Round The World

New Delhi, 29 May 2007

EU Reprimands Pakistan

Kashmir under International Spotlight

By Dr. Chintamani Mahapatra

School of International Studies, JNU

The European Union, which is not a country but a supranational body seeking European economic and political integration, is increasingly becoming an important actor in international affairs. It has come out with a clear policy formulation on Kashmir issue. No country has formally done so.

It has now officially pronounced its position on the festering Kashmir issue between India and Pakistan by overwhelmingly approving the Emma Nicholson Report on Kashmir. Entitled “Kashmir: Present Situation and Future Prospects”, the report has come out with recommendations for both India and Pakistan in their current drive towards working out a lasting solution to this six-decade-old dispute.

The report calls on the two Governments to “inject a new impetus for exploring options for increased self-governance, freedom of movement, demilitarization and inter-governmental cooperation on issues such as water, tourism, trade and the environment and to promote a general breakthrough in seeking a resolution of the Kashmir dispute.”

It “urges the Governments of Pakistan and India to resolve the crucial riparian issues affecting the head waters and the use of the rivers flowing through Jammu and Kashmir (the Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej rivers) as swiftly as possible”  by assigning priority to the “agricultural, fishing, livestock and human water requirements of the local people.”

It also “urges the Governments of Pakistan and India also to transform the ceasefire in place in Siachen since 2003 into a lasting peace agreement, given that on this, the highest battlefield in the world, more soldiers die every year for reasons of climate than of armed conflict” and “calls on the European Union to support India and Pakistan in negotiating a zone of complete disengagement in the Siachen region without prejudice to the position of either side, in particular by offering assistance in providing monitoring technologies and verification procedures”

The report also has two pieces of good advice to offer to India and Pakistan. One is on the need for facilitating a ceasefire to be declared by the militant armed groups “to be followed by a disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration process” The other is for Pakistan “to close down militant websites and magazines” and for both countries to “consider introducing a law against hate speech”.

In all of the above, Pakistan may feel elated that some of President Pervez Musharraf’s suggestions, such as “self-governance”, “demilitarization” etc. have found acceptance. The report is silent on the details and India may not react to this at the moment. Most of other recommendations make lots of sense.

On matters of suggestions given individually to India and Pakistan, the two countries are bound to respond differently, since the list is much longer in the case of Pakistan. India has received more praise than Pakistan. Pakistan has been asked to fulfil more obligations than India.

The report has appreciated India’s dynamic democracy and regrets the deficit of democracy in Pakistan. Secondly, Pakistan has been reprimanded for its authoritarian administration over the people of PoK, while India’s effort to conduct democratic elections in Jammu and Kashmir has been appreciated. India’s achievement in according special status to Kashmir, including prevention of settlement of non-Kashmiri Indians has been contrasted with Pakistan’s policy encouraging demographic invasion of Northern areas. Thirdly, Pakistan’s role in fomenting militancy and terrorism in Kashmir has been highlighted, so is the cost of it to India in terms of human lives.

Fourthly, the report does not find the time suitable for holding any plebiscite in Kashmir, which rings a happy tune into the Indian ears. Fifthly, Pakistan’s public position on stopping cross-border terrorism has been acclaimed, but Pakistan’s lackluster performance on this has been regretted. India’s, on the other hand, has got kudos for professing “zero tolerance” on human rights violation.  Sixthly, India’s success in promoting socio-economic development in Jammu and Kashmir through “special packages” has been contrasted with pitiable human conditions in Pok, marked by illiteracy, lack of public health facilities and malnutrition.

The report, moreover, has asked Pakistan to hold free and fair election in the occupied areas, promote social welfare, eliminate terrorist training camps and observe human rights in Kashmir. India has also been criticized for extrajudicial killings, torture and disappearances of individuals in Kashmir and asked to eliminate the special immunities granted to the security forces. The Indian human right groups have been advised to keep a special vigil on the issues and events related to people’s rights in the state.

India’s response to this report has so far been low key. But Islamabad has been furious. Through months of debates and deliberations on this issue in the European Parliament, Pakistan consistently lobbied for brining about more than 400 amendments to this report. The ISI, the International Council of Human Rights based in Brussels and Pakistani Embassies in various European capitals left no stone unturned to moderate the language and alter certain contents in the report. But Pakistani efforts have not borne much fruit.

In any case, what is the significance of this report? What will be its implications? First of all, its significance lies in the massive support it received in the European Parliament. The EU is certainly an important player in global politics and it is positioning itself on very many issues to make its influence felt in different parts of the globe. The spread of terrorism and the continuing threat it poses to European security, among others, have pushed the EU to play a more proactive role in South Asia. The solution of Kashmir issue will have a great deal of influence over the issue of terrorism and thus this report is not only timely but is also hopefully a harbinger of certain positive changes in the sub-continent.

Secondly, the importance of this report is also reflected in Pakistan’s responses. For far too long, Pakistan sought to mislead the international community on the Kashmir affairs. It sought international support to resolve the issue only to hide its support to terrorism and magnify its anti-India allegations related to human rights conditions in Kashmir. Now that the EU has come out with its report, it is finding it hard to accept it and is realizing the folly of internationalizing an issue that deserves bilateral solution.

After the United States, it is now the EU that appears determined to deal with terrorism forcefully. If terrorism is to be uprooted, terrorist training camps and other facilities in South Asia must end. For that to happen, the real problem of Kashmir needs to be addressed. However, Pakistani people need to be sensitized about the conduct of their government. The biased reportage in Pakistani media on this report does not suggest that people in Pakistan have been sensitized on this issue yet.---INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)