Awaking to existing realities in Kashmir

Pakistan OBSERVER, Tue, Oct,09, 2007.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema
 

The Geneva Convention on Kashmir held during the last week of September at the Palais des Nations has adopted many proposals to improve the lives of the Kashmiri people and to facilitate the desired resolution of the ongoing complex Kashmir dispute. The Convention was held concurrently with the 6^th session of the UN Council for Human rights. The Convention was mainly organized by the International Council for Human Rights (Kashmir Center, European Union) and the International Human Rights Association of American Minorities. The Kashmiri people from both sides of the LOC participated in the Convention along with some jurist, scholars, human rights activists, think tanks and NGOs etc. 

After having detailed deliberations the Conventions adopted many proposals including demilitarization, ending violence and stopping human rights violations, access for NGOs, improvement in communication for the Kashmiri people and the establishment of a think tank to monitor and assess the ongoing peace process. While it is difficult to dispute with the intentions of the participants and the nature of proposals, the real question how to deal with Indian intransigency is totally left out. 

Let us discuss the main proposals. The first and the most important one revolves around the demilitarization of the state. There is no doubt that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is heavily militarized. For every ten Kashmiris, there is one Indian soldier. No where in the world one can witness such a heavy concentration of forces as it is currently in the disputed territory of Kashmir? The huge military presence by the Indians has not been able to break the will of the Kashmiri people for what they call Azadi. 

Many good proposals regarding demilitarization of Kashmir have been put forward by various scholars, governments and even the international organization but not a single one has been accepted by the Indians. Sir Owen Dixon the UN representative in the early fifties gave many good feasible proposals but almost all of them were shot down by the Indian authorities though on some proposals even the Pakistani authorities expressed reservations. 

In not too distant past the Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf revived the idea of demilitarization as one of the most important step towards the eventual resolution of the dispute. He even went to the extent of suggesting that if India is unable to agree to a comprehensive demilitarization, the three bordering district could be initially demilitarized but unfortunately the Indians promptly rejected them. With this kind of repeatedly demonstrated attitude, how can the Convention proposal be translated into a practical reality? 

The second important proposal deals with the cession of violence within the state. The proposal suggested that the international organizations such as European Union or the United Nations should try to appeal to the Kashmiri resistance groups to declare ceasefire. While the past has already witnessed a ceasefire by Hizb Ul Mujahideen in July 2000 and such a ceasefire can again be secured provided the Indians extends sincere cooperation. However the main question that needs to be subjected to discussion and analysis deals with how to end violence in Kashmir. 

By all independent accounts it has been established that there exist three sources of violence in Indian held Kashmir. The major sources of violence are the Indian security forces and if demilitarization can be achieved and the number of security forces is substantively reduced, this source of violence can be effectively plugged. Once this is plugged, the resistance group (the second source of violence) would automatically drastically reduce their activities if not altogether abandon them. This is closely linked with the notion of demilitarization. Apart from a Pakistani Prime Minister Jamali who unilaterally announced ceasefire on the LOC in November 2003 which in a way increased sense of security and safety among the Kashmiris, no move has ever been made by the Indian side. 

The proposal dealing with the effective reduction of human rights violation and protection of rights of the Kashmiri people is also linked in some ways with the idea of demilitarization. Almost all violations of human rights in the Indian Held Kashmir are the product of the excesses committed by the Indian security Forces. Many accounts exit that have not only recorded the brutalities of the Indian forces but has also documented many cases of human rights violations. 

Over the years many organizations both the insiders as well as the outsiders, have made regular appeals to the Indian authorities only to experience rebuffs after rebuffs. In the long history of brutal suppression by the Indian security forces, one only comes across of few cases when the Indian government itself took notice of such barbarities but in terms of punishment nothing has really been ever undertaken. For few days such cases are highlighted in the media and then everybody forgets about it. 

The Geneva Convention on Kashmir strongly urged for free access to respected independent NGOs monitoring protection of human rights and counseling the victims. Again this is an idealistic proposal. India has never acceded to such requests in the past and is unlikely to do so now. India has denied access to countries and almost all NGOs even those which are known to be independent in their approaches. 

Perhaps the most interesting proposal of the Geneva Convention was the formation of European Kashmir Think Tank Group. It was decided to establish a Kashmir European Strategic Group (KESG)which would not only monitor the ongoing India-Pakistan peace process but would also make periodic injections of new ideas with a view to encourage the two governments to sincerely work towards the eventual resolution of conflicts. In addition The KESG is also expected to address the Kashmir conflict. 

The formation of KESG now reflects rather late awaking of the European to a major conflict in South Asia which has the seed of major war. Indeed the Europeans have been too deeply involved in sorting out their own internal differences and accommodating new European members within the European Union. So far they have demonstrated not much interest in world peace and have frequently given preferences to their internal affairs than to contributing substantively to the world peace. The major conflicts that have seeds of continuing violence and are pregnant with dangers of major wars are indeed the Kashmir dispute and the Arab-Israeli Conflict over Palestine. 

The 21^st Century has seen some activities by the European in terms of contributing to world peace. The initial focus was on the Palestine issue and now it seems they are beginning to recognize Kashmir’s dangerous situation and its explosive potential. The formation of even a thinking groups regarding the Kashmir dispute appears to me that the European are at last waking up to existing realities. So far their contributions towards the improvement of human rights situation in the Indian Held Kashmir are indeed negligible.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.