[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Draft on Kashmir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plebiscite was never held because pakistan did not agree to withdraw its
forces from POK so that plebiscite can be held On both parts of kashmir in a
fair manner.International observers could have been allowed if Pak allowed
that. Holding plebiscite Only in Indian side Kashmir would be futile. Hence
was never held. Now it is too late. Two generations downstream, no body
cares about plebiscite or accession or all that history. People there need
peaceful survival. We have extended friendship, bus trip, train too,
tolerating a bit of fake currency too.If it helps ceasefire and peace why
not involve third party mediation, sitting across the table where major role
players of the world Can take part in those negotiations? Let it be just
what we have known as Indian Kashmir we have at the end.So what? Why not
declate LOC as international border. True that opposition party and many in
the country will raise a BIG hue and cry when it is done by any one in power
But they do not know what they would have done given to them selves such a
problem to solve. May be at the cost of one term power, in the worst case,
those in power should do it.No point in clinging to Imaginary Kashmir,
displaying it in all our Maps and protesting against any international body
that shows cut out portion. It is just hype. Once agreed upon that, may be
there will be some room for withdrawal of terrorist forces from there.
Next step should be open borders like in Europe. But the hostility should be
put to rest.
We don't want third party interference..We don't want to declate LOC as
international border, admitting that part is theirs.Neither do we have guts
to wage a war and snatch all that which is originally ours.When militants
want pak mediation we say ' No we will talk only to militants'.When Pak says
Third party, we say, no only bilateral ! Even if the Govt in power decides
in favour of international border, and then an open border, I don't think
people will suddenly vote it out. Even if so, they will return to power just
like Indira Gandhi came back despite so much in media about emergency. So I
will call upon those in Govt to keep an open mind and resolve the issue in a
way things are settled for ever.. Not in a way it keeps getting precipitated
for
decades till every body get bored again and again of all the murders,
plunder, fire.
POK is never going to be ours unless we wage a SUCCESSFUL war with Pakistan.
That being remote, any way POK Not being with us, declaring it International
Border will enthuse rest of world including Arabs to pressurise Pakistan to
Come to reasonable terms. If Third party.. so what, there will be some
solution to it right ? Why to shy out? Probably opposition also can be taken
in to confidence in these radical shifts asking it an option whether it
would endorse open war Or Nomenclature change to LOC. Whether it would agree
in the larger interest for a third party for talks.
But at the end No more special status.. for Kashmir. It is just part of rest
of India in real sence.
LOC turned to international border, Third party negotiations and ceasefire.
Givinga lead of one full year after ceasefire, if it is good, then Open
borders.
Afterall Why Not ?..
Parameswar
----------
From: Nayak [SMTP:nayak@zdnetmail.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 10:02 AM
To: debate@indiapolicy.org
Subject: Re: Draft on Kashmir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate
it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kashmir for the US Secretary of State
By S.K. Nayak
This is a policy recommendation on Kashmir to the new Secretary of
State
who will be appointed in 2001 by either Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore
depending on
the outcome of Florida hand count and the decision of courts. An
argument
is made here, calling for reinforcement of the new Administration's
orientation towards South Asia, and, Kashmir in particular.
Breakdown of Track II
After the Kargil war and the Kandahar hijacking of its national air
carrier in 1999 India has refused to discuss any issue with Pakistan
until
Islamabad stops support for what India calls "terrorists" and what
Islamabad calls "freedom fighters" in Kashmir. India even denied
visas
recently to a group of Pakistani scientists who wanted to attend a
meeting
in New Delhi on regional rice cultivation. Incidents of attack on
diplomats
and their family members posted at each other's national capitals
have
increased over the last several months. There has been a breakdown
of
normal diplomatic contacts between the two governments. There's also
been a
breakdown of unofficial dialogues between non-officials who are in
contact
with their governments. This Track II diplomacy has a definite role
in
bringing both the governments closer during last several years.
President
Clinton's visit to both the countries in March does not seem to have
broken
the ice. Indian Prime Minister's visit to Washington
last month can be seen in the light of strengthening the relations
between
two countries, no perceptible move towards resolution of Kashmir
crisis
emerged from this visit.
India has seen this year a flurry of high profile visitors.
Mr. Mori came
few months after Mr. Clinton and secured India's participation in a
joint
naval exercise in South China Sea much to the discontent of China.
Mr.
Putin and Mr. Vajpayee agreed to expand the scope of the
relationship
between the two countries. Mr. Bill Gates also came to India to
forge an
alliance with a local IT giant. The United States is in a remarkable
position to act decisively with a long-term policy toward the South
Asian
balance of power equation. India's growing economy, military power,
enduring democratic institutions coupled with its strategic
relationship
with Russia and its less-than-comfortable parleys with China make it
an
ideal candidate to strengthen the American interests. India can be a
regional ally who can leverage China. Pakistan is a necessary issue
that
must be dealt with in any form of alliance with India. However,
stronger
and democratic Pakistan is conducive to India's emergence as a major
power,
which in itself is complimentary to the American interests.
Terrorists led by Osama Bin Laden identify the United States and
India
among the archenemies of Islam. Support of Taliban to Laden and to
send its
terrorists through Pakistan to Kashmir has been mapped for quite
some time.
India continues to play an important role in the war against drugs
production and trafficking. She is an ideal partner for the United
States
in containment of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to
terrorists' hands and to reduce threats from terrorism.
Kashmir is an essential and necessary issue in any policy
initiative in
South Asia. It is a complex one when compared with other areas such
as
Middle East.
Roots of Indo-Pak conflict
The conflict over Kashmir has its roots in 1947-48, when
India and
Pakistan got independence from Britain. Pakistan was created
primarily for
the Muslims of British India. Like many other princely states in
both
countries, Jammu and Kashmir was not a part of the British India.
These
states were to choose between joining India and Pakistan, taking
into
account geographical proximity as well as their religious makeup.
The Hindu
ruler of the predominantly Muslim state of Jammu and Kashmir
initially
wanted to pursue a path of independent statehood, but sought
military
protection from India when invaders from Pakistan occupied his
state. India
dispatched military help to deal with the Pakistanis. The Maharaja
of Jammu
and Kashmir acceded to India immediately after arrival of military
help.
Pakistan considered the accession as illegal. It occupied a part of
the
Kashmir state. At the time, India said that Kashmir's accession
would be
conditional, promising the United Nations that a plebiscite would be
held
to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri people. To date
that vote has not been held, as India argued that Pakistan first had
to
vacate its portion of Kashmir and that the Simla agreement with
Pakistan
concluded in 1972 provided a new mechanism for settling the dispute.
Neither India nor Pakistan wants an independent Kashmir, which may
be the
wish of many in Kashmir. Part of Jammu and Kashmir in Ladakh area
has been
occupied by China after its victory in the 1962 war with India.
Pakistan
has ceded a small part of its Kashmir to China. India and Pakistan
have
fought four wars over Kashmir including the Kargil war of 1999 after
both
the countries had gone nuclear in 1998.
It's about Core Values
Kashmir is a complex issue, not just about real estate and
populations,
but due to competing core values: India as a democratic, secular
state and
Pakistan as an Islamic homeland where democracy gets throttled every
now
and then by military rulers and fundamentalists of rabid variety.
Pakistan's involvement with the Taliban in Afghanistan is a matter
of
concern not only for India but also for US, Russia and the Central
Asian
Republics. Pakistani Army's role in foisting terrorism in Kashmir
and
abetting drug trafficking has been common knowledge for several
years.
People of Indian part of Kashmir enjoy all the fundamental rights
guaranteed under the Indian Constitution and have participated in
various
electoral processes, though electoral malpractices by various
political
parties is a source of grievance among Kashmiris. The crisis in
Kashmir is
ultimately a crisis of democracy.
Till recently American policy toward India and Pakistan was shaped
by the
Cold War. After the departure of the Soviets from Afghanistan in
1989 the
dominant American policy has been one of preventing the two
countries from
going nuclear. On several occasions during the last decade America
intervened to resolve regional crises, the most recent one during
the
Kargil War last year.
There has been no broad U.S. initiative on Kashmir since the early
1960s.
