How far India would succeed in sustaining this bold offensive posture depends on its ability to expose and isolate Pakistan internationally.
Following the arrest of some 500 youths demanding the release of a top political activist Baba Jan, large scale protests had rocked Pakistan Occupied Kashmir’s Gilgit-Baltisan region- the only Shia dominated area in a predominantly Sunni Pakistan. And a US based Gilgit-Baltisan National Congress, reacting to the situation, said Pakistan‘s withdrawal from POK would help resolve the Kashmir issue. It may sound farfetched.
However, the Indian Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar, in a letter dated August 25 to his counterpart in Pakistan Aizaz Ahmed Chaudhury, made the Government of India position, for the first time, unambiguous sending a clear message to the neighbour who adopted terrorism as instrument of state policy. He made it clear that the dialogue could be only on cross border terrorism and Pakistan vacating “illegal occupation of the Indian state of J&K.” When we talk about Kashmir problem, we must consider the five parts of J&K- Jammu, Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, POK and Gilgit-Baltistan. We have been defensive on the Kashmir issue all these years. It is high time we stopped soft peddling the issue, talked tough and took offensive diplomatic posture.
When Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947, in the face of invasion from armed bandits across the border, joining the J&K into the Union of India, there was no condition attached. The Indian army should have driven out the invaders completely from the State. It was at Gandhiji’s instance that the fighting was stopped midway. Had the invaders been compelled to retreat completely from the State, Kashmir would not have become such a serious issue between Pakistan and India.
And it was Mountbatten who persuaded Nehru to take the Kashmir issue to the UN. However, the UK ambassador to the UN Noel Baker made a statement in the UN denying India’s charge that Pakistan was aiding the raiders in Kashmir. Mountbatten sent a cable to Prime Minister Attlee disapproving the developments at the UN. The cable read: “Any prestige that I may previously have had with my Government has of course been largely lost by my having insisted that they should make a reference to the UNO with the assurance that they would get a square deal there.” Having insisted on referring the Kashmir issue to the UN, Mountbatten made no effort to prevent his Government at home from turning it into a cold war issue. He betrayed Nehru. Even the idea of plebiscite in Kashmir originally was that of Mountbatten. Nehru was prepared to hold plebiscite in good faith provided J&K was cleared of all the invaders and Pakistan stopped assisting them and vacated the illegally occupied territory of the State. And with Pakistan joining the western military alliance system, membership of the SEATO and the Baghdad Pact and acceptance of massive military aid from western powers, its position vis-à-vis Kashmir had changed.
Nehru seemed to have realised the mistake of referring the Kashmir issue to the UN. When Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal in July 1956, it precipitated a major international crisis in the Middle East. Britain and France attacked Egypt, followed by Israel, because, according to them, Nasser’s action constituted “a serious threat to the freedom of navigation.” Nasser wanted to take the issue to the UN. It was Prime Minister Nehru who dissuaded him from taking the Suez Canal crisis to the UN and helped in finding a negotiated settlement.
At last the MEA has taken an unequivocal stand. It would definitely put Pakistan on defense, making it to rethink on its policy of promoting terrorism. How far India would succeed in sustaining this bold offensive posture depends on its ability to expose and isolate Pakistan internationally. It is said, “a diplomat is an honest man sent abroad to lie for his country.” That is what Abdul Basit, Pakistan High Commissioner in India, has been doing. He made a fool of himself by observing Pakistan Independence Day- August 14- as Independence Day of Kashmir. India has been restraining unnecessarily in spite of Pakistan carrying uninterrupted malicious propaganda against India on Kashmir. If Kashmir is the legacy of Partition, so is Baluchistan. In fact, Jinnah had recognised Baluchistan’s independent status before he obtained its accession.
Pakistan’s controlled territory has been a hotbed of terrorists and militants who think of Kashmir as the unfinished agenda of Partition. They don’t realise Pakistan founded on religious identity itself is on the verge of further breaking up. Its majority seceded in 1971, resulting in the birth of Bangladesh. Baluchistan that accounts for three-fifths of the landmass is waging war against Pakistan. Sind Province also wants to secede. The Mouhajeers from India who migrated to Pakistan are second class citizens.
The solution to Kashmir coldrum lies in identifying and isolating the separatists and militants who are drafting the innocent children to sub-serve their vested interest. It is a serious crime, ruining the future of children. Left to them, they would create chaos and permanent law and order problem. It is a positive development that in a bid to end the cycle of violence in the valley, the central agencies have identified some 400 militant leaders fuelling protests for crackdown under the Public Safety Act. Even the Supreme Court, while hearing the Petition of Panthers Party Chief Bhim Singh on August 26, sent a tough message to the Centre: “Help those striving for peace and book those who are fomenting trouble or inciting violence.”
It is important to ensure the separatists and militants, who receive moral, financial and military support from across the border, are not given leverage. Their bogey of ‘azadi’ is a diversion tactic. Has anybody defined what ‘azadi’ is? Everyone interprets it in his own way. How is that the killing of Burhan Wani, in an encounter by the security forces, has resulted in the whole valley coming to a standstill for more than 50 days now? What is ‘azadi?’ Is it secession from India? Is it merging of the J&K into Pakistan? Or is it Talibanisation and establishing an Islamic State with religious fanatics destroying freedom and democracy? The misguided youth need to be reached out to with hard facts and evidence to free them from the clutches of terrorists, militants and the separatists. This is the real challenge.
The Union government must not waver in the firm stand that it has now taken vis-à-vis Pakistan and terrorism. It is time for hard talk and action. We cannot afford to allow the agent provocateurs to hold the state to ransom. The unprecedented curfew since July 9 has cost the state and the nation heavily, with some 6000 and 3000 civilians and security personnel injured and more than 70 persons dead, besides depriving the livelihood to the people. The State, the Centre and the entire spectrum of political classes should reach a consensus as to how to douse the fire when an all party delegation visits the Valley.
