Pakistan Occupied Kashmir

Introduction

Seven decades of Indo-Pakistani relations have been delineated by bloodshed. The repercussion of affairs in Kashmir has led to affray between the two nations. The contention over Kashmir, for Pakistan, might confine to their Islamic congruence. India’s secular dogma might be scrutinized on the other hand. Ergo, the only confrontational nuclear neighbors of this world not only fight over territory but also their ideologies. The Kashmir conflict floats on the rule of colonialism: both of these nations profess the same dependency.

Formation of PoK

J&K has been an apple of discord betwixt India and Pakistan since 1947. At the time of independence, the then circa 565 princely states were given a choice between the India and Pakistan. The state of affairs that added fuel to fire to the confusion due to the partition was the incongruity of the Maharaja Hari Singh when he had no option but to accede Kashmir to India through an instrument of accession. Since then this instrument has been contentious and the apple of discord with a fragment seeing it lawful and others a travesty.

The issue was internationalized by Jawaharlal Nehru by putting it to the UN. Pt. Nehru, mentioned that "once the soil of the state had been cleared of the invaders (from Pakistan) and normal conditions restored, its people would be free to decide their future by the democratic method of a plebiscite or referendum which in order to ensure complete impartiality, might be held under the international auspices". That referendum is far from brass tacks.

International law and conventions

There is an argument which says that the International law and UN conventions on the Kashmir issue are non-relevant because the resolution that was passed in the UN due to the post-partition conflict between India-Pakistan stands to be a dead letter now owing to the limitation period.

It was circa 17 years that the involvement of the UN lasted for in the Kashmir issue. With the signing of the Simla Agreement in 1972, UN was thrown out of the picture as both the nations adopted a bilateral approach to the Kashmir enmeshment. Although the UN passed plethora resolutions, they are not self-enforceable and only the parties to the dispute, on their consent can enforce it. After hearing Indian and Pakistani representatives, the U.N Security Council passed its first resolution (Resolution 38) on Kashmir Conflict on January 17, 1948, calling India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on January 20, the Security Council passed another resolution (Resolution 39), creating the United Nations Commission for Indian and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the dispute and mediate between the two countries.

In the initial times, when UN brought to the porch the idea of a plebiscite, Pakistan opposed it fearing that its outcome would indubitably be predisposed by Sheikh Abdullah as he was close to the then PM Nehru. Indian opposed this plan of a plebiscite as they were adamant on the contention that J&K had become a part of the Union of India. Nix of the resolutions passed by the UN turned to be fruitful because sometimes the Soviet vetoed in favor of India, the other times China favored Pakistan. Consequently, the UN stepped out of the issue after Russia negotiated the Tashkent Agreement.

India was too adamant on refusing to give any heed to the UN resolutions and this proved to be one of the crowning factors of failure of UN resolutions. Although it was India who took this matter to the UN in the first place with the anticipation to proclaim Pakistan as an assailant in the 1947-48 war, contrary to this, UN suggested for a plebiscite and hence, India shied away from all the UN resolutions.

Both the nations have time and again violated the Simla agreement which, apparently, zeroed down international intervention by providing for bilateral solutions to the Kashmir issue. First, of them being the 1982 Siachin glacier violation wherein India sent its forces to the Siachin glacier area and set up an arduous military post there. Pakistan, in 1984, also sent its troops. From the time then, both the nations are sitting making it a violation. The next one was the famous Pakistan planned Kargil war. Also, India violated the Simla agreement when instituted a fence lengthways the LoC. Even if not the spirit of the letter of Article 4(ii)[1] of the agreement, it indubitably violated the agreement.

So, presently, since there have been ample violations of the agreement, it is high time that either new bilateral talks come into existence or both the nations start taking UN resolutions earnestly. Although the UN resolutions stand to be a dead letter now, such resolutions can, under no circumstances, become outmoded by events. The passage of time cannot annul a persistent and nonpareil norm, i.e., the right of self-determination. This conception of terming a resolution as a dead letter on non-implementation, it would, indubitably, extinguish serious international agreements.

Consequently, the United Nations Charter will grieve with an alike destiny as the resolutions on Kashmir. This right of self-determination is an unrestricted right, by definition itself. It is not just solely Pakistan’s fault, but also India’s in parts. There is a rudimentary principle negating the possibility of an agreement betwixt parties if it affects the rights of a third party. If such happens, that international agreement would be considered nothing but a flout. India-Pakistan is making a mockery of the democratic norms with the Kashmir issue.

