July 14, 2006

Flashpoint Kashmir

While the world’s attention is focused on the Middle East, the relatively less noticed carnage in Kashmir continues. India opportunistically has used the umbrella of the much-touted ‘war on terrorism’ to castigate the cause of Kashmir.
First, the concept of terror is being deliberately magnified to overshadow and obscure the sheer enormity of state terror. Second, the label of terror is being used to deflect attention and to dilute the legitimacy of lawful resistance to forcible military occupation of a land and people where a plebiscite under applicable UN resolutions has been pledged.
US Senator Chuck Hagel in 2002 called South Asia “the most dangerous immediate flashpoint in the world” because of the fear of “two nations, eyeball to eyeball, with nuclear weapons, engaging in a hair-trigger exchange over Kashmir.” Just recently, he has reiterated his position in an article entitled “Principles and Interests” in the Summer 2006 issue of The National Interest. Hagel has also advocated that American foreign policy be guided by “principled realism”. But “principled realism” can mean acceptance of an inherently unjust and untenable status quo in Kashmir.
The cloud of Kashmir hovers over one of the most volatile regions of the world. It is a ‘sleeper’ flashpoint which can erupt any time like the volcano Krakatoa east of Java, leaving in its wake a destructive tsunami and lethal fallout, as it did catastrophically on August 18, 1883. Simply put, the volcano can be ignored; but the volcanic eruption will not ignore those in its path or even those seemingly beyond its range.
Indian-held Kashmir remains a human tragedy and a humanitarian disaster. Physicians for Human Rights and Asia Watch termed Kashmir a “human rights disaster”. Under international law, it remains a disputed territory and under UN resolutions it remains an unfinished business. Yet, collective punishment is the norm; custodial deaths are routine, and torture and disappearance remain the modus operandi of occupation. Human Rights Watch documented more than 300 cases of disappearances between 1990 and 1999, as well as extra-judicial executions and torture, noting in a July 1999 report that “torture has been used routinely by all the security forces operating in Kashmir.” More recently, in its World Report: 2006, Human Rights Watch observed that “troops continue to be responsible for arbitrary detention, torture, and custodial killings,” noting “a disturbing rise in extrajudicial executions.” Perhaps even more egregious are amply documented reports that rape has been systematically employed as a weapon against the people of Kashmir.
In a landmark judgment on June 29, the US Supreme Court sagaciously ruled that detainees held by the United States pursuant to the ongoing conflict must be afforded some Geneva Convention protections, specifically as provided in Common Article 3, which states:
“Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms . . . shall in all circumstances be treated humanely … the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever: violence to life and person, in particular . . . cruel treatment and torture; . . . outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; … the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.”
The majority opinion emphasized that the scope of Common Article 3 is very broad, applying to all conflicts and not just internal armed conflicts. In a concurring opinion in which three other Justices joined, Justice Stevens further declared that violations of Common Article 3 are considered “war crimes” under US law.
Kashmir stands today as a symbol of the breach of the Geneva Conventions. Its unresolved status makes it a fertile breeding ground for the spread of rising global zealotry. However, despite well-documented human rights violations committed against Kashmiri men, women, and children, Kashmir remains on the back burner of global attention and imagination.
Many US policy-makers have difficulty empathizing or relating to the Kashmir controversy. As a result, perhaps, the US – while generally supporting a “peace process” – has declined to support a specific solution or to engage on the issues except to view the conflict through the prism of terrorism. However, history is chronicled by the victors, and reflected by those controlling the power structure. They get to choose who is depicted and defined as the terrorist and who as the freedom fighter. One might reflect on what would have been the effect and how it would have been recounted in world history books had George Washington been captured and dealt with by British forces. In this connection, the brutalities inflicted on the royal Mughal household by British forces in the aftermath of the unsuccessful uprising of 1857 make instructive reading.
Fifty years ago, Dr. Josef Korbel, of the UN Commission on Kashmir and former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s father, wrote the seminal book, “Danger in Kashmir” (Princeton 1954). In the 21st century, the danger has grown to make South Asia one of the most dangerous regions in the world. Kashmir is a calamity-in-waiting that the world can ill-afford to ignore.