3C. Conflict And Instability In The Middle East And South Asia Arab-Israeli conflict: causes and consequences Indo-Pakistani war over Kashmir: causes and impact CAUSAL FACTORS 1. Religion First Kashmir War (1947-8) Pakistan s claim to the state rested primarily on the fact that the majority of the Kashmir population is Muslim. This was crucial because, in Pakistani eyes, the Partition of India in 1947 (by which Pakistan was created) was based on the Two-Nation theory. The Two-Nation Theory stated that Muslims and Hindus were two separate nations by every definition; therefore Muslims should have an autonomous homeland in the Muslim majority areas of British India for the safeguard of their political, cultural and social rights However, While Hagerty refers to Kashmir as a zero-sum test for each state s legitimizing ideology, to talk of this as a primarily religious conflict and to argue that the unfinished task of partition should be completed by joining Kashmir with Pakistan in order to bring peace is to oversimplify the situation because: Ø Kashmir did not have a homogenous Muslim population: Kashmir has a Muslim majority, not a homogenous Muslim population. Further, in addition to the many subregional groups, there are numerous hill tribes with their own distinct identity and cannot all be identified as Kashmiris. Ø Indian leaders have never accepted the Two-Nation Theory: While the Pakistani government drove almost all the Hindus out of Pakistan as a matter of national policy within days of coming into existence, the Indian government and Congress leaders tried to persuade its Muslim population not to migrate to Pakistan. Ø Religion was not the only factor that led to the rebellion in the Poonch Valley: Prevailing opinions chaffed at the Maharaja s egregious taxation and perceived insensitivity to the Muslim majority. While Muslims of the Poonch region rose up against him to liberate their Muslim brothers, historian Alastair Lamb claims the Poonch rebellion was as much about plundering loot as it was about a jihad for liberation. Second Kashmir War Theft of holy relic in Kashmir in 1963 which led to violent anti-indian riots Ø The phial containing the sacred relic a strand of hair from the head of Prophet Mohammed mysteriously disappeared from the Hazratbal shrine, causing large-scale violence to erupt throughout the Valley, icedvovos Page 1 27/11/12
especially in Srinagar resulting in the destruction of the Hindus and Bakshi s property. Ø Showed that religion was in itself, a very potent cause of conflicts and disagreements, as can be seen from the dramatic actions taken by Muslims in reaction to the disappearance. Ø Holy relic incident was a focus for intense religious and nationalist emotions (Bell). It also released force which had little to do with the calculations of statesmen. Religious developments way in which the Kashmiri insurgency evolved; not necessarily a fundamental cause of its outbreak Kashmir Insurgency (1989-present) Some of the main groups involved, particularly in the later stages as the conflict evolved into a more religious one, were fundamentalist militants for whom the insurgency was jihad. Ø In particular, what happened in Afghanistan was important in influencing developments in Kashmir. These Islamist groups were operating according to a trans-national Islamic agenda which had little to do with Kashmiri nationalism (helpful if you get a question on whether the Kashmir conflict was more to do with religion or territory) One of the consequences of this Islamicisation of the conflict was a brutal episode of ethnic-religious cleansing that took place in 1990 aimed at Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus). It was thus unsurprising that the Kashmiri problem should be a factor in the rise of Hindu fundamentalism in India Ø In retaliation to the excesses of Kashmiri Muslim militants, sectarian Hindu parties in India have invoked the Kashmir struggle to identify Indian Muslims with Pakistan, which led to pogroms against Muslims most notably in Mumbai from Dec 1992 to Jan 1993 and Gujurat from Feb-Mar 2002 which killed more than 4000 innocent civilians. The main political expression of this growing Hindu fundamentalism was the rise of the BJP. However, Pakistan remained an important related factor she was the conduit of overt and covert international military aid to Afghanistan, training and supplying Afghani mujihadeen and other Islamist volunteers. Ø Many fighters, drawing on their experience in insurgency operations, later moved their operations to Kashmir, which Pakistan actively encouraged. 2. National Security First Kashmir War (1947-8) Pakistan icedvovos Page 2 27/11/12
Ø According to the past as well as current strategic thinking in Pakistan, Kashmir s annexation was absolutely vital for Pakistan s national security. Ø Pakistan s military security would be seriously jeopardized if Indian troops came to be stationed along Kashmir s border. India Ø Kashmir s northern frontiers were common with Afghanistan, the USSR and China; thus security of Kashmir was vital to the security of India, especially since part of the southern boundary of Kashmir and India is common. Ø Territorially, Kashmir also represents a beachhead against autonomy or independence claims from groups in other parts of India. Ø Territorial concessions by the Indian government might be viewed as weakness and precipitate further problems of irredentism for the Indian state. 3. Nationalism Idea of contending nationalisms India espoused secular rule where Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Parsis, and Jews can live together under one unified nation as they have done for centuries. On the other hand, Pakistani nationalism was founded on the two-nation theory upon the belief that Muslims would be oppressed under Hindumajority rule, hence the need for a Muslim state that is separate from Hindu-majority India. Hence, the ceding of Kashmir would represent a defeat of Indian secularism in a Muslim-majority state. As a result, Kashmir has become hostage to these bitterly contending nationalisms. 4. National Identity India considered the retention of Kashmir an essential feature of its secular composite national identity. Pakistan considered its Muslim identity incomplete as long as Kashmir had not joined it. Strong ethnic factors Ø Kashmiri Brahmins have been a conspicuous element in the Indian intellectual and political elite, epitomized by Prime Minister Nehru. This group has been a powerful lobby pleading for Kashmir to remain an integral part of India. Ø On the other hand, the man celebrated in Pakistan for dreaming about a separate Muslim homeland, Dr Iqbal, was a Kashmiri. Ø Also, the Pakistani equivalent of the Indian lobbying group, calling for union of the whole of Kashmir with Pakistan or its independence is made up of Kashmiri refugees who fled the Indian-administered Kashmir as well as the sizable community of ethnic Kashmiris who have been settled in the Pakistani Punjab for more than 100 years. icedvovos Page 3 27/11/12
5. Strategic/ Economic Concerns First Kashmir War Hydro-political aspect Both India and Pakistan had to feed huge populations, with the pressure increasing due to rapid population growth. o The most developed regions of Indian agricultural production and almost the whole Pakistani agricultural sector are dependent on the waters from rivers which originate in the mountains of Kashmir, which meander into the two states. The state which controls the upper riparian would thus enjoy a strategic advantage because it can divert the flow of water or even deny it from the other. However, it often seems that these concerns over water is a moderating rather than aggravating influence on relations between India and Pakistan. o Both sides knew they could not afford to postpone an agreement on water sharing until the final status of Kashmir was settled. o Under the auspices of the World Bank, the Indus Waters Treaty was agreed between them in 1960, whereby the waters were allocated fairly to both India and Pakistan. Violation of Simla Accord Indian Occupation of Siachen (1984) The Saltoro Ridge (part of the Siachen glacier) could potentially be used as a means for Pakistan and China to link up, with the strategic Karakoram Range under their complete control. Hence India sought to drive a wedge between Pakistan and China. The Shaksgam valley was the second level of the China factor. This area of Kashmir was ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963. By occupying the Saltoro, India retains the option of negotiating with China about the Shaksgam Valley at an appropriate time. The location of the Shaksgam Valley is such that China has to be a party to any negotiations regarding Siachen. Note: Siachen is a good example of how difficult it is to resolve the various issues of the Kashmir dispute. Between 1989 and 2003 India and Pakistan held 9 meetings to hammer out a peace deal for Siachen but got nowhere. These negotiations have been dogged by what has been called a "trust deficit" between the two sides and by a fundamental disagreement as to what should be the basis of a settlement. 6. Political Disillusionment Kashmir Insurgency Led to rise in terrorism in Kashmir Originally, Kashmiri activism was focused on achieving independence for Kashmir; the most prominent group leading the insurgency in its early days was the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) which began as a secular nationalistic movement and had a long history of armed struggle against Indian intervention. icedvovos Page 4 27/11/12
The initial frustrations that led to insurrection had little to do with religious fanaticism and much to do with political disillusionment. Ø Popular perception during most of the 1980s-90s that both the state and federal governments had failed in their political responsibilities Ø Religious fanaticism had little to do with the rise of terrorism in Kashmir; it was economic and political frustrations that were the most prevalent factors, at least in the beginning. Ø As the Kashmiri public s calls for political reform went largely unheeded by the Indian government, terrorist violence began in earnest, with many groups emerging almost simultaneously. Thus be careful in trying to characterize the Kashmir problem in ethnoreligious terms. Certainly, the insurgency produced such