Kashmir Affairs - Security & Conflict Analysis of Kashmir

India-Pakistan Peace Process: Roadblocks & Way Ahead

Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal

(March 2008)

The peace initiative undertaken by India and Pakistan began more than three years ago, though in the years preceding these several attempts were made like the Lahore bus diplomacy and Agra summit that miserably failed. Looking at the past failures, the survival of the peace process for this long is no less an achievement on its own. Yet, viewing how badly the hostility between the two countries has affected the economy and social fabric of the two countries, and along with it the entire South Asian region, there is a need to speed up this peace process that has unfortunately not inched more than just a handful of gestures.

From a positive perspective, on both sides, public opinion is fast building up that there is a need for a peaceful resolution of all disputes between India and Pakistan, including Kashmir. There is a growing understanding that both countries which spend a whopping sum on their defence budgets to maintain their armies and paramilitary forces against each other should end this hostility and instead spend the same money on other sectors like education, health and development - all of which have played second fiddle to hostility. The peace process has also brought the officials on both sides closer to systematically negotiate various contentious disputes like Siachen and Sir Creek. Both sides principally agree to the softening of borders, release of prisoners, exchange of trade and relaxing the visa restrictions. Three years ago, a ceasefire came into being on the Line of Control (LoC) and has by and large been respected. In 2005, for the first time, an entry point was opened on the LoC as part of the first Kashmir specific confidence building measure to pave way for divided families to meet. The first point to open linked up Muzaffarabad and Srinagar. Later in the year, four more such entry points were opened along the LoC, facilitating to and fro the movement of people from both sides on a fortnightly basis.

However, not much progress has actually been made on any of the issues pertaining to the peace process. Despite several meetings, the typical hawkishness mars the prospects of issues like Siachen. As regards to the issues of visa relaxation and the release of prisoners, barring gestures and rhetoric, nothing much is moving. Regarding the opening of LoC routes, the bus does not move to and fro over the borders but drops the people only up to the Line of Control, that too once a fortnight. The permit system is cumbersome and also conditional, forbidding people other than those who have proof of having blood relations on the other side to travel. Besides, trade along LoC, which is an important confidence building measure, is something over which both the countries are dragging their feet.

What retards the peace process?
There are several factors. Much of the trouble is rooted in the traditional psyche on both sides. The mindsets of the ruling elite have been so badly conditioned in a mould of suspicion and mutual hatred that it is difficult to totally shun it. This is what evokes belligerence on both sides despite the existence of goodwill gestures. The internal problems of both countries, especially Pakistan at this juncture, have also played spoilsport with the peace process. The ruling establishment in New Delhi often goes slow on peace process whenever it is faced with vote bank politics in specific areas. But the biggest drawback of the peace process is that despite the rhetoric, the core dispute of Kashmir is not even being addressed. Kashmir is either still treated as a bilateral dispute or something that is too complicated to be handled. Neither a dialogue on Kashmir is in place, nor are important genuine CBMs, barring the limited opening of LoC. These CBMs are imperative for two simple reasons. One, they would facilitate the movement of a meaningful democratised dialogue process with involvement of the people of Kashmir. Secondly, they are imperative to reduce the levels of scepticism of Kashmiris towards the peace process and address their growing alienation.

Kashmir; The Human Dimension
Before listing the important required Kashmir centric CBMs, it is important to understand the ground situation in Kashmir from a humanitarian angle along with its political dimensions. The Kashmir conflict is a political dispute and needs to be settled politically. However, the human side of the story cannot be forgotten. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have suffered a great deal, physically and psychologically due to this dispute, especially during the last 18 years of armed conflict in Kashmir Valley, Doda and other militancy affected areas of the state. Sandwiched between the guns of the militants and the Indian paramilitary forces, the people are facing the brunt of atrocities and suppression. An estimated 80,000 people have been killed by either militants or paramilitary forces. Many of those killed are civilians who died in cross firing, staged encounters and while in custody. There are a large number of people who are missing and commonly these disappearances are referred to as enforced disappearances since they disappeared in the custody of paramilitary forces. The women, along with children, have been the worst sufferers because they bear the brunt of violence as sisters, mothers, wives and daughters. Besides, there has also been a high incidence of rapes, molestations and also forced marriages. The psychological impact of warfare has affected the people, particularly the women and children, most of whom are also impacted by playing the untraditional role of bread earners. The insurgency and counter insurgency operations have only caused absolute militarization of civilian space. These have not only brought war to the doorsteps of many people, making the younger generation habitual of a culture of warfare, guns and ammunition, which is tarnishing the social and moral fabric of the society and leading to its degeneration, it has also lead to the brutalization and de-humanization of the society which is a cause for concern and needs to be dealt with. The armed conflict has not only caused killings, disappearances and physical torture to the people but also created fear psychosis and several other psychological problems. The number of people suffering from psychological diseases is spiralling and the rate of suicide and suicide attempts is also phenomenal. Besides, it has also caused massive displacements and partial dislocations.

Disproportionate Presence of Troops
In the last 18 years of armed insurgency and counter insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir, the people have been sandwiched between the guns of the militants and paramilitary forces. Ever since the insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir began in 1989, there has been enormous presence of armed troops in the state on the pretext that this is imperative for territorial security and for eliminating militancy. Though the exact number of paramilitary forces operating in Jammu and Kashmir is not known, by any estimates 0.5 to 0.6 million troops of Army, Border Security Force (BSF) and Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) are operating in the entire state. Besides this, there is a massive presence of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and the newly formed Indian Reserve Police. The number is rather disproportionate with regards to the total population of Jammu and Kashmir and has obviously led not only to fear psychosis, deep rooted alienation and human rights violations at the hands of paramilitary forces but has also contributed in hampering the social fabric of the society, particularly in Kashmir Valley, Doda, Rajouri and Poonch. Also these troops have unlimited powers under the Disturbed Areas Act and Armed Forces Special Powers Act that pave way for human rights violations.

