Half widows, mass killings, pellet guns and the unsettled business of partition; you guessed it right ladies and gentlemen; I’m talking about the tinderbox that is Kashmir. Just like handing out ‘democracy’ to the Middle East is Uncle Sam’s crusade, ours is the Sisyphean ordeal of liberating Kashmir.
Recently, the foreign secretary Aizaz Chaudary while talking about Kashmir remarked that “ the moral and legal strength of the issue comes from the UNSC resolutions” and then he went on to blame the UN for not implementing them. The Billion dollar question is: what is the foreign secretary, blaming the UN for not implementing, when –legally- the said resolutions were rendered futile by our own doing. You don’t believe me? Let me explain.
Recently, the Prime Minister had an ‘I have a dream’ moment at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) summit, while pouring his heart out about Kashmir; the former secretary general, however, didn’t budge, can you guess why? No, it’s not because we are Muslims. It all goes back to 1971, when a freedom movement fomented in the economically neglected Eastern wing of Pakistan, leading to the third Indo-Pak war and the eventual dismemberment of the country. When the dust settled, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto took charge of the country; in those challenging circumstances, on 2nd July 1972, a weak and feeble Pakistan entered into a peace compromise with India, known as the Simla Agreement, which enfeebled Pakistan’s case for Kashmir.
The clause 2 of the agreement clearly states that
“the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations” including Kashmir; also the countries would not meddle with each other’s internal affairs (which both countries did at multiple times) and the agreement also states that the ceasefire line between the Pakistan controlled Azad Kashmir and the Indian Occupied Kashmir would, henceforth, be known as the Line of Control. The signing of this agreement questions the involvement of any third party (including the UN) in the Kashmir issue for mediation and rendered the UNSC resolutions of 48 & 49, futile.
Afterwards, Pakistan waged Islamic proxies in IOK to advance national security goals: after the withdrawal of the soviet forces and the wake of the nuclear program ; Pakistan entered the 90’s under sanctions, paralyzed , solitary, abandoned by the US, with legions of militarized Jihadist in its midst; which were directed towards IOK to wage a proxy; hijacking the Kashmir freedom movement. Pakistan claimed to provide political and ‘moral’ support. The rationale was to tie down the Indian security forces in Kashmir and “bleed it by a thousand cuts in order to bring it to the table of negotiations”, to resolve the issue bilaterally (as espoused in the Simla agreement) and freedom became a fading hope from a plausible prospect in the valley of Kashmir.
And that leaves us with the question: why isn’t the UN doing anything? Well, now you know.
The writer is a student of law at the International Islamic University, legal intern at the district courts, Islamabad and an executive body member at the Law Student’s Council.
All the views and opinion are the writer’s own point of view. JursOnline is not responsible for any views/opinion or any writer whosoever.