Thursday, April 26, 2007
Manmohan Singhâs âsimple visionâ for Kashmir
Editorial
The Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, inaugurated the third roundtable conference on Kashmir in New Delhi on Tuesday and aired his vision of splitting the state of Indian-held Kashmir into three: Naya Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. He called it a âsimple visionâ which, he argued, must become âa model of real empowerment of the people and comprehensive security for themâ. But he admitted that this vision could not materialise unless differences with Pakistan were resolved and the âtrust deficit casting a shadow on our relationsâ overcome.
Mr Singh had aired his âsimpleâ vision on Kashmir last year too at the Srinagar University. As he spoke in New Delhi, the Hurriyet Conference (APHC) leaders from Kashmir were conspicuous by their absence: they had boycotted it because, they said, it promised ânothing newâ. Knowing he was not saying something that would inspire the world with its originality, Mr Singh went into his general good wishes for the region where SAARC held out the only sane view of the future.
Mr Singh promised to reduce the troops in Kashmir âin proportion to the threat posed by the terroristsâ and stated that India and Pakistan were discussing a number of proposals on how to solve the Kashmir dispute. But his preferred formulation was that conditions be created for the final solution through normalisation of relations: âEfforts for better relations between the two countries will not be fruitful unless a peaceful environment is created through honouring of commitments made to curb militant activities.â On the other side, for Pakistan âpeace firstâ means resolving the Kashmir issue first.
The four working committees from the last conference were to be ready with their reports but the one dealing with centre-state relations had not finished its work. In the given atmosphere, the âthree part simple visionâ of Mr Singh simply meant creating three small states out of the State of Jammu and Kashmir: the valley of Kashmir would be 95 percent Muslim, Jammu would be 66 percent Hindu and Ladakh would be 50 percent Buddhist.
So far, the Valley has been the centre of revolt, many of the âfreedom-fightersâ wanted to be independent by annexing the Indian and Pakistani parts of Kashmir. Some also wanted the Indian part to go to Pakistan. As the fighting went on with India and Pakistan repeatedly coming close to going to war again, Ladakh and Jammu appealed to New Delhi for a merger with the Union. The politics was clearly religious which was only natural after years of âjihadâ and atrocities by the Indian army.
Then Pakistan thought up the Chenab formula. At first the rumours were that the Vajpayee government might buy it. But then the Indian side rejected it. President Pervez Musharraf reformulated the idea in 2004 in a clever âseven partsâ vision. Five parts, he said, were with India and two with Pakistan. This is how he gave five âgeographicalâ parts to India, separating bits that contained Muslims: Ladakh (the Ismaili part), Kargil/Dras (Muslim), Poonch (contiguous to Azad Kashmir), Jammu (Muslim-majority districts) and the Valley.
Once the âseven regionsâ are agreed, President Musharraf recommends the following course. First, identify the region at stake; second, demilitarise it; third, change its status, to be followed by Indo-Pak joint control, UN mandates, condominiums, etc. The interesting part is that he takes the Ismaili/Shia bits in Ladakh and Northern Areas without regard to the fact that the Gilgit Shias have been fighting against the Pakistan government for the last five years. And Ismailis are the next community in the crosshairs of the jihadis whom President Musharraf cannot control.
What President Musharraf did was to borrow the Chenab Formula and embroider on it. This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistanâs borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu. With the inclusion of Ladakh, which also lies north of the Chenab river, India would be left with approximately 3,000 square miles of territory out of 84,000 square miles.
It is obvious that Mr Singh is not prepared to be very creative about Kashmir although he seems very keen to move the Indo-Pak equation forward. Even if one accepts that Pakistan has to give more ground and move forward to normalisation without making it conditional to Kashmir, the Indian prime minister has been completely without his beans, to use a colloquialism. One knows that status quo governments are usually constipated, but Mr Singh is not open to even mildly laxative ideas on how to make Pakistan love normalisation. So far, an internally troubled Pakistan is going through it as if it were on a dentistâs table getting a tooth extracted without anaesthesia. *
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\04\26\story_26-4-2007_pg3_1
Manmohan Singhâs âsimple visionâ for Kashmir
Editorial
The Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, inaugurated the third roundtable conference on Kashmir in New Delhi on Tuesday and aired his vision of splitting the state of Indian-held Kashmir into three: Naya Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. He called it a âsimple visionâ which, he argued, must become âa model of real empowerment of the people and comprehensive security for themâ. But he admitted that this vision could not materialise unless differences with Pakistan were resolved and the âtrust deficit casting a shadow on our relationsâ overcome.
