China’s role in the global context has grown in terms of its output, trade and now its voice and leadership in sustainable and inclusive development, and resolve to pursue low carbon pathways. A further paradigm shift is anticipated in the role and influence of China, as it delivers on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) […]
Jammu: With Parliamentary by-polls only three weeks away, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti is back at raising emotive issues, suggesting to New Delhi to avail the benefits of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Describing Jammu and Kashmir as the gateway to Central Asia, she said it could become a corridor of economic activity in the […]
via Country Will Benefit From China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Mehbooba — India News 2Day
Speakers at a seminar in London last Tuesday urged India and Pakistan to include people from all parts of the former state of Jammu & Kashmir in a meaningful dialogue for establishment of permanent peace in South Asia. While addressing the seminar titled “India-Pakistan Peace Process: The Way Forward”, a select group of British MPs, experts in international relations and Kashmiri peace activists demanded that Kashmir conflict should be resolved according to the aspirations of people of Jammu & Kashmir.
The seminar was co-sponsored by MP Simon Danczuk, International Centre for Peace and Democracy, International Pahari Literary Society and Institute for Gilgit Baltistan Studies.
Prominent among speakers were Chairperson All Party Parliamentary Group on Pakistan Andrew Stephenson (Conservative), Member House of Lords Qurban Hussain, MP Paul Uppal, Member All Party Parliamentary Group on Kashmir MP Simon Danczuk, President Institute for Gilgit Baltistan Studies Senge Hasnan Sering , MP Yasmin Qureshi, Executive Director International Pahari Literary Society Ali Adaalat and Secretary General Jammu & Kashmir Council for Human Rights Dr. Nazir Gilani. Chief Executive Press for Peace Zafar Iqbal and Chairperson Indo European Forum Krishna Bhan also spoke on the occasion.
MP Simon Danczuk opened the house for discussion with his keynote address. He said that Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan were very important issues for British parliamentarians. He stressed the need for creating peace, encouraging cooperation and finding solutions to bring India and Pakistan closer.
Andrew Stephenson said that lower level judiciary in Pakistan was not functioning properly due to corruption and bribery. He stressed the need of a complete overhaul of judicial system in Pakistan. He stressed that British Pakistanis should help Pakistan by investing in the country to bring it out of the economic downfall. He said that deteriorating security situation was pushing Pakistan toward destruction whereas its neighbor India was fast progressing.
Member Parliament Yasmin Qureshi said that India and Pakistan both were nuclear powers and Kashmir conflict could be a war trigger between these two countries. She said both were spending billions of Pounds on defense matters and weapons that could be spent on people’s wellbeing.
Senge Hasnan Sering said that Confidenc Building Measures on Kashmir to be extened Gilgit-Baltistan. He urged India and Pakistan to open ancient routes for trade between Laddakh and Gilgit-Baltistan. He expressed that more than 10,000 Ladakhis living in Gilgit-Baltistan demand resumption of travel to Ladakh on urgent and humanitarian basis. He was of the view that opening up of travel routes between Ladakh and Gilgit-Baltistan will help revive secular culture and help counter terrorism.
Sardar Mumtaz Khan said that we should take a collective stance on Kashmir Conflict by leaving differences of caste, creed, religion and regional identity aside. He said that tribal intrusion at the time of partition paved way for external intruders in Kashmir. He was of the opinion that for a peaceful settlement of Kashmir Conflict all unsolved matters of the people of all parts of Jammu and Kashmir should be resolved and included in peace efforts.
Lord Qurban Hussain said that instead of killing innocent people of Kashmir, India and Pakistan should listen them. He further said that dialogue process was only possible if violations of human rights were stopped, removal of forces from populated areas was guaranteed and restrictions on travel across LoC were withdrawn. He condemned the forced migration of Kashmiri Pandits from different parts of the state.
Daalat Ali said that one million British Kashmiris were facing problem of identity as they are considered either Pakistani or Indian nationals in Britain. He said all parts of Jammu & Kashmir including Indian and Pakistani Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan were colonies of India and Pakistan.
