Monday, 27 June 2011



HISTORY OF KASHMIR

The conflict in Kashmir dates to the partition of India in 1947. The State of Jammu & Kashmir was at this time majority Muslim but with a Hindu ruler, and it was unclear whether it would accede to Pakistan or India. Its eventual accession to India became a

 matter of dispute 

(UNMOGIP Background

In August 1947, India and Pakistan became independent. Under the scheme of partition provided by the Indian Independence Act of 1947, Kashmir was free to accede to India or Pakistan. Its accession to India became a matter of dispute between the two countries and fighting broke out later that year.

«Despite the disagreement between India and Pakistan over UNMOGIP’s mandate and functions, the mission has remained in the area to observe the 1971 ceasefire arrangements.»
In January 1948, the Security Council adopted resolution 39 (1948) , establishing the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate and mediate the dispute. In April 1948, by its resolution 47 (1948) , the Council decided to enlarge the membership of UNCIP and to recommend various measures including the use of observers to stop the fighting. At the recommendation of UNCIP, the Secretary-General appointed the Military Adviser to support the Commission on military aspects and provided for a group of military observers to assist him. The first team of unarmed military observers, which eventually formed the nucleus of the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), arrived in the mission area in January 1949 to supervise, in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the ceasefire between India and Pakistan and to assist the Military Adviser to UNCIP.

The tasks of the observers, as defined by the Military Adviser, were to accompany the local authorities in their investigations, gather as much information as possible, and report as completely, accurately and impartially as possible. Any direct intervention by the observers between the opposing parties or any interference in the armies’ orders was to be avoided. These arrangements remained in effect until the conclusion of the Karachi Agreement on 27 July 1949 establishing a ceasefire line to be supervised by UN military observers.

The Karachi Agreement specified that UNCIP would station observers where it deemed necessary, and that the ceasefire line would be verified mutually on the ground by local commanders on each side with the assistance of UN military observers. Disagreements were to be referred to the UNCIP Military Adviser, whose decision would be final.

On 30 March 1951, following the termination of UNCIP, the Security Council, by its resolution 91 (1951) decided that UNMOGIP should continue to supervise the ceasefire in Jammu and Kashmir. UNMOGIP's functions were to observe and report, investigate complaints of ceasefire violations and submit its finding to each party and to the Secretary-General.

At the end of 1971, hostilities broke out again between India and Pakistan. They started along the borders of East Pakistan and were related to the movement for independence which had developed in that region and which ultimately led to the creation of Bangladesh.

When a ceasefire came into effect on 17 December 1971, a number of positions on both sides of the 1949 ceasefire line had changed hands. The Security Council met on 12 December, and on 21 December adopted resolution 307 (1971) , by which it demanded that a durable ceasefire in all areas of conflict remain in effect until all armed forces had withdrawn to their respective territories and to positions which fully respected the ceasefire line in Jammu and Kashmir supervised by UNMOGIP.

In July 1972, India and Pakistan signed an agreement defining a Line of Control in Kashmir which, with minor deviations, followed the same course as the ceasefire line established by the Karachi Agreement in 1949. India took the position that the mandate of UNMOGIP had lapsed, since it related specifically to the ceasefire line under the Karachi Agreement. Pakistan, however, did not accept this position.

Given the disagreement between the two parties over UNMOGIP's mandate and functions, the Secretary-General's position has been that UNMOGIP could be terminated only by a decision of the Security Council. In the absence of such an agreement, UNMOGIP has been maintained with the same arrangements as established following December 1971 ceasefire. The tasks of UNMOGIP have been to observe, to the extent possible, developments pertaining to the strict observance of the ceasefire of 17 December 1971 and to report thereon to the Secretary-General.

