[Reader-list] Giving Kashmir away? No way

[Aditya Raj Kaul]

*Giving Kashmir away? No way
*  ** *Rajiv Sikri*
**
*Link - http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/aug/21guest1.htm*
**
August 21, 2008

Is it an orchestrated coincidence or random chance that on August 17, two
leading national dailies prominently carried commentaries advocating
independence for the Kashmir Valley? With surprising ease and lack of angst,
each author has argued in favour of secession by part of an integrally
constituted state of the Union of India.

Tremendous efforts by all the state and non-state personae in Jammu &
Kashmir and the rest of India over the last six decades have seen sharp ups
and downs, almost see-saw phases in the feelings of alienation followed by
assimilation, poverty followed by growing prosperity among the people of
this state.

The last few years have brought in the most sustained period of political
stability, free and fair elections, economic recovery and strengthening
integration, achieved through painstaking efforts and sagacity by all
players. Heading into the November 2008 state assembly elections in Jammu &
Kashmir, the separatist groups found themselves on the sidelines, threatened
with further irrelevance and declining support should these elections be
held as smoothly and with equally wide participation as those in 2002.

The Amarnath Yatra
[Images<http://search.rediff.com/imgsrch/default.php?MT=amarnath
yatra>
] land issue that surfaced in June has been extremely poorly handled by the
state and central governments at every stage. The nation needs answers and
accountability about why in less than two months the marginalised separatist
groups are once again being allowed to set the political agenda in the
Valley. Why have no efforts been made to explain the reality of the proposed
temporary land allocation scheme (for the Amarnath Yatra) to the agitating
people in the Kashmir Valley? Why have the strong feelings of every
community in Jammu over the cancellation of the allocation been so
deliberately ignored and under-estimated? Why is it that even the most
elementary efforts were not undertaken to disabuse the people of Kashmir
Valley about a so-called economic blockade? If there was at any point the
possibility of a shortage of essential supplies for the people of the
Kashmir Valley this should have been overcome by arranging sufficient
airlifts and/or trucking in such supplies through the alternative Manali-Leh
route.

At the same time, no matter how serious these lapses, the answer cannot be
to suggest that the Kashmir Valley be allowed to secede from India. The
sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation is as much a composite
whole as the human body is. If there is an ailing part of the body, you
diagnose the problem and take remedial measures, not carelessly, almost
casually, suggest an excision and discarding of the offending section.

For those who advocate a referendum in Jammu and Kashmir
[Images<http://search.rediff.com/imgsrch/default.php?MT=jammu and
kashmir>
], there are some questions. Do they feel that Jammu and Kashmir legally and
constitutionally cannot be considered a part of India? On what basis can
there be a referendum in the Kashmir Valley, or separate referenda in Jammu,
Ladakh and the Valley? On what basis can "independence" be considered as the
so-called third option? Should the proposed referendum be based on the UN
resolutions of August 1948 and January 1949? Or are such sentiments the
manifestation of a simultaneous bout of exasperation and giving in to the
separatists who have been quite unnecessarily allowed to mount pressures in
a sudden reversal of the peaceful situation that existed in the state prior
to June?

The UN resolutions of 1948/49 (adopted by the UN Commission for India and
Pakistan) are unequivocal and specific in making the proposed plebiscite in
all the five regions of Jammu and Kashmir conditional upon (i) withdrawal of
Pakistani troops from all the areas of the state of Jammu and Kashmir that
it has occupied (this includes PoK, the Northern Territories and the
Shaksgam valley that has been ceded by Pakistan to China); and (ii) the
withdrawal by Pakistan, from these occupied areas of Jammu and Kashmir, of
their tribesmen and nationals not ordinarily resident in these areas. The UN
Commission in an *aide-memoire* issued on January 14, 1949, stated that in
the event of Pakistan not implementing these pre-conditions, India's
acceptance of the UN resolutions would no longer be binding on them.

As recently as March 2001 former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, speaking
in Islamabad [Images<http://search.rediff.com/imgsrch/default.php?MT=islamabad>
], accepted the legal and practical difficulties in implementing the UN
resolutions and hence their irrelevance. It is evident that the UN
resolutions no longer provide any basis for holding referenda either in the
Kashmir Valley or in Jammu and Ladakh.

Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India, and will remain so. The
Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir itself recognises this. Any move to hold a
referendum in any part of Jammu and Kashmir would contradict the fundamental
statement in Section 3 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir that 'the
State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of
India'. Section 147 prohibits any amendment of Section 3 by the state
legislature. In any case, India has stringent laws that forbid secessionist
activity.

It is time that the people of India and all national political parties come
out unequivocally against anyone who advocates secessionism. In this
context, the print and electronic media too should be more responsible about
giving prominence to such views.