He demanded that British Kashmiris should be issued with special permits like state subject certificates and they should be allowed to visit all parts of the state of Jammu & Kashmir. He called upon British MPs to play their active part in giving Kashmiris their right of self-determination.
Mumtaz Khan highlighted the need of reopening of old trade routes between different parts of the state. He criticized the role of Kashmir Council and said that it was impossible to give Kashmiris their due rights in presence of such brutal authority.
Syed Nazir Gilani said that militancy in Kashmir had murdered the right of self-determination of Kashmiri people. He said the AJK act was against the universal declaration of human rights and it was meant to subjugate people of the area. He also stressed MPs’ role to give people of Kashmir their democratic rights.
Krishna Bhan said that Kashmiri Pandits were forced to migrate from Kashmir due to extremist tendencies in the state and growing militancy. She said that any development on Kashmir without involvement of Kashmiri Pandits would be unfruitful. Chief Executive Press for Peace Zafar Iqbal highlighted the human rights violations in Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistan administered Kashmir. He said that all political prisoners of Gilgit-Baltistan should be released immediately as a goodwill gesture to promote peace. He strongly appreciated local human rights activist Babajan’s efforts in raising awareness about the flood victims of Hunza. He asked India and Pakistan to remove hurdles in cross-LoC trade. He said that people of different religion in Jammu & Kashmir must be allowed to visit religious shrines in across the Line of Control.
A senior lawyer-cum-politician from Gilgit Baltistan (GB)-a territory disputed between India and Pakistan and currently governed by Pakistan-backed government, has recently sent a communiqué to the president of Pakistan soliciting representation for this region in the upper house of the parliament. Advocate Amjad Hussain, member Gilgit Baltistan Council and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader expressed his opinion in a letter addressed to President Asif Ali Zardari. He is among one of those members of ruling PPP who have been extraordinarily active to put pressure on Islamabad-controlled government in Gilgit Baltistan to hastily make administrative changes in this area. A recent announcement by the chief minister of Gilgit-Baltistan to divide whole region into three administrative divisions is part of such political advancements.
The Gilgit Baltistan Council is the controlling body of the government of Pakistan for this region. It comprises of prime minister of Pakistan, governor and chief minister of Gilgit Baltistan, six members nominated by prime minister and six more by Gilgit Baltistan Legislative assembly. The federal minister of Kashmir & Gilgit Baltistan affairs is a non-voting member and minister in-charge of this council.
The Gilgit Baltistan region, formerly known as Northern Areas, was directly controlled by a division in the Ministry of Kashmir and Northern Areas (KANA) in Islamabad until as recently as 2009. The government would never have considered an elected government in this region if it had not come under a firm political pressure by a number of human rights organizations and diplomatic missions in Islamabad, particularly the EU member states. Now, a province-like setup has been made functional here under the arrangements of Gilgit Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order 2009 (GBESGO).
Currently political and democratic rights of the people of Gilgit Baltistan are being managed (controlled) by Pakistan through Gilgit Baltistan Council. The GBESGO gives more powers to Islamabad-controlled Gilgit Baltistan Council than Gilgit Baltistan Legislative Assembly which otherwise should have been given the status of the highest democratic institution at local level.
Advocate Amjad Hussain has officially approached federal government of Pakistan to make arrangements for allocation of seats in the Senate for people of Gilgit Baltistan, which he thinks would be a suitable measure to redress the grievances of people of this region. He says that Gilgit Baltistan is neither represented in National Assembly nor in the Senate. Thus, people of this area have no say in the Parliament and they feel divorced from the political mainstream. He further argues that Pakistan Election Commission (PEC) has announced the Senate elections this year and awarding a ticket to a representative from GB will strengthen the political process initiated by the GBESGO.
