Kashmir: Point of Conflict between India and Pakistan - Research Paper Example

Kashmir: Point of Conflict between India and Pakistan Introduction Although some of the modern historians and research scholars consider Kashmir as one of the most dangerous zones in the world, sandwiched between two nuclear nations, the fact remains that it is the God’s own paradise on this earth. Many intellectuals who have visited Kashmir in past and recently describe it as Switzerland of West. The recent conflict is only a few decades old, while Kashmir has a glorious history of several centuries. However, the present conflict has resulted in three major wars between India and Pakistan, Kashmir being the flashpoint for each. While India uses the secular and pluralistic card to retain its part of Kashmir, Pakistan deploys the religious bogey to gain the control of Indian Kashmir. For the people of Kashmir, it is a fight for their identity, as they are not historically aligned to the culture of either country. Pakistan has under its control a sizable part of undivided Kashmir. Pakistani authorities name it as, “Azad Kashmir” Ancient History of Kashmir Kashmir has been the envy of many neighboring states, during past several centuries. The Hindu, Buddhist, Afghan and Mogul rulers left their impact on the culture and social environment for people of Kashmir. Hinduism arrived in Kashmir, around one thousand years back, replacing the Buddhist Monarchies that ruled the region for many centuries. Islamic arrival is the latest and most recent in the history of varying cultural and religious faith for the natives of Kashmir. An Irani sufi saint. ‘Hamdani’ arrived in Kashmir, along with his followers, around four hundred years back. He was responsible for mass conversion of Hindus into Islamic fold, starting with the royal queen, the wife of ruling king ‘vikramadity’. The following centuries saw massive decrease in Hindu population, matched by similar increase in the population of Muslims, in Kashmir. Legacy of present conflict This goes back to the era of undivided India under the British rule. Indian freedom struggle had compelled British monarchy for complete independence to India. Lord Mountbatten was the viceroy deployed by British authorities to look over the strategy for transfer of power. He designed the partition plan along with his assistant Ismay, who was British High Commissioner to India. The policy decision involved partition of Kashmir based on religion. Although Hindus and Muslims participated in the freedom struggle without any grudge against each other, British diplomacy wanted to create a wedge between the two communities. The British Empire was already on decline, during the years of 1945-47, following the World War. The move by British authorities, as executed by Lord Mountbatten, meant to retain their strategic position in the region. Creating a separate Islamic state, from undivided India could serve its purpose of maintaining sound relations with Islamic nations of the Middle and Southeast Asia. Lord Mountbatten was responsible for motivating Indian Muslim League leader Jinnah for demanding a separate nation for Muslims, while Nehru, the Indian National Congress Leader was persuaded to reconcile to the fact of partition. The leader of freedom movement, Mahatma Gandhi played the role of a catalyst, for this transition. .(Chaulia) Kashmir was a misfit While Sardar Patel persuaded many princely states of India to reunite and agree to accession with Union of India, Junagardh, Hyderabad and Kashmir remained the disputed areas, at the time of partition. Kashmir was not ruled entirely by British forces during their rule over India. Moguls had greater influence on Kashmir and its rulers. The Hindu king of Kashmir had to face revolt by Muslims for freedom. Already weakened by such crisis, Patel persuaded the king to sign the accession treaty, which he did unwillingly. However, Kashmir got involved in Indo-Pak conflict by the Pakistani invasion in 1947, as the newly created nation wanted to have control over Kashmir, based on the religious principals of partition.(India-Pak War of 1965) The first conflict started few days after Indian independence, as Pakistan sent tribal pathans to raid the Indian Kashmir. Although local Muslims were against this, they were unable to prevent the resultant brutalities and violence caused by such raids, on Hindu minority. Sardar Patel persuaded Nehru to send air force and army to crush this invasion. While Kashmir was saved, temporarily, it served British diplomacy well, to keep the flashpoint going. This resulted in possession of nuclear warheads by both countries and armed conflict on three occasions, after 1947.(India-Pak War of 1965) People of Kashmir have no say in all this diplomacy, as most of the negotiations between India and Pakistan have not involved them at any stage. Pakistani establishment has always been stressing the point in international forums that Kashmir is the core issue between the two countries.(Chaulia) Back channel diplomacy While India maintained that Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, dialogue process started between the two nations, on the behest of USA and UK. The dialogue started in 1998, with peace, security and Kashmir issues on the agenda. Meeting between two prime ministers followed this and ‘Lahore Deceleration’ was announced during the visit of Indian prime Munster Vajpayee to Lahore in Pakistan. The agreement declared that all issues including that of ‘Jammu and Kashmir’ would be settled amicably through process of dialogue between the two countries. However, Pakistan army did not take this favorably, as army coup in Pakistan followed this. Kargil conflict was the immediate outcome.