerned about the continuing communication restrictions and detentions in the Valley.’ French President, Emmanuel Macron called for the rights of people to be maintained. The British foreign secretary stated, ‘allegations of HR violations, if any, must be investigated.’ He added, that ‘the dispute is a bilateral issue.’
Thus, for the international community the issue is HR due to the security and communication lockdown. India had faced similar comments in the past, including OHCHR reports, which it rejected.
The world has stood by the Indian decision that abolition of Article 370 is an internal matter. It has also supported the Indian view that Kashmir is a bilateral issue. Harping on HR is an international phenomenon. Nations handle HR comments in their own ways.
China has been criticised for HR of Uyghurs, Israel for ignoring the rights of Palestinians, Sri Lanka for violating rights of Tamils, Myanmar for HR violations of Rohingyas, Europe for ignoring rights of refugees, US for violating HR of illegal migrant children detainees and Pak and Saudi Arabia for HR of minorities. Nations either ignore the criticism or state these are internal matters.
Post the passing of 5 resolutions against Israel and criticism on its own handling of migrant children, the US withdrew from the UNHRC in Jun 18. UNHRC resolutions are not legally binding but carry moral authority. India may have to consider its approach, when the UNHRC meets this week and under pressure from Pak decides to discuss Kashmir.
Pak’s attempts to push for reinstatement of Article 370 and international mediation has been ignored globally. Their claims of receiving international support are only for domestic consumption. HR criticism would vanish with time or India has options to deal with it. It is time Pak accepts reality and creates conditions for talks by stopping export of terrorists, rather than threaten war.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army