By officially endorsing the sense of deprivation and lack of a suitable platform for redressal of grievances of local people, the PPP politician from GB has accepted that not only the incumbent government has failed to deliver but also much-trumpeted GBESGO is still far from being fruitful. This has not been the first instance that a politician from an area which is part of former state of Jammu & Kashmir and claimed by India as its territory, has strongly asserted that people of this region should be given representation in Pakistani parliament. Many voices have been raised in past to advance this agenda. However, there is no such provision in the current constitutional framework of Pakistan that people of any part of the state of Jammu & Kashmir could be given representation either in the parliament or the provincial setup.
This is not the case that only Gilgit Baltistan region is deprived of its right to influence important decisions about its people in the federal cabinet. People of Azad Kashmir have also been denied representation in the national legislatures because of the absence of constitutional or legal provisions. In absence of political or constitutional backing at national level, safeguarding people’s interest becomes more difficult for local politicians either in Gilgit Baltistan or Azad Kashmir. They have no mandate to interfere into the affairs of parliamentary committees and other high-level resource management bodies of the government and their efforts to gain more powers and influence are often frustrated by the powerful federal ministries.
Why people of Gilgit Baltistan or Azad Kashmir can’t be given representation in Pakistani parliament is not a matter of choice for Pakistan. By virtue of international obligations and binding resolutions on Kashmir no part of the former state of Jammu & Kashmir including Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan could be annexed or brought under the national constitutional framework. However, Pakistan could improve governance issues by justifiably considering people’s demands in these areas. But, this matter is more influenced by political will than the constitutional or legal arrangements.
Almost all of mainstream political parties of Pakistan have been and continue to nurture a skeptical and jaundiced opinion about giving greater political rights to the people of Azad Kashmir. Whether it is Pakistan Peoples Party, Muslim League (N), (Q), (A) or (F), JUI, JI, ANP or MQM; they are not willing to give people of these areas any leverage in national affairs. The reason behind this jaundiced approach is not that Pakistani politicians are afraid of powerful military establishment which has hitherto controlled the Kashmir policy.
They are simply not giving them importance out of arrogance and selfishness. They would never take up issues affecting the performance of Kashmir Council, Gilgit Baltistan Council, federally controlled bureaucracy or judiciary in Gilgit Baltistan or Azad Kashmir and role of intelligence agencies.
The government of Pakistan is aware of the fact that considering giving greater political influence to the people of Gilgit Baltistan would not be a welcome move for the people of other parts of Azad Kashmir. More than ever, those groups, who are backed by pro-independence political forces, would consider it a direct interference in the affairs of people of Jammu & Kashmir.
The chief judge of the AJK high court was shot on last Tuesday in Muzaffarabad. Justice Ghulam Mustafa Mughal was rushed to a nearby military hospital, where doctors said his condition was stable. Authorities were searching for the unidentified assailant. The police were unclear on the motive for the attack and there was not an immediate official response from the federal interior ministry. There could be a personal reason or a judicial battle between some warring factions behind this attack; yet, chances of an act of terrorism are equally high.
Muzaffarabad and other parts of Pakistan administered Kashmir have been generally spared from bomb attacks and assassinations blamed on the Taliban and al-Qaeda-linked networks in other parts of Pakistan. The biggest terrorism-related incident was in 2009 when at least 15 people were killed and dozens more injured in a suicide bombing that ripped through a Shia mosque. In pre-Musharraf jehadi era, members of jihadi outfits would feel proud of openly displaying lethal and unlicensed weapons in almost all parts of Pakistan Administered Kashmir as there was no formal check by government agencies on display and use of firearms.
Although Musharraf’s policy of reconciliation and his four-point agenda did not succeed in a get through on Kashmir, it, however, bridled, to some extent, the dangerously growing influence of jihadi elements in both parts of Jammu and Kashmir. During last months of Nawaz Sharif government in Pakistan, the so-called jihadi organizations had mushroomed in almost all over Pakistan and it was increasingly becoming difficult for peace-loving people to keep a safe distance from their influence and activities.
A clear policy shift by Pervez Musharraf government on Kashmir issue paved way for disarming of armed jihadi activists present in the area. That policy ceased to work long before the Bombay attacks. Initially, the militant groups in and around Muzaffarabad, appeared with new faces and camouflaged attire, apparently to help the government in rehabilitation and reconstruction activities. Their ostensible approach was humanitarian and development focused. But there are a number of evidence to suggest that they are once again under the protection of Pakistan’s intelligence apparatus.
Training camps are once again being set up, though, not with a sole purpose of terrorism training. There is much to be covered in the new syllabus. This time Kashmiri juveniles have not been given priority to be recruited for the sacred mission. According to popular research on terrorism trends, poverty, and ethnoreligious hatred has provided a major pool for jihadist recruitment in Southern Punjab.
In 2002, Musharraf government banned the most violent of the militant groups that were active on Kashmir front. He also withdrew Pakistan’s open support for Kashmir militancy. The chauvinistic trends and corruption running deep into the jehadi kingdom operating on Kashmir front later exposed its true face. Majority of those organizations operating under a cover of pan-Islamic revolutionary concept had no concern with the ‘Kashmir cause’ and almost all of them were working on their own agenda.
Their heavily guarded and extensively fortified training camps all along LoC were happened to be the centers of moral turpitude, cruelty, inhuman and degrading treatment of young Kashmiris, forced recruitments, sexual harassment, blackmailing, and mental and physical torture etc. Ironically, the most striking element of this jihadi culture was its political face, namely the jehad-e-Islami or the armed struggle for Islamic supremacy.
Pomp and show was an essential part of that jihadi culture. Bearded faces with long hair locks, athletic and strong body structure, awesome and aggressive gestures, a bulk of misleading literature, tones of propaganda material including audio cassettes, posters, and stickers, a barrage of motivational magazines were everywhere from Muzaffarabad to Kotli and Bhimber to Rawalakot.
Thanks to 9/11 and US aggression in Afghanistan which brought some sigh of relief to fearful and ever apprehensive peace-loving people in Muzaffarabad and around. Onwards is hide-and-seek, pick-and-use, the use-and-throw play of top to bottom jihadi activists. This play was started from Tora Bora and reached its climax at Abbottabad operation targeting Ossama bin Laden.
Recent reports from independent media suggest that much of the past glory of militants have been resurrected and they have reopened their ‘tactical schools’ for poverty-stricken and development hungry Kashmiris. The post-earthquake failures of government to revive peoples’ confidence on the democratic system have paved way for pro-militancy organizations to regroup and reassert their presence by taking an active part in development and aid activities.
Recently released American diplomatic cables have revealed that some foreign governments have spent millions of dollars to fund jihadi outfits in different parts of Pakistan including Pakistani Kashmir. Their most preferred form of funding was in the shape of donations to madrassas or religious schools.
A recent report published in Pakistani press highlighted that majority of students in these madrassas in and around Islamabad hailed from Pakistan Administered Kashmir and tribal areas of Pakistan. The diplomatic document exposed that most of the funds in question were sent to madrassas and these religious schools are major links between terrorist organizations and their foreign funding masters.
The recent attack on a senior member of Pakistani judiciary could be a warning shot or more precisely a coded signal for the security establishment and the government as well that jihadists are ready to launch a full-fledged militant activity in Jammu & Kashmir.
“Pakistan does not claim Kashmir. Kashmir dispute is about aspirations of Kashmiris.”Pakistan’s foreign affairs spokesperson Tasnim Aslam was more articulate and fluent in her speech than the President himself when he said that Pakistan was willing to withdraw its claim over Kashmir. In his previous interview with a private TV channel President Pervez Musharraf has said, “If they (APHC leaders are not willing to accept this (his formula for the solution of Kashmir issue); they must be prepared to fight withIndia for another hundred years.
