September 23, 2016
By
Saeed Qureshi
Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif’s speech at the 71st Session of UN General Assembly on
21 September instant was resounding and historic by all standards. It exemplified
a robust and unconditional advocacy of the right of self-determination of the Kashmiris.
He called upon
the UN to hold the plebiscite in Kashmir in compliance with the UN Security
Council Resolution 47 passed on 21 April 1948. He vociferously highlighted the grave
atrocities being committed by the Indian army in the Indian held Kashmir.
At the same time,
he offered full cooperation to the international community in resolving the
outstanding Kashmir issue as well as to uproot the terrorism in all forms. He
even pleaded with India for a constructive bilateral interaction to resolve all
the outstanding issues including Kashmir between the two neighboring countries
in an amicable and peaceful manner. Prime minister Sharif has certainly made a
mark and pushed the burden of positive response on India now heavily banking
upon brute use of force to silence Kashmiris.
India and
Pakistan are perennial adversaries and there are several reasons for that
animosity. Pakistan is an Islamic state. It came into existence for the Muslims
of the sub-continent. India is known as a Hindu majority state although it
professes secularism. Democracy has always been there in India barring state of
emergency declared by prime minister Indira Gandhi from 1966-1977.
Out of Pakistan’s
existences of 69 years thus far, it remained under the army and semi-army rule
for 31 years. India and Pakistan fought four wars. These were in 1947(first
Kashmir war), in 1965(all-out war on Kashmir), 1971(Bangladesh) and 1999(Kargil
war). Unfortunately, in all these military confrontations, Pakistan suffered
more harm than India.
The 1971 conflict
was most devastating for Pakistani that resulted in the separation of East
Pakistan and surrender of 90,000 Pakistani military cadres and civilians before
the Indian army. Following the recent
anti-Indian upsurge in Indian occupied part of Kashmir there is a possibility
of another military flare-up as well as unleashing of diplomatic tussle between
the two inveterate neighbors.
The Line of Control(LOC)
between India and Pakistan is a temporary arrangement. It means the control of
the respective governments in their under control areas of Jammu and Kashmir,
Gilgit and Baltistan. Both countries are
obliged under the above-mentioned Security Council Resolution to hold the
plebiscite for eliciting the will of the people of Kashmir either to join India
or Pakistan.
At the time of the
partition of India and Pakistan in 1947, the Kashmir valley was under the Sikh
ruler Maharaj Hari Singh. On his own accord he acceded to India and thus
depriving the Kashmiri people to exercise their right of self-determination to
join either India or Pakistan.
This is the bane
of contention between India and Pakistan, each having claim on Kashmir. But
India has been avoiding such a plebiscite because the majority of the
population in Jammu and Kashmir and Northern areas is Muslim by faith. India’s
fear is that by consenting to the plebiscite, Jammu and Kashmir as well as the Northern
areas would opt for Pakistan. That is why three out of four wars have been
fought over the issue of Kashmir and not through the ballot as was the case in
other states and regions.
In the aftermath
of the 18 Indian soldiers killed in Uri on September 19, in the Indian
Administered part of Kashmir(IAK) there have been inflammatory and coercive
statements from the India leadership of revenge and retaliation. Pakistan COAS
(Chief of Army Staff) General Raheel’s statement that Pakistan would go to any
limit for defense of the country against the foreign aggression, should serve
as a clarion call for India to heed. It is clear that the incumbent government
of PMNL and the armed forces of Pakistan are on the same page as far as the
issue of Kashmir and defense of Pakistan are concerned.
Prime minister
Narendra Modi is known as a fanatic Hindu. He has the infamous backlog of
killing thousands of Muslims in the state of Gujrat when he was the chief
minster then. He has been having whirl-wind tours of the globe for winning
international support and goodwill for India and boosting trade relations. He
has succeeded in inking several important economic and bilateral trade agreements
in favor of India. He has yet to come up with his stance on the continuing
protests of the Kashmiris against the brutalities of the Indian army killing
and maiming scores of local population.
It is hoped that
sensing the changing scenario in the backdrop of the Indian brutal measures in
Indian held Kashmir, he may desist from a military adventure. If he goes for a
military option, it might be a rerun of the 1971 episode but may cause irreparable
setbacks to both Pakistan and India militarily and economically.
In this extremely
volatile and complex situation the reaction and role of the United States is quite
crucial. Of late America has been tilting towards India and abandoning its age
old ally Pakistan by connecting her with terrorism. The fact is that Pakistan
is not sponsoring terrorism but a strong bulwark in stopping it. There is clear-cut
leaning of USA towards India as evidence by crucial multifarious agreements one
of which is known as U.S.–India Civil Nuclear Agreement. America is the second
largest trade partner of India.
In case of
Kashmir it is not Pakistan alone but the world community that supports the legitimate
cause of Kashmiris and the inhuman treatment by India. How long half a million
Indian army would keep the Kashmiris at bay and silence them by bullets and
barrel of gun.
It is to be hoped
that America would prefer to play the role of a neutral mediator and use her
influence in prevailing upon India to desist from use of army to subdue the Kashmiris
but agree to a plebiscite for permanent solution of this thorny issue hanging
fire for the last 69 years.
It is time for
both the neighbors to desist from wasting their resources and manpower on
mutual destruction and annihilation. With the resolution of Kashmir dispute
both the countries can enter into a phase exemplary peace, friendship and
leading partners in trade and tourism. Let them convert the sub-continent into
an abode of peace and fraternity.
Both India and
Pakistan are beset with serious problems such as grinding poverty, corruption degradation
of life, poor governance etc. The money saved from wars can be diverted to improve
the lives of the citizens on both sides of the divide. India in comparison to
Pakistan has another grave problem of huge population estimated to be 1.20
billion. It is one billion or six time more than that of 200 million of Pakistan.
Its area of 3.3 million sq. km is three fold more than that of Pakistan’s 881000
sq. km.
Despite “impressive economic growth during recent
decades, India continues to face socio-economic challenges. India contains the largest
concentration of people living below the World Bank's international
poverty line of US$1.25 per day. 30.7% of India's children under the age of
five are underweight. 15% of Indian population is undernourished. [ In comparison
21.04% of the population of Pakistan lives below the international poverty line
of US$1.25 a day.
No comments:
Post a Comment