Southern China International Model United Nations
Official Background Guide
Security Council: Mediating the Kashmir Dispute Between Pakistan
and India.
Agenda overseen by — Joe Motwani
1.
History of the issue
Kashmir, the region enclosed by China, Pakistan and India has been a hotbed for
conflict and turmoil for the last 70 years. In 1947, British rule in India came to a rather
abrupt end, and soon followed the proceedings for the partition of India into two
sovereign states; culminating in the formation of a Muslim majority nation named
Pakistan, translating to the “land of the pure”. The methodology adopted for the division
of India was based upon the geographic distribution of Hindus and Muslims. Regions
with majority Muslim populations were deemed to be Pakistan and regions with majority
Hindu populations were deemed to be India. This saw the western portion of India being
transformed into Pakistan as well as a region in the east known as East Pakistan. The
partition saw religious genocides taking place throughout the Indian sub-continent, and
the figures of the deaths have been placed to anywhere from 200,000 to 2,000,000 people.
Although most of India was divided without much lasting animosity, the region of Jammu
and Kashmir has been different7.
Jammu and Kashmir was home to a Muslim majority population however the
Maharajah of Kashmir, Hari Singh was a Hindu and therefore signed a treaty of accession
with India making it legally, a portion of India5. Soon followed armed conflict over the
region by the armies of India and Pakistan, and in 1948, India raised the issue in the
United Nations Security Council, which in Resolution 47 called for a referendum on the
status of the territory4. The resolution also called for Pakistan to withdraw its troops from
the region and for India to reduce its military presence to the bare minimum. In essence
a ceasefire was called, however Pakistan refused to remove its troops and therefore, for
practical purposes, Kashmir was divided8.
In 1951, India conducted elections in the states of Jammu and Kashmir thus backing
accession to India. As a result, India claimed a referendum unnecessary to the
disagreement of the UN and Pakistan. The following years resulted in no more changes,
and in 1957, India released the official constitution of Jammu and Kashmir declaring
them to be a part of The Republic of India8. This sparked further conflict within the subcontinent and in 1962, Pakistan’s ally, China entered the conflict by declaring war on
India. The war was fought over the region of Aksai Chin and upon its conclusion, China
gained all of Aksai Chin17. This added an interesting dynamic to the situation in the region
as it placed India against two major powers.
After years of minor border firings and diplomatic turmoil, in 1971, India and
Pakistan fought another war culminating in the defeat of Pakistan as well as the liberation
of East Pakistan and the formation of the nation of Bangladesh. Upon the conclusion of
the war, India and Pakistan signed the Simla Agreement turning the Kashmir ceasefire
line into the Line of Control (LOC)9. It also called for a diplomatic solution to the crisis
and set the tone for Indo-Pakistani relationships thereafter. The years that followed gave
way to relaxed tensions in the sub-continent, however, in 1974, India conducted its first
nuclear test codenamed Smiling Buddha prompting calls for nuclear development within
Pakistan16. This heightened tensions again and although, on the surface things seemed
calm, it led to the creation of an arms race within the sub-continent.
In 1984, after years of relaxed relations, the Indian army seized control of the
Siachen Glacier, an area not demarcated by the LOC thus prompting the Pakistani army
to attempt at capturing the territory from India to no avail. The following years was an
era of insurgency within Kashmir. Pro-independence groups1 were formed calling for
independence from India were met by a violent response by the Indians who deployed
thousands of troops to control the situation6. India blamed Pakistan for this and accused
Pakistan for sending fighters across the border to spark up such protest, all of these claims
were vehemently denied by Pakistan. The insurgency further escalated with both, India
and Pakistan deploying hundreds of thousands of troops on their respective sides of the
LOC and after years of disarray, India and Pakistan went to war in 1999 after militants
from Pakistan-Administered Kashmir ventured into Indian-Administered Kashmir,
specifically in the region of Kargil. The war culminated with India regaining control of
Kargil14.
