Afghanistan, Kashmir, and South Asian Security
by Raju G. C. Thomas, Marquette University
U.S. officials have called South Asia the most dangerous place on earth. This view was voiced by President Clinton prior to his visit to South Asia in March 2000, almost two years after the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in May 1998. On October 12, 2001, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told reporters again that Kashmir "is the most dangerous place in the world" and that "the main purpose of [Secretary of State] Powell's trip would be to ensure that tensions between the two countries do not escalate."
Prospects for Afghan and Kashmir Settlements
With the elimination of the Taliban regime and the al-Qaeda ("base") of their special guest, Osama bin Laden, the Bush administration plans to establish a structure of stability in the region. This will include the establishment of a multi-ethnic Afghan regime and the resolution of the Kashmir issue so as to diffuse the prospect of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
It would appear unlikely in the long term that the Northern Alliance, composed of minority Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, and the various tribal and religious factions of the majority Pashtuns will cooperate for any long spell under American occupation. Large-scale U.S. economic aid may only increase the struggle and corruption among them for the spoils. A new danger may arise if disgruntled Pashtuns revive the old pre-1980 "Pashtunistan" movement that sought to unite the Pashtuns on either side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
The problem with Kashmir is that there is no room for compromise on either side. Pakistan will not give up its claim (at the very minimum) to the Valley of Kashmir. India may give up its claim to Azad Kashmir (which it does not really want anyway), but it will not give up the valley or any other part that it holds. There will be no change in these positions, no matter which government is in power in Islamabad or New Delhi.
From the Indian standpoint, the very prospect of American mediation requires an acknowledgment that there is something to mediate, and that would be the prized Valley of Kashmir. To India, that would be the first step towards losing the valley and maybe more. India is a country of seven major religions and about 35 (18 official) major languages. There is legitimate fear that if India loses Kashmir, the entire turbulent northeast sector of India could go the same way, and then maybe Sikh-majority Punjab, and parts of the prosperous Dravidian south, although much of the rest of India is now deeply integrated, thanks mainly to the Bollywood film industry and the economic integration of the country.
The Basis for Indo-Pakistani and Sino-Indian Settlements
Consider this. There was no basis for Palestinian-Israeli negotiations or American mediation until the Palestinians first accepted the reality of the existence of Israel, which has existed for over 50 years, whatever the legitimacy of Palestinian grievances. Negotiations are possible only on the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, and the status of East Jerusalem. Similarly, there is no basis for Pakistani-Indian negotiations or American mediation until Pakistan first accepts the fact that the part of Kashmir held by India for more than 50 years is an integral part of India, whatever the legitimacy of Pakistani grievances. If the U.S. government would make this fundamentally clear as they did in the case of Israel, then all that wishful thinking by Pakistanis and Kashmiri separatists will eventually dissipate. Only then will violence end and peace between India and Pakistan become possible.
It is relevant to note that the basis for the settlement of the Sino-Indian border dispute was the territorial status quo with marginal adjustments, whatever the legitimacy of the Indian claim to Aksai Chin in the northwest, and the Chinese claim to Arunachal Pradesh in the northeast. Both India and China have accepted these realities and have incorporated them in the 1994 Border Peace and Tranquility Agreement. Today, the Sino-Indian Himalayan border dispute is resolved de facto.
A solution to Kashmir must be along similar lines. Not only is there the risk of India unraveling, as Yugoslavia did in a bloodbath when Slovenia and Croatia were hastily and recklessly recognized, or now the probability of Indonesia unraveling after East Timor was dislodged through diplomatic intervention, but also the future of 144 million Muslims in India depends on maintaining the territorial status quo in Kashmir. If four million Kashmiri Muslims cannot live in Hindu-majority India, by logical extension neither can 144 million Muslims in the rest of India. It was the leaders of the Indian Muslims in the Hindu majority areas of British India who were mainly responsible for the creation of Pakistan, not the Muslims of the Muslim majority areas that became West and East Pakistan.
Keep in mind that the four million Kashmiri Valley Muslims, out of a total Indian population of one billion, could easily have been swamped through Punjabi Hindu and Sikh settlements. The Indian government has continued to prevent this for more than 50 years through a special constitutional provision. Indeed, in Azad Kashmir, the Kashmiri identity does not exist because of Punjabi Muslim settlements and intermarriages with local Kashmiris.
The answer to South Asia's problems is the same as that being enforced in the case of Israel, a state that was not recognized as legitimate by the vast majority of the states of the world until after the 1991 Gulf War. However, today Israel exists and is universally recognized. The Palestinians, led by Yasir Arafat, have learned to recognize that reality. Similarly, Kashmir is a part of India, Tibet is a part of China, and the Pashtun province of the Northwest Frontier Province is a part of Pakistan. Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and China must all recognize these realities and agree to maintain the territorial status quo and internal sovereignty of each other's states, whatever the legitimacy of each other's territorial claims. Only marginal adjustments may be allowed.
WAMM Action!
Briefing: Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan Prof. Raju G.C. Thomas
Saturday, March 16, 2002
10:00 a.m.
Hennepin Avenue United Methodist Church
511 Groveland at Lyndale Avenue, Minneapolis
Raju G.C. Thomas serves as professor of international relations at Marquette University. This event is sponsored by the WAMM Asia Pacific committee. FFI: wamm@mtn.org or 612-827-5364.