The military authorities of Pakistan have continued to lodge complaints with UNMOGIP about ceasefire violations. The military authorities of India have lodged no complaints since January 1972 and have restricted the activities of the UN observers on the Indian side of the Line of Control. They have, however, continued to provide accommodation, transport and other facilities to UNMOGIP.)
 between the two countries, with both India and Pakistan claiming ownership of Kashmir. After a brief war in 1947-48, Kashmir was divided between Pakistan and India administered territories. A ceasefire line was agreed under UN supervision, which has since been renamed the

‘Line of Control’
(

BBC News Online looks at possible solutions for Kashmir. Click on the maps below


Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

Scenario 5

Scenario 6

Scenario 7






Religious groups: Indian-administered Kashmir

REGION
Buddhist
Hindu
Muslim
Other
Kashmir Valley
-
4%
95%
-
Jammu
-
66%
30%
4%
Ladakh
50%
-
46%
3%

Religious groups: Pakistani-administered Kashmir

REGION
Buddhist
Hindu
Muslim
Other
Northern Areas
-
-
99%
-
Azad Jammu and Kashmir
-
-
99%
-
Source: Indian/Pakistani Government Censuses

Scenario one: The status quo
Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 50 years. Currently a boundary - the Line of Control - divides the region in two, with one part administered by India and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalise this status quo and make it the accepted international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both want greater control over the region.

In 1947-8 India and Pakistan fought their first war over Jammu and Kashmir. Under United Nations' supervision, they agreed to a ceasefire along a line which left one-third of the state - comprising what Pakistan calls Azad Jammu and Kashmir, and the Northern Areas administered by Pakistan and two-thirds, Jammu, Ladakh and the Kashmir Valley, administered by India.

In 1972, under the terms of the Simla agreement, the ceasefire line was renamed the Line of Control.

Although India claims that the entire state is part of India, it has been prepared to accept the Line of Control as the international border, with some possible modifications. Both the US and the UK have also favoured turning the Line of Control into an internationally-recognised frontier.

But Pakistan has consistently refused to accept the Line of Control as the border since the predominantly Muslim Kashmir Valley would remain as part of India. Formalising the status quo also does not take account of the aspirations of those Kashmiris who have been fighting since 1989 for independence for the whole or part of the state.)
Around one third of the territory has since been administered by Pakistan, with the remainder administered by India, including Kashmir Valley, which has a strong Muslim majority.

Further wars have broken out between India and Pakistan in Kashmir in 1965 and 1999, whilst there is also a Kashmir separatist movement. To further complicate matters in the region, the border with China is also disputed. India does not recognise the border established after war between India and China in 1962. China has traditionally diplomatically favoured Pakistan though
 relations with India
(Sunday, 2 June, 2002, 01:40 GMT 02:40 UK
China and the Kashmir crisis

India and China have long been mistrustful
 
Analysis

By Michael Yahuda
Professor of International Relations,
London School of Economics and Political Science


China has long been involved in a triangular relationship with Pakistan and India, and is now a reluctant and silent third party to the dispute over Kashmir.


Enlarge map
Beijing has traditionally supported Pakistan against India, but now in the post-Cold War era the Chinese have distanced themselves somewhat from Pakistan in order to cultivate better relations with India.

Nevertheless China has a strategic interest in the survival of Pakistan and it will not want to see it drawn into a war which it cannot win, nor will it want to see its government humiliated.

The Chinese approach is determined by three broad considerations; border issues, geopolitics and international strategy.

Borders

  China has contained India by cultivating its neighbours and by blocking Indian aspirations to be the dominant power in the southern reaches of the Himalayas


There is a contested border with India, and India has not forgotten its defeat by China in a border row in 1962.

China also borders Kashmir and the Indians do not recognise the border agreement the Chinese reached with Pakistan over the section of Kashmir under Pakistani control.

Although the Chinese and Indian sides have been unable to resolve their border dispute, they have nevertheless agreed in recent years to take various measures to reduce tension and the possibility for conflict along the lines of control that separate their two forces.

Geopolitics

From a geopolitical point of view, China has consistently sought to constrain Indian power and confine it essentially to the region of South Asia.


if there is a Pakistani nuclear strike, China will be blamed for supplying the technology
In addition to the strategic interest in not having to confront a single powerful neighbour to the south of the Himalayas, China is also concerned by the residual Indian interest in Tibet.

