While flaunting it as a solemn occasion called ‘Kashmir Solidarity Day’, Islamabad organises a comical extravaganza of sorts with emotional [as well as menacing] speeches and contrived protests [which includes the indispensable burning of the Indian national flag] on 5 February every year. However, despite all the “sound and fury” it contains, this three-decade old annual ritual has failed to evoke any meaningful international response whatsoever, and the reason for the same isn’t very hard to find.

Islamabad’s Incredulous Stand on Kashmir

Pakistan takes a lot of pain to keep reminding the world that its Kashmir narrative is “principled” as it is completely in accordance with relevant UNSC resolutions on this issue. This raises the obvious question- why is no one endorsing Islamabad’s so-called “principled’ stand on Kashmir? To determine whether Pakistan’s allegation of global apathy towards Kashmir is true, it’s necessary to examine what is actually stated in UNSC Resolution 47, which Islamabad keeps invoking at the mere drop of the hat!

Even a cursory perusal of this UNSC resolution will reveal that Islamabad’s so-called “principled” stand on Kashmir is a humongous sham and a pathetic case of ‘cherry-picking’. What’s even more astonishing is that despite being nothing but an attempt to conceal its own failure in fulfilling the mandatory prerequisites necessary to implement UNSC resolutions on Kashmir, Islamabad still feels that the world will swallow the brazen lies it’s peddling.

Pakistan’s Impertinence

While UNSC Resolution 47 does mention plebiscite in J&K, this exercise can only be undertaken after Pakistan complies with two critical directives laid down by UNSC. One, it needs to withdraw all Pakistani nationals from Pakistan occupied Kashmir [PoK], and two, it needs to “provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste, or party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, and that therefore they should co-operate in the maintenance of peace and order.” [Emphasis added].

Ironically, while it keeps complaining about New Delhi’s refusal to implement UNSC resolutions on Kashmir, Islamabad itself is guilty of failing to facilitate the plebiscite process by fulfilling the UNSC directions ibid. While PoK remains under the iron fist of the Pakistani Army, Section 7[3] of PoK’s Interim Constitution forbids any attempt by its citizens “to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the State’s accession to Pakistan.” [Emphasis added].

So, when the Pakistani Army continues to occupy POK and the constitution of POK categorically deprives its citizens “full freedom . . . to vote on the question of the accession of the State,” with what face can Islamabad demand that people of J&K should be allowed to exercise their ‘right to self-determination’? Accordingly, it’s not at all surprising that the international community pays no heed to Pakistan’s ridiculous lament?

‘Disputed Territory’ Diatribe

Another central ingredient of Islamabad’s feeble Kashmir narrative is its own bizarre deduction that J&K is a “disputed territory”. In fact, ever since New Delhi abrogated Article 370, this seems to have become the proverbial ‘fig leaf’ with which Islamabad is trying to hide the near complete obliteration of its Kashmir narrative.

Pakistan claims that UNSC resolutions imply that J&K is “disputed territory,” and even though deeply flawed, let’s, solely for discussion’s sake, accept the same. As the phrase suggests, “disputed territory” denotes a piece of land whose ownership is undecided, and hence its claimants have no rights on the same. So, by arbitrarily ceding the approximately 5,180 km² Shaksgam tract in PoK to China in 1963, how can Pakistan even believe in its wildest dreams that the international community will buy its absurd “disputed territory” deduction!

Secondly, a claimant can’t allow a ‘third party’ to undertake any developmental activity on ‘disputed’ land without explicit permission of other claimant[s] or the authority which had determined that the area in question is ‘disputed territory’. So, allowing infrastructure creation by China in POK under its CPEC projects without even approaching UNSC, serves as the final nail in Pakistan’s ‘disputed territory’ coffin!

 Revisiting Indian Response

Absence of any serious takers for Pakistan’s Kashmir narrative and its weird habit of making a fool of itself through foot-in-mouth utterances may well be two of the reasons for New Delhi’s subdued response to Islamabad’s virulent verbal attacks. Readers may recall that after Article 370 abrogation Islamabad approached UNSC with great flourish to get this decision revoked. However, just a day before the scheduled UNSC meet, the then Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi warned his people not to live in a “fool’s paradise” as UNSC members, “are not waiting for you with garlands in their hands.” Similarly, after making a lot of noise and announcing that it had decided to take the Article 370 abrogation issue to the International Court of Justice, Islamabad suddenly developed cold feet and never exercised this option. 

Silence on Pakistan’s diplomatic blunderbuss is a mature response as it clearly indicates that Islamabad’s allegations are so incredulous that they don’t deserve a response. Nevertheless, by letting Islamabad get away with slander gives its proxies in Kashmir an opportunity to echo the same falsehood and indoctrinate gullible Kashmiris. This in turn retards mainstreaming efforts in Kashmir Valley and as such there is a definite requirement for New Delhi to be more proactive and immediately demolish Islamabad’s canards.

So, while Islamabad continues its puerile efforts to showcase solidarity with secessionists in Kashmir, New Delhi needs to expose Pakistan’s shameless duplicity and outrageous machinations in Kashmir to the world [in general] and people of Kashmir [in particular]. This shouldn’t be a difficult task, as unlike Islamabad which has to conjure myths in order to keep its Kashmir narrative alive, all that New Delhi has to do is to simply present facts and these by themselves will automatically expose Pakistan’s unending litany of lies!

