9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

PrinterFriendlyVersion

KashmirAndTheUnitedNations
ByWajahatAhmad
27August,2008
Countercurrents.org

Kashmir,alongwiththeIsraeliPalestinianconflictandthewarinKoreanPeninsula,
was among the first crisis that the United Nations had to confront in the postWorld
WarIIperiod.SixtyyearshavepassedbysinceKashmirconflictwasfirstdebatedin
theU.Nandyettheconflictcontinuestoeludeasolution.
The U.N involvement in the Kashmir Conflict largely lasted for 17 years (1948
65).AftertheIndoPakwarof1965,theU.NengagementwithKashmircontinuedata
very nominal level till the 3rd PakistanIndia war of 1971 and completely ended with
thesigningoftheSimlaAgreementin1972,anIndoPakpeaceagreement,whichlaid
emphasisonadoptingabilateralframeworktosolvetheKashmirimbroglioandkept
theU.Noutofthepictureafterwards.
During the course of its engagement with the Kashmir Conflict, spanning 23 years
(19481971),theU.Npassedanumberofresolutions,whichwereaimedatmediation
and resolution of the conflict. Between 1948 and 1971, the U.N Security Council
passed23resolutionsonKashmirConflict.
The U.N resolutions regarding the Kashmir issue are not selfenforceable. In other
wordstheresolutionsarerecommendatoryinnatureandcanbeenforcedonlyifthe
parties to the dispute, viz. India and Pakistan, consent to their application. Indian
refusal to implement the U.N resolutions on Kashmir was to relegate them to the
marginsoftheconflict.
IndialodgedacomplaintunderArticle35(ChapterVI)oftheU.NCharterintheU.N
SecurityCouncilonJanuary1,1948,chargingPakistanwith'aidingandabetting'the
PakistanitribalinvasioninJammuandKashmir.IntheUnitedNations,Indiaclaimed
thatalltheterritoriesofthePrincelyStateofJammuandKashmirlegallybelongedto
herbyvirtueofthetreatyofaccessionsignedbytheHindukingoftheKingdom with
the Indian Union. Two weeks later, Pakistan responded to the Indian complaint with
countercharges.Pakistandeniedhavingaidedtheraiders,accusedIndiaofannexing
Kashmir and of trying to throttle Pakistan in its infancy The first U.N debate on
Kashmir started under the rubric of "Kashmir Question". However, the Pakistani
delegationarguedthattheKashmirQuestionhadtobeseeninthecontextofIndia's
attempts to negate the existence of the newly born State of Pakistan and that the
conflict in Kashmir was threatening the very survival of Pakistan. The Pakistani
argumentwastoprevailandthedebateintheU.Nshiftedfrom"KashmirQuestion"to
"IndiaPakistandispute".TheU.NMilitaryObserversGroupthatwaslaterestablished
inthedividedterritoriesofKashmirwithofficesinbothIndianoccupiedKashmirand
Pakistan occupiedKashmir was to be known as "U.N Military Observer Group in
IndiaandPakistan"(UNMOGIP)andnotas"U.NMilitaryObserverGroupinKashmir".
http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

