World Affairs Council of Charleston - Home Page



Implications of the Kashmir and Jammu Crisis Victoria SmithMarch 2020Introduction In August 2019, India made global headlines when it revoked the statehood of the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, instead calling it a “union territory.” The region has long been the catalyst of violence between India and neighboring Pakistan, and tensions are currently at a high. This report seeks to investigate the historical sources, present implications, and potential future repercussions of this contentious issue. It will start with a short overview of key facts on the region and a summary of its history, followed by a brief discussion of what makes the region so valuable to the parties involved. It will end with an analysis of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s aggression in Kashmir as it relates to the bigger picture of Asia’s current geopolitics. Fast FactsCapital: Srinagar (summer), Jammu (winter) Population: 12,541,302 (2011)Major Languages: Urdu (official), Kashmiri (most widely spoken), Dogri, PunjabiReligion: Approximately 2/3 Muslim, remaining 1/3 predominantly Hindu with some BuddhistsEconomy: Mostly agriculture: rice, corn, legumes, cotton, tobacco, wheat, barley, silk, fruits; in Ladakh livestock like yak and Kashmir goats. Other natural resources are limited: timber, natural gas, hydroelectricity. A Brief History of the Kashmir ConflictThe conflict over Kashmir and Jammu has been a long, complex affair intricately intertwined with India’s colonial history and emergence as an independent country. The history of the modern conflict starts with the First-Anglo Sikh War (1845-1846), when the British East India Company secured territory formerly belonging to the Sikh Empire as British holdings. Under the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar, the East India Company sold these newly created territories of Jammu and Kashmir and promised their military support to the new owner, Gulab Singh, a Hindu Dogra maharaja. Throughout the short reign of the Dogra rulers, the Jammu and Kashmiri Muslims faced discrimination from their Hindu rulers. Growing discontent among the Muslim population eventually led to political mobilization against the Jammu and Kashmiri government in favor of an independent state. India’s independence in 1947 and the subsequent creation of Pakistan created a choice for Jammu and Kashmir’s Hindu maharaja Hari Singh and his predominantly Muslim subjects. The maharaja initially decided to remain an independent state so as not to anger either the two new countries nor Kashmiri citizens. However, Pakistani tribal militias armed by the national government soon attacked Jammu and Kashmir, starting the first Indo-Pakistani War. Realizing he needed to ally with one of the two countries, Hari Singh formally allied himself with India and allowed the Indian army into his state to defend it from Pakistan’s threat. There was a lull in fighting with the 1949 Karachi Agreement, and in 1950 the Indian constitution became law. Among the many constitutional articles was the infamous Article 370, which included Jammu and Kashmir under the Indian state with a special status; the exact nature of Jammu and Kashmir’s status would be formally outlined in the 1952 Delhi Agreement. Legislation enacted by the Indian national government and the Kashmiri government over the next few years went further and further to extend India’s power over the region until it was considered to be a full Indian state by 1960. However, the Pakistani government continued to believe that because Jammu and Kashmir had a Muslim-majority population, the region should be part of Pakistan. War broke out again in 1965, but this time, with Cold War alliances: India was supported by the Soviet Union while the United States and Great Britain supported Pakistan. India moved quickly to bring the war to the U.N. Security Council, which had also helped settle the previous conflict. Arms bans were put in place, and the Soviet Union acted as a mediator for negotiations of the Tashkent Agreement. The status quo of Indian power resumed, but with troop withdrawals from disputed territory. Still, there was significant unrest amongst the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir, including armed militias calling for a referendum on its status as an Indian state. In 1971, Pakistan initiated the Third Indo-Pakistani War, where it ended up losing territory for the independence of what is now Bangladesh. The following year, India and Pakistan established a Line of Control in their territories as part of the Simla Agreement. Once again, Jammu and Kashmir was stated to be fully part of India. Violent unrest continued throughout the next two decades, and in 1990 Kashmir’s Hindu population began to flee. India gave its military special powers to ensure regional security, but was met with even more insurgency. In 1999, a coalition of Kashmiri militants and Pakistani soldiers moved to control strategic territory along India’s side of the border, prompting another war. Once again, India was able to push back and reclaim its territory. Recognizing they could not beat the Indian military with conventional methods, the Kashmiri militants turned to acts of terrorism. In December of that year, Kashmiri militants hijacked an airplane to secure the release of three Kashmiri prisoners. After a legislative chamber was attacked in the Kashmiri capital of Srinagar in 2001, militants attacked the Indian Parliament. Clashes continued over the next few years, including 2008’s dramatic four-day-long attack on multiple prominent locations in Mumbai, which killed 170 people and wounded hundreds more. Throughout the 2010s, more attacks occurred, including on Indian military personnel and equipment and on Hindu pilgrims. India’s retaliation grew progressively more hardline, starting with a months-long curfew in 2016, then a declaration of the Indian government’s rule in 2018, and a revocation of Kashmir’s special status under Article 370 and a military crackdown in 2019. Reports indicate that prominent Kashmiri