The 2000’s were filled with other instances of declining relations; a prominent one
example is the attack on the Indian parliament in 2001 which brought the two countries
on the cusp of war. The 2008 Mumbai attacks were also a contributor to declining
relations8.
2.
Recent developments
In recent years, under the new Bharat Janta Party (BJP) government, relations
between the governments have seen further deterioration as a result of the anti-Pakistan
policy of the incumbent prime minister, Shri. Narendra Modi. In late 2016, India
conducted surgical strikes on the Pakistan side of the LOC, and by doing so, it became
the first time that the army has ventured into the other side (apart from times of war)8.
The issue in Jammu and Kashmir is one of vital importance due to various reasons.
Perhaps the most significant reason is the fact that all involved nations possess nuclear
weapons and as such, an escalation in the situation could prompt to global destabilization.
Furthermore, with the nations holding approximately 1.4 billion people, the loss of life in
a war scenario would be catastrophic and could result in the potential to ignite global
conflict9. Furthermore, with current tensions between the United States and Russia, an act
of war in the Indian subcontinent could prompt the initiation of World War III15.
India’s recent seek to gain international power has also affected the relationship
between India and Pakistan with the latter trying to sabotage every attempt that India has
made. In 2016, India attempted to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), if her bid was
successful, it would become the first nation to join the NSG without signing the NonProliferation Treaty (NPT). However, in order to acquire membership into the NSG, a
unanimous decision must be made. China, a crucial member of the NSG blocked India’s
bid as it wanted Pakistan to also be granted membership which was rejected by most
nations. This further strained India’s relations with both China and Pakistan and has
resulted in the buildup of increased animosity3.
China and Pakistan are also cooperating on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor
(CPEC) which is an economic corridor that aims to construct highways, railways, optical
fiber and pipelines in order to result in better connectivity between Pakistan and China.
The $54 billion project passes through Pakistan-Administered Kashmir, which India
claims and as a result of this, India claims that the corridor has ulterior motives such as
removing credibility from India’s claim to the region. This has added an interesting new
dynamic to the Kashmir conflict which could potentially further worsen the situation8.
Water is another aspect of the conflict which has yet to completely play out.
Kashmir is the main source of water for both India and Pakistan and as such, the two
nations have agreed to not alter the water sources regardless of political tensions. The
Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 in order to ensure this and is viewed as being
one of the most successful treaties having adhered to by both nations over the course of
multiple wars and diplomatic rows. Regardless of its past success, India has recently
stated that if Pakistan continues its behavior, it will have no choice but to cut off supply
to Pakistan resulting in the potential death of millions11.
3. Emphasis of the discourse
3.1. Indian Approach
The Indian government and the different political parties of India are known
to disagree on various issues, however the Kashmir issue has been able to transcend
these differences and unite the different parties, religions and communities together
against the common threat of a Pakistani invasion. Although it is almost unanimously
agreed that Kashmir should remain a part of India, there has been debate over the
governing of the region. Muslims across India call for greater autonomy of the region,
while this is debated by Indian politicians due to the fear of Pakistani militants.
However, on the overlying issue of Kashmir, there is no debate within India3.
India’s approach to the situation thus far has been mainly diplomatic. India has
called multiple times that this issue should remain between India and Pakistan, and
should not be extended on the world stage. India has also refused to make
concessions in Kashmir and refers to Pakistan administered Kashmir to be “Pakistan
occupied Kashmir”. India’s uncompromising stance on the Kashmir issue is
something that has arguable prevented change in the region for the past 70 years.
India does not believe that talks regarding Kashmir are legitimate as it does not
believe that the partition of Kashmir should even be an issue and considers it to be a
integral, and legal part of India3. India has also disallowed for a plebiscite to take place
and believes that elections are an adequate alternative.