After all India still harbours the Dalai Lama and his unofficial government in exile.

China has contained India by cultivating its neighbours and by blocking Indian aspirations to be the dominant power in the southern reaches of the Himalayas.

Thus China continues to refuse to recognise India's claims to Sikkim, it encourages Bangladesh to stand up to India and above all China has supported India's arch-rival Pakistan.

In the 1965 Indo-Pak war China went so far as to threaten to open a second front against India.

But its main support has been expressed through the supply of arms.

Once Pakistan was confined to its western sector in 1971 it became no match for Indian power.

The Chinese have sought to redress the balance by helping Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons and missile technology.

Despite repeated Chinese denials the evidence supplied by the Americans is overwhelming on this score.

International strategy

From a wider international perspective, India and China were rivals in the Cold War era.

From the 1970s this was reflected in American support for China and the Soviet alliance with India.

  China is anxious to avoid trouble with the US


Since the end of the Cold War, however, India and China have scaled down their enmity and have found reason to co-operate, more especially in managing relations with the sole superpower, the United States.

But after 11 September matters became more complicated.

Both China and India have drawn closer to the US - India perhaps more so than China.

Indeed India and the US held joint military exercises for the first time in May.

But China is anxious to avoid trouble with the US at a time of leadership succession, and at a time when it has to adjust to the terms of entry to the World Trade Organisation.

Moreover, China has benefited to an extent from the "war on terror", which has enabled it to suppress resistance to its rule in its Central Asian province of Xinjiang.

Nevertheless the Chinese eye warily the American military presence in Central Asia.

Nuclear fall-out

Thus from a Chinese point of view the crisis in Kashmir has come at a most difficult time, and it is clear that the Chinese are not best pleased with their Pakistani friends for provoking it.

  The Chinese are very much opposed to the possible use of nuclear weapons


The Chinese opposed the Pakistani incursion into Kargil 18 months ago, and on this occasion it is clear that the Chinese have withheld support from Pakistan.

They have not joined Islamabad in calling for an international settlement of the Kashmiri issue, but have implicitly sided with New Delhi in calling for dialogue between the two.

Although they have not said so publicly, the Chinese are very much opposed to the possible use of nuclear weapons.

It is they who will be blamed for having supplied Pakistan, and they too have much to fear if the psychological barrier to their use were to be broken.)
have improved in recent years.

Given the apparently irreconcilable territorial claims in Kashmir, there is no immediate end in sight to this conflict. Now that both India and Pakistan are in possession of nuclear weapons, the stakes in this conflict are of global significance. In this difficult context, local peacebuilders work to diffuse tensions. This work is vital when the potential for local violence to spark larger conflicts carries such huge dangers.

kashmir:conflict profile.
The partition of India continues to leave open wounds on both its Eastern and Western borders with the struggle in Kashmir being one of its most highly publicised conflicts, enveloping three nuclear powers: Pakistan, India and China. The complex conflict is set to the backdrop of the valleys and mountains of the Himalayan region which contain many diverse linguistic, ethnic and religious groups.

Image from Julie Starr, published under a creative commons license

The bloody territorial dispute of the Kashmir region has continued for more than six decades, resulting in 100,000s of deaths and with Kashmiris facing the daily life of military occupation and ongoing militia operations. While the violence decreased in recent years since the beginnings of a peace process in 2004, it has flared up again in the summer of 2009 and the region remains highly unstable and volatile. The deeply entrenched views each side hold; the involvement of different domestic and international groups and governments; the fragility of political, economic and social stability in all the countries concerned and the larger conflict surrounding water resources and land, limits the possibilities of reconciliation, making this one of the longest-running intractable conflicts in the world.