tensions and animosities but there was no evidence that it was in itself the product of these kinds of ancient hatreds Ø Despite significant economic disparities between Hindus and Muslims, and Hindu dominance of most political and economic institutions, widespread communal hatred did not exist in Kashmir. Violent interethnic conflict was not prevalent; instead, a common bond of Kashmiri identity, popularly referred to as Kashmiriyat, prevailed. Since the outbreak of insurgency in 1989, ethnic stereotypes have come to the fore the displaced Hindus of the Kashmir Valley now tend to see their former Muslim neighbours as little better than marauders. ROLE OF ACTORS 1. Role of British British was responsible for Indo-Pakistani tensions in that they, as past rulers of India, fostered implacably hostile identities between the two factions of Hindus and Muslims (Ganguly) British adopted a divide and rule policy in their ruling of India Ø The divide and rule policy categorized and split the people of India according to their religion and ethnicity, and they treated each group differently. Ø This formed a clear divide between people of different religion and also prevented interactions between the religious and ethnic groups. According to Ganguly, The two states that emerged would be predisposed to conflict showing how the effects of British governance lasted even after the partition of India, so as to affect Indo-Pakistani relations after 1947. 2. Role of Pakistan First Kashmir War Pakistani tribesmen and disguised troops crossed the border into Kashmir and massacred the Dogra troops there. icedvovos Page 5 27/11/12
Second Kashmir War Pakistani adventurism caused by overconfidence Operation Gibaltar Ø With the anti-indian tenor in Kashmir following the theft of the Muslim holy relic and arrest and detention of the popular Kashmiri leader Sheikh Abdullah, the Pakistanis thought this automatically translated into support for Pakistan, and a willingness to resort to large-scale violence to express this discontent with Indian rule. Ø Pakistanis thus tried to stir up revolt within Kashmir to rise up against India, but with little success. The Kashmiri people did not rise up but instead provided the Indian army with sufficient information for them to learn of Operation Gibraltar. Ø This was because the generation of Kashmiris was politically quiescent, lacking the political sophistication due to their low levels of literacy, education and exposure to the mass media. They lacked awareness of their political plight and the requisite organizational impetus. What made them so confident? Ø India had just experienced a humiliating military debacle with China (1962) hence Pakistan underestimated the strength of the Indian army. Ø Border skirmishes occurred between India and Pakistan over the Rann of Kutch in early 1965. Pakistan had done well in these skirmishes and gained territory. This emboldened them that they might similarly do well in a quick military campaign in the disputed territory of Kashmir. Ø Pakistan believed it would gain the support of its ally, USA, but once the fighting started, US imposed a military embargo on both India and Pakistan for using weapons that had been provided to fight communism for other purposes. This was a major blow to Pakistan for much of its military hardware was supplied by the US. Ø Mild manner of India s Premier (Lal Bahadhur Shastri) who had just come to power in 1964 gave Pakistani leaders the impression that he was weak and would not be inclined to act assertively in Kashmir. This notion was strengthened by his handling of several domestic problems in 1965, such as the language riots (imposition of Hindu as the national language) and the Akali agitation in Punjab, in which he failed to act decisively. In this way, India s regime seemed shaky, and hence Pakistan was convinced it was an opportune time for adventurism in Kashmir. Kargil War (1999) Pakistani adventurism infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants over the Indian side of the Line of Control. icedvovos Page 6 27/11/12
Ø In response, the Indian army attacked the Pakistani positions and with international diplomatic support eventually forced a Pakistani withdrawal across the Line of Control. Reasons for adventurism Ø To give Pakistan leverage over the Siachen glacier issue and force the Indian troops to withdraw from there ultimately pressuring India to negotiate a settlement of the broader Kashmir dispute. Ø Pure retaliation for the Indian 1984 operation that seized the glacier? Ø Pakistan believed that any tension in the region, particularly if it turned into nuclear tension, would internationalise the Kashmir issue, helping it to secure a speedy resolution. Ø Seemed to be an initiative of the Pakistani military, particularly the newly appointed Chief of Staff, Pervez Musharraf, (although he was probably reactivating an older plan) Kashmir Insurgency (1989-present) Pakistani complicity helping the insurgents in Kashmir in independence struggle Ø The US State Department s 2001 report on Patterns of Global Terrorism specifically identifies Islamabad as the chief sponsor of militant groups fighting in the disputed