An argument given to justify the disproportionate presence of troops in Jammu and Kashmir is the bid to draw distinction between the borders and the interiors and officials have maintained that since Jammu and Kashmir is a border state, the presence of troops is required. This plea can be dismissed as a senseless logic since several other Indian states like Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat share their borders with Pakistan. There, however, is a marginal presence of troops even at the borders. Secondly, the massive size of the militarized security agencies network to fight insurgency is not solely restricted to the armed forces and para-military forces. Jammu and Kashmir police is part of the network with its specially carved out branch of Special Operations Group (SOG). But more significantly, civilians have been armed to aid the paramilitary forces in counter insurgency operations by way of recruiting Special Police Officers (SPOs) and the creation of Village Defence Committees. Besides, surrendered militants have been clandestinely given back their weapons to both help the paramilitary forces and unleash a reign of terror among the innocent civilians. Most of the SPOs recruited happen to be surrendered militants. Besides, civilians are being largely involved in the armed conflict by motivating or compelling them, often by way of torture and harassment, to work as informers and couriers for the paramilitary forces. Every year, more number of civilians are being armed or dragged into the conflict, thus gradually militarizing the civilian space totally.

While it cannot be negated that several militant groups too have been guilty of perpetrating human rights violations, torturing and harassing ordinary civilians, killing innocents and resorting to acts of grenade blasts which has taken a heavy toll of civilians, the errant acts of the paramilitary forces cannot be justified on this basis. In fact, the security agencies, which are bound by a certain law and supposed to be accountable organs of a state in one of the biggest democracies of the world, are expected to act with greater restraint and responsibility and cannot get away with acts of human rights violations in the name of national security or fighting insurgency. Both the Indian Constitution and the international laws make the state responsible for the protection of human rights of every individual. Besides, if national security simply means guarding the territories and not protecting the people of a democratic state, this logic turns out to be absurd. The disproportionate presence of paramilitary forces and the policy to encourage gun culture as a counter insurgency measure has only paved way for more violence and glamorised the gun, which has long term repercussions and needs immediate remedy.

Confidence Building Measures
Three major steps need to be taken to ease tensions, reduce the levels of violence and to allow people to be a part of the ongoing peace process between India and Pakistan.
1. To announce an independent commission for probing all cases of human rights violations, perpetrated by militants or paramilitary forces, and to ensure justice in each case.
2. To begin a process of demilitarization in a phased manner to be followed by a ceasefire, coinciding with a process of genuine and democratized dialogue. The process of demilitarization should pave way for a phased de-escalation of troops and also begin the exercise for a time bound de-commissioning of militant groups, followed by a ceasefire. The troop reduction should not simply be focused on the army but should also include all para-military forces, SOG and even surrendered militants. At the same time, as part of the de-militarization process, draconian measures like Armed Forces Special Powers Act should be revoked.
3. All political prisoners or innocents arrested on frivolous charges or no charges at all should be set free.

Several other CBMs that address issues of alienation and deprivation can follow in due course of time. The onus for introduction of such CBMs lies both with India and Pakistan - India, for reigning in its forces and Pakistan for ensuring militant groups to lie low. The international organizations and community can also play a role in impartially observing the exercise of such confidence building measures to bring in an element of accountability.

Denial of Human Rights Violations
Unfortunately, Pakistan’s internal crisis is proving to be a major bottle neck in furthering the peace process. But that alone is not the reason for retardation. Certain moves that can begin are unfortunately being delayed by the Indian government for no rhyme or reason. The biggest move is fulfilling the promise of zero tolerance to human rights violations, which are continuing in Jammu and Kashmir without any let up. Why is it that it is becoming even increasingly difficult for the authorities to even acknowledge that human rights violations exist? The official claims in the past that human rights violations are now minimal are contrary to even the State Human Rights Commission report. Denial and negation of incidents of human rights violations has far reaching repercussions than usually deemed. Denial, and that too an official denial, means a negation of the people who have been killed, the offence committed by the perpetrators and of people who disappeared. Denial lies at the core of human rights abuse and only inspires and legitimises more acts of violations. The gravity of the situation has to be seen in this context, without comparing the statistics of the dead and tortured with other conflict situations world-wide where the graph of violence may run into hundreds of thousands. It is also pointless arguing whether the number of those killed in militancy related or counter insurgency violations in the last two decades is somewhere around 40,000 or has almost crossed 100,000. The fact is that human rights are grossly abused. The existence of draconian laws, the impunity enjoyed by the armed forces and the act of denial (both officially and politically) exposes the larger, planned and pernicious design of suppressing the masses through physical elimination or fear psychosis. Denial of human rights abuse, thus, is not a simple case of intended or unintended faux pas. It has dangerous repercussions.

The Pakistan crisis cannot be an impediment in starting a process for de-militarisation or repeal of draconian laws. It certainly cannot be an obstacle in setting up an independent tribunal for investigating all cases of human rights violations, and certainly not even in acknowledging the cases of human rights abuse.

Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal is the Executive Editor of Kashmir Times, one of the oldest and leading English dailies of Jammu & Kashmir.