Observations of an ex pat: Kashmiri powder keg

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi should consider the age-old truism “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Actually, to say that Kashmir isn’t broke would be putting an optimistic gloss on the Asian sub continent’s number one flashpoint. Since independence and partition in 1947, the mountainous region has been the cause of three wars and numerous border clashes which have threatened to escalate into full-blown conflicts.

Kashmir is a simmering political cauldron whose lid has largely been kept in place by two clauses in the Indian constitution which give the Muslim-dominated, but Indian-controlled region autonomy in all matters except foreign affairs, defence and communications.  Kashmir has its own flag and has passed laws favouring the property rights of the Muslim majority. Modi has revoked the constitutional clauses—articles 370 and 35A—and dropped big hints that he wants to develop Indian-administered Kashmir with imported Hindu settlers.

The result has been riots, demonstrations and the recall of the Pakistani ambassador to India. But that could only be the start. Both states are armed with about 150 nuclear weapons each and blinkered by a dangerous religious zeal. The conflict also has the potential to drag in China and possibly the US. China’s interest is its claim to a desolate and sparely-populated section of Kashmir.  The Chinese have also $46 billion investment in Pakistan to protect.

America’s position is more ambivalent. It needs Pakistani support the fight in Afghanistan, but is angry at what President Trump has called Pakistan’s  “lies and deceit” in combating the Taliban. At the same time, Trump and Modi enjoy close personal relations through a shared right-wing populist approach to political issues.

The problems started with partition. Kashmir has three religious populations: Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist. The overwhelming majority of the inhabitants are Muslim. But at the time of partition it was ruled by a Hindu Rajah. As the sub-continent edged inexorably towards partition, Irregular troops from Pakistan moved into Kashmir to claim the entire country. The Hindu Rajah, Hari Singh, appealed for help to the Congress Party in India who dispatched troops to the region.

The result was a stand-off; A UN-mediated ceasefire and the division of Kashmir which left Pakistan in control of the under-developed provinces of Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir which are 100 percent Muslim and India in control of the more prosperous Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir  provinces which are 66 percent Muslim with the balance made of up Hindus and Buddhists.

The UN ceasefire agreement included a clause for a referendum over the decision of who governs the whole of Kashmir. The Indians failed tocomply with this part of the agreement as their part of Kashmir was 66 percenty Muslm.  Instead they came up with the compromise of autonomy in the form of constitutional clauses 370 and 35A. The Muslims in Indian-administered  Kashmir were generally satisfied  with this. They were not as zealous as their co-religionists in Pakistan and were happy to remain part of India as long as they were allowed control of domestic affairs.

China became involved during the 1950s after it annexed Tibet. They had never accepted the British-drawn boundaries and claimed roughly 20 percent of Kashmir known as Trans-Karakoran. The sparsely populated region (population 250,000) is a desolate Himalayan province known for its windswept salt flats. Ownership of Trans-Karakoran was the main cause of the 1962 Sino-Indian War which resulted in China occupying the region and India continued to dispute their giant neighbour’s claim.

Three years later, in 1965, the first Indo-Pakistan War broke out after Pakistan launched an insurgency  bid to wrest control of Jammu and Kashmir from India. The war ended with a return to the status quo after mediation by Britain, Russia, the US and the UN.  Both Pakistan and India were dissatisfied with Western efforts which basically involved an embargo on both countries. This resulted in a closer long-term relationship between Pakistan and China on the one hand and India and Russia on the other.

Kashmir was not a major issue in the 1971 Indo-Pakistan conflict following the bid for independence from Pakistan of Bangladesh. But the two countries did clash again in 1999. Commonly known as the Kargil War, this conflict again started with a Pakistan incursion into the Indian-administered half of Kashmir.  American pressure forced another return to the status quo and represented a major defeat for Pakistan which lost 4,000 troops.

The 1965 and 1999 wars  were both limited to conventional weapons. Pakistan had developed its first nuclear weapon the year before but did not feel confident about standing up to the Indians who conducted their first nuclear weapons test in 1974 and were estimated to have over 100 nuclear warheads. The other factor was that Narendra Modi’s BJP Party was not in power. Congress (I) was, and their policy was to govern on behalf of both India’s Muslim and Hindu communities. The BJP, in contrast is a Hindu nationalist party. Ending autonomy and gaining control of all of Kashmir is part of their election manifesto.