Image from mfr_isb@yahoo.com, published under a creative commons license

In 2010, India administered 43 per cent of the region including most of Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh and the Siachen Glacier. Pakistan controls 37 per cent of Kashmir namely Azad Kashmir and the northern areas of Gilgit and Baltistan. In addition, China occupies 20 per cent of Kashmir following the Sino-Indian War of 1962. The Shaksam Valley, which China claims, is part of Tibet and under Chinese occupation.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
Amidst the turmult of independence in 1947 Muslim revolutionaries from Western Kashmir and Pakistani tribesman from Dir advanced into the Bramulla area. This was due to rumours that the ruling Maharaja Hari Singh was planning to annex the Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir to India and the advancing forces intended to liberate the area from the Dogra rule.

Officially, the Indian government could only intervene if the Maharaja relinquished power of the region at which point they could send in ‘military aid’, as India and Pakistan had signed the Standstill Agreement, which was an agreement of non-intervention. The Maharaja ultimately agreed to relinquish power and the Indian army moved in to drive out the Pakistani forces and occupied the remaining areas of Kashmir and Jammu, despite Pakistani calls for a referendum and the Muslim majority in Kashmir. The war continued until 1948 when India requested the involvement of the UN Security Council. The Council passed a resolution that imposed an immediate ceasefire and called on Pakistan to withdraw all military presence. In addition, it stated that India could retain a minimum military presence, while Pakistan would have no say in administration and “the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.” The ceasefire was enacted on 31 December 1948, however Pakistan did not withdraw its troops from the region and a plebiscite was not conducted, leading to the beginning of increasing unrest in the region.

Sino-Indian War of 1962
The increasing unrest and escalating violence culminated in 1962 when military from China and India clashed in territorial disputes. China quickly overpowered the Indian military and occupied the area, claiming the area under administration and naming the region Aksai Chin. The border dispute between this area and other smaller areas is known as the Line of Actual Control. Current construction of a ‘fence’ around the Line of Actual Control has been disputed by both China and Pakistan, however, India claims that the ‘fence’ reduces insurgent attacks. Until the ceasefire in 2003 the Line of Control was one of the most violence-prone de facto borders in the world and saw daily shelling, mortar firing, artillery shelling, and machine gun exchanges between Indian and Pakistani troops and other militant groups.

1965 and 1971 wars
In 1965 and 1971, heavy fighting broke out again between India and Pakistan. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 resulted in the defeat of Pakistan and the surrender of the Pakistani military in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), which led to the signing of The Simla Agreement between India and Pakistan. By this treaty, both countries agreed to settle all issues by peaceful means and mutual discussions in the framework of the UN Charter. However, this form of track-two diplomacy was merely a ‘paper peace’ and did not reflect the situation in Kashmir that had left a bitter legacy of a deadly 20-year war.

Militancy
The Simla Agreement had little bearing to events on the ground and there were increasingly organised uprisings.  Opposition to the Indian administration, disputed state elections and military occupation led to some of the state’s legislative assemblies forming militant wings, which further created the catalyst for the Mujahideen insurgency, which continues to this day. The three main militant groups in Kashmir are Hizbul Mujahideen; Lashkar-e-Toyeba; and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen but all have also fractured into different, sometimes opposing factions, many of whom have different aims on how to resolve the conflict, what their objectives are and their views on the use of violence to continue their struggle. However, in recent years their membership and influence has diminished.


The Kargil War of 1999
In mid-1999 insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir infiltrated into Jammu and Kashmir. The insurgents took advantage of the severe winter conditions and occupied vacant mountain peaks of the Kargil range. By blocking the highway, they wanted to cut off the only link between the Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a high-scale conflict between the Indian Army and the Pakistan Army. International fears that the conflict could turn nuclear led to the involvement of the United States pressurising Pakistan to retreat.

