Page 6 - Pakistan Link - September 25, 2020

P6 – PAKISTAN LINK – SEPTEMBER 25, 2020
n By Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai
S Washington, DC
ir Mohammad Zafrullah Khan, Paki-
stan’s foreign minister and delegate to
the United Nations, made it clear on
January 16, 1948 during the 228th meeting
of the Security Council that
Gilgat-Baltistan is a part of
the State of Jammu & Kash-
mir. Here is the relevant
part of his eloquent speech:
“The population of
Kashmir is distributed com-
munally as follows: In Kash-
mir proper, apart from Jammu, 93.5 percent
are Muslims. Sixty-two percent of the popu-
lation of Jammu are Muslims. Gilgat, which
is the high mountain region, is entirely Mus-
lim. The total area of the state, which is largely Pakhtunkhwa), which has historically made
composed of high mountains and barren hills,
is 82,000 square miles.
Now, if it is true that Pakistan plans to el-
evate Gilgat-Baltistan (G-B) to a full-fledged
province with all constitutional rights, it will
unwittingly disturb the disputed nature of
the State of the Jammu and Kashmir. It will
be akin to the unilateral action taken by Na-
rendra Modi on August 5, 2019 when Article
370 and 35 A were abrogated. Both these ac-
tions will be in violation of the United Nations
Security Council resolutions # 91 of 1951 and
122 and 126 of 1957.
These resolutions categorically state: “Af-
firming that the convening of a Constituent
Assembly as recommended by the General
Council of the ‘All Jammu and Kashmir Na-
tional Conference’ and any action that As-
sembly might attempt to take to determine the
future shape and affiliation of the entire State
or any part thereof would not constitute a dis-
position of the State in accordance with the
above principle.”
So as bottom lines go, say what you want
about Gilgat Baltistan. Do as you wish. It will
not affect the status of what constitutes the
whole of Jammu and Kashmir or its parts as a
disputed territory.
Gilgat-Baltistan on the Horns of a Dilemma
The plan was announced by Ali Amin
Gandapur, Minister of Kashmir Affairs and
Gilgat – Baltistan on September 17, 2020. He
further said that people of GB would be given
representation in the Senate and the National
Assembly of Pakistan.
Obviously, if Pakistan makes Gilgat-
Baltistan a province of Pakistan, then India
has all the right, perhaps not legal but as a mat- with the Security Council resolutions and the
ter of principle, to justify her stand that Indian will of the Kashmiri people.”
occupied Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part
of India. And on what justification will Paki-
stan protest? As the saying goes, what is good
for the goose may also be good for the gander.
Mr Gandapur’s intentions are not ques-
tionable but his statement is. He is a seasoned
politician, coming from a province (Khyber
lot of sacrifices for the cause of Kashmir.
Pakistan has continually made Indian-
occupied Kashmir an international issue and
brought it frequently to the attention of the
UN for human rights abuses, and rightly so.
www.PakistanLink.com
Just this week, on September 14, 2020, Ambas-
sador Munir Akram said, “He (Imran Khan) is
expected once again to project the just cause of Pakistan is unacceptable as it is tantamount to
the Kashmiri people and call for action by the
international community to halt India’s mas-
sive violations of human rights, rescind the
unilateral measures imposed in Indian Illegal-
ly Occupied Jammu & Kashmir since 5 August
2019 and promote a solution in accordance
Ambassador Munir Akram has forced In-
dia to adopt a defensive posture in respect to
its unilateral action taken in August 2019. But
Mr Gandapur inadvertently provides India a
cover to shield her illegal and unconstitutional its principled stance on the Jammu and Kash-
action taken in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
It is obvious, however, that making GB
a fifth province of Pakistan isn’t going to fly
with anyone. The pro-resistance leadership
in Kashmir certainly aren’t going to. Syed Ali
Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Moham-
mad Yasin Malik said in March 2016 when
OPINION
such a proposal was being floated by Riaz
Hussain Pirzada, Pakistan’s minister for inter-
provincial coordination. “Any proposal to de-
clare Gilgat-Baltistan as the fifth province of
changing the disputed nature of Kashmir.”
Quite understandably, Mian Nawaz Shar-
if, then the Prime Minister of Pakistan wrote
to Mohammad Yasin Malik, Chairman Jammu
Kashmir Liberation Front on March 18, 2016:
“I would like to make it unambiguously clear
that Pakistan is fully aware of the sensitivities
attached to Gilgat-Baltistan with regard to the
Jammu & Kashmir dispute. Media specula-
tions are a result of either misperceptions or
misinterpretations… I would like to assure
you that Pakistan will never compromise on
mir dispute which is based on the UN Secu-
rity Council resolutions. Nor will Pakistan
take any measure that may cause harm to the
valiant struggle of the people of Indian Occu-
pied Jammu and Kashmir, for their inalienable
right to self-determination, promised to them
by the UN Security Council resolution.”
Likewise, Z. A.Bhutto, then the foreign
minister of Pakistan, wrote to the President of
the Security Council on March 16, 1963: “It is
necessary for me to point out the evident fact
that the territory of Jammu & Kashmir is not a
part, integral or otherwise, of the territory of
the Union. The territory of Jammu & Kashmir
belongs to the people of Jammu & Kashmir. It
is a territory the future of which must be de-
cided in accordance with the United Nations
Commission’s resolution of plebiscite under
the auspices of the United Nations to deter-
mine its accession to India or Pakistan. My
Government is bound by its duty to declare
before the Security Council that, pending de-
termination of the future of Kashmir through
the will of the people impartially ascertained,
no position taken or adjustments made by ei-
ther of the parties to the present controversy
between India and China or any similar con-
troversy in the future shall be valid or affect
the status of the territory of Jammu & Kashmir
DILEMMA, P10