Fact Sheet

CAUSE OF KASHMIR

Failures of Generals and Achievements of Politicians

As people of Pakistan anxiously wait the outcome of the latest Indian move to enter into a dialogue to resolve Indo-Pak disputes, including Kashmir, it is time to recall the steps that the Pakistani leadership took to translate the expression of national aspirations about Kashmir into progress towards helping the Kashmiri people in achieving their objectives, as well as reaffirming Quaid-e-Azam’s declaration that Kashmir is the jugular vein of Pakistan.

Traditional Position

All successive governments in Pakistan have been pursuing this issue in their own way.  However, no government except those led by military dictators departed from the fundamental position that the settlement on Jammu and Kashmir was and has been a part of the unfinished agenda of the 1947 partition of British India.  That position was endorsed by the UN resolutions calling for plebiscite in the disputed state.

Ayub Era and Tashkent Declaration

The cause of Kashmir and Pakistan’s traditional position on this issue suffered the first setback during the rule of Field Marshal Muhammed Ayub Khan, when the adventure of Operation Gibralter led to 1965 war culminating in the Tashkent Declaration.  Signing that declaration under Soviet pressure, Ayub Khan failed to insist that the unresolved issue of Kashmir was at the core of continuing tension with India, and that all other differences were offshoots of the Kashmir dispute.  The Tashkent Declaration avoided specific mention of the need to resolve this dispute.  It merely stated that “Jammu & Kashmir was discussed, and each of the sides set forth its respective position”.

Follies of Yahya Khan

General Yahya Khan’s unwise and dictatorial policies not only led to dismemberment of the country, but also weakened Pakistan’s case with regard to the future of Jammu and Kashmir.  His foolish adventurism encouraged Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India to boast that the two-nation theory, which was not only the basis of Pakistan’s creation, but also the principle underlying demand for plebiscite in Kashmir, was dead.

Simla Agreement

It was left to a politician and elected Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to try to redeem the status of Kashmir cause that had suffered serious damage due to the follies of General Yahya Khan.  He signed the Simla Agreement with Indira Gandhi in very adverse circumstances.  However, the document specifically mentioned the need of a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir.  The relevant portion of Simla Agreement stated: “Both Governments agree that their respective Heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile, the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.”

U-turn by Pervez Musharraf

General Pervez Musharraf has been ruling the country unchallenged for over 42 months.  He claims commitment to the Kashmir cause, but the doubts about his intentions held by discerning persons from the beginning have been proved right.  His government, now hiding behind the cloak of an elected Prime Minister, has steadily deviated from Pakistan’s traditional position on future of Kashmir.  Indeed, his policies and actions on this important matter of national security stand in sharp contrast to the policies pursued by previous political leadership, particularly by the exiled Prime Minister Muhammed Nawaz Sharif.

General Musharraf has been trying in vain to belittle Nawaz Sharif’s Kashmir policy, even falsely claiming that it was at his initiative that reference to Kashmir was included in the Lahore Declaration.  In fact, as will be shown in this document later, he sabotaged the progress that the Declaration had achieved towards settlement of all disputes, including Kashmir with India. 

Following facts highlight the difference between the proactive policies of Nawaz Sharif and the reactionary and defeatist measures adopted by General Pervez in respect of the dispute with India over the rights of the Kashmiri people.

• It was soon after he first became Prime Minister in 1990 that Nawaz Sharif gave the call to the nation to mark February 5, 1991 as the day of solidarity with the people of Kashmir, because realization of their right of self-determination was the first item on his agenda.

 On the other hand, the Kashmir cause did not get a place in the seven-point agenda of General Pervez Musharraf that he announced after capturing power in October 1999.

• Nawaz Sharif had the opportunity to talk with four Indian Prime Ministers individually and at different forums, including the UN General Assembly, where he always articulated Pakistan’s position on Kashmir in an assertive and positive manner.  He held his head high in all those encounters, and never adopted an appeasing attitude, even when he sat on the opposition benches. He availed of every opportunity to expose Indian atrocities and human rights violations against the unarmed people of Kashmir and won world sympathy on these issues with India losing face in the comity of nations.

 General Pervez, on the contrary, has been so eager to please India that he announced unilateral withdrawal of Pak forces from the Line of Control on October 17, 1999, just four days after snatching power, which proved to be the first in a series of retreats ever since. Indian response to his repeated pronouncements to appease New Delhi has now reached a stage where India is so arrogant that it asks Pakistan to hand over Azad Kashmir.

