|
June 6, 2002
Mark Weisbrot
Spying
and Lying:
The FBI's Shameful Past
June 5, 2002
Robert Fisk
Berlusconi the Censor
Danielle Brian
Nuclear
Plants and Terrorism
Ardeshir Cowasjee
For What Do We Fight?
George Monbiot
Kashmir
on the Brink
Michael Neumann
What is Antisemitism?
June 4, 2002
Dave Marsh
Bono the Useful Idiot
William Evan / Francis
Boyle
Kashmir:
Invoking Intl. Law to Avoid Nuclear War
Cockburn / St. Clair
The Future Wellstone Deserves
June 3, 2002
Ramdas / Makhijani
India,
Pakistan and Nukes:
A Road Map to Peace
Fran Shor
Meanwhile, Back in Afghanistan
Neve Gordon
The Caterpillar
Effect
June 2, 2002
Fidel Castro
From FDR to Mister "W.":
Cuba, the US and Democracy
Arundhati Roy
Under the
Nuclear Shadow
Bernard Weiner
Bush 9/11 Scandal for Dummies
June 1, 2002
Norman Madarasz
The
Strange Math of Roberto Carlos: Brazil v. Turkey
Gavin Keeney
Bush and Mies van der Rohe:
Architecture and Ideology
Jeff Halper
Sharon's
Post-Incursion Plan:
Incarceration or Transfer?
Walt Brasch
Crumpling the Constitution
May 31, 2002
Rev. Sandra Olewine
Land Grabs and Occupation:
Silent Destruction of Palestine
James Dunlop
Russian
Colonel:
"Insane But Fit for Duty"
Chomsky / Bennett
Debating "Terrorism"
May 30, 2002
Steve Perry
Jim Carrey:
"Love Me!"
Tom Turnipseed
Sex Among the Sacred
George Monbiot
Corporate
Phantoms
Web of Deciet over GM Foods
Robert Jensen
Are You a Journalist
or a Patriot?
Gary Leupp
Georgia
and the War on Terror
May 29, 2002
Mokhiber / Weissman
The Age of Inequality
Philip Farruggio
The
Cleaning Lady
Bill Christison
Disastrous US Foreign Policy:
Part 2, Globalization
Resources:
100s of Links
About 9/11
CounterPunch:
Complete
Coverage of 9/11 and Its Aftermath
Five
Days That
Shook The World:
Seattle and Beyond
By Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Photos by Allan Sekula
(Click Here to Order from CounterPunch
Online at 20% Off Amazon.com's price!)
INSIDE
EXCLUSIVE
TO
COUNTERPUNCH
SUBSCRIBERS
Published March 15, 2002
Read Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
The Memphis Blues Again:
Six Decades of Memphis Music Photographs
Photos by Ernest Withers
Text by Daniel Wolff
The New Intifada:
Resisting Israel's Apartheid
Edited by Roane Carey
A Pocket Guide to
Environmental Bad Guys
by James Ridgeway
and Jeffrey St. Clair
The
Phoenix Program
by Douglas Valentine
Al Gore:
A User's Manual
by Cockburn
and St. Clair
Buy
This Explosive
New Book at an
Amazing Discount!
Reviews of Gore:
a User's Manual
|
June 6, 2002
The Indo-Pakistan
Conflict
It's Just a Shot Away
by
Ron Jacobs
In recent weeks the eyes of the world have frequently
been cast on the Indian subcontinent as the threat of war between
India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir (hereafter Kashmir)
grows ever more likely. Although there have been three major
conflicts between these two nations since their creation after
World War II, none have drawn the attention that the current
threat has. That attention is due first and foremost to the threat
that any war between these two will go nuclear. If this occurs,
we are told 25 million people could die in the first week after
any such attacks. That such a holocaust can even be contemplated
is a sorrowful witness to the current state of our world.
How did this situation of permanent conflict
evolve in Kashmir? Like many other post-colonial battles, the
situation in Kashmir is a direct legacy of British colonialism.
Kashmir was a principality during the reign of the British Empire.
What this meant is that the region was ruled by an Indian-born
prince, or maharajah, and experienced a somewhat greater degree
of autonomy than those regions of the Empire that were under
direct British rule. Although these principalities were technically
independent, the maharajahs were pressured to accept the paramountcy
of the British Crown. Of course,, they all did, otherwise they
would have been taken over by the troops of the Empire and subject
to direct rule. The state of Kashmir was ruled by an oppressive
and corrupt Hindu dynasty known as the Dogras. At the time of
the partition (1947)-when India and Pakistan became independent
and began deciding the subcontinent along mostly religious lines-Sir
Hari Singh was the Maharaja. The British considered Jammu and
Kashmir to be a geo-politically significant territory, especially
the Gilgit areas, which were considered to be a sensitive listening
post from which to keep track of Russian and Chinese ambitions
in Central Asia as well as an important frontier region in the
event of Russian or Chinese attack. (Recently, various US defense
analysts have speculated once again on Kashmir's strategic importance,
especially in light of the US's apparent desire to ring China
with military bases.)
When it became clear that British rule
in the subcontinent would be ending, there were two dominant
philosophies at work. One, preferred by Jawaharlal Nehru, called
for a single secular nation. The other, encouraged by Muhammad
Ali Jinnah and eventually adopted by the British, called for
two nations divided along communal and religious lines. It was
the latter that was put in place and, despite the best hopes
and efforts of Nehru and Jinnah, disintegrated into an unfathomable
orgy of religious and communal violence between Muslims and Hindus.
As in the other principalities, the Maharajah of Kashmir was
given the choice of joining India or Pakistan, or remaining independent.
Most of the other principalities took the route of joining one
or the other of the larger nations, depending on the will of
the majority of their peoples. Kashmir, however, had a unique
position. Unlike the other princely regions, it was a predominantly
Moslem region ruled by a Hindu dynasty. Because of its strategic
location, any of the three options were possible.
Many Kashmiris believe that the principle
British architect of the partition and Viceroy of India, Lord
Mountbatten, manipulated the partition in such a way so that
Kashmir would become part of India. This belief is based in part
on the fact that Mountbatten granted India a portion of the Punjab
known as the Gurdaspur district, despite the fact that the logic
of the partition should have granted this district to Pakistan.
By assigning this region to India, Mountbatten created a land
bridge from India to Kashmir, thereby making it feasible for
India to access this strategically important area of the old
empire. Furthermore, Mountbatten and India considered the Indian
leaders to be the more capable at keeping Soviet and Chinese
influence out of the subcontinent and, consequently, considered
it essential that Kashmir not go to Pakistan.
As Moslems fled India and Hindus fled
Pakistan, often with nothing more than their lives thanks to
the murderous religious riots perpetrated by extremists on both
sides, the situation in Kashmir remained murky. The transfer
of power from Britain to the governments of India and Pakistan
was scheduled to occur in August 1947. In June of that year a
tax revolt began in the Moslem region of Kashmir known as Poonch.
This refusal to pay taxes to the Maharajah soon became a full-fledged
secessionist movement, which was provided very limited support
by the Pakistani military (still under the control of the British)
in the form of small arms and ammunition smuggled to the fighters.
In the early autumn of 1947, the Maharajah asked the Sikh army
in a neighboring province for assistance in quelling the Poonch
rebellion. India's central government also provided what assistance
it could. He simultaneously began talks with an independent Moslem
leader who was critical of both India and Pakistan-Sheikh Abdullah-he
was holding in one of his jails. Pakistan saw the conjunction
of these events as proof that Jammu and Kashmir were going to
accede to India. The leaders of the Poonch rebellion began to
look for outside help. This help came in the form of the Pathan
fighters, who may or may not have been the help the Poonch leaders
were looking for.
These fighters were known for their brutal
fighting methods. Indeed, they continue to have a reputation
for brutality even today, as the West has discovered once again
during the various Afghani wars in the last twenty-five years.
True to their reputation, the Pathan fighters waged a campaign
of looting, death and rape as they made their way towards Kashmir's
largest city, Srinagar. The Maharajah, meanwhile, asked for help
from the Indian army. On October 24, 1947, the Poonch rebels
proclaimed the creation of the Azad (Free) State of Kashmir.
Three days later, the Maharajah acceded to India. Included in
the accession agreement was a clause that called for requiring
a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the people once law and
order had been reestablish-ed in the region. By this time Indian
troops were in Kashmir and Pakistani troops were on their way.
The Indian troops were provided to the Maharajah with the provision
that Sheikh Abdullah (a good friend of Nehru) be made the head
of the new interim government. However, the Pakistani troops
were temporarily halted due to a brief flurry of diplomacy between
Nehru and Jinnah and the refusal of the British government to
allow a war between the two Commonwealth armies.
In the spring of 1948 and after the diplomacy
failed to resolve anything, Pakistani troops moved into Kashmir
and began assisting the Poonch rebels. The first Indo-Pakistani
war had begun. It ended on January 1, 1949 when the United Nations
imposed a ceasefire and created the Line of Control (LOC), which
is where close to 1 million Indian and Pakistani troops are currently
positioned waiting on the orders from their respective governments
that could plunge the entire region into the bloodiest of the
conflicts over the state of Kashmir to date.
Since 1949, neither Pakistan or India
have given an inch. Their basic positions regarding Kashmir remain
the same. There has never been a plebiscite of the Kashmiri people
to determine their national wishes, nor has there been what could
be truly considered fair elections for the state government that
exists there under Indian rule. Indeed, most of the elections
have been so controlled that the ruling party has screened the
candidates before allowing them to run. The interim government
of 1948-49 was replaced by a permanent one under the aegis of
India with Sheikh Abdullah at its head and India has continued
to rule as if the accession of Kashmir is a done deal. Indeed,
in 1964, it altered its constitution ending the so-called special
status Jammu and Kashmir enjoyed, making the state a regular
part of India. Furthermore, in 1953 it engineered the election
of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed over Sheikh Abdullah, who despite his
cooperation with India, still hoped for Kashmiri independence.
(He had been imprisoned for treason in 1953 because India feared
he would make Kashmir independent) Unfortunately for India, neither
Pakistan or most of the Kashmiri people concur with their viewpoint.
In addition to ending Kashmir's special
status, in 1964 Sheikh Abdullah was jailed once again. This,
along with the mysterious disappearance and return of a lock
of the Prophet Muhammad's hair from a religious shrine in Kashmir,
was the pretext Pakistan needed to invade. Another war between
Pakistan and India occurred in the summer of 1965. Military action,
including bombing raids and infantry battles took place inside
India and Pakistan. The war ended with the Tashkent Ceasefire
Declaration of January 10, 1966, with nothing resolved, leaving
the way open for more wars. Another war occurred in 1971, after
the outlawing of the Plebiscite Front-a Kashmiri independence
organization fronted by Sheikh Abdullah. This war resulted in
the creation of the state of Bangladesh out of what had been
East Pakistan. It also resulted in the signing of the Simla Agreement.
This agreement forbade either India or Pakistan from unilaterally
changing the demarcation of the LOC and to respect the other's
territorial integrity.
Meanwhile, in 1975 India made a deal
with Sheikh Abdullah whereby he would be returned to power if
he recognized India's accession of Kashmir. He refused, preferring
to enter himself into the elections, which he won handily. He
immediately began to consolidate his power, suspending civil
and press freedoms and instituting preventive detention polices.
In 1981, he passed his mantle on to his son Farooq, whose reign
lasted less than three years, when a coup threw him out and put
into place an Indian puppet government under G.M. Shah. This
government was unable to rule as independence and Pakistani-inspired
violence continued to rise. On March 7, 1986, India imposed direct
rule. By 1990, over 400,000 Indian troops were in the state enforcing
that rule. Now, close to 750, 000 are in the state, with most
of them at the LOC, trading gunfire with their Pakistani opposites
on the other side of the line.
If there is a solution to the Kashmiri
problem, it lies in independence. Indeed, the repeated election
of Sheikh Abdullah on a nominally pro-independence platform prove
this, despite his dictatorial rule of his final years. The largest
of the organizations fighting Indian occupation-the Jammu and
Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF)-has been insistent since its
founding in 1964 that accession to Pakistan would only be trading
one form of oppression for another. The JKLF is also resolute
in its commitment to a secular state, finding the Islamic fundamentalism
of some of the other independence organizations to be contrary
to Kashmiri traditions. It is some of these other organ-izations
which Pakistan supports, especially Hizb-ul Mujahidin, the armed
wing of the outlawed Jamaat-i-Islami political party. In general,
the Kashmiri population supports the end of the military occupation
by India and some form of autonomy, if not complete independence.
What can the people of the world do?
First and foremost, we must demand a pledge from both India and
Pakistan that they will not use nuclear weapons now or ever.
Secondly, we must insist via the UN General Assembly that troops
from both countries pull back from full alert and diminish their
numbers along the LOC and other border areas. Thirdly, talks
between the Kashmiris, Indians, and Pakistanis designed to establish
a plebiscite that will determine the national future of Kashmir
should begin immediately. Fourth, it is imperative that all U.S.
and other foreign troops leave the region, including those forces
in Afghanistan. Fifth, talks to abolish all nuclear weapons from
the face of the earth must begin immediately. Sixth, the U.S.
and all other nations involved in arms sales to Pakistan and
India must end those sales.
Ron Jacobs
can be reached at: rjacobs@zoo.uvm.edu
|