10 - 16 January 2002
Issue No.568
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 10 - 16 January 2002 Issue No.568 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Janus-faced Kashmir
A long-running sore since partition, Kashmir is the focus of not one, but two ongoing conflicts, writes Iffat Malik
Kashmir is back in the headlines as yet again Indian and Pakistani forces square up for what could be their fourth full-scale war. Forced back into the spotlight in October with the assault on Kashmir's State Legislative Assembly by suicide bombers, the Kashmir conflict was last in headlines two years ago, when Kashmiri militants battled Indian troops in the peaks of Kargil.
Villagers sit on the back of a truck before heading out of Wagha, Pakistan. Thousands of people living along the Pakistan India border, fled their homes fearing war. The two nuclear neighbours have increased a military buildup along their border after India accused Pakistan of supporting terrorists (photo: AP)The Kashmir conflict can be divided into two closely intertwined, but nonetheless distinct disputes. On the one hand there is the international dispute between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir, which has been running hot and cold since partition in 1947. On the other hand, there is the internal ethnic conflict between Kashmiri Muslims and the Indian government. Essentially an armed separatist movement, this conflict is based largely in the Kashmir Valley, in Indian Kashmir, and has been under way since 1989.
When British India was divided into its two successor states of India and Pakistan in 1947, the many hundreds of princely states -- nominally independent kingdoms -- were given the option to join either state. In making their choice, they were to bear in mind geographical contiguity and population. For most, the choice was therefore very straightforward. The state of Jammu and Kashmir, one of the largest princely states, had a less clear-cut option. It bordered both India and Pakistan and could therefore join either. Population-wise Jammu and Kashmir had a Muslim majority, but there was a significant Hindu community and it was ruled by a Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh.
Singh himself favoured independence, but following an invasion by Pakistani insurgents from the west, he eventually signed an Instrument of Accession to India. Indian troops entered the state from the east, and were soon in combat with insurgents, as well as regular Pakistani forces. That first Indo-Pakistani war ended with a cease-fire in 1948, following which Pakistan controlled one third of the state -- renamed Azad (free) Kashmir -- and India two-thirds.
India and Pakistan went to war over Jammu and Kashmir again in 1965. That conflict spread to their international border before outside intervention brought about another cease- fire. In 1971 a conflict which started over East Pakistan/Bangladesh also spread to Kashmir. The line dividing Indian and Pakistani territory has since come to be known as the Line of Control (LoC).
Islamabad and New Delhi have maintained their respective claims to the state since 1947. Pakistan repeatedly demands the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions on Kashmir, which call for a plebiscite. Pakistan clearly anticipates that the Muslim majority would vote for accession to Pakistan. India, on the other hand, claims that the Instrument of Accession signed by Hari Singh made the state a legal and permanent part of the Indian Union. It therefore rejects any kind of outside interference.
More than 56 years into this international dispute, positions on both sides have become only more entrenched. The original reasons for India and Pakistan wanting the state have been enhanced by the burden of history. Jammu and Kashmir is a test of the two-nation theory on which partition was based: that Muslims and Hindus cannot live together. The state's location also gives it vital strategic importance. Resolving the international dispute will require compromise by both India and Pakistan on their long-held positions -- something neither side appears willing to do.
Kashmir's internal ethnic conflict has been ongoing since 1989. The majority of Kashmiri Muslims in Indian Kashmir appeared content in the early years after partition. Their charismatic and popular leader, Sheikh Abdullah, was strongly pro-India. Under a special constitutional arrangement negotiated with the Indian government, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was to enjoy a high degree of autonomy from the centre. Under the agreement, the state government was to have control of everything but defence, foreign affairs and communications.
But ultimately, the state was not given the kind of autonomy it had envisioned and it seemed that the region was gradually being integrated into the Indian Union. Allegations that India was rigging elections to foster pliant, pro-centre rulers were rife.
What appeared to be an erosion of the region's autonomy was only one part of massive socio- economic changes. Kashmiri Muslims were becoming better educated and this raised their expectations in terms of job opportunities and political rights. They were also becoming more aware of political developments further afield, like the Afghan jihad and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Endemic corruption and India's reluctance to let the state become financially strong combined to produce negligible economic development. Graduates streaming out of colleges and universities could not find work and this only added to frustration.
In 1987 the National Conference, the traditionally pro-autonomy Kashmiri party, allied itself with the Indian Congress Party. This created a political vacuum that was filled by Islamist parties, although they never managed to gain power through elections. This led Kashmiri Muslims, encouraged by the example of the Afghan mujahidin (holy warriors), to turn away from the ballot box and take up militancy. In this respect, the Kashmiri Muslim separatist movement arose indigenously.
Islamabad claims it only provides moral, political and diplomatic support to the Kashmir cause, but it is common knowledge that Pakistan also gives material help to militant groups. Pakistan's growing involvement is clear from the fact that the pro-independence militant groups that dominated the beginning of the insurgency have been displaced by pro-Pakistan groups.
Twelve-plus years of conflict have taken a heavy toll on the Kashmiri people. The valley's small Hindu community, the Pandits, who traditionally lived in harmony with their Muslim neighbours, have fled. Tourism, the main source of income, has dried up. Thousands have been killed and injured, or otherwise suffered trauma because of the ongoing conflict, and militants seize on allegations of human rights abuses by Indian security forces to fuel Kashmiri Muslim anger.
A solution to the ethnic conflict in Indian Kashmir could lie in Kashmiri Muslims abandoning their demand for secession in exchange for New Delhi allowing genuine autonomy. So far, however, neither side has given an inch on their demands. Resolution of the internal conflict therefore appears as unlikely as that of the international Indo-Pakistani dispute.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page