CPEC Moving From Discussion To Solutions

By Zulfiqar Qazilbash

 CPEC is a major Chinese project closely related to its One Belt, One Road initiative that aims to boost Asian trade internally as well as externally. The initiative is ambitious on an unprecedented scale. It dwarfs the Marshall Plan which rebuilt Europe after the Second World War. It will impact about 65 per cent of the world’s population, about one-third of the world’s GDP, and about a quarter of all the goods and services the world moves. We are fortunate to be part of it. However, it is time for Pakistan to move from discussions around the project into developing a national vision that takes full advantage of the opportunities presented. Much is at stake if we do not do this in an accelerated time frame. Following are some of the major areas that need to be addressed:

Environment: Environmental cooperation is usually a major part of such agreements but this component has yet to be addressed. This is a problem since it has been estimated that once trade starts flowing up to 7,000 trucks a day will pass through the ecologically sensitive Khunjerab Pass and generate up to 36.5 million tons of Co2 emissions en route to Gwadar.

All experts agree that the emissions will melt the northern region’s glaciers and negatively impact agriculture and food and water security of our growing population. We need a solution and one that has not been discussed so far is to use the project to facilitate the migration of our transportation sector to first hybrid and then electric power. This will have three major benefits. The repowering station requirements of CPEC transport vehicles moving to electric power will accelerate and enable the early migration of our remaining transportation infrastructure to renewable energy. Oil-related products currently account for approximately a third of our annual imports. It will free us from the circular debt problem associated with them. Secondly, it will open up opportunities for the private sector to set up micro hydroelectric plants in G-B, AJK and K-P and small-scale solar and thermal power plants in Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan that generate power for the vehicle repowering stations along the route.

Thirdly, if properly regulated this could allow communities to be brought together in common economic interest to service the traffic passing through their area (repowering stations, food outlets, workshops, hospitals, etc). The vested economic interest will enhance security and provide more confidence to the Chinese sponsors to increase investments along this corridor.

If environmental impact is not addressed then as factories get built in the economic zones, the pollution will further exacerbate our problems of climate change. This is a great concern given that according to PWSER research, Pakistan is on track to experience an African-style, large scale water famine as early as 2025.  The only solution is massive water storage projects which can also generate cheap renewable hydropower electricity for our residential, agricultural and industrial sectors.  Currently, 35 per cent of our energy is oil based which requires foreign exchange externally and has led to circular debt internally. The suggested projects will generate a lot of employment and most of the large-scale construction could be locally managed minimising foreign exchange requirements which depreciate the local currency. We should seek assistance from the Chinese to set up a regional carbon trading market that finances a lot of these renewable energy projects. Ideally we should have been debating and finalising a comprehensive programme put together by our government to address this upcoming crisis before this time. In our democracy, an endeavour this big will take time to educate and build national consensus and then it will take more than a decade to implement this programme.

Industrial development: CPEC is a game changer and opens up trade between the Central Asia and the Middle East, Africa and Europe. Its major purpose is for China to increase its trade with these regions by improving and simplifying logistics and transportation. Currently imports into Europe from China account for about $450 billion which has room to grow in a $7 trillion market. As trade increases along this corridor, it would be foolish if Pakistan did not develop its own national strategy to cooperatively capitalise and cash in some of the economic opportunities presented. However our current exports are dominated by textile and organic commodities with low value addition. Clearly, our current corporate and SME sectors is by and large not ready to address this upcoming opportunity and we are in danger of being swept aside.

An illustration of what can happen is found in many marginalised communities who are situated along the Iran trade corridor in Balochistan or the Afghan trade corridor in K-P and get no visible benefit from the passing trade. Under the Obama Administration, USAID had announced a $40 million project called SME-A for intervention that provides technical assistance to 6,000 SMEs in the areas of textile, ICT, light engineering, hospitality, minerals, leather, logistics and packaging. Given what’s at stake, the government should seriously consider taking a piggy back ride on this initiative and expand collaboration if it continues in the Trump administration. It should consider taking it over if for some reason the US backs off the project.

Regional hub: CPEC provides an unprecedented opportunity to Pakistan as it fulfills its geostrategic potential as the gateway of trade between Central Asia to the Middle East, Africa and Europe. It is ideally situated to become the defacto maritime trade hub between the Europe and Asia. A regional hub provides many opportunities other than logistics and transportation including legal, financial, marketing, business communication and other services.

China has created the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank and the Silk Road fund to support this realignment of global trade with roles loosely defined around the World Bank and IFC. Many new institutions will be required for instance similar to the World Bank International centres for Settlement of International Disputes. Pakistan is in an ideal position to develop these capacities if our government provides the enabling environment for it through capacity development programmes, enlightened legislation and policies. Our argument would be that Karachi is more suited location wise than Mumbai or Colombo and cheaper than Singapore to address these needs. Pakistan has in the past shown the ability to set up world-class institutions that serviced global trade and can rise up to the challenge if it puts the right people in charge. In time, the acquired competencies and broader understanding of the benefits would give us the political will to overhaul our internal justice system and inefficient bureaucracy. Ranked at 106/113 in the WJP Rule of Law Index, this is something we badly need.

