Daily Times

In the post-cold war era and especially after 9/11, India gave up its cold war policy of nonalignment and chose to align with the US, as a sole superpower. The US was also inclined to court India in its latest policy of containing rising China. With the offer of the US, India signed a hard-bargained nuclear deal in 2005 and 2008. Both countries signed an agreement on strategic partnership. Subsequently, both countries have signed many important military-related agreements and finally, the US declared India as its close defence partner.

By getting closer to the US, India was exploiting the US’s interest of containing China, just to acquire the US military technology and equipment, and the diplomatic support of the US, the UK and France for getting a veto power seat in the UNSC to become an equal power to China. But India was not interested in joining the US’s effort of containing China. Although the US also had apprehensions about India’s resolve to act as a bulwark to contain China, still its policymakers thought it beneficial to make India a major power, as a competitor to China in Asia.

And, by becoming a partner to the US, India also wanted to dominate Pakistan by acting as a spoiler of the US-Pakistan relations by blaming Pakistan for supporting terrorism in Afghanistan and the Kashmiris’ peaceful freedom struggle, which India terms as terrorism. Because India wanted to crush the freedom struggle in the occupied state of Jammu and Kashmir by the use of force and winning over the sympathies of the US, the UK, France, EU and Japan so that they do not hold India responsible for committing human rights (HR) violations in Jammu and Kashmir.

Despite that the US had termed India a lynchpin to its Indo-Pacific strategy, India was reluctant to toe the US’s line on its sanctions on Russia and Iran. Rather, India also maintained its deeper strategic and military relations with Russia and its burgeoning trade relations with China. India was also lucky all the major powers were also interested in making investments and selling their arms and military equipment to India to earn profits.

China was also expanding its trade and investment relations with India to engage it to constrain it from getting involved in the US strategy of containing China. Moreover, with the introduction of the Belt and Road project and the CPEC, through its investments, China wanted to facilitate peace and prosperity in South Asia and wanted Pakistan and India to build mutual peace by resolving the Jammu and Kashmir dispute in the light of the UNSC resolutions, through a dialogue. India too wanted to engage China in wider trade relations for maintaining tranquillity on the borders and diluting China-Pakistan strategic friendship.

India was also lucky that all major powers were also interested in making investments and selling their arms and military equipment to India to earn profits

Given its close relations with the major powers, India’s Prime Minister, Modi has chosen to abrogate Article 35-A and 370 of the Indian constitution to integrate the UNSC recognized occupied Jammu and Kashmir as part of India. And, to rule out the chances of the Kashmiris’ expected response, the unprecedented lockdown, telephone and internet blockade clamped on August 5, 2019, in the Kashmir Valley, and the genocide being committed there by the Indian security forces is continuing for the last three months.

Due to the PM Imran Khan’s strong advocacy of the restrictions imposed in the Kashmir Valley, the genocide being committed there and the Kashmir dispute requiring its resolution based on the UNSC resolutions, and that the Western media has strongly highlighted the Kashmiris plight, the world leaders have not supported India’s stance of terming the Jammu and Kashmir as its internal issue, and have asked India to lift the restrictions, stop HR violations and release the detained young men. But due to their strategic and commercial interests linked with India, the world leaders have remained reluctant to take concrete action against India in the form of a binding UNSC resolution. But China, Turkey and Malaysia’s unwavering support of Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir were highly laudable.

However, President Trump’s repeated and standing offer to mediate the resolution of the Kashmir dispute against India’s wishes, the statements of the UN congressmen asking India to ease restrictions in Kashmir, and the statements of the UK, France, Germany and Russia, asking India to resolve the Kashmir dispute by holding a dialogue with Pakistan are very encouraging. That indicates that these major powers, in view Pakistan’s major contribution in fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan as a non-NATO ally of the US, also realise the strategic significance of Pakistan for peace in Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Middle East.

In view of the fact that despite their lockdown and genocide being committed in the Kashmir Valley, the Kashmiris are more determined to continue with their freedom struggle, and that the world powers’ support for the Kashmiris is gradually increasing, Pakistan should continue to provide a strong political, moral and diplomatic support to the people of Kashmir till the world leaders become convinced to ask India to resolve the Kashmir dispute in the light of the UNSC resolutions by holding a dialogue with Pakistan.

The writer is a former Research Fellow of Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI), Islamabad