By revoking the special status of Kashmir, India has plunged entire south Asia into a new crisis. It has imposed curfew in Kashmir and put nearly all Kashmiri leaders under house arrest. The entire valley of Kashmir is and cut off t from the rest of the world. Literally no tele or road communication with rest of India or the world in anticipation of protests.
As expected Pakistan has reacted strongly to the Indian move and vowed to do whatever it can to help Kashmiris pursue their right of self determination. Ironically, though, not a single Kashmiri expert or jurist has been named on the committee. It once again reflects the shortsighted tactical mindset ruling Pakistan.
Beside confronting Pakistan with a new political crisis, the entire situation following the August 5 abolition of Article 370 is pretty grim and reflects poorly on the state of preparedness of our civil and military leadership.
It also begs some basic but important questions; will all permanent members of the Security Council allow India to get away with the brazen breach of UN resolutions – which in fact amount to international law – on the status and fate of Kashmir?
Big powers including the United States and its European allies, face a tough credibility challenge ahead; will they sacrifice the primacy of United Nations security council resolutions by looking the other way?
China has already spoken against the Indian move but how will the United States react to the forcible annexation of Kashmir through a presidential order?
Can the Trump administration wash its hands off the UN Security Council resolutions and look the other way, particularly when the State Department quotes Indian officials who said that “this (Kashmir annexation) is India’s internal matter?”
We have to be very clear; it is meanwhile not India’s internal matter at all as long as unresolved resolutions on this dispute sit at the UN Security Council agenda as ” the unfinished items of the partition of 1947.”
Under question is the inalienable right to self-determination. Will the US and its allies side with the principle as enshrined in the UN Human Rights charter, or prefer relations with a strident India? US officials gleefully describe the current state of Pak-US relations as a “very warm partnership that is working out well on Afghanistan.”
There is a definite feel-good sense being conveyed by a number of US administration officials about the renewed warmth in the bilateral relationship, a new new-born partnership with Pakistan. But this partnership will certainly be on trial once Pakistan takes the Kashmir issue to United Nations Security Council. The conduct of the US as well as three other Permament Members will be worth watching not only at the Security Council but also in the plenary meeting of the Financial Action Task Force later this year-in October.
Both issues will offer a good opportunity to call out P5 as well as major European countries on their public support to Pakistan. Do they side with universally acknowledged principles or with motivated political moves initiated by an India that has literally trashed UN instruments of conflict resolution?
The credibility of P5 is indeed on trial as much as Pakistan’s ability to anchor the Kashmiris’ right of self-determination in the UN resolutions.
