This Blog provides an insight on the Kashmir-issue, India and Pakistan. The articles on this Blog can be best described as thought-provoking. The articles thrive to trigger debate about the miseries enslaved Kashmiris are facing and discuss also possible solutions to this long standing conflict. It also aims to convince readers why Independent Kashmir is the best solution for all parties involved.



Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Making Kashmir a theocracy

Kashmir dispute is sixty-four years old. Three wars, 1947, 1965 and Kargil have been fought. Simultaneously there surfaced armed insurgencies and political movements. This affair consumed two generations and next two also seem to be meeting the same fate. The question repeatedly asked is why despite such sacrifices neither the world opinion is supporting the demand of Kashmiris for self-determination nor is the question re-introduced in the UN with full force?

Curiously most of the members of the UN lent their full weight in favour of self-determination and freedom of many countries in the world like Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, East Timor and some more in the African and Asian continents. Many countries established diplomatic and political relations with the nascent independent countries and in some cases the armed struggle of East Timor, Bosnia and now South Sudan are before us.

Despite sixty Muslim countries being the members of the UN, they have not been able to play any practical role to win self-determination for the people of Kashmir. At best some resolutions have been passed at OIC platform in which Pakistan with a few more member countries jointly asked for the resolution of Kashmir problem by the two countries.

The question is what are the reasons that Kashmir issue could not surface in any shape like the issue of self-determination other than a just bilateral issue? Let us study in depth the reasons for Kashmir movement not to have succeeded in garnering support from world body. Disinterested analysis will show that on ideological level the J&K movement remained divisive. There has been slogan mongering either for accession to Pakistan or for freedom for the sake of Islam. Even in both ideologies local organizations lacked sincerity. Protagonist groups and leaders of accession to Pakistan managed to extract huge monies from different governments in Pakistan. But notwithstanding that these henchmen or surrogate organizations or Pakistani managers or policy planning institutions were able to forge any policy regarding Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan with sincere intentions. Is accession to Pakistan possible in these circumstances? Of course slogan mongering and unleashing armed insurgency are there. Accession to Pakistan on theoretical basis and on international level that would keep the ground situation in sight has never been attempted. Such efforts lacked sincerity.