Latest news with #ShimlaPact
Express Tribune
7 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Revisiting August 5, 2019
Six years after the revocation of article 370 of the Indian constitution on August 5, 2019 which had given special status to Jammu & Kashmir, it is time to analyse to what extent New Delhi managed to get support of local Kashmiris, and how after the Pahalgam terrorist attack and Operation Sindoor, the Modi regime failed to seek international backing on its flawed narrative about Pakistan's involvement in acts of terror in the occupied territory. The recently concluded debate in the Indian parliament on Operation Sindoor featured opposition leader Rahul Gandhi lambasting Prime Minister Narendra Modi for lying over President Donald Trump's claim of brokering a ceasefire in the May 7-10 Indo-Pak war and India losing five war planes in the armed conflict. The Kashmir conflict which, according to the Modi regime, had lost its momentum and New Delhi had fully absorbed it in Indian union after August 5 is again a high-profile international issue. How did India lose its perceived edge over its absorption of J&K on August 5, 2019? Why did the Modi regime fail to provide evidence of Pakistan's alleged involvement in the Pahalgam attack on April 22, 2025 in which 26 civilians were killed? How did the failure of Operation Sindoor reverse Modi's Kashmir policy, providing Pakistan a unique opportunity to forcefully raise the Kashmir issue at the international level? Certainly, frustration and anger within the Modi regime over failing to take Operation Sindoor to its desired conclusion means that for the first time since August 5, 2019, New Delhi's confidence to firmly establish its control over occupied Kashmir has been dented. A major setback after the August 5, 2019 actions was caused when following the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, President Trump stated that he was ready to help resolve the Kashmir conflict in order to establish peace in South Asia. Since signing the Shimla Pact with Pakistan in July 1972, India has maintained a consistent position that the Kashmir issue is a bilateral matter and can only be resolved through negotiations between Islamabad and Delhi. Trump's offer of mediation on Kashmir not only antagonised India but also challenged its position that Kashmir was no more an outstanding issue in the wake of its merger with India union. The Modi regime, however, miscalculated Operation Sindoor which proved counter-productive and brought the Kashmir dispute back in the limelight. The Indian Supreme Court had, in December 2023, dismissed petitions against the revocation of article 370 and legitimised the J&K merger with the Indian union, ordering that the statehood of the disputed territory be restored by September 24, 2024. Following the Supreme Court verdict, the election to the J&K Legislative Assembly, held in September-October 2024, saw the National Conference (NC) forming a coalition government along with Congress, and Omer Abdullah became the Chief Minister. Even after the election in the occupied region, the real power rested with the Governor and New Delhi continued to undermine the authority of Chief Minister. In order to further legitimise its position on J&K after August 5, the Modi regime publicised the holding of tourism conference under G-20 in Srinagar in May 2023 and launched infrastructure road, dam and power projects. But all its efforts to strengthen its hold over J&K after August 5, 2019 suffered a setback when Operation Sindoor failed and Kashmir regained its status as a dispute between Pakistan and India. Revisiting the August 5, 2019 actions, particularly the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Act passed by the Indian parliament and later upheld by the Supreme Court, needs to be analysed from three angles. First is the debacle of Operation Sindoor which led to the questioning of the Indian position whereby after August 5, 2019, the target was to wrest Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan from Pakistan. Indian Defense Minister Raj Nath Singh had been threatening Pakistan that after absorbing J&K, India's next target would be Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. However, after the May 7-10 Indo-Pak war, the Modi regime is pursuing a defensive position. The recent furor in the Indian parliament in which the Modi regime was blamed by Congress and other opposition parties for mismanaging the Pahalgam episode as well as Operation Sindoor means the very stance of New Delhi after August 5 is losing credibility. On July 30, Indian opposition parties in the parliament had to stage a walkout when Prime Minister Narendra Modi avoided speaking on the floor of the assembly to respond to the allegations about the shooting down of five Indian war planes by the Pakistan Air Force and failure to provide security to tourists who were killed by terrorists in Pahalgam. Second, Pakistan lost a valuable opportunity to counter New Delhi's August 5 actions. As a result, not only India strengthened its position, particularly in the Valley, but also augmented its programme for settlement of Indian nationals. Indian authorities, following the model of the Israeli annexation of Palestinian lands in the occupied West Bank, launched the policy of grabbing Kashmiris' lands under the cover of security and development. By abrogating articles 370 and 35-A, India not only ended the so-called autonomous status of the occupied region, but also got a free hand to settle non-locals in the Muslim-majority state and allowing them to vote in elections. Even then, in the September-October 2024 elections in the disputed state, the BJP failed to get a majority. Pakistan should have exerted pressure on the Modi regime for merging J&K with India as union territories in sheer violation of UNSC resolutions. Finally, Pakistan can still compel India to amend its policy on occupied Kashmir and resolve the conflict through negotiations if it is able to put its own house in order. Simply to argue that President Trump has offered to mediate is not enough. What is required of Pakistan is to better its economy, seek political stability, ensure good governance, guarantee rule of law, and eradicate extremism, corruption and nepotism. Despite revoking article 370 and absorbing J&K, India lacks legitimacy to justify its hold over the occupied Muslim-majority state. A strong Pakistan can certainly gain support of international community for Kashmiris.
