In an article published in Express Tribune dated 22nd
June 2013, Shyam Vij talks about 4 different solutions for Kashmir, one of
which he assumes to be the most plausible one. Let’s take a look at each of the
four options and analyse them for their plausibility.
1). The first solution Shyam Vij talks about is the military
option. He believes India hasn’t shown any interest in annexing the Pakistan
Occupied Kashmir, and has therefore shown no inclination towards a military conflict
with Pakistan to annex it. On the other hand, Pakistan, since it’s inception
has been far too desperate and has centered it’s whole ideology around annexing
the Indian administered Kashmir. Conflicts of 1948, 1965, 1989 (where it
perpetrated and supported an armed rebellion in Kashmir) and 1999 are examples
of the incessant audacity in believing that it’s Pakistan right to capture the
Indian administrated Kashmir, even if its only a small part of it for a start.
The author believes Pakistan has still kept this option alive.
I have reservations over believing that Pakistan still has
this option open. A lot has changed in Pakistan (for worse) since 2000s and a
lot has changed in India too (for good) since 2000s. Pakistan has an open war
front to deal with on its western borders. While it sympathises with and
supports the factions of Afghan Taliban, The Haqaani Network (the ones whom the
American drones come searching for into Pakistan from nearby Afghanistan) and
the organizations tasked with jihad against India, namely Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad,
Hizbul-Mujahideen, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen etc., it has suffered colossal damages
in the hands of organizations which are against Pakistan, namely the, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
(an anti-Shia militia) and Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (which believes Pakistan
has been playing on both sides in the war on terror). With a paralysed economy
and internal conflicts threatening to implode Pakistan, it would be detrimental
for it to open another war front on its eastern borders with India. There are
certain wise people who indeed realize that.
As far as India is concerned, military option has severe
ramifications even if it is to target the terrorists’ training camps in
Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and elsewhere in the country. Such an action would
only propel more people to join the jihad against India, especially when
unemployment is endemic in Pakistan. Also, in case of India, unlike the US,
Pakistan is not on India’s payroll. Any military action against Pakistan by
India will be retaliated in the same manner. And with China sitting not too far
away, it would only make the region more unstable than it already is.
2). The second solution according to him is of maintaining
the current status quo. While the Government of India and also the people of
India would be reasonably satisfied with such an outcome, there is no way it
would go down well with the Pakistanis. They have religiously invested last
sixty five years in breeding prejudiced hatred for India, hatred for the
infidel Hindus and jihad for Kashmir. Would it be easy for them to let go of
the basic principle on which the country came into existence? Of course not.
The right wing forces in Pakistan, including the sporadic ones present in the
army and the ISI, apart from the freelancers that exist, are way too strong to
influence the public opinion in case the government of Pakistan were to
sanction a Kashmir solution based on the status quo.
3). The third option is of holding the plebiscite in Kashmir
which includes not two but three options. India, Pakistan or freedom. This solution
may not be acceptable to both in its entirety. Pakistan insists on holding a
plebiscite with options mentioned as per the UN resolution 47, dated 21
st
April 1948, which are either India or Pakistan. The pre requisite for its
implementation was that Pakistan withdraws its forces and tribesman that
infiltrated into Kashmir and after which India shall hold a plebiscite for the
entire region, keeping minimum forces required in Kashmir. While Pakistan ignored
the UN mandate on withdrawing its forces from Kashmir, India too subsequently
refused to implement the plebiscite, since Pakistan had refused to comply with
the pre-requisite.
Today, there exists a considerable amount of resentment
against Pakistani establishment in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. A lot of Shias in
PoK have been gunned down by the terror groups and there is precious little
that the establishment there has done to prevent such incidents from happening.
There exists a strong possibility that if given an option, a majority of people
may vote in favour of an independent state in PoK. And especially when as per
the UN resolution, it is India who is supposed to conduct the plebiscite for
the region, it’s not exactly a risk worth taking for Pakistan.
For India, an independent Kashmir would have more
implications than it has for Pakistan. India cannot afford to loose Kashmir it
administers for various reasons. A landlocked independent Kashmir has every
chance of going radical and becoming a hot bed for India centric terror
activities, funded and supported by Pakistan. It is quite likely that once
independent, it may go the Afghanistan way.
Like in Pakistan, in India too, a lot of public opinion has
been built on Kashmir being an integral part of India. Any government allowing
its secession would be condemned and admonished by people, media and opposition
alike.
Another issue is the Indus river. The Indus is the longest
and the largest river in Pakistan and around two-thirds of the water supplied
for irrigation and for domestic purposes comes from Indus and its associated
rivers. The river originates in the vicinity of Lake Mansarovar and traverses a
course through Ladakh, towards Gilgit & Baltistan and then flowing in the
southern direction across the entire length of Pakistan, thus acting as its
lifeline. Pakistan fears India is building dams on this river to obstruct the
flow of water into Pakistan. While this fear doesn’t hold true for now, in
future if things between India & Pakistan get murkier, India would always
want to have this option up its sleeve, for which it cannot afford to let go of
Kashmir.
4). The fourth option which the author backs himself too is
the Four Point Formula. These four points are an open border, local autonomy, a
joint mechanism to allow both sides of J&K to work on matters of common
interest and demilitarisation. To support this option, the author gives the
example of South Tyrol province in northern Italy, which shares its sovereignty
with Italy and Austria.
While the option remains a practical one, from an Indian
point of view, would it help as far as limiting Pakistan sponsored terror
activities in India is concerned? It is highly unlikely that it will.
The whole purpose of jihad against India is freedom for
Kashmir. This middle of the line understanding may sound a practical one, but
it is not going to stop the right wingers like Hafiz Saeed, Syed Salahuddin or
Masood Azhar to encourage youth to take up arms against India in the name of
jihad. Moreover, the right wing of Pakistan is still burning in rage against
the partitioning of east Pakistan from the west and primarily hold India
responsible for it. Unless they succeed in parting Kashmir from India’s
occupation, I doubt their call for jihad would cease.
Demilitarisation is again an option that may not go down too
well with the Indians, considering Pakistan’s treacherous past record. The
possibility of sneaking the militants or army men in to somehow capture Kashmir
will always exist. It is not just people like Hafiz Saeed, but individuals in
the Pakistan Army, ISI, have too been brought up on the same ideology of jihad.
Pakistan’s army is the only professional army of the world who’s motto itself
encourages and supports any organization which carries out jihad for Allah. Their motto reads , ‘ A follower of none but Allah,
The fear of Allah, Jihad for Allah’
Whatever might the solution for Kashmir be, it is unlikely
that it would fall completely outside the ambit of the ones that have been mentioned.
Only time shall make it clear as to which one of the above decides the destiny
of India, Pakistan and the people of united Jammu & Kashmir.
