How sincere is Jaishankar on PoK? | Faraz Ahmad

Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar stated at Chatham House, London, on March 6 that the only outstanding issue with Pakistan in reference to Jammu and Kashmir was Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and would be solved the day that part of Kashmir was re-occupied by India.

Jaishankar must have chuckled when he said this because he was replying to a question on Kashmir raised by some Pakistani journalist in London, asking about the Indo-Pak dispute over Kashmir lasting all the 78 years since Indian independence and the simultaneous birth of Pakistan on our western borders.

This is not the first time an Indian leader has laid claim to PoK, specially since Modi-led BJP government came to rule India since 2014.

Pre-delimitation the state of Jammu and Kashmir had 111 seats of which 46 were from the Kashmir valley, the largest part of J&K, 37 from Jammu a comparatively smaller part with predominant Hindu population, and four in Ladakh, with a large complement of Buddhist population plus, 24 seats reserved for Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).

In August 2019, the Modi government with a wave of the hand struck away Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and did the unparalleled in Independent India’s history— demoted the J&K state to a Union territory (UT), directly under its thumb, cut off Ladakh making that also another UT. Was it because of a communal bias since J&K is or rather was the only Muslim majority state in India, showcasing India’s commitment to secularism? A year later in 2020 the Centre set up a Delimitation Commission under the chairmanship of retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, naturally from Modi-Amt Shah’s home state, who did not just redraw the assembly and Lok Sabha constituencies in Kashmir alone, but attempted to bring numerically bigger Kashmir valley with an overwhelming Muslim population at par with the smaller Hindu majority Jammu by increasing the Jammu seats from 37 to 46 while adding one more to the Kashmir valley increasing its strength from 46 to 47, without any population assessment, presumably to enable the BJP to rule the state as far as possible. It didn’t eventually succeed, but the effort was evident. However, she did away with those 24 seats reserved for PoK to return to India, which never happened and doesn’t seem to happen in any foreseeable future. It stood to reason, once we reconcile to the fact of that part of Kashmir having gone over to Pakistan forever while establishing and making the world, including Pakistan, recognise our Kashmir valley as an inseparable part of India.

In the Simla Agreement of 1972 between our late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Bhutto conceded this. But he pleaded with Indira not to put this on paper lest the hawkish elements in Pakistan turn hostile against him. But soon after came the cunning General Mohammad Ziaul Haq by deposing Bhutto through a bloodless coup who propagated the thesis of a thousand cuts to bleed India first in Punjab and later in Kashmir as well.

Much later in February, 1999 the then BJP Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee started a Delhi-Lahore Deluxe Bus service named Sadae Sarhad (Call from the border) and travelled himself along with a retinue of several political and other celebrities to Lahore where he signed with the then Pakistan Prime Minister the Lahore Declaration, promising to desist from using nuclear weapons against each other, now that both had become nuclear nations. Then followed surreptitious Kargil aggression by Pakistan under General Parvez Musharraf, again jeopardising the attempt at peaceful coexistence.

The last was the Pulwama attack just before the 2019 general elections, which brought back Modi with a resounding victory on the strength of the Balakot air raid on Pakistani terror bases, the Modi government said. Balakot is in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the northwestern end of Pakistan, while Muzaffarabad, the capital of PoK from Srinagar, is less than the distance between Delhi and Chandigarh. So, why not aim at the PoK?

Over the past few years in the Modi regime, every time anyone raises the issue of Kashmir on an international forum, India now announces its claim on PoK. But the point made by J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah is, who is preventing India from going and taking over PoK? Nobody in India, least of all the poor Kashmiris, is constantly being humiliated. However, if the Modi government were so serious and really intended to take back PoK, would they have asked the Delimitation Commission to scrap those 24 seats from the J&K Assembly, which was a mere token expression of our stake in the entire Kashmir, including the PoK? Just shows how hollow and bogus Jaishankar’s call for PoK sounded.

Omar in fact also asked the government not to forget the Chinese intrusion into Kashmir and stake a claim on the part of Kashmir, which Pakistan has handed over to China in their joint pursuit to build the marvel of a Karakoram Highway from Xinkiang to Hasan Abdal in Pakistani Punjab via Gilgit Baltistan in PoK. But when we have shown such fear of confronting China over their intrusion into Ladakh and our northeastern borders while the Modi government simply stood by, would this regime dare to challenge China? In fact Jaishankar told the Indian Parliament in its Winter session just three months back, ”The House is aware that our ties (with China) have been abnormal since 2020, when peace and tranquility in the border areas were disturbed as a result of Chinese actions. Recent developments that reflect our continuous diplomatic engagement since then have set our ties in the direction of some improvement.” Mark how he won’t dare describe the Chinese occupation of Indian territory an aggression.

At Chatham House, Jaishankar was also asked about US President Donald Trump issuing threats every other day to India and the world at large. While ordering the withdrawal of USAID to several ongoing Indian infrastructure projects and social activities, Trump wondered why, since India was earning huge tariffs from taxing goods imported from the US, it needed US aid. The question on Trump was addressed to the Indian External Affairs Minister in this background. But when our dear Prime Minister has pretended to turn a deaf ear to all the derision by Trump, why would Jaishankar dare raise a finger at the US President? But he went not one but several steps beyond, appreciating US President saying, "We see a president and an administration which, in our parlance, is moving towards multipolarity and that is something that suits India," and added further, "From President Trump’s perspective, the one big shared enterprise that we have is the Quad, which is an understanding where everybody pays their fair share… There are no free riders involved. So that’s a good model which works."

Was Jaishankar’s meek response to the aggressive posture of Trump at the instance of the Indian Prime Minister alone, or Jaishankar was also mindful of his son living in Washington for last 20 years by his own admission as the Executive Director of Observer Research Foundation, America-Full time as well as associated with another 10 or more US organisations concerning diplomacy and foreign policy, in other words a lobbyist for India. If Trump took umbrage to a word from Jaishankar, it could even jeopardise his son’s stay and career in Washington DC. That’s for Jaishankar to answer.