|
Kashmir:
Obama is up against a brick wall
Ehsan Mehmood Khan
Obama’s statement on
resolution of Kashmir issue has gone down the veins of
Indian political edifice as a shockwave. Immediate
Indian rejoinder has transpired in sending out an
All-Parties Delegation to the United States of America
to brief Obama’s aides on Kashmir and confidence-building measures between
Pakistan and India.
The delegation was pre-planned but earlier it was
deputed to participate in the meetings of a United
Nations Committee in New York. With new development on
cards, the delegation has also been assigned to
pre-empt anything by Obama and his administration
beyond the statement.
With their age-old
rhetoric on bilateralism and heedless to any third
voice, however sane, the Indian polity had never
expected such a loud word from the president-elect of
the Unites States. In last about four decades, they
have been successful in deterring the third party
involvement in Pak-India affairs especially Kashmir.
Given the law and order situation prevailing in the
north-western part of Pakistan and American rhetoric
on suspected presence of al-Qaeda high-ups in FATA,
India had expected nothing from Obama save for
unswerving politico-military pressure on Pakistan. At
any rate, they had not anticipated something that
could favour
Pakistan as against India in
anyway.
In an exclusive
interview with CNN, Obama had conjectured “…we also
have to make the case that the biggest threat to
Pakistan now is not India which has been the
historical enemy. It is actually militants within
their borders.” One would tend to agree with him but
only if he makes such a case wherein he succeeds in
removing the globally-known bone of contention between
Pakistan and India, and in effect, the entire world
would succeed!
Obama articulated in
another interview that he would “support the ongoing
Pak-India efforts to resolve the Kashmir problem…to
address the political roots of arms race between
Pakistan and India.” Obama’s statements on Pak-India
affairs particularly with regard to Kashmir have lit a
beam of hope round the world that he would put in
sustained efforts to set a full stop before the
age-old disputes like that of Kashmir.
It goes without saying
that the world leadership is well-versed with the
dynamics of Kashmir. They may or may not speak but are
fully aware of the role of Kashmir in perpetual
warlike situation in South Asia for last over six decades. They also know the potential danger of
escalation of discord and friction between the two
nuclear-armed neighbours. So is Obama too!
Nonetheless, Obama is not first in line to long for
resolution of the issue of
Kashmir. Even his
Republican predecessor George Bush pronounced in
February 2008 that “the US supports any solution of
Kashmir, which is acceptable to India,
Pakistan and the people of Kashmir.” Flashing back in timeline, Sir Owen Dixon, the UN envoy on
Kashmir, had made creditable effort to resolve the issue right in the bud but to
no avail, courtesy the Indian inflexibility. Later,
the US
president, John F. Kennedy, had put in wholehearted
efforts to seek an acceptable-by-all solution in early
1960s but remained short of success, thanks to Indian
obduracy.
Above notwithstanding,
Obama seems optimistic to make the grade. The only
thing that might cross his way is again feared to be
the tough Indian stance of NO to multilateralism or
trilateralism with regard to long-standing disputes
and a cosmetic YES to bilateralism. To note, India has
even kept the contentious and security issues out of
the realm of South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC), which has become instrumental in
holding back the performance of SAARC. Hence, India
would endeavour to keep Kashmir out of the Indo-US affairs. All-Parties Indian delegation assigned to
the US is reported to have been well briefed by
India’s exterior minister on two issues; firstly to
lobby for securing permanent membership in UN Security
Council and, secondly, to brief well the aides of
Obama on Indian point of view on the issue of Kashmir.
The delegation includes Kashmir Committee Convener
Ashok Bhan, Priya Dutt, Vijay Bahugna, Trichi Shiv,
Anant Geetey, Prahalad Joshi, Sukhdev Paswan and Jaya
Pradha.
In the aftermath of
Obama’s unambiguous statement on Kashmir, Parnab Mukherjee, the Indian exterior minister was quick to repeat the
rhetoric of bilateral nature of the issue in question.
He pronounced that the issue of
Kashmir would be
resolved in keeping with the spirit of Shimla
Agreement and Lahore Declaration. Granted that
bilateral dialogue between the contending parties is
the best way but only if it does occur and that too
meaningfully. To my remembrance, nothing bilateral
(and consequential) has ever come up between India and
Pakistan. It has always been the third party
involvement that worked. Even though it did not hold
long, yet the Treaty of Tashkent was traded between
India and Pakistan by Moscow. Likewise, albeit ongoing
hiccups in water sharing system between the two
countries, the Indus Water Treaty arbitrated by the
World Bank in 1960 held good even during the all-out
wars. With such a state of affairs in the retrospect,
how can the world expect that bilateralism would work
on the subcontinent? Obama must remember that due to
military nature of security paradigm of South Asia
owing Indian territorial disputes with as much as four
of its neighbours (Pakistan, China, Bangladesh and
Nepal), militarism is the stronger stimulus than
something like bilateralism. Obama must also make a
note of the fact that India is the largest arms
importer on the globe and squarely due to Indian
security perceptions, South Asia has come up as the most militarised region in the world. Soldier-to-area
ratio of the region is quite ‘healthy’. There is one
soldier to each square kilometre of territory!
Coming back to point,
to offset the Indian efforts to win over the US minds
in line with India’s Kashmir perspective, it would not
be naïve to suggest that an All-Parties Hurriyet
Conference Delegation composed of leaders from both
sides of the Line of Control should also visit the US
at an early date. The purpose should be to enlighten
the upcoming US Administration on the position of the
people of Kashmir. |
