[UNSC] A Closer Look at India’s Draft Resolution

Written by Hindustan Times

The recent draft resolution co-sponsored by India is a good start, but is no panacea for the Kashmir conflict.

(Source: UN Photo / Evan Schneider)

There was little surprise in the UNSC when Russia motioned to introduce a draft resolution, which she had co-sponsored with India. It was glaringly obvious in the small council of just ten delegates that two of the key figures in debate were working on a comprehensive solution. After being introduced, the draft resolution in question was largely praised for its careful balancing of interests, though some continued to criticise its limited effects.

The delegate of Estonia applauded the curtailment of the UNSC’s role, reminding the council that the issue was a “fundamentally bilateral” one. On the other hand, the draft resolution was criticised by China for being too unambitious, saying, “we have spent far too long standing idly by as humanitarian problems occur before us.” Even more critical was Estonia, which absurdly compared India and Pakistan to “five-year olds” who would never take the advice of the UNSC.

International reactions aside, it is worth taking a closer look at the actual draft resolution, and carefully weighing its merits.

Article I: Additional Measures to the UNMOGIP

This article essentially asserts that the current status of the UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) remains as strict observers, though more regular monthly reports will be expected to ensure agreements are followed. It also calls for translators familiar with the native languages of the Kashmiri people to assist the UNMOGIP. This article seems uncontroversial, and indeed it is a good sign that the UNSC has curtailed some of its more radical aspects seeking to turn the UNMOGIP into an active military force - such a proposal would have drastically violated India’s national security and interests.

Article 2: The Creation of United Nations Commission of Inquiry in India and Pakistan (UNCIIP)

Responding to mass allegations of human rights abuses in the Kashmir region, this article would lay such concerns to rest by equipping the UNHCR, India, and Pakistan with the resources of an observer body on the ground to report any human rights abuses. This is a commendable effort to end the humanitarian issues in Kashmir, though it must be followed up with real action taken by governments.

Article 3: Ceasefire between India and Pakistan

This article represents another strong effort by the UNSC to pressure Pakistan, which has been reluctant to enter talks, to do so at last. Though this political pressure on the recalcitrant Pakistan is more than welcome, other measures must be taken to reduce tensions and build trust - both the carrot and the stick must be used when dealing with a capricious country like Pakistan.

Article 4: Protection of Human Rights of the Kashmiris

This article also seeks to protect Kashmiri human rights via a twofold process: encouraging India and Pakistan to rectify laws which contain loopholes or gaps, and recommending that they heed previous reports on human rights in Kashmir. This approach is a good one - the UNSC has no right interfering in the laws of any sovereign state, but India will no doubt carefully consider the recommendations made and implement them if they are valid.

Article 5: Improvement of Communications from the Kashmir Region

This article calls for better communications networks to and from Kashmir. This article seems somewhat weak, with no clear reasons for its inclusion, but it could possibly benefit communications from the UNMOGIP and the newly-established UNCIIP.

Article 6: Counter-terrorism Efforts in the Kashmir Region

Article 6 applies sanctions on several terrorist organisations, and investigates other methods to cut off funding. A strong attempt to curtail the rise of terrorism in Kashmir, it is a good start, but ultimately the Pakistani government must be held responsible for such atrocities. Without Pakistan’s willingness to take action to end terrorism, it is unlikely that much progress can be made on this front.

Article 7: Negotiations of Claimants in the Kashmir Region

This suggests that UN bodies oversee negotiations between India and Pakistan, and strongly encourages China to abide by its agreements in the Trans-Karakoram tract and negotiate with India. Though the content of this article has already been covered somewhat in Article 3, it provides welcome detail nonetheless, and the support of the UN in coordinating peace talks would be a good change.

Article 8: The Role of UN Peacekeeping in the Kashmir Region

This article differentiates various levels of conflict in Kashmir, from the use of arms in a military buffer zone to full-scale military aggression. In the most serious of cases, UN Peacekeeping forces are to be deployed to the Kashmir region. It is good that the involvement of the UNSC is limited, but this continues to risk infringing upon India’s sovereignty - the deployment of foreign troops on India’s soil may be too severe of a national security risk to countenance.

Ultimately, this draft resolution is an excellent first step towards resolving the conflict once and for all, though followup from the parties involved  is needed. Without a willingness by India and Pakistan to resolve their differences, there is only so much the UNSC can do. This draft resolution affirms this, and places the UNSC in a strictly supportive role, facilitating negotiations and suggesting ways to reduce tensions and protect human rights. India’s efforts in this conference has not gone unrecognised, and her delegate’s efforts to gain UN support while protecting Indian interests is impressive.

India’s diplomatic skill has been evident throughout this debate. All the better, for it will be needed when dealing with an adversary like Pakistan. That will be the hard part.