Kashmir Portal

A digital Kashmir Info Network

It is a matter of perspective

Posted by Kashmir Portal on June 16, 2009

Getting into this discussion meant to invite ire of either of my respectable friend and colleague,Dr. Shabir sb and Dr.Nazir gilani sb, who have made very well contribution on the prevailing situation and subsequent development led them to come up with two different but very interesting opinions with respect to Kashmir conflict and India . I think what Dr. Shabir tried to prove through his lengthy argument to disown the political ire over the Shopian incident which without conducting full probe of the incident, jumping to any conclusion is ethically, legally and consciously wrong. However, selection of the words have led him into conflicting views when he chooses that “ India reacted like any occupation force does”.

Here Comes Dr. Nazir Gilani sb, who rather rescued him from his conflicting words and approach by using his legalist and juridical wisdom, knowledge and skill, he is known for, by simply bringing in juridical dimension of provisional agreement that Indian government has with Kashmir government known as “ instrument of accession”, and that allowed India to enter in Kashmir . So calling India as occupying forces means we refuse to recognize the sanctity of “provisional agreement” which then Kashmir legal heir and ruler, had done with India and was also recognized by Pakistan .

What further political implications such uncareful selection of words can lead us to challenge our own recognized legal position with India as party that makes Kashmiri’s relevant to the issue, not UN resolutions. The UN resolutions some our friends place great emphasis all the time has undermined the Kashmir position but enhanced Pakistan’s position that clearly disrespect the free choice of Kashmiri’s which only provisional agreement recognize, while UNCIP only recognized right of accession. So there is clear variation in UNCIP Resolution from provisional agreement that involves two parties to fulfill the obligations they had then entered; on the cessation of hostilities, and control from Pakistan Kashmir arts, and India is bound to fulfill its obligations and seek opinion to finalize the status of Kashmir .

The other point that didn’t fit into nationalistic profile of Shabier sb when he specifically sought opinion of valley people on the observations of Gilani sb that is very much against the very essence of nationalism especially what shabir sb believe in entire state Jammu and Kashmir as single entity but trying to localize it which opponent forces normally practice to keep this division alive. I do not mean to doubt his intentions but words normally create such impression.

My submission mustn’t be read in the support or against anyone except giving my own point Of view since such topic directly hurt or undermine our viewpoint if we misjudge the historical and legal factors involve in the conflict. I think it is important aspect of the discussion and Afzal tahir sb can also enlighten us on the issue since he has also carried out extensive studies on legal aspect of Kashmir conflict.

Mumtaz Khan

Advertisements

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: