The Kashmir Issue in the context of Article 370
The Kashmir Issue in the context of Article 370
(A Research Essay)
Authors
1 Aliya Siddique, 2 Muhammad Naeem
Laureate Folks International
laureatefolks@gmail.com, WhatsApp: +923334446261
ABSTRACT
In the global context in general, and in South Asia in particular,
since the independence and hard partition of South Asian Global places India
and Pakistan in 1947, there has been an uncompromising, conflictual,
distrustful, and genuinely unstable political standoff. Furthermore, while
being neighbors with literary, social, and cultural links, they have
maintained a significant distance from one another. There are several grounds
and causes for such political instability, but the Kashmir issue remains the
most important and challenging for global progress. That would be a strategy to
fix a host of concerns among all the world's people, especially the Kashmir
dispute, throughout their long-term understanding of the evolving nature of
their dynamic own circle of relatives participants, whereas the recognizing the
role coming from external powers that may make a significant contribution to
the nature of their dynamic own circle of relatives participants to some
extent. The kingdom was awarded significant sovereignty under Article 370,
including the freedom to form its legislation, emblem, and prison sentences.
Kashmir would no longer also have its government but would be subject to the
Indian constitution in the same sense that any other country might be. Kashmiris
may be subject to all Indian legislation, and anyone from elsewhere in the
state may be permitted to buy the land. Because Pakistan and China are allies. The
permanent member of the United Nations is China, the current gap between India
and China might be a crucial factor in resolving this issue.
Key Words: Kashmir, Social and cultural differences,
India, China, Article 370
1.1 Introduction.
The northernmost territory of the Indian subcontinent is
Kashmir. The Kashmir Valley, situated between the Great Himalayas and the Pir
Panjal Range, is a popular tourist destination that was referred to as Kashmir
till the mid-nineteenth century. It now encompasses the Indian states of Jammu
& Kashmir and Ladakh, as well as Pakistan's Azad Kashmir and
Gilgit-Baltistan. Kashmir seems to be a deciding factor for Indo-Pak family
members in these conditions.
Pakistan now controls one-third of Jammu and
Kashmir, which was once an independent state and is partitioned into de facto
provinces named Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir. Kashmir had a completely
Muslim population before the 1947 division. Although becoming mainly Muslim,
Pakistan's landscape had become thinly populated, isolated, and financially
impoverished. Kashmiris will no more have their very own constitution and, just
as any other kingdom, would be subject to the Indian constitution. All Indian
constitutional rules may be applied to Kashmiris to those who have the
financial means to buy property in the territory. It also intends to look
towards the future of Indo-Pak families by examining efforts done on both sides
of the border to mend fences.
Kashmir is the deadliest and also most volatile conflict
in South Asia between nuclear rivals India and Pakistan. Following Burhan
Wani's murder in 2016, the Kashmiri freedom movement picked up steam as a real
and local force. The current curfew in Indian-controlled Kashmir, combined with
the cancellation of Articles 370 and 35(A) on August 5, 2019, a strong army force,
press blockage, abduction of youngsters, extreme kinds of brutality, and
suppression of people's voices, has generated indignation and criticism. The
moment has come for India and Pakistan to admit their losses and begin the
process of resolving the Kashmir issue after 72 years of independence and a
reputation for tricky diplomacy. Consequently, it is believed that India and
Pakistan will commit to long-term efforts and scientific processes to end the
land dispute and safeguard Kashmiris from emotional and physical damage.
1.1 Historical Background
In 1947, Britain was about to conclude
hundreds of years of rule over the subcontinent and its 390 million people.
Muslims were given land in the Indian Subcontinent's northwestern and Bengal
areas, while Hindus were given land in the country's center and south. The
majority of Muslim territory was handed to Pakistan, whereas the majority of
Hindu land was transferred to India. Jammu and Kashmir was the only princely
state in which a Hindu Maharaja ruled over a majority Muslim population.
Pushtoons from NWFP Province (now known as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KPK) invaded
Kashmir in October 1947, with the support of Pakistan's government, and
Maharaja left Srinagar.
Kashmir's Political Situation before
Partition
The All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conferences
were founded by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, which came into power in 1932. In
1939, the Muslim conference was renamed the National Convention to include
non-Muslim Kashmiris. As a result of Sheikh Abdullah's better ties with the
Congress in the mid-1940s, early Kashmir politics became fraught with problems.
Sheikh Abdullah, who challenged the legality of the "Amritsar
The Muslim Conference was advised by Jinnah
to reject this resolution, which he described as "overseas inspired,"
presenting the Jinnah as anti-Kashmiri and breaking his position. In 1944, the
National Conference created a social and financial plan known as "Naya
Kashmir" and presented it to Maharaja Hari Singh. The goal of this plan
was to transfer Jammu and Kashmir from absolutist rule to complete democracy.
562 royal nations were forced to join both India and Pakistan at the time of
its independence. Kashmir, the world's largest royal monarchy with an area of
84,471 square miles, has infected Pakistan in every way.
On Kashmir, Pakistan's Position:
Pakistan has made every effort to settle the
Kashmir conflict with India. Rising geostrategic linkages between India and
Iran, America, and Afghanistan demonstrate the growing asymmetry in negotiating
dynamics between the two countries. By diverting the flow of the Indus River
and its tributaries away from Kashmir, India is creating existential risks to
Pakistan. As a result, Pakistan's posture on Kashmir has shifted, and the
country may now be considering a less drastic approach to resolving the issue.
The Kashmir dispute has harmed
Pakistani-Indian relations since 1947. At the time of the partition,
Mountbatten granted an order prohibiting partition based on geographic or
demographic considerations. This decree incorporated royal states into both
Pakistan and India, except Junagadh, Jodhpur, and Hyderabad. The status in
Kashmir has drastically changed since the times when the Hindu ruler of a 75
percent Muslim territory living close to Pakistan was eager to join India.
Maharaja Hari Singh decided to join India in
October 1947, resulting in a moderately effective struggle for Pakistan.
Following a ceasefire at the United Nations summit, Pakistan has acquired
one-third of Kashmir's land. Pakistan's Kashmir claim is both moral and
revanchist. India declared presidential power in Kashmir for the entire year of
1964, extending the objects 356 and 357. This is a gross violation of Article
370, which ensures Kashmir's unique independence. Following a catastrophic
setback in the 1962 war with China, India modernized its army and stunned
Pakistan by putting a significant deployment of soldiers on the battlefield.
According to Barry Buzan's book, India and
Pakistan are immersed in a tough security environment. Interstate antagonism is
motivated by territorial conflicts over Kashmir, competing legal foundations
comprising of an Islamic republic of Pakistan against a secular India, and
structural inequality. Notwithstanding India's predominance in terms of land
area, people, army, and financial strength, Pakistan had repeatedly challenged
India's authority with the cooperation of the United Nations, Middle Eastern,
China, and Gulf governments and protected its economic structure and army
power.
Since India's nuclearization in 1974 and
Pakistan's in 1998, there have been six nuclear-related crises. These were
serious crises, but they were normalized by the world power intermediary. The
Brasstacks Crisis (1986-87), the Compound Crisis (1990), as seen via the Kargil
battle, the Twin Peaks Crisis, the Mumbai attack Crisis of 2008, and the
Pulwama assault disaster (2019) were the most serious threats to nuclear
development.
The Indian Government's Position on the
Kashmir Conflict
India has claimed that it is futile to
mention anything else after accepting the Simla Agreement, which proclaims that
both India and Pakistan will bring an end to the fight and keep the peace in
the subcontinent. The deal does not include the terms "right to
self-determination," which Indians believe brings an end to the debate
over holding a referendum.
On the Kashmir Issue, the UN, and
International Law
Kashmir is one of the oldest issues of the UN
Security Council. The Security Council passed resolutions on August 13, 1948,
and January 5, 1949, pledging that the people of Kashmir had the right to
choose their destiny. A referendum should indeed be held to find a solution to
the Kashmir conflict, as per international law.
Current Concerns
In today's Jammu and Kashmir, unimaginable violence exists. The primary
sources of antagonism include suicide bombers, terrorist assaults, security
services opening fire, and inter-religious violence. Every day, innocent
civilians are killed. Thousands of cases of brutality, rapes, deaths in
custody, extrajudicial killings, and abductions are revealed each year. Since
1989, the region has been marked by terrorist acts, with more than 34 000
civilian deaths between 1989 and 2001.
