Daily Times

Although United Kingdom had proposed a timetable to hold a free, fair and secure Plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir in October 1948, arguing that after October Kashmir would have a snow fall and voters would find it difficult to participate, the actual resolution for scheduling a date came on 14 March 1950. The resolution gave India and Pakistan five months to cooperate with the UN Representative for India and Pakistan (the agenda title had been changed from Jammu and Kashmir Question to India-Pakistan Question), so that he could prepare the environment for UN Plebiscite Administrator Fleet Admiral Chester W Nimitz to conduct the Plebiscite.

The secret telegram sent by Sir Girja Shankar Bajpai of Indian Embassy in Washington to Delhi reveals that he had found in his first courtesy call made on Admiral Nimitz that he had set First November 1950 as the date for holding a Plebiscite. The Indian Embassy official had found that the Plebiscite Administrator had started working on “whether existing electoral rolls should be used for plebiscite. He had the precedent of NWFP referendum of 1947 in mind.”

If Kashmiris and their support constituency, had used the compass of their wisdom well, we should have been celebrating the 70th anniversary of the realisation of Right of Self Determination on 5th February 2020. It is an irony that we shall be observing it as a ‘Kashmir Solidarity day’, as a condemnation of India’s continued occupation of the habitat and oppression of the people.

This year the solidarity day has graduated to a next higher level, because India has reoccupied and annexed a part of the State. Prime Minister of Pakistan, Parliamentary Kashmir Committee, Government of Azad Kashmir and all others have decided to send a special message of support to the people placed under a lockdown and a message of sharp rebuke to Modi Government that their action is artificial, has no merit and would not be allowed to endure. Prime Minister Imran Khan has used his ability to engage the opposition (not Pakistani) and he does not run out of vocabulary, which is the main tool to engage the various constituencies on Kashmir.

Prime Minister has set a new trend by using social media, to keep the dignity of his promise, that he would be the Ambassador of Kashmir. To be truly so, Prime Minister has to be patient, humble and available to Kashmiris during these difficult times for their families, friends and neighbours, placed under the lockdown. We have failed to twist Modi’s wrist or fracture it so far, except Prime Minister’s scathing rebuke, the merits of which have been noticed around the world. They have started to join in and endorse Pakistan’s position and effort to let peace survive. The situation has made Kashmiris living in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan and as diaspora, very jittery and angry.

It was well in time and need of the hour, that The Parliamentary Committee on Kashmir convened its 9th in camera meeting on 31 January in the Constitution Room, with two agenda items, namely the “Jurisprudence of the UN Resolutions and Kashmir Case” and “the latest situation in Indian held Kashmir”.

It needs to be made clear that other Governments in the past referred to Kashmir at the Annual sessions of the UN General Assembly but failed to touch it in the Security Council

Kashmir Committees have failed in the past, just because the successive Governments (with one exception) used it as a means to engage its members in political tourism and their visits abroad were just symbolic and an escape from Islamabad. No one was there to scrutinise the reports submitted, if any, on their return. So much so that even the President Musharraf’s Kashmir Committee, headed by late Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan, a fatherly figure in Kashmiri ‘power politics’, failed to put an end to this ‘political tourism’. The leadership of these committees was also unconvincing and mediocre.

The present Government seems to have succeeded in finding the right leadership for the Kashmir Committee. The chairman invited and encouraged a Kashmiri input at the in camera meeting. The chairman had made a wise decision to have an input on the “Jurisprudence of the UN Resolutions and Kashmir Case” from the President of JKCHR and “the latest situation in Indian held Kashmir” from the two conveners of APHC Syed Abdullah Gilani and Syed Faiz Naqshbandi. All the three hail from the Indian occupied Kashmir and have families, friends and neighbours imprisoned by Indian forces from 5 August 2019. These three Kashmiri inputs are very important but would not complete the constituency of inputs. There are 2.5m Kashmiri refugees living in various provinces of Pakistan.

Members of the committee made good attempts to engage the three special guests. However, chairman did not lose his interest and energy in keeping the two sides at it. He had his questions right from the beginning and kept on enquiring more from the speaker on jurisprudence. People in all disciplines in the society (and parliament is part of our society), usually misdirect themselves and fail to differentiate between ‘jurisprudence’ and ‘history’ and the relation between the two in Kashmir case. Jurisprudence on Kashmir has evolved in the company of history of meetings held at the UN Security Council. If we did not have an acceptance and a jurisprudence of the Kashmir case at the UN Security Council, China would not have been able to seek two in camera meetings on 16 August 2019 and 15 January 2020. If there were no ‘jurisprudence’ PTI Government would not have claimed that it revived Kashmir after 54 years of neglect in the Security Council.

It needs to be made clear that other Governments in the past referred to Kashmir at the Annual sessions of the UN General Assembly but failed to touch it in the Security Council. It was for the first time since 1251st meeting of Security Council held on 5 November 1965 that Kashmir found an entry in August 2019 and January 2020 into the Security Council chambers. Credit goes to Prime Minister of Pakistan and all forces in Pakistan for their combined efforts at the General Assembly and Security Council.

Para 3 of UN Security Council resolution 80 of 14 March 1950 , confirms the agreement on the appointment of Plebiscite Administrator and adds, “Considering that the resolution of the outstanding difficulties should be based upon the substantial measure of agreement of fundamental principles already reached, and that steps should be taken forthwith for demilitarization of the State and for the expeditious determination of its future in accordance with the freely expressed will of the inhabitants.”

It is time that Pakistan revisits its demand made on 16 January 1957 for a United Nations Force in Kashmir. Pakistan’s proposal was supported by Australia, Cuba, United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and United States of America, in their sponsored Resolution dated 14 February 1957 (S/3787). India has surrendered its accession at the UN Security Council on 15 January 1948, a cease fire has been accepted in January 1949 and there are UNMOGIP in Kashmir. Therefore, the situation claimed on 26 October 1947 has been reversed and Indian army has no right to be in Kashmir. To make any headway, a credible Kashmiri input is paramount.

#insolidaritywithkashmir

The author is President of London based Jammu and Kashmir Council for Human Rights – NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations