Kashmir

Kashmir

Introduction

The Kashmir Conflict is an ongoing armed conflict over the territory of the Kashmir region, waged primarily between India and Pakistan. The origin of the conflict goes back to the British Empire’s partition of India in 1947. From 1947 to the present, India and Pakistan have fought three major wars to gain the territory of Kashmir. Several diplomatic attempts to resolve the conflict have also been made by both countries, the Soviet Union, and by the United Nations. However, a great number of regional crossfires have continued to break out in Kashmir after the third Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. Currently, India controls 45% of Kashmir (Jammu & Kashmir), Pakistan controls 35% (Northern Areas: Azad Kashmir, Gilgit, and Baltistan), and China controls 20% (Aksai Chin).[i]

Reference

[i] “Kashmir Fast Facts.” CNN. March 31, 2016. Accessed February 09, 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/08/world/kashmir-fast-facts/.

India

India is involved in the Kashmir conflict primarily because the Indian government claims that Kashmir is an integral part of India, and because governing Kashmir would help India’s goal to be recognized as a secular state.[i]

Before the Indian Independence Act of 1947, the Indian subcontinent was ruled by the British Empire under the Crown rule.[ii][iii] By the 1880s, many Indians were educated and wanted to establish their own government.[iv] In 1947, after a long struggle, British rule ended in India, Pakistan, and Kashmir. As India and Pakistan established their countries, Kashmir remained independent.[v] However, in October 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir at the time, signed a letter acceding the princely states, Jammu and Kashmir, to India.[vi] Even though many Kashmiris protested against the Maharaja and a majority of Kashmiris were Muslims rather than Hindus, India claimed the legal right to govern Kashmir.

In 1976, the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution of India substituted the description of India from “sovereign democratic republic” to “socialist secular democratic republic.”[vii] The change defines India as a secular state, rather than as a Hindu state.[viii][ix] India refuses to give up Kashmir because it maintains that a Muslim majority region cannot be turned over to a Muslim neighbor just because it is Muslim.[x] As Stephen Philip Cohen, a senior fellow of the India Project of Brookings Institute, argues in his paper, “in contrast, India’s secularism, strengthened by the presence of a Muslim-majority state of Kashmir within India, proves that religion alone does not make a nation.”[xi]

Additionally, the mountains of Kashmir provide a natural barrier to an invading army from the north; thus, control of the region strengthens India’s national defense. For these legal, constitutional, and strategic reasons, India aims at fighting for the territory of Kashmir, even at the cost of war and violent policing.

Pakistan

In contrast to India’s legal claim, Pakistani government regards the 1947 accession as a form of threat by the Indian government[xii]. From the Pakistani perspective, the Maharaja of Kashmir was incompetent when signing the instrument of accession because he was usurped by the revolt, and he acceded to India under duress.[xiii]

Countering India’s secularism claim, Pakistan argues for the two-nation theory, which provides a rationale for Pakistan to occupy Kashmir. The two-nation theory, originated during the British partition, defines Pakistan as a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent and gave a reason for Pakistan to become independent in 1947.[xiv] It states that the essential factor that defines two different nations is their religion.[xv] Therefore, the theory implies Hindus should join India and Muslims should join Pakistan. According to this theory, as Kashmir is mostly  Muslim-dominated, Pakistan has grounds to gain the territory.

Strategically, Kashmir is a significant crossroad that connects Pakistan with China.[xvi] As a long-term ally with China, control over Kashmir would facilitate more and efficient international trade, thereby fostering the economic development of Pakistan.

For the reasons above, the Pakistani government is willing to engage in this long-lasting contest with India.

People of Kashmir

The whole Kashmir region has a majority Muslim population. Specifically, the population of Jammu and Kashmir consists of around 70 percent Muslims, 30 percent Hindus, and a minority of Buddhists.[xvii]  People residing in the Kashmir region are deeply involved in the conflict, because their rights and living situations are tied to the course of the conflict. The separatist violence since 1947 has killed more than 47,000 people, not including people who disappeared due to the conflict.[xviii] In addition, policing in India is violent during protests, causing injuries and deaths of innocent citizens.[xix]

In 1947, before British India was partitioned, there were about 600 princely states. Lord Mountbatten, the last British Viceroy, advised other states to accede to Pakistan, but India opposed the plan because a majority of the population in these states were Hindus.[xx] The disagreement of claiming sovereignty over states of Kashmir caused India and Pakistan to engage in the long-lasting territorial disputes.

From a Kashmiri perspective, according to Mehraj Hajni, a lecturer at Government Degree College in Kargil, “many young people in the late 1980s concluded that salvation lay in succession from India, which could be achieved only through an armed struggle.”[xxi] Meanwhile, Pakistan was keen to cast influence on Kashmiris. During the 1980s, Pakistan provided arms and ammunition to the angry young Kashmiri Muslims. As a result, an armed movement was initiated in Jammu and Kashmir. Dissatisfied with the armed militants and Indian security forces’ exchange of fires, the Kashmiri separatists formed their own organizations and took a violent upsurge with significant mass support.

In 1996, Elections were held in Kashmir, and the National Conference, which was led by Indian politician Farooq Abdullah, formed the government of Kashmir.[xxii] Nonetheless, according to Meharaj Hajni, the failure of the government to fulfill its election promises, “including the restoration of autonomy to the state, ending human rights violations, relief to the victims of violence, safe return of Kashmiri Hindus to their homes, and an end to the unemployment problems”, made the government unpopular.[xxiii]

Based on a survey conducted in 2010 that aimed to collect Kashmiri attitudes towards the dispute, only 28 percent Kashmir in Jammu and Kashmir indicated an intention to vote to join India, while only 2 percent indicated to join Pakistan. [xxiv] In Azad Kashmir, 50 percent said they would vote for the whole of Jammu and Kashmir to join Pakistan.[xxv]

Currently, Kashmiris’ interests lie in the desire to end violence and resolve the dispute through political negotiations.[xxvi] The indigenous militant movement is weakening every day. [xxvii]

References

[i] Stephen Philip Cohen, “India, Pakistan and Kashmir,” The Brookings Institute, accessed April 15, 2017.

[ii] Edmund Wright, “A Dictionary of World History,” Oxford University Press, pp.537

[iii] C. Christine Fair, “Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army’s Way of War,” Oxford University Press, pp.61

[iv] “The End of The British Empire in India,” National Archives, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/empire/g3/cs3/background.htm

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] “The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976,” India Code, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm

[viii] Paul Wiseman. “Kashmir Conflict Has More Than Two Sides.” USA Today. January 9, 2002. Accessed March 15, 2017. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/01/09/kashmir-qna-usat.htm

[ix]The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976″. Government of India. Accessed March 29, 2017. http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm

[x] Stephen Philip Cohen, “India, Pakistan and Kashmir”

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] “Diplomatic History of Kashmir.” Diplomatic History of Kashmir. Accessed February 2, 2017. https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/war_peace/confrontation/hkashmir.html.

[xiii] Ibid.

[xiv]H. M. Sanjeev Kumar. 2011. “Competing Conceptions of Nationhood: The Cultural Dimensions of India-Pakistan Conflict and the Subcontinental Security Dynamics.” International Journal Of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences 5, no. 9: 203-212. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed April 15, 2017)

[xv] Robin W. Winks and Alaine M. Low, t: Historiography, Oxford University Press, 2001

[xvi] Sadia Fayaz, “Kashmir Dispute between Pakistan and India: The Way Out,” Qurtuba University of Science and Information Technology Peshawar, Accessed April 9, 2017

[xvii] “In 10 yrs, Muslim Count Up by 17.74 lakh, Hindu population by 5.61 lakh in J&K,” The Tribune, August 27, 2015, accessed April 16, 2017, http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/jammu-kashmir/in-10-yrs-muslim-count-up-by-17-74-lakh-hindu-population-by-5-61-lakh-in-j-k/124893.html

[xviii] “Kashmir Fast Facts.” CNN. March 31, 2016. Accessed February 09, 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/08/world/kashmir-fast-facts/.

[xix] “Police Kill 6 in Political Violence in India’s Kashmir,” Bangkok Post, April 10, 2017, accessed April 16, 2017, http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/world/1229848/police-kill-6-in-political-violence-in-indias-kashmir

[xx] Mehraj Hajni, “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective,” Epilogue Press, Epilogue, Vol 3, Issue 7, pp. 27.

[xxi] Ibid.

[xxii] Ibid.

[xxiii] Mehraj Hajni, “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective”

[xxiv] Robert W. Bradnock, “Kashmir: Paths to Peace,” Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2010.

[xxv] Ibid.

[xxvi] Mehraj Hajni, “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective”

[xxvii] Ibid.

1931: Hari Singh was part of a Hindu Dogra dynasty, ruling over a majority Muslim State. The movement against the repressive Maharaja Hari Singh began.[i] It was suppressed by the Maharaj’s forces.

1946

  • May: The National Conference, which was found by Sheikh Abdullah, an Indian politician fighting for equal rights in Kashmir, launched the “Quit Kashmir” movement against the Maharaja, demanding a restoration of sovereignty to the people of Kashmir.[ii] Abdullah was arrested and charged with sedition.
  • July: The Maharaja declared that the Kashmiris would decide their own destiny without any outside interference by any countries.[iii]

1947

  • June: The Indian Independence Act led to the devision of British India into the two independent dominions of India and Pakistan.[iv]
  • June 13: Dispute between India and Pakistan arose over the accession of princely states in Kashmir.[v]
  • October 22: First Indo-Pakistani War broke out as thousands of Pathan tribesmen sponsored by the government of Pakistan invaded Kashmir in order to control it.[vi]
  • October 24: The Maharaja of Kashmir approached the Indian government for military assistance. Later the Indian Union proposed the condition of the assession of Kashmir prior to any deployment of Indian troops.[vii]
  • October 26: The Maharaja of the State of Jammu and Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession, acceding the state to the Indian Union. India accepted the accession.[viii]
  • October 27: The Indian army entered the state to repel the invaders. Mohammad Ali Jinnah ordered to send Pakistani troops into Kashmir.[ix]
  • November: India proposed that Pakistan withdraws all its troops first, as a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected on the grounds that the Kashmiris may not vote freely given the presence of India army. Pakistan proposed to simultaneously withdraw all troops followed by a plebiscite under international auspices. India rejected.[x]

1948

  • January 1: India brought the Kashmir issue to the UN Security Council.[xi]
  • April: UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 to call for India and Pakistan to cease war and call for India to cast a plebiscite in Kashmir.[xii] Both India and Pakistan rejected the resolution but promised to work with the Commission.

1949

  • January: The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolution stated that the question of the access of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan would be decided through a free and impartial plebiscite.[xiii] Both countries accepted the principle.
  • October: According to Kashmir Library, the Indian Constituent Assembly adopted Article 370 of the Constitution, “ensuring a special status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir” with Indian jurisdiction in Kashmir limited to defense, foreign affairs, and communications.[xiv]

1951: First post-independence elections in Kashmir administered by India. The UNCIP resolution stated that the elections do not substitute a plebiscite.[xv]

1954: The Constituent Assembly of India passed a resolution ratifying the accession of Kashmir to India.[xvi]

1956: The Constituent Assembly of India declared Kashmir as an integral part of the Indian Union.[xvii]

1957: UN passed another resolution stating that actions taken by All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, a pro-India organization, would not constitute a final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.[xviii]

1965

  • April: Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. As stated in BBC News, “a clash between border patrols erupted into fighting in the Rann of Kutch, a sparsely inhabited region along the southwestern Indo-Pakistani border.”[xix]
  • August: The government of Pakistan launched a covert offensive across the line of control into the India-administered Jammu and Kashmir.[xx]
  • September: According to BBC News, “India retaliated by crossing the international border at Lahore.” [xxi] The UN sponsored another ceasefire that was agreed by India and Pakistan.[xxii]

1966: The governments of India and Pakistan met at Tashkent and signed a declaration showing their commitments to solve the conflict through peaceful means. They also agreed to withdraw to their pre-1965 positions, under the Soviet Union’s mediation.[xxiii]

1971: The Civil War of Pakistan. West Pakistan army was fighting against East Pakistanis, who demanded autonomy and later independence.[xxiv]

December: India invaded East Pakistan in support of the East Pakistani people. East Pakistan became the independent country of Bangladesh.[xxv]

1972: In July, Indian government and Pakistani government agreed to cease fire at Line of Control by signing the Simla Agreement.[xxvi]

1974: According to Jawad Asgar Khan, “the Kashmir state government reached an accord with the Indian Government, which affirmed its status as ‘a constituent unit of the Union of India’,” while Pakistan rejected the accord.[xxvii]

1987[xxviii]: Farooq Abdullah won the Assembly elections in Kashmir.

1989[xxix]: Muslim political parties in the Kashmir valley accused the 1987 elections were rigged, causing some political groups to demand independence for the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

1990

  • January: Farooq Abdullah resigned. Indian troops killed an estimated 100 unarmed protesters at the Gawakadal Bridge.[xxx] This incident led to an insurgency of the entire population.
  • February: An estimated 400,000 Kashmiris took to the streets of Srinagar, demanding a plebiscite.[xxxi]
  • March: An estimated one million Kashmiris protested on the streets and more than 40 people were killed in a police firing.[xxxii] Massive protests continued in Srinagar.

1996-97: Pakistan and India attempted to sooth their conflict by having peace talks on the Line of Control and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the independence of both countries.[xxxiii]

1999

  • February: Pakistani Army began to reoccupy its side of the Line of Control in the Kargil region, which it had abandoned before.[xxxiv] It also sent forces to some posts on the Indian side of the Line of Control.
  • May: According to BBC News, “India launched air strikes against Pakistani-backed forces that had infiltrated into the mountains in Indian-administered Kashmir, north of Kargil. Pakistan responded by putting its troops on high alert as the fighting built up towards a direct conflict between the two states.”[xxxv]
  • June: US President Bill Clinton asked Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to pull out from Kargil.[xxxvi]
  • July: Following the Washington accord, Sharif agreed to withdraw Pakistani troops, but some forces remained in positions on the Indian side of the Line of Control. The Indian army launched its final attacks in the last week of July. When the Pakistani forces were cleared, the fight ceased on July 26.[xxxvii]

2001

  • July: Pakistani General Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister of India Atal Bihari Vajpayee met for peace talks.[xxxviii]
  • October: Kashmiri Assembly in Srinagar attacked, 38 people dead.[xxxix]
  • December: Armed attack by terrorists on the Indian Parliament in New Delhi. 14 people dead. Indian government accused three people from Pakistan of being involved involved in the preparation of the attack.[xl] The tension between India and Pakistan worsened.

2003: In November, India agreed to cease fire along the borders of Pakistan and India in the disputed region of Kashmir.[xli] The ceasefire went into effect on November 26 and was the first ceasefire in 14 years.

2004: India Prime Minister Modi invited Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to his inauguration, trying to alleviate the tension.[xlii]

2006: In November, Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shanker Menon and his Pakistani counterpart, Riaz Mohammed Khan, met in New Delhi, India for peace talks. The main topic of discussion was finding ways to implement an anti-terror mechanism that both countries have agreed to employ.[xliii]

2008: In August, protests against Indian occupation started in Srinagar, when the leader of the All Party Hurriyat Conference organized a civil disobedience campaign.[xliv] The protests turned violent. The local police fired teargas and killed more than 20 protestors.[xlv]

2010: Protests in Srinagar. Anti-India protestors fought battles with the local police and parliamentary forces, causing deaths of more than 100 people.[xlvi]

2014: Jammu and Kashmir registered its highest voter turn-out in assembly elections with an estimated 65% of voters casting their votes. Indian authorities claimed that this vote for Kashmiri people in favor of democracy of India.[xlvii]

2015: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Pakistani counterpart met in Ufa, Russia, agreeing to let their security advisors meet and discuss ways to counter terrorism.[xlviii] However, the two countries exchanged gunfire along the line of control only a week after the friendly attempt.[xlix] As a result of the crossfire, 4 people were killed and 14 people were wounded.[l]

References

[i] Prem Nath Bazaz, “Struggle for Freedom in Kashmir,” New Delhi, pp.140-160

[ii] Oirent Longman, “Kashmir: Toward Insurgency,” pp.95

[iii] Ramachandra Guha, “India After Gandhi: The History of the World’s Largest Democracy,” Pan Macmillan, pp.xv

[iv] “Indian Independence Act, 1947,” Legislative of UK, Accessed April 6, 2017, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1947/pdf/ukpga_19470030_en.pdf

[v] A.G. Noorani, “Relevance of U.N. Resolutions,” Frontline, February 5, 2016.

[vi] Prem Nath bazaz, “Azad Kashmir,” Ferozsons (1950), p.33

[vii] Dr. G.M. Athar, “Pre-Independence Standstill Agreement,” Brighter Kashmir, December 12, 2016, Accessed May 23, 2017, http://brighterkashmir.com/pre-independence-standstill-agreement/

[viii] “Instrument of Accession of Kashmir”

[ix] Alastair Lamb, “Incomplete Partition,” Oxford University Press (2002), pp.185-187

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Karel Wellens, “Resolutions and Statements of the United Nations Security Council: (1946-1989); a Thematic Guide,” BRILL, pp.322

[xii] Srinath Raghavan, “War and Peace in Modern India,” Palgrave Macmillan, pp.131-132

[xiii] UNCIP Resolution, 5 January, 1949.

[xiv] “Kashmir: Nuclear Flashpoint,” Kashmir Library, accessed June 9, 2017, http://www.kashmirlibrary.org/kashmir_timeline/kashmir_chapters/article-370.shtml

[xv] UNCIP Resolution, 30 March, 1951.

[xvi] “The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan by Dilip Hiro,” Nation Books, p.151

[xvii] Ibid.

[xviii] “Kashmir, UN Security Council Resolution 122”

[xix] “The 1965 War,” BBC News, accessed June 9, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/india_pakistan/timeline/html/1965.stm

[xx] Ibid.

[xxi] Ibid.

[xxii] Ibid.

[xxiii] Asad Hashim, “Timeline: India-Pakistan Relations,” Aljazeera, May 27, 2014, accessed June 9, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/kashmirtheforgottenconflict/2011/06/2011615113058224115.html

[xxiv] “India Pakistan: Troubled Relations,” BBC News, accessed April 4, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/1971.stm

[xxv] Ibid.

[xxvi] Ibid.

[xxvii] Jawad Asgar Khan, Probing War & Warfare. New Delhi: A.P.H. Pub. Corp., 2005.

[xxviii] Balraj Puri, “Kashmir: Towards Insurgency,” New Delhi 1993, pp.52

[xxix] Ibid.

[xxx] Human Right Watch, “India’s Secret Army in Kashmir,” New Delhi 1999, pp.71-72

[xxxi] Amnesty International, “Disappearances in Jammu and Kashmir,” 1999

[xxxii] Ibid.

[xxxiii] Ibid.

[xxxiv] “How I Started A War,” Time. July 12, 1999.

[xxxv] “India Pakistan: Timeline.” BBC News, accessed February 10, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/default.stm

[xxxvi] Bruce Riedel, “American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil Summit at Blair House,” Center for the Advanced Study of India, 2002.

[xxxvii] Bruce Riedel, “American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil Summit at Blair House”.

[xxxviii] A.G. Noorani, “The Truth about Agra,” Frontline, Vol. 22 Issue 15 (2005) http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2215/stories/20050729002104400.htm

[xxxix] Nigel Price, Michael Wells, Nicholas Fellows, and Anjali Tyagi, “Camridge Igcse India Studies,” Cambridge University Press 2012, pp.137

[xl] Naunidhi Kaur, “Conviction in Parliament attack case” (Issue 23. Vol 19.). Frontline. Frontline Magazine. Accessed May 24, 2017

[xli] “Kashmir Fast Facts,” CNN Library, updated March 29, 2017, accessed April 4, 2017, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/08/world/kashmir-fast-facts/

[xlii] Ibid.

[xliii] Ibid.

[xliv] “Mourners Riot Over Kashmir Protest Deaths.” August 13, 2008. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1fa9b5d6-6921-11dd-91bd-0000779fd18c.html?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true#axzz4cOCdEHOA

[xlv]“Timeline: The Kashmir Conflict.” August 1, 2011. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/kashmirtheforgottenconflict/2011/07/2011727134530154224.html

[xlvi] Ibid.

[xlvii] “Jammu and Kashmir Registers Highest Voter Turnout in 25 Years, Jharkhand Breaks Records.” Press Trust of India. December 21, 2014. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.ndtv.com/assembly/jammu-and-kashmir-registers-highest-voter-turnout-in-25-years-jharkhand-breaks-records-715845

[xlviii] Muhammad Akbar Notezai, “India-Pakistan Clashes in Kashmir,” The Diplomat,August 02, 2015, accessed August 15, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2015/08/the-india-pakistan-gunfire-exchange-in-poonch/

[xlix] Ibid.

[l] Ibid.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 39 (1948)[i]

During the first Indo-Pakistani War, India brought the issue to the United Nations on January 1, 1948. On January 20, 1948, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 39, establishing the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate and mediate the dispute[ii]. The resolution was largely influenced by the British delegation, which proposed to create an administration of commission that is headed by a neutral Chairman and to appoint a joint military occupation in Kashmir.[iii][iv]

Conditions: To establish a Commission of the Security Council, composed of three representatives of the United Nations.

Functions of the Commission: To investigate the facts of the dispute, to exercise any mediatory influence, to carry out the directions given by the Security Council, and to report how far the directions have been carried out.

Decision-making of the Commission: The Commission shall make its decision by majority vote.

Results:

  • A three members Commission for India and Pakistan was established in April 1948.
  • The UNCIP recommended observers to “accompany the local authorities in their investigations, gather as much information as possible, and report as completely, accurately and impartially as possible” along the ceasefire line, according to the United Nations. The arrangements remained in effect until the termination of the UNCIP in 1951, which led to the establishment of the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) to continue supervising the ceasefire in Jammu and Kashmir.[v]

United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 (1948)[vi]

On March 18, 1948, China tabled a new draft resolution in three parts: 1. Ask Pakistan to pull back the tribesmen and its nationals 2. Ask India to create a “Plebiscite Administration” whose director would be nominated by the UN secretary general and would function as officials of the state 3. Call for an interim government representing all major political groups.[vii] After subsequent discussions of the draft, the United Nations adopted Resolution 47 on April 21 to advise Pakistan and India to cease war.

Conditions:

  • Enlarge the membership of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan to 5 members.
  • Call for “Pakistan to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting”, as stated in Resolution 47, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any material aid to those fighting.[viii]
  • Call for India to withdraw to a military level minimally necessary to maintain law and order.
  • Call for India to undertake a Plebiscite Administration in Jammu and Kashmir to hold a plebiscite as soon as possible on the question of the accession of the State to India or Pakistan.

Results: Both India and Pakistan agreed on the resolution, but they held disagreement over demilitarization and a plebiscite.[ix] The United Nations, nevertheless, attempted to negotiate ways for a plebiscite but did not reach a permanent resolution.  The mediation attempt eventually failed because on February 6th, 1954, the Kashmir Assembly ratified the accession of Kashmir to India, leaving the UN with no probable reason to encourage a plebiscite.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 91 (1951)[x]

The UN Security Council received and noted the report of Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan in 1951. Pakistan was alarmed by the National Conference’s preparation to convene a Constituent Assembly in Srinagar and reported the matter to the United Nations. In Resolution 91, the UN Security Council recognized that the main differences preventing an agreement between the parties were: “the procedure for and the extent of demilitarization of the State preparatory to the holding of a plebiscite; and the degree of control over the exercise of the functions of government in the State necessary to ensure a free and fair plebiscite.”[xi] On March 30, 1951, the Council adopted Resolution 91.

Conditions:[xii]

  • “Call upon the parties to co-operate with the UN Representative to the fullest degree in effecting the demilitarization of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.”
  • “Call upon the parties … to accept arbitration upon all outstanding points of difference reported by the Representative.”
  • “Request the Governments of India and Pakistan to ensure that their agreement regarding the ceasefire shall continue.”
  • Establish the United Nations Military Observer Group in India & Pakistan to monitor the ceasefire on the Line of Control.
  • Remind India and Pakistan that the convening of a Constituent Assembly by National Conference does not constitute a disposition of Kashmir State.

Results:

  • Wishing to maintain his power, the leader of the National Conference, Farooq Abdullah, continued to form a Constituent Assembly.[xiii]
  • The election for the Constituent Assembly was rigged, and the Jammu Praja Parishad political party, which was against the National Conference, did not gain any seat.[xiv] Protests led by the Jammu Praja Parishad broke out and the government arrested the organizers, and utilized police force to suppress the protests.[xv]
  • India and Pakistan complied with the ceasefire requirement. No major crossfires were observed by the UN Commission.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 211 (1965) [xvi]

India and Pakistan fought the second major war in 1965. The Resolution 211 was adopted on September 20, 1965, calling for a ceasefire between the parties.

Conditions[xvii]:

  • “Demand a cease-fire should take effect on Wednesday, 22 September 1964, at 0700 hours GMT.”
  • “Request the Secretary-General to provide the necessary assistance to ensure supervision of the cease-fire and the withdrawal of all armed personnel.”
  • “Decide to consider … what steps could be taken to assist towards a settlement of the political problem underlying the present conflict.”
  • “Request the Secretary-General to exert every possible effort to give effect to the present resolution, to seek a peaceful solution, and to report to the Security Council thereon.”

Results:

  • Crossfires did not stop in Kashmir after the resolution was adopted.
  • Because the Cold War was at its peak, the United Nations turned its eyes towards the Cold War instead of focusing on the demilitarization of Kashmir.[xviii]
  • India and Pakistan chose to resolve the conflict bilaterally, but the ceasefire did not last long.

The Tashkent Declaration (1966)[xix]

The UN Resolution 211 did not stop crossfires between India and Pakistan. As a third-party mediator, the Soviet Union held a meeting in Tashkent on January 10, 1966. As a result of the mediation, the Prime Minister of India, Lal Bahadur Shatri, and the President of Pakistan, Ayub Khan, signed a declaration to restore normal and peaceful relations.

Conditions:[xx]

  • Both India and Pakistan shall withdraw all armed personnel no later than February 25, 1966 to the positions they held before August 5, 1965 and both sides shall observe the ceasefire terms on the ceasefire line.
  • Both sides shall base their relations on the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of each other.
  • Both parties shall consider measures towards the restoration of economic and trade relations, communications, and cultural exchanges between India and Pakistan.

Results:

  • The Indian and Pakistani High Commissioners returned to their respective posts.[xxi]
  • On February 25, 1966, India and Pakistan smoothly withdrew their troops to their pre-August 5, 1965 position.[xxii]
  • Exchange of prisoners of war was accomplished on February 25, 1966.[xxiii]
  • On May 26, 1966, India unilaterally lifted the ban on trade with Pakistan.[xxiv]
  • On October 11, 1967, India and Pakistan agreed to resume telecommunications between the two countries.[xxv]

The Simla Agreement (1972)[xxvi]

The third Indo-Pakistani war took place in 1971. Different from the previous wars, which were over the Kashmir issue, where as  the major controversy of this war was about the independence of East Pakistan. As Pakistan’s rival, India supported East Pakistani militarily, and the independent nation of Bangladesh was formed.[xxvii] As a proposal to make peace, the governments of India and Pakistan signed the Simla Agreement on July 2, 1972.

Conditions[xxviii]:

  • “A mutual commitment to the peaceful resolution of all issues through direct bilateral approaches.”
  • “To build the foundations of a cooperative relationship with special focus on people to people contacts.”
  • To withdraw forces to their sides of the international border and uphold the inviolability of the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir.
  • To follow the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, respect each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, and negotiation peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.

Results:

  • India insisted that by agreeing to the Simla Agreement, Pakistan had conceded removal of the Kashmir dispute from the international arena and reached a bilateral settlement without outside interference.[xxix] However, it did not make any official request to the UN Secretary General to withdraw the observers because of China’s support of Pakistan’s stance. Pakistan insisted that the principle of bilateralism did not preclude it from raising the Kashmir issue in the United Nations.[xxx]
  • India did not withdraw all its troops from the 5,000 square miles of Pakistani territory occupied during the war unless it extracted satisfactory concessions in Kashmir.[xxxi]
  • India intended to draw a new “line of control” in Kashmir, while the Pakistani government emphasized that the withdrawal of troops across the international borders should not be linked with the delineation of the actual Line of Control in Kashmir.[xxxii]

US Mediation (1999) [xxxiii]

In 1999, Pakistani Army advanced into Kargil highway, threatening to weaken Indian control over the region. The two parties engaged in a military conflict along a hundred fifty kilometers front in the mountains above Kargil in late May and early June.[xxxiv] The United States was alarmed from the beginning of this conflict because of its potential to escalate. It is also worth noting that both parties had sought third party support (Pakistan from China and Arab powers, India from Russia and Israel).[xxxv] The possible deployment of nuclear weapons also worried the United States.