Pakistan, for its part, owes its entire existence to the Muslim faith.  Blind obedience to the teachings of Mohammed has led devout members of the Pakistani army and intelligence services to form close relations with the Taliban, prompted a cut in US military assistance and strained the strategic link between Washington and Islamabad at a time when the Americans need maximum leverage.

Diplomats fear that if Modi does not back down there is a strong likelihood of war. Pakistan lost the two previous conventional wars. With a population of 200 million and an underdeveloped economy, Pakistan has little chance against India’s billion citizens and booming industries. Pakistan, especially the politically powerful army—could be sorely tempted to use nuclear weapons to resolve this 72-year-old dispute. Kashmir could become the spark that ignites the nuclear powder keg.

* Tom Arms is membership secretary for Tooting Lib Dems. He also broadcasts on foreign affairs for US Radio, regularly contributes to Lib Dem Voice, lectures and is working on a book on Anglo—American relations which is due to be published next year.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

7 Comments

  • The USA is in talks with the Taliban, which if successful means their need for Pakistan plummets, at which point I can quite easily see President Trump swinging behind Modi. Turbulent times we live in, nothing is forever especially alliance’s.

  • Andrew Daer 9th Aug '19 - 10:50am

    Tom, thanks for this excellent and considerably less confusing summary of Kashmiri history and politics than the one some of us came across in Arundhati Roy’s recent novel. Utmost happiness seems a rather distant prospect in that part of the world.
    Unfortunately, not for the first time Britain’s colonial legacy places us in the position of an interested, and to some degree culpable, observer, but one with little influence.
    It seems to me ever more urgent that we try to understand how our European ancestors transitioned from religious fanaticism to the more rational basis we operate by now, and try to spread that thinking to places where religious differences are still used as political weapons. Some might call this idea colonial-style arrogance, but it would be hard to deny that the Enlightenment drove most of the advances in science and political freedom we benefit from now. The absolutely last thing we need is the isolationism of the current crop of right-wing world leaders (I would include in that description the de facto leader of Great Britain, Nigel Farage), because the good aspects of European culture will seep into countries like Pakistan and India only if we increase and enlarge our contact with them. We all need to strive to do that, and to break down the barriers religion can place in the way of properly accepting the common humanity of all people.

  • Andrew McCaig 9th Aug '19 - 1:29pm

    On the face of it Modi has just committed an outrageous provocation in Kashmir.

    Where is the voice of our Party on this?

  • Andrew McCaig 9th Aug '19 - 1:35pm

    It seems that Jo has not managed to appoint a Foreign Affairs spokesperson to replace herself.

    So it really is up to her to say something. We could be looking at a major war here.

  • Must admit I’ve been a bit surprised by Jo’s decision not to reshuffle the team immediately after Brecon. Maybe she is assuming there will be more defections and wants to wait till then, but I think she’s already missed a trick. And yes Andrew it’s not a great look, having no Foreign Affairs spokesperson with this crisis coming to the boil.

  • Paul Barker 9th Aug '19 - 7:20pm

    Modi has seen The Chinese Dictatorship using the same techniques, flooding Ethnic Minority areas with Han settlers, first in Tibet, then Inner Mongolia & now The Muslim South West. There has been very little reaction from The “International Community’. The lesson is obvious, that India can get away with it.
    If The USA did object, China & India could point out that the same technique was used to build America.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarLaurence Cox 20th Nov - 11:34am
    @Cim Back when Charles Kennedy was leader, there was a debate on Trident replacement at party conference; I think it was a Spring Conference at...
  • User AvatarYeovil Yokel 20th Nov - 11:20am
    Layla was interrupted so many times in that interview that it was tantamount to persistent heckling or a heated pub argument - she did well...
  • User AvatarPeter Martin 20th Nov - 10:48am
    A trade deal with the US doesn't necessarily mean drugs will be more expensive. Canada has a trade deal but the price of their "meds"...
  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 20th Nov - 10:20am
    Splendid stuff, Chris. It's heartening to see a member of a younger generation than mine speaking out so vigorously for our beliefs and values. With...
  • User AvatarPeter Hirst 20th Nov - 10:10am
    We do need a wider geographical spread of elected members to our committees. Perhaps at least reserved members for the north, midlands, Wales and Scotland....
  • User Avatarcim 20th Nov - 10:10am
    RossMcL - fair enough on Kennedy, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have been so terse about it even if told to. "Short questions, short...