Connect with us

South Asia

The Kashmir imbroglio: Concerns and Way out

Published

on

Kashmir is the valley of enormous beauty with beautiful and serene valleys, enclosed by the mighty Himalayas and lofty mountains, with the heart-enthralling scenes of beautiful meadows and low-lying areas, but the state has manifested into an intractable problem of the Asian sub-continent, posing challenges of a continuous struggle day in and day out. Although, it is known by the Switzerland of Asia through its beauty, yet, there is a different side of the story turning its glamour upside down. Kashmir is the burning issue of the subcontinent that continues to haunt relations between India and Pakistan. It is also one of the oldest issue in the UN history. Despite a series of UN resolutions, India and Pakistan have been unable to resolve this imbroglio.

Prior to accession with the Union of India, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state. Through the historical chronicles, we come across the instances that the people of the state have been ruled by a different number of rulers over the period of time. The first Muslim ruler of Kashmir was Shah Mir who laid foundation of the Shah Mir dynasty. Kashmir was also part of the great Mughals empire from 1586 to 1751.Later on, until 1820,it was under the reigns of Afghan-Durrani empire.Ranjit Singh annexed Kashmir at that point of time. The treaty of Amritsar signed on 15 march 1846 was a grim chapter in the history of Kashmir under the provisions of which Raja Gulab Singh after the first Anglo-Sikh war purchased the vale from the British and became its ruler .The rule of his descendents continued under the paramountcy of the British till the partition of India in 1947, when the erstwhile princely state was claimed by the respective descendents of the partition. That issue at stake continues till today without a glimmer of hope between India and Pakistan, leaving the aspirations of the masses to fly in air with each passing day. The instrument of accession signed by the Maharaja with the Union of India was a turning point in the annals of history where the erstwhile state was acceded with India after the guerrilla attack.UN was invited at that time to mediate on the issue. In 1948, a ceasefire was agreed upon under the auspices of the UN.Unfortunately, the referendum was never conducted which heightened the state of hostility between India and Pakistan. The two nuclear states of India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir including the Kargil war. In 1987, insurgency erupted in the state of J&K. Dixon plan was a failed attempt from the UN to meditate on Kashmir. According to A.G.Noorani,the people of Kashmir are very much party to the problem.

In all these preceding years, Kashmir has been on a tumultuous journey of agonies and pain. The Amarnath land controversy over the transfer of land was an unfortunate episode in 2008 which consumed 40 people leaving behind a tale of pain and suffering for the respective families.2009 and 2010 also carried on the legacy of protests and killings. The year of 2016 was a historic and a turning point in the state which brought about a paradigm shift in the dynamics of the political thinking of the masses and affected a change of thinking, creating much more alienation of the people from mainstream India. This not only affected the life of the people, but also added a chapter of tragedy to the flashpoint of Kashmir.

Over the years of  political churnings and establishment of new regimes after the conduction of the elections, the people have attained a political maturity .The double dose of autonomy and self rule proposed by NC and PDP have found very little take from the mainland of India.Although,the political establishment at New Delhi appointed three interlocutors in the past,but,what transpired after the provision of their reports is still shrouded in a political mystery. Since its inception, both India and Pakistan have tried to solve the issue of Kashmir. A number of bilateral negotiations have been initiated at different levels to settle the protracted issue. Kashmir problem dogged with near perpetual instability, posing a grave risk to the peace and stability of South Asia in particular and the whole continent in general. Time is testimony to the fact that an environment of peace and reconciliation has been a sine qua non for the redressel and resolution of the issues, be it local or universal. The parties to the problem at stake, that is India and Pakistan cannot remain mute spectators to this imbroglio. A sort of acknowledgement of the problem from a humanitarian perspective is need of the hour.Blame games, face-offs and broken promises are in no way remedies to the problem. What is actually a solution is to sit across the table to have a meaningful and a multi-pronged strategy of the dialogue to contain the problem and resolve it for once and all. The leadership of the separatist chamber has also to be invited, being a major party to the redressal. Also, the appointment of the interlocutor is a good step. But, the reports should be heed to and not be put into the backburner. For how long will the valley bleed? Time has to ripe to fructify the peace in the state. The loss of the youth is the loss of the humanity, for it alienates and creates a concurrent of nationalism .The alienation of the people has to do away with.