Actions:[xxxvi]

  • US Secretary Albright called Sharif and Chief of Army Staff General Musharraf to express the potentially devastating consequences. Nevertheless, these attempts did not work.
  • The United States then went public to call upon Pakistan to respect the Line of Control.
  • As the military clash continued to deteriorate and Pakistan was not on the advantageous side, Sharif requested American intervention to stop India counterattack.
  • On July 2, 1999, the Prime Minister put in a call to President Clinton. The US President made it clear that the US would only help if Pakistan first withdraws to the Line of Control. Clinton also communicated with the Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee on the phone and Vajpayee was firm on India’s stance that Pakistan must demonstrate no threat of aggression.
  • Clinton met with Sharif on July 4, 1999 and secured a sizable cash payment to Pakistan that compensated Islamabad due to past sanctions. Sharif agreed to take concrete and immediate steps for the restoration of the Line of Control.

Result: The Prime Minister ordered the army to pull back its men and its allies.[xxxvii]

References

[i] “Resolution 39,” United Nations Security Council.

[ii] “India-Pakistan Background.” United Nations. Accessed March 20, 2017. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unipombackgr.html

[iii] Sumit Ganguly, The Origins of War in South Asia: Indo-Pakistani Conflict Since 1947, Westview Press

[iv] C. Dasgupta, War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-48, SAGE Publications (November 8, 2014)

[v] “UNMOGIP Background,” United Nations, accessed May 4, 2017 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unmogip/background.shtml

[vi] “Resolution 47,” United Nations Security Council

[vii] Srinath Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India, Palgrave Macmillan; 2010 edition (October 15, 2010), pp.131

[viii] Sabahat Akram and Midhat Shahzad. “UN Mediation On Kashmir Dispute: Past And Future.” November 2015. Vol.3, No.2, pp. 1-9. Accessed February 10, 2017. http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Un-Mediation-On-Kashmir-Dispute-Past-And-Future—.pdf.

[ix] Sumathi Subbiah. “Security Council Mediation and The Kashmir Dispute: Reflections on Its Failures and Possibilities for Renewal.” Accessed February 10, 2017. https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/27_1/07_FMS.htm.

[x] “Resolution 91,” United Nations Security Council

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Ibid.

[xiii] Sumantra Bose, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Harvard University Press, pp. 53-58

[xiv] Ibid.

[xv] Ibid.

[xvi] “Security Council Resolution 211 (1965).” United Nations. September 20, 1965. Accessed February 1, 2017. http://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IN%20PK_650920_Security%20Council%20Resolution%20211%20(1965).pdf

[xvii] Ibid.

[xviii] Sumathi Subbiah. “Security Council Mediation and The Kashmir Dispute: Reflections on Its Failures and Possibilities for Renewal.” Accessed February 10, 2017. https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/27_1/07_FMS.htm.

[xix] “Tashkent Declaration,” United Nations Security Council

[xx] Ibid.

[xxi] “The India-Pakistan War of 1965,” United States Office of the Historian, accessed April 8, 2017, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war

[xxii] D.C. Jha, “Indo-Pakistani Relations Since the Tashkent Declaration,” The Indian Journal of Political Science, Indian Political Science Association. Vol. 32 no. 4, pp.502-521

[xxiii] Ibid.

[xxiv] Ibid.

[xxv] Ibid.

[xxvi] “Simla Agreement July 2, 1972.” Ministry of External Affairs. July 2, 1972. Accessed February 15, 2017. https://mea.gov.in/in-focus-article.htm?19005%2FSimla%2BAgreement%2BJuly%2B2%2B1972.

[xxvii] “Indo-Pakistan War of 1971,” Global Security, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1971.htm

[xxviii] “Simla Agreement July 2, 1972.”

[xxix] Zubeida Mustafa, “The Kashmir Dispute and the Simla Agreement,” Pakistan Horizon. Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.38-52.

[xxx] Ibid.

[xxxi] Ibid.

[xxxii] Ibid.

[xxxiii] Bruce Riedel, “American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil Summit at Blair House”.

[xxxiv] Ibid.

[xxxv] Ibid.

[xxxvi] Ibid.

[xxxvii] Ibid.

In terms of violence and crossfire, riots continue to break out in Kashmir. In July 2016, 30 protesters were killed during a demonstration over the killing of a young Muslim, who was shot dead by India security forces. More than 300 people were injured during the protest.[i] Neither does India nor Pakistan cease exchanges of gunfire across the line of control.  In February 14, 2017, as reported on India Today, three India soldiers were killed after encountering ”militants and security forces in Pir Mohalla, Hanjin in Jammu and Kashmir’s Bandipora district.” One militant, believed to be a Pakistani national, was killed in the gunfight.[ii] This July, at least 7 Hindu Pilgrims were killed and 19 wounded as they were caught in crossfire in Indian administered Kashmir.[iii]

Besides armed clashes, both India and Pakistan seek to strenghten their international ties. In June 2017, Pakistan and India became members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organizaiton (SCO), an intergovernmental organziation that promotes economic development, political order, and international security.[iv]  Indian Prime Minister addressed on Twitter that he spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping and “spoke about India-China relations and how to further improve ties”.[v] By joining the SCO, India probably tries to mitigate the economic momentum established by the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. During the summit, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said  the SCO “is destined to become a cornerstone of global politics and economics, with economics gaining primacy”, and “it helps use all combat terrorism”.[vi] Although the two actors of the Kashmir conflict joined the SCO, the SCO might not be able to alleviate the tension over Kashmir. Nominally, one of the SCO’s objectives is to combat separatism and foster security of member countries.[vii] Nonetheless, Russia still supports separatist conflicts in Ukraine and Georgia, and the summit barely gave discussion of fighting separatism. [viii]

References

[i] Andrew Marszal. “Kashmir reeling from worst violence since 2010 as 30 killed.” The Telegraph. July 11, 2016. Accessed February 1, 2017. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/11/kashmir-reeling-from-worst-violence-since-2010-as-30-killed/.

[ii] Shuja-ul-Haq Wani. “Encounter in J-Ks Bandipora: 3 Army soldiers die, 1 militant killed.” India, News – India Today. February 14, 2017. Accessed February 14, 2017. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/jammu-kashmir-encounter-badipora-district-army-personnel/1/882195.html.

[iii] Mukhtar Ahmad, “At least seven pilgrims killed in Indian administered Kashmir”, CNN, July 11, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/asia/kashmir-pilgrims-killed/index.html

[iv] “’It is a historic day’: Pakistan Becomes Full Member of SCO at Astana Summit,” DAWN, June 9, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, https://www.dawn.com/news/1338471/it-is-a-historic-day-pakistan-becomes-full-member-of-sco-at-astana-summit

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Casey Michel, “It’s Official: India and Pakistan Join Shanghai Cooperation Organization,” The Diplomat, July 12, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2017/06/its-official-india-and-pakistan-join-shanghai-cooperation-organization/

[viii] Ibid.

China

Pakistan and China have had a long-term relationship, and China has always stood behind international affairs of Pakistan, including the conflict over Kashmir. One critical reason for China’s support for Pakistan is that Pakistan ceded over 2,000 square miles of territory to China under the Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement of 1963.[i] By supporting Pakistan, China would secure its control over the area. If India and Pakistan resolved the conflict, the ceded area would be subject to renegotiation, and this is not what China wants. Also, the economic ties between China and Pakistan cannot be neglected. In May 2013, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang visited Pakistan and proposed the concept of the “China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.” [ii] In April 2015, according to Raymond Lee, China and Pakistan officially signed “51 Memorandums of Understanding between the two countries, the inauguration of eight projects, and the launching of five joint energy projects”.[iii] The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is estimated to be worth 46 billion US dollars.[iv] By establishing a stronger economic relationship, both China and Pakistan gain economic benefits, which reinforce the close tie between the two countries. This leads to the third point about China’s interest: if India regains control over the Northern Areas of Kashmir, all land connections between China and Pakistan would be cut and obstructed by India.[v] As an ally and a competitor of India over economic power, China is hesitated to push for a resolution of the Kashmir conflict that could pose threats on China’s strategic military and economic fronts.

Russia

India-Russia relationship was friendly during the early 20th century. Mahatma Gandhi was inspired by the Russia Revolution of 1905 and developed a close connection with Russia.[vi] V.I. Lenin also expressed interest and sympathy to the Indian freedom struggle.[vii] The Soviet Union consistently gave India valuable political, diplomatic and strategic support bilaterally as well as in international forums on Kashmir. On August 9, 1971, the government of India and the government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics signed the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation, which further set a peaceful friendship between the two countries.[viii] In October 2000, the two countries signed the Declaration on the India-Russia Strategic Partnership, establishing advanced cooperation “in almost all areas of the bilateral relationship including political, security, trade and economy, defense, science, and technology and culture”, according to Embassy of India.[ix] In January 2017, Russia amended its law, allowing long-term contracts between India and Russia in support of military equipment and supplies.

However, recently, Russia is taking a more balanced approach toward India and the Kashmir issue, and it establishes close diplomatic ties with Pakistan. For example, Moscow offered assistance in the expansion of Pakistan Steel Mills, technical support for power plants, and announced interest in Pakistan’s coal project.[x] In terms of military assistance, despite the recent surge of violence in Kashmir, Moscow did not cancel nor postpone its first-ever military exercise with Pakistan.[xi] In September 2016, 70 Russians and 130 Pakistanis special forces held their first joint military exercises in Cherat, northern Pakistan.[xii] Notwithstanding, Russia is more interested in cooperation with India (both within the BRICS block and bilateral), and such a significant partnership with India will not be undermined. [xiii]

Towards the Kashmir issue, Russia is becoming a reluctant actor, because the objectives of Russia lie in: 1.To defy the unipolar world dominated by the US 2.To maintain a diplomatic relationship with both India and Pakistan.In condemning the 2016 Uri attack, the “deadliest attack on security forces in Kashmir in two decades”, Russia named Pakistan directly by stating “We note with concern the resurgence of terrorist attacks near the Line of Control.[xiv] It is alarming and according to New Dehli, the attack on military unit near the town of Uri was committed from the territory of Pakistan”, as reported by the Diplomat.[xv] Hence, even though Russia maintains a relationship with Pakistan, the stronger India-Russia tie would not be affected.

