KASHMIR SITUATION
Statement by Sheikh Abdullah to the Constituent Assembly, Jammu and Kashmir – II
Permit me now to deal with each one of these items and also the agreements arrived at between the J&k Government and the Govt. of India in relation to them.
Residuary Powers
It was agreed that while under the present Indian Constitution, the Residuary Powers vested in the Centre in respect of all the States other than J&K, in the case of our States, they rested in the State itself.
Citizenship
It was agreed that in accordance with Article 5 of the Indian Constitution, persons who have their domicile in the Jammu & Kashmir State shall be the citizens of India. It was further agreed that the State legislature shall have power to define and regulate the rights and privileges of the permanent residents of the State, more especially in regard to acquisition of immovable property, appointments to services and like matters. Till then, the existing State law would apply. It was also agreed that special provision should be made in the laws governing citizenship to provide for the return of those permanent residents of Jammu & Kashmir State, who went to Pakistan in connection with the disturbances of 1947 Orin fear of them as well as of those who had left for Pakistan earlier but could not return. If they returned, they should be entitled to the rights and privileges and obligations of citizenship.
There are historic reasons which necessitate such constitutional safeguards. I am glad to say that the Government of India appreciated the need for such a safeguard. No definition of the special rights and privileges of the residents of the State can afford to remain static. The need may arise at one stage or the other to liberalize such a definition. The importance of the fact that State Legislature shall retain powers to be able to effect such modifications becomes obvious in this context.
On account of the disturbances of 1947 and also a consequence of the invasion of this country by Pakistan, large numbers of the residents of this State suffered dislocation. The resettlement of the dislocated population, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, cannot one-sided or unilateral.
Fundamental Rights
It was agreed that the Fundamental Rights, which are contained in the Constitution of India could not be conferred on the residents of the J&K State in their entirety taking into account the economic, social and political character of our movement as enunciated in the New Kashmir Plan. The need for providing suitable modifications, amendments and exceptions as the case may be in the Fundamental Rights Chapter of the Indian Constitution in order to harmonize those provisions with the pattern of our principles was admitted. The main point to be determined is whether the Chapter of our Fundamental Rights should form a part of the Kashmir Constitution or that of the Union Constitution.
Supreme Court
It was agreed that the Supreme Court should have original jurisdiction in respect of disputes mentioned in Article 131 of the Constitution of India. It was further agreed that the Supreme Court should have jurisdiction in regard to Fundamental Rights which are agreed to by the State. On behalf of the Government of India, it was recommended that the Supreme Court should be the final Court of appeal in all civil and criminal matters.
We, however, felt that this would need a detailed examination and consequently it was agreed that we should have time to consider it further.
National Flag
The new State Flag was in no sense a rival of the National Flag. But for historical and other reasons connected with the freedom struggle in the State, the need for the continuance of this flag was recognised. The Union flag to which we continue our allegiance as a part of the Union will occupy the supremely distinctive place in the State.
President of India
It was agreed that the powers to grant reprieve and commute death sentences, etc. should also belong to the President of the Union.
Headship of the State
The following arrangement was mutually agreed upon:-
i) The Head of the State shall be the person recognized by the President of the Union on recommendation of the Legislature of the State
ii) He shall hold office during the pleasure of the President.
iii) He may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office.
iv) Subject to the foregoing provisions, the Head of the State shall hold office for a term of five years from the date he enters upon his office.
v) Provided that he shall, notwithstanding the expiration of his term, continue to hold the office until his successor enters upon his office.
Financial Integration
We agreed that it would be necessary to evolve some sort of financial arrangement between the State and the Indian Union. But as this involved far-reaching consequences, it was felt that a detailed and objective examination of this subject would be necessary.
Emergency Powers
On behalf of the Government of India, it was stated that the application of Article 352 of the Constitution was necessary as it related to vital matters affecting the security of the State. They did not press for the application of Article 356 or 360.
On behalf of the Kashmir Delegation, it was stated that the application of Article 352 to the State was not necessary. In the event of war or external aggression, item 1 in the Seventh Schedule relating to the defence of India applied and the Government of India would have full authority to take any steps in connection with defence, etc. In particular, we were averse to internal disturbance being referred to in this connection, as even some petty internal disorder might be considered sufficient for the application of Article 352.