As previously stated, armed militant organizations are to blame for most
of the crime. The terrorists who started the rebellion in the 1980s were mostly
nationalists and secularists. They desired a sovereign Kashmir. Nevertheless,
the insurgents' makeup has altered dramatically since that time. The extremists
that exist today are primarily extreme Islamic in nature.
There are three key causes for the militants' shift in philosophy.
Islamabad has been quite supportive of pro-Pakistani organizations. It is
controversial whether Pakistan provides spiritual and political help or
military and weaponry support. Second, there has been an influx of Afghan
Islamic warriors who have been able to join in Kashmir's acts of violence.
The Indian army's overbearingness has also prompted armed militants to
expand their operations. In Indian-administered Kashmir, there are roughly 25
armed insurgent factions. The majority of them are part of a coalition known as
the United Jihad Council (UJC). Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Toiba are renowned
militant groups who are focusing on Jihad (Muslim holy war).
There is still a lot of antagonism along the Line of Control today. The
Siachen glacier, which the LOC never handled, is likewise a source of violence
after partition in 1947, no one bothered to extend the line of control between
Pakistan and India up to Siachen because no one believed the area was worth
caring about. Because neither country saw the glacier as strategically important,
soldiers were not deployed on the 47-mile portion of the Siachen until 1984.
Troops now flank the Siachen glacier, which has been termed the world's
highest battleground due to its elevation of 20, 700 feet. At altitudes of more
than 18,000 feet, the human body begins to degrade. The very hostile climate of
the Siachen glacier has taken more lives than gunfire, temperatures below 70
degrees Fahrenheit at an altitude of 20,700 feet.
Severe frostbite, respiratory issues, respiratory and brainy edema
(swelling), unclear way of speaking, and frequent nosebleeds are common among
soldiers who stay alive the brutal environments. Fearing an invasion by
Pakistani soldiers, the Indian government spends $1 million per day to keep
control of the glacier. Troops will remain in Siachen's toughest conditions
till India and Pakistan strike a Kashmir agreement. In Kashmir, there are
substantial issues, and one would wonder why the UN does not have a bigger
presence there. UNMOGIP (United Nations Military Observer Group in India and
Pakistan) was founded in 1949., is presently the only UN presence in Kashmir.
Its mission is to monitor the peace agreement, investigate violent incidents,
and report back to both countries and the Secretary-General.
Among the countries sending military forces to Kashmir are Belgium,
Chile, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, and
Uruguay. The group received $9.2 million in US dollars last year. There are now
116 employees on the payroll, which includes 46 observers. The UN is not
sending any peacekeeping personnel, medical help, or financial aid.
The Roots of the Conflict
The historic Partition of India must be referred to comprehend the
causes of the fight. During British rule, the Indian Subcontinent was mostly
populated by Hindus and Muslims, the two largest religious groupings. During
the latter half of the nineteenth century, the two communities had good
connections and formed a united front in the fight for independence from
British rule.
India’s historic Partition must be referred to comprehend the causes
of the fight. The two primary religious organizations, Hindus and Muslims,
dominated the Indian Subcontinent during British colonialism. During the latter
half of the 19th century, the two populations had good connections and formed a
united front in their fight for independence from British rule.
With time, however, the tensions between the two populations grew
stronger. Power conflicts between the All India Muslim League and the Indian
National Congress (the two largest political parties in undivided India) in the
1930s and early 1940s resulted in serious sectarian tension and violence. As a
result, India's partition became an inevitable task. Pakistan became a
Muslim-dominated state after partition in 1947, while India became a liberal,
democratic nation. And Kashmir, which lies on the border between the two
countries, became entangled and imprisoned between them.
Kashmir from an Indian Perspective
According to India, Kashmir belongs to it in its entirety, and Pakistan
and China are making bogus claims to Indian territory. India views Maharaja
Hari Singh's proclamation of accession to be legally enforceable, hence Kashmir
is legally and equitably granted to India. As previously stated, Kashmir is
India's sole route to Central Asia. Without it, India has no direct land
connectivity to Central Asian and European countries.
