[UNSC] Kashmir Conflict: The Game of Tug of War

Written by The Economist


Can Kashmir see the light at the end of the tunnel?


Ever since the division of the Indus Valley subcontinent in 1947, Kashmir has been at the heart of the India and Pakistan disputes. Human rights violations have been on the rise. People’s right to movement has been oppressed by curfews.  There are more frightening instances of civilian killings as well as use of excessive force. Their safety and wellbeing is constantly at risk. Altogether, these cases go against multiple articles in the United Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)


This decades-long conflict stemmed from Pakistan rejecting the Instrument of Accession  signed by India with the Maharaja of Kashmir in 1947. Pakistan refused to recognise the treaty and stuck to its stance of Kashmir belonging to Pakistan because of its Muslim majority. Because of this, Pakistan retaliated and this triggered the first out of four India-Pakistan wars. After the second war between the two countries, the line of control was formed. This line of control has no legal teeth but just acts as a place where arms on both sides are limited. 


In the end this issue falls to the hands of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) which has once again stepped in to tackle this icky issue. The first time was when the violence failed to come to an end during the war. That was the point when the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) and United Nations Military Observer Group (UNMOGIP) were formed. The role of these organizations was to mediate disputes between the 2 nations as well as to oversee the ceasefire which was brokered in 1948.  


Given the complexity of the issue and stubbornness from both parties, mitigating this dispute was no easy feat. The UNMOGIP was at the centre of discussion at the start of the first council session. The Delegate of Russia called for the UNMOGIP to increase its activity and report the situation on the ground more often, while keeping its distance from the conflict. On the other hand, the Delegate of India expressed strong rejection of the UNMOGIP, claiming that “the issues between Pakistan and India to be bilateral.” This clearly shows that India wants to settle things with Pakistan head on without interference with other countries. 


There was also an interesting solution to implement sanctions against state funded terrorist groups in Pakistan. The council came to a consensus that unilateral sanctions against either one of the countries would be too extreme and decided to lower the power of terrorists instead. After all the move will be of assurance to the world that the UNSC is taking steps to combat terrorism, a global issue. 


The situation is very volatile and uncertain. Kashmiris have suffered long enough and are tired from attack after attack from both sides despite declaring ceasefire multiple times. Many lives have been lost. Not only Kashmiris but brave soldiers who have ventured out to fight in the battlefields to protect their country’s dignity and honour. Kashmir’s neighbours just see Kashmir as an asset, a tool to increase their status in the world and improve their economic position. However, Kashmir sees themselves as an independent nation who wished to fly their own flag.


Article 370 of the Indian constitution gave them hope of autonomy, to be sovereign. All that hope was crushed when the article was revoked by the Indian government, in effort to integrate Jammu and Kashmir into India. The announcement of the revocation was carefully planned with police on standby to prevent any uprising and placing Kashmiri top officials under house arrest. The fate of Kashmir, a small nation bountiful with natural resources, is in the hands of mighty superpowers surrounding it. Other nations spectate.  This game of tug of war sees no end.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

[UNHCR] Exiting Afghanistan: Biden’s Big Blunder

Written by Wall Street Journal Upon American troops’ evacuation from Afghanistan, Kunduz and other provincial capitals fell to the Taliban within just 48 hours. On April 14, 2:29PM, President Biden announced that “more and endless American military force could not create or sustain a durable Afghan government”. A bold claim, especially since following American troops’ evacuation from Afghanistan, Kunduz and other provincial capitals proceeded to fall to the Taliban within a mere 48 hours. Biden’s controversial decision to pull out American troops from Afghanistan was not received well internationally, with news agencies such as BBC and NPR  stating that “As Kabul falls, Biden backlash grows” and that “Republicans were scathing about the White House’s actions, and Democrats, while acknowledging that President Biden was carrying out the policies of his predecessor, criticized the haphazard manner of the U.S. withdrawal.” In addition, how relinquishing a large amount of support from A...
Read more

[G20] A Delicious Outcome for Food Security

Written by Daily Mail After yet another day of productive discussions, the council of G20 has achieved not one, but multiple agreements and articles, a feat that may seem far-fetched to other councils. Amongst the agreements and discussions said, some key ideas stood out more than others, such as technology that is more sustainable and efficient, together with the use of genetic engineering. Creations of various different aids and funds have also pushed the council to greater heights, ensuring that the council progresses forward as a whole. The council plans to use “a kind of genetic engineering, which is a kind of controversial, as the GMO that we currently have at the moment”, as said by the delegate of Italy, who claims to be the unofficials spokesperson of the G20, alongside the delegate of Spain. The delegate of Italy also stated that, “the council believes that research into mutated genesis will be extremely beneficial in reducing the impact of climate change going forward”, in a...
Read more

[UNCTAD] No More Silence

Written by RT      RT has interviewed the Delegates of New Zealand and the United States of America to better understand their viewpoints regarding the mitigation of fallouts of the US-China Trade War.      RT chose to interview the Delegate of New Zealand based on her claim that the Trade War has not created a great impact on its nation. However, New Zealand also believes in shifting away from the US and China as economic powers.      The Delegate of the USA has remained relatively silent during the council sessions. As one of the large countries in question, RT hopes to find out more about the views of the US regarding the damage they have caused due to the Trade Wars. But can we really stop the silence? Q: To the delegate of New Zealand, you have mentioned that the US-China Trade War has minimal consequences on your nation, so why would you be willing to incur high administrative costs to diversify your supply chain? A: “By switching suppl...
Read more