In conclusion, CPEC is a game-changing opportunity for Pakistan. Global pundits are looking at the multi-trillion dollar investments being made by China and saying that its effective utilisation is key to the success of this vision. Similarly, for Pakistan, if we do not evolve a vision of how we use this improved infrastructure and realignment of global trade in this region for our benefit, and execute on it effectively we are in danger of being left behind. Indeed it will be a shame if we do not rise to the opportunity and fashion national consensus on an inclusive strategy that leverages this project to propel a major part of our population, and not just a few families, into the economy of the 21^st century.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 30^th, 2017.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

CPEC: Regional impact

Dr Zafar N Jaspal

Since the announcement of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project in April 2015, Islamabad and Beijing have been endeavouring to construct and operationalise its infrastructure as soon as possible. Both sides are cognizant to the immense dividends of the project. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif categorised it as a “game changer.” Chinese also consider it imperative for their “One Belt, One Road” initiative. Simultaneously, the adversaries of both nations have been struggling to sabotage the project. Therefore, both sides need to remain vigilant to the implicit and explicit challenges to the project.

CPEC project has amplified Pakistan’s pivotal role in the connectivity of West Asia, Central Asia and South Asia. Though, Pakistan and China would be the main beneficiary of the project, yet other regional actors would be equally benefit from the operationalisation of the project. Islamabad always advocate that without increasing economic cooperation among the regional actors, the Central, West and South Asiannations could not resolve their economic challenges. The regional organizations such as South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and Economic Cooperation Organisations primary objective is to promote trade between/among the members of these organizations. The member nations of these organizations are economically underdeveloped and also encountering socio-political challenges. Perhaps, without economic stability, the political stability is a wishful thinking. These nations need mutual cooperation for the sake of their socio-economic improvement. Hence, CPEC would be having positive consequences for the members of regional organizations.

Islamabad is encouraging the neighbouring states to invest in the CPEC project. Indeed, the neighbouring states investment enhances the significance of the project, but it also has constructive impact on the investors’ economies. On April 21, 2015, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif stated: “it is catalytic project that will help us combine the geo-economic streams of our countries. The corridor symbolizes our commitment to create win-win partnerships which threaten none and benefit all.” Precisely, CPEC would be having dividends for the entire region.

The ruling elite of the neighbouring countries, except India, also expressed their immense confidence in the CPEC project. On March 1, 2017, Pakistan successfully held the 13th Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) Summit at Islamabad. The participants in the ECO expressed their resolve to enhance the regional connectivity. Therefore, they endorsed the theme of the summit—“Connectivity for Regional Prosperity.” Certainly, without regional connectivity, the ECO members cannot resolve their socio-economic problems.

The CPEC has a potential to revolutionize the regional cooperation in the fields of socio-economic development, trade, shipping, road and railway transportation, communications, industry and banking. It would also encourage tourism in the region. The CPEC project seems very advantageous for the ECO member states. It is because one of the main objectives of ECO is “development of transport & communications infrastructure linking the Member States with each other and with the outside world.” Importantly, out of 10 ECO member states 7 are landlocked. The operationalisation of CPEC routes would provide shortest route to sea at least 6 members of ECO. In addition, CPEC would also facilitate the Eurasian trade.

The 13th ECO Summit Islamabad Declaration states: “Welcome in this regard CPEC as a far-reaching initiative that would act as catalyst for development of entire region.” Perhaps, CPEC would enhance ECO-wide connectivity in terms of transport and transit; telecommunications; cyber; and all forms of energy; as well as people-to-people exchanges, including through regional tourism arrangements.

Pakistan with the assistance of China has been building Gwadar Port. The port obviously holds enormous promise for neighbouring countries and regions such as Afghanistan, China, West Asia, Central Asia and Eurasia. The successful implementation of the CPEC would provide Turkey, Iran and Pakistan access to Central Asian States, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan-Russian Federation and Europe through China. The shipping, trucking and logistics industry of these states would have immense opportunity to grow after operationalisation of the CPEC. Certainly, this unprecedented sea and road link would have far-reaching positive geo-economic dividends for the entire region.

To conclude, the region is primed for a network of rail and road linkages besides sea routes, energy, and trade corridors. Thus, operationalisation of CPEC definitely leads to a new era of regional socio-economic stability through enhanced regional cooperation for development.

— The writer is Associate Professor, School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

Email: jaspal_99@hotmail.com

Refocus on India’s Water Terrorism on the Water Day

By Sajjad Shaukat

Every year, World Water Day is celebrated on March 22 on global level, focusing attention on the water crisis as well as the solutions to address it.

An international day to celebrate freshwater was recommended at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The United Nations General Assembly responded by designating March 22, 1993 as the first World Water Day.

Each year, this very day highlights a specific aspect of freshwater. In 2015, World Water Day has the theme “Water and Sustainable Development.” Similarly in 2016, the day pointed out various aspects of water.

Although Pakistan also celebrates World Water Day, yet its case is different from other countries, as India has stared water terrorism against Pakistan.

It is notable that since the 9/11 tragedy, international community has been taking war against terrorism seriously, while there are also other forms of bloodless wars, being waged in the world and the same are like terrorism. Political experts opine that modern terrorism has many meanings like violent acts, economic terrorism etc., but its main aim is to achieve political, economic and social ends. Judging in these terms, India’s water terrorism against Pakistan is of special consideration.

In March, 2011, speaking in diplomatic language, Indus Water Commissioner of India G. Ranganathan denied that India’s decision to build dams on rivers led to water shortage in Pakistan. He also rejected Islamabad’s concerns at water theft by New Delhi or violation of the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, assuring his counterpart, Syed Jamaat Ali Shah that all issues relating to water would be resolved through dialogue. However, ground realties are quite different from what Ranganathan maintained.

Besides other permanent issues and, especially the dispute of Kashmir which has always been used by India to malign and pressurize Pakistan, water of rivers has become a matter of life and death for every Pakistani, as New Delhi has been employing it as a tool of terrorism to blackmail Pakistan.

