Kashmiris: determined to win freedom

The non-resolution of the Kashmir dispute in conformity with the aspirations of the people of the state and the UN resolutions on the subject, even after 68 years of the partition of the Subcontinent, has not dampened the spirit and resolve of the people of Kashmir to win their freedom.
The observance of ‘Accession to Pakistan Day’ every year on July 19 to commemorate the passing of a resolution on the subject by the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference in 1947 on the same date amply demonstrates this irrefutable reality. The resolution adopted at a convention of the party in Srinagar said: “The Convention of Muslim Conference has reached the conclusion that geographical conditions, 80 percent of Muslim population, important rivers of Punjab passing through the state, language, cultural, ethnic and economic relations and contiguity of the state with Pakistan made it imperative to merge with Pakistan.”
This resolution, coming in the wake of the announcement of the Partition Plan and immediately before the formal Independence not only reaffirmed the basic principles enunciated in the Partition Plan regarding the fate of the princely states but also spelled out in unequivocal terms the wishes of the people of Kashmir to join Pakistan. The observance of the Accession to Pakistan Day in Occupied Kashmir and all around the world where Kashmiris live, the recent wave of protest demonstrations in Kashmir against the Indian occupation and the raising of Pakistani flag during the demonstrations, strongly repudiate Indian claims that Kashmir is an integral part of India.
It is pertinent to point out that the Indian move was strongly rejected by UN resolutions 91 and 122 passed in the wake of Indian machinations to undermine the UN resolutions on the subject. These resolutions reiterated that the question of the accession of Kashmir cannot be resolved by any means other than those enunciated in the UN resolutions on the subject.
The Indians negated their own stand on the Kashmir being an integral part of India by accepting it as a disputed territory in clause 6 of the Simla Agreement signed between the two countries on July 10, 1972 in the wake of 1971 war. Article 6 of the agreement says: “Both governments agree that their heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representative of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations”.
Unfortunately, the Indians have never shown honesty of purpose in resolving this issue and have used varying tactics to suspend or scupper the process of dialogue. India has always remained evasive on the core issue of Kashmir. The Indians maintain that in view of the Simla Agreement Pakistan cannot internationalise the Kashmir dispute. This Indian stance, like her other vacillating positions on the issue is also divorced from the legal realities involved in the issue. In article 1 of the Simla Agreement it has been agreed by the two sides that principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.
As is evident, the bilateral agreement does not change the status of the dispute. It also does not preclude the possibility of invoking UN resolutions and raising ithe dispute at the UN in case the bilateral agreement fails to deliver. Article 103 of UN Charter says: “In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the members of the UN under the present charter their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present charter will prevail” What that means is that the UN resolutions on Kashmir will take precedence over all other international agreements on the same issue. So Pakistan is very much within its right to invoke UN resolutions, after having been frustrated to find a solution through a bilateral agreement.
The UN resolutions on Kashmir adopted under chapter VII of the UN charter remain legally binding on the parties to the dispute. Article 25 of the UN Charter reiterates the obligatory nature of the UN resolutions and authorises the UN to enforce its decisions and resolution through military means or by any other means necessary; for examples, the powers that the Security Council used in the Korean War and in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991. It is abundantly clear from the foregoing that the legal status and obligations of the parties to the dispute under UN resolutions and that of the Security Council to have them implemented remain unaffected.
The Indians have again changed their stance on the issue by preferring the theory that there are only two parties to the dispute, Pakistan and India; a position taken in the backdrop of meeting of Hurriyat leaders with the Pakistani high commissioner in New Delhi. This meeting was used as an excuse to suspend the scheduled secretary-level talks between the two countries that were agreed to in a meeting between Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif when the two leaders met on the occasion of Modi’s inauguration as prime minister of India. This indeed is a bizarre proposition and a flagrant violation of the UN resolutions which invariably emphasise the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir and deciding the question of accession through a UN-sponsored plebiscite. The dispute is about the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir; how can they be excluded from any arrangement regarding deciding their fate and the question of accession?
It has now become an almost predictable pattern of India’s response to peace overtures to make commitments on resolutions of outstanding issues and normalisation of relations whenever the leaders of the two countries have an opportunity to meet and then wriggle out of those commitments on one pretext or the other to perpetuate the stalemate. In the wake of the Delhi meeting between the two leaders, besides postponing the dialogue, hostilities along the LoC were fomented to vitiate the atmosphere for peace negotiations.
Now after the Ufa meeting and agreement to work together for building bonhomie between the two countries and to fight the scourge of terrorism together, a similar situation has been created along the LoC and through the violation of Pakistan’s airspace, forcing the Pakistani forces to down an Indian drone. These are certainly very discouraging developments and make it crystal clear that the Indians are not at all interested in normalising relations with Pakistan, and the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
It is time the international community and the UN took notice of the atrocities committed by the Indian armed forces in Kashmir – as also enunciated in the recent Amnesty International report – and use their influence on India to take steps towards the resolution of the Kashmir dispute. India would do this if it is really interested in peace in the region and wants to forestall the possibility of a nuclear conflict in the region. Peace and security in the region will remain elusive without the resolution of the Kashmir issue. Neither the people of Kashmir nor those of Pakistan can afford to forego their principled and legal stance on the issue.
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Email: ashpak10@gmail.com