The military siege of the shrine of Hazrat Bal in Kashmir could be precipitous. The Indian army is itching to “flush” out the “trouble-makers”. It cannot do that without violating the shrine’s sanctity and damaging it physically. If that happens, it will be seen everywhere as yet another example of India’s brutality and recklessness.
Fortunately, the Indian judiciary has sounded a note of caution by allowing food to be sent in to the occupants of the shrine. Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Ayer has also pleaded for the siege to be lifted — his argument is that wiping out a few militants is hardly likely to reverse the dialectic of violence and insurgency in Kashmir. Indeed, it will only serve to outrage the sentiments of Muslims all over the world, including the 100 million Muslims in India, and isolate New Delhi from the international community.
As it is, India’s attempts to hang on to Kashmir by brute force, even genocide, are finally beginning to attract worldwide censure. US President Bill Clinton’s public concern about the serious abuse of human rights in the Valley by the Indian security forces is palpable. The US State Department has firmly endorsed the disputed status of J&K and called for a negotiated settlement which takes into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. Its view is that “external interference” — a stock phrase used by the Indians to allege a Pakistani hand in the Valley — is not responsible for the crisis which is based on indigenous factors because “the Kashmiris have been unhappy with their status vis a vis India for a long time. The US now sees Kashmir on the radar screen along with Yugoslavia and Somalia and lots of other places in the former Soviet Union. We can’t overlook it because there is a message in that”. What is the message?
The US would like everyone to believe that its recent concerns have to do with violation of human rights. That is only partly true. The real message is that if the Kashmir dispute isn’t resolved amicably, it could provoke a fourth war between India and Pakistan. Because both countries are potential nuclear states, the fear is that such a war could escalate into a nuclear holocaust, with serious implications for the security of the rest of the world.
For a long time, the US has wrongly believed that its goal of nuclear non-proliferation in South Asia could be pursued by leaning on Pakistan to sign the NPT while treating India with kid gloves. The Pressler amendment and the US military aid cut-off in 1990 were designed to achieve this objective. As long as the Kashmiris were relatively passive, the US saw no reason to take a special interest in their predicament. But now that Kashmir is in open revolt against India, the Pakistani argument that the road to nuclear non-proliferation in South Asia lies via Srinager is beginning to make sense in Washington.
The establishment of a new slot at the US State Department for the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs is evidence of heightened US concerns in the region. Ms Robin Raphel’s appointment to that office is a most welcome development. She is highly knowledgeable about the area and has an excellent grasp of the nature of the historic conflict in the sub-continent. The implications for world security in case of a clash between the two countries, cannot be lost on her.
Meanwhile, the ground situation in the Valley has gone from bad to worse. The military siege of Kashmir confirms the inexorable imprisonment of the arrogant Indian state in a web of internal and external contradictions. Such problems and dilemmas have increased in direct proportion to the state’s audaciousness. First it was the Golden Temple in Amritsar, then came the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya and now we have arrived at Hazrat Bal in Kashmir.
The phenomenal rise of militant Hinduism in “secular” India is yet another manifestation of the bankruptcy of the Indian state. Western friends of India would do well to recognise these insidious developments and counterpose them against the overwhelming rejection of the mullahs by the people of “fundamentalist” Pakistan in last month’s general elections.
The contradictions in the Indian position are manifold. India insists upon a global view on nuclear non-proliferation, a regional one on arms limitation talks and a bilateral one on the Kashmir dispute. This is like having one’s cake and eating it too. If India is still not prepared to recognise post cold-war realities, the world should sit up and take notice.
Later this month, a resolution sponsored by Pakistan and several other countries will be tabled in the United Nations condemning India for unprecedented violation of human rights in Kashmir. It would be tragic if the Western powers, especially the United States, were to shoot down this resolution or dilute it for fear of antagonising New Delhi. Far from yielding any dividends, a policy of molly-coddling India has only served to aggravate the situation. It is time India was convicted for state terrorism in Kashmir.