- Unless the UN resolutions are followed, India will only lose out
The joint statement issued at the end of President Arif Alvi’s visit to China revealed that among other things the issue of Kashmir was also raised. China underscored that it was paying close attention to the current situation and reiterated that the Kashmir issue was a dispute left from history which should be properly and peacefully resolved, based on the UN Security resolutions and bilateral agreements. China also opposed any unilateral actions that complicated the situation. The Chinese position stated in the joint statement was actually a reiteration of its stance that it has always maintained regarding Kashmir issue and the unilateral decision taken by the Modi government to change the special status of IOK.
India as usual reacting to the reference to Kashmir in the statement, said that Kashmir was its union territory and an integral part of India, and issues related to Jammu and Kashmir were internal matter of India. On really wonders at the Indian audacity of resorting to such a blatant falsehood in regards to Kashmir in view of the fact that neither the UN nor the international community agrees to the Indian rhetoric though they have shown a criminal indifference to the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
In the aftermath of scrapping Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution and declaring Indian-Occupied Kashmmir as part of the Indian Union, the UNSC in its discussion on the situation has twice reiterated that the Kashmir dispute needs to be resolved in conformity with the UN charter and the relevant UN resolutions.
India also must realize that its posture of a war-like state was not only jeopardizing regional peace, security and economic wellbeing, but it was also inimical to her own strategic and economic interests. Freedom movements and historic realities cannot be changed through decrees and barrel of the gun
Perhaps it would be pertinent to unravel the issue in its historic perspective to set the record straight and expose Indian hypocrisy and cunningness. Kashmir was a fit case for accession to Pakistan as urged by Lord Mountbatten in his address to the Chamber of Princes on 25 June 1947. It was a Muslim-majority state ruled by a non-Muslim. When its ruler signed the controversial instrument of accession, India by accepting it negated her own stance on Hyderabad and Junagadh when it had contended that those states could not accede to Pakistan because of the majority of their populations being Hindus. However, Lord Mountbatten made it clear that the accession was accepted provisionally and the issue would be resolved through reference to the people.
In the backdrop of the revolt of the people of Kashmir against the decision of their ruler and the consequent war between India and Pakistan, the former took the matter to the United Nations. The UN passed resolutions after hearing the two sides that pledged the settlement of the question of accession through a plebiscite under its auspices. India accepted the resolutions and Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru repeatedly reiterated commitment to implement them. But the Indian government, instead of creating conditions for holding of the plebiscite, made a hypocritical move by having the accession of Kashmir to India announced by the constituent assembly of Indian Held Kashmir and then started calling Kashmirits integral part, notwithstanding the fact that the UN through its Resolutions 91 and 122 repudiated the Indian action and reiterated that the question of accession of Kashmir could only be settled through a plebiscite held under the auspices of the UN.
Indian hypocrisy was exposed again when in the aftermath of 1971 war between the two countries, when it accepted Kashmir as a disputed territory in the Simla Agreement; a proposition which also figured in the Lahore Declaration. But India never showed seriousness in resolving the issue. Kashmir however continued to have special status as per article 370 of the Indian constitution, which in a way was an acknowledgment of the reality that it was not part of the Indian Union.
In view of the foregoing irrefutable realities the move by the Modi government to end the special status of Indian-Occupied Kashmir, instead of fulfilling India’s obligation towards the people of Kashmir, constituted a blatant repudiation of the UN resolutions on the issue as well as an affront to the conscience of the world community. However the redeeming fact in this regard is that the world community by and large has refused to buy the Indian narrative of Kashmir being its internal matter. Even strategic partners of India have shown concern on the developments in Indiian-Occupied Kashmir which is under siege for more than 200 days now.
The international media also rejected this unilateral action of the Modi government. The New York Times in its editorial terming the step as a wrong and dangerous move observed “The United States and China must not allow Kashmir to become a pawn in their ongoing disputes; on the contrary, the United States, China, the United Nations and other powers with influence over India and Pakistan must urgently do what they can to prevent India’s folly from escalating into a perilous and unpredictable regional crisis”. Amnesty International, which has been regularly documenting blatant human rights violations by the Indian security forces in Indian-Occupied Kashmir, in a statement said, “New Delhi’s unilateral decision to revoke Article 370 without consulting the state’s inhabitants is likely inflame prevailing tensions, alienate the local population and increase the risk of further human rights violations amidst a complete clampdown on civil liberties and communication blackout” The statement not only draws a right picture of the situation prevailing in the Valley at the moment but also expresses fears about future human rights situation in the backdrop this development.
India seems unmoved by the international disapproval of her actions in Indian-Occupied Kashmir, and Modi has repeatedly insisted that the move to make it a territory of the Indian Union could not be revoked at any cost. Indian obduracy in this regard is a threat to regional peace. India is in the grip of the proponents of a supremacist Hindutva ideology like the one propounded by Hitler. It is indeed a very dangerous happening in this part of the world. Prime Minister Imran Khan has rightly warned the world about the impact and consequences of the pursuance of the Hindutva philosophy by the Indian rulers at all the international forums, including the UN General Assembly. The UN, the world community and those powers which are looking the other way to the lurking dangers for the sake of their strategic and commercial interests linked with India need to shake their conscience before it is too late.
India also must realize that its posture of a war-like state was not only jeopardizing regional peace, security and economic wellbeing, but it was also inimical to her own strategic and economic interests. Freedom movements and historic realities cannot be changed through decrees and barrel of the gun. The people of Kashmir are fighting for their right of self-determination. It is in the interest of India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir that the dispute is resolved in conformity with the UN resolutions and the Indian commitments in that regard.