UK ought to be responsible
Hem Raj Jain, New Delhi, India
The Nicholson's report, as finally adopted by the Foreign Affairs Committee of European Union (Parliament) on 21 March and officially released on April 26 (which will go to plenary for full parliamentary vote during the week of 21 May) is a document which reflects the insensitivities of UK (ex-ruler of India including J&K and Pakistan) with which it allows EU to play with the Kashmir problem. The Kashmir problem is the result of political confusion & legal bungling of India as given below: - (1)- As per the website of Indian Embassy "UNCIP adopted a resolution on August 13, 1948, divided into three parts. Part (3) of the Resolution to be implemented after parts (1) and (2) stated that both India and Pakistan had reaffirmed their wish that the future status of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people". (2)- A person even with a rudimentary knowledge of law understands that if the title of J&K was already accepted with India then where was the need for determining the status of J&K in accordance with the will of the people. (3)- But this confusion on the part of India is due to: - (i)- India was partitioned mainly on the basis of census and after conducting pre-partition plebiscite, based on religion, in western and eastern part of British India. (ii)- As per Indian Independence Act, 1947 princely states (like J&K) were given freedom to accede to either India or Pakistan. The then ruler of J&K opted for India. Hence as per law J&K belongs to India and any person or functionary of the government of India who participated or was involved in the said proceedings of UN plebiscite resolution, he committed an offence of sedition as per section 124-A of Indian Penal Code. (iii)- But despite having legal advantage as per Indian Independence Act, the government of India participated in these plebiscite resolution proceedings of UN due to political tangle where India had already violated this 'Princely State Ruler's discretion' doctrine in the case of Hyderabad by taking an excuse of territorial continuity. (iv)- Hence J&K having territorial continuity with Pakistan and having majority Muslim population (a basis of religion based partition) left India totally confused politically which culminated in the said legal bungling. But now lot of water has flown through Jhelum. Hindu majority India is simply not interested in retrieving its lost territory of Pakistan side of Muslim majority Kashmir. At the same time India will never accept the violation of its sovereignty & territory (including POK) in any manner. The UK instead of merely supporting the said resolution mooted by Nicholson (which is nothing more than sermons to Pakistan for democracy and to India for human rights along with some futile pious declarations) ought to take a proactive & humane role, through EU (and ultimately through UN), in solving Kashmir problem (UK's ethical responsibility) which was left behind by them in the tearing hurry of leaving the subcontinent due to debilitation caused to them by the Second World War.
|