The Legitimacy of Kashmir’s Claim and Pakistan’s Role
Discussing the legitimacy of any claim over Kashmir involves examining the historical context and the current position of both India and Pakistan. This dispute has historical roots stemming from the partition of British India and the subsequent complex dynamics of the region.
Historical Context
Formation of Pakistan: It is important to note that Pakistan itself was not in existence when the freedom struggle for India began. The partition of India and the creation of Pakistan occurred in 1947, during which the princely states including Jammu and Kashmir had to choose their fate. The decision was made based on the wishes of the people of the princely states, traditionally under the rule of a king or maharaja.
Princely State of Kashmir
Indian Control: According to the decision made by the final authoritiesthe king or maharaja, not the population at largeKashmir voted to join India. This decision was part of the larger partition process, where non-Muslim-majority states like Kashmir initially decided to join India.
Partition Tensions: Tensions arose when attempts were made to force the maharaja of Kashmir into seceding to Pakistan. The Muslim League had demanded a Muslim majority state, which Kashmir fit into. However, the Kashmir population had conflicting sentiments, and their ability to determine their future was limited. The situation escalated when tribal forces from Pakistan intervened, leading to the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947.
Current Claims and Gilgit Baltistan
Pakistan’s Claim: While India asserts its control over Kashmir, Pakistan maintains its claim based on the right of self-determination for the people of Kashmir. Pakistan argues that the legitimate wishes of the people should be the deciding factor. However, the situation in Gilgit Baltistan, a region that separated from Kashmir, complicates this narrative.
Indian Perspective: India claims that Gilgit Baltistan is a part of Kashmir based on historical and legal grounds, but these claims are contested by Pakistan. Despite the ongoing dispute, there is still an anti-India sentiment in the region, which further fuels the controversy.
Hyderabad Parallel
Hyderabad Scenario: In the case of Hyderabad, a rich state with a Muslim ruler and a predominantly Hindu population, the Indian forces claimed the right to intervene when they believed that a minority leader had no say in the situation. This action led to the state being assimilated into the Indian federation despite the consent of the majority of the population.
Applicability to Kashmir: While the Hyderabad situation is distinct, it does highlight the challenges of applying the principle of self-determination in complex political contexts. The decision to join a dominion is often influenced by external pressures, making the legitimacy of any claim a subject of ongoing debate.
Conclusion
The legitimacy of any claim on Kashmir is a complex issue that involves historical events, the principles of self-determination, and the current geopolitical landscape. While India asserts its control based on historical and legal grounds, Pakistan maintains its claim based on the principle of the right of the people of Kashmir to self-determination. This controversy remains unresolved, contributing to the ongoing Indo-Pakistani dispute.