It's also critical for India's international defense. Pakistan's only Chinese
border is the Siachen Glacier. In the event of a battle, if Kashmir is not
recognized, China and Pakistan may join forces, placing India in grave danger.
Because of its difficult relations with China and Pakistan, India is terrified
of this.
In 1963, Pakistan also gave China the Shaksgam valley and Gilgit. This
area used to be part of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Some assume that this was
done to destabilize India and enable the deployment of Chinese troops in
Kashmir. India is in danger, even if it refuses to acknowledge it. This region
has become increasingly important as China-Pakistan ties have deepened and more
Chinese and Pakistani military have been deployed.
Indian nationalism has also risen in recent years, particularly when
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's nationalist Bhartiya Janata Party took power in
2014. Since the formation of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, both foreign and
native rebels have carried out a wave of terrorist attacks in the region and
India. In 2001, insurgents from this region, as well as international
terrorists, attacked the Indian Parliament, killing a large number of people.
There have been several instances where this has occurred. As a result, tens of
thousands of civilians and Indian soldiers have been killed.
As a result, the Indian population has become furious. Because many of
these terrorists have camped in Pakistan, this enmity is focused on them. The
Indian people have been asking the government to stop the killings and to take
urgent action against the terrorists. Because Pakistan and China have illegally
occupied their territory, the Indian people have acquired feelings of hatred
and animosity toward them. They feel that Kashmir belongs to India in its
entirety and that immediate action is necessary.
From a Pakistani Perspective on Kashmir
Pakistan believes Kashmir was illegally granted to India by a king who
did not represent the people. Furthermore, they believe Kashmir should be
theirs because the majority of Muslim-dominated states have relocated to Pakistan.
Pakistan's strategic importance in Kashmir, on the other hand, is
undeniable. Kashmir has a lot of resources, as previously stated. The Kashmiri
Rivers are equally important to Pakistan. If India fully controls Kashmir, it
risks damaging Pakistani agriculture and generating droughts.
The only direct connection between Pakistan and China is through
Kashmir. This is critical for military and economic reasons because China is a
formidable partner. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor passes through Kashmir
as well. This direct route to Pakistan will be severed if Kashmir falls to the
separatists. This direct touch with China has been extremely beneficial in
terms of economic development.
Moreover, if India achieves complete control of Kashmir, it might send a
large contingent of troops to the border, posing a serious security threat to
Pakistan. Losing Kashmir would not only cut off China's support but would also
put Indian troops close to Pakistan's major cities. This might be fatal in a
time of unrest. As a result, Pakistan believes that if Kashmir falls to India,
it will be at India's mercy.
Pakistan's administration has remained certain that Kashmir cannot be
lost. They maintain that India has no legal or moral claim to Kashmir and that
it is theirs. As a result, they've asked the UN to mediate the conflict.
Kashmir from a Kashmiri perspective
The perspective of Kashmiris has mostly been ignored. Some believe
Maharaja Hari Singh's surrender of Kashmir to India was unlawful because he did
not represent the majority of the people. Before the partition, Kashmir was
home to about 4 million people. Around 70% of the population were Muslims, 25%
Hindus, and 5% Buddhists and Sikhs.
Even before the division, there was a growing backlash against the king.
The Muslim Conference, led by Sheik Abdullah, denounced the Maharaja, alleging
he was a menace to Islam. The Conference, however, eventually lost steam and a
majority of its followers, forcing Abdullah to adopt secularism. Abdullah
continued to wield considerable power. Later, Pakistan's future prime minister,
Mohammed Ali Jinnah, and Abdullah became bitter rivals. He became an Indian
leader's ally as a result of his connection with Jinnah.
Following the partition of India and Pakistan, Kashmir signed a
cease-fire with both countries while they decided on their fate. When Pakistani
militants attacked India, Abdullah went to India as the Maharaja's spokesman
and requested security, which led to Kashmir being leased to India.
Before the invasion, the situation in Kashmir was uncertain. Many people
wanted Kashmir to be free. Others, on the other hand, wished to visit India or
Pakistan. In 1953, Abdullah was apprehended for attempting to establish an
independent Kashmir and secret contacts with foreign powers. In 1954, the
Kashmiri Constituent Assembly approved Kashmir's admission to India.
There was, however, no truce. Kashmir's people are split. A huge number
of Kashmiri authorities have reportedly become corrupt, according to reports.
After a military coup deposed the democratically elected administration of
Kashmir, Pakistan invaded the region in 1965. Anti-Pakistan sentiment has risen
as a result in Kashmir. With India's entry, Kashmiri leaders looked to have
changed their tune.
Beginning in 1980, Kashmir had a rapid Islamization. Propaganda was
distributed and cities were renamed. Adherents of other religions were labeled
as "spies" or "outsiders." There is evidence that countries
like Saudi Arabia influenced and aided the disease's spread. This was the
beginning of the state's instability.
Since then, the region's violence and disorder have only gotten worse.
Thousands of people have died as a result of confrontations involving rebel
organizations, terrorist organizations, Pakistani forces, and Indian forces. As
a result, the number of armed people and equipment in the area has dramatically
increased. Terrorist activity has been progressively rising as well.
The Kashmiri people have had enough of decades of conflict and violence,
it is safe to state. On the one hand, terrorist organizations and opposition
forces continue to assault. Military troops, on the other hand, have been
increased in number. Human rights violations have been leveled against these
troops. The people of Kashmir want all parties engaged to halt the violence. A
growing number of Kashmiris are supporting the referendum that was supposed to
take place during the division. Furthermore, the number of people who want
Kashmir to be independent is increasing.
1.2 Rationale
Even after more than seven decades of
partition/independence, Indo-Pak relations have undoubtedly experienced
problems and catastrophes. The ongoing progress of removing Article 370 over
Kashmir's unique status in India is reported to be the major source of
contemporary conflict between India and Pakistan. Furthermore, It is also a
well-known fact that competition between individuals is not always beneficial
to anyone's gain and cannot produce fruit. Within that context, this study may
be useful in determining the potential for peace and collaboration between two
countries following the repeal of Article 370, which has remained a difficult
challenge for both India and Pakistan.
2.1 Review of the Literature
According to Pasha (2001), Pakistan has
played an important role in fostering good relations between India and
Pakistan. The role of the media is critical in creating a favorable environment
for the normalization of relations between those foreign places. According to
Mustafa, journalists in all foreign places may need to relax and initiate peace
negotiations.
Pakistan has demonstrated leaning toward
military rule and autocratic government, according to Ray (2003). India has
accused Pakistan of supporting certain terrorist groups in Kashmir on multiple
occasions. In addition, India holds Pakistan responsible for a slew of deadly
terrorist attacks against it. Pakistan, on the other hand, insists on providing
"ethical assistance" to Kashmiri separatists.
According to Haskote (2019), the fundamental
origins of Article 370 generate conditions of inequity in India. Second, how
Article 370's retention indicates the simmering of difficult topics. Third, how
Article 370's ramifications exacerbate inequity in J&K. Fourth, how the
politics surrounding Article 370 are attempting to gain constrained advantage
from it.
According to Vasrshney (2018), notwithstanding
its extraordinary popularity, J&K has been entangled in scandal and
political intrigue from its inception. Conflicting the goals of the main
characters resulted in a series of modifications on certain major problems.
Nonetheless, it also set the tone for the future. India and Pakistan, for
example, have been at odds over the validity of accession, both making claims
and counter-claims. Because the issue was addressed before the UN, the question
of a referendum has grown more complicated.
According to Haque (2019), Article 370 of the
Indian Constitution is aimed at answering a slew of confusing concerns,
starting with the history of Jammu and Kashmir and concluding with a
determination of whether or not Article 370 should be supported. Every state in
India is unique and has its own set of characteristics, but the most beautiful
and well-known state in the country is in the north.
Since the administration of Narendra Modi
abolished Jammu and Kashmir's special status under Article 370 of the
Constitution on August 5, Pakistan has stepped up its diplomatic efforts
against India, according to Raza (2020). Imran Khan's government has approached
a lot of nations for help in settling the Article 370 crisis in Jammu and
Kashmir, including the P-five, the UN, and groupings of Islamic international places,
but to no avail.