3.2. Pakistani approach
Pakistan, much like India, unanimously agree that Kashmir is an integral part
of Pakistan. Unlike India however, Pakistan deems the issue to be a dispute between
the two nations and calls it “unfinished partition”. It states that the militants who
cross the LoC into India are fighting for their Muslim brethren and as such, cannot be
stopped from carrying out their moral obligation. Pakistan demands for the plebiscite
stated in UN resolution 47 to be carried out and does not believe elections are an
appropriate substitute2.
Pakistan deems India’s right to the territory based on the accession by
Maharajah Hari Singh to be illegitimate and false. It believes that the original
structure of partition which divided the nation based on religious lines should be
adhered here too and due to the overwhelming Muslim majority in Kashmir, it should
be a part of Pakistan2.
Pakistan often uses the topic of Kashmir on the international stage and uses it
to attack India. It brings up the issue at almost every international forum which has
garnered a negative response from India4. Pakistan has deemed Kashmir to be its
“Jugular vein”2 and as such has justified its position on the international stage.
3.3.Stance of intergovernmental organizations
The United Nations has had minimal involvement in the issue of Kashmir since
1948 when resolution 47 was passed4. The resolution called for a plebiscite to be held
to determine the faith of the region, a notion which was outright rejected by India.
India cites the United Nations law which prevents them from interfering in the
domestic jurisdiction of a nation, and since India claims the Kashmir issue not be an
issue of ownership but rather one of occupation, it will not recognize the United
Nations resolution calling for a plebiscite6.
However, nonetheless, intergovernmental organizations mainly act as
spectators and mediators and rarely intervene in the dispute with the exception of
the human rights chapter of the United Nations. The International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights has often raised human right violations occurring in Kashmir
however due to the disputed status of the region as well as the United Nations unable
to directly interfere, these violations have been met with only criticism.
3.4.Stance of important countries
3.4.1.United States of America
The United States has had a long, inconsistent position on the Kashmir issue.
Upon the independence of India and its partition into Pakistan and India, the United
States remained mostly uninvolved in the issue. However, soon after, upon the
beginning of the Cold War, the United States found an ally in Pakistan and supported
it13. This garnered an Indian response which resulted in India establishing ties with
the Soviet Union. The Indian Subcontinent had become another battleground for the
two powers and both were quick to support their respective allies. In the 1971 war,
the US found relentlessly supported Pakistan and even sent a nuclear-powered
aircraft carrier to the Bay of Bengal. The Soviet Union countered this by sending its
own fleet into the region. The rest of the 20th century occurred in a similar fashion.
In recent times however, the United States has seen a shift in policy. With India
emerging as a economic and political superpower, the United States has established
closer ties with India and in the process has severed ties with Pakistan13. This has
transcended over to the Kashmir issue where the United States has lightened its views
on enforcing UN resolution 47 and has instead sided with India’s position of keeping
the Kashmir issue a bilateral dispute.
The US’s change in policy can be credited towards Pakistan’s terrorism
problems and 9/11 which drastically harshened the US position towards militancy
thus resulting in a deterioration of relations. Furthermore, Osama Bin Laden’s
capture in a military town in Pakistan has also prompted the United States to question
the motives of Pakistan13.
3.4.2.China
Another major involved nation is China. China’s stance on the topic is one that
favors Pakistan. With China and Pakistan being close allies, it is no surprise that China
has repeatedly stood up for its ally. Furthermore, with a tense history between India
and China which reached its peak in the Sino-Indian War of 1962, China has made its
position very clear by repeated intrusions into Indian territory north of Kashmir near
the Chinese-administered region of Aksai Chin17.
China’s position stems from various reasons. One reason is the fact that India
is a nation that challenges China’s claim as a regional superpower and as such, China
feels obligated to possess bad relations with it. India has repeatedly acted as a
counterbalance to China’s foreign ambitions and China’s stance on the Kashmir issue
seems to follow the same course of action. Moreover, China supports Pakistan’s
claims due to economic reasons. The under construction China-Pakistan Economic
Corridor (CPEC) intends to connect China to Gwadar Port, thus providing it with a
direct, efficient link to Africa allowing it to further expand its conquests2.