India strongly resents any input of any outside power in Kashmir
crisis.
Pakistanis want outside mediation in the dispute. Islamabad wants a
plebiscite to be held in Kashmir with the options of either choosing
Pakistan or not. India considers Kashmir its integral part and
strongly
objects to any outside mediation. India has suggested the resolution
of the
matter through the Simla Agreement with Pakistan. Lack of
flexibility in
Pakistan's policy towards Kashmir is echoed in India's path to
follow a
path of consistent increase in the level of security forces in
Kashmir.
Recent initiatives by India to talk to terrorist groups has not led
to any
definite results but has forced the ruling political party in
Kashmir to
demand regional autonomy from India and thereby further complicating
the
options before India.
Recent Events
Mr. Putin during his recently concluded state visit to India has
attempted
to reinvigorate Russia's partnership with India, as it had declined
over
the 1990s. He offered unqualified support for a permanent seat for
India on
the UN Security Council. He declared Russian support for the Indian
position against foreign interference in Kashmir. Russia is the only
member
of the nuclear club cooperating with India on nuclear energy
matters.
Despite unrelenting US pressure Russia has pressed ahead with plans
to
build two nuclear power reactors at Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu, India.
Putin's
visit to India's Bhabha Atomic Research Center at Trombay directly
related
to this construction project and reflects Russia's preparedness to
provide
further aid. Indian armed forces depend heavily on Russia, which
provides
up to 70% of India's material.
India has taken steps, during last few weeks, to normalize its
relations
with Iraq by sending a Minster of State to Baghdad for resumption of
civilian air services between the two countries.
In the US Indian-Americans play an important role in the New
Economy. The
Republican campaign has not faired too well in enlisting the support
of
this part of the electorate. If Mr. Bush occupies the White House,
it is
not clear if the Democrats can hold on to the support of
Indian-Americans.
A definite policy of republicans towards India is a sure way to
endear this
community
Options
Kashmir provides an ideal opportunity to US to play an
important role in
the South Asia. Three broad options are presented here.
First, the US does not get involved in the Kashmir
imbroglio, but
furthers its trade interests. This option is not compatible with
America's
role as a hegemon. It has a role in prevention of nuclear war and
its
associated problems in South Asia. A more important concern is
preventing
both India and Pakistan from transferring their nuclear technology
to
undesirable hands.
Second, the US should maintain a comfortable distance from
the Kashmir
crisis in public, but adopts a posture of publicly exhorting both
countries
to resume their dialogue on Kashmir. India needs to be encouraged in
its
efforts to talk to various groups of insurgents. Washington should
privately but actively work towards a resumption of talks, perhaps
by
serving as an informal channel of communication between Delhi and
Islamabad
and providing technical inputs to both countries for facilitating
their talks.
Third approach is to break the Kashmir conflict into a number of
issues
where progress can possibly be achieved without touching upon the
core
problem of plebiscite that defies immediate solution and results in
deadlock and escalation of skirmishes. These issues include a
reduction of
incidents across the Line of Control, withdrawal of forces from the
frozen
wastes of the Siachin Glacier, and improving economic ties between
both
parts of Kashmir. US can facilitate these issues and can offer
technical
assistance for avoiding any unpredictable activity in Siachin or
across the
Line of Control. The Administration at Capitol Hill should reinforce
its
focus on South Asia. Coordination activities in the State Department
should
not attempt to mediate the dispute, but aim at harmonizing American
policies with those of other Departments, serve as a clearinghouse
for
ideas and policies, and promote and facilitate Track II diplomacy. A
well-defined focus in coordination activities will convey the
seriousness
of the Administration towards the issue that may see
several Administrations before any definite progress is made.
Beginnings
have been made and the case is for deepening it without offending
either of
the contending parties.
The way forward
A recommendation is made in favor of the last two options to be
pursued
simultaneously. The Indo-US joint working group on terrorism has met
several times after Clinton's visit to South Asia. India has to
realize
that a stronger and stable Pakistan will only support India's dreams
of
becoming a major player in world affairs. Kashmir holds the key to
that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.
debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:
../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform. debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives: ../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------