{"id":23172,"date":"2019-09-14T15:01:05","date_gmt":"2019-09-14T10:01:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/?p=23172"},"modified":"2019-11-22T12:00:12","modified_gmt":"2019-11-22T07:00:12","slug":"slugfest-kashmirs-special-status","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/pakistan-affairs\/slugfest-kashmirs-special-status\/","title":{"rendered":"Slugfest about Kashmir\u2019s “Special Status”"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Hero\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Slugfest about Kashmir\u2019s \u2018Special Status\u2019<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

Amjed Jaaved<\/span><\/p>\n

It is eerie that our foreign office, media and the politicians have shallow understanding of the Kashmir dispute. Let us not forget the dimensions to this decades-long conflict. Pakistan is committed to the United Nations resolutions. And, these resolutions do not recognise \u2018accession\u2019 of disputed Kashmir under a resolution of the puppet Constituent Kashmir assembly or under Maharaja\u2019s \u2018instrument of accession\u2019 on which Indian claimed is based.<\/p>\n

India never presented the accession \u2018resolution\u2019 or the \u2018Maharaja\u2019s instrument of accession\u2019 before the United Nations. Yet, it claims that the occupied Kashmir\u2019s constituent assembly had voted for accession to India. As such, it is no longer necessary for her to let the promised plebiscite be held in Kashmir. Now, it has abrogated \u2018special status\u2019 granted by its constitution to the Kashmiris.\u00a0 Has disputed Kashmir reverted to 1947 status in India\u2019s own parlance?<\/p>\n

In parliament, Indian home minister, Amit Shah, banked on the \u2018instrument\u2019 which is void.\u00a0 The Independence Act required intention of accession to be absolute and crystal-clear. But, even a stray glance at the \u2018Instrument\u2019 would make it clear that it is equivocal. The \u2018Instrument\u2019 expresses \u2018intention to set up an interim government and to ask Sheikh Abdullah to carry the responsibilities\u2019 with Maharaja\u2019s prime minister. The last sentence in the alleged \u2018Instrument\u2019 is \u2018In haste and with kind regards\u2019. Handwritten corrections on the text of the \u2018Instrument\u2019 speak volumes about the wavering state of the Maharaja\u2019s mind. Any \u2018instrument\u2019 extracted under coercion and duress is invalid under law.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Subsequent accession resolution, passed by the occupied Kashmir\u2019s \u2018constituent assembly\u2019 is also void. This resolution violates the UN Security Council\u2019s resolutions forbidding India from going ahead with the accession. Aware of India\u2019s intention to get the \u2018Instrument of Accession\u2019 rubber-stamped by the puppet assembly, the UNSC passed two resolutions to forestall the \u2018foreseeable accession\u2019. UNSC Resolution 9 of March 30, 1951, and confirmatory Resolution 122 of March 24, 1957, outlaw accession or any other action to change status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir.<\/p>\n

\"56b322b66f8e4\"<\/a>\u2018Instrument of Accession\u2019 is a myth, unregistered with the United Nations. Alastair Lamb in his book \u201cKashmir: A disputed legacy (1846-1990)\u201d also considers the Instrument of Accession, which was \u2018signed\u2019 by the Maharaja of Kashmir on October 26, 1947, as fraudulent. He argues that on the date of the alleged instrument, the Maharaja was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 km). How could he sign the instrument while being on the run for safety of his life? There is no evidence of any contact between him and the Indian emissaries on October 26, 1947.<\/p>\n

India has never shown the original \u2018Instrument\u2019 to any international body or forum. It took the Kashmir issue to the United Nations in 1948 under Article 35 of Chapter VI which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes. Lamb, in his book Incomplete Partition (Chapter VI: The Accession Crisis, pp.149-151) points out that India marched its troops into Kashmir without maharaja\u2019s permission \u2013 an act of aggression. Lamb further says \u2018timing of the alleged Instrument of Accession undoubtedly affected its legitimacy’ (p.172). He adds \u2018It, in fact, took place after the Indian intervention, then it could well be argued that it was either done under Indian duress or to regularise an Indian fait accompli<\/em>‘. The Instrument of Accession, according to Wolpert, was only signed by Maharaja Sir Hari Singh after Indian troops had assumed control of the Jammu and Kashmir State’s summer capital, Srinagar.<\/p>\n

\"56b3339fd019c\"<\/a>So, in the light of above facts, Pakistan cannot accept \u2018special status\u2019 as a fait accompli<\/em>. Rather, it should focus on human rights violations, and Kashmiris’ right of self-determination under UN conventions. While agitating these issues, Pakistan should avoid the legal wizard, a self-styled \u2018international-law expert\u2019 and founder of a research society of international law, who selected Reqo Diq-fiasco incompetent legal team.<\/p>\n

The dire predictions of Kashmir observers and human rights groups have proved correct. The special status given to India-held Kashmir under Article 370 of the Indian constitution has been all but removed through a resolution in the upper house of parliament, in a move to avoid the lawful route of a constitutional amendment. India is poised to forcibly convert occupied Kashmir into a Union Territory in violation of all its commitments, including those made at the UN.<\/p>\n

The resolution and a presidential order were used to deprive the Jammu & Kashmir assembly of the right to have a say in any changes desired in its status. Meanwhile, a bill in parliament called for separating Ladakh from J&K, but if this amounted to justifying the division of areas on the basis of faith, it was not something that the BJP leaders were likely to lose sleep over, reassured of their own powers of intimidation after their election win earlier this year. Not just that, they also drew strength from India\u2019s image in the international community as a prospering capitalist model.<\/p>\n

The changes reduce IHK to the status of a colony. The special status the region enjoyed since 1954 was basically a measure that guarded against any attempt at changing the demography of an overwhelmingly Muslim Kashmir. Its abolition could mean an invasion of the Valley sponsored by the BJP in its current belligerent mood.<\/p>\n

The move will have violent consequences. The Kashmiris have shown in recent months that, although abandoned by many supporters, their ability to take on the might of the occupiers has far from diminished. In fact, it is the subterfuge, the force, the tricks employed by the BJP that have stoked the fires.<\/p>\n

Pakistan has vowed to campaign against the new developments, which the world must have known were in the making. Serious concern of the latest Indian action in IHK was being expressed for some time. Pakistanis will be asking their government as to what exactly transpired, and in precisely what context did Kashmir feature, at the recent meeting between Prime Minister Imran Khan and President Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

Indeed, Islamabad is being advised to link its support for the normalisation of Afghanistan in a post-American pullout scenario with Kashmir. That is easier said than done given the current sense of global indifference towards IHK. The world watched in silence as thousands of troops moved into the disputed occupied valley in recent days. Few took notice \u2014 even though there may be no cruder version of how a majority living by the tenets of an ideology built on fear of a minority than the one present today in Kashmir.<\/p>\n

The hatred inherent in such a brand of politics has been formally accepted as fair and correct by a parliamentary decree in the biggest democracy of the world.<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Slugfest about Kashmir\u2019s \u2018Special Status\u2019 Amjed Jaaved It is eerie that our foreign office, media and the politicians have shallow understanding of the Kashmir dispute. Let us not forget the dimensions to this decades-long conflict. Pakistan is committed to the United Nations resolutions. And, these resolutions do not recognise \u2018accession\u2019 of disputed Kashmir under a …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":23178,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[10390,2,10873],"tags":[574,2419,1163,257,1226,40,2231,610,1161,10115,13,537,258,8467,3790],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23172"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23172"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23172\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23185,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23172\/revisions\/23185"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/23178"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23172"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23172"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23172"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}