|
Right of self determination
is a right bestowed to nations that they can determine their future. This
right if properly used helps to end colonialism, and encourage other
oppressed nations to continue their struggle for national emancipation.
In other words this is anti imperial and anti oppression; and countries
with colonial mind - set do not like this right. We thought we were a
separate nation with history going back to thousands of years; and that
we were not part of British India, and the Two Nations Theory did not
apply to us. People of Jammu and Kashmir and our ruler, despotic as he
was, didn’t want to be part of new countries which were to emerge after
the division of the British India in accordance with the Two Nations
Theory.
Both
new countries- India and Pakistan- spoke of democracy and principles, but
with regard to Jammu and Kashmir both had imperialist aims as both wanted
to get Kashmir by hook or crook. It was clash of their imperialistic
designs which resulted in division of Jammu and Kashmir, hence continued
tension, hostility and wars since 1947. This struggle to get Jammu and
Kashmir and control affairs of these areas has brought suffering and
misery to the people of Jammu and Kashmir; and it has also caused many
problems for both India and Pakistan.
What
should be the future of Jammu and Kashmir could only be determined by the
people of the State by using their right to self determination.
Internationally accepted concept of right to self determination was not
in the best interest of Pakistan, as by its exercise Jammu and Kashmir
could have become an independent state, so Pakistani government in 1948/9
circumscribed the concept by limiting the choice of Kashmiris to choose between
India and Pakistan.
Our
struggle has been for unfettered right of self determination that people
of Jammu and Kashmir could decide if they want to join India, Pakistan or
become independent. After fifty eight years of continued struggle,
suffering and destruction, now we are told by some ‘Kashmiri leaders’
that the term ‘self determination’ should not be even included in any
resolution. In highly propagated ‘Kashmir Conference’ last week in
Washington, some ‘leaders’ opposed self determination and others decided
to abstain when the issue came to voting. What a U turn?
They
now claim that in place of self determination other methods could be used
to ascertain what people want. By this they probably mean some kind of
elections. But until recently this pro Pakistan group has fiercely
opposed elections in the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir, and received
huge rewards for this ‘deed’.
They
have always seen Kashmir and its solution through the eyes of Islamabad;
and when Pakistan claimed that ‘what satisfies Islamabad will ultimately
satisfy the Kashmiri people’ they surely had these Kashmiris in mind.
This somersault in Kashmir policy is not of their choosing especially if
we see it in the light of President Musharaf’s statements about ‘self
rule’ and ‘autonomy’.
Does
it mean that they have abandoned their struggle to get right of self
determination for the people of Jammu and Kashmir ? Or does it mean that
they think right of self determination is no longer appropriate to the
Kashmiri struggle- what ever it means if we take the concept of right of
self determination away from it?
If
they think right of self determination is no longer appropriate to the
Kashmir dispute then struggle in one sense is over. The State of Jammu
and Kashmir is practically divided between India and Pakistan with claims
from both sides that they have given autonomy to areas under their
control with no legitimate government on the other side. In view of this
scenario what needs to be done is to work out future relationship with the
respective governments; and both are more than happy to work out new
relationship with areas under their control as long as legal status of
these areas do not change.
This
arrangement will surely satisfy India, Pakistan and all those ‘leaders’ ,
political activists and militants who have either ‘attached’ themselves
with India or Pakistan; but what about majority of the people who were
not happy with the status quo and who wanted to determine their own
future by exercising unfettered right of self determination.
This
reminds me that Majid Tramboo arranged a conference on right of self
determination in Geneva in 1999. I was President of JKLF UK & Europe
at that time, and Yasin Malik was Chairman. Yasin Malik was in hospital
in New Delhi and was to address the conference on phone. I drafted his
speech which included a phrase that we wanted united and independent
Kashmir. Majid Tramboo asked me to take this phrase out as his ‘friends’
won’t like it. I refused to do so as it was fundamental to the JKLF ideology.
This
and other issues resulted in serious disagreements and I together with
Azmat Khan, Abbas Butt, Asim Mirza and Saghir Ahmed (Secretary General,
Central Committee members and Publicity Secretary respectively) walked
out of the conference. We later on learnt that in place of united and
independent Kashmir, a term ‘self rule’ was used, which of course is
different to independence.
Therefore
it is no surprise that some people wearing the JKLF cap have changed
their stance on Kashmir as it suits their commercial and political
interests, hence we hear one ‘JKLF stalwart’ promoting self governance as
advocated by President Musharaf. This man used to boast, ‘JKLF is in my
pocket, ‘Yasin Malik is in my pocket’; and now he says, “Self-governance
is a developing concept which is seen more positive, extensive, humane
and forward looking than classical self-determination’.
He
and some others who have hitherto happily danced on every tune played by
Islamabad, might have started paying some attention to the music
emanating from New Delhi as well. It is because of this change that new
theories are being discussed and promoted instead of our inherent right
of self determination; and interestingly these new concepts suit both
Islamabad and New Delhi .
Not
long ago demand of Kashmiri leaders from the Valley was to have a
dialogue with the Prime Minister of India. Indian Prime Minister had
meetings with some groups and some individual leader and then decided to
have a conference where all leaders- big and small could take part and
discuss future of Jammu and Kashmir.
This
call unnerved these leaders. They didn’t know what to do or what to say
as they had no plan or strategy for the resolution of Jammu and Kashmir.
This conference could have exposed them so they decided to boycott it.
Earlier call of these leaders to boycott the elections was boycotted by
the people telling them what importance they had.
When
these leaders with distorted vision about future of Jammu and Kashmir,
and no strategy for resolution of the dispute boycotted the conference,
ordinary people questioned their motives as to what exactly they wanted
to achieve. And in view of many diplomats and Kashmir watchers this has
tarnished their sincerity and commitment to the Kashmir cause.
With
passage of time these people who have made business out of the Kashmir
dispute are being exposed. Their credibility and sincerity is under
scrutiny; and their popularity is fast diminishing. In some political
parties there are no workers and all they have is a few ‘leaders’, and
yet they claim to represent the entire Kashmiri nation. This joke must
end; and these people must not be allowed to play with sentiments of the
people and future of Jammu and Kashmir.
The
writer is Chairman Diplomatic Committee of JKLF, Director Institute of
Kashmir Affairs and author of many books on Kashmir.
|