Opposing Views
The major points of two of the main stakeholders India and Pakistan can be summarised as follows:

Indian view
India claims that as the Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947, handing control of the Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir over to India, the region is theirs, having been validated by the Indian Independence Act and the departing British Empire.
India claims that the UN Resolution 1172 in 1948 accepted India’s stand regarding all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan.
India claims that Pakistan has not removed its military forces, which India views as one of the first steps in implementing a resolution.
India accused Pakistan of funding military groups in the region to create instability, and accuses Pakistan of waging a proxy war.
India accuses Pakistan of spreading anti-India sentiment among the people of Kashmir, through the media, to alter Kashmiri opinion.
According to India, most regions of Pakistani Kashmir, especially northern areas, continue to suffer from lack of political recognition, economic development and basic fundamental rights.
Pakistani view
Pakistan claims that according to the two-nation theory Kashmir should have been with Pakistan, because it has a Muslim majority.
Pakistan argues that India has shown disregard to the resolutions of the UN Security Council, and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan, by failing to hold a plebiscite.
Pakistan rejects Indian claims to Kashmir, centring around the Instrument of Accession. Pakistan insists that the Maharaja did not have the support of most Kasmiris. Pakistan also claims that the Maharaja handed over control of Jammu and Kashmir under duress, thus invalidating the legitimacy of the claims.
Pakistan claims that India violated the Standstill Agreement and that Indian troops were already in Kashmir before the Instrument of Accession was signed.
Pakistan claims that between 1990-1999 the Indian Armed Forces, its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent militias have been responsible for the deaths 4,501 of Kashmiri civilians. Also from 1990 to 1999, there are records of 4,242 women between the ages of 7-70 that have been raped. Similar allegations were also made by some human rights organizations.
Pakistan claims that the Kashmiri uprising demonstrates that the people of Kashmir no longer wish to remain part of India. Pakistan suggests that this means that either Kashmir wants to be with Pakistan or independent.

The Peace Process

One of the first peace initiatives in July 2000 laid a tentative framework for reconciliation. The largest militia group, the Hizb’ul–Mujahideen, declared a unilateral ceasefire against the Indian forces after covert negotiations between the different stakeholders. However, the demands from the militia group, which included India declaring Kashmir a disputed territory and that tripartite negotiation should begin immediately, were not met and the ceasefire collapsed.  In 2003 another ceasefire was declared along the Line of Control which resulted in five-stage talks between the Indian and Pakistani governments, commencing in 2004. Some progress was made, leading to increased trade and movement between the borders. However, the talks have were suspended for two years due to the 2008 Mumbai attacks and this has led to a recent upsurge in violence and strikes, with 2010 seeing the highest levels of violence in years with many young Muslim Kashmiris involved in action against the police and Indian Army. There continues to be violent reprisal attacks from the Indian Army, and many human rights condemnations as cited by many human rights organisations.

However, since February 2010 high-level talks have resumed, with the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan meeting in July in Islamabad in an effort to resume the dialogue that was in progress before the Mumbai attacks.

Although the violence continues, the 2008 election saw a substantial vote for the moderate parties, which is perhaps representative of the desire for a more stable region and the general population’s exhaustion with the conflict and the want for peace. Furthermore, the increase in trade and movement of people between the regions, along with the cumulative impact of civil society movements, have played an important role in suppressing any re-emergence of a large-scale armed struggle. The region may be moving forward into a ripeness for reconciliation, but many in Kashmir and the international community call for the right of Kashmiris to determine their own future and call for a referendum on independence.

kashmir conflict resources :-

General
BBC in-depth – Kashmir flashpoint: Features the latest stories from the region as well as a discussion of the keys debates surrounding the ongoing dispute. The personal perspectives under the ‘Voices from Kashmir’ section are particularly worth a look. The BBC Search function for Kashmir is also useful, as is the BBC Timeline – India and Pakistan – Trouble Relations.

published under the creative commons license

Flashpoints: Country briefing on the conflict in Kashmir, including a list of related resources.

Global Security – Kashmir: For the main combatants involved in the dispute, refer to the right-hand side of this page. Also noteworthy is the extensive background information and the maps.

INCORE: International Conflict Research Institute at the University of Ulster’s guide to Internet resources on Kashmir.