In this regard, Indian decision to construct two hydro-electric projects on River Neelam which is called Krishanganga is a blatant violation of the Indus Basin Water Treaty. The World Bank, itself, is the mediator and signatory for the treaty. After the partition, owing to war-like situation, New Delhi deliberately stopped the flow of Pakistan’s rivers which originate from the Indian-held Kashmir. Even at that time, Indian rulers had used water as a tool of aggression against Pakistan. However, due to Indian illogical stand, Islamabad sought the help of international arbitration. The Indus Basin Treaty allocates waters of three western rivers of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab to Pakistan, while India has rights over eastern rivers of Ravi, Sutlej and Beas.

Since the settlement of the dispute, India has always violated the treaty intermittently to create economic crisis in Pakistan. In 1984, India began construction of the Wullar Barrage on river Jhelum in the occupied Kashmir.

In the past, the issue of Wullar Barrage has also been discussed in various rounds of talks, being held under composite dialogue process between the two rivals, but Indian intransigence has continued. In the mid-1990s India started another violation by constructing the Baglihar dam on the Chenab river. In 2005, Pakistan had again sought the World Bank’s help to stop construction of the Baglihar dam. Although WB allowed India to go ahead with the project after a few modifications, yet it did not permit the interruption of the agreed quota of water flow to Pakistan.

In 2008, India suddenly reduced water flow of the Chenab river to give a greater setback to our autumnal crops. Islamabad on September 17, 2008 threatened to seek the World Bank’s intervention on the plea that New Delhi had not responded to its repeated complaints on the issue appropriately. But, India did nothing to address the problem.

However, New Delhi has been using water as an instrument to pressurize Islamabad with a view to getting leverage in the Pak-India dialogue especially regarding Indian-held Kashmir where a new phase of protests against the Indian illegitimate occupation has accelerated. In this respect, the then Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi had said on February 8, 2010 that Pakistan’s case on Kashmir and water was based on truth, and the government would fight it with full strength.

Indian diplomacy of water terrorism could also be judged from some other development. Online reports suggest that New Delhi has secretly offered technical assistance to the Afghan government in order to construct a dam over Kabul River which is a main water contributor to Indus River.

In fact, India wants to keep its control on Kashmir which is located in the Indus River basin area, and which contributes to the flow of all the major rivers, entering Pakistan. It is determined to bring about political, economic and social problems of grave nature in Pakistan.

In this context, China Daily News Group wrote in 2005: “Another added complication is that in building a dam upstream of Pakistan, India will possess the ability to flood or starve Pakistan at will. This ability was witnessed in July of 2004 when India, without warning, released water into the Chenab river, flooding large portions of Pakistan. The history of conflict between these two nations makes it possible for New Delhi to use nature as a real weapon against Islamabad.”

According to an estimate, unlike India, Pakistan is highly dependent on agriculture, which in turn is dependent on water. Of the 79.6 million hectares of land that makeup Pakistan, 20 million are available for agriculture. Of those 20 million hectares, 16 million are dependent on irrigation. So, almost 80% of Pakistan’s agriculture is dependent on irrigation.

It is noteworthy that many of Pakistan’s industries are agro-based such as the textiles industry. Besides, 80% of Pakistan’s food needs are fulfilled domestically. Thus an interruption of water supply would have broad-ranging effects. For example, when the country suffered a drought from 1998 to 2001, there were violent riots in Karachi.

It is mentionable that half of Pakistan’s energy comes from hydroelectricity, and at present, our country has been facing a severe crisis of loadshedding which is the result of power-shortage in the country. During the recent past summers, people in a number of cities like Karachi, Lahore, Multan, Faisalabad etc. lodged violent protests against the loadshedding, culminating into loss of property and life.

It is of particular attention that Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Water and Power Khawaja Asif warned on February 10, 2015 that although the electricity shortage in the country would be overcome within two to three years, the scarcity of water is another issue looming in the country.

While, Pakistan has already been facing multiple challenges of grave nature coupled with a perennial phenomenon of terrorism like suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targetted killings etc., committed by the militants who are being backed by Indian secret agency, RAW, New Delhi also employs water as an instrument by increasing its scarcity, making life too often miserable for Pakistanis with the ultimate aim of creating poverty which could produce more terrorism in turn. And, India is likely to deepen differences among Pakistan’s provinces over various issues which are directly or indirectly related to water.

Nonetheless, Islamabad must include water as a major focus of agenda in the future dialogue; otherwise India is likely to continue its water terrorism against Pakistan.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Kashmir: Distress of the Amritsar Treaty

                                        

                                                           By Sajjad Shaukat

The very distress of the people of Jammu and Kashmir started on March 16, 1846 when the Treaty of Amritsar was signed. Under the Treaty, British colonialists sold Kashmir along with its people e to a Dogra Hindu, Gulab Singh for 7.5 million rupees. The Treaty of Amritsar which was signed by Gulab Singh, Hardinge, Currie and Lawrence had common cause among the parties with the aim to end the Muslim rule in Jammu and Kashmir. Gulab Singh thus became the founder and first Maharaja of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K).

As a consequence of the Treaty of Amritsar, a reign of terror was unleashed by the Dogra dynasty on the Kashmiris. During the Dogra rule (1846-1947), Kashmiri Muslims were leading so miserable life that it was difficult to differentiate them from beasts. Slave labour, heavy taxes, capital punishment for cow slaughter, and living under constant terror was order of the day.

In this regard, Yousaf Saraf in his book, ‘Kashmiris Fight for Freedom’ calls it “free forced labour” and “instead of donkeys and horses, Kashmiri Muslims were used for transportation of goods across the far-flung areas.” Atrocities of the Dogra regime could also be judged from the book of Sir Walter Lawrence, ‘The India We Served’. While describing the pathetic picture of the Kashmiris, he writes, “Army was employed in forcing the villagers to plough and sow, and worse still, the soldiers came at harvest time and when the share of the state had been seized” and “there was very little grain to tide the unfortunate peasants over the cruel winter.”

