India's Actions in Kashmir: The UN Must Intervene

The Modi Government’s move to rescind Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution was not unanticipated. It has been the longstanding plan of the ruling BJP-RSS coalition to transform Muslim Jammu and Kashmir into a Hindu-majority state to appease the Hindu ideologues and end Kashmiri resistance to India’s occupation of the former Princely State.

This move is a violation of a series of UN Security Council resolutions which: a) designate Jammu and Kashmir as “internationally disputed territory”; b) prescribe a UN-supervised plebiscite as a means to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide whether they wish to join India or Pakistan; and c) require both State Parties not to unilaterally alter the status of the disputed territory until the final resolution of the dispute.

Likewise, the Simla Agreement between Pakistani and India committed both sides to not unilaterally change the situation in Jammu and Kashmir or along the LOC (ceasefire line).

International Implications of New Status for Jammu and Kashmir
Alexey Zakharov
Further developments in Kashmir will be determined by two factors: the agenda the Indian government offers to the Muslim population of the new union territories, and how Islamabad responds to these moves.

India has been in violation of the UN Security Council resolutions since it resiled from its commitments under Security Council resolution 47 and subsequent resolutions to hold a UN-supervised plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. It further violated these resolutions and the Simla Agreement by unilaterally and surreptitiously occupying the Siachen Glacier in the 1980s.

Since December 1989, India has been engaged in massive oppression and human rights violations, perpetrated by 700,000 troops, to defeat the struggle for freedom in occupied Jammu and Kashmir.

This reckless step taken by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), to rescind Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution, is the latest and most blatant of India’s continuing violations of the letter, spirit and purpose of the UN Resolutions and India’s commitments under the Simla Agreement. 

The Indian decision has, moreover, discarded the justification offered by India itself for the questionable and unproven “accession” of the Maharajah of Kashmir to India in 1947. According to Indian officials and historians, Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, providing a special status for Jammu and Kashmir, was the “condition” under which the Kashmiri Maharajah signed the document of “accession” to India (although the signed document has never been produced). With the removal of this “condition”, India’s claim to Kashmir has been invalidated by its own justification. India’s presence in Jammu and Kashmir now is naked foreign military occupation.

Implications of the Developing Situation in Kashmir
Gulshan Sachdeva
Due to increasing economic and strategic convergence with India, major powers may not say anything openly but are not going to accept easily that changes in Kashmir are purely an ‘internal affair’ of India. They will try to push for India-Pakistan dialogue.

Pakistan’s PM has declared that Islamabad will oppose the Indian move in every international forum and demand the implementation of the UN Security Council resolutions, including for the conduct of a UN-supervised plebiscite.

This decision by the Modi Government has been universally condemned by the people and leadership of Kashmir, including by the political parties and leaders who had collaborated in the past with the Indian occupation authorities. The move will further intensify the popular struggle for Kashmiri freedom amid India’s repression and human rights violations.

Indian oppression is bound to provoke attacks by the Kashmiri freedom fighters against India’s occupation forces. In a now familiar sequence, India will blame Pakistan for such Kashmiri attacks and provoke the kind of India-Pakistan crisis faced last February and on several previous occasions. Such a crisis can easily escalate into a general war with the inherent danger of the use of nuclear weapons, which both countries possess.

The February crisis was successfully defused due the self-restraint displayed by Pakistan and its PM, including by the gesture of unilaterally releasing the captured Indian fighter pilot. The people of India and Pakistan may not be as fortunate next time. 

India, Pakistan and the New Phase in Kashmir
C. Raja Mohan
Through his first term and since, Prime Minister Modi has repeatedly demonstrated that he is capable of taking fresh policy initiatives that depart from India’s overly cautious strategic tradition. He also brings unprecedented domestic political support and significant international influence behind his effort to revamp India’s strategy towards Pakistan and Kashmir.

It is high time for the international community, especially the UN Security Council, to intervene actively and decisively to demand that India; one, rescind its decision to abrogate the Constitutional Articles assuring Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and autonomy; two, halt its repression and human rights violations in occupied Kashmir and withdraw the bulk of its military forces from occupied Kashmir; three, cease its violations of the ceasefire along the LOC in Kashmir; and four, take the concrete steps envisaged in the Security Council resolutions to organize and hold a UN-supervised Plebiscite to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide whether they wish to join Pakistan or India.
The Removal of Article 370: What Next?
Kriti M Shah
Given the imminent withdrawal of US troop from Afghanistan and the possibility of the Taliban holding some amount of political power, Pakistani militants who have supported the insurgent group would in all probability turn their focus east, towards Kashmir.
Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.