Kashmir Dispute- Indian and Pakistani Prespectives

The Indian Approach

At the core of Indian position on Kashmir is New Delhi’s claim that the decision of the Maharaja Han Singh to accede to the Indian Union, regardless of its circumstances, is final and legal and it cannot be disputed.” If there is any “unfinished” business of partition, it is the requirement that Pakistan relinquish control of that part of Jammu and Kashmir that it illegally occupies. India further maintains that the UN Resolutions calling for the will of the people to be ascertained are no longer tenable because Pakistan has not fulfilled the precondition of withdrawal from the territory it occupied through aggression. New Delhi further maintains that after Pakistan’s attempts to alter the status quo, by force, of war in 1965, Islamabad has forfeited the right to invoke the UN Resolutions. The will of the people does not need to be ascertained only through a plebiscite. The problem of Kashmir, according to India, is one of terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. The targets are Muslims in Kashmir, belying Pakistan’s argument that it is concerned about the welfare of Muslims in Kashmir. While India wants to resolve all outstanding issues with Pakistan through a process of dialogue, the integrity and sovereignty of India cannot be a matter for discussion.

Indian Perspective Levels for Kashmir Issue

The Indian policy towards Kashmir operates at three distinct levels: local, bilateral and international. At the local level, the principal Indian goal is to crush the Kashmiri resistance by massive use of force on the one hand and by manipulating the differences among different Kashmiri resistance groups on the other.

At the bilateral Indo-Pakistan level, India, while expressing its willingness to discuss all outstanding issues with Pakistan, has tended to avoid conducting any meaningful dialogue with Pakistan regarding Kashmir that involves a movement away from the stated Indian position that Kashmir is an integral part of India. Although India’s principal purpose in maintaining a posture of dialogue with Pakistan is to gain time to consolidate its hold over in Kashmir by pacifying the Kashmiri resistance, independent analysts believe that “already in possession of the larger and most prized section of the state and aware of the difficulty that would face any effort to pry Pakistan loose from the rest,” New Delhi would be willing to “accept conversion of the LoC... into a permanent international boundary.”

At the international level, Indian policy on Kashmir is primarily aimed at three objectives: deflecting the Pakistani campaign alleging human-rights violations in Kashmi emphasizing that the Simla agreement provides the only viable forum to settle the Kashmir. issue and discrediting the Kashmiri resistance movement as a “terrorist activity” sponsored by Pakistan.

The Pakistani Approach Towards Kashmir Issue

Historically, the Government of Pakistan has maintained that J & K has been a disputed territory. The state’s accession to India in October 1947 was provisional and executed under the coercive pressure of Indian military presence. The disputed status of J & K is acknowledged in the UN Security Council resolutions of August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, to which both Pakistan and India agreed. These resolutions remain fully in force today, and cannot be unilaterally disregarded by either party.

1. Talks between India and Pakistan over the future status of J & K should aim to secure the right of self-determination for the Kashmiri people. This right entails a free, fair, and internationally supervised plebiscite, as agreed in the 19481949 UN Security Council resolutions.
2. The plebiscite should offer the people of Kashmir the choice of permanent accession to either Pakistan or India.
3. Talks between India and Pakistan, in regard to the future status of J & K, should be held in conformity both with the Simla Agreement of July 1972 and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. An international mediatory role in these talks may be appropriate.