3.4.3.Russia
Russia is another major country in this issue. Russia has had a long history of
involvement in this issue much like the United States and its predecessor, the Soviet
Union had the same history. The Soviet Union was an ally of India during the Cold
War, and were opposed to American backed Pakistan. In the war of 1971, the Soviet
Union was crucial in providing India with military support as well as helping it
counter the US13.
In more recent times, Russia has remained a close partner of India. Their
cooperation ranges from the fields of military to cultural events aimed at bringing the
two nations closer together. Russia is India’s biggest provider of military hardware
and is also a crucial trade partner3. Together, they have formed BRICS along with
Brazil, China and South Africa. This is an organization that reflects the next economic
superpowers of the world.
Furthermore, Russia has supported India in its attempts to gain further
international power and has backed its bid to become a permanent member of the
United Nations Security Council. Furthermore, it has backed India to become a
member of the elite Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and has aided India to establish
itself as a political superpower.
However, in recent times, there have been bumps in the relationship such as
Russia’s military exercises with Pakistan as well as its close cooperation with China.
Russia has also not publicly clarified its support towards India in the Kashmir issue
and as such, there are still hurdles in them establishing complete friendship.
3.4.4.United Kingdom
The United Kingdom believes that the Kashmir issue should be solved
bilaterally and does not believe that international interference is the best course of
action. With the United Kingdom attempting to establish greater trade relations with
India, it is in their best interest to cooperate with India on this matter and thus
explains their position on the issue3.
3.5.Stance of developing countries
Developing nations such as Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, etc,. mainly support India
in the Kashmir issue. The reason behind this is due to pure economics as well as some
political reasons. With India emerging as a political and economic power as well as being
the predominant superpower in the region, countries have wanted to establish closer ties
with India in order to reap of its development3.
In Afghanistan alone, India has invested bullion of dollars into its infrastructure and
has built a dam in cooperation with the Afghan government. As such, Afghanistan has
sided with India in the issue of Kashmir3. Furthermore, with the unstable relations between
Pakistan and Afghanistan arising due to the terrorist threat has taken its toll on their
relationship, explaining Afghanistan’s stance on Kashmir.
Other nations in South Asia such as Nepal and Bangladesh follow more neutral
positions however still favor India’s position of keeping the issue bilateral. India has aided
both nations in their development and as the leading member of the South Asian
Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC), it has tremendous influence in the local
sphere3.
Apart from South Asia, other developing nations such as those in Africa also
support India, apart from Egypt who has a close relationship with Pakistan. In South Africa,
the South African Kashmir Group (SAKAG) has been found to support India’s claims in
Kashmir and thwart Pakistan’s advances.
4.
Possible solutions
With Kashmir being the central security issue for both countries, a solution must
be inclusive of the concerns of both nations and thus it may be extremely difficult to form.
Developed nations believe that the best course of action for this issue is to engage in
diplomatic bilateral talks. With India and Pakistan both being nuclear-weapons nations, a
conflict between the nations could soon turn nuclear and could result in a potentially
catastrophic event. Furthermore, with the conflict having the potential to trigger other
conflicts, nations are vary of the war and as such are suggesting peaceful diplomacy as the
solution.
As such, mediation becomes a difficult task due to India’s unwillingness to make
the issue an international discussion. Therefore, mediation can only take the form of
spectating from foreign nations upon which India can choose to take their advise or not12.
A more practical approach towards mediation is by aiding in the engagement of complex
ties between the people of the country. With the help of foreign NGOs, the two nations can
exchange cultural, social and religious aspects therefore bringing the people of the nations
closer together. Although this is not a immediate solution, it is a necessary step if the two
nations are to develop closer ties in the future18.
5.
Keep in mind the following
The issue being debated in this committee deals specifically with the
mediation of the Kashmir issue as opposed to a solution to the issue. The United
Nations does not have the jurisdiction to determine a solution to the issue as it deals
with the territorial integrity of nations and as such it can only perform one job, which
is to provide a platform for constructive conversation. This background paper focuses
on the issue itself since the steps towards successful mediation need to be thought of
by the delegates. With the background info provided within this paper, the delegates
should be able to initiate their proceedings.
Furthermore, the chair would like to once again like to remind all delegates
that the issue being debated does not encompass the human rights violations.
Delegates that make unrelated claims as their main argument will be looked
unfavorably upon. The delegates should instead think about the geopolitics of the
region as well as the history of the region. The delegates should research every aspect
of the relationship between the involved nations as to gain accurate point of views on
the issue. Furthermore, the delegates should consider international politics and the
changing dynamic of power in the global sphere. Focusing on the details can reveal
extraordinary information, things which can help form an excellent resolution.
6. Evaluation
The issue between India and Pakistan is one that requires in-depth thinking as
well as research of the highest quality. The issue is more than just a territory dispute
and deals with the history of the foundation of the nations. Mediation therefore is an
extremely hard task to successfully carry out. The delegates should remember to take
into account the positions of both nations on mediation; India believes the
discussions should be bilateral while Pakistan wants to involve other nations. The
delegates should also consider the activities that are occurring in the region such as
cross-border terrorism,religious riots, and human right violations10, all of which are
contributing to the declining state of relations. If this decline is to continue, successful
mediation will not be possible.
Bibliography
1. Baba, Noor Ahmad. "Democracy and Governance in Kashmir." The Parchment of
Kashmir (2012): 103-24. Web.
2. Byman, Daniel. "Pakistan and Kashmir." Deadly Connections (n.d.): 155-86. Web.
3. Chowdhary, Rekha. "Kashmir in the Indian Project of Nationalism." The Parchment of
Kashmir (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
4. Das, Taraknath. "The Kashmir Issue and the United Nations." Political Science
Quarterly 65.2 (1950): 264. Web.
5. Gupta, Jyoti Bhusan Das. "Kashmir Accedes to India." Jammu and Kashmir (1968):
82-115. Web.
6. Hilali, A.z. "Kashmir dispute and UN mediation efforts: An historical perspective."
Small Wars & Insurgencies 8.2 (1997): 61-86. Web.
7. ”Kashmir." The Encyclopedia of Political Science (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
8. ”Kashmir profile - Timeline." BBC News. BBC, 29 Sept. 2016. Web. 14 Jan. 2017.
9. Makhijani, Arjun. "Short history of Kashmir dispute." Institute for Energy and
Environmental Research. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2017.
10. Mathur, Shubh. "Kashmir and International Justice." The Human Toll of the Kashmir
Conflict (2016): 131-43. Web.
11. Misra, Ashutosh. "Bridge over Troubled Waters: The Indus Waters Treaty." IndiaPakistan (2010): 57-80. Web.
12. Nayar, Kuldip. "Kashmir: Re‐ reading its past in order to proffer a practicable
solution." The Round Table 81.323 (1992): 303-14. Web.
13. Palit, Parama Sinha. "The Kashmir policy of the United States: A study of the
perceptions, conflicts and dilemmas." Strategic Analysis 25.6 (2001): 781-803.
Web.
14. Saideman, Stephen M. "At the heart of the conflict: irredentism and Kashmir." The
India– Pakistan Conflict (n.d.): 202-24. Web.
15. Shekhawat, Seema. "Conflict within Contested Kashmir." Gender, Conflict and Peace
in Kashmir (n.d.): 54-76. Web.
16. The Kashmir issue. London: International Institute of Kashmir Studies, 1988. Print.
17. "The McMahon Line/ Aksai Chin dispute." Domestic Politics, International
Bargaining and China’s Territorial Disputes (n.d.): 96-126. Web.
18. Wolpert, Stanley. "Potential Solutions to the Kashmir Conflict." India and
PakistanContinued Conflict or Cooperation? (2010): 94-105. Web.