Kashmir Newz – Maps of Jumma and Kashmir: An interesting collection of regional maps each, representing a different understanding of Kashmir and Jumma’s territory. Includes: India’s local version, India’s international version, Pakistan’s version, Western version, Central Intelligence Agency and the USA’s version.

UK FCO guidelines: Country profile from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including travel advice for those planning to visit the region and recently updated timeline of recent conflict.

photo by Shashwat Nagpal, published under the creative commons license

Government and International Organisations
Amnesty International: Thousands lost in Kashmir mass graves (2008): A disturbing article from Amnesty International outlining the discovery of hundreds of unidentified graves believed to contain victims of unlawful killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other abuses.

CIA Fact book: General information on Pakistan, including maps and statistical information.

Human Rights Watch: Search on all reports produced by HRW on human rights abuses and other issues in Kashmir.

Human Rights Watch – India: Scroll down to the Jammu and Kashmir section for the latest from Human Rights Watch.

Internally Displaced Monitoring Centre: This is an extensively categorised and comprehensive resource of IDPs in India. Under the ‘Internal Displacement Profile,’ search for the specific Kashmir reports, statistics and maps.

ICC: Contains news on any impeding investigations or cases in the ICC for Kashmir.

International Crisis Group: Recent reports from International Crisis Group on Kashmir.

UNMOGIP – The UN Military Observer group in India and Pakistan: A small UN outfit remains in the border region. Particularly noteworthy is the history of UN involvement and detailed map section.

UN Resolutions: Links to all UN resolutions passed in relation to Kashmir.

US AID: Gives an overview of US AID funded programmes in the region of Jammu and Kashmir.

photo by mfr_isb@yahoo.com published under the creative commons license

Local Newspapers
Kashmir Observer
Greater Kashmir
Rising Kashmir
Kashmir Times

Other
Indian Census 2001: Site of Indian census, including (contested) information on Jammu and Kashmir.

Google maps: Link to Google maps page of Jammu and Kashmir.

Kashmir information network: Links to noted authors on Kashmir, Kashmiri newspapers, recommended articles and books, and background to the conflict.

kashmir:conflict timeline:-


1846: The State of Jammu and Kashmir is created under the Treaty of Amristar, when the Maharaja Gulab Singh buys the Kashmir Valley from the East India Company and adds it to Jammu and Ladakh already under his rule.

1857: The Indian Rebellion of 1857 against the British/First Indian War of Independence.

1931: The movement against the Maharaja in Kashmir begins but is suppressed by State forces.

1932: Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah sets up the ‘All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference’ to fight for Kashmiri freedom from the Maharaja’s rule, which would branch off to become the National Conference in 1939. The Glancy Commission publishes a report in April 1932, highlighting the inequality of the Muslim population and discusses the need for their adequate representation in the state’s services; the Maharaja accepts these recommendations but delays implementation; the Maharaja grants a Constitution providing a legislative assembly for the people, but the Assembly turns out to be powerless.

1939: The National Conference launches the ‘Quit Kashmir’ movement demanding abrogation of the Treaty of Amritsar and a call of sovereignty for the people of Kashmir.

1940: The Pakistan Resolution is passed and demands the establishment of an independent state, comprising all regions in which Muslims are the majority.

1947 (Mar): An internal revolt begins in the Poonch region but is suppressed by the Maharaja’s forces.

1947 (15 Aug): The partition of India: The British Indian Empire is dissolved and the Muslim-majority areas in the East and West are partitioned to form the separate state of Pakistan.


1947: Kashmir signs the Standstill Agreement with Pakistan. The Maharaja delays his decision to accede into either India or Pakistan.

1947 (Oct): Indo-Pakistani War of 1947:  Thousands of Pashtuns from Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province attack Kashmir and the Maharaja’s forces. The Maharaja ask India for help, who abides under the conditions that he relinquish control over defense, communication and foreign affairs to India. The Maharaja agrees and signs the Instrument of Accession.

