The dialogue means dialogue for implementation of UNSC resolutions
Kashmir locating at cusp of northern side of India is a dispute of international stature. The dispute is multi dimensional in orientation when seen through prism of past and contemporary prism. To be nearer to core, the British government announced a viable scheme for transfer of power to Indian hands by respecting the status of princely states thanks to Mount batten plan. The choice of joining either party or to remain independent was indeed a noble vision in eyes of whole international community. But the events that followed exit of Britain were mere frustration and bloodshed. In fact the scheme was used in perverted for to some regions like Kashmir where the atmosphere was filled with helter skilter and thus paving way to war as nothing else could digest the resolution to either Pakistan or India. So the conclusion of accession was grand ideal on certain conditions with India which mentions foreign affairs ,communication and defense at mercy of union, means to regional autonomy like Catalonia say for example with same scheme of Govt. as that of union -PM AND PRESIDENT.
Reality emerged piquant with involvement of Pakistan and subsequent entry of dispute on UNSC platform which decided case in favour of Kashmir in plain white. Thus adhered to British scheme of choice through PLEBISCITE which was also accepted by India. Back to back resolutions from UNSC changed future course of action and thus paved way to regional tensions. But the J L Govt delayed the plan on one pretext or other which is mentioned in history forever. Thenceforth the dispute traversed steps of ladder in pandemonium atmosphere with back to back wars with Pakistan. To Indian side the government adopted strategy of economic concessions which worked out in its favour with arrival of gun culture. This section of community wants to clear the decks through violence they only know the language of bombs and pistols. Moderate section which pleads for demands to UNSC RESOLUTION implementation the so called separatist with amplified influence over Kashmir. This section often seems running a parallel Govt through publishing calendars for agitation and calm. That’s to say the atmosphere of Kashmir remains one of most unpredictable with peak terrorist period on cards now. On other side of coin The government started some initiatives of dialogue with N.N.VOHRA, P CHIDAMBARAM , THREE MEMBER INTERLOCUTERS IN 2010 and now DINESHWAR SHARMA who is on second visit . All of the series of engagements are a total failure on part of dispute resolution.
To a much deeper level it is necessary to claim such a state of health in dispute resolution through dialogue. First is to accept Kashmir as dispute. The new and innovative way of union to declare the IOK AS INTEGRAL PART is nothing more than a mockery of UNSC. When the Govt is not accepting J&K as dispute the dialogue for normalcy is nothing more than engaging in zero sum game where only “0 ” is certain for Kashmir. And the statement rejects UNSC resolution in crystal clear manner. The irony of fact is that union Govt. contemporary goal of foreign policy includes provision of SEAT IN UNSC as core aim. Second the dispute is all in all POLITICAL in nature. Economic doles and handouts are in no way in line with aspirations of teeming kashmiris. The fate of 80000 crore package could only manage CM MEHBOOBA to secure her alliance. No economic package could bring the eyesight of 100s of aspiring youth back who managed only wild attitude of pellet guns from security forces. Is it seditious to claim internationally designated right? Thirt the contents of dialogue – dialogue on what,there’s a biased attitude of Govt on this dimension. Because the dispute has been resolved in 1948 by UNSC. The thing left is implementation. Herein lies the stereotypical attitude of union where they presume it to be a mere law and order problem. If it is so, it may be in another state as well. Why they think only interlocutors could solve here ? Are security forces incapable to stand against law and order? These mns of questions have the backing history at its frontier. 4th dimension of problem is,whenever mere start of dialogue comes into play ,the main stake holders are left behind- HURRIYAT AND PAKISTAN even CHINA shall be included as well. What will be the answer when you claim whole J&K ( PoK and Chinese occupied ) as integral to Indian union on one hand with their non inclusion into dialogue on the other. Isn’t it paradoxical? All these features are lacked in letter and content of any initiative of dialogue on India’s front to whatsoever the person in making be. This time Dineshwar Sharma who only managed the political corridors in Srinagar who amply accept constitution of India. Who would answer the question about the fate of recommendations from 3 membered interlocutor team thanks to their expensive one month stay in hotels?
The appointment of interlocutor is nothing but to gain something from calm after 2016 anti India uprising. But as it seems juggernaut is on its way. Radicalism is on its peak than ever it has been with crystal clear support from public. The indigenous movement who even at times deny Pakistan support is new and innovative strategy to get the things done through violence. Most of the reports from international journals bring fore the reality of security forces ceding ground support in whole kashmir with south supporting through recruitment of even DR’S AND EIGENEERS. Where is the fate of claim that poverty us main cause of militancy? The step of dialogue is right with full and clear support from ISLAMIC thinking but that should be in letter and spirit. The religious sanction of waging war against kufr is new and innovative way of struggle in Kashmir where protest CASO Stone pelting is order of day. The ground speaks reality itself.
To sum up means to say government of the day should engage on dialogue front with every stakeholder in quick possible manner. The poison of plebiscite will cede ground to independence in quickest manner than is being expected today. Therefore the need of the day is to shed the past rhetoric by accepting open and free dialogue with each stakeholder on how to implement UNSC resolutions because whatever nature of resolution will be from Indian side is unacceptable now. The Abdullah family is the thing of past now. Let’s hope to get some bolt from blue.
Shahid Majeed Mir can be mailed at mirshahid363@gmail.com
