It appears that Pakistan's 20 year proxy war is finally showing results. For the past 20 years Pakistan has either created, trained and/or funded militants to infiltrate the Kashmir Valley and than to cause general mayhem. The need for Pakistan to do so was quite simple: as a military strategy, all-out war was not possible against the Indian army, and therefore the "million cuts" strategy was created. The fact that many individuals in the area were trained by the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's CIA) to fight in Afghanistan, and were now "finished" and "free" to do other endeavors made the late 80's-early 90's the appropriate time to begin such a strategy.
But for almost 20 years India has held firm. The nefarious designs of Pakistan's Army have for the most part been unsuccessful in changing India's mind, and/or weakening its resolve (on the other, to be fair, the rigged state election in 1989 certainly hurt India's image to Kashmiris).
This may be changing. Under extreme pressure from the US, as well as the need to resolve the issue so India can press Pakistan for economic progress (including the much talked about Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline), India recently suggested it would "accept" the current "Line of Control" as an International Boundary. Though I can certainly understand the "acceptance" as a compromise for "the sake of peace", this certainly does not makes me feel at ease. Personally, Pakistan and India both seem to be acting like the fake-mother in the story of King Solomon. I would like to propose my own solution; one that I think will please noone, and therefore is the only FAIR solution. There is compromise for the sake of peace, there is compromise for the sake of compromise (so politicians can be endowed with accolades), and than there is compromise for the sake of truly righting wrongs, and moving on. I think I have such a proposal.
To understand where the proposal comes from, first I would like to give some insgight to the area, and its recent history.
The area known as Kashmir is really not just Kashmir. What is called Kashmir is really mad up of three different areas known as Ladakh (which is mainly Buddhist), Jammu (mainly Hindu) and Kashmir Valley (mainly Muslim). When we talk about Kashmir today, we are referring to these three combined regions which are controlled by India. These three regions combined make up the state known as Jammu & Kashmir, or Kashmir for short.
Greater Kashmir at the turn of the century however was larger. It consisted of the current Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir (in short it is called Kashmir), as well as the part controlled currently by Pakistan (Indians call it POK -Pakistan occupied Kashmir-, Pakistanis call it "Azad" -meaning free- Kashmir), as well as Aksai Chin, and Waziristan (the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan now). This whole region was controlled by the Dogra clan, of which there was a King. In 1935, the British "persuaded" the Dogras to give up Waziristan to create the North-West Frontier Province.
In 1947 British dominion ended with what is known as the Partition (of United India into two states: Pakistan and India). The purpose of the Partition was to vivisect United India into two states based on religious demographic lines. The British carefully controlled the partition prior to their exit with specific codes and rules. For example, United India had 565 Princely States (which were states technically not controlled by the British, but by Princes who essentially acquiesced to British demands). The British offered that the leader/rulle of these Princely states had the option to either join Pakistan, join India, or stay independent.
Greater Kashmir at the time of Partition was the three regions that are currently in India, plus what is known today as POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir by Indians, Azad Kashmir -meaning Free Kashmir- by Pakistanis), as well what is today known as the Northern Areas, Aksai Chin and Waziristan. This whole Greater Kashmir region was controlled by the Dogras, of which there was a King: Hari Singh.
For the most part, the decisions left to the Princely States were not difficult; however the Greater Kashmir region proved to be a tricky situation. Hari Singh was a Hindu King in a Muslim dominated state/region. Hari Singh preferred to stay independent, and tried to play both Pakistan and India against each other.
Unfortunately, Pakistan would not allow Hari Singh to make a decision, and Pakistani tribals were told to enter Kashmir in an attempt to either force out Hari Singh or to force his hand in acceding to Pakistan. Just like 40 years later when Pakistan's ISI decided to funnel many "Afghan Civil War vets" into Kashmir Valley to cause the current unrest (of the last 15-20 years), Pakistan's leaders decided force, instead of the agreed on rules, would be the avenue of accession.
But the action in many ways backfired. Hari Singh was not able to stave off the invasion, and instead decided to accede to India (sending his letter of accession to Lord Mountbatten, making it official) in return for India protecting Kashmir against the Pakistani marauders. India sent int troops only after the accession letter was signed, since both countries had made a non-intervention agreement. India could not help Kashmir unless it acceded first. Once the Letter of Accession was accepted by Lord Mountbatten (who was the British Viceroy of United India, and the coordinator of the Partition) India entered Kashmir and fought off the tribal invaders. This triggered the "First Kashmiri War". During this war India went to the newly created UN to ask for resolution. The UN called for a plebiscite.