Iran

Iran’s interest in the Kashmir dispute is two-folded. First, it is sensitive to human rights issues being used as instruments of external intervention, as this may set an undesirable precedent that will undermine the status quo in Iran.[xvi] Second, it is willing to maintain a close tie with both India and Pakistan.[xvii] Thus, Iran does not openly support a particular party, but rather address human rights issues and offers to reach a resolution between India and Pakistan.

Iran was the first country that recognized Pakistan after its independence and has built a strong tie with Pakistan. During the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, Pakistan supported Iran through military assistance. Moreover, Iran and Pakistan are founding members of the Economic Cooperation Organization, which promotes trade and investment between its member countries.

Since Pakistan supported Iran during the Iran-Iraq War, Iran’s relationship with India was impeded. However, the situation changed when India and Iran collaborated in the 1990s by supporting the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan against the Taliban regime. More importantly, the two countries share significant economic benefits with each other. India is the second biggest oil buyer from Iran. Despite Western sanctions over Iran’s nuclear program, India continues to deal with Iran. In return, Iran is among the fourth place of India’s oil supplier in 2016.[xviii] Hence, to maintain profitable international trade and economic development, Iran is unlikely to take a stance against India on the Kashmir conflict.

Affirming its stance, in August 2016, under the deterioration of the Kashmir conflict, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani was quoted as saying “Continuation of providing services to the people of the region by India’s government and eliminating the people’s feeling of discrimination and deprivation compared to other Indian citizens can be decisive in creating sustainable security in Kashmir.”[xix] Through this statement, Iran reinstated its stance to seek for peaceful governance in Kashmir. Additionally, Iran also offered mediation assistance to help resolve the dispute. In September 2016, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that Tehran is ready to mediate between India and Pakistan if asked by the two sides.[xx] Therefore, Iran does not only support either party involved in the Kashmir issue, but rather takes a position as a third-party mediator and a partner to both countries.

United States

As a nation far from the conflicted region but imposes great influence in the world, the United States has a history of ambivalent relations with India regarding the conflict. According to the Office of the Historian, “the US officials regarded Indian leadership with some caution due to India’s involvement in the nonaligned movement.”[xxi] However, the victory of China over a 1962 border conflict between India and China motivated the US and the U.K. to provide military supplies to India.[xxii] Later, due to the Cold War and India’s move to turn to the Soviet Union for assistance, the US refrained from getting more involved in support of the Indian Army.[xxiii] On the other hand, US-Pakistani relations had been “more consistently positive”, because the US government regarded Pakistan as an example of moderate Muslim and appreciated Pakistani efforts to hold against communist expansion during the 1960s.

Since September 11, 2001, the US perspective turned to a new angle – to prevent terrorist groups from threatening the safety of US citizens. Washington decided to target al Qaeda and its host, the Taliban regime that resides in Afghanistan. To achieve this goal, The U.S. regards Pakistan’s cooperation necessary for political and operational reasons.[xxiv] As a result, the US has kept providing military aid packages to Pakistan. Particularly, in October 2010, The United States announced that it would provide a $2.29 billion as military aid to Pakistan to strengthen its army’s anti-terror capabilities at the end of the US-Pakistani strategic talks.[xxv]

European Union

The European Union takes a balanced stance in the conflicted region, as it neither stands by India nor supports Pakistan from a historical perspective. In a motion for a European Parliament resolution that was published in April 2007, the European Union (EU) expressed its willingness for the Kashmir conflict to be solved.[xxvi] Particularly, the EU pointed to its regret that Pakistan had failed to fulfill its obligation to introduce meaningful and representative democratic structures and lacked a sufficient political will to address basic needs provision. In January 2017, however, EU condemned India for violating rights of innocent citizens in India-occupied Kashmir.[xxvii] The EU asserted that it would support the right of self-determination of Kashmiris.

The interest of the EU is quite clear. It attempts to foster human rights in the Kashmir region and to encourage a peaceful resolution between India and Pakistan. Nevertheless, the attempts stay only to a limited extent. Similar to the statements above, the EU’s efforts to resolve the issue include submitting motions, suggesting a resolution, and condemning terrorist actions and violent policing in Kashmir.

References

[i] Jabin T. Jacob. “China and Kashmir.” University of Illinois, Accessed March 23, 2017. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/15471/China_and_Kashmir.pdf?sequence=2

[ii] Raymond Lee, “The Strategic Imporatance of Chinese-Pakistani Relations,” Aljazeera Centre for Studies, August 3, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://studies.aljazeera.net/en/reports/2016/08/strategic-importance-chinese-pakistani-relations-160803101555719.html

[iii] Raymond Lee, “The Strategic Imporatance of Chinese-Pakistani Relations.”

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Jabin T. Jacob. “China and Kashmir.”

[vi] Nivedita Das Kundu, “India-Russia Relationship: Past, Present & Future,” accessed April 9, 2017, http://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/india-russia-relationship-past-present-future/

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] “Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Co-operation,” Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, accessed April 9, 2017, http://mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/5139/Treaty+of+

[ix] “Bilateral Relations: India-Russia Relations,” Embassy of India, accessed April 10, 2017, http://indianembassy.ru/index.php/bilateral-relations/bilateral-relations-india-russia

[x] Saddam Hussein, “Russia and Pakistan’s Reluctant Romance,” The Diplomat, February 25, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2017/02/russia-and-pakistans-reluctant-romance/

[xi] Umair Jamal, “Russia Wants to De-Hyphenate India and Pakistan. Should Delhi Worry?” The Diplomat, September 27, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2016/09/russia-wants-to-de-hyphenate-india-and-pakistan-should-delhi-worry/

[xii]“Russia and Pakistan Slowly Move Towards An Embrace,” Aljazeera, December 3, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/12/russia-pakistan-slowly-move-embrace-161203083811644.html

[xiii] “Russian Spares for Indian Weapon Systems,” The Hindu, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Russian-spares-for-Indian-weapon-systems/article17024135.ece

[xiv] “Militants Attack Indian Army Base in Kashmir ‘killings 17’,” BBC News, September 18, 2016, accessed April 8, 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37399969

[xv] Umair Jamal, “Russia Wants to De-Hyphenate India and Pakistan. Should Delhi Worry?”

[xvi] Maroof Raza, Wars and No Peace Over Kashmir, New Delhi: Lancer Publishers ; Hartford, Wi : Spantech &​ Lancer, c1996.

[xvii] Ibid.

[xviii] Nidhi Verma, “India’s 2016 Iran Oil Imports Hit Record High,” Reuters, February 1, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017,http://in.reuters.com/article/india-iran-oil-idINKBN15G3XR

[xix] Moazum Mohammad, “New Blackout Ordered in Radio Kashmir, Doordarshan,” Kashmir Reader, August 11, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://kashmirreader.com/2016/08/28/irans-shamkhani-asks-india-for-restraint-in-kashmir/

[xx] “Pakistan Welcomes Iran’s Mediation Call on Kashmir,” Islamic Republic News Agency, accessed April 8, 2017, http://www3.irna.ir/en/News/82338742/

[xxi] “Milestones: 1961–1968 – Office of the Historian.” US Department of State. Accessed February 10, 2017. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war.

[xxii] Ibid.

[xxiii] Ibid.

[xxiv] Navnita Chadha Behera. “Kashmir : Redefining the US Role.” October 30, 2002. Brookings Institute. Accessed March 20, 2017. https://www.brookings.edu/research/kashmir-redefining-the-u-s-role/

[xxv] “$2.29 Billion US Aid for Pakistan to Fight Terror.” The Hindu. October 22, 2010. Accessed March 23, 2017. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/2.29-billion-US-aid-for-Pakistan-to-fight-terror/article15789419.ece

[xxvi] “On Kashmir: Present Situation and Future Prospects.” European Parliament. April 25, 2007. Accessed March 23, 2017. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A6-2007-0158+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN#title1

[xxvii] MA Mir. “EU Parliamentarian Condemns Indian Atrocities in Kashmir.” The Express Tribune. January 9, 2017. Accessed March 23, 2017. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1288625/global-support-eu-parliamentarian-condemns-indian-atrocities-kashmir/

Predictions

Four scenarios could occur in the future:

  1. Maintaining the Status Quo[i]: This scenario is most likely to happen in the near future. Because Kashmir has been an area of dispute for 70 years, solving this long-term problem in a short time seems questionable. Currently, the Line of Control separates the administration of the Indian government and Pakistani government of the region. Although small crossfires continue to break out along the ceasefire line, as long as there is no significant military clash, the status quo could remain.
  2. Kashmir joins India or Pakistan[ii]: India has longtime rejected a free plebiscite to determine the fate of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. If a plebiscite is held in Kashmir, and Kashmiris vote to join either country, the other country would relinquish control over the region. A portion of Kashmiris who want full independence may not be satisfied with either result.
  3. Independence of Kashmir[iii]: Another consequence of a free plebiscite could lead to the independence of Kashmir. However, this is highly unlikely, since India and Pakistan have fought three major wars and devoted a significant number of national resources into the territorial dispute, neither country would want to accept the outcome of an independent Kashmir.
  4. Dividing Kashmir[iv]: If, as a result of a regional plebiscite, the majority of the inhabitants of the Kashmir Valley choose independence, the majority of inhabitants in Muslim-dominated states choose Pakistan, and the majority of inhabitants in Hindu-dominated states choose India, the whole Kashmir region could be divided and each country gets a portion of the land. Then, possibly the Northern Areas would become a part of Pakistan, and Ladakh and the Hindu districts of Jammu would be merged with India, leaving some other areas independent. Still, this scenario could only happen if India agrees to cast a plebiscite in Kashmir.

