Shehla Naz
The Kashmir dispute is one of the oldest on UN agenda. In January 1948, India took the issue of Kashmir to the UN Security Council (UNSC) with three main evident motives; to interrupt the uprising of the people of Jammu and Kashmir; to legitimize her act of illegal occupation and finally to get a dispensation in her favour. India succeeded in achieving her first two objectives right away but the UN took a fair approach and decided for a plebiscite to to decide the future of the people of Kashmir as per their wishes. In that Kashmiris envisaged a ray of hope and found a savior in the form of UN . Conversely, till day the credibility of UN’s promises remains under question. Nothing concrete so far has been done by UN and international community, except mere condemnations of human rights committed by India in IOK .Taking advantage of lukewarm response by UN/UNSC and international community, India has unleashed a reign of terror against Kashmiris. To date the issue demands UN’s decisive role which has succumbed to Indian intransigence. There are many factors that led to ineffectiveness of UN in this regard including limitations of UN, impaired institutional capacity of UN in view of world power politics and Indian filibustering and divisionary maneuvers.
The UN has passed a number of resolutions on Kashmir dispute, but under Chapter-VI of UN Charter which are nonbinding in nature hence cannot be enforced. This indeed is one of the main obstacles to the resolution of the Kashmir dispute and favors Indian political interests. Moreover the institutional capacity of UN remains impaired mainly owing to international power politics, military alliances, strategic alignments and mutual economic interests of major world powers .US having strategic partnership and shared economic/strategic interest with India terms the issue as bilateral dispute so remains least interested. In addition to that India continues to maneuver with the diversion and delaying tactics including efforts to change the legal status of IOK, denigration of UNMOGIP , challenging the legal validity of UNSCRs in view of Simla Agreement, attempts to link Kashmiri freedom movement with terrorism, non-cooperation under the excuse of bilateralism and intransigence against UN efforts etc. On its part, Indian policy has been to gradually incorporate the state into its territory and relegate the UN role for the resolution of Kashmir issue. Moreover, the ratification of the Instrument of Accession by the Constituent Assembly, in 1954, was done disregarding UNSC resolutions. On contrary the UNSC Resolutions 91(1951) and 122(1957) reject the claim of India with respect to ratification . India gradually stopped UN military observers to visit IOK and even questioned legal status and the validity of UNMOGIP. Once Permanent Indian Representative to the UN, Mr Hardeep Singh Puri said that, “UNMOGIP’s role had been ‘overtaken’ by the 1972 Simla Agreement.” However, later on, Mr Martin Nesirky, the spokesperson of the then UN Secretary General (UNSG) , clarified that, “UNMOGIP can only be terminated by a decision of the Security Council”. UNSG Dag Hammarskjold(1965) had clearly stated that ‘the UN decision is valid until it has been invalidated by the organ which took it.’ Recent violation / aggressive posture on LoC, discarding dialogue process and attempts to change special status of IOK in their Constitution demonstrate Indian real intentions and future plans.
India is taking full advantage of war on terrorism mainly to deprive Kashmir liberation movement of its moral high ground while trying to affiliate it with Al-Qaida / terrorism, gain world sympathy as victim of terrorism and declare all the groups participating in Kashmiri movement for self-determination as terrorists in gradual and a systematic manner. By harping on terrorism mantra, India continues to divert attention from her human rights violations in IOK. UN has been striving to solve the issue but so far remains unsuccessful. Various UN mediators were appointed to resolve this issue, but no one was successful in convincing India on a compromise. Sir Owen Dixon, the UN mediator, in his report submitted in 1950, wrote: ‘In the end I became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any such form, or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion, permit of the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled’. Dr. Frank P. Graham, appointed UN representative for India and Pakistan in 1951, submitted five reports, up to March 1953, but his efforts at mediation also proved unsuccessful as India consistently refused to take recourse to all proposals of various statesmen and UN representatives for the holding a plebiscite.
India always sought to put Kashmir issue on back burner from time to time . Notwithstanding that Kashmir case remains strong in that the occupying power itself took it to UN . Both parties to conflict agreed to allow UN intervention and hold plebiscite. India is in consistent effort to paint Kashmir Freedom movement with colour of terrorism to deprive it of legal right of self-determination. UNSC Resolution 1377 clearly requires all the UN member states to address regional conflicts that might be an impediment in fight against terrorism. It is generally known fact that extreme level of frustration on part of many of resistance movements may lead to terrorism, though unjustifiable. Though Kashmiris in IOK have so far passed the test of patience against extreme level of Indian brutality, it must be remembered that they are also human beings.
Currently emboldened by US support, India is hell bent upon suppressing the peacefully articulated Kashmiris’ voice through instrument of violence and other tactics including recent ban on Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front(JKLF). Indian true face and false narrative needs to be exposed. Pakistan requires consistent efforts to draw international attention to human rights violations and inhuman treatment of Kashmiris at the hands of Indian forces being an utter violation of International Human Rights Law and demanding UNSC the return of UNMOGIP and other independent observers into IOK. There is need to persuade world power to establish Commission of inquiry as recommended in recent UNHRC’s report on Kashmir. Major Powers and UN need to seriously revisit their role in resolution of Kashmir issue and find peaceful and fair solution in favor of Kashmiris. Kashmir issue is not only the territorial problem but also a humanitarian issue. Resolution of Kashmir issue is the key to peace and stability in South Asia as also recognized by the then UN Secretary General Mr Ban Ki Moon who said on 04 February 2009 that Kashmir is the main cause of instability in South Asia.