Both India and Pakistan claim Kashmir, but
only rule it in part, according to Sabzware (2018). The atomic power neighbors
have fought each other in three battles over the contested land. An
insurrection has been going on for a long time in Indian-controlled Kashmir,
and it has now delivered every other spice in the mix. The Indian government's
acceptance of Jammu and Kashmir has been interpreted as a rejection of the
two-country concept.
2.2 Research objectives:
·
Examine how India and Pakistan's bilateral ties are affected by the
ongoing Kashmir dispute.
·
To look into the possibilities of India and Pakistan having a war over
the Kashmir conflict?
·
To see if further financial cooperation might help to restrict the scope
of the Kashmir issue.
·
Determine if a peaceful resolution in the ongoing Kashmir dispute is
possible following the revocation of Article 370.
2.3 Research Questions
·
Why is it that the Kashmir dispute refuses to be resolved by peaceful
means?
·
How does the ongoing Kashmir issue influence India-Pakistan relation?
·
What is the situation of India-Pakistan ties now that Article 370 has
been revoked in Kashmir?
·
Is it possible to establish mutually beneficial economic benefits for
the two parties?
·
Can states reduce tensions stemming from the Kashmir issue?
3.1 Research Methodology
The design of this study would be
qualitative. Approaches for descriptive and analytical study would be used.
Both primary and secondary sources are used to make inferences. Documents from
Pakistan's and India's official governments would be evaluated for primary
data. Books and newspapers would be used as secondary resources to develop a
model or theoretical framework for finding the best potential answer to this
problem.
3.2 Theoretical Framework-The PSDM Model
The dispute resolving theory's Problem
Solving and Determining Factor Model (PSDM) is a smart strategy to comprehend
and grow a reasonable approach to reaching beneficial outcomes. During the
decision-making process, PSDM has two processes: identifying the problem and
implementing innovative alternatives to solve the problem.
The goal of picking this strategy is to
identify the greatest potential answer for this specific issue by reading many
publications and newspapers, meeting with high-ranking Pakistani officials, and
weighing in on their perspectives. This methodology has also been applied to
the resolution of other conflicts, such as the conflict between North and South
Korea.
Here's what they are:
·
Identifying Alternative Solutions
·
Recognizing Conflicts
·
Appraisal of the Reached Agreement
·
Choosing an alternative and deciding to put it into action.
It's the first step in the problem-solving process, and it involves
assessing the conflict and all of its relevant components and characteristics,
such as the parties' varied connections and goals, their needs and beliefs,
their feelings and investments, and so on. The "5-Ws" and
"1-Hs" (what, why, where, when, who, and how) might be used to
diagnose the conflict. The party's interests, desires, and unique structural
features of the battle are all considered in the warfare appraisal. As a
result, Problem-Solving needs to be addressed to find a solution for
constructing a single meaning for such contradictory circumstances.
Identifying Alternatives to the Problem:
It tends to mean that when a dispute has been
identified, the next stage is to assess and produce possible approaches. Both
warring parties must be satisfied with the solutions. This section focused on
thinking to come up with innovative ideas and possible approaches, allowing the
parties to generate as many ideas as possible.
Assessment of the Reached Agreement: This is the process's third step, and the
process's almost final decision element. After a hard and fast alternative
solution has been developed, the next critical step is to consider
possibilities, make assumptions of their benefits and drawbacks, and select the
best possible plan to devote and execute.
Decision-making Commitment: Lastly, once a mutually accepted solution has
been established, the system's last phase illustrates how to incorporate it
into official and formal judgment.
Analyze and Discuss
This chapter is focused on a study of the
Kashmir dispute in the context of Article 370. The chapter will be discussed on
the PSDM model, review of literature, and videos of conversations with
Pakistani government officials as well as some Indian civilians. As previously
stated and while discussing the history of the Kashmir conflict, which
currently exists on the ground. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent decision
to repeal Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution, which bestowed
special status on Jammu and Kashmir, has sparked debate across the political
scale.
While advocates of the project argue that it
satisfies a commercial campaign pledge made by the Bhartiya Janata Party, which
won a second term with a six-percentage-point increase in the vote, detractors
see it as a precursor to a shift to majoritarian. On the outside, the move is
suggested for gaining Pakistan's attention on its western edge and stopping the
stop sport in Afghanistan, as well as for shifting Kashmir's trouble from a
disagreement with Pakistan to an internal issue.