Recommendations

Political analysts and scholars have primarily proposed five possible solutions to the Kashmir conflict.[v] The first states that a plebiscite should be held in Kashmir to determine whether to join India or Pakistan, but it will likely lead to mass exodus because of the lack of demographic unity in Jammu and Kashmir.[vi] The second proposal suggests conceding the Kashmir Valley to Pakistan. This proposal would not be desirable to India and the Hindu population in Kashmir Valley, since the communal sentiment against Muslims is already widespread.[vii] A third option is to let Kashmir become independent.[viii] However, such arrangement must be guaranteed by India and Pakistan, which is unlikely, judging by the precedent set so far between the two countries. A “creative solution” indicates a shared sovereignty. Such proposal not only lacks historical precedent, but also raises problems like “how to allocate responsibilities over economic development?” [ix]

The fifth suggestion appears to be the most viable in terms of alleviating the tension, although it does not propose a plan directly towards a solution of the Kashmir conflict. It contains three elements:

  • “Granting of greater autonomy within a reorganized federal polity,” as stated in Sisir Gupta’s book.[x] This will involve the untying of years of political centralization, and discussions with militant groups, which would help curb the rampant military activities.[xi] This task is achievable. Discussions can be led by bilateral meetings of the governments of India and Pakistan, or by third-party mediators like the UN.
  • “Improving the recruitment, organization, and training of India’s paramilitary forces to check human rights violations by these forces in the area due to lack of supervision and training”.[xii] Such improvement needs to be accomplished to retain peace and contain resentment among the populace of Kashmir.[xiii] This goal can be reached as well. The United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) can monitor the human rights violations while the United States, the EU, China, and Russia could pressure India to reach this goal through diplomatic means.
  • “Restarting negotiations between India and Pakistan on a number of unresolved bilateral issues.”[xiv] These negotiations must attempt to first build trust through unilateral concessions and then proceed with soft positional bargaining, holding off contentious issues like Kashmir to achieve cooperation in less controversial issues.[xv] This objective is attainable. India and Pakistan can first hold talks and start building trust on non-controversial issues such as trade and communications, and gradually move to other contentious issues. Undoubtedly, it takes time to build trust and resolve the Kashmir dispute between the two adversary countries, but restoring negotiations would be the first crucial step towards a potential resolution.

References

[i] “The Future of Kashmir,” BBC News, accessed April 9, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/03/kashmir_future/html/

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Vanrun Vaish, “Negotiating the India-Pakistan Conflict in Relation to Kashmir,” International Journal on World Peace, Vol. XXVIII No. 3 September 2011

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Sumit Ganguly, The Origin of War in South Asia: Indo-Pakistani Conflict, Westview Press, 2nd edition

[viii] Ibid.

[ix] Sumit Ganguly, The Crisis in Kashmir: Portents of War, Hopes of Peace, Cambridge University Press, Feburary 13, 1999

[x] Sisir Gupta, Kashmir: A Study in India-Pakistan Relations, Asia Publishing House, 1st Edition

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Ibid.

[xiii] Ibid.

[xiv] Ibid.

[xv] Vanrun Vaish, “Negotiating the India-Pakistan Conflict in Relation to Kashmir.”

On April 9, 2017, the Election Commission conducted by-polls in twelve states including Jammu and Kashmir and Delhi.[i] Former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir Farooq Abdullah is contesting the Srinagar seat. In his campaign, Abdullah stated that “stone-pelting youth were not giving up their lives for tourism but for resolution of the Kashmir issue as per the wishes of its people.”[ii] As a result, Abdullah has won the parliamentary seat, but his impact of bringing peace to Kashmir seems to be very limited. Although Abdullah urged for third-party mediator such as the U.S. and China to help resolve the conflict, Indian Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi refuted that Kashmir was India’s internal matter.[iii] Overall, positive changes of the deadlock in Kashmir are yet to be seen.

References

[i] “Live Updates,” India.com, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.india.com/news/india/jammu-and-kashmir-karnataka-delhi-by-elections-2017-polling-live-news-updates-2009108/

[ii] “Stone-Pelting Youth Giving Up Life For Resolution Of Kashmir Issue: Farooq Abdullah,” The Times of India, April 5, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/stone-pelting-youth-giving-up-life-for-resolution-of-kashmir-issue-farooq-abdullah/articleshow/58028469.cms

[iii] “Third party like US, China can help settle Kashmir issue: Farooq Abdullah,” Hindustan Times, July 21, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/third-party-like-us-china-can-help-settle-kashmir-issue-farooq-abdullah-to-govt/story-2Y8HZgyxv5ISydQyxf6YjP.html

  • Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-48, SAGE Publications (November 8, 2014)

Chandrashekhar Dasgupta is an Indian diplomat who has served as Indian ambassador to the EU, Belgium, Luxemburg and China. This book addresses the questions of why India took the Kashmir issue to the United Nations; why India did not carry the war into Pakistan; the reasons India accepted a ceasefire; and the interplay between diplomatic and military development.

  • Maroof Raza, Wars and No Peace Over Kashmir, New Delhi: Lancer Publishers ; Hartford, Wi : Spantech & Lancer, c1996.

The author is a retired Indian Army officer, with experience in counter-insurgency operations. This book offers analysis of the Kashmir issue from historical perspectives and political perspectives. Additionally, it draws a prospect of potential conflict resolution in the region.

  • Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War, B.Tauris; 3 edition (May 15, 2010)

The author is a British military historian. Drawing upon research in India and Pakistan, as well as historical sources, this book traces the origins of the state in the 19th century and the 20th century clashes between Muslim and Hindu interests now culminating in the threat of a major war.

  • Victoria Schofield, “Why Kashmir Is Still Important,” Asian Affairs, 46:1, 18-31, DOI: 10.1080/03068374.2014.994961

This paper presents analysis of Kashmir issue from a historical perspective and an international perspective.

  • Sumantra Bose, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Harvard University Press (September 30, 2005)

The author is Professor of International and Comparative Politics at the London School of Economics. This book draws extensive firsthand experience in the contested region, explains how the conflict became a grave threat to South Asia and the world, and suggests feasible steps toward peace.

  • Chitralekha Zutshi, “An Ongoing Partition: Histories, Borders, and the Politics of Vivisection in Jammu and Kashmir,” Contemporary South Asia, 2015, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 266-275, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09584935.2015.1040734

The author is a professor in History at College of William and Mary. This article demonstrates the conceptualization of the drawing of multiple borders across Kashmir from the perspective of partition, and argues that vivisection and its politics has played a significant role in defining the nature of the ongoing crisis in the region.

  • Syed Waqas Haider Bukhari and Miss Tahira Parveen, “China’s Approach Towards Kashmir Conflict: A Viable Solution,” Journal of Professional Research in Social Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1 July 2014.

The authors are instructors specializing in international relations. This paper explains China’s stance and actions on the Kashmir issue.

  • Abdul Majid and Mahboob Hussain, “Kashmir: A Conflict between India and Pakistan,” Research Journal of South Asian Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2016, pp. 149-159

Both authors are from University of the Punjab, Center for South Asian Studies. This paper analyzes the origins of the Kashmir dispute, its influence on Indo-Pakistan relations, and the prospects for its resolution.

  • Sadia Fayaz, “Kashmir Dispute between Pakistan and India: the Way Out,” Qurtuba University of Science and Information Technology Peshawar

The author is a PhD Scholar, Department of Political Science, Qurtuba University of Science and Information Technology Peshawar. This article discusses some of the important problems involved in the dispute, politics of the region, history and its dynamics.

  • Gowhar Geelani, “Kashmir: the Forgotten Conflict,” 2014 Institute of Race Relations, 56(2), pp. 29-40.

Gowhar Geelani is a journalist, commentator and political analyst from Srinagar. This paper tells a Kashmiri side of the story of Kashmir conflict.

  • Kausar Parveen, “Nature of India Politics before 1947,” Pakistan Vision, Vol. 14 Issue 1 (2013), pp. 130-182.

The author is a lecturer at Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. This scholarly journal presented a historical background of India politics before the Kashmir conflict started.

  • Ian Copland, “Islam and Political Mobilization in Kashmir, 1931-34,” Pacific Affairs, Unviersity of British Columbia, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Summer, 1981), pp.228-259

The author is a professor in history specializing in the history of religion and governance in colonial India at the Monash University. The paper presents a detailed historical view of Kashmir and the interactions of India and Pakistan during 1931-34.

Rodrigo Tavares, PhD, is a Research Fellow at United Nations University, Belgium, and at the School of Global Studies, Gothenburg University, Sweden. This article introduces a conflict resolution framework for the Kashmir conflict.

  • Mehraj Hajni, “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective,” Swords and Ploughshares, vol. XVI, no. 1 (winter 2007-8), pp. 12-14. Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Dr. Mehraj Hajni is a lecturer at Government Degree College in Kargil. This paper offers a historical analysis from a Kashmiri perspective, essential to understanding the emergence of the Kashmir problem in its various dimensions.

  • “Armed Conflict Report: India-Kashmir”. United States Department of Justice. Accessed February 10, 2017. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/02/25/India_Kashmir.pdf

This report identifies the type of conflict, parties to the conflict, status of the fighting, number of deaths, political development, background, and arms sources of armed conflict between India and Pakistan.

  • Kunal Mukherjee, “The Kashmir Conflict in South Asia: Voice from Srinagar.” Defense & Security Analysis. December 16, 2013. Vol 30, 2014 – Issue 1.

Dr. Kunal Mukherjee is a lecturer from the Department of Politics Philosophy and Religion at Lancaster University. The journal contains analysis from the internal dimension of the Kashmir conflict, which is India’s repressive state policies, and from the external dimension of the conflict, which is indo-Paki relations. The journal also presents local people’s views in Kashmir through interviews.

Dr. Shanthie Mariet D’Souza is a Research Fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore. This scholarly article examines the shifting agenda and the activities of three primary militant formations operation in Jammu and Kashmir: the Hizb-ul Mujahideen, the Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammad.

