news details |
|
|
| Kashmir -- a way forward | | Kathwari Formula And Its Implications | | Rustam
JAMMU, Jan 11: The US-based Kashmiri Farooq Kathwari set up the so-called Kashmir Study Group (KSG) more than 13 years ago in America. Its stated goal was to work out a solution to the Kashmir issue acceptable to India, Pakistan and Kashmiri people. Its methodology was to involve certain selected persons from Pakistan, Pakistan-Occupied- Jammu and Kashmir, India and its Jammu and Kashmir in the exercise, come out with a solution to the "Kashmir problem" and then try to evolve broader consensus among what Kathwari would call the "various stakeholders".
In December 1998, the KSG came out with what is known as the "Livingston Proposal". In 2005, it came out with what it called "Kashmir - A Way Forward - 2005". These proposals or proposed solutions "explored the ideas of creating self-governing regions on both sides of the Line of Control. These proposals were submitted to "government officials in India and Pakistan and to diverse leadership in Jammu and Kashmir region, as well as many opinion makers in India, Pakistan and the Jammu and Kashmir region". But nothing came out of the efforts put in by the KSG. The reasons were obvious. One of the reasons, of course, was the suggestion regarding the creation of self-governing regions (read more than semi-independent regions).
Kathwari and his KSG again come out with a proposal, called "Kashmir - A Way Forward - 2011". This is the latest proposal. It has been, according to Kathwari, "developed in consultation with persons from the Jammu and Kashmir region from both sides of the Line of Control and with Indians and Pakistanis".
What is the proposal all about? Let me first quote verbatim this proposal. We will take up its implications later. The proposal reads: "We recommend that each of the five regions comprising the former princely State of Jammu and Kashmir be given an opportunity to operate as self-governing regions, exercising the maximum appropriate degree of self-governance, given its individual situation. The regions so established need not exercise the exact same government authority, although a broadly consistent approach throughout the area of the former princely State of Jammu and Kashmir might offer certain advantages in administration and coordination. Similarly, the creation of these self-governing regions need not occur simultaneously; new arrangements on the Indian side need not await changes on the Pakistani side".
"These self-governing regions - Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh - operating under the overall umbrella of the present State of Jammu and Kashmir could be established in the portion of the pre-1947 territory now administered by India".
"Two self-governing regions - Azad Kashmir (read POJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan - could be established on the side now administered by Pakistan".
"Within each of the regions, wherever necessary and feasible, arrangements would be made to ensure the representation and effective participation of significant local minorities. The definition, scope, and implementation of such arrangements should be the subject of wide consultations within the regions, among both majority and minority communities".
"An all-Kashmir body would be set up to coordinate areas of common interest such as regional trade, tourism, environment and water resources. This body would include representatives from each of the regions as well as from the governments of India and Pakistan".
"Each of the regions would be governed by an agreed set of democratic principles, preferably determined and accepted through a consultative procedure that would take place within the region. Each region would have a legislative body that would legislate on all appropriate matters within the competence of the region (excluding defence ad foreign affairs). India and Pakistan would be responsible for the defence of the regions on their respective sides of the Line of Control and each region would appoint and control a local police force to maintain internal law and order. India and Pakistan respectively would be expected to work out financial arrangements for the regions".
"Persons domiciled in the regions would continue to be entitled to Indian or Pakistani passports under the same conditions as presently exist".
"The borders of the regions with India and Pakistan, as well as those between regions, would remain open for the transit of people, goods and services in accordance with arrangements to be worked out between the governments of India, Pakistan and the regions".
"While the present Line of Control would remain in place until such time as both India and Pakistan should decide to alter it in their mutual interest, both India and Pakistan would reduce their military presence in the regions, particularly in the populated areas, to the minimum level consistent with each country's security, on an agreed-upon plan. The terms of the reduction in military presence would need to be negotiated".
"We suggest that the proposal is probably the best conceived of as an 'interim settlement" (possibly for a 15-20 year period), which could be subject to subsequent approval or adjustment. However, the parties can decide to make this a 'final settlement', if a sufficient degree of agreement or consensus can be achieved".
"The proposal represents a starting point towards defining a practicable framework that could satisfy the interests of the people of the Kashmir region, India and Pakistan. It would end civil strife and the tragic destruction of life and property in the Kashmir region. By resolving the principal issue (read Kashmir issue) that has repeatedly led to armed conflict between India and Pakistan, it would go far towards relaxing political tensions in South Asia. It would offer enormous economic benefits not only to the Kashmir region but also to India, Pakistan, and South Asia as a whole". (To be concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