1/7

9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

The job of the group was to monitor, investigate and report complaints of ceasefire
violationsalongthe"ceasefireline"inKashmirtotheUnitedNations.
After hearing Indian and Pakistani representatives, the U.N Security Council passed
its first resolution (Resolution 38) on Kashmir Conflict on January 17, 1948, calling
India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on
January20,theSecurityCouncilpassedanotherresolution(Resolution39),creating
the United Nations Commission for Indian and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the
disputeandmediatebetweenthetwocountries.
Led by Britain and the United States, the U.N Security Council passed another
resolution (Resolution 47) on April 21, 1948, which enlarged the membership of the
UNCIP from 3 to 5 , called for cessation of hostilities between India and Pakistan,
withdrawalofallPakistanitroopsandtribesmenandbulkofIndiantroops(exceptfora
minimal number required for maintaining law order),allowing return of refugees,
release of political prisoners and holding of a U.N supervised Plebiscite in the
(Princely)StateofJammuandKashmirtodeterminetheaspirationsofherpeople.The
Plebiscite was to be held by a U.N appointed Plebiscite administrator. The U.N
Security Council passed another resolution on June3, 1948, which reaffirmed the
previousresolutionsandaskedtheUNCIPtoproceedtothe"disputedareas"tocarry
outitsmissionasstatedunderResolution47ofApril21,1948.
TheUNCIPreachedtheIndiansubcontinentinJuly1948andafterdeliberationswith
IndianandPakistanileadership,producedaproposal,whichcalledforanimmediate
ceasefire and a truce agreement between India and Pakistan, withdrawal of all
PakistanitribalsandnationalsandbulkofIndia'stroops.Indiarejectedtheproposals
on the basis of the argument that the proposal did not opportune any blame on
Pakistanwhich India considered as the aggressor in Kashmir whereas Pakistan
rejectedtheplanastheInterimadministrationofValleyofKashmirandtheterritories
that had fallen under Indian control had been assigned to Sheikh Abdullah's control.
SheikhAbdullah,whohadbecomethePrime Minister of the autonomous J&K State
onMarch5,1948,wasconsideredbyPakistanasIndia'sallyandbyimplicationcould
influencetheplebisciteinIndia'sfavour.Pakistanalsorejectedtheagreementon the
ground that it was supposed to withdraw all its forces from the State whereas India
wasallowedtoretainsomeofitstroopstomaintainorder,whichcouldpotentiallylead
tocoercionorintimidationof voters by Indian forces to influence the outcome of the
proposedplebiscite.
On August 14, 1948, the UNCIP submitted proposals to the Indian and Pakistani
governments, which for the first time contained an acknowledgment from Pakistan
about the presence of its troops in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. The proposal
envisionedthewithdrawalofPakistanitroopsandnationalsandbulkofIndiantroops
fromtheState,subsequenttotheirwithdrawaltheadministrationoftheterritorywasto
berunbytheCommission.
OnDecember11,1948,theUNCIPlaidoutanewsetofproposalsthatelaboratedon
the question of Plebiscite in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. As per the proposals
"The question of accession to India or Pakistan was to be decided by a free and
impartialplebiscite,whichwascontingentuponhavingaceasefire".
The two countries accepted the ceasefire plan and allowed the U.N to observe the
ceasefire from January 1, 1949.The ceasefireline "went through the western part of
Jammu and the eastern part of Poonch, leaving the capital city of Poonch on the
Indiansideoftheline,thencrossedtheJhelumRiveratapointwestofUriandmade
alargesweepfollowingthevalleyoftheKishingangaRiver.Fromthere,itproceeded
http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

2/7

9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

toKargil,whichalsoremainedontheIndianside,andthennorthwesttotheChinese
border.Hunza,Gilgit,Baltistan,Chilas,thegreatpartofPoonch,andthesmallerpart
ofJammuremainedincontrolofPakistanandAzadKashmir".
OnJanuary5,1949,theUnitedNationscameupwithanewplanforaplebiscite.To
addressPakistan'sfearsthatthePlebisciteoutcomemaybeinfluencedinIndia'sfavor
by Sheikh Abdullahwho was seen as close to Indian P.M. Nehru and had been
appointed as the interim head of J& K administrationand the limited Indian troops
whichweremeanttomaintainlawandorderduringtheplebiscite,theU.Nproposed
thattheStateofJammuandKashmirshouldbeunderthefullcontrolofthePlebiscite
Administrator.ThePlebisciteadministratorwastoenjoyquasisovereignpowersover
theStateofJammuandKashmir.TheproposalwasrejectedbytheIndianside,which
maintainedthattheStatehadbecomeapartoftheIndianUnion.
In December 1949, UNSC President General A. G. L McNaughton tried to mediate
betweenIndianandPakistanattheU.Nbutfailedtomanageanagreementbetween
the two sides. McNaughton submitted a series of proposals, suggesting
demilitarization of Kashmir to ensure an impartial Plebiscite in Kashmir. These
proposalswererejectedbyIndia.
AfterthefailureofMcNaughtonproposals,theUnitedNationsreplacedtheUNCIPby
a single U.N representative Owen Dixon in 1950.Owen Dixon after meeting the
officials of India and Pakistan soon concluded that there was little or no hope
regardinganIndoPakagreementondemilitarizationproposals.Dixoncameupwitha
set of proposals, which envisioned holding of 'regional plebiscites' in the State of
Jammu & Kashmir. The proposals submitted to the U.N Security Council in 1950,
suggested(a)holdingaPlebisciteinthewholeStateofJammu&Kashmir,regionby
region (b)holding a Plebiscite only in regions which were 'doubtful', the rest would
constitutethoseregionsthatwereexpectedtovotedefinitelyeitherforanaccession
with either India or Pakistan. The doubtful region was meant to be the Valley of
Kashmir.HoweverIndiaandPakistancouldnotcometoanagreementontheDixon
proposals. After the failure of Dixon, the U.N appointed Frank Graham as a U.N
representative to mediate between Indian and Pakistan to get them to agree on
holding a Plebiscite in Kashmir. Graham worked from 195153 without meeting any
success. Frank Graham was followed by Gunnar Jarring in 1957 who also failed to
makeanyheadwayonKashmir.
In the wake of the termination of the mandate of UNCIP, The U.N Security Council
passed Resolution 91 on 30 March, 1951, which established the United Nations
MilitaryObserverGroupinIndia&Pakistantomonitortheceasefireline(nowcalled
Line of Control, the border that divides Indian and Pakistani controlled parts of
Kashmir) in Kashmir. The UNMOGIP still maintains its presence in both Indian
administeredKashmirandPakistanadministeredKashmir.
On 23 January 1957, India's client regime in 'Jammu & Kashmir', led by Bakshi
GhulamMohammadadoptedaconstitutionfortheStateandaresolutionratifyingthe
State'saccessionwithIndia.PakistanraisedtheissueintheU.NSecurityCounciland
adayafter,theUNSCpassedaresolutionwhichreiteratedtheearlierU.Nresolutions
onKashmirthatcalledforafinalsettlementofthedispute"inaccordancewiththewill
of the people expressed through the mdemocratic method of free and impartial
plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the U.N." Thus the 1957 U.N resolution
deemed any constitutional change undertaken by India within Indianadministered
KashmirasirrelevanttotheresolutionofKashmirConflict.

http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

3/7

9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

TheDixonPlanseemedtobethelastseriousendeavoronpartoftheU.Ntosolvethe
Kashmir conundrum. Although Pakistan kept raising the Kashmir issuein theUnited
Nationsinthe60s,U.NinvolvementinKashmirwasconsiderablyreducedafterIndo
Pak war of 1965. In 1962 the Kashmir Question was again debated in the U.N
SecurityCouncil.However,theUNSCfailedtopassaresolutiononKashmirinviewof
a Soviet veto, which discouraged the UNSC from pursuing the Kashmir question
afterwards.
TheU.NwasvirtuallyelbowedoutoftheKashmirdisputebyRussiaaftertheIndoPak
war of 1965 when Russian negotiated the Tashkent Peace Agreement between the
tworivalnationson10January1965.DuringtheIndoPak1965wartheU.Npasseda
strongly worded resolution, calling on India and Pakistan to agree on a ceasefire.
Howeveritwasonlyafterintensepressureappliedbythetwosuperpowers,U.Sand
theSovietUnionthatIndiaandPakistanagreedtoobserveaU.Nsponsoredceasefire
onSeptember29,1965.
ThelastUNSCresolution(307)thatdealtwithKashmirwaspassedinthewakeofthe
India Pakistan war of 1971, where Kashmir was not at the centre of the conflict
between the two countries. The resolution could be passed only after Indian had
declaredaunilateralceasefire.UNSC'sattemptstopassresolutionsduringthe1971
war were blocked by a Soviet veto and with the signing of the Simla peace accord
between India and Pakistan in 1972, which laid stress on bilateral solutions to the
Kashmirissue,theU.NinvolvementinKashmirwasinrealitydead.
The failure of the U.N in mediating a solution to the Kashmir dispute can be largely
ascribedtoIndianrefusaltoheedtotheresolutions.Indiahadtakentheissuetothe
U.N,withthehopethattheinternationalbodywoulddeclarePakistanasanaggressor
in the 194748 war and would help her to gain control over Pakistanadministered
Kashmir as India claimed the whole of Kashmir by virtue of the accession treaty
signed by the Maharaja of Jammu & Kashmir with her. Contrary to India's
expectations, the U.N called for a Plebiscite in Kashmir. Consequently India was to
shyawayfromimplementationofU.Nresolutions.
The fresh delineation of the "cease fire line" which was originally established in
1949aftertheIndoPakistanceasefireinJammu&KashmirinKashmirbyIndiaand
Pakistan in 1972 converted the "ceasefire line" into "Line of Control" (LOC), which
from an Indian perspective turned the temporary border in the disputed territory of
Kashmirintoadefacto'permanentborderbetween'IndiaandPakistan.Pakistanwas
forcedtoacceptthechangeinthewakeofitsdefeatinthe1971war.Indiacontended
thatwiththeformationofLineofControl,themandateoftheUNMOGIPhadexpired.
However Pakistan insisted that the "U.N Military Observer Group in India and
Pakistan"(UNMOGIP)continuemonitoringtheLOCasitwasadisputedborderand
thatthe"LOC"wasinfacttheoriginalceasefireline.IndiawantedtheUNMOGIPto
leaveasit didn't want to accept any sort of international intervention in the Kashmir
conflict. Since 1972 India has not reported to the UNMOGIP whereas Pakistan has
continued to report Indian violations of the LOC to the observer group.While the
movement of the UNMOGIP is unrestricted in PakistanadministeredKashmir, the
observergroupisnowhereinsightbeyondtheirofficepremisesatSonawarlocalityof
Srinagar.Withitslimitedmandate,thegrouphasplayedvirtuallynoroleintheconflict
after 1972. Even during the popular Kashmir uprising in 198990, when hundreds of
thousands of Kashmiris marched in profreedom processions in Kashmir Valley and
whenthousandscrossedtheLOCtoreceivearmstraining,theUNMOGIPremainedin
hibernationinitsSrinagaroffice.
In October 2001, the UNMOGIP Chief, MajorGeneral Hermann Loidolt described
Kashmirasa"tormentedcountry"andblamedIndiaand Pakistan for playing games
http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

