Zarvan
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 54,470
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi
This newspaper recently carried a report about the announcement of a $12 billion (800 billion rupees) economic package by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to rebuild the part of Kashmir occupied by India. This announcement came one year after the floods that devastated Kashmir, which has been disputed territory between India and Pakistan for nearly 60 years and over which they have fought three wars.
Omar Abdullah, former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir state, criticized Modi for the package saying that it would not address the political issues of the state. “Prime Minister Modi has made the same mistake of weighing the Kashmir issue in rupees and paise,” he tweeted. It was noteworthy that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, grandfather of Omar Abdullah, supported the accession of Kashmir to the Indian Union at the time of the partition of the subcontinent.
Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a senior Kashmiri leader who opposes India’s rule in the Valley, had planned to hold a “Million March” to protest Modi’s visit to Kashmir. However, Geelani was put under house arrest and was unable to lead the rally as security forces cordoned off his house. He announced then that economic packages had failed to resolve the Kashmir dispute in the past and that such attempts would not succeed in the future.
The Kashmir problem dates back to the time of the partition of the subcontinent when British colonial rulers agreed with the leaders of the Indian National Congress and the All India Muslim League on the division of British India into two nations – India and Pakistan. The partition was based on the two nation theory under which the Muslim majority regions would become part of the new nation of Pakistan while the Hindu-majority regions would remain part of India.
The princely states, which enjoyed autonomy, were left to choose whether to join India or Pakistan after taking geographical and demographic considerations into account. Considering the fact that the majority of people were Muslims, Kashmir was supposed to join Pakistan. However, the Hindu king of Kashmir Maharaja Hari Singh agreed to Kashmir’s accession to India. But Pakistan was vehemently against this as this totally contravened the Independence Document and the Partition Plan, agreed by both sides as the basis for the partition of the subcontinent.
This led to the first war between the two countries and subsequently the United Nations’ intervention as a mediator to enforce a ceasefire and end the conflict. The UN established a body called the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan to investigate the facts that gave rise to the Kashmir dispute and to exercise any mediatory influence in order to carry out the directions given by the Security Council. The UN appointed mediators and arbitrators in order to fix the Ceasefire Line and ensure demilitarization as well as to carry out a plebiscite under UN supervision.
The UN mandate was to appoint a Plebiscite Administrator to supervise a free and impartial plebiscite through which the people of Kashmir would determine which country they wanted to belong to.
Even though both countries agreed to a ceasefire as well as to maintain a Ceasefire Line, the plebiscite did not take place. This was mainly because of breaking the promise made by India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. India’s main justification for not holding the plebiscite was the result of the elections held in Kashmir in which the National Conference was victorious. This party was led by Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, who favored Kashmir’s accession to India. But this election, which scuttled the UN-sponsored plebiscite, was not acceptable to the United Nations, Pakistan and the majority of the people of Kashmir.
The Kashmir problem remains insoluble in the absence of a settlement acceptable to both sides. It has been instrumental in straining bilateral relations between the two neighboring nuclear powers. Every now and then, leaders from one country or the other declare their willingness and determination to solve this problem but to no avail. When Muhammad Ayub Khan came to power in Pakistan, he stated his desire to resolve the dispute through negotiations. He was instrumental in holding a series of talks between the two countries in the 1960s but they did not bring about any positive outcome. The situation led to the second war over the issue in 1965, and a ceasefire came into force after the intervention of the United Nations.
On the other hand, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee became prime minister of India, he expressed his desire to resolve the issue, and subsequently a series of negotiations were held. The talks were halted following the Mumbai terror attacks. India accused Pakistan of being behind the blasts that shook India’s commercial capital. However, Pakistan blamed India, saying that the attacks were the handiworks of some Indian elements.
When Modi became prime minister, he also expressed his desire to solve the dispute and resumed talks at the level of national security advisors of both countries. But these talks were suspended following India’s protest over the meeting of the Pakistan High Commissioner in India with a prominent opposition leader of Kashmir.
The solution to this long-standing problem is the implementation of UN resolutions to hold a plebiscite so that the people of Kashmir can determine their own future. They can either opt for India or Pakistan or to become part of a new independent Kashmir state.
— Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi is a former Saudi diplomat who specializes in Southeast Asian affairs. He can be reached at algham@hotmail.com
Let the people of Kashmir determine their own future
@Khafee
Who care...by the way where is Saudi Arabia?