The Kashmir conflict assumes dynamic forms with each passing day. The recent recruitment of meritorious and dynamic qualified youth into militancy has set alarm bells not only in the local circles, but also at the national level triggering widespread debates, counter-debates and narratives, trying to uncover the root genesis of the problem at large. The Kashmir issue if analysed in its totality and put to the table of dissection and vivi-section,is the longest South Asian issue which refuses to calm down in the contemporary times and calls for a comprehensive analysis and a pragmatic approach for its resolution permanently once for all, sans lackadaisical heed and a no-point direction from the political and administrative quarters of both India and Pakistan.

Although, the side of Pakistan and the leadership of Hurriyat Conference have, time and again sought the world attention to play their part in the resolution of the Kashmir conflict, but, the leadership of India always reiterate their view of a no third party intervention .Over the years, Kashmir has become a symbol of agonies,pains,sufferings,tragedies and what not. The instability of the region ascribed to the political manipulations has added fuel to the fire over the course of these years.Today,when the world is enmeshed in its own state of conflict, the conflict of Kashmir cannot be put to backburner and draped by political manuevours.The vocal politics has to metamorphise into a politics of compassion on paper to give a touch of care for the sufferings of yore,to pledge an end to the vicious cycles of killings and to recognise this monster and have a bargain for peace with a vision for the prospective future of Kashmir,including its sister concerns of Jammu and Ladakh region.after all, peace comes from within, one need to explore it and not without.

To fructify the dream of a microcosm painted with the colours of peace and development within the macrocosm of grand nationalism, the confluence of one and all is the need of the hour, especially, with a bigger role over the horizon of the fourth pillar and third eye, that is, media within the pursuit of humanitarian horizon and aloof of we vs. they. Unfortunately, Media of the mainland India has played a very negative role in portraying the valley of Kashmir during all these years and added a current of hyper-sensationalism of the miniscule issues, leaving behind the real aspirations of the people aside. This has not only manifested in the negative image of the Kashmir valley, but added an element of otherwise image on the main spectrum of the collected psyche of the people of the rest of the country. This step-motherly treatment should subsume with an ethic of care and concern, lest, time takes the cogs out of wheels in a different way.

After the triumph of Imran Khan, to be Prime Minister of Pakistan, there is now a renowed focus on the Kashmir problem. Will he be able to solve the problem of Kashmir is a million dollar question to ponder upon. Both India and Pakistan have to come across a viable-cum-meaningful dialogue to resolve the pending issues, including the problem in Kashmir for the greater good of the people, particularly the masses of valley.

The author has done M.Sc.(Biochemistry),B.Ed from Jamia Millia Islamia New Delhi,M.A.(History) and also qualified CTET from CBSE. Previously,he was also working as a project trainee at JNU,New Delhi.He writes for a number of platforms on socio-politico-economic issues and currently works in J&K, government education department. He can be reached at abidjmi121[at]gmail.com

Continue Reading
Comments

South Asia

Breaking Down the South Asian Dynamic: Post Pulwama attack & Saudi Prince’s visit

Uzge A. Saleem

Published

on

The political and strategic activities of the South Asian region have been on a high for the past week or so. The region faced a very unfortunate incident on 14th February, 2019 when 40 Indian soldiers were killed in an attack in Pulwama, India. The already torn region of Kashmir faced yet another blow and has been in turmoil since the attack. The 14th February attack somehow translated into more violence against the innocent civilians of Kashmir. Not only Kashmir but other cities of India have also been actively involved in hate crimes against Muslims, particularly Kashmiri students. BBC news reported the violence against students from Kashmir in various universities across the country and how they were being thrown out of their residences.

The attack has been condemned by all alike, however, the Indian nation has assumed Pakistan to be behind the attack. The Prime Minister Nirendra Modi has given his two cents on the matter and his words seem to be clearly motivated by his desire to cash this unfortunate incident for a win in the upcoming Indian general elections. India’s highest Diplomat in Pakistan has also been called back and the action has been reciprocated by Pakistan as well. As we break down the current rush of hostilities between the two nuclear neighbors there are mainly two theories revolving around. The Indian theory is short and bitter, it claims Pakistan is responsible because it is an irresponsible state that provides safe havens to terrorists. The group linked to this attack has also been declared close to Pakistan’s agencies on many occasions. The theory is evidently childish and sounds like it is being repeated for the 100th time with no solid proof or credible information yet again. The mere allegations have brought no good but unfortunately India’s higher names are set on fueling the age old fire for their petty gains.