The Indian Army enters the state to repel the invaders. Sheikh Abdullah endorses the accession as ad-hoc which would be ultimately decided by a plebiscite and is appointed head of the emergency administration.

1948: India takes the Kashmir problem to the UN Security Council. The resolution orders the cessation of hostilities and a formulation of a truce agreement, and that a plebiscite should determine the future of Jammu and Kashmir. However, both countries cannot agree on the terms of demilitarisation.

1949: On 1 January, the ceasefire between Indian and Pakistani forces leaves India in control of most of the valley, as well as Jammu and Ladakh, while Pakistan gains control of part of Kashmir including, what Pakistan calls, Azad Kashmir and Northern territories.

1950 (Jan): India gains independence and becomes a republic.

1957: India’s Home Minister declares that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is a fundamental part of India and there can be no question of a plebiscite. Kashmiri activists continue to insist on self-determination.

1963 (Dec): Mass uprisings occur in the Kashmir Valley and protests occur against Articles 356 and 357 of the Indian Constitution, by which the Indian government can exercise legislative powers. The Indian army attacks the protesters.

1965: Indo-Pakistan War of 1965. Pakistan backs rebel groups in Kashmir and sends armed Pakistani infiltrators to join them across the ceasefire line, which leads to more violence across the whole of the Kashmir Valley.

1966: Kashmiri nationalists form another Plebiscite Front with an armed wing called the Jammu and Kashmir National Liberation Front (NLF) in Azad Kashmir, with the objective of freeing Kashmir from Indian occupation.

1971: The Indo-Pakistan War of 1971: Pakistan descends into civil war after East Pakistan demands autonomy and later independence of what will become Bangladesh.

1972: India and Pakistan agree to a ceasefire, and sign the Simla Agreement, which states that they will respect the Line of Control, the border between the two countries and China. However, fighting continues along this line, making it one of the most violent and dangerous border lines in the world.

1987-1990: Kashmir Insurgency: After the 1987 elections the Muslim United Front (MUF) declares the elections as rigged, and the insurgency in the valley increases. The MUF candidate later breaks away to become head of the militant group Hizb-ul-Mujahedin. Further protests and anti-India demonstrations in the Kashmir Valley followed by police retaliation, arrests and curfew orders by the Indian police and army.

1989: At the end of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan a great deal of weapons are released into Kashmir and Pakistan provides further training to Kashmiri and foreign militant groups in Kashmir. The Kashmiri independence movement becomes more Islamist in its ideology.

1990 (1 Mar): An estimated one million people take to the streets in protest of the Indian occupation and more than 40 people are killed by the police. This is seen by many as the beginning of a massive Kashmiri uprising, but India claims that it is orchestrated by Pakistani trained operatives. Many of the 162,500 Hindu community in Kashmir flee the area to refugee camps in Jammu.

1990: An estimated 34,000 people have been killed since 1978.

1998: India and Pakistan perform nuclear tests in a show of strength.

1999: Indian and Pakistani militaries clash in Kargil, India launches air-strikes in Kashmir.

1999: General Musharraf leads a military coup in Pakistan.

2000 (Nov): India puts a ceasefire into effect in Kashmir. However, violence continues.

2001 (Oct): Kashmiri assembly in Srinagar attacked and 38 people are killed.

2001 (Dec): Attack on Indian parliament in New Dehli. The militant groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed take responsibility.

2003: India and Pakistan restore diplomatic ties.

2004 (24 Sep): Prime Minister Singh and President Musharraf meet in New York during UN General Assembly for first round of peace talks.


2006: Second round of Indo-Pakistan peace talks.

2007: Amnesty International and other human rights organisations report of gross human rights violations from India that include systematic arrests and detentions, enforced curfews, and testimonies of rape and torture. India denies many of these claims and states it is suppressing terrorism.

2008 (Aug): The beginning of the second uprising by local groups and youths which leads to massive redeployment of Indian security forces.


