Last spring in the pages of The Dartmouth, I had a war of words on the issue of Kashmiri independence with a few writers, including an alumnus who had lived in India for several years. I made the claim that India illegitimately occupied Kashmir in 1947 and continues to sabotage peace talks with Pakistan, its archenemy on the Kashmir issue. The debate, however, was not resolved, and the Kashmiri problem remains.
Kashmir is the Muslim dominated section of the North Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is a separate administrative unit from Jammu, the Hindu majority region, and Ladakh, the Buddhist majority territory. Kashmir is claimed by Pakistan, while China controls Ladakh. The three regions were combined into one state by the British in the 1920s, and a Hindu King, Hari Singh, was empowered over it. Singh then proceeded to exclude Muslims, Buddhists and other non-Hindu groups from the state's administration. The three religious groups had peacefully coexisted for several decades, but Singh's divisive policies fueled a liberation movement among Kashmiri Muslims in early 1930. The Muslim Conference was formed in 1932 to fight for independence from Hari Singh. In 1941, the Conference decided to accede to Pakistan and in 1946-47 launched a "Quit Kashmir" movement to fight for independence from Hari Singh. The movement snowballed into a popular revolt, and the Kashmiris were joined by tribesmen from Northern Pakistan. Hari Singh tried to ruthlessly suppress the revolt and later asked for assistance from India. Sardar Vallabbhai Patel, a Hindu nationalist leader, agreed to help Hari Singh in return for accession to India. Singh agrees; India invades Kashmir; the popular will is suppressed. In January 1948, India and Pakistan went to war over Kashmir. The United Nations brokered a peace treaty in 1949, and the two parties agreed to a plebiscite to decide the fate of Kashmir. Kashmir was divided along a Line of Control " Pakistan-held Kashmir and Indian-occupied Kashmir.
During the next few decades, India constantly rejected results of elections in Jammu and Kashmir denying the popular National Conference, the reincarnated Muslim Conference, from holding office in the state. Until the late 1980s, when popular insurgency started in Kashmir, the Indian government had installed a puppet government in the state.
Since independence in 1949, India has been involved in three international wars and several skirmishes with its neighbors, Pakistan in the west and China in the North, over Jammu and Kashmir. In 1962, China attacked India over border disputes and took over de facto control in Ladakh. The second war between India and Pakistan in 1962 ended with a resolution to hold a plebiscite and to stick to the Line of Control. Another war between the two in 1972 also ended with a similar result. Finally, since militarized clashes between India and Pakistan in 1999, the two states have been at loggerheads over Kashmir. For several months, both had mobilized over a million troops along the Line of Control. Cross-border shelling takes place almost everyday.
Since 1989, Kashmir has been embroiled in a violent conflict between the Indian Army and Kashmiri insurgents. In 1990, over 400,000 Kashmiris marched to the U.N. Kashmir Observer Group to demand implementation of the plebiscite. Professor Hafeez Malik, professor of political science at Villanova University, has said that this rebellion is quintessentially indigenous. This is not to say that Pakistan has not exacerbated the situation by aiding and abetting the Kashmiris and by encouraging foreign terrorists to operate in Pakistan. It is preposterous to say that all fighters in Kashmir are Pakistani terrorists.
India refuses to hold peace talks with Pakistan or with Kashmiri separatist leaders. It claims that until all incursions into Indian-held Kashmir by militants are stopped by Pakistan, it will not sit down at the negotiating table. President Bush and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage have praised the Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf for his efforts to reduce cross border infiltration. Recently, Christina Rocca, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, strongly urged India to repair its relations with Pakistan. American officials have agreed that the high-altitude, mountainous borders cannot be sealed, but Indian officials continue to demand that all penetrations into India by Islamic terrorists be stopped. Not only does it refuse to negotiate, but India has also assassinated several leading Kashmiri separatist leaders in the past few years. It has repeatedly turned down invitations by Pakistan to hold talks. The Indian Army has been condemned by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and several other international organizations for its indiscriminate slaughter of innocent Kashmiri civilians.
So, India had agreed in 1949 to a plebiscite in Kashmir. Last I checked it was 2003, and lo and behold! There has been no referendum in Kashmir yet, and there seems to be very little possibility of one in the near future. I am not in favor of an independent Kashmir or a Pakistan controlled Kashmir. I would like to see a plebiscite in Kashmir, both Pakistani and Indian controlled, so that the residents of Kashmir can decide their future.
Pakistan wants annexation of Kashmir in its entirety, righting what it sees as a wrong from the partition of India by the British in 1947. India too wants all of Kashmir claiming authority from the Kashmiri King's decision to join India in 1947. Neither state has a "right" over Kashmir unless the Kashmiri people make their decision known. If we are eager to spread ideals of democracy and majority rule around the world, how can we ignore this glaring example of suppression of the popular will in Kashmir?