Time of India
26-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
‘Buying Chinese products is indirectly funding enemy'
Nagpur: The 26th Kargil Vijay Diwas was held by Bhonsala Military School on Saturday. Deputy Commandant of the Army's Uttar Maharashtra and Gujarat (UMANG) sub-area, Brigadier Abhijit Valimbe, was the chief guest. Member of RSS' all India executive body (publicity wing), Mukul Kanitkar, was the keynote speaker. Addressing a gathering of over 400 students, Kanitkar said Indians who buy Chinese mobile phones are actually indirectly funding the enemy to procure the weapons that they used to martyr Indian soldiers in Doklam. "At Doklam, the Chinese troops hit the unarmed Indian soldiers with sticks wrapped with barbed wire. When I saw those images, I thought that such sticks could easily be procured for Rs 300 to 500 by them. The money to buy the sticks that were used to take the lives of Indian soldiers went from Indians' pockets. Even today, those who use Chinese brands are indirectly funding the enemy," he said. The items from toothpaste with which the day begins to the mosquito repellent coils that are burnt in the night should be completely Indian. Not only the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) has to be taken back but even the areas like Tibet and Ladakh have to be freed from China. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Easy Trick to Protect Your Kids From Mosquitoes (They Can't Stand This) Squito Stickers Undo When the British left the country, international boundaries were drawn merely on paper, and Indians were forced to accept it," said Kanitkar. He criticised the Shimla Pact between India and Pakistan that followed the 1971 war, calling it to be a disgrace. "I went to deliver a lecture at the Institute of Advanced Studies, the place where the Shimla Pact was signed. The hosts insisted I visit the room where the agreement was signed but I refused." Kanitkar also expressed concern about people becoming ignorant about national heroes. He said once, he went to Prayagraj and wanted to see the place where freedom fighter Chandrashekar Azad laid down his life. The place is still popularly known as Company Garden rather than Chandrashekhar Azad Park, though it has been named after him.
Express Tribune
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
The missing diplomatic statesmanship
Why is diplomatic statesmanship missing in the case of the prevailing Indo-Pak tension? And how are the two countries bogged down for the last several years in the stand-off over occupied Kashmir? Since August 5, 2019 when India revoked article 370 of its constitution and annexed the disputed region, the two sides have touched their lowest level of diplomatic, security, economic and political interaction. According to AI overview, "Diplomatic statesmanship involves the skillful and strategic management of a state's foreign policy and international relations, utilizing diplomacy and negotiation to achieve its goals while maintaining peaceful relations. It encompasses the art and science of conducting foreign affairs to safeguard national interests, promote cooperation, and address international challenges". Nevertheless, diplomatic statesmanship is a fundamental requirement to manage and resolve a crisis by unleashing a process of dialogue. In the past, the leadership of India and Pakistan possessed political will and skills to seek a breakthrough for de-escalating tension and normalise their relations. Liaquat-Nehru pact of 1950, Indus-Water Treaty of 1960, Tashkent Declaration of January 1966, Shimla Pact of July 1972, Lahore Declaration of February 1999 and several military and non-military confidence-building measures under Track-1, Track-II and Track-III diplomacy reached during 1980s and 1990s reflected statesmanship on the part of New Delhi and Islamabad to move forward following different phases of cold war. In the second decade of 2000 and onwards when India took steps to absorb the occupied Kashmir and blamed Pakistan for terrorism, Islamabad was forced to respond accordingly. Hardcore evidence is available on how the Modi regime is trying to destabilise Pakistan by fanning the fire of terrorism in Balochistan and elsewhere. Diplomacy, which should have been an option to end the Indo-Pak standoff following the August 5, 2019 measures, was not utilised. Downgrading of diplomatic staff in each other high commissions; banning the use of airspace; suspending air, road and rail links; and ending bilateral trade reflect lack of diplomatic statesmanship on the part of the two countries. Post-2019 era is the worst in the context of Indo-Pak diplomacy, as statesmanship which had earliest helped defuse crises, was replaced by warmongering, threats and acts of brinkmanship. The only area in which diplomatic statesmanship relatively worked is the involvement of foreign powers like the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia and others to urge India and Pakistan for a strategic restraint. President Donald Trump has called upon Islamabad and New Delhi to de-escalate tension. Efforts are being made by external powers to prevent another round of hostilities. It is strange that foreign powers remind India and Pakistan to exercise strategic restraint whereas the two nuclear-armed neighbours lack the wisdom to deal with critical issues by diplomatic means. When the mindset of BJP and the Modi regime is to use 'Pakistan bashing' and 'terrorism' for domestic consumption and create media hype in the wake of any terrorist incident, the application of diplomatic statesmanship is not