It was suggested on behalf of the Government of India that Article 352 might be accepted as it is with the addition at the end of the first paragraph (i) of the following words: "but in regard to internal disturbance at the request or with the concurrence of the Government of the State".
We generally accepted this position, but wanted some time to consider the implications and consequences as laid down in Articles 353, 358 and 359 which on the whole we accepted. In regard to Article 354, we wanted to examine it further before expressing our opinion.
Conduct of elections to Houses of Parliament
Article 324 of the Indian Constitution already applies to the State in so far as it relates to elections to parliament and to the offices of the President and the Vice-President. of India.
I have put before this House the broad indications of the agreements arrived at between us and the Government of India. The attitude of the Government of India has been most helpful. A satisfactory position has emerged and we are now able to assess the basic issues of our constitutional relationship with India in clearer terms. Both the representatives of the Government of India and the Kashmir Delegation have been impelled by the desire to strengthen further the existing relationship to remove all obscurity and vagueness. We are convinced, as ever before, that we have the full support both of the Government and the people of India in the fulfilment of our democratic ideals and the realization of our objectives.
This goodwill and amity, I am sure, will result in the consolidation of freedom and democracy in our country.
It is, of course, for the Constituent Assembly. To determine the extent and scope of the State's accession to India. The Assembly may agree to continue this relationship on the present basis or extend its scope as it might like and consider feasible and proper.
Karan R. Sawhny On the Next Step in Kashmir
In South Asia, the virtuous triangle of good governance, development and peace has often been fractured by the involvement of neighbouring states in fomenting, support and exacerbating internal conflicts. Without external support most of these conflicts would never have reached the levels of intensity and bloodletting witnessed in the last fifteen years.
In all cases, people affected by violence cross borders for humanitarian reasons and eventually develop contacts with the intelligence agencies of the refuge-giving country. Gradually, the host country itself gets entangled in the internal strife of its neighbours. Internal conflicts do not take place merely because of the existence of ethnic, tribal or communal plurality. They occur because such sectarian differences are manipulated by opportunist political leaders. Such manipulation is usually successful only when ordinary citizens feel alienated due to flawed governance. When people reach such a state of desperation that they are willing to risk their lives to undermine the state-structures of the country they live in, deadly conflicts spread like wild fire.
Where states lost their legitimacy in the eyes of their people, violence became widespread, often assisted by hostile elements in the neighbouring states.
The recent elections in the Indian States of Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir have given their people the opportunity to participate in decision-making. Punjab, after a decade of violence, has established peace through the exercise of democratic choice and the State's people are now enjoying their rights in a normal environment.
If Dr. Farooq Abdullah succeeds in his peace-making efforts, this region would have its best chance of living in harmony.
Many experts feel that the elections held six months ago "give the people a right to participate indecision-making" and the although "the elections may not be considered an end in itself, they provide a beginning for the peaceful resolution of conflict in Jammu and Kashmir".
In this context both the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir and the senior Kashmiri leader and Central Cabinet Minister, Professor Saifuddin Soz, have categorically stated that the ruling National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir was prepared to order fresh Assembly polls if the Hurriyat Conference agreed to participate in them. Emphasising that accepting the reality was the only option in Kashmir, Professor Soz stated on television recently that the Hurriyat leaders should realise that they will never succeed in securing independence and only greater autonomy within the framework of the Indian Constitution was feasible. They should not seek the impossible and it is in the interest of Kashmiri Muslims that Kashmir should continue to be an integral part of India.
With the return to power in Pakistan of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. South Asia is at a historical crossroads. If his government is able to end cross-border terrorism, considerable goodwill will be created between the two countries and a relationship could be built with both eyes fixed on the future. India and Pakistan could then together re-establish in this region the fractured triangle of peace, development and good governance for the benefit of their peoples. It is only when civil society struggles to strengthen the virtuous triangle that the half-century old conflict in Kashmir will cease.