Dr. Anthony St. John is an associate professor at American University with research interests in international negotiation and mediation. The paper offers a historical view of the enduring rivalry between India and Pakistan over Kashmir and potential mediation methods that the US could take to mitigate the conflict.

  • Sumathi Subbiah, “Security Council Mediation and The Kashmir Dispute,” Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Vol. 27 Issue. 1 (2004)

Sumathi Subbiah is a Senior Executive Editor of the Boston College International & Comparative Law Review. The paper offers a historical and legal background to the Kashmir Dispute and Security Council Mediation and explains why the security council’s mediation efforts failed and proposes a strategy to re-engage India towards dispute resolution.

Bibliography

“Afghanistan, Between India and Pakistan,” The Diplomat, August 19, 2016, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/afghanistan-between-india-and-pakistan/

“All Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference (AJKMC),” Global Security, Accessed April 4, 2017, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/ajkmc.htm

“Bilateral Relations: India-Russia Relations,” Embassy of India, accessed April 10, 2017, http://indianembassy.ru/index.php/bilateral-relations/bilateral-relations-india-russia

“Diplomatic History of Kashmir.” Diplomatic History of Kashmir. Accessed February 2, 2017. https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/war_peace/confrontation/hkashmir.html.

“How I Start A War,” Time. July 12, 1999.

“India Pakistan: Timeline.” BBC News, accessed February 10, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/default.stm

“India Pakistan: Troubled Relations,” BBC News, accessed April 4, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/1971.stm

“India Gets Huge Support on Kashmir Among British Lawmakers,” Press Trust of India, September 11, 2014, accessed April 22, 2017, http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-gets-huge-support-on-kashmir-among-british-lawmakers-662700

“Indian Independence Act, 1947,” Legislative of UK, Accessed April 6, 2017, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1947/pdf/ukpga_19470030_en.pdf

“India-Pakistan Background.” United Nations. Accessed March 20, 2017. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unipombackgr.html

“Indo-Afghan Relations, Development Partnership,” Embassy of India, Kahul, accessed April 9, 2017,  http://eoi.gov.in/kabul/?0707?000

“Indo-Pakistan War of 1971,” Global Security, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1971.htm

“Iran Offers India Olive Branch on Kashmir,” The Times of India, December 31, 2002, accessed April 9, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Iran-offers-India-olive-branch-on-Kashmir/articleshow/32880145.cms

“’It is a historic day’: Pakistan Becomes Full Member of SCO at Astana Summit,” DAWN, June 9, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, https://www.dawn.com/news/1338471/it-is-a-historic-day-pakistan-becomes-full-member-of-sco-at-astana-summit

“Jammu and Kashmir Registers Highest Voter Turnout in 25 Years, Jharkhand Breaks Records.” Press Trust of India. December 21, 2014. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.ndtv.com/assembly/jammu-and-kashmir-registers-highest-voter-turnout-in-25-years-jharkhand-breaks-records-715845

“Kashmir, UN Security Council Resolution 122”

“Kashmir: Conflict Profile,” Peace Direct, accessed April 9, 2017, https://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/kashmir/conflict-profile/

“Kashmir Fast Facts,” CNN Library, updated March 29, 2017, accessed April 4, 2017, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/08/world/kashmir-fast-facts/

“Kashmir Fast Facts.” CNN. March 31, 2016. Accessed February 09, 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/08/world/kashmir-fast-facts/.

“Kashmir: Nuclear Flashpoint,” Kashmir Library, accessed June 9, 2017, http://www.kashmirlibrary.org/kashmir_timeline/kashmir_chapters/article-370.shtml

“Live Updates,” India.com, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.india.com/news/india/jammu-and-kashmir-karnataka-delhi-by-elections-2017-polling-live-news-updates-2009108/

“Militants Attack Indian Army Base in Kashmir ‘killings 17’,” BBC News, September 18, 2016, accessed April 8, 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37399969

“Mourners Riot Over Kashmir Protest Deaths.” August 13, 2008. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1fa9b5d6-6921-11dd-91bd-0000779fd18c.html?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true#axzz4cOCdEHOA

“MPs Debate Kashmir,” UK Parliament, Janurary 12, 2017, accessed April 22, 2017, https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/backbench-business-committee/news-parliament-2015/mps-debate-kashmir/

“Milestones: 1961–1968 – Office of the Historian.” US Department of State. Accessed February 10, 2017. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war.

“Nuclear Weapons, Who Has What?” CNN, accessed April 9, 2017, http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2013/03/world/nuclear-weapon-states/.

“On Kashmir: Present Situation and Future Prospects.” European Parliament. April 25, 2007. Accessed March 23, 2017. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A6-2007-0158+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN#title1

“Pakistan Welcomes Iran’s Mediation Call on Kashmir,” Islamic Republic News Agency, accessed April 8, 2017, http://www3.irna.ir/en/News/82338742/Najibullah Noorzai, Nidhi Verma, “India’s 2016 Iran Oil Imports Hit Record High,” Reuters, February 1, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017,http://in.reuters.com/article/india-iran-oil-idINKBN15G3XR

“PM Proposes Formalization of LoC Ceasefire, Demilitarization of Kashmir,” Diplomatic News Agency, September 30, 2015, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.dnanews.com.pk/pm-proposes-formalization-of-loc-ceasefire-demilitarization-of-kashmir/

“Resolution 39,” United Nations Security Council.

“Resolution 47,” United Nations Security Council

“Resolution 91,” United Nations Security Council

“Russia and Pakistan Slowly Move Towards An Embrace,” Aljazeera, December 3, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/12/russia-pakistan-slowly-move-embrace-161203083811644.html

“Russian Spares for Indian Weapon Systems,” The Hindu, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Russian-spares-for-Indian-weapon-systems/article17024135.ece

“Security Council Resolution 211 (1965).” United Nations. September 20, 1965. Accessed February 1, 2017. http://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IN%20PK_650920_Security%20Council%20Resolution%20211%20(1965).pdf

“Statement by NSC Spokesperson Ned Price on National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice’s Call with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval of India” US Government, accessed April 9, 2017, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/28/statement-nsc-spokesperson-ned-price-national-security-advisor-susan-e

“Stone-Pelting Youth Giving Up Life For Resolution Of Kashmir Issue: Farooq Abdullah,” The Times of India, April 5, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/stone-pelting-youth-giving-up-life-for-resolution-of-kashmir-issue-farooq-abdullah/articleshow/58028469.cms

“Simla Agreement July 2, 1972.” Ministry of External Affairs. July 2, 1972. Accessed February 15, 2017. https://mea.gov.in/in-focus-article.htm?19005%2FSimla%2BAgreement%2BJuly%2B2%2B1972.

“Tashkent Declaration,” United Nations Security Council

“The 1965 War,” BBC News, accessed June 9, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/india_pakistan/timeline/html/1965.stm

The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976″. Government of India. Accessed March 29, 2017. http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm

“The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976,” India Code, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm

“The End of The British Empire in India,” National Archives, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/empire/g3/cs3/background.htm

“The Future of Kashmir,” BBC News, accessed April 9, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/03/kashmir_future/html/

“The India-Pakistan War of 1965,” United States Office of the Historian, accessed April 8, 2017, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war

“The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan by Dilip Hiro,” Nation Books, p.151

“Third party like US, China can help settle Kashmir issue: Farooq Abdullah,” Hindustan Times, July 21, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/third-party-like-us-china-can-help-settle-kashmir-issue-farooq-abdullah-to-govt/story-2Y8HZgyxv5ISydQyxf6YjP.html

“Timeline: The Kashmir Conflict.” August 1, 2011. Accessed March 13, 2017. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/kashmirtheforgottenconflict/2011/07/2011727134530154224.html

“Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Co-operation,” Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, accessed April 9, 2017, http://mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/5139/Treaty+of+

“US Security Advisor Calls Up Doval Dondemns Uri Terror Attack,” The Hindu, September 29, 2016, accessed April 7, 2017, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/US-Security-Advisor-calls-up-Doval-condemns-Uri-terror-attack/article15005699.ece

“$2.29 Billion US Aid for Pakistan to Fight Terror.” The Hindu. October 22, 2010. Accessed March 23, 2017. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/2.29-billion-US-aid-for-Pakistan-to-fight-terror/article15789419.ece

Ahmad, Mukhtar, “At least seven pilgrims killed in Indian administered Kashmir”, CNN, July 11, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/asia/kashmir-pilgrims-killed/index.html

Akram and Shahzad. “UN Mediation On Kashmir Dispute: Past and Future”, International Journal of History and Philosophical Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 1-9, November 2015, accessed April 9, 2017, http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Un-Mediation-On-Kashmir-Dispute-Past-And-Future—.pdf

Akram, Sabahat and Shahzad, Midhat. “UN Mediation On Kashmir Dispute: Past And Future.” November 2015. Vol.3, No.2, pp. 1-9. Accessed February 10, 2017. http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Un-Mediation-On-Kashmir-Dispute-Past-And-Future—.pdf.

Amnesty International, “Disappearances in Jammu and Kashmir,” 1999

Ankit, Rakesh, “October 1947,” Epilogue 4(11) p.9

Article 370 of the Indian Constitution.

Baba, Noor Ahmad. 2014. “Resolving Kashmir: imperatives and solutions.” Race & Class 56, no. 2: 66-80. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed April 10, 2017).

Bangash, Yaqoob Khan, “Junagadh: Legally Pakistan,” the News on Sunday, March 2, 2014, accessed April 4, 2017, http://tns.thenews.com.pk/junagadh-legally-pakistan/#.WOeeo1OGPBI

Bazaz, Prem Nath, “Azad Kashmir,” Ferozsons (1950), p.33

Bazaz, Prem Nath, “Struggle for Freedom in Kashmir,” New Delhi, pp.140-160

Behera, Navnita Chadha. “Kashmir: Redefining the US Role.” October 30, 2002. Brookings Institute. Accessed March 20, 2017. https://www.brookings.edu/research/kashmir-redefining-the-u-s-role/

Sumantra Bose, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Harvard University Press

Bradnock, Robert W., “Kashmir: Paths to Peace,” Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2010.