Before partition, when there was Dogra rule in Kashmir, civil liberties were non-existent. People were asked to pay taxes for their hearths, agricultural tools and even wives. This was the most heinous aspect of a tyrannical rule. The idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of Sub-continent was much fascinating for the people ofKashmir. They invited Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah to visit Kashmir in order to show their sympathy to this idea. In the later years of history they proved their allegiance to this cause and wanted to accede to Pakistan.
Ideologically, Kashmiri nationalism is a natural outcome of the concept of a separate homeland for the Muslims of subcontinent. Therefore Kashmir’s accession to Pakistanremained a focal point of the struggle of Kashmiri Muslims after independence of Indiaand Pakistan.
According to official version, when Pakistan turned over Afghan policy, it was considered necessary due to our commitments on war against terror. Though, lately we have accepted that it was the threat that worked. Contrarily, our relations today withIndia are much better than the previous years of tensions and mistrust. But we are heading towards another somersault on Kashmir without any homework. Astonishingly, Musharraf’s close aides in the parliament including federal ministers are still trumpeting that there is no policy shift on Kashmir.
President Musharraf’s stance can be termed as his vision about Kashmir. On January 7, 2006 in a media interview in Islamabad, he aired the idea of demilitarization of three major cities in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) namely Srinagar, Kupwara and Baramullah as the first step towards solving the issue by placing the disputed area under joint control and management.
This was not the first time Musharraf had proposed demilitarization in Kashmir. He floated the same idea in October 2004, though without naming any town. He said, “Demilitarize Kashmir, give self governance to its people with a joint management arrangement on top.”
Now, the president has gone not a single step forward but a giant leap. Asked whetherPakistan was giving up its claim to Kashmir, Musharraf said, “We will have to… yes… if this solution comes up”. Let us have a glance how this incident was reported in our immediate neighborhood. Speaking without thinking (daily Star Bengladesh), Musharraf a Modern Kautaliya (Greater Kashmir), Musharraf has misspoken again (Gulf News),Pakistan changes tenor of its Kashmir position (Hindustan Times).
Kashmir is no more an integral part of Pakistan, not even a joint territory between Indiaand Pakistan. Pakistan also assert now that “If we talk of independent Kashmir then we will be out of Kashmir’s legal framework which give the Kashmir dispute an international legality”
If Kashmir is not going to be an integral part of Pakistan/India nor it is an independent state, then what type of the territory is it? Self rule in its finest shape without an international face is no more than a mess. So, let the Kashmiris fight for another hundred years with this mess.
Earlier President’s four point formula included identification of the territory of the state of Jammu & Kashmir, demilitarization on both sides of the LoC, self governance by the people of the state and a joint control by India and Pakistan.
At first, India categorically denied this formula. But with the passage of time willingness to think upon these lines has been shown by Indian authorities at occasions. India is interested in converting this occasion into an opportunity to get some pledges upon nontraditional security environment. New Delhi is willing to set up cross LoC joint mechanisms on issues of health, water management, environmentprotection and tourism etc. but unwilling to give sovereignty status under a joint management system.
According to Indian approach, we should think in terms of Indo Pak joint management of various resources and consultative institutions in agriculture, forestry, environment, tourism, water and power by making borders irrelevant. But, Indian opposition leaders from BJP are still pressing the government not to indulge in such interaction withPakistan.
We must understand that first we stepped down from previous stand on Kashmir in which we considered it a disputed state between two countries. Its status was yet to be determined according to the UN resolutions and those resolutions called for a plebiscite in Kashmir.
Now Pakistan has forwarded such an idea in which people’s opinion has not been considered relevant. Not even in the most recent interaction of foreign office with Kashmiri leaders anyone hinted such a bold initiative.
Earlier, in President’s opinion, the identification of territorial boundaries of the state of Jammu & Kashmir was the first step to move forward. As far as this identification process is concerned, recently, foreign minister Khurshid Mehmood Qasuri said that both countries were close to reach an agreement on Siachin. But when India openly asked to show our positions on map we opted to be silent.
Insight on Kashmir 