 |
||
|
||
|
||
What a week it's been! Heaven sent opportunities for any parliamentary rebel to show their mettle. What with proposals for "top up" university fees, the funeral of a police officer killed on anti-terrorist duty, the raid on a mosque, and the BBC investigation of "Asian" gangs parading their fast cars and violence to corner the trade in hard drugs from Pakistan and Afghanistan in British cities. Enough to raise the heckles of any rebel, and certainly one whose constituency is impacted by such events.
But no, these issues are too close to home; they affect the folks in Selly Oak too much to merit a motion in Parliament. Why bother with humdrum matters that might concern a majority of ones constituents, when one can lecture the largest and one of the most vibrant democracies around.
That Lynne Jones MP for Selly Oak, should choose India's Republic Day to table an Early Day Motion in the House of Commons for "self determination in Kashmir" shows utter contempt for India. At best, it can be put down to ignorance of the facts, but worse, it seems to exhibit a disregard for democracy and pandering to the prejudices of a small, minority vote bank.
Ms Jones does not call for independence for Kashmir, merely "self determination", surely code speak for accession to Pakistan. Note also, how only a part of J&K is mentioned, as if only Kashmiris matter; that the people of Jammu and Leh, and of the northern areas, which are occupied and ruled directly by Pakistan's military dictatorship do not matter. The state, if you did not know, is Jammu and Kashmir, J&K.
On the subject of self-determination, Ms Jones ought to ponder the following:
* At the time of partition, around 30% of the population of what is today Pakistan, was Hindu. What happened to this population? Where was the self-determination for these people, whilst they were systematically ethnically cleansed from the Islamic republic?
* The part of the state of J&K now fancifully called "Azad" Kashmir had a substantial Hindu and Sikh population before October 1947. Why are they no longer there today?
* Most people who claim to be Kashmiris and call for self-determination, have dual nationality: British and Pakistani. Why is it that such calls come almost entirely from those with allegiance to Pakistan? Can she reconcile this with their silence on military dictatorship? Or perhaps, a military dictatorship is part of the package for self-determination. * In the past 14 years, the Kashmir valley has seen the forced eviction of half a million Hindus by systematic assaults through cross border terrorism. What is the connection between this and the ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims from post-partition Pakistan? What of the human rights and self-determination of these people?
Lynne Jones is right to point out the dangers of nuclear weapons. Many countries have dangerous weapons, and they pose a far greater threat to peace than India. Why then the absence of an early day motion drawing attention to these countries? Before lecturing India to "commit itself to talks with Pakistan on all the issues that divide them, including Kashmir" she should dwell on the philosophy behind the "Two Nation Theory" that still remains the foundation stone of Pakistan. This is that the Muslims of India could not co-exist with other Indians.
Without going into details, a brief history to enlighten Ms Jones and hopefully cause her to reassess her simplistic notions on self-determination:
* The accession of J&K to India was conducted per the rules of partition: the Maharaja had the right to accede the state to India, as he did. Furthermore, the UN Security Council and the legal adviser of the UN Commission endorsed this accession.
* It was India who lodged a complaint to the UN about Pakistan's invasion of the state. Pakistan is still the aggressor whilst India remains the complainant in the dispute.
* UN resolutions of 1948 called upon Pakistan to vacate all territories of the state of J&K, for India to administer the state and for normalcy to prevail, before any plebiscite could be held. Pakistan has yet to abide by this.
* The "self-determination" and the "will of the people of J&K" has been legitimately and constitutionally expressed: A constituent assembly was duly formed and elections on the basis of universal adult franchise were held in 1951, which were declared fair and free by observers from around the world. The assembly debated all alternatives for the future of J&K: (1) accession to India, (2) accession to Pakistan, and (3) complete independence.
* The same constituent assembly confirmed the accession of J&K to India. Section 3 of the Constitution of the state of J&K clearly states "The state of J&K is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India".
* As a practical exercise in "self-determination" and "the will of the people", several subsequent elections to the constituent assembly have been held, the most recent being in October 2002.
No doubt Ms Jones has a grasp of democracy and might think carefully before she brings another worthless motion to the Commons, but, given her reference to "human rights violations" in Indian J&K, it is worth pointing out:
* A delegation of British MPs visiting Srinagar strongly advocated that Pakistan has to end cross border terrorism in J&K. Delegation leader Stephen Pound said: "It is clear that the number of Kashmiri terrorists is reducing and the struggle is becoming much more of a proxy war fought by mercenaries and terrorist groups that have agendas other than Kashmir."
* Freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and of press are not only guaranteed to the people of J&K, but they exercise them everyday. If Ms Jones is unaware, she should visit Srinagar or any town or village in Indian J&K, see the places of worship, read the papers. Indeed, she may be shocked to learn that most casualties are the victims of terrorists. She may also be shocked that the pressure on both people and the press to "conform" comes from the "self-determination" elements whose cause she espouses, many with terrorist credentials. She can then compare this with the situation across the line of control in Muzzafarabad and Giljit.
* Article 370 of the Indian constitution grants the people of J&K privileges that few in the world enjoy: representation in the federal parliament without being obliged to pay income tax.
Better still, Ms Jones would serve
her constituents, including those misguided about "self-determination in
Kashmir" far better is she concerned herself more with domestic matters
like drug related crime, transport, education, and health. Now, these would
be juicy matters to rebel about! Wouldn't they?
|
||
|
||
|
||