Kashmir : Antidotes & More

In an article published in Express Tribune dated 22^nd 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.