2010 (Aug): Tens of thousands of people stage street demonstrations against the deaths of two young men detained in Indian custody.

2010 (Sep): The Indian government has claimed it will release hundreds of students and young people after months of civil unrest that has left at least 107 people dead.


kashmir: key people and parties:-


The Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party (JKDFP): was founded in 1998 by Hashim Qureshi and  Shabir Ahmad Shah as a separatist party that advocates self-rule for Jammu and Kashmir.

The Jammu and Kashmir People’s Democratic Party (PDP): was founded in 1999 by Mufti Mohammed Sayeed and is a separatist party that advocates self-rule for Jammu and Kashmir.

The All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC): was founded in 1993 and is a political front formed as an alliance of 26 political, social and religious organisations in Kashmir. One of the main objectives of the APHC is ascend the Indian controlled regions of Kashmir to Pakistan and to instate Islamic governance.


The Indian National Congress (INC): is one of the two major political parties in India and is considered centre-left in the Indian political spectrum. In the 2009 general election it formed a coalition with a number of allies called the UPA and was able to form a majority and form a government.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): is India’s second largest political party and is considered centre-right in the Indian political spectrum and is the Hindu-National party. They were in power from 1998 to 2004 when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

The Jammu and Kashmir National Conference Party (NCP): was founded by Sheikh Abduallah in 1939 and dominated electoral politics for many decades in the state, it is now being led by his grandson Omar Abdullah. They are a moderate separatist party and call for Jammu and Kashmir’s right to self-determination and autonomy.

MILITANT GROUPS
Jaish-e-Mohammed: is a militant organisation that operates in Kashmir but is based in Pakistan. The group’s main aim is to ascend the Indian controlled regions of Kashmir to Pakistan and to instate Islamic governance and has carried out several attacks. It has been banned in Pakistan since 2002 and its Commander-in–Chief Masood Azhar is currently imprisoned in Pakistan, however, the group continues to operate.

Hizb-ul-Mujahideen: is a militant organisation that has operated in Kashmir since 1989 and is the militant wing of the Kashmiri political and religious group Jamaat-e-Islami. The current leader of the group is a Kashmiri known as Sayeed Salahudeen who resides in Pakistan. The group is considered by many to be the most widely supported and populist militant group active in the conflict.

Lashkar-e-Taiba: was founded in 1994 as the militant wing of the Marqaz, a centre which was founded in the 1980s by Hafiz Mohammed Saeed and is one the largest and most active of the militant operations. They have taken responsibility for a number of violent attacks including the Red Fort attacks in Delhi in 2000. India has also accused them of being responsible for the 2009 Mumbai attacks. They differ from the other main militant groups as most of their members are non-Kashmiri. They are an extremely well-known and prominent group in Pakistan. However, they have been banned since 2002 in Pakistan, but they continue to operate and include different factions.

key people:
Farooq Abdullah: Has dominated local politics for years and is the son of Sheikh Mohammed, who founded the National Conference Party. While he has accepted that Kashmir should remain part of the Indian Union, he has campaigned for its greater autonomy. He has been criticised for shifting his allegiances to political parties, but is currently an ally of the BJP.

Omar Abdullah: Is the son of Farooq Abdullah and was made head of the National Conference in 2008, he resigned in 2009 amid allegations of a sex scandal, however he is currently still in the party and is Chief Minister for Jammu and Kashmir.

Shabir Shah: Is a high profile campaigner for Kashmiri independence since the late 1960s, and has spent much of his life in Indian jails. However, he was suspended from the APHC due to political disagreements and went on to found his own party in 1998 called the Jammu Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party (JKDFP).

Abdul Gani Bhat: Is another key player in Kashmiri politics and advocates for Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan. In 1993 his party, the Muslim Conference, became part of the main Kashmiri separatists alliance the APHC. He recently claimed that other separatists involved in the conflicts had assassinated some high profile leaders in the separatist movement and his own brother.




No comments:

Post a Comment