August 01, 2008

Flirting with Fire

 

The upsurge of unrest in Held Kashmir once again is a jolting reminder of the salience of Kashmir. 
Public opinion polling data managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, released on July 16 in Washington on the attitudes of the Indian and Pakistani people on Kashmir, is further evidence of how crucial this issue is to the future of the region (vide www.WorldPublicOpinion.org). 
Despite efforts to put Kashmir on the backburner, the core issue of the subcontinent refuses to evaporate.  Its capacity to dictate and derail the future of the region remains as potent as ever.  Though occasionally Kashmir may look benign to the outside eye, yet, its inflammatory undercurrent cannot be discounted. 
In 1964, the prospect of an Indo-Pak war over Kashmir appeared unlikely with Indian Prime Minister Pandit Nehru showing signs of flexibility and with the freshly released Kashmir leader Sheikh Abdullah visiting Pakistan.  Sheikh Abdullah had to abort his visit on May 27, when Nehru suddenly died.  The year 1965 brought all-out war.  Similarly, during 1998, when the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan were exchanging pleasantries in Lahore, there was little intimation that Kashmir would once again ignite the Kargil conflict in 1999.
The lingering repercussions of the 1965 war weakened and eventually felled Ayub, and the Kargil conflict helped topple Nawaz Sharif.  Kashmir has the curious habit of devouring Pakistani rulers.  Few causes have had facts, law, and principles so clearly on its side.  And few causes have been so mismanaged and mangled as has Kashmir by Pakistani ruling circles.  The downturn in Pakistan’s domestic situation has benefited India in that it has distracted attention away from Kashmir.
Also, the argument can be made that efforts and energy squandered in Afghanistan could have been more effectively conserved and deployed in furthering the Kashmir case.  Irrespective of what has occurred in and around Pakistan, the issue of Kashmir remains as is.
Some issues don’t disappear.  Kashmir is like a raging volcano whose lava smolders under the surface and then explodes with surprising ferocity. 
There is a moral blindness about Kashmir among Indian security and policy elites, lulled as they have been under the self-deceptive cloak of secularism.  Crimes against humanity have been committed under the banner of the “world’s largest democracy” including, but not limited to, systematic rape, disappearances, torture, and custodial deaths – all amply documented by key human rights organizations.
The case for Kashmir is quite clear-cut. India continues to cling on to Kashmir in violation of applicable UN resolutions calling for a fair and free exercise of the right of self-determination through a plebiscite under UN supervision. Why this has not been done is simple enough.  India would lose the vote, in the blunt words of Krishna Menon, who was India’s Defense Minister under Nehru and was the most vocal opponent of plebiscite. 
This promised and long-denied plebiscite continues to pose an enduring threat to regional stability and also thwarts India’s wider geopolitical ambitions. 
The key issue here is occupation.  Occupation does not work, whether it is in Kashmir, Palestine, or Chechnya.  The systematic coercion of one group of people by another to subjugate often leads to the very disaster which the proponents of occupation want to avoid.  It is an irony, as well as the tyranny of the human condition, that those who hold their freedoms dear deny the same to others.
It is futile to tackle the consequences of violent extremism while overlooking the causes.  It is like seeking a prescription from a doctor without allowing him to make a diagnosis of the disease. 
Kashmir remains an unresolved geopolitical reality.  And geography is sometimes destiny.  To ignore injustice and human suffering in Kashmir would be flirting with fire.