political leaders have been kept under house arrest and that gathering in large groups is forbidden. The largest mosque in Srinagar has apparently not held religious services in months. Meanwhile, the region has seen its telecommunications largely cut off, preventing much news from reaching beyond its borders. As of April 2020, the state remains in lock down and is suffering economically, having lost more than 20 percent of its annual output. While a few Internet restrictions have been lifted, usage is still heavily regulated and has severely affected Kashmir’s ability to fight the deadly 2020 outbreak of COVID-19.Why is Jammu and Kashmir Valuable? The constant turmoil around Jammu and Kashmir’s status and international disputes over the territorial ownership indicate that the state is valuable to India and Pakistan as well as China, which controls the small northeastern portion of Aksai Chin. The answer is simple: water. The Indus River’s largest tributary begins in Kashmir. As part of the western Himalayas, the mountains contain glaciers that help to power India and Pakistan’s economies via agriculture, electricity, and drinking water. The Indus River is the only river system Pakistan has access to and supports a huge percent of the country’s agriculture, while India’s booming economy and population growth make controlling this water source all the more vital for its existence. This conflict may potentially deteriorate further during the coming decades, as global fresh water supplies diminish and global population and consumption are predicted to increase. Complicating the situation is China’s plan to build a China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) as part of Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative. The CPEC would run through parts of Kashmir, which India and Pakistan continue to argue over. This would potentially bring Pakistan a mighty ally against Indian aggression, though some experts disagree given Pakistan’s ties with the United States. The Indian government has a history of non-alignment and has always shown caution and even indecision over Belt and Road projects, while Pakistan has made bold moves to invite China into Kashmiri territory that is still disputed. India called on both countries to suspend the project, which, for the most part, has happened. China recognizes that India is not a small nation that it can bend to its will, but a powerful potential partner or adversary. While this story is far from finished, Pakistan’s aim to use China as an ally appears to be at least temporarily foiled. And India, like China, is seeking to develop trade routes into Central Asia, which would have to go through Pakistani Kashmir. Kashmir and the Politics of Narendra ModiTo view India’s power grab in Kashmir solely through the lenses of historical tensions and economic benefits would be too narrow. The move is a product of current Indian domestic and international political aims. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who leads the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, has promoted policies favorable to India’s Hindu majority and has done little or nothing to stop pervasive attacks against Indian Muslims. Meanwhile, he maintains widespread popularity. Modi’s boldness in seizing control of Kashmir can therefore be viewed as a natural part of his aims to consolidate power within his base and silence a dissident population.Shifts in global geopolitical norms have made this moment an opportune chance for Modi to act as aggressively as he did. Tensions between world powers have fostered an international culture that prioritizes sovereignty and relies more on unilateral action, with waning commitment to democracy and self-determination in favor of nationalist and authoritarian regimes. States that may have once sought to mediate the situation have largely ignored it, whether out of indifference (the United States) or problems dealing with their own dissident territories (China, Russia). Furthermore, Modi must have noticed the complete willingness of Islamic countries to ignore human rights abuses against Xinjiang’s Muslims in favor of economic relations with China; he correctly calculated there would be no Muslim solidarity for Kashmir, either. Modi has effectively been granted freedom to move against Kashmir by his domestic constituents and the international community, with only Pakistan to protest.Conclusions and Implications The history of Jammu and Kashmir has been one of consistent turmoil, and the 2019 Indian power grab has only served to heighten tensions. At the heart of the issue is the continual Muslim/Hindu conflict, shaped by policies reflecting India and Pakistan’s urgent need for the region’s vital water supplies. Prime Minister Modi’s 2019 move to strip Kashmir of its special status is reflective of a political moment where both domestic and international politics are either supportive or unwilling to confront his aggression.The implications of India’s actions in Kashmir have yet to be fully realized. With hegemonic China expanding its economic and military power across Asia and the world, India is poised to play an important role in the global balance of power over the next few decades and potentially offset some of China’s growing influence, as evidenced by the United States government’s pivot to the Indo-Pacific Strategy under the Obama administration. With economic interests appearing to shift toward the Central Asian interior, India’s military power and economic activities may become all the more important in the race for natural resources. Therefore, it is likely that India’s power projection in Jammu and Kashmir is meant to be representative of India’s resolve to protect Indian political, economic, and military interests. While India may not yet have the power to assert its interests on a larger international scale, it is declaring its strength and sovereignty on a more domestic level. In short, Jammu and Kashmir is merely a piece of Modi’s larger political goals for India.FinalApril 13, 2020 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download