Bukhari, Syed and Parveen, Tahira, “China’s Approach Towards Kashmir Conflict: A Viable Solution,” Journal of Professional Research in Social Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, July 2014.

Cohen, Stephen Philip, “India, Pakistan and Kashmir,” The Brookings Institute, accessed April 15, 2017.

Dasgupta, C., War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-48, SAGE Publications (November 8, 2014)

Dr. G.M. Athar, “Pre-Independence Standstill Agreement,” Brighter Kashmir, December 12, 2016, Accessed May 23, 2017, http://brighterkashmir.com/pre-independence-standstill-agreement/

Fair, C. Christine, Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army’s Way of War, Oxford University Press,

Fayaz, Sadia, “Kashmir Dispute between Pakistan and India: The Way Out,” Qurtuba University of Science and Information Technology Peshawar, Accessed April 9, 2017

Ganguly, Sumit, The Origin of War in South Asia: Indo-Pakistani Conflict, Westview Press, 2nd edition

Ganguly, Sumit, The Crisis in Kashmir: Portents of War, Hopes of Peace, Cambridge University Press, Feburary 13, 1999

Guha, Ramachandra, “India After Gandhi: The History of the World’s Largest Democracy,” Pan Macmillan, pp.xv

Guha, Ramachandra, “Opening a Window in Kashmir,” World Policy Journal 21(3):79-94, pp.80

Gupta, Sisir, Kashmir: A Study in India-Pakistan Relations, Asia Publishing House, 1st Edition

Hashim, Asad, “Timeline: India-Pakistan Relations,” Aljazeera, May 27, 2014, accessed June 9, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/kashmirtheforgottenconflict/2011/06/2011615113058224115.html

Hajni Mehraj, “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective,” Epilogue Press, July 2009, Epilogue, Vol 3, Issue 7, pp. 27.

Hiro, Dilip, “The Longest August: The Unflinching Rivalry Between India and Pakistan,” Nation Books, Chapter 6

Human Right Watch, “India’s Secret Army in Kashmir,” New Delhi 1999, pp.71-72

Hussein, Saddam, “Russia and Pakistan’s Reluctant Romance,” The Diplomat, February 25, 2017, accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2017/02/russia-and-pakistans-reluctant-romance/

Jacob, J abin T. “China and Kashmir.” University of Illinois,  Accessed March 23, 2017. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/15471/China_and_Kashmir.pdf?sequence=2

“In 10 yrs, Muslim Count Up by 17.74 lakh, Hindu population by 5.61 lakh in J&K,” The Tribune, August 27, 2015, accessed April 16, 2017, http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/jammu-kashmir/in-10-yrs-muslim-count-up-by-17-74-lakh-hindu-population-by-5-61-lakh-in-j-k/124893.html

Jamal, Umair, “Russia Wants to De-Hyphenate India and Pakistan. Should Delhi Worry?” The Diplomat, September 27, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2016/09/russia-wants-to-de-hyphenate-india-and-pakistan-should-delhi-worry/

Jha, D.C., “Indo-Pakistani Relations Since the Tashkent Declaration,” The Indian Journal of Political Science, Indian Political Science Association. Vol. 32 no. 4, pp.502-521

John, Anthony St.. “Third Party Mediation over Kashmir: A Modest Proposal”. International Peacekeeping, Vol. 4, Winter 1997, pp. 24. https://www.american.edu/sis/faculty/upload/Wanis-Third-Party-Mediation-Over-Kashmir.pdf

Kaur, Naunidhi, “Conviction in Parliament attack case” (Issue 23. Vol 19.). Frontline. Frontline Magazine. Accessed May 24, 2017

Khan, Jawad Asgar. Probing War & Warfare. New Delhi: A.P.H. Pub. Corp., 2005.

Korbel, Josef, “Danger in Kashmir,” Princeton University Press, pp.23

Kundu, Nivedita Das, “India-Russia Relationship: Past, Present & Future,” accessed April 9, 2017, http://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/india-russia-relationship-past-present-future/

Kumar, H. M. Sanjeev. 2011. “Competing Conceptions of Nationhood: The Cultural Dimensions of India-Pakistan Conflict and the Subcontinental Security Dynamics.” International Journal Of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences 5, no. 9: 203-212. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed April 15, 2017)

Lamb, Alastair, “Incomplete Partition,” Oxford University Press (2002), pp.185-187

Lee, Raymond, “The Strategic Importance of Chinese-Pakistani Relations,” Aljazeera Centre for Studies, August 3, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://studies.aljazeera.net/en/reports/2016/08/strategic-importance-chinese-pakistani-relations-160803101555719.html

Longman, Oirent, “Kashmir: Toward Insurgency,” pp.95

MA Mir. “EU Parliamentarian Condemns Indian Atrocities in Kashmir.” The Express Tribune. January 9, 2017. Accessed March 23, 2017. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1288625/global-support-eu-parliamentarian-condemns-indian-atrocities-kashmir/

Michel, Casey, “It’s Official: India and Pakistan Join Shanghai Cooperation Organization,” The Diplomat, July 12, 2017, accessed August 16, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2017/06/its-official-india-and-pakistan-join-shanghai-cooperation-organization/

Mohammad, Moazum, “New Blackout Ordered in Radio Kashmir, Doordarshan,” Kashmir Reader, August 11, 2016, accessed April 9, 2017, http://kashmirreader.com/2016/08/28/irans-shamkhani-asks-india-for-restraint-in-kashmir/

Mustafa, Zubeida, “The Kashmir Dispute and the Simla Agreement,” Pakistan Horizon. Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.38-52.

Noorani, A.G., “Relevance of U.N. Resolutions,” Frontline, February 5, 2016.

Noorani, A.G., “The Truth about Agra,” Frontline, Vol. 22 Issue 15 (2005) http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2215/stories/20050729002104400.htm

Noorzai, Najibullah, “Afghanistan, Between India and Pakistan,” The Diplomat, August 19, 2016, Accessed April 9, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/afghanistan-between-india-and-pakistan/

Notezai, Muhammad Akbar, “India-Pakistan Clashes in Kashmir,” The Diplomat,August 02, 2015, accessed August 15, 2017, http://thediplomat.com/2015/08/the-india-pakistan-gunfire-exchange-in-poonch/

Parashar, Parmanand, “Kashmir and the Freedom Movement,” Sarup & Sons, 2004, pp.142-143

“Police Kill 6 in Political Violence in India’s Kashmir,” Bangkok Post, April 10, 2017, accessed April 16, 2017, http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/world/1229848/police-kill-6-in-political-violence-in-indias-kashmir

Price, Nigel, Michael Wells, Nicholas Fellows, and Anjali Tyagi, “Camridge Igcse INDia Studies,” Cambridge University Press 2012, pp.137

Puri, Balraj, “The Question of Accession,” Epilogue, 4(11): 4-6

Puri, Balraj, Kashmir: Toward Insurgency, New Delhi 1993.

Raghavan, Srinath, “War and Peace in Modern India,” Palgrave Macmillan, pp.131-132

Raina, Dina, “Kashmir: Distortions and Reality,” New Delhi, IN.: Reliance Publishing House. pp.25-26.

Rajan, Sheila. “The Prospect of Third-Party Mediation of the Kashmir Dispute: Is There A Way to Re-engage India in a Facilitated Discussion?” Michigan State University College of Law. pp. 22. http://www.law.msu.edu/king/2005/2005_Rajan.pdf

Raza, Maroof, Wars and No Peace Over Kashmir, New Delhi: Lancer Publishers ; Hartford, Wi : Spantech & Lancer, c1996.

Riedel, Bruce, “American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil Summit at Blair House,” Center for the Advanced Study of India, 2002.

Schofield, Victoria, Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War, pp.18

Schofield, Victoria, Why Kashmir is Still Important, Asian Affairs, 46:1, 18-31, DOI: 10.1080/03068374.2014.994961

Sinhal, Kounteya, “Debate on Kashmir in UK Parliament Causes Stir,” The Times of India, September 10, 2014, accessed April 22, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Debate-on-Kashmir-in-UK-parliament-causes-stir/articleshow/42188476.cms

Snedden, Christopher, “Kashmir: The Unwritten History,” HarperCollins India, 2013

Subbiah, Sumathi. “Security Council Mediation and The Kashmir Dispute: Reflections on Its Failures and Possibilities for Renewal.” Accessed February 10, 2017. https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/27_1/07_FMS.htm.

“UNMOGIP Background,” United Nations, accessed May 4, 2017 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unmogip/background.shtml

UNCIP Resolution, 30 March, 1951.

UNCIP Resolution, 5 January, 1949.

Vanrun Vaish, “Negotiating the India-Pakistan Conflict in Relation to Kashmir,” International Journal on World Peace, Vol. XXVIII No. 3 September 2011

Wani, Shuja-ul-Haq, “Encounter in J-Ks Bandipora: 3 Army soldiers die, 1 militant killed.” India, News – India Today. February 14, 2017. Accessed February 14, 2017. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/jammu-kashmir-encounter-badipora-district-army-personnel/1/882195.html.Wellens, Karel, “Resolutions and Statements of the United Nations Security Council: (1946-1989); a Thematic Guide,” BRILL, pp.322

Winks, Robin W. and Low, Alaine M.,” The Oxford history of the British Empire: Historiography,” Oxford University Press, 2001

Wiseman, Paul. “Kashmir Conflict Has More Than Two Sides.” USA Today. January 9, 2002. Accessed March 15, 2017. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/01/09/kashmir-qna-usat.htm

Wright, Edmund, “A Dictionary of World History,” Oxford University Press, pp.537

Yahuda, Michael, “China and the Kashmir Crisis,” BBC News accessed Aprilk 4, 2017, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2020788.stm