The
current agitation in Indian-Held Kashmir is rooted in the struggle
of the people for the exercise of the right of self-determination.
Peaceful processions chanting demands for freedom were fired upon
by Indian Army and Police. Hundreds of men, women and children have
been killed or wounded. New Delhi's allegations of assistance
to the Kashmiri people from the Pakistan side are unfounded.
Objective reports
in foreign media testify that the Kashmiri agitation is indigenous.
Pakistan upholds the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to
self-determination in accordance with the resolutions of the United
Nations Security Council. These resolutions of 1948 and 1949 provide
for the holding of a free and impartial plebiscite for the determination
of the future of the State by the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The basic points about the UN resolutions are that : (i) the
complaint relating to Kashmir was initiated by India in the Security
Council ; (ii) the Council explicitly and by implication, rejected
India's claim that Kashmir is legally Indian territory; (iii) the
resolutions established self-determination as the governing principle
for the settlement of the Kashmir dispute. This is the world body's
commitment to the people of Kashmir ; (iv) the resolutions endorsed
a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the
mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed
and specified conditions.
The Security
Council has rejected the Indian contention that the people of Kashmir
have exercised their right of self-determination by participating
in the "elections" which India has from time to time organised
in the Held Kashmir. The 0.2% turn out during the 1989 "elections"
was the most recent clear repudiation of the Indian claim.
Pakistan continues to adhere to the UN resolutions. These are binding
also on India. The Simla Agreement of 2 July 1972, to which
Pakistan also continues to adhere, did not alter the status of Jammu
and Kashmir as a disputed territory: Para 6 of the Agreement
lists "a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir" as one
of the outstanding questions awaiting a settlement. Para 4
(ii) talks of a "Line of Control" as distinguished from
an international border. Furthermore, it explicitly protects "the
recognised position of either side," The recognised position
of Pakistan is the one which is recognised by the United Nations
and the World Community in general. Article I (iv) obviously
refers to the Kashmir issue when it talks of "the basic issues
and causes of conflict which have bedevilled the relations between
the two countries for the last 25 years.
The Simla Agreement
does not preclude raising of Kashmir issue at the United Nations:
Para I (I) specifically provides that the UN Charter "shall
govern" relations between the parties. Para I (ii) providing
for settlement of differences by peaceful means, does not exclude
resort to the means of pacific settlement of disputes and differences
provided in the UN Charter. The UN Security Council remains
seized of the Kashmir issue which ermines onf the Council's agenda.
Articles 34 and 35 of the UN Charter specifically empower the Security
Council to investigate any dispute independently or at the request
of a member State. These provisions cannot be made subservient to
any bilateral agreement. According to Article 103 of the UN
Charter, member States obligations under the Charter take precedence
over obligations under a bilateral agreement. Presence of
United Nations Military Observers Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)
at the Line of Control in Kashmir is a clear evidence off UN's involvement
in the Kashmir issue. Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory.
It dies not
involve the principle of respect for the unity and territorial integrity
of states, to which Pakistan adheres. Attempts to forcibley
suppress the legitimate demands of the people of Jammu and Kashmir
are doomed to failure. Similarly, threats of use of force will not
affect Pakistan's resolve to maintain its position of principle.
|