4/7

9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

withKashmir.TheobserveralsodescribedtheLOCasaceasefirelineandadisputed
border,whichfellunderUNMOGIPmandate.Thestatementevincedasharpreaction
fromIndia,whichcalledtheU.Nobserver'sstatementas'uncalledfor'andtheIndian
External Affairs Minister threatened to lodge a complaint in the U.N against the
observer. Not surprisingly, Loidolt's statement was welcomed by Kashmiri separatist
leaders.
ThemostrecentU.NefforttoengagewithKashmircameduringtheIndoPakborder
confrontationof2002,whenIndiamobilizedhalfamilliontroopsalongitsborderwith
Pakistan to pressurize Pakistan to stop aiding insurgents in Kashmir.U.N Secretary
General Kofi Anan's efforts to mediate during the crisis were snubbed by India. Kofi
Annan was not allowed to visit India and to placate Indian fears, Annan stated that
U.NresolutionsonKashmirwerenot"enforceableinamandatorysweep".
U.NandthepoliticsofseparatisminKashmir
ThoughU.NinvolvementinKashmirhasbeenreducedtoanaught,theexistenceof
U.NresolutionsonKashmirhasgreatlyshapedKashmiripoliticalidentityvisavisthe
Kashmir Conflict. The disputed status of Kashmir as declared by the U.N played on
the psyche of Kashmiri people and strengthened their distinct political identity. The
U.Ninvolvementin Kashmir has left a firm imprint on separatist politics and political
mobilizationinKashmir.TheKashmiriseparatistparty,PlebisciteFront,alludedtoand
tookitsnamefromtheU.N'snotionofPlebiscite.Thepartywasestablishedin1955in
IndianadministeredKashmir by Sheikh Abdullah's close associate, Afzal Beigh and
defined the Kashmiri selfdetermination movement for around two decades. In
PakistanadministeredKashmir, a proindependence party, also by the name of
PlebisciteFrontwasformedbyKashmirinationalists.Thoughnotformallylinkedtothe
Kashmir Valley centered, Plebiscite Front, the Pakadministered Kashmir based
PlebisciteFrontshareditspoliticalvision.DespitethattheU.NresolutionsonKashmir
gave Kashmiris only two choices to determine their political fate, viz., accession to
IndiaortoPakistan,thePlebiscitemovementinbothpartsofKashmir,whilecallingfor
aU.N referendum in Kashmir wanted the inclusion of an independent Kashmir as a
politicaloptioninthePlebiscite.
From1955to1974,thewords,PlebisciteFrontandPlebisciteknownasMahazeRai
Shumari and Rai Shumari, respectively, in Kashmir were to dominate the popular
political discourse in Kashmir. 'Hold the plebiscite now, holds it fast', constituted the
keyslogansofthePlebiscitemovementinKashmirduringthe1950sand60s.
WhenapopularuprisingbrokeoutagainstIndianruleinIndianadministeredKashmir
in 1990, one of most shouted slogans during proindependence processions was to
be,'Untilaplebisciteisheld,ourstrugglewillcontinue'.Duringtheheadydaysofthe
1990 uprising large proIndependence processions of Kashmiris would often lead to
the UNMOGIP headquarters in Srinagar to lodge protests and call on the U.N to
implement its resolutions on Kashmir. In one such procession, more than a million
KashmirismarcheduptotheUNMOGIPheadquartersinSrinagaron1March,1990,
shoutingprofreedomslogansandcallingforaU.NsupervisedPlebiscite.Thecrowd
alsosubmittedmemorandatoUNSecretaryGeneralurginghimtointerveneandpush
IndiaintograntingKashmiristheir'righttoselfdetermination'.Evennowitisacommon
practice among Kashmiri separatists to send memoranda to the UNMOGIP in
Srinagar,demandingimplementationofU.NresolutionsinKashmirorthefulfillmentof
therightofselfdeterminationofKashmiris.
In the ongoing wave of proindependence mass protests in Kashmir, Kashmiris are
againlookingtowardstheU.Nwithafainthope.OnAugust18,2008,respondingto
thecallofseparatistleaderswhohadcalledforamassmarchuptoUNMOGIPoffice,
http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