U.K. JKLF, London's Memorandum to High Commissioner of India, London, 11 February, 1997 (Extracts)
On the 13th anniversary of Shaheed Maqbool Butt's martyrdom ... we strongly condemn the oppressive use of force against the innocent population of Kashmir valley by the occupying Indian forces and demand an immediate end of the ongoing persecution.
We are equally concerned about the role of foreign agencies and communalist elements in the Kashmir valley, who are responsible for sectarian and communal violence in the name of Islam and 'Jihad-e-Kashmir’ Such elements are also responsible for killing of human rights workers, religious and political leaders, parliamentarians, intellectualise and members of the Muslim and Hindu community. This coupled with the barbarous role of the armed forces has forced thousands of people, both Hindus and Muslims to flee and seck refuge elsewhere.
Apparently, the ruling elites of both, India and Pakistan are directly or indirectly responsible for a slow and continuous destruction of our beautiful country and a massive annihilation of its inhabitants by means of a prolonged limited war.
The year 1997 marks the 50th anniversary of Kashmiri nation's struggle for the unification and independence of Jammu Kashmir. We (express) our solidarity with and support for the indigenous, secular and democratic movement against foreign occupation of our mother land.
We take this opportunity to convey to the millions of freedom and peace loving people, and democratic forces in India and Pakistan, as well as the world's civilised nations that the Kashmir issue is not a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan; rather it is a question of regaining our lost national sovereignty.
In the name of common religion or geographical affinity, both the governments are making territorial claims on our country and in total contravention of the UN charter, both have banned our people's right of free movement in their own country.
We seek help from the United Nations, in particular the members of the Security Council to achieve the following objectives:
* Withdrawal from Jammu Kashmir of all the Indian and Pakistani forces including armed or unarmed foreign elements.
* Immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners, and other civilians held by both governments without fair trail and legal representation.
* Recognition of the inherent right of Kashmir nationals including expatriates to enter, settle, and travel freely in any part of their country.
* Protection, rehabilitation and compensation to all refugees including Muslims, Hindus and other minorities.
* India and Pakistan must provide guarantee of non-interference (military or otherwise) in Jammu Kashmir’s internal affairs.
*Election of regional assemblies for the following regions.
i) Jammu ii)Kashmir Valley
iii) Ladakh/Zanskar iv)Gilgit-Baltistan
v)Azad' Kashmir
Election of a constituent assembly on the basis of one person one vote, representing all the regions and sections of the Kashmiri people on both sides of the divided line, to frame a constitution and to determine our relationship with our neighbours including India and Pakistan.
Shoukat Maqbool Butt, President,J&K National Liberation Front and Member Organisations of JK Liberation Council
UNI Report on Madarsas in J&K
A total of 167 madrasas (Islamic schools) indoctrinating children about militant activities are still being run in Jammu and Ladakh regions despite the State Government's efforts to close down such institutions.
Beginning children on "A-for-Allah and B-for-Bandook (gun)", Islamic and the banned Falah-i-Amma Trust, get heavy financial assistance from several West Asian countries and Muslim educational Trusts.
Of the 167 schools, 7 are running in Jammu city and5 on its outskirts. Remaining 160 are being run in the border districts of Rajouri (11), Poonch (60) and Doda (78) of Jammu region and the Kargil (5) districts of Ladakh. The sources said there were about 1,400 suchinstitutions in the State in 1990 mostly in Anantnag and Bagdam districts of Kashmir Valley. The sources said Falah-i-Amma Trust, with its headquarters at Batmaloo was banned by the Government but the Trust changed its name and continued functioning.
According to the sources, 17 such institutions are at present running in the border district of Rajouri with a total student strength 655. These madrasas are run from places such as Budhal, Sakeri, Upper Dara, Katgali, Palangar, Deraj Thana, Mandi Bakori, Majrakot-I, Majrakot-II and Kabhar. The State Education Minister Abdul Qayoom said that the Government would not allow fundamentalist education to be imparted in educational institutions. He said several such schools were closed in the past ... He said intelligence agencies had been asked to file yearly reports on the activities of such institutions and those reports would form the basis for recognition and de-recognition of such institutions.