To reviewers, even so, the reduction of Jammu
and Kashmir to the status of two union territories – shortened by the exclusion
of Ladakh – does not resolve the issue of Kashmir as a source of international
conflict, and that it is only a question of time before Pakistan makes its
strong presence, most likely through revived conflict, either directly or
indirectly.
The union territory of Kashmir is currently
under lockdown, with almost 50,000 more paramilitary troops deployed to avoid
violence.
Transmission lines have been disrupted,
making it impossible to muffle anticipated unfavourable reactions from
Kashmiris. The centralized government, which has been in power since central
rule began over a year ago, has effectively determined that some Kashmiris are
in danger of rebelling after being stripped of the modest independence they had
enjoyed in the past.
This is especially true because they were
neither engaged nor supported in their relationship with the rest of India's
political re-engineering. Authorities have put roughly 500 major elected
figures and separatists into preventative detention, including three former
leader ministries who are now being kept off the radar and without prosecution.
In response to India's activities, Pakistan
has begun diplomatic efforts. It has addressed to the UN Secretary-General to
bring the events in Kashmir to the notice of the Security Council. Its
diplomatic relations with India have been degraded, trade relations have been
limited, and train and bus connections between the two nations have been
discontinued. However, putting its tried and tested surrogate warfare option on
hold now may be premature.
After returning from a trip to China, its
Foreign Affairs minister paid a visit to Pakistan-administered Kashmir, where
he downplayed the likelihood of any extra zealous Pakistani action, implying
that the global community has become wary of tougher moves through Pakistan.
Pakistan wants to redirect the power of anti-India surrogate organizations to
Kashmir because it is under strain to be restrained in its response. Pakistan
cannot afford to remain silent, because jihadi proxies, who are otherwise
"real terrorists" who are anti-India, will most likely turn inside.
Since 2014, Pakistan has expressed a desire
to end its operational processes against "horrific terrorists." It
would be preferable to channel such power outwards. While Indian troops are on
red alert, for the time being, the outcome of this example could be known by
the start of the northern winter.
While interviewing Indian citizens on
television, the majority of them were hesitant to provide their comments on the
subject, indicating that they felt pressured or fearful of their government;
their right to freedom of speech appears to be ambiguous as they refused to
express their views. However, some self-assured residents responded in a biased
manner, claiming that it is a matter for their country and that they have no
objections.
Furthermore, in a new conversation with
Indian news Karan Thappar, Dr. Moeed Yusuf (Advisor on National Security and
Strategic Policy Planning to Pakistan's Prime Minister) stated unequivocally
that there are essentially two challenges. One is Kashmir, and the other is
terrorism, and Pakistan is willing to sit down and discuss both concerns at the
same time. He went on to say that this time, both sides should see Kashmir as a
3rd person and sit like 'ADULTS' to find an acceptable and feasible solution to
the issue, adding that Pakistan stands for peace and wants to go forward. So,
if both countries agree and work maturely to have the best, the PSDM model can
be used to find a solution for Kashmir.
Recognizing the struggle in Kashmir:
Determining the root causes of an issue is
the first step toward resolving a conflict. Circumstances in Kashmir are
unpredictably volatile and extremely vulnerable to terrorism. Moreover, the
current situation implies that each perspective on Kashmir, such as Pakistan's,
is in support of a UN referendum as being in line with the will of Kashmir's
people. India, on the other hand, does not recall the UN ruling as well as
Pakistan does. India considers Kashmir to be a crucial component of the country
that cannot be removed from it. India objected and argued that it was a
bilateral count number between India and Pakistan to reject a UN referendum
that may include the voice of Kashmiris.
Identifying Alternatives to the Problem:
There are many different options for Kashmir:
1st solution:
Kashmir to be an independent country
Discussion:
These two countries have already fought three
wars, one of which was for the Kashmir dispute. On numerous fronts, the Kashmir
conflict plan has grown difficult: the first is its critical location, which is
so precise that neither India nor Pakistan wants to give up any part of
Kashmir. Those countries, on the other hand, would pose enormous threats to an
independent Kashmir. Kashmir would continue to be at a crossroads between two
belligerent nations, Pakistan and India. If Kashmir declares independence, they
will likely want to restart the process from the beginning.