 

• Nawaz Sharif, though always open to purposeful dialogue with India, never begged for it; and every time he met with his Indian counterparts, he stressed the need to resolve the Kashmir issue according to the UN resolutions.

 General Pervez Musharraf, already weakened by his position as an unelected leader, humiliated the people of Pakistan by beseeching Indian leaders to speak to him.  Finally, when he was invited to Agra, he assiduously avoided mentioning the UN resolutions on Kashmir.

 Lahore Declaration

Nawaz Sharif’s forceful diplomacy made the Indian Prime Minister travel to Lahore, where, after his significant visit to Minar-e-Pakistan, he signed the Lahore declaration pledging to “intensify efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.”

 In comparison, General Musharraf returned from Agra without even a joint statement, and brazenly defended his remark that the Lahore Declaration did not refer to the Kashmir issue.  Irritated by his failure at Agra, he also made the wrong statement on July 20, 2001 that "the politicians showed no courage to talk about the Kashmir dispute during their dialogue with India and none discussed it with the Indian leaders."

 Sabotage by Musharraf

The Lahore Declaration was signed by two democratic leaders with equally valid claim of representing their respective people.  It was signed in a spirit of peace and amity.  But General Musharraf sabotaged this spirit with his adventure at Kargil.  It has now been established beyond doubt that the General did not consult or inform the Prime Minister of the details and implications of his plan with the result that Pakistan forces suffered unprecedented loss of life, and Musharraf himself begged Nawaz Sharif to seek Washington’s intervention to pull the General out of the mess of his own making.  It is now on record that General Musharraf profusely thanked Nawaz Sharif when he returned from Washington on July 8, 1999.

 The spirit of Lahore Declaration  received another serious jolt on October 12, 1999, when General Pervez Musharraf toppled the democratic government of Nawaz Sharif

 From then on it has been a tragic tale of national humiliation, surrender of national interests and particularly betrayal of the Kashmir cause.  In fact, this cause was never in the mind of General Pervez. It even did not get a place in his seven-point agenda that he announced after capturing power.

 The Indian attitude exploited world reaction to the murder of democracy in Pakistan. New Delhi refused to talk to a military dictator, and launched coercive diplomacy to prevent a just and principled settlement of the Kashmir issue.

 General Musharraf, in order to strengthen his personal rule, yielded to American pressures at the cost of vital national interests. His basic misconception that the United States could be trusted to safeguard Pakistan’s core interests, also led him to believe that Washington would use its influence to bring India around to a just and peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute.  Events have proved that US influence has worked in the opposite direction. 

 It was at the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) in Almaty, June 3-5, 2002, that the US openly accepted Indian position of equating the liberation struggle in Kashmir with terrorism, and made General Musharraf promise to stop the Kashmiri freedom fighters from crossing the Line of Control.  That promise completed the u-turn from Pakistan’s traditional national policy on Kashmir.  Actually, he had initiated that u-turn at Agra where he talked of forgetting history and changing the mindset of the people with regard to disputes with India.

 US-India Collusion

Supporting India on curbing the freedom struggle of the Kashmiri people is one aspect of US policy to give preference to New Delhi over Islamabad in its dealings with South Asia.  And it found a useful tool in General Pervez for implementation of that policy.  When General Pervez promised to “curb all domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States, its friends and allies”, he implicitly agreed to curb the freedom fighters of Kashmir.

 Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has been acting as point man of the United States for promoting the false argument about what Washington and New Delhi have agreed to call “cross-border infiltration”.  He dropped in Islamabad on June 6, 2002, right after the CICA, and got a reaffirmation of the promise that Musharraf had made in Almaty.

 The recent remarks of Armitage while visiting Islamabad have finally exposed the real face of Musharraf’s Kashmir policy.  The US official openly refused to accept the Kashmir dispute as core issue between Pakistan and India.  His remarks are in line with previous statements of US envoys in New Delhi and Islamabad, who have been exerting pressure on Pakistan to yield to the Indian position on Kashmir, which General Musharraf has obediently done!

 It has again been proved without doubt that military interference in the national policies has always damaged vital interests of Pakistan. On the contrary, democratic leaders were able to promote peace with India and they signed Simla Accord and Lahore Declaration to prepare solid grounds for normalization of relations between the two neighbors.