Kashmir, again?
This refers to the article by Laura Schuurmans (The
Jakarta Post, Aug. 12, p. 7). I wonder if she is in sync with the reality in
Kashmir.
The subject of Kashmir routinely pops up in the Post and
is discussed overenthusiastically by the Jakarta expat community ad
infinatum/ad nauseum, and there is generally nothing new to add on either side!
So let me borrow from a study by London’s Kings College
scholar Robert Bradrock, (Kashmir: Paths to Peace Opinion Poll,
http://tinyurl.com/2bsxhkc). It involved interviews of 3,774 people in both
parts of Kashmir during September/October 2009 for Chatham House, home of the
Royal Institute of International Affairs and a world-leading institute for the
debate and analysis of international issues. Its conclusions surprised me!
I quote from this 39-page report regarding conclusions on
page 35.
“Despite the complexity, some conclusions are clear. 81%
say unemployment is the most significant problem facing Kashmiris [66% in PoK*,
87% in J&K]. Government corruption [22% PoK* and 68% J&K], poor
economic development [42% PoK*, 45% J&K], human rights abuses [19% PoK*,
43% J&K] and the Kashmir conflict itself [24% PoK*, 36% J&K] are all
seen as major problems. 80% of Kashmiris say that the dispute is very important
to them personally.
The two questions envisaged under the UN resolutions of
1948/1949, which proposed a plebiscite, were restricted to the choice of the
whole of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir joining India or
joining Pakistan. This poll shows that preference for those options is highly
polarized. 21% of the population said they would vote for the whole of Kashmir
to join India, and 15% said they would vote for it to join Pakistan.
Furthermore, only 1% of the population in PoK* say they would vote to join
India, while only 2% of the population in J&K say they would vote to join
Pakistan. There is further polarization between the districts.
The option of independence has been widely promoted on
both sides of the LoC over the last twenty years. However, although 43% of the
total population said they would vote for independence, in only five out of
eighteen districts was there a majority preference for the independence of the
whole of Kashmir.” (The original report refers to PoK as AJK!)
These results support the already widespread view that
the plebiscite options are likely to offer no solution to the dispute.
One very important aspect of the UN resolutions which
calls for a plebiscite in J&K and neither stressed by Pakistan nor
highlighted by India is that the same resolution calls for a complete
withdrawal of Pakistani troops from PoK as a mandatory pre-condition for
holding plebiscite in J&K, thereby implying that Pakistan was the
aggressor. (http://tinyurl.com/32ua68b or
www.kashmir-information.com/historicaldocuments/112.html)
However, holding the plebiscite has been rendered further
difficult due to eviction under duress of the Hindu population from the valley.
This eviction under duress scattered Hindus all over India and the world, thus
expunging their availability to vote in a plebiscite, if and when it is held.
But, the UN resolution of 1948/1949 has been superseded
by the Shimla Agreement signed in July 1972 by the late Z.A. Bhutto (then
president of Pakistan) and the late Indira Gandhi (then PM of India).
So it has only academic value now.
K.B. Kale, Jakarta
First published in JP on 23rd August 2010. The link is:
2010
No comments:
Post a Comment