We have a theory from Pakistan’s side as well. Although it is not an official theory nor has it been discussed by any of the higher leaderships publicly but it is nonetheless doing the rounds in the policy circles. It claims Indian officials themselves were involved in not only the Pulwama attack but the less spoken of, Iran attack as well. Both the attack were significantly close to Pakistan’s Eastern and Western borders. This is something the state of Pakistan would not bring upon itself at such a crucial time when the security situation of the state was desired to be at its best for the arrival of the Saudi crown prince, Muhammad Bin Salman. The visit was not only a remarkably significant diplomatic achievement for Pakistan but was also very significant for the South Asian region and Muslim countries around the globe. In times like this when the state of Pakistan was consumed in making preparations for the arrival of the Prince it would be a rather immature strategic move to involve itself in something so disastrous and fragile at the same time. However, some believe Indian officials planned this to create unrest in the region as an attempt to halt the Prince’s visit.

The visit, however, took place anyway and was a rather successful one. Not only were MoU’s signed between the leadership of Pakistan and the Royalty of Saudi Arabia but mechanisms to implement the MoU’s were also chalked out. The spontaneous release of 2107 Pakistani prisoners from Saudi prisons n the request of Pakistan’s prime minister was a clear show of the blooming Saudi-Pak relations. It not only took the friendship and trust between the two nations to new heights but created a new sense of love and respect for the Prince amongst the general public of Pakistan which has not been seen so evidently before. The prince being awarded with the highest civil award of Pakistan marks the utmost success of the visit which did not settle well with many of the self-proclaimed key players of the region.

The prince has plans to visit India as well where it is expected that peace between India and Pakistan would be suggested as a key desire. It can also be expected that India’s leadership would take this opportunity to trade peace in return of other favors from the Saudi delegation. Regardless of the absurd reaction from the neighboring country, Pakistan has remained calm and acted with utmost maturity during the entire blame game. Regardless of knowing very well how capable the Pakistani army is, the state has made no loose remarks and has also recorded its reservations against India’s escalating remarks in a letter penned down by the Foreign Minister of Pakistan to the General Secretary of the United Nations. Pakistan always has, still does and always will promote peace and prosperity in the region.

Continue Reading

South Asia

The Pulwama Attack and India’s rhetoric

Published

on

The Attack which occurred in the Pulwama District of Jammu and Kasmir was indeed a horrific event. The attack took place on India’s Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). The suicide bomber triggered the car bomb while 78 vehicles with over 2,500 CRPF men were on the Srinagar-Jammu Highway. Pakistan’s Foreign Office was quick to condemn this unfortunate event. According to the statement released the attack occurring in Pulwama District was a matter of grave concern.

India was however very quick at pointing fingers towards Pakistan. Within an hour or so of the incident, while even the basic on-site investigations weren’t completed, India blamed Pakistan for the Pulwama Attack. Pakistan’s Foreign Office rejected any claim linking the attack to Pakistan without proper investigations. The Pulwama attack no doubt is a tragedy, but the way the attack unfolded and India’s knee-jerk reaction has raised quite a lot of doubts and questions in Pakistan, India as well as the international community.

Questions Pakistan asks

First of all, on what pretext did the Indian authorities blame the Pakistani State for the attack? The suicide bomber named Adil Ahmed Dar was a native Kashmiri, the car used in the Suicide attack was a Mahindra Scorpio (non-existent in Pakistan). How can Indian authorities deduce Pakistan’s hand, with this little information, in such a less time?

Secondly, Adil Ahmed Dar has been named as the suicide bomber by the Indian Media. According to the Kashmir Times story published on 9th October 2017, Indian Security forces had apprehended a Kashmiri named Adil Ahmed Dar. The news quoted the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of police for Southern Kashmir, S P Pani that the militants belonged to Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. Now, this is conflicting news because Indian media claims the attacker to be from Jaish-e-Muhammad. There are also news reports that the attacker never came back from police custody. Without proper investigation, no one will know whether he escaped from the authorities or he was made to film the confession statement under duress.

Thirdly, Indian authorities have claimed that 350KG of explosives were packed into the car which rammed into the CPRF bus. How 350Kg of explosives could be accumulated in the most heavily militarized regions of the world right under the nose of the heavily armed Indian Army. The stretch on which the incident occurred had been cleared earlier in the morning, and authorities have termed this as a “serious breach” of security. Doesn’t this point to the incompetence of the world’s largest buyer of military hardware?

Lastly, who is the beneficiary of the attack, especially from a timings point of view? The attack happened just a day before Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman was due in Islamabad to announce billions of dollars of investment, while on the other hand, Modi wants some political leverage against his opponents. His Pakistan bashing is really popular in his BJP vote bank and this could also be an effort to woo his supporters back to him.

