By Dr D.K. Giri
The security scenario in Kashmir seems to have become worse, at least in perception, after the Taliban’s coming to power in Kabul. Going by the past experience, we can predict a spill-over of terrorism from Afghanistan to Srinagar. How does New Delhi deal with this impending threat?
Clearly, Kashmir, the part with India, and the Pakistan occupied territory have been unfinished business. India is claiming, albeit, not so vociferously yet, the POJK, and Pakistan is leaving no stone unturned to grab Indian Kashmir. The rivalry originating from her and manifesting in different other aspects of bilateralism continues. It has been since 1947. Taliban in Afghanistan is an important variable in the equation. It too has to be strategically dealt with.
Before we proffer some diplomatic tools that can be used in solving the Kashmir tangle, let us sample some of the observations made by experts. There are at least three kinds of voices from Taliban, one of engaging in Srinagar, another of being concerned about it, and third of plain neutrality. The first stand was articulated by, Suhail Shaheen of Taliban who told the BBC’s Hindi service: “As Muslims, we also have a right to raise our voice for Muslims in Kashmir, India or any other country.”
In another interview with a Pakistan-based channel, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid urged Pakistan and India to sit together to resolve all issues. This is position of concern, but not direct involvement. At the same time, in a recent interview with CNN-News18, Taliban leader Anas Haqqani said: “Kashmir is not part of our jurisdiction and interference is against our policy.”
The reactions from the Indian side reflect deep anxiety, ominous anticipation but resolute preparedness. Naturally, going by the past experience, when the Soviet Union withdrew from Kabul in 1989, terrorists from various groups backed tacitly by Pakistan army and the ISI turned to Kashmir. Indian officials worry that Afghanistan under the Taliban could be used as a base for organising Islamist militants in Kashmir.
Now, when the last US soldiers have left Afghanistan and Taliban has taken over, it again has left thousands of mercenaries jobless, who are triumphant after having driven yet another superpower out of Afghanistan. Boyed by such triumphalism, the terrorists can flex their muscle elsewhere. Their dictum is they “exist to kill and kill to exist”. So, to expect them not to do harm is naïve.
The European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS) has expressed similar fear that Pakistan-backed and trained ‘jihadi’ terrorists will be diverted to Kashmir after the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan. A former Kashmir militant who trained in Afghanistan in the 1990s and fought alongside Afghan mujahideen in Kashmir added: “The Taliban victory has already supplied oxygen to our movement.”
According to the Intelligence agencies, at least six groups of terrorists have infiltrated the Kashmir Valley. From various intelligence sources it is estimated that as many as 300 terrorists have again occupied the camps across the Line of Control in Pakistani territory. Such incursions will continue to occur unless the contention over Kashmir is not resolved.
New Delhi took a bold and sagacious step in convening a meeting of the security heads on Afghanistan. Although it was a bit late in the day, it underlined India’s potential to play a role in the war-torn country. To be sure, it is a tall order for India to break into the vaunted security circle of Afghanistan. As such, the big two players, China and Pakistan did not attend the New Delhi meeting.
The prudent step for New Delhi to take should be to decouple the strategies on Afghanistan and Pakistan, vis a vis Kashmir. Pakistan will like to link the two. It is in India’s interest to separate these. In practical terms, it will mean, New Delhi should engage with Afghanistan irrespective of Pakistan’s position and vested interest in Kabul.
On the other hand, New Delhi should engage with Islamabad to resolve Kashmir, the issue. The terms of engagement have to be creatively worked out so that the dialogue process is resumed or recreated. Some of the tools that will constitute the dialogue process will include a framework based on a set of agreed principles. One may have to go back to the first principle.
What is it really about? What are we trying to achieve? The second tool will be to proceed to a resolution, in which, the issue needs to be focussed on and grippled, continually, inexhaustively, and relentlessly, day by day. The biggest problem with the Middle East peace process is that no one ever gripped it long enough or firmly enough.
There are many successful examples in the world of conflict resolution. Nothing is impossible in life and in politics if right inputs are made and a process is created. New Delhi has two options on Kashmir– one is to hold up to Pakistan and its allies by balance of power, or resolve it by bilateral negotiation, a dialogue process. At present, there is no dialogue in sight. That is a big miss in the diplomacy in South Asian region. The conflicts among South Asian countries have been prompted and abetted by external players. The countries concerned should try to stay away from such manipulation and solve their respective problems. That is challenge of the time.
(INFA)
