215474_01-64.qxd:IH
6/11/10
12:37 PM
Page 53
Kashmiris Own Their Future Resolving the Kashmir dispute requires active international involvement.
BY GHULAM NABI FAI
UNITED: Kashmiris of many faiths rally for the restoration of their right to self-determination
T
___________________________________________________
here can be “no redrawing of borders in Jammu Kashmir,” claims Indian prime minister Dr. Manmohan Singh (23 Nov. 2009, “Times of India”). Former Indian supreme court judge Saghir Ahmad recommends “restor[ing] the autonomy [in Kashmir] to the extent possible” (“Saghir Ahmad Report,” 23 Dec. 2009). Such views need to be supplemented by the Kashmiri viewpoint and heeded by those who seek a final settlement. When the Kashmir dispute erupted in 1947-48, the UN ruled that its status must be ascertained according to its people’s wishes and aspirations. The resulting Security Council resolution, adopted on 21 April 1948, was based on that unchallenged principle. India and Pakistan, and the international community have acknowledged and endorsed this right of self-determination; thus, any other formula is an absolute fallacy — especially when such an arrangement would on a provision of the easily changeable Indian constitution. The Kashmiris’ past experiences with limited autonomy under Indian hegemony have been fruitless: first under a personal understanding between Jawaharlal Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah and then provided for by Section 370 of the Indian constitution. The ceasefire line, which is just as ugly and sinister as the Berlin Wall, deserves to be torn down. If it is not erased peacefully in accordance with the people’s will, it will remain a continual provocation to violence that, even if curbed for a while, will always reappear with greater force and potential destructiveness. Converting it into a permanent international border is another ideal (and therefore unrealistic) solution, for it both insults the Kashmiris’ intelligence and
is the best possible formula for sowing a minefield in nuclear-armed South Asia. The Kashmiris have revolted against the Indianenforced status quo in order to emphasize that their homeland cannot be parceled out between India and Pakistan; rather, it is the home of a nation with a history far more compact and coherent than India’s and far longer than Pakistan’s. No settlement will hold unless it is explicitly based on self-determination and erases the line of control. A joint opinion poll conducted by CNNIBN and “Hindustan Times” in India and “Dawn” and “News” in Pakistan on 12 Aug. 2007 found that the vast majority of those polled in the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley (87% to be precise) preferred freedom from Indian occupation. This result was consistent with another poll conducted on 5 Nov. 2004 by the monthly magazine “Outlook” (New Delhi): 78% demanded freedom from Indian occupation. To the Kashmiris, freedom (ITALICS azadi) means rejecting the concept of autonomy as well as not having the line of control converted into an international border. The Kashmiri leadership is mindful of Washington’s desire that India and Pakistan keep “talking to each other.” But to expect a breakthrough is to ask for miracles. The goal of resolving this ongoing dispute cannot be left to either country, for bilateral talks have gone nowhere ever since this dispute arose sixty-three years ago. In fact, any attempt to strike a deal between any two parties without the association of the third party will fail, as proven by the IndianPakistani talks at Tashkent (1966), Simla (1972), Lahore (1998), and Agra (2001). These attempts went nowhere because JULY/AUGUST 2010 ISLAMIC HORIZONS 53
they sought to bypass the primary party: the Kashmiris. Similarly, the agreements between Sheikh Abdullah and Nehru (1952), the pact between Abdullah and Indira Gandhi (1975), and an agreement between Farooq Abdullah and Rajiv Gandhi (1980s) — all of which sought to bypass Pakistan — left the basic issue unsettled. There is but one fair, just, legal, and moral solution: the use of peaceful means to bring about self-determination, which means including the Kashmiris’ genuine leadership — Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist — as an equal partner in all negotiations with New Delhi and Islamabad. The mediation of a UN-appointed figure such as Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, is also necessary. If all parties negotiate in good faith, a common ground leading to a just, fair, and final resolution can be obtained. If self-determination can work in East Timor, South Africa, and Serbia, it can work in Kashmir — a land surrounded by nuclear powers with plenty of missiles.
_______________________________ Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai is executive director of the Kashmiri American Council.
IMAM WANTED For Muslim Community of the Quad Cities (MCQC), Bettendorf, Iowa Qualifications: Degree in Islamic Studies/related fields, fluent in English and Arabic, ability to effectively communicate with groups of diverse age and background. Applicants should be able to: > Give khutbahs and conduct educational programs/ activities for the community; > Activities and Sunday school classes for children and youth; > Need to network with neighboring Muslim communities; > Involve MCQC in local activities and community service in the city; > Initiate and participate in interfaith and da‘wah programs. Salary and benefits commensurate with experience. Send resume/inquiries to: qrmcqc@hotmail.com, cell 563 503 9611