possible. For Modi, winning elections in Bihar is more important by exploiting the Pahalgham incident than conducting a transparent investigation into how the terrorists could kill 28 tourists in the occupied region where more than half a million Indian troops have been deployed. From any standpoint, it is certain that the Pahalgham incident was a false-flag operation conducted by the Modi regime itself to use it for winning elections in Bihar and strengthening its anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan rhetoric. The absence of critical thinking in Indian civil society and opposition parties to gauge what actually happened and how tourists were killed in a heavily fortified region reflects the lack of statesmanship on their part. Modi regime is not even innovative while blaming Pakistan for acts of terrorism, using the same old tactics. Independent voices in India, although muted, are pointing their fingers at the Modi regime. There is no dearth of such voices who believe that the Modi government staged drama in Pahalgham to malign Pakistan. Even the relatives of the tourists who were killed in the attack blame the Indian government for lack of security in Pahalgham to the extent that even relief and rescue operation was conducted quite late and the FIR of the incident was launched only within 10 minutes of the attack. BJP has a track record of letting terrorist incidents take place and then blame Pakistan or Kashmiri resistance groups. This time too, immediately after the Pahalgham incident, Indian Muslims and Kashmiris studying in India were subjected to mistreatment, harassment and attacks. Houses of Kashmiris in the Valley were demolished on the suspicion of involvement in the killing. Taking advantage of the Pahalgham attack, Indian Home Minister Amit Shah and the occupied Kashmir governor started taking measures to harass Kashmiris. More than 2,000 Kashmiris have been arrested on charges of Pahalgham terrorist attack and the lives of Muslims in the held region are being made miserable by the occupying Indian military. Diplomacy serves as the only option for normalising the Indo-Pak relations and resolving the contentious issues between them. Three steps can be helpful in the context. First, the Indian leadership, led by Narendra Modi, has acted in an irresponsible manner. They have themselves committed a false-flag operation for domestic political gains. In 2019, BJP won the general election by using Pakistan Card; and in 2025 it wants to win the elections in Bihar by taking advantage of the Pahalgham attack. Modi knows that his party's electoral support is waning, evident from the fact that it failed to win a two-thirds majority in the 2024 general election. Yet, as the world's largest democracy, Indian civil society and opposition parties should have acted in a responsible manner instead of creating war hysteria. India should have opted for diplomatic statecraft rather than threatening Pakistan with dire consequences on the Pahalgham incident without providing any credible evidence. Second, the United States has used its highest diplomatic channels to prevail over India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and defuse the crisis. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio talked to Pakistan's Prime Minister and India's Minister of External Affairs urging them to launch credible investigation into the April 22 terrorist attack and take strong measures against terrorism. Third, the UN and EU should also launch diplomatic endeavours to defuse the prevailing Indo-Pak tension. Russia, China and Saudi Arabia have already played their role in this regard. Remember, failure of diplomacy means the outbreak of hostilities.
The Hindu
25-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
India-Pakistan relations post Pahalgam terror attack: A timeline
After a terror attack claimed by The Resistance Front (TRF) killed at least 26 civilians in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, India accused Pakistan of involvement in orchestrating the attack by providing support to extremist elements in their territory, while Pakistan denied any such backing. Follow Pahalgam attack updates on April 25 Milestone treaties like the Indus Waters Treaty and the Shimla Pact have been paused as both countries rewrite the terms of diplomatic engagement. Tensions have escalated to such a point where Pakistan's Prime Minister's Office put out a statement saying any attempt by India to interfere in the Indus water supply to Pakistan will amount to an 'act of war.' Here is a timeline detailing the developments. Also read: Pahalgam Terror Attack: A memorial The attack in Pahalgam is seen as one of the worst incidents in recent times.. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi all cut short their overseas trips to return to India after the attack., with Mr. Modi promising the terrorists 'punishment beyond their imagination.' In the aftermath of Indian and Pakistani responses, the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres appealed to both governments to exercise 'maximum restraint.' He called for a peaceful resolution of the conflict between both countries, through 'meaningful, mutual engagement.' On the other hand, the World Bank, which is a signatory to the Indus Water Treaty, said that it does not interfere in 'treaty-related sovereign decisions taken by its member countries.' Today (April 25, 2025), the houses of two LeT terrorists suspected to be behind the Pahalgam attack were were blasted to ruins in Pulwama and Anantnag. They belonged to Asif Sheikh at Tral and Adil Thoker.
