UN on Kashmir
In recent weeks, External Affairs Minister Dr. S Jaishankar has been quite blunt and vocal in articulating India’s stand on Kashmir – he is dismissive of all the voices within and abroad challenging the narrative of change in the Valley after the abrogation of Article 370. He gets miffed and doesn’t hide his feelings when it comes to Pakistan and the territories of the PoJK under the illegal occupation of the neighbouring country.
Part of his thesis is drawn from the cold past of the history, and the rest is driven by the contemporary geopolitical landscape in South Asia. At times, he is brusque when he talks of Pakistan. It is perhaps natural too as the Indian nation has sacrificed and suffered a lot due to Pakistani activities in the country, particularly Jammu and Kashmir. There is a toll of thousands dead, and many more displaced.
In his remarks, during Raisina dialogue in Delhi, Jaishankar hit at the United Nation for being unfair to India on Kashmir when the world body put attacker and victim on par. As was natural, Pakistan that has made the UN resolutions as its swan song to highlight what it calls the only way to attain permanent solution to Kashmir and lasting peace between India and Pakistan, reacted in the manner it has become habitual.
First, let’s read what Jaishankar said: “After the Second World War, the longest standing illegal presence and occupation of a territory by another country pertain to India, what we see in Kashmir. Now we went to the UN what was an invasion was made into a dispute. So the attacker and the victim were put on par, who were the culpable parties? (the) UK, Canada, Belgium, Australia and (the) USA”
This statement needs to be understood and analyzed in the historical perspective of the late 1940s when Government of India took the issue of Pakistani invasion of Jammu and Kashmir to UN Security Council that envisages that any member may bring any situation whose continuance is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security to the attention of the Security Council. It stated that “such a situation now exists between India and Pakistan owing to the aid which invaders consisting of nationals of Pakistan and of tribesmen from the territory immediately adjoining. Pakistan on the north-west is drawing for operations against Jammu and Kashmir, a state which has acceded to the Dominion of India and is part of India.”
It went on to cite “the circumstances of accession, the activities of the invaders which led the Government of India to take military action against them, and the assistance which the attackers have received and are still receiving from Pakistan …. The government of India requests the Security Council to call upon Pakistan to put an end immediately to the giving of such assistance, which is an aggression against India.” It also warned that if Pakistan failed to do so, the Government of India “may be compelled, in self-defence, to enter Pakistan territory, in order to take military action against the invaders. The matter is therefore, one of extreme urgency and calls for immediate action by the Security Council for avoiding a breach of international peace.”
There is a lot of controversy and historical contradictions attached to the Government of India’s moving the UNSC for declaring Pakistan as an aggressor and asking it to vacate all the territories of Jammu and Kashmir, the fact remains that what India did was in conformity with the norms of the best of the international relations. And, there is another part of the history that the western powers were more than keen to have their own control in this Himalayan territory for their geo-strategic and geopolitical interests. There was a fear that the western forces, particularly the US and the UK would have sent in their forces under the mandate of the UN to gain access to Central Asia and the Soviet Union. The post-World War history had created a world of deep divisions and competition. There was a premium on strategic territories and Jammu and Kashmir was one of them. For that, we will have to look at the full map and boundaries of Jammu and Kashmir, not just the map of the UT of J&K which is making efforts to come to terms with.
As on August 15, 1947, when Maharaja Hari Singh signed standstill agreement with Pakistan, the state had approximately 225,156 sq. kms. Today, the UT of J&K (on the Indian side) has 42, 241 sq. kms, Ladakh 59, 141sq. kms. That translates into 1, 01,387 sq. kms. Pakistan occupied territories -Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK-86,268 sq. kms, of this area Pakistan ceded over 5,180 to China in Shaksgam to China under Sino-Pakistan agreement in 1963. And China has 42,735 sq. Kms. It means that jointly Pakistan and China are in illegal occupation of 1, 29,003 sq. Kms.
In this scenario, Jaishankar is justified in his statement, and all the response that Pakistan has offered is a distortion of history. Its Foreign Office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan, while trying to clear the air, muddled it. He said “It was India that took the Jammu and Kashmir issue to the United Nations in 1948,” that is what Jaishankar also observed. Khan said “India has no right to blame the Security Council and its erstwhile members for the resolutions that were subsequently adopted.” Here lies the catch. India moved the UNSC against Pakistan's aggression, how could the first part be true and not the original issue that Pakistan had invaded J&K which made India to protest and seek action from the UNSC against the invaders.
It's time that Pakistan read again the UN resolution of April 1948 , in which it was asked to clear the J&K’s territories under its occupation of all its nationals and army. It is an age of digital media where history is just a click away. Nothing can cloud that.