Indo-Pakistani region. Ø Islamabad s backing for the five main groups fighting in Kashmir revolves around the perennial conflict with India, seen to be a threat to Pakistan s long-term viability and integrity. Ø Sponsoring militancy in Kashmir is regarded as a relatively cheap and effective way of offsetting existing power symmetries while creating a bulwark of instability along the country s vulnerable southern flank. Ø Pakistan fundamentally altered the dimensions of the conflict in Kashmir by financing the militants, provides military backing, logistical support and ideological indoctrination foreign militants are explicitly exhorted to fulfill their spiritual obligations to the jihad by fighting in the name of the pan-islamic cause. Clearly, Pakistani aggression served to damage any trust or relationship both parties had built up initially. Furthermore, their aggression bred distrust and hardened India s stand against Pakistan, as it used Pakistan s failure to adhere to agreements as justification for its refusal to negotiate, prolonging the conflict. 3. Role of India After First Kashmir War (1947-8) Indian intransigence resistance to third party involvement in what it sees to be a domestic issue icedvovos Page 7 27/11/12
After the war, India and Pakistan held talks to discuss the terms of the proposed referendum in Kashmir, but the necessary conditions to ensure a free and fair result was never agreed. Ø The Pakistanis insisted that the entire kingdom be placed under a neutral administration, while the Indians insisted that the Pakistanis should vacate the areas they occupied by 1949 Over time, India s position on this issue changed radically to be one of intransigence and stubbornness. Ø 1953 was the last year in which a referendum seemed to be a possibility, but this was stalled by Pakistani Prime Minster Bogra Ø From 1954 onwards, however, the Indians were increasingly reluctant to discuss the holding of a referendum at all, leading to various allegations that, with the onset of hostilities between Sheikh Abdullah and Nehru, New Delhi was no longer confident of success, or indeed the wider loyalties of the National Conference New State Constitution of India Ø 1957: Incorporated Kashmir into the Indian Union, in face of fierce protests from the Kashmiri people, Pakistan and the UN the state of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India. Continuously resisted the idea of referendum after 1954, even when Pakistan agreed to India s initial preconditions. Ø 1957: SC President proposed to the Council that the issue to referred to arbitration, which Pakistan accepted by India rejected. Ø In the same year, Pakistan was willing to withdraw its troops from Kashmir to meet India s preconditions to hold a plebiscite, but again India rejected. Ø 1958: Graham (UN representative, involved in earlier attempt at mediation) submitted a report to SC recommending that it arbitrate the dispute but again, India rejected the proposal. 1971 War Intervening in Pakistan s domestic issues This war only indirectly involved Kashmir; it was a war between East and West Pakistan, in which India intervened on behalf of the Bengalis resulted in independent Bangladesh. About 10 million refugees streamed into India from East Pakistan following brutal repression from the Pakistan military after the elections, and India provided sanctuary to Bangladeshi guerillas. In retaliation for intervening in their domestic affairs and exploiting the internal disturbances, Pakistan attacked airfields in India and Indiacontrolled Kashmir. India struck back in West Pakistan and directly intervened in the East on behalf of the Bangladeshis. icedvovos Page 8 27/11/12
The US then sent a nuclear-armed aircraft carrier and its battlegroup to the region to send an implicit threat to India (this later influences nuclear politics of India in favour of nuclear testing). Violation of Simla Accord Indian Occupation of Siachen (1984) The Saltoro Ridge (part of the Siachen glacier) could potentially be used as a means for Pakistan and China to link up, with the strategic Karakoram Range under their complete control. Hence India sought to drive a wedge between Pakistan and China. The Shaksgam valley was the second level of the China factor. This area of Kashmir was ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963. By occupying the Saltoro, India retains the option of negotiating with China about the Shaksgam Valley at an appropriate time. The location of the Shaksgam Valley is such that China has to be a party to any negotiations regarding Siachen. Note: Siachen is a good example of how difficult it is to resolve the various issues of the Kashmir dispute. Between 1989 and 2003 India and Pakistan held 9 meetings to hammer out a peace deal for Siachen but got nowhere. These negotiations have been dogged by what has been called a "trust deficit" between the two sides and by a fundamental disagreement as to what should be the basis of a settlement. 4. Role of Kashmir By actively pursuing its own independence (Kashmir separatism), Kashmir contributed to the outbreak of the Indo-Pakistan war by provoking the intervention of both India and Pakistan who wanted to