The aftermath of the first Kashmir War was that the Kashmiri Parliament ratified the Letter of Accesion, that called for the "perpetual merger of the state with India". Pakistan still calls for plebiscites. In the 1960s Pakistan ceded parts of the Kashmir that it controlled to China.
In 1989 a widespread armed insurgency begin in Kashmir (Indian Held Kashmir) which continues even till today. A large proportion of the fighters are "foreign" in that they are not Kashmiris. It is interesting to note that the Afghan Civil War was winding down at this juntion of time, and therefore many soldiers needed a new cause. It should also be noted that Kashmiri militants terrorized the Kashmiri Pandits (Kashmiri Pandits are Kashmiri's who are Hindu), and basically forced them to leave Kashmir. Kashmiri Pandits are for the most part basically refugees now. Their tale is the saddest one of this whole situation.
With all this in mind, it is reasonable to suggest that both sides claims have varying degrees of relevance. Yet one can not deny the popular support of the militancy in Kashmir, even though it is mainly funded from Pakistan. Essentially, it must be accepted that a solution is necessary. One simple solution is status quo. I would like to offer another.
The current political situations of the region need to be explained though. It should be noted that Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh are combined to make up the "Jammu & Kashmir" state of India. This is a special status state with its own Constitution and control. It is quasi-independent essentially. Compare this to the Northern Areas controlled by Pakistan, which is not independent, and is governed by appointed minsters of the Federal government of Pakistan. Essentially, it is not given state-level status nor independence. The same can be said for Azad Kashmir (aka Pakistan Occupied Kashmir), however Pakistan's Kashmir has a stronger democratic presence than the Northern Areas do.
My suggestion would create a new set-up. First and foremost, the region needs to be united again. Though a "status-quo" suggestion is the easiest way, I think a reunion of the region is the only fair way to go. So the Northern Areas (also known as Gilgit-Baltistan), POK, Kashmir, Jammu, Ladakh, and Aksai Chin (including the Trans-Karakoram tract Pakistan gave away to China...even though it claims the Kashmir region is disputed) all should brought back into "one roof" so to speak. Each region should be considered a "state" in the new province known as "Greater Kashmir Province". Each "state" will have its own uni-cameral parliament, and will directly vote for a Governor. Each Governor will appoint a "Prime Minister" who is to be ratified by the states respective parliament to sit in a political forum known as the "Council of Ministers".
The Governor will run his/her state as any President would run his/her state. All intrastate decisions are for the parliament (legislature) and Governor (executive). At the provincial level will be the "Council of Ministers" which will be one Minister from each state as well as one appointed representative from Pakistan, and one appointed representative from India. The reps from Pakistan and India will have veto power. One veto can be overruled by a unanimous vote by the other Council members. Two vetoes (as in both India and Pakistan) can not be overruled. Essentially this would allow Pakistan and India a say in the region, but would check the two nations will not undermine Greater Kashmir's interests. It would also force the states of the region to work together, ameliorating tensions, as well as catalysing the imperitive to unite under one provinicial government. In theory, if the Province unites seamlessly, a bi-cameral legislature could be created, making the state uni-cameral legislatures less powerful.
I doubt such a solution would please anyone. India does not want to give up what it has, nor does Pakistan. China would have to be forced into agreeing to such a deal as well. Moreover, Kashmir, with its larger population, would have to accept equal footing with the sparcely populated Aksai Chin (though since there are two Kashmir's one would argue this is only fair). All out independence would not be granted, but an autonomy unseen anywhere else in the World (for a regional province) should be acceptable.
Still, there are many question marks to deal with. First and foremost is the Kashmiri Pandits. The Kashmiri Pandits were Hindus forced out of Kashmir for fear of violence. They must be repaired. Allowing Kashmiri Pandits to either return home or sell their home should be allowed. A solution without satisfying them is illegitimate in my opinion. Secondly, other than the Kashmiri Pandits, a general freeze of populations will be necessary. For example, leaders in the Northern Areas claim that Pakistan tries to push Punjabi and Pathans into the area (much like the Chinese government pushes the Han people into Tibet, so as to demographically control the area). Voting rights should only be given to those who are of the actual region. This of course should be a temporary rule until the regions borders can be secured, and an assurance that population gerrymandering is not done. Also, Kashmiri Pandits rights can be transferred if they wish not to return.
As stated earlier, this solution will please noone, but for that reason, among others, is why it is the proper solution. A reuniting of the region under a US-style Federal system could even be a precursor in creating a US-style Federal system for the whole Indian Continental region....but perhaps we are getting ahead of ourselves. :)