US Council for Foreign Relations: Task Force Report
On a New US Policy towards India and Pakistan
Neither India nor Pakistan appears willing to accord the people of Kashmir the right to independence.
The continuing conflict drains both countries political and financial resources, while causing real harm to both countries and most of all to the Kashmiris each side regularly demands international action against the other.
Kashmir is a principal but not the sole cause of bad relations between India and Pakistan. It is also a reflection of their general state of animosity. If the Kashmir dispute were resolved tomorrow, in other words, relations between them would still be somewhat sour. Still, Kashmir remains a possible casus belli.
Unfortunately, there is no "right" or plausible solution to the conflict in sight. India, Pakistan, and the Kashmiris themselves each have claims that cannot be reconciled. The issue is so politicized and emotional that it is hard even to discuss an approach toward resolution -multilateral or bilateral - in public without being accuses of tilting toward one side. The U.S. government does not have a great deal of leverage in regard to the Kashmir dispute, and the time is not ripe for Washington to launch a major new initiative. Nevertheless, the United States should be prepared to seize opportunities to contribute to peacemaking should they arise in the future.
From this analysis flow two policy prescriptions for the Kashmir dispute, relating both to the level and content of U.S. diplomatic activity. although individual members of the Task Force favour alternative U.S. stances - including active support for the Indian position towards Kashmir, absolute neutrality, or support for a solution based on some form of Kashmiri self-determination - the majority of the group believes U.S. interests in both India and Pakistan are best served at this time by working with other governments on a step-by-step approach towards series of practical interim objectives. The United States ought to pursue mainly quiet diplomacy to Kashmir, promoting modest but incremental steps to (defuse) tensions and reduce friction between, the protagonists with the help of other countries. It should explore the possibility of forming a "contact group" of external powers. The overall goal of these efforts, in turn, should be to achieve an interim set of agreements of even informal understandings, rather than to settle "final status" issues.
The United States in concert with other governments, should seek to lower tension and violence, reduce military forces, and restore political normalcy Kashmir. Specifically, India and Pakistan should be urged to undertake regular and sustained bilateral negotiations directed toward a cease-fire and a halt to military actions(other than patrols or strictly defensive purposes) along the line of control in Kashmir, the reconstitution and increased monitoring of peacekeeping machinery along the boundary, supplementing U.N .- sponsored with bilateral mechanisms if possible; and renewed negotiations for a separate rapid agreement over the withdrawal of both military forces from the Siachen glacier. Pakistan should be urged to end direct and indirect military support to Kashmiri insurgent organizations. And India should be urged to continue and accelerate moves to resurrect the political process in Kashmir, including grants of amnesty for those insurgents willing to abjure violence, punishment for those members; of the security forces involved in human rights violations, and conduct of discussions with the newly elected Kashmiri government about the degree of autonomy for the state within the Indian constitution.
At a Prayer Meeting in Delhi, 29 Dec., 1947
"I have been taken to task for daring to say what I have said about Kashmir and the Maharaja Saheb. Those who have done so have evidently failed to read my statement carefully. I have simply tendered advice which I suppose the lowliest can do. To do so sometimes becomes duty as was the case with me. What was it for? It was, if accepted, designed to raise the Maharaja Saheb in his own and the world's esteem. His and his state's is today a most unenviable position. He is a Hindu prince having under his sway a very large majority of Muslims The invaders have called their invasion a holy war for the defence of Muslims .. Is it any wonder that I have advised the ruling authority to rise to the occasion and become like the King of England?. "
Foreign Mercenaries in J&K
1991 2 1995 77
1992 6 1996 213
1993 79 1997(May) 65
1994 77
Origin: Afghanistan, Pakistan, POK, Sudan, Bahrain,Yemen, Turkey, Chechenya, Iran and Bangladesh(Source: Indian Army-quested in the Pioneer, New Delhi,28.6.97)
Kiran Karnik on Trans-sylvanian Model Solution
Any solution in which Pakistan recognises India's territorial rights in Kashmir-even if this is limited to the part now under its control-will, in the final analysis, be acceptable to India; and this will be irrespective of other conditions. Similarly, Pakistan will, in the ultimate analysis, find it difficult to turn down a solution that formally recognises and provides some kind of special and "guaranteed" rights to the Kashmiris. After all, this is what it claims to be fighting for, and not for a piece of the territory.
Transylvania ... has, for some time, been a bone of contention between Hungary and Rumania. While it is not a part Rumania, a large part of the population is ethnically Hungarian. Both sides have claimed the area, and this problem, which is a legancy of the break-up of the Austro-Hungrarian Empire, has embittered relations between the two countries. A few months ago, the two countries came to a settlement which, in basic terms, is a "territory for rights' arrangement. In return for Rumanian agreement to provide certain guaranteed rights for the ethnic Hungarians.Hungary has given up all its territorial claims on the area. Whatever the Indian viewpoint, Pakistan does consider --for emotional reasons that defy logic- Muslim Kahsmiris as their "ethnic" brethren. Hence for the concern for the rights “of Kashmiris". A " Transylavania settlement" is therefore possible, despite the many obvious differences in the situation Such a solution will satisfy the minimal strategic requirements of both countries, even if it does not meet the maximal position of either. More important, this solution will mean no loss of for either side. This will make it easy for both governments to sell the packages to their citizens. In fact, each can proclaim a victory, and in the process a vindication of its position. India will retain Kashmir -the area it now controls- and thus protect and project determination to retain its territorial integrity. Pakistan will have establish its ability to fight for and ensure the rights of the Islamic Umma in general, and Kashmiri Muslims in particular.
The territory for human rights solution, despite some premise that would normally be unacceptable to one side or the other, provides a real solution and is, at least comparatively, a win-win or mutually beneficial solution. It is not an ideal solution.
... A referendum in Kashmir is now a completely infeasible proposition. Another ideal solution could be a de-militarised, autonomous State (with its full territory, as it existed in1947), with open borders to Pakistan and India. This would require an exceptionally friendly relationship between India and Pakistan, and although there is no dearth of rhetoric, it may be difficult even then. A completely independent Kashmir, as another possibility will definitely be unacceptable to India for strategic and other reasons. Moreover, it is unlikely to be welcomed by Pakistan either, despite any public postures that it may adopt. With are-opening of the formal dialogue between India and Pakistan, supplemented by much greater people-to-people interaction. This is an opportune time to move ahead withhold initiatives.
On Muslim Indians Apathy over Kashmir
The Indian state is secular. The Secular spirit pervades the whole body of the Constitution of India.
The decision to make Indian State secular was deliberate. Muslims in India have reasons to be happy about the Constitution.
Kashmir ... provides the acid test for the Indian Muslims' secular credentials. Faith in secularism implies repudiation of the two-nation theory in toto. The militancy in Kashmir and the demands of the militants’ is a negation of secularism, so dear to Indian Muslims. The two-nation theory was mercifully given quite an un-Islamic burial by Pakistan in the battle-fields of Bangladesh, but the Kashmiri militants, with the active connivance and full support of Pakistan, have successfully revived its ghost, which has been strangulating secularism in the Valley for a long time.
Indian Muslims have shown just no concern over the happenings in Kashmir. They have not pointed out to Kashmiri Muslims about the dangers that lie in the course that they are following. Their inaction is amazing and silence deafening. Kashmir has given a big jolt to secularism. Any further aggravation of the situation there will raise the ante for its banishment from the Indian scène. Muslims in the rest of India should wake up to this danger and stop the rot. This would be the most effective way of serving the cause of secularism. This indeed is a sacred duty which they must discharge. (A.R. Khan in News from India)
On Pakistan's 50th Anniversary
The nation has no reason to celebrate the 50thyear of the creation of the country when its sovereignty was at stake, political stability non-existent and social unrest rampant.
"I think we should be ashamed of ourselves instead".
'Instead of being a nation we have become a crowd. Looking back at what we have done in the past50 years, do we have a right to indulge in activities like celebrating the golden jubilee?"
Malik Meraj Khalid, Former Acting Prime Minister, Pakistan.