While speaking at the recently concluded Jaipur Literature Festival, former Indian ace spy master AS Dulat shared his observations and views on the current situation in J&K and abrogation of Article 370 with his characteristic gusto and candour.

Having held high positions in the Intelligence Bureau [J&K Division], Research and Analysis Wing, and being part of India’s ‘Track II’ team engaged in backdoor diplomacy with Pakistan, Dulat is undoubtedly a respected authority on Kashmir. However, while most of his observations are bang-on, some assessments made by him are debatable.

A ‘Mainstreamed’ Kashmir?

The top spy master’s view that All Parties Hurriyat Conference [APHC] is “all finished”, and that a “muscular policy” in Kashmir is helping security forces in Kashmir to curb terrorism are unquestionably correct. However, most Kashmir watchers may not agree with his assessment that Kashmir has “almost totally mainstreamed”, as the situation on ground doesn’t support this viewpoint.

There’s no doubt that the “Kashmir banega Pakistan [Kashmir will become part of Pakistan]” slogan has lost much of its sheen in Kashmir. However, this is due to the realisation among secessionists that given the firm determination of the center and security forces to defeat terrorism, the so called ‘armed struggle’ would never succeed. So, the decline in propagation of separatist ideology is the result of New Delhi’s “muscular policy” and not because of ‘mainstreaming‘. 

Consequently, the ISI is instead tasking its proxies to promote religious radicalisation to fuel terrorism and thus keep its proxy war in J&K and this is evident from the upsurge in targeted killings of minority community members and migrant workers. Accordingly, it may be a bit premature to infer that Kashmir has “almost totally mainstreamed”. 

So, while Dulat must have arrived at this conclusion after extensive interaction with locals in Kashmir, could it be that he has unwittingly been a victim of unintended misinformation? After all, hasn’t he himself highlighted this characteristic trait by stating that “a Kashmiri will tell you something in Islamabad, something in Srinagar”?

Article 370 Abrogation

Similarly, Dulat’s argument that abrogation of Article370 was unnecessary “because there was nothing left in it,” and that “it was only a fig leaf which had provided a Kashmiri a little bit of dignity…,” is surprising. Article 370 allowed erstwhile J&K to have a separate constitution, state flag and autonomy of internal administration, which was tantamount to an acknowledgment that it was not an integral part of India.

So, even though provisions of Article 370 may have been diluted through presidential orders over the years, it did give Islamabad a handy diplomatic stick to beat New Delhi’s claim that J&K is an integral part of India.

Dulat’s view that Article 370 “provided a Kashmiri a little bit of dignity”, is questionable. If Article 370 gave anything, it was just a heightened sense of arrogance that was evident by habitual use of the word “Indian” while addressing a non-Kashmiri. However, locals can’t be entirely blamed for their seemingly contemptuous attitude. “Special status” accorded by Article 370, gave many residents of Kashmir an impression that J&K was a separate entity and not part of the Indian Union.

The alienation promoted by Article 370 was successfully exploited by Islamabad as it gave implied credibility to its flawed narrative of J&K being a “disputed territory”. When none of the 564 erstwhile princely states that merged with the Union of India were accorded ‘special status’, making a sole exception in the case of J&K obviously gave an impression that its merger was indeed conditional. This is why Article 370 abrogation has rattled Islamabad like never before and has sent it running from pillar to post in a desperate attempt to undo the revocation of this temporary constitutional provision.

The fact that it did not succeed despite having approached UNSC and having raised this issue in each and every regional and international forum came as a double whammy for Islamabad. Firstly, absence of any meaningful support for Pakistan on this issue has effectively demolished its Kashmir narrative. Secondly, by rightly ignoring Islamabad’s ludicrous claims, New Delhi’s principled stand that Kashmir is an integral part of India has yet once again been vindicated.

Most importantly, UNSC and the international community has univocally endorsed India’s assertion of Kashmir being a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan with no scope whatsoever for any third-party intervention.

Militancy or Proxy War?

Lastly, Dulat’s view that “militancy has come down and will continue to come down. But terrorism will stay unless we sort it out with Pakistan”, is confusing and incongruent. The undeniable reality is that there was no such thing as ‘militancy’ in J&K- right from day one, this region has been experiencing a full-blown Pakistan army sponsored proxy war- and this admission has come from the horse’s mouth itself!

Readers may recall that Pakistan’s ex-President and former army chief Gen Pervez Musharraf himself revealed that “Kashmiris who came to Pakistan received a hero reception here. We used to train them and support them. We considered them as mujahideen who will fight with the Indian Army.”

Syed Salahuddin, who heads the ISI created Pakistan occupied Kashmir based United Jihad Council and is chief of the Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist group too has admitted that “we are fighting Pakistan’s war in Kashmir”.

So, when the masterminds of terrorism in J&K have themselves made it abundantly clear that the singular aim of the so-called ‘armed struggle’ is not to achieve any political or ideological object but solely to fight the Indian army, one fails to understand as to how one can one mistake brazen terrorism as ‘militancy’?

Sorting Out Terrorism

Dulat’s advice that “terrorism will stay unless we sort it out with Pakistan” makes good sense. But when terrorism has become the very mainstay of Islamabad’s foreign and military policy towards India, how on earth will New Delhi be able to “sort it out with Pakistan” remains a million-dollar question!