(wirsing) The back channel diplomacy, keenly monitored by western nations, involved track one and trick two processes. While track one, being the unofficial dialogue progress served the purpose to find an amicable solution, track 2 diplomacy involved formal meetings between high level officials of two countries.(The Kashmiri Conflict) However, efforts of such diplomacy got a jolt, as Gen. Musharaf, Chief of the Army in Pakistan, dethroned Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharief. Taking over the reins, Gen. Musharaf continued with track one diplomacy and the peace process progressed, seemingly well. Retired Pakistani diplomat Mr. Naik recalls that the process had resulted in the formulation of a fixed time table and agenda for reaching a compromise settlement on the issue of Kashmir. (Wirsing) Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus The recent Jehadi movement in Kashmir has its roots in the rigged elections of the state, back in 1980s. The suppression of People’s movements and mass opinion resulted in the outcry for freedom by Kashmiri youth, on a massive scale during 1989-90. Motivated and supported by Pakistani authorities, directly and indirectly, the local Muslim freedom fighters started ethnic cleansing and it resulted in the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus, in one go. The local freedom movement had roots in Pakistan as well, as JKLF and other regional parties operated from its territory of Azad Kashmir. Killing of 24 villagers, belonging to ‘sikh sect’ evoked international anger in 2003, which was the follow-up of December 2001 attack on Indian Parliament. The flashpoint had reached a climax and international agencies, including NGOs played major role in averting the prospects of a nuclear war between the two countries. .(The Kashmiri Conflict) Solution alternatives People of Kashmir want freedom from the rule of both, India and Pakistan. The present thinking of kashmiri intellectuals has learned from the experience of misuse of Kasmiri psyche by Pakistani authorities. One solution could be holding the plebiscite in Kashmir, being the long-term demand of many Kashmiri leaders. However, with the diversity of area and population that the state of Jammu and Kashmir has, it is difficult to obtain a single consensus that can apply to all the regions. The three regions of J&K are Kashmir, Ladakh and Jammu. While Muslim population dominates Kashmir, Jammu has Hindu majority and Ladakh has more Buddhists. The three options provided in the process of plebiscite are annexing of Kashmir with India, Pakistan or remaining free. (kumar) Although people of Kashmir are Muslims and the present, generation is inspired by the foreign Muslim militancy; the majority of Kashmiris will opt for freedom to run the state on their own. While this does not serve the purpose of Pakistani army and rulers, India cannot afford to loose the state. Indian authorities have spent a lot on maintenance of Kashmir and armed forces stationed there, over the decades. The other solution proposed by few political thinkers across the two nations, is the adoption of ‘line of control’ as an international border between the two nations. However, this also cannot be acceptable to both countries as they pronounce their respective claims on territories of erstwhile Kashmir held by each. (Kumar) In fact, Pakistan has annexed some of such areas to China, in the Gilgit region. Latest happenings The recent killings of Indian soldiers, by Pakistani forces along the border and subsequent compliments from Pakistani terrorist elements like Hafiz Sayeed on such inhuman acts have further widened the conflict, reducing the chances of any resolution in the near future. (Shukla) Conclusion The war between two nations has done an irreparable damage to Kashmiri psyche. As the conflict gathered momentum, particular with active local participation, the present generation of Kashmiri youth does not see beyond the culture of violence to attain their goal of total freedom. The uprising in any form in Kashmir is towards this end only. However, there is an urgent need, on the part of both the countries to look into the problem of Kashmir from the viewpoint of local population. Nevertheless, the peace process must continue, as violence has no place in any conflict resolution. The Pakistani-sponsored terrorist attacks on Indian parliament and Taj International Hotel in Mumbai have reduced the chances of any durable solution. Works Cited Chaulia, Sreeram, “India/Pakistan” .Asia Times Online. 21 May 2002, Web. 17 Nov. 2013. Kumar, Susmit. “An Impeding Nuclear War between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.” Susmitkumar online, 1999. Web. 17 Nov. 2013. < Shukla, Saurab “Pakistan’s Dirty Diplomacy” Daily Mail. UK, 10 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Nov. 2013 < http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2260382/Pakistans-dirty-diplomacy-Islamabad-uses-UN-seat-corner-India-Kashmir-leaders-insist-Army-mutilates-corpses.html > “The Indo-Pak War of 1965”. US Deptt. Of State: Office of the Historian, nd. Web. 17 Nov. 2013. < http://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war> “The Kashmiri Conflict”. The Carter Center, 21 Nov. 2002. Web. 17 Nov. 2013. < Wirsing, Robert “Kashmir in the Shadow of War” Google books, 2003. Web. 17 Nov. 2013 Read More