The plight of civilians and predicament of refugees

There doesn’t exist a situation like that of China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine in the India-Pakistan rivalry over Kashmir. The sole reason being that at the time of the partition, there was a provision regarding the transfer of civilians. An option was given to the people. But the plight of the civilians in the day to day armed conflict between India-Pakistan requires thoughtfulness. Also, the civilians of J&K do not wish to either go to Pakistan or remain in India. So, the question of transfer of refugee doesn’t hold much significance as in China-Tibet case or Israel-Palestine case.

The epoch, in 1947, wherein populaces were forced to abandon their homes in what is now called Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) on the attack by Pakistani forces on Jammu & Kashmir, curdled the blood. The ones who drifted from regions like Muzaffarabad, Poonch, Kotli, Bhimber, and Mirpur are still unsettled and haven’t been granted the refugee' status. Our Indian govt has been sticking to the stand that they aren’t qualified to be called refugee and claim their benefits as they drifted from PoK, which is, indubitably, a part of India. Ergo, lately, the compensation t0 be provided to Mirpur residents, whose possessions inundated owing to the Mangla dam’s construction was refused by the Indian government.

Presently, people from PoK staying in Jammu & Kashmir having no political status amounts to be circa 1,200,000 and also they are bereft of any assurance from the Indian governments as to their standing in the Kashmir conflict. Both the nations are constantly arguing over the territory issues. Amidst all this, nix authority has paid any heed to the opinion and state of the Indian Muslims and also the civilians of PoK. If the countries are under the impression that without fathoming the plight of civilians, they would be able to find a solution to this long-standing row, then they are wide of the mark.

Over the time, the State government in J&K has been of, by and for the Kashmiris. As PoK refugees aren’t Kashmiris, they weren’t permitted to settle down in the Valley because the State government never wanted them to. To their relief, the central government settled a few refugees in the Jammu region, others being forced into states like Punjab, Rajasthan, UP. Nix authority has shown tenor to the settlement of these refugees. The present schemes implemented for the cause are mere baffling relief measures, small ex-gratia grant with rehabilitation.

Those refugees have yet not been compensated for their properties in PoK territory and to twist the knife, they are told that providing compensation at this pass will put India’s stand at stake at the UN. On raising this issue, the contention that comes to the porch is PoK will be retrieved and the people will be sent back. Thinking with a practical approach, by no stretch of the imagination, our authorities have the requisite capacity to retrieve PoK. In all this mess, the refugees are shorn of rights and being bamboozled.

Role of Pakistan in securing the needs and security of PoK civilians

Following the earthquake of October 2005, the harsh reality of PoK erupted. The condition was impecunious then. The area spectates Pakistan sponsored terrorism and also the rise of Jihadi influence in the area has been alarming. There is nix political party working for the upliftment of the province, making a pathway for the terrorists a plain sailing.

The people now endure problems of unemployment and lack access to other basic amenities. The attacks on Kashmiri Pandits in Nadimarg, 2003 were done by these groups. Russian president Vladimir Putin in 2002 said, "We must call Pakistan to put an end to the terrorist activities being carried out in its territory in India, in Kashmir."

Mr. Jack Straw, UK Foreign Secretary, stated in the British parliament in 2002, "A number of terrorist organizations have been at the forefront of violent activities in the region. Successive governments of Pakistan have encouraged and funded terrorists to make incursions across the line of control and engage in terrorism." Kashmiris are getting unsettled by the growing number of foreign mercenaries in Kashmir and by increased domination from Islamabad.

Pakistan has ignored the resentment of the people in this region against increasing Chinese presence in the area. China has even been taking many development projects in PoK, trans-Karakoram tract in 1963. There is even a suspicion that the Sunni majority state of Pakistan along with China may exterminate the Shia minority in Gilgit Baltistan in order to silence all opposition to their policies in future[3]. Indiscriminate violence has marked the area since 1989 and over 34 000 civilians have been killed from 1989 to 2001.

Kashmir is a beautiful place, with even more beautiful people. Seven decades and generations have gone through it. It is perhaps time for India to stick to its Parliamentary resolution 1994 that stated the following:

• The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means;
• India has the will and capacity to firmly counter all designs against its unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity;
• Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression; and resolves that all attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of India will be met resolutely."

Although there is a wide clamor among the international bodies as to the right of self-determination, this very right could lead to a cataclysm in both the nations. Pakistan has been out-crying the same right for Muslims in Kashmir since long now, but it doesn’t realize the fact this right could have a disastrous impact. This would create an identical situation like that during the partition because in 1947 too, the religious base for the partition was the same. If we stand too adamant on this right, we might end up repeating the history. Bringing in separate nationalism as the base for resolving Kasmir issue would take us back to the two-nation theory again.