In an unprecedented show of exemplary wisdom and timing, Prime Minister Modi has put to rest vexed issues related with special status of ‘OUR PART’ of J&K in less than 24 hours. What an outstanding demonstration of ‘Political Generalship’!
Having resolved the ‘Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) as the western powers call this region, it is time we transferred our attention to resolving the ‘Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) issue.
Let me state with all professional honesty, expertise and experience at my command; We cannot wrest POK from Pakistan by use of brute force, the Military Option. There are only two alternatives; firstly we accept POK as it is at present or secondly we seek mediation from friendly foreign countries viz Russia, Israel, USA etc to pressurize and/or convince Pakistan to move out of POK.
The word ‘Mediation’ spoken in the context of resolving J&K imbroglio between India and Pakistan invites wrath and condemnation from all quarters in India, be it a politician, bureaucrat, Military Person or an ordinary citizen. Our irrational approach towards mediation as a possible and/or probable option has been an issue of intrigue to me for all these years, specially after 1971 war and Shimla Accord.
Let us look at the facts with objectivity without any intention to denigrate our past decision makers. A simple but startling fact is that it is ‘WE THE INDIANS’ sought mediation from the United Nations when Pt Nehru approached the UN in 1949. Existence of United Nations Mobile Observer Group India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) is an unquestionable testimony of the same.
In spite of nearly 70 years of continued state of violence, unrest and military engagements at regular intervals interspersed with talks and visits by top political leaders, India and Pakistan are nowhere near resolving the issue.
Apart from approaching UN in 1949, Pt Nehru pleaded (almost begged) with the then US administration to help us face the Chinese onslaught in 1962. Excerpts from Pt Nehru’s letter to POTUS will leave no one in any doubt that we as a nation have approached for mediation and/or help in the past.
Excerpts:
The pleading telegrams Nehru sent to Kennedy in November 1962 make very distressing reading. These are no longer classified. I quote one of them in its melancholy entirely.
“Dear Mr. President,
“Within a few hours of despatching my earlier message of today, the situation in the North East Frontier Agency Command has deteriorated still further. Bomdila has fallen and the retreating forces from Sela have been trapped between the Sela Ridge and Bomdi La. A serious threat has developed to our Digboi oil fields in Assam. With the advance of the Chinese in massive strength the entire Brahmaputra Valley is seriously threatened, and unless something is done immediately to stem the tide, the whole of Assam, Tripura, Manipur and Nagaland would also pass into Chinese hands.
I, therefore, request that immediately support be given to strengthen our air arm sufficiently to stem the tide of Chinese advance.
I am advised that for providing adequate air defence, a minimum of 12 squadrons of Supersonic All Weather Fighters are essential. We have no modern radar cover in the country. For this also we seek your assistance. Our need is most immediate. The U.S. Air Force personnel will have to man theses fighters and radar installations while our personnel are being trained. US fighters and transport planes manned by U.S. personnel will be used for the present to protect our cities and installations from Chinese air attacks and to maintain our communications. We should, if this is possible, also like U.S. planes manned by U.S. personnel to assist the Indian Air Force in air battles with the Chinese Air Force against Chinese communications lines, supplies and troop concentration may lead to counter air action by the Chinese.
Any air action to be taken against the Chinese beyond the limits of our country, e.g. in Tibet, will be taken by I.A.F. planes manned by Indian personnel.
We are confident that your great country will, in this hour of our trial, help us in our fight for survival and for the survival of freedom and independence in this sub-continent as well as the rest of Asia. We on our part are determined to spare no effort until the threat posed by Chinese expansionist and aggressive militarism to freedom and independence is completely eliminated.
“With kind regards,
“Yours sincerely,
“Sd/- Jawaharlal Nehru.”
Regards,
Chanakyan precepts of Military Strategy strongly advocate seeking ‘help’ from ‘friends’ in international arena to resolve/tide over national security related issues. Exporting entire fleets of ‘BIG TICKET’ platforms from international ‘friends’ is one such act. Why then are we so stuck up when it comes to seeking mediation to resolve the J&K issue?
Few examples of mediation/direct support to our stand on various issues, J&K included are listed below:-
- On 22nd June, 1960 Irish proposal of handing over the ‘INDIAN OCCUPIED KASHMIR (IOK)’ to Pakistan was considered by the UN Security Council. Permanent members of UNSC USA, UK, CHINA and France voted for the proposal and were supported by the then three non-permanent members, Chile, Ireland and Venezuela. The day was saved for India when the then USSR representative in UN ‘VETOED’ the proposal. Coincidentally it was 100th VETO used by USSR in UNSC.
- Incidentally 99th VETO by the then USSR in UNSC was also in our favour when the matter of GOA annexation was brought in for consideration at UNSC.
- After 1965 war Indian PM flew to Tashkent to meet Pakistan dictator Field Marshal Ayub. The meeting took place under the ‘umbrella’ of the then USSR leadership. Wasn’t that mediation?
- After attack on Parliament on 13th December, 2001 there were SEVEN VISITS by high ranking US officials to India including the then Secretary of State. Wasn’t that mediation?
An ordinary Indian views the J&K fiasco in two entirely different but inter-related dimensions. These are:-
Firstly, the issue of special status to J&K by virtue of inclusion of provisions of Article 35A and 370. Let us briefly examine as to what did the draconian and perverted provisions of Article 370 meant for India. Facts are listed below (adapted):-
- Jammu – Kashmir’s citizens have dual citizenship.
- Jammu – Kashmir’s national flag is different.
- In Jammu – Kashmir it’s not a crime to insult India’s national flag or the national Symbols!
- The order of the Supreme Court of India is not valid in Jammu – Kashmir.
- Parliament of India may make laws in extremely limited areas in terms of Jammu – Kashmir.
- In Jammu-Kashmir, If a Kashmiri woman marries a person of any other state of India, Kashmiri citizenship to that female ends! In contrast if a Kashmiri woman marries a person from Pakistan that person will get citizenship of Jammu – Kashmir.
- RTI does not apply in Kashmir. RTE is not implemented .CAG does not apply. Indian laws are not applicable.
- Sharia law is applicable to women in Kashmir. There are no rights to panchayats in Kashmir.
- Indians of other states cannot buy or own land in Kashmir. Minorities in Kashmir [Hindus and Sikhs] do not get 16% reservation.
- Pakistanis gets Indian citizenship if they marry a girl from Kashmir.
- Jammu – Kashmir’ Legislative Assembly’s term is 6 years. Whereas its 5 years for the States of India.
Blaming the British for J&K fiasco is only partially true. Most of the problems are of indigeneous nature. Articles 35A and 370 were not created by British. Rogue leaders of J&K, the ‘Abdullahs and ‘Muftis’ are the main architects of the current state of unrest.
Sheikh Abdullah and his future generations thrived on this irrational legislation ably supported by the Mufti’s and an invertebrate political outfit of India, which ruled for more than five decades.
Finest example of how mediation can resolve the most complex issues was ‘CAMP DAVID ACCORD’ brokered between Arabs and Israelis with USA acting as mediator. It is a different matter that pseudo intellectuals of our great nation, whose supposed speciality/expertise lies in international relations not only advocate ‘NO MEDIATION ON J&K’ but also advocate the flawed precept that during the Cold War era, Moscow bailed New Delhi out of tricky situations (because we were a weak nation) by vetoing UN resolutions, but an increasingly powerful India no longer needs that backup. Obviously they have never read Chanakyan postulates dealing with maintaining international relations from position of strength.
Mediation to resolve POK issue will place greater pressure on Pakistan rather than on India, as is often perceived. In any case mediation does not imply that mediator’s views/recommendations have to be adopted in toto. Iran nuclear deal is an example of such options available to all sovereign nations. Placing too much emphasis on possible outcome has actually blinded us from considering mediation as an option. If we as Indians (common citizens like me or Leaders governing the country) cannot come to terms and accept that bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan will never resolve the vexed issue, we shall continue to search for ‘a black cat in a dark room, which is not there’. Turmoil in J&K actually weakens our case; reasons for such turmoil notwithstanding.
Nay sayers to mediation must consider the (un)likely prospect of Pakistan succeeding to bring the J&K issue in UNSC and the P-5 vote for the proposal. What then would be our options? Merely living in belief that it cannot happen would be near perfect example of ‘Ostrich Syndrome’.
It can happen even now. Pakistan will, almost certainly, raise the recent happenings/ issue in UNGA and seek its consideration by UNSC in near future.
In international diplomacy there are no weak/strong nations. A tiny nation located at a strategic area on the globe can call the shots against her far more powerful adversary. North Korea presents an ideal case in point. During the height of Cold War POTUS never met the USSR president on three occasions within 12 months. But current POTUS has met the North Korean strong man Kim thrice and doing the unthinkable on the last meeting while stepping across the 38th parallel into North Korea.
Mention of territorial details of J&K at this stage is considered essential. Erstwhile state of J&K ceded to India by Maharaja Hari Singh spread across nearly 2,20,000 sq km. As on date distribution of ‘OWNERSHIP’ is as follows:-
- Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) 79,156 sq Km
- China 37,185 sq km (Aksai Chin)
- China (Karakoram Highway) 5,200 sq km (Pakistan ceded this area to China)
Grand Total 1,21,541 sq km
- With India 98,459 sq km
India thus has less than 50% area under control from the originally ceded area by Maharaja Hari Singh.
Our leaders have never considered splitting the state of J&K into two separate states in spite of the fact that in the other part of the nation new states have been created on the basis of geography, language and so on. Jammu region ought to have become a separate state, almost entirely due to geography. Valley and Ladakh region could have formed a single state or nominated as union territory for better administration.
The above statement/view was penned before the momentous events of 6th August, a date the international community (Japanese in particular) relate with the nuclear holocaust. But from now on every Indian would proudly recall this date as completion of integration of state of J&K in India on equal terms.
We now have two union territories carved out of J&K, one with legislative assembly. I still believe Jammu region ought to have become a separate entity, either a UT or a full fledged state.
A mention about Pak reactions; the effervescence created by meek Pakistanis will die down in a few days/weeks. While they have sent back Indian High Commissioner they have not recalled Pakistan High Commissioner from India. We must not retaliate/reciprocate in the typical bureaucratic manner and adopt the ‘One for One’ policy normally in vogue in such cases. It will project our political and diplomatic maturity on one hand while on the other it will project Pakistan’s knee jerk reaction in poor light.
During the forthcoming engagement in international fora, we ought to politely but firmly present our case on resolution of POK and seek ‘help’ from friends, clearly and unambiguously stating that the so called IOK issue was and is an internal matter of India.
8th August, 2019
Memoirs of an Intellectual Journey 
Very good analysis about J and K and quite a laudable suggestion for POK.
Great going Sir !
LikeLike