5/7

9/7/2016

PrinterFriendlyPage

hundredsofthousandsofpeoplefromthelengthandbreadthofthevalleyconverged
neartheTouristReceptionCentre,closetotheUNMOGIPofficeinSonwarlocalityof
Srinagar to urge on the U.N to intervene in Kashmir. The sea of people comprising
students from schools, colleges and universities, doctors, teachers, para medics,
thousands of Kashmir government employees, professionals and peasant masses
carriedplacardswhichread,"StopGenocideofKashmiris,InterveneUNO","Banki
moon,Comesoon","WewantPlebiscite"etc.
Representatives of the Kashmiri separatist leadership presented a memorandum
(addressed to U.N Secretary General, Ban kimoon) to the UNMOGIP observers,
urging on the U.N to intervene in Kashmir. The memorandum, which was also
publishedinthelocalpressinKashmirValleystated,"WethepeopleofJammu&
KashmirhavefirmfaithintheinstitutionofUnitedNations,whichhasbeenworkingfor
the mitigation of the sufferings of the oppressed around the world, will actively
engage/monitorandinterveneinJammuandKashmirandA)CalluponIndiatoend
its forcible occupation of Jammu Kashmir and also desist from use of brute force
againstthepeopleofJammuandKashmir.B)Byitselftakealleffectivemeasuresin
givingthepeopleoftheState,thechancetoexercisetheirrighttoselfdetermination
for deciding their future as has been conceded to them by Pakistan and India and
approvedbytheUnitedNationsOrganization"
Someoftheprotestorscarriedcopiesofthememorandumwhichhadbeencirculated
bythe"CoordinationCommittee"oftheseparatistleadership.
InKashmir'scurrentmediaandpopulardiscoursesonKashmirconflict,'U.NKashmir
relationship' has again come under focus. Kashmir Valley's largest selling English
daily, Greater Kashmir, recently cited Zafar Shah, an eminent Kashmiri lawyer, as
saying 'when armed resistance broke out in the valley in 1990,at least 600
memoranda were presented to the UN Observers stationed in Kashmir'. Shah, a
Kashmiri nationalist, further said, "The U.N resolutions passed in 1948 are the
backboneoftheKashmirstruggleandgivelegitimacytoit".
AstheshadowsofAugust25lengthen,IwriteinmyhouseinSrinagar,acitybesieged
bythousandsofIndianmilitaryandparamilitaryforcesandimprisonedbyanindefinite
curfew.Ihearfromsomelocaljournalistfriends on phone that at least five Kashmiri
protestors have been killed and more than 150 have been injured by Indian
paramilitaryforcestryingtostampdownproindependenceprocessions.Forthepast
twomonthsorso,IndiantroopstryingtostopthenewandmassivewaveofKashmiri
nationalist mobilization have shot and killed around 40 Kashmiris and injured more
thanhalfathousand.AsKashmirgroansunderIndianmilitaryrepressionandasthe
U.N maintains its silence on the happenings in Kashmir, Kashmiris' 'wait for Banki
Moon'seemsanunendingandfutileone.
Despite the U.N's gross failure in Kashmir, the presence of UNMOGIP office in
KashmircontinuestosymbolicallyaffirmtheKashmirisentimentthattheirlandisnot
yet another Indian State but an internationally recognized disputed territory and that
theircauseisahistoricalandjustone.
ThewordsUnitedNations,SelfdeterminationandPlebiscitehavebecomeintegralto
theKashmiripoliticallexicon.ThoughtheU.Nhasfailedinbringingaboutasolutionto
the Kashmir conundrum, its past involvement in Kashmir Conflict has undoubtedly
providedlegitimacyandstrengthtotheseparatistargumentinKashmir.Ironically,on
theonehandKashmiriseparatismhasdrawnstrengthfromtheU.Nresolutionsbuton
theotherhandtheframingoftheKashmirConflictasanIndiaPakistan(InterState)
ConflictintheU.NhaspreventedinternationalrecognitionoftheKashmirinationalist
movementasthedefiningcharacteristicofthepresentdayKashmirConflict.

http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

6/7

9/7/2016

http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html

PrinterFriendlyPage

7/7