Lahore Declaration, Though Welcome, Remains Ambiguous on Role of Kashmiri People

By Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai

After their historic meeting in Lahore, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of India and Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan agreed on a document known as the Lahore Declaration. Signed on Feb. 21, it offers hope for peace in South Asia if the course of justice is followed and India undertakes to abide by its commitments.

The Kashmiri American Council (KAC) and the people of Kashmir equally share a vision of peace and stability between the two countries, and of progress and prosperity in Kashmir. The people of Kashmir want the people of India and Pakistan to live in peace and prosperity always.

That is why we believe that the Kashmir conflict has to be resolved through peaceful negotiations between India and Pakistan and not through military means. We agree that lasting peace, harmonious relations and friendly cooperation will serve the vital interests of the peoples of the two countries, enabling them to devote their energies to a better future.

It is also true that the possession of nuclear weapons by the two countries adds to their responsibility for avoidance of conflict. This can best be accomplished by resolution of the Kashmir conflict to the satisfaction of the people of Kashmir.

However, the people of Kashmir are perplexed that the two countries have reiterated their determination to implement the Simla Agreement in letter and spirit. Why the stress on the Simla Agreement? It seems that the Simla Agreement is being invoked because of lack of knowledge about its actual terms and the circumstances in which it was signed.

India is taking full advantage of this factor to spread the misinformation that the Simla Agreement sanctions perpetuation of the status quo in Kashmir, and absolves India from the responsibility of striving for a settlement of the dispute.

A sincere and serious effort toward a just settlement of the Kashmir dispute must deal honestly with the realities of the situation and fully respond to the rights of the people involved in it. The Simla Agreement does neither. Indeed, it was not intended to do so; at best, it is reticent on the issues that need to be addressed.

The agreement reached between India and Pakistan on Sept. 23, 1998 states that an environment of peace and security is in the supreme national interest of both sides and that the resolution of all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, is essential for this purpose. This agreement signaled progress simply because this undeniable fact was agreed upon at the highest level of leadership.

Now that the two prime ministers have agreed to intensify their efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, the question is, have they also agreed that the final settlement of the Kashmir issue is not possible without the involvement of the legitimate and accredited leadership of the people of Kashmir?

There is need to clarify the assertion that the two neighbors shall refrain from intervention and interference in each other’s internal affairs. Does this imply that India believes that no international agency can intervene in whatever inhuman acts India commits in the occupied territory?

We welcome the two countries’ resolve to take immediate steps for reducing the risk of accidental or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons and to further confidence building in the nuclear and conventional fields, aimed at prevention of conflict. However, the reality remains that one can prevent a conflict only up to a certain extent. Ultimately it has to be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties—especially in this case, the people of Kashmir.

We welcome the two countries’ condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and their determination to combat this menace. The people of Kashmir, too, agree that terrorism in all its forms and shades has to be condemned by all; especially the sort of state terrorism being perpetrated by India in the occupied territory of Kashmir.

The people of Kashmir would like to see an actual implementation of the two countries’ resolve to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms. This is the cry heard from all civilians on the streets of Kashmir. Unfortunately, the ground reality is quite different from what India would like the world to believe.

Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai is the executive director of the Kashmiri American Council in Washington, DC.