news details |
|
|
| Relation between big powers and problem of Jammu & Kashmir | | |
Dr. Rajkumar Singh
For the last 50 years the problem of Kashmir between India and Pakistan has been an international issue. The major world powers have been taking active interest in the matter for their own reasons. Apart from facing a war-like situation on several occasions the two had fought in 1965, 1971 and 1999 that proved, to a large extent, futility of war in solving the problem. Pakistan, in a well-thought strategy began to generate fresh extremism and violence in Jammu and Kashmir. Special Kashmir funds for supporting insurgency had been created. Government sponsored media campaign had increased manifold. Advertisements were appearing in the press asking for ‘Jehad’. Fatehas were being read in the Mosques and in the Parliament for the terrorists. A Pakistani citizen sitting in USA was owing up responsibilities for kidnappings and killings, and also openly asking his so-called followers to assassinate the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition in India.
Earlier efforts by India
New Delhi, as a part of its diplomatic efforts to appraise major world powers sent S. K. Singh, country’s Foreign Secretary to USA and in response, the Bush Administration had reaffirmed US support for the resolution of the Kashmir question in the “Simla Agreement”, which called for peaceful resolution of all bilateral matters between India and Pakistan. At the same time the United States had rejected a bid by Pakistan seeking American support for bringing a resolution on Kashmir to the United Nations Security Council. The present dispensation in US had also appreciated new Indian Government’s willingness to discuss and sort things out through a dialogue.
The new Prime Minister of India V. P. Singh, in a letter to the US President, George Bush had welcomed Washington’s understanding of India’s position on the criteria for resolving its problems with Pakistan. He noted with satisfaction the US endorsement of the principle that all issues involving New Delhi and Islamabad should be sorted out peacefully and bilaterally. However, despite all this Pakistan was slowly but surely sought to internationalise the Kashmir issue through the UN ignoring the advice of the United States that the Simla Agreement of 1972 offers the best option for resolving the dispute between the two countries.
At the end of three-day visit of India’s Foreign Secretary S. K. Singh to USSR and his consultation with top Moscow officials the Foreign Minister of the country said, “The Soviet Union condemns foreign interference in any form in the affairs of India and assured all round co-operation. The Soviet Union is also of the view that Pakistan must recognize the reality that Kashmir is an integral part of India. Abdul Wakil, the Foreign Minister of Afghanistan in a meeting with his Indian counterpart extended full support to India on the Kashmir issue and had unequivocally condemned Islamabad’s interference in the affairs of that state as well as its efforts to internationalise the issue. In the meantime, French President Mitterrand, in a banquet speech reply in Islamabad favoured peaceful solution of the problem and said. “It would not be good if the efficacy of the Simla Agreement was brought into question.
Chinese designs in South Asia
The peoples Republic of China being a major Power seemed sandwiched between its two objectives. Far from wanting to promote any conflict in South Asia, they are keen to avoid it. They do not want on the one hand, the slow progress of the normalization and improvement of relations with India to be reversed or impeded and wish to retain their special strategic equation with Pakistan on the other which had served their interests well. Even earlier Peking had offered mediation over the Kashmir crisis but the possibility of China or any other country mediating between India and Pakistan was ruled out. A foreign office spokesman said that New Delhi’s stance on this matter is “absolutely clear”. The Simla Agreement provided the framework for sorting out bilateral differences. Peking’s comment on the issue came only after Ms. Bhutto had sent her foreign policy adviser Iqbal Akhund to Beijing to persuade them to speak in support of the Pakistani position. Perhaps, for the sake of satisfaction to Pakistan, the Chinese leaders described Kashmir as a “dispute” and a problem left over by history with a reference to the “UN decisions” relating to Kashmir. But they also mentioned the Shimla Agreement, which the Chinese had seldom taken note of before Li wanted the two countries to settle the Kashmir issue “in conformity” with “Panchsheel”. Most significantly the Chinese leaders have asked India and Pakistan to “set peace and stability in South Asia above everything else. India has never been in favour of third-party involvement or mediation as all issues between the two countries were to be settled bilaterally and through peaceful methods as per the provisions of the Simla Agreement.
Moves by the United Nations
In a fresh move to settle the problem of Kashmir between India and Pakistan the UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali on 17 September 1996, in a report on the working of the organisation to the General Assembly laid emphasis on the urgency of the issue and said’ “I am ready to render whatever assistance may be needed in this regard, should both countries find it useful.” Sometimes the US too, appeared sincere in solving the issue and perhaps in a bid, foiled Islamabad’s attempt again to internationalise the issue. Benazir Bhutto on 4 October 1996, proposed a multilateral dialogue for peace and security in South Asia with the participation of India, Pakistan, the five permanent members of the Security Council and other major powers like Japan and Germany. But the US, apart from suggesting to resolve the issue through bilateral talks, charged Pakistan that “in the opinion of the United States, it is Pakistan that is reluctant to hold a dialogue with India on Kashmir. In the background of India’s readiness to resume the dialogue and Nawaz Sharif becoming the new elected Prime Minister of Pakistan, Robin Raphel said that the US finds the present stage congenial for Indo-Pakistan dialogue.
The US Administration had favoured such a course in the past and would encourage the two sides to have meaningful contacts, she asserted. The country went a step further and sent its envoy Wisner on a three-day visit to review the post-poll situation in the state. During the visit when he was asked a question, denied the allegation that the US Government was having a tilt towards Islamabad in its policy on Kashmir. But the US neutrality regarding Indo-Pak relations was questioned by Farooq Abdullah, the Chief Minister of J & K who refuted the claim of Wisner that America was neutral on the Kashmir issue.
He added further that Pakistan had inflicted war on us and if US stops arms supply to Pakistan, the impass would have been sorted out once and for all. The US was requested to give up its emphasis on maintaining a strategic balance between India and Pakistan. Indian Ambassador, Naresh Chandra, in an interview with Washington Times, on 14 February1977 said that the US attitude implied the assumption of continued confrontation between India and Pakistan rather than looking to the potential for bilateral and regional co-operation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