Although the idea of an independent Kashmir
appears challenging, the Kashmiri people should be asked to choose their future
and destiny when no one else understands what is best for them. They should be
granted the right to self-determination, as it is their right to select their
fate, just as other countries do. If the people who live there seek
independence and do not want to join either India or Pakistan, they should be
given the freedom and opportunity to live free of both nations.
2nd Solution:
Indian-controlled Kashmir will merge with
Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, with Pakistan owning the entire region.
Discussion: Because most Kashmiris are Muslims and Pakistan is a Muslim state, it
is suggested that this is a good option for Kashmir. People in Kashmir are
peace-loving and liberal. If the choice of siding with Pakistan because of the
Muslim majority in Kashmir is chosen, and Kashmiris respect the outcome, India
will undoubtedly face difficulties in handing up their dominated territory to
Pakistan because of pride. Because it is one-sided, this idea is impractical.
The Kashmir dispute involves three parties: India, Pakistan, and Kashmir. This
response can only help one party: Pakistan. As a result, this appears to be a
bit of a stretch.
3rd Solution:
Pakistan-controlled Kashmir has joined
Indian-controlled Kashmir, and the entire region now belongs to India.
Azad Kashmir has a large Muslim population,
and convincing a Majority Muslim Azad Kashmir to connect a Hindu majority will
be difficult. As a result, the inhabitants of Azad Kashmir will never choose to
be a part of India. Another issue is most likely one of communication. Azad
Kashmiris speak in a more exact dialect than Kashmiris on the Indian border.
Finally, this answer may enrage
fundamentalists in Pakistan's Swat Valley and Afghans, who will never tolerate
a Muslim country with a Hindu majority. As a result of the battle between India
and China, Pakistan, as China's closest buddy, can enhance its speech in the UN
because China is an eternal supporter, and each can jointly enhance its speech
and undermine India's power on international grounds.
Limitations
The study is entirely derived from the
literature.
7.1 Conclusion
The Kashmir dispute is without a doubt an
unmanageable conflict that necessitates the search for a peaceful solution. The
main challenge for those wanting peace and stability is determining what
political framework is required to satisfy Kashmiris' sense of identity as well
as India and Pakistan's history. The preceding argument reveals Kashmiris'
dissatisfaction with India's government.
This is understandable, given the valley's
frequent demonstrations. Given the geopolitical realities on the ground in the
Indian subcontinent, the most viable solution to the Kashmir issue appears to
be reducing security services in Kashmir and giving Kashmiris basic human
privileges, such as freedom from daily frisking, while focusing on expanding
employment and educational opportunities for Kashmiris. While this may no
longer be the best solution to this problem, it may provide the framework for a
better solution while also alleviating the region's everyday challenges.
In brief, if this paradigm were to be
implemented, India and Pakistan would be held accountable for returning to the
negotiation table after completing all of the PSDM Model's processes and
finding the best potential solution. It might also help events meet Kashmiris'
desire for self-determination. It may provide the parties with a better
understanding of each other's interests and perspectives on the dispute.
It is necessary to make decisions and put
them into action. Furthermore, the events want to be held responsible for
ongoing human misery and possible ramifications. Violations of human rights may
be addressed. The study demonstrated that Kashmiris are dissatisfied with
India's illegal treatment of Kashmiris. The repeal of Articles 370 and 35(a)
has exacerbated the situation in Kashmir.
7.2 Recommendation
·
India and Pakistan should meet at a desk to discuss the best answer
feasible using the PSDM paradigm.
·
Both nations should honor Kashmiri citizens' views.
·
The Indian government's lockdown in Kashmir should be lifted promptly.
·
To have a peaceful discourse about this topic, Jammu and Kashmir should
be demilitarised.
·
The United Nations should have taken some action to resolve this
decades-old dispute.
References:
·
https://www.e-ir.info/2020/10/07/a-look-into-the-conflict-between-india-and-pakistan-over-kashmir/
·
https://www.grin.com/document/308859
TEAM
Laureate Folks International
Educational Research Consultants
Pakistan
https://laureatefolks.blogspot.com
Comments
Post a Comment