On April 19, 1931, the ban of Eid Khutba ignited widespread demonstrations in the Jummu city. For the first time, people openly opposed the oppression. On July 13, 1931, thousands of people thronged the Central Jail Srinagar. As the time for obligatory prayer approached, a young Kashmiri stood for Azan. The Dogra soldiers opened fire at him. In this way, 22 Kashmiris embraced martyrdom in their efforts to complete the Azan.

The people carried the dead and paraded through the streets of Srinagar, chanting slogans against Dogra brutalities. Complete strike was observed in the city, which was followed by weeklong mourning. This incident shook the whole state and the traffic from Srinagar to Rawalpindi and Srinagar to Jammu came to halt.

However, upon these ruthless killings, the Kashmiri leadership realized the need to form a political party, Muslim Conference (MC) with a view to waging struggle for their freedom. Later, in 1934, state’s first elections were held and MC won 10 out of 21 seats, and after two years in 1936, it succeeded in getting 19 out of 21 seats. Indian Congress was upset with this situation and tried to create division in the ranks of Kashmiri leadership. Afterwards, on July 19, 1947, MC passed a resolution to merge Kashmir with Pakistan, considering the geographical proximity—majority of Muslim population (77%), language and cultural relations of Jammu and Kashmir.

During the partition of the Sub-continent, in 1947, the ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Hari Singh, in connivance with Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor-General Lord Mountbatten, had decided to join India, quite contrary to the wishes of the majority of Kashmiris.

When a contention arose between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute in1948, India took the issue to the United Nations Security Council and offered to hold a plebiscite in the held Kashmir under UN supervision. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its promise. Instead, in March 1965, the Indian Parliament passed a bill, declaring Kashmir a province of India.

While passing through various phases, the struggle of Kashmiris which has become an interaction between Indian state terrorism led by the Indian security forces and war of liberation by the freedom fighters, keeps on going unabated.

Despite the employment of various forms of state terrorism by the Indian security forces, war of liberation intensified since 1989.

A report on human rights violations by Indian Army and its paramilitary forces in Indian-held Kashmir disclosed that since 1989, there have been deaths of 93,274 innocent Kashmiris, 6,969 custodial killings, 117,345 arrests and 105,861 destructions of houses. Indian brutal security forces have orphaned over 107, 351 children, widowed 22,728 women and gang raped 9,920 women.

Besides Human Rights Watch, in its various reports, Amnesty International has also pointed out grave human rights violations in the Indian-controlled Kashmir, indicating, “The Muslim majority population in the Kashmir Valley suffers from the repressive tactics of the security forces. Under the Jammu and Kashmir Disturbed Areas Act, and the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and Public Safety Act, security forces have extraordinary powers to shoot suspected persons.”

Particularly in 2008, a rights group reported unmarked graves in 55 villages across the Indian occupied Kashmir. In this context, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves. Notably, foreign sources and human rights organizations including Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) have pointed out that unnamed graves include thousands of innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and paramilitary troops in the fake encounters including those who were tortured to death.

It is notable that leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi has taken various steps to strengthen Indian illegal control on Kashmir. The Modi regime hurriedly decided to forcibly annex disputed territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, uncovering its intentions to wrap up the article 370 of the Indian constitution which ensures a special status to J&K. Therefore, United Nations Military Observer Group India and Pakistan in New Delhi was asked to vacate official accommodation. In fact, BJP government‘s long term strategy is to affect demographic changes in the Indian occupied Kashmir by composition of the region—predominately with Hindu population.

During People’s Democratic Party (PDP)-BJP alliance government in the Indian Occupied Kashmir, BJP in aid of RSS accelerated its agenda of complete integration of Kashmir into India. Though legal experts of India and IOK High Court clarified the permanent status of Article 370 of Indian Constitution, BJP’s agenda of trifurcations is still on table. However, short of that, BJP and RSS are busy in changing religious identity of the State. For example, special concessions were given to expand the horizon of Amarnath Yatra to project that Hindus have greater stakes in IOK than Muslims.

Special efforts are being made for demographic engineering in the State. For instance, West Pakistan Refugees have been recruited in the Indian Armed Forces from IOK quota. Allocation of lands for separate cities for repatriating Hindu Pundits and allocation of INR 2 million for rehabilitation of each Pundit family in the Valley are aimed at creating Hindu constituencies in a thorough Muslim region of the Valley through delimitations.

Kashmiri Hurriyat leadership had been suppressed by the PDP-BJP government by not allowing them to organize rallies for demanding freedom and expressing love for Pakistan. Their leaders were detained in Police Stations or kept under house arrests during all important events. Detention of Masarat Alam, even after acceptance of bail by IOK High Court, exhibits coercive mechanics of Indian forces/police in the State.

Nevertheless, this time, the very day has come at time when the people of Kashmir have intensified their legitimate struggle in the aftermath of the martyrdom of the young Kashmir leader Burhan Wani by the Indian security forces in the Indian Occupied Kashmir in wake of continued sieges and prolonged curfews. Since July 8, 2016, Indian forces have martyred more than 150 innocent persons who have been protesting against the martyrdom of Burhan Wani and for liberation of their land.

By manipulating the false flag terror attacks at a military base in Uri and Baramulla, the BJP-led Indian Prime Minister Modi has also acceletated war-hysteria against Pakistan. After deployment of heavy arms and weapons at the Line of Control (LoC), Indian forces have increased troops and continue shelling in Pakistani side of Azad Kashmir. And Pakistani troops are giving matching response to Indian unprovoked firing across the LoC and are well-prepared for Indian another surgical strikes, as threatened by Indian new army Chief Army Chief Gen. Dalbir Singh Suhaag. New Delhi’s main aim is to deflect the attention of the international community from the new phase of Kashmiri Intifada, while pressure has been mounting on the Modi government both domestically and internationally to resolve the issue of Kashmir with Pakistan.

In response, Pakistan’s Army Chief Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa on January 5, 2016 rejected claims by his Indian counterpart Gen. Bipin Rawat about “so-called surgical strikes” and their possible recurrence.

According to ISPR, Army Chief Gen. Qamar Bajwa made it clear that “Pakistan Armed Forces were fully geared to respond to any aggression by India.”

Indian malicious intent is evident from the blame game against Pakistan for every internal security issue, merely to avoid serious dialogue on bilateral issues as well as the humanitarian crisis in Kashmir. Pakistan is committed to the just and democratic solution of the Kashmir issue, which is plebiscite, however, India has never been serious in resolution of the dispute, neither through bilateral dialogue nor involving third party mediation nor by abiding by the UN Resolutions.

Returning to our earlier discussion, the Treaty of Amritsar is the genesis of the distress of the Kashmiris, and their war of liberation keeps on going, and will continue until they get their legitimate right of self-determination.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

The Day Kashmir was sold

By Reema Shaukat

While making pronouncements, very few decision makers or authorities notice their impact in the long term. History reveals that occasionally, wrong decisions prove to be very drastic, though at that time, they seem quite enthralling. One such wrong choice, which has an astounding impact, was the day in history when the Treaty of Amritsar was signed. This treaty was signed on March 16, 1846 and has ten articles which suggest how Kashmir was cleverly vended. March 16, therefore, is noticeable as a day on which the beautiful valley of Kashmir was sold for just seventy-five lakh rupees.

Against the desires of its inhabitants, Gulab Singh Dogra, the ruler of Jammu at the time, sold this valley to the British Government in India under a contract. Gulab Singh Dogra had long-term relations with the British Indian government and to further strengthen ties, he worked as the British wished. It is worth noting that under the suppression of Gulab Singh Dogra, the wishes of Kashmiris were never addressed by the British government, nor this whole business of the Amritsar Treaty was in their knowledge. According to Article 1 of this treaty, the British Government transferred independent possession to Maharajah Gulab Singh and the heirs male of his body all the hilly or mountainous country with its dependencies situated to the eastward side of the River Indus and westward of River Ravi, including Chamba. Under Article 3 of this treaty, Gulab Singh was to pay 75 lakhs (7.5 million) of Nanak Shahi rupees (the ruling currency of the Sikh kingdom at the time) to the British Government, along with other yearly honours. History actually narrates that the Treaty of Amritsar is the foundation of Dogra rule in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. During Dogra raj, the plight of Kashmiri Muslims is known by the act of brutalities on them as they were ruthlessly tortured and were deprived of basic human necessities. So this seed of oppression was sowed centuries ago by the Indians against Muslims, which has stronger roots today and proves how this wrong decision taken to please authorities of the time had drastic consequence even after more than a century has passed.

Going a little back in history will help to understand the Kashmir predicament. During the partition of the Sub-continent, the people of Muslim majority State, Jammu and Kashmir (JK) decided to join Pakistan according to the British-led formula. But, Dogra Raja Hari Singh, then Hindu ruler of JK, in connivance with the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor General Lord Mountbatten, joined India. The real design to forcibly gain Kashmir began to unfold on August 16, 1947, with the announcement of the Radcliffe Boundary Award. It gave the Gurdaspur district, which was a Muslim majority area, to India to provide a land route to the Indian armed forces to move into Kashmir. This led to a rebellion by state forces, which stood against the Maharaja and were joined by Pathan tribesmen. When Pakistan responded militarily against the Indian aggression, on December 31, 1947, India made an appeal to the UN Security Council to intervene and a ceasefire ultimately came into effect on January 1, 1949, following UN resolutions calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its promise of holding a plebiscite. Instead, in March 1965, the Indian Parliament passed a bill, declaring Kashmir a province of India, an integral part of the Indian union.

The bloody tragedy of poor Kashmiris had started after 1947 when they were denied their legitimate and UN approved right to self-determination. As a natural outcome of Indian injustice, people of Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) organised themselves and launched a war of liberation which India tried to crush through coercion and brutalities. Later, in 1988, India positioned a very large number of its armed forces to suppress the Kashmir struggle at gunpoint. With the advent of Indian occupational forces, the ethnic cleansing campaign against the Kashmiri people has intensified manifold. So far, more than 100,000 people have been killed at the hands of the Indian occupational forces. The number is growing logarithmically as Indians are using increasingly brutal methods to suppress the people of IOK and their legal struggle for freedom. Many human rights organisations including Amnesty International in their reports have mentioned the sufferings of Kashmiris at the hands of Indian forces. The recent Amnesty International Report of 2016-17 shows that Indian security forces used arbitrary or excessive force against demonstrators on several occasions. Many people were killed and hundreds blinded by security forces’ use of pellet-firing shotguns, which are inherently inaccurate and indiscriminate. Likewise, after the death of Burhan Wani, a curfew was imposed, private landlines, mobile and internet service providers suspended their services for weeks on orders from the state. The communication shutdown undermined a range of human rights and residents reported being unable to reach medical assistance in cases of emergencies. Hundreds of people, including children, were placed in administrative detention and dozens of schools were set on fire by unidentified people. India has been victimising Kashmiri leaders off and on through dirty tactics to break their will and resolve. They have been repeatedly harassed and physically intimidated. Instead of accepting the existing reality, India has sought to blame Pakistan for allegedly promoting the Kashmiri uprising. These Indian accusations against Pakistan is a tactic to delude the international community on the Kashmir issue and a concealment of their state sponsored atrocities against the innocent people of IOK.

A peaceful, negotiated settlement of the Kashmir dispute in accordance with UN resolutions has always persisted as Pakistan’s foreign policy. In order to find an early and just solution to the decades old Kashmir dispute, Pakistan has always urged the international community to play an active role. So the long past mistake of signing a treaty and handing over a territory without the consent of its people must now be resolved according to the will of its dwellers.

Indira Jaising: 'In India, you can’t even dream of equal justice. Not at all

Monday to Thursday, she’s busy in court. On Saturday and Sunday, she’ll be in Chennai, delivering a seminar about women’s rights. There’s a small window on Friday morning, the 76-year-old Indira Jaising tells me. I snap it up.

When I get to her office, she is poring over a draft report that her NGO, the Lawyers Collective, is about to publish about female genital mutilation. “Tell Masuma that in my opinion, there are no voices of women in that report, and she needs to bring them on board,” she tells one of her junior colleagues. From the very beginning of her 52-year career this is what Jaising has fought for – the victim’s voice.

Over half a century, Jaising has forced systemic changes in India’s slow, trundling legal system, and provided legal representation to the poorest in the country. She has been a powerful insider, becoming the country’s first female additional solicitor general in 2005, the third highest ranking government lawyer in the country, and regularly advising politicians. She drafted India’s first domestic violence act, allowing thousands of women to bring civil and criminal suits against attackers for the first time ever.

But more often, she is the outsider, hurling down embarrassing challenges to the government and the establishment, leading commissions in Punjab to investigate the extra judicial killings, police brutality and disappearances in northern India in the 1970s and 80s, or taking up the cause of the Muslim victims of the 2002 riots in Gujarat, a case that has grave implications for the current Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, who has been accused of bearing some responsibility for the violence that resulted in over a thousand deaths.

She has fought some of the most high-profile legal cases of the last half century, such as the case for compensation for the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy, considered one of the world’s worst industrial disasters. And her NGO has provided advice and legal counsel for many of the poorest, most dispossessed people in India. On the wall behind her desk is a framed photograph of herself taken by Raghu Rai, a famous Indian photojournalist. “I don’t know how he got me to laugh in this picture,” she says, looking up at it and smiling. “I never laugh.”

Jaising was born six years before partition, a period of mass tragedy and bloodshed after the British finally withdrew and a border was created between India and Pakistan. Her own parents had already relocated to India, but much of her family were forced to migrate as refugees from Sindh in modern-day Pakistan, and scattered around India. 

Born in Bombay, now Mumbai, Jaising always had a strained relationship with her mother. Looking back, she believes her mother was pressured to marry and have children. This created resentment between them, but also gave her a deep personal sense of what being trapped felt like. “I think [my sense of morality] comes from memories of being a woman and what it means in Indian society, seeing my mother going through the ignominy of being married without consent, and having to live in a joint family with no autonomy.”

In her 20s, her parents started groom hunting. But Jaising refused to hear about it. “I said ‘what are you talking about? I’m not interested in this alliance.’ I turned off. I thought, this is not my life, I don’t want it,” she says. She had already begun dreaming of a career in law while sitting on her uncle’s balcony, overlooking a law college. Her parents, unlike many Indian families, expressed their reservations but did not restrict her. 

She turned out to have an exceptional natural talent for law. Despite poor attendance, she breezed through her examinations and got a prestigious job at a commercial firm called Mulla & Mulla in Mumbai. “I have always considered the fact that I didn’t have anyone in the legal profession a big advantage. I had no role models to emulate and I could fashion my own way.” 

Breaking into the law, one of India’s most elite-driven and nepotistic industries, was no small feat. As a young woman in newly independent India, though highly educated, every freedom had to be fought for. When she announced that she would be going to London to do a year-long fellowship at the Institute of International Legal Studies, her parents were deeply unhappy. “In my community a girl only leaves home after marriage,” she explains. But despite their worries, her parents did not refuse.

And in 1970s London, surrounded by a society caught up in protests and strikes, Jaising caught a fever for activism that has stayed with her throughout her life. “We were on the streets all the time. It was a fun thing to do, you could abandon other commitments and be free. But the impact never left me.” For her generation in India, children of the freedom fighters and martyrs that had won India’s independence, living in a free country was never thought of as a luxury. “We were midnight’s children, and this was our inheritance,” she says.

Jaising studied the British legal and social system closely, and was particularly inspired by the council-funded community law centres. There, she felt, “you could dream of equal justice. In India, you can’t even dream of equal justice. Not at all.” It was the final inspiration that would set her on her lifelong mission to provide at least some kind of justice for the poor in India. 

By 1975, then aged 35, she had set up an NGO in India, then called the Workers Law Centre, and taken on the case of the railway union workers who were carrying out national anti-government strikes that had created panic and were being brutally crushed by the authorities. Thousands were sent to jail or fired from their jobs. The strike provoked prime minister Indira Gandhi to call a three-year emergency. 

The world watched as India succumbed to what felt increasingly like a dictatorship. The suppression of dissent, and the flagrant human rights violations galvanised new anti-government activism, which was already familiar to Jaising. “I knew my contribution would come as a lawyer, to build a legal framework within which democracy could be defended,” she says. “Of course, the emergency was evil, it had to be fought, but we were in our space.” Jaising took on the railway workers’ case for free, which led to the NGO’s offices being raided. In 1984, as tumult began to engulf India, Gandhi was assassinated by her own Sikh guard. But Indians would continue to feel that democracy was failing as they watched Gandhi’s own son, Rajiv, take the role of prime minister. 

The Bhopal disaster would become both a national issue and a personal challenge. In 1984 a toxic cloud of gas from a chemical plant, owned by American firm Union Carbide, spread across the city of Bhopal. No one knows exactly how many died, ut the Bhopal Memorial hospital and research centre estimates that more than 10,000 people lost their lives, and 500,000 suffered painful injuries.

Jaising got involved in the proceedings when she heard the government of India planned to take over responsibility of representing the victims. “I thought there’s something very wrong about this. I felt that you can’t disenfranchise the victims, where is their voice?” She felt the government would never get justice for the victims of the tragedy. “The government was complicit. They had a lot to answer, such as why did their regulatory mechanisms fail? What were they doing when laws were being violated all the time?” Jaising won the right for the victims to have their own representation.

But it was a tiny victory against the larger reality; Union Carbide paid a small amount of the requested damages (thousands of the victims say they have still never received a penny of that money) and were then sold on to Dow Chemical. Dow argues that they never owned or operated the plant. This bleak reality of inequality in the justice system, seeing poor, underprivileged people getting a lesser justice than wealthy individuals in the Indian legal system is the most disheartening thing about working as a lawyer, says Jaising. “It’s one of the things that makes me really sad. The one big thing that could make me drop out is this.”

 1984: Firemen hose water over canvas screens at factory boundaries to prevent the spread of dangerous fumes at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India. Photograph: Peter Kemp/AP

In India’s sluggish judicial system, many of the battles Jaising has taken on have stretched for years, even decades. Her attempt to get justice for the two British Muslims who were killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots, is still held up in the courts. Her case for gay marriage won in Delhi’s high court but was overturned last year in the supreme court. Victims of Punjab’s extrajudicial killings are still fighting for justice in the courts.

And yet she retains a passionate love for the law. “The law is like plasticine in my hands and I can shape it and mould it the way I want to,” she says. “The whole aesthetic value of being able to create something out of the law is completely all-encompassing. The outcome of anything you take to court really depends on what you put into the argumentation, what you put into your understanding of law. Very often laws are written in a way that they allow you to interpret them in a very contemporary context. Law is creative, it is not set in stone.”

She has also wrestled, right from the beginning, with being a woman in a world dominated by men. In the early days, “of course, all the judges were men. They couldn’t quite figure [it] out, ‘what is this? Where is this woman coming from and why is she here in the first place and why in a field like labour law which is so all-male?’” But Jaising dismissed them with insouciant defiance. “I knew what I wanted to say. I would argue my cases in court with great abandon,” she says. “It didn’t occur to me that I was doing something that was not done.”

Over the years, Jaising has noticed the small courtesies offered by men to other men: the chance to have their cases heard first, the relaxed, friendly body language of male judges when speaking to male lawyers, the sporting laughter at their irritating jokes. “It gets to be depressing not to have a community to bond with. [Women] are increasing now, but they’re also not very bonded, they are isolated.” 

As a result, she explains, women’s power within the legal system is restricted. She has spoken out about facing sexual harassment in the corridors of the supreme court herself, the unwelcome touch of a colleague, disguised as innocent brush of the hand. Though she immediately confronted the man about it, her seniority and his insolence were shocking. This sort of thing is a widespread problem in India’s courts, one that keeps many women away. “Women don’t have the ability to lobby for themselves the same way, they’re not part of an old boy network,” she says.

And now she is fighting Modi’s government. Last year the government cancelled the foreign funding licence for her NGO, which has cut it off from important funding sources, such as grants that supported her human rights work. Jaising believes the government’s actions were a deliberate attempt to squash dissent. “Maybe like the rest of the world, India is also going through a terrible crisis at this time,” she says. 

Under Modi’s Hindu nationalist BJP government, there is a palpable rise of sectarianism and anti-leftist vitriol. Jaising has frequently been a target. But she is just not the type to back down from a fight. “Today you’re in a situation where your right to free speech is being challenged, your right to association is being challenged. The core of your being is being challenged. You’re being told whether you’re a patriot or not a patriot, which I will never allow anyone to tell me. Your lifetime of work is being questioned and this is something I think is evil. And you suddenly find yourself in a space where you realise ‘My god, this fight is going to go on’.”

This is the first in a series of interviews with women who have changed the world. Please get in touch with globaldevpros@theguardian.com and tell us who you think we should speak to.

First prize goes to India for oldest, largest and most unsafe nukes

By:  Daily Times Monitor

WASHINGTON: Pakistan's security threat comes from India since ithas begun a new strategy of conducting surgical strikes inside Pakistan, an English daily quoted a new study which also warns that despite nuclearisation, the possibility of another war in the region cannot be ruled out.

The 15-month study project by a Washington think-tank called the Brookings Institution, focuses on the "strategic chain" linking Pakistan, India, China, and the US.

It argues that the strategic dynamics among these four nuclear powers cannot be understood or effectively addressed on a strictly bilateral basis.

"While Pakistan responds strategically to India, India responds both to Pakistan and China, which in turn responds both to India and the United States," according to a report released on the completion of the project.

The 76-page document is the first Brookings publication articulating the Pakistani perspective on its nuclear doctrine.

"Without Indian restraint, Pakistan is unlikely to constrain its programmes unilaterally. Without Chinese restraint, India will be very reluctant to limit its programmes unilaterally or engage in bilateral controls with Pakistan that, according to India, would limit its options vis-a-vis China. And without US constraints on capabilities of concern to China, Beijing may continue to resist curbing its strategic modernisation efforts," it argues.

The study notes how India and the US have expressed concern about the longstanding Pakistan-China relationship in important areas, and Pakistan has expressed concerns about India-US cooperation in important areas, especially in the wake of the US-India civil nuclear deal.

Although not included in the study, the report also explores the influence of other major powers on South Asia's strategic dynamics, arguing that Russia too is an additional link in the chain.

The report warns that as the nuclear gap between China and India narrows, China may increase its interest in the India-Pakistan nuclear competition. This is because China "fears that the widening nuclear and conventional military gaps between India and Pakistan may threaten regional stability," the study adds.

It includes a paper on Pakistan's strategic environment and doctrine authored by Muhammad Ali of the Centre for International Strategic Studies, Islamabad.

The paper summarises Pakistan's threat perceptions and the steps it is taking to deal with those perceptions.

It argues that "Pakistan's security threat comes from India" and the longstanding unresolved Kashmir dispute lies at the heart of tensions between the two neighbours.

The author notes that India's political elite, with its growing economy, is pursuing an ambitious and destabilising military build-up, to become a global power and regional hegemony.

New Delhi, emboldened by a Western-supported military build-up, is less willing to pursue a negotiated and peaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute, while the Kashmiri people continue to struggle for their UN-recognised right to self-determination.

"The absence of a meaningful, sustainable, and result-driven dialogue and the growing strategic partnership between India and the United States are matters of grave concern for Pakistan," the author warns.

He notes that 42 years after its first nuclear test, New Delhi spends almost seven times more on its military than Islamabad. The author believes that India's growing conventional and strategic capabilities are overwhelmingly poised against Pakistan.

He also examines the Indian 'cold start' doctrine, which "aims to rapidly launch shallow thrusts inside Pakistani territory to capture and use it for coercing Pakistan".

The author points out that the large-scale Indian development of highly-mobile and armouredmechanised formations, artillery, rapid airlift capabilities, forward displacement of troops and garrisons, supporting communication infrastructure, and massive spending provide compelling evidence of operationalisation of the "cold start" doctrine, despite Indian official reluctance to formally accept it.

He notes that India has the oldest, largest, and fastest-growing unsafeguarded nuclear programme of all Non-Proliferation Treaty states and the entire developing world.

Rejecting India's argument that its missiles are meant to tackle a perceived threat from China, the author argues, "The most advanced, accurate, and operationally-ready Indian missiles can be employed against Pakistan more effectively than against China."

Peaceful Struggle for Independence in Jammu and Kashmir

By Afshain Afzal

In the most disturbing and shocking incidents of Indian atrocities, Indian Army and other security forces were found beating children of under ten years of age. Many children were slapped and dragged on the ground on the charges of teasing Army personnel. There only offence was that they were chanting “Meri Jaan Pakistan, Kashmiri Key Azadi Ka Matlab Kiya La Illha Ha Ill Allah”. If we recall, despite threats and warnings by the Indian Army Chief Bipin Rawat that if any Kashmiri display Pakistani flag, he would be treated as anti-state and linked with ISIS / Daesh, Kashmiris waved Pakistani flags after Juma prayers near Jamia Masjid in Srinagar and other parts of the state. Interestingly, the peaceful struggle of the Kashmiris to get themselves free from Indian occupation can be realized for the simple fact that top Kashmiri-Pakistani leader Syed Ali Geelani has called off its strike on Friday, 24 February 2017, in view of the Shivratri or Herath festival celebrations in Jammu and Kashmir state. In fact, the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmiri consider their co-Kashmiri Hindu and Sikh as part of their nation and salient participants in the freedom struggle. 

To tarnish the image of Kashmiris freedom fighters, Indian agencies, in a self-staged drama to impress international community, killed five Indian Army personnel and injured nine personnel including Lieutenant Colonel Mukesh Jha and Major Amardeep in a combing operation Shopian district on 23 February 2017. Interestingly, New Delhi has launched a new campaign by giving an impression that Jammu and Kashmir state in going to be turned into “Switzerland of India” by inviting Indian and foreign investments. Where in an environment of total blackout, even journalists and peace activists are not allowed to visit the state as the Indian atrocities against innocent peaceful Kashmiris will be exposed, how tourists can be allowed to visit the state. No doubt, the voice of Kashmiri Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and others cannot be suppressed by Indian occupying forces as they are determined to get their right of self-determination and join Pakistan.

Ironically, in this so called critical security situation, Jammu and Kashmir’s Secretary Tourism Farooq Shah has announced that Indian Rs 2400 crore will be spent to promote tourism in Jammu and Kashmir in the 5 years time. Interestingly, in this regard New Delhi would contribute Rs 2000 crore. As per the detail, the Indian government has decided to settle non- Kashmiris in various parts of Jammu and Kashmir in the name of investment from the Centre. As per the plan, on the principle of private sector oriented investment, Indian and foreign companies would be settled to run the projects to attract tourism. In the same regard, as per the military authorities in Srinagar and Karu, Indian Army has been give a go a head by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to develop Kargil and Ladakh. It is being projected that international and national hotel including chain of Indian ITC Hotels. One wonders when existing hotels are giving a haunted look, how further investment would be possible without first giving the rights of plebiscite to the Kashmiris.

Where Chairman J&K Legislative Council, Haji Inayat Ali claims "things are different from what is portrayed in media. Tourists are always safe there. Even during peak of militancy, tourists were never troubled", how Indians can dub Kashmiris as terrorist. There is no doubt that the Kashmiris are peace loving people but intentionally they are being propagated as terrorist and members of Islamic State / Daesh. It is on record that India is carrying out staged killings of its own security personnel only to prove that peaceful freedom struggle in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir is linked with terrorism. Had this not been the case why cases against Indian Army personnel for their involvement in fake encounters and extra judicial killings are pending in various Indian and Jammu and Kashmir state Courts.