Mr Singh had aired his âsimpleâ vision on Kashmir last year too at the Srinagar University. As he spoke in New Delhi, the Hurriyet Conference (APHC) leaders from Kashmir were conspicuous by their absence: they had boycotted it because, they said, it promised ânothing newâ. Knowing he was not saying something that would inspire the world with its originality, Mr Singh went into his general good wishes for the region where SAARC held out the only sane view of the future.
Mr Singh promised to reduce the troops in Kashmir âin proportion to the threat posed by the terroristsâ and stated that India and Pakistan were discussing a number of proposals on how to solve the Kashmir dispute. But his preferred formulation was that conditions be created for the final solution through normalisation of relations: âEfforts for better relations between the two countries will not be fruitful unless a peaceful environment is created through honouring of commitments made to curb militant activities.â On the other side, for Pakistan âpeace firstâ means resolving the Kashmir issue first.
The four working committees from the last conference were to be ready with their reports but the one dealing with centre-state relations had not finished its work. In the given atmosphere, the âthree part simple visionâ of Mr Singh simply meant creating three small states out of the State of Jammu and Kashmir: the valley of Kashmir would be 95 percent Muslim, Jammu would be 66 percent Hindu and Ladakh would be 50 percent Buddhist.
So far, the Valley has been the centre of revolt, many of the âfreedom-fightersâ wanted to be independent by annexing the Indian and Pakistani parts of Kashmir. Some also wanted the Indian part to go to Pakistan. As the fighting went on with India and Pakistan repeatedly coming close to going to war again, Ladakh and Jammu appealed to New Delhi for a merger with the Union. The politics was clearly religious which was only natural after years of âjihadâ and atrocities by the Indian army.
Then Pakistan thought up the Chenab formula. At first the rumours were that the Vajpayee government might buy it. But then the Indian side rejected it. President Pervez Musharraf reformulated the idea in 2004 in a clever âseven partsâ vision. Five parts, he said, were with India and two with Pakistan. This is how he gave five âgeographicalâ parts to India, separating bits that contained Muslims: Ladakh (the Ismaili part), Kargil/Dras (Muslim), Poonch (contiguous to Azad Kashmir), Jammu (Muslim-majority districts) and the Valley.
Once the âseven regionsâ are agreed, President Musharraf recommends the following course. First, identify the region at stake; second, demilitarise it; third, change its status, to be followed by Indo-Pak joint control, UN mandates, condominiums, etc. The interesting part is that he takes the Ismaili/Shia bits in Ladakh and Northern Areas without regard to the fact that the Gilgit Shias have been fighting against the Pakistan government for the last five years. And Ismailis are the next community in the crosshairs of the jihadis whom President Musharraf cannot control.
What President Musharraf did was to borrow the Chenab Formula and embroider on it. This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistanâs borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu. With the inclusion of Ladakh, which also lies north of the Chenab river, India would be left with approximately 3,000 square miles of territory out of 84,000 square miles.
It is obvious that Mr Singh is not prepared to be very creative about Kashmir although he seems very keen to move the Indo-Pak equation forward. Even if one accepts that Pakistan has to give more ground and move forward to normalisation without making it conditional to Kashmir, the Indian prime minister has been completely without his beans, to use a colloquialism. One knows that status quo governments are usually constipated, but Mr Singh is not open to even mildly laxative ideas on how to make Pakistan love normalisation. So far, an internally troubled Pakistan is going through it as if it were on a dentistâs table getting a tooth extracted without anaesthesia. *
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\04\26\story_26-4-2007_pg3_1
