Before going towards the proposal of Kashmir’s conflict, I consider it is important to discuss the history of the conflict. Pakistan and India achieved independence on 14th and 15 August 1947 respectively and after conquering freedom from British Rule both of the two new dominions wanted to keep control of the acceding willing independent States ruled under Nizam’s Order. Kashmir was also one of them but interestingly the majority of the population of Kashmir belongs to the religion of Islam while the ruler was the professor of Hindu Religion. The majority of the population were willing to accede Kashmir with Pakistan while India occupied it through manipulations and intrigues involving Maharaja Patiala initially and then slowly roping in Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir and Sheikh Abdullah, a popular leader of Kashmir. Both were hoodwinked with false promises and dream of secular India that proved to be a mirage. Hari Singh wanted Kashmir to remain independent. The growing Indian clandestine political activity sent alarm bells to the newly created independent state of Pakistan.
Very little could be done by Pakistan´s shocked Governor-General M A Jinnah whose army Chief General Douglas Gracy preferred to act on the orders received from Governor General of India Lord Mountbatten. An act in desperation by a Kashmiri Major Khurshid Anwar to stop India´s occupation plan lacked initial support from Pakistan army which, if provided, would have put Kashmir in Pakistan’s lap lock, stock and barrel. Hari Singh succeeded his uncle Maharaja Pratap Singh, and ascended the throne on October 14, 1925. He manoeuvred to maintain his independence by playing India and Pakistan by signing standstill agreements with both the countries. Firmly in control after occupation, using Hari Singh to the hilt internationally, India terminated and dispensed with Hari Singh’s rule in 1951, asked him to move to Bombay for the rest of his life till he died there on April 26, 1961.
In my opinion, India puts all its eggs in one basket; exiled Maharaja to rot in Bombay and sent Abdullah in different jails of India which implied the end of his political career and limit his influence. The purport accession based by India on the loyalties extended by Maharaja and Abdullah smashed to smithereens exposed India’s blatant lies. I think that the authorities from India, due to frustration, are now toying with the idea of creating regionalism, communalism and division among people, hoping to complicate the issue further.
Today Kashmir is a divided in to two parts occupied by India & Pakistan respectively. One part of Kashmir known as Jammu Kashmir is occupied by India (IoK) while the other part known as Azad Kashmir is apparently independent but in real occupied by Pakistan (PoK).
Constitutional Law & Kashmir Issue:
As per the study, the constitution of India Article 370 claims that Rules and order related to Kashmir will be drafted with the consent of Kashmiri Government while being picked by Indians and Occupied by Indians the Article 1 of Jammu and Kashmir Constitution narrates that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India. Article 5 states that the executive and legislative power of the State does not extend to matters except those with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws for the State under the provisions of the Constitution of India. These provisions cannot be amended.
While Pakistan have taken a soft stance on the issue of Kashmir as per the Constitution of Pakistan under Article 257 utters that when the people of state of Jammu and Kashmir decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and that state shall be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of that state. The stance of Pakistan occupied Kashmir is very much close to the reality means that Pakistan have not forced these peoples to carry forward the will and stance of Pakistan, the Constitution of Azad Jammu and Kashmir in its preamble enunciates as whereas the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir is yet to be determined in accordance with the freely expressed will of the people of the State through the democratic method of free and fair plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations as envisaged in the UNCIP Resolutions adopted from time to time.
Solution of the Kashmir Conflict:
I think that a plebiscite with free consent of locals of Kashmir under the United Nations Charter is the only solution by which the issue of Kashmir could be resolved. UN under an organ like Trusteeship Council has to take the charge of both parts of Kashmir under her custody and the troops of Pakistan and India along with the other agencies should be ceased to play any role in the politics of both territories, and then the people of Kashmir (Both IoK & PoK) are asked to decide whether they want to join India or Pakistan or even they want to enjoy a sovereign and independent status. To me with the best of my knowledge and conscience this is the solution that can curtail the mass killings and wide spread human rights violation that the Residents of Kashmir have had faced up till now.
All the three parties of the plebiscite i.e. India, Pakistan and State of Kashmir should be legally bound to accept the verdict and outcome of the plebiscite and the party who went against the version of referendum will be considered as oppressor and insurgent. Under the same Charter of UN proceedings should be initiated against the insurgent state and the rule of Majority and free will should be the one that should prevail.
Latest posts by Pau Petit (see all)
- What Textiles, Wars and Earthquakes Have in Common - 26 November 2016
- A proposal of a solution to the Kashmir conflict - 5 September 2014
- Youth Unemployment - 18 June 2013