Kashmir: A humanitarian issue

The Kashmir issue has been the bone of contention between the two South-Asian neighbors. It has been the prime reason for hostilities between India and Pakistan. There exists a UN resolution demanding for a plebiscite in Kashmir, for seeking the will of Kashmiri people to weather join Pakistan or Kashmir. India, however, refuses to implement the UN resolution in their true letter and spirit.  Pakistan has been asking India for a dialogue on a peaceful settlement of Kashmir Issue, but India has not only turned down Pakistan’s offers but has kept its heavy-handedness in suppressing the people of Kashmir.

Last year, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) published a report on Kashmir. The report made startling revelations about Indian atrocities in Kashmir. The UN reported the use of pellet-firing shotguns against violent protesters resulting in deaths and serious injuries. Official government figures list 17 people as being killed by pellet injuries between July 2016 and August 2017. In January 2018, the Jammu and Kashmir chief minister told the state legislative assembly that 6,221 people had been injured by pellet guns. The Human Rights Watch stated that Indian security forces “assaulted civilians during search operations, tortured and summarily executed detainees in custody and murdered civilians in reprisal attacks”; according to the report, rape was regularly used as a means to “punish and humiliate” communities.

The Pulwama attack is purely a domestic issue and blaming Pakistan is just a way for diverting attention from the Indian Army’s atrocities in Kashmir, its incompetence and the BJPs failures. BJP is facing an election defeat visibly and the upcoming elections could most likely mean an end to Modi’s political career. Fore-seeing his future, he is using the one card which plays in India well “Pakistan Bashing”.

Prime Minister Modi has openly threatened revenge on Pakistan. He has to understand that peace in the region is the ultimate prize. Peace and stability in South Asia is a combined responsibility and that such irresponsible remarks are a direct threat to stability.  The Indian media should also tone down the warmongering and hysteria in their content. In these times when information travels with the speed of light, any misunderstanding could have disastrous effects.

Pakistan has offered India times and again to solve all issues including Jammu and Kashmir through peaceful dialogue. In Pakistan, India-bashing has never been an election slogan. Anti-India fanatics do not come to power and the common people do not buy into their anti-Indian rhetoric. Isn’t it high time for India to shun this pointless and baseless habit of pointing fingers at Pakistan for every wrong which happens inside it, and instead address its internal issues through dialogue, at least this is the way civilized nations resolve their issues?

Continue Reading

South Asia

What Can the Afghan Government and Taliban Learn from Colombia’s Peace Deal with FARC?

Hamidullah Bamik

Published

on

The experience of Colombia’s peace with FARC has always been the subject of Western experts working on the war in Afghanistan due to the characteristics of Afghanistan’s war akin to Colombia’s war.

It is argued that the insurgent movement with a political rivalry to mobilize dissenters to enter the community is a substitute order that rebels attempt to fundamentally change the infrastructure of society. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Afghan Taliban insurgents can be put into such socio-political context.

The FARC, with the full name of Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (in Spanish was formed in the 1960s as the armed wing of the Communist Party of Colombia. The FARC officially separated from the Communist Party of Colombia in 1980 but continued its guerrilla war against the Colombian government. The war between FARC and the Government of the Republic of Colombia lasted 55 years and left dead approximately 250,000 people.

Colombia’s Peace Process

The Government of the Republic of Colombia has made three major and important attempts to build peace in the last thirty years, especially in the mid-1980s and late 1990s, but all failed. But peace efforts that began in Havana, the capital of Cuba in 2012, came to fruition five years later. Ultimately, these efforts effectuated in to the signing of a peace agreement between the Colombian government and FARC on November 24, 2016.

The Colombia’s peace agreement with FARC was rejected by less than one percent in a referendum on October 2, 2016. The results of the referendum showed that 50.2 percent of voters opposed the agreement. But later, many Colombians who were anti-FARC rebels became their supporters. To strengthen further the peace and stability in Colombia, the Colombian government allocated 10 seats to FARC in 2018 and 2022 in the Colombia’s Congress elections.

The success of the peace talks between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and FARC is derived from their mutual agreement on key issues. First, they reached a reciprocal agreement on development of rural areas, especially those areas that were damaged more than other areas during the conflict. Second, they talked about the elimination of drugs and reducing high poverty rates in the peace process and agreed mutually. Third, the Government of the Republic of Colombia concurred with political participation of FARC members in the political process. Hence, they could successfully end their chronic conflicts that took many Colombians’ lives.

Afghanistan’s Peace Process

In November 2001, the Taliban regime was overthrown entirely by the United Nation forces led by the US. Subsequently, the Afghan government and the international community stepped up their efforts to support various plans to undermine the expansion of insurgents and ultimately bring them to the peace process. These efforts include programs such as Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR 2003-2006), United Nation supported Afghanistan New Beginning Programs (ANBP) and its successor the Disbandment of Illegal Armed Groups (DIAG 2005.

When US President Barack Hussein Obama put forward the idea of looking for moderate elements among the insurgent groups in March 2009, the official peace talks in Afghanistan became more important. Unfortunately, all the above peace efforts have not been effective in stabilizing Afghanistan and failed to pursue a meaningful engagement of the involved countries in Afghanistan’s war in the peace process.

Recently, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan declared two truces with the Taliban to encourage them to join the peace process. But unluckily, the Taliban groups not only did not welcome the Afghan government’s ceasefire, except the first truce but also responded with atrocity and intensifying their insurgency. Political experts are inclined to argue that the experiences of the Colombian government’s peace deal with FARC insurgents can aid Afghanistan in reaching a permanent peace deal with the Taliban groups.

The Similarities of Afghanistan’s and Colombia’s War

According to Foreign Policy, the current Afghan war is reminiscent of the Drug War in Colombia and requires a Colombian plan for its termination. The insurgency in Afghanistan is nurtured by an ideological war that is being conducted to bring Afghans under the banner of religion. Conversely, in Colombia, FACR fought with the central government for lucrative sources of money and ways to smuggle drugs. However, it is argued that despite having ideological roots, narcotics is the main financial source of Afghanistan’s insurgent groups.

In 2016, the Global Witness reported that the warlords and Taliban’s earnings from a small Badakhshan region are equal to the total income of the Afghan government’s natural resources sector. The report adds that in 2014, armed groups from two mining areas of Deodarra in Kuran and Munjan districts in Badakhshan province earned about $20 million. It echoes that the ongoing war between the Taliban and the Afghan government is also a war on controlling natural sources like the war between FARC and the Colombian government. Thus, the experiences of the Government of the Republic of Colombia in its peace talks with FARC can help the Afghan government in its peace talks with the Taliban.

The Afghan Taliban groups like the FARC in Colombia, are dwindling in Afghanistan. They still have their local supporters in Afghanistan. Theo Farrell, the professor and executive dean of law, humanities, and the arts at the University of Wollongong, Australia argues that the availability of social resources and the elements that drive and enable military adaptation were the main reasons of Taliban’s successful resurgence after 2001. It projects that still, Taliban groups have a large number of adherents among the Afghan communities. Undoubtedly, they will support the Taliban if the group joins in peace talks with the Afghan government and forms its political faction as did the FARC in Colombia.

The FARC opened negotiations with the Colombian government after decades of armed conflicts. Many of FARC insurgents like the Taliban groups did not believe in the usefulness of the talkswith the Colombian government at the beginning. But they tested their trust and succeeded in this regard. Likewise, the best option for the Afghan Taliban to put into practice their demands is joining the negotiating table with the Afghan government.

The Colombia’s Peace Process Takeaways for Afghanistan’s Peace Process

Perhaps the most important innovation to come out of Colombia’s peace process has been the inclusion of victims. Delegations of victims from both sides of the conflict were invited to come to Havana to recount their experiences. In other words, the Colombian peace process was the first in the world that included a formal role for victims of the conflict—they got to interact directly with the negotiators. The inclusion of victims gave the Colombian government’s peace process its best chance of success. Likewise, Afghanistan’s government can emulate a similar way to succeeding in the peace process with the Taliban. The Afghan government should invite the representatives of the victims of war to the negotiating table so that they can share their stories and gain confidence that their voices are heard in the peace process. 

Ultimately, the need for a comprehensive and lasting peace in Afghanistan requires creating a national and international consensus on the peace process with the Taliban. This is what Colombian President; Juan Manuel Santos did about peace with the FARC rebels. Initially, a national consensus regarding the peace deal was created inside Colombia. Then the Colombian government reached an international consensus for peace with the neighboring countries, the regional and international powers. Similarly, the Afghan government should reach a unanimous agreement on peace talks with the Taliban inside Afghanistan, then with Afghanistan’s neighboring countries, regional and international powers. Doing so, the Afghan government might be able to close the war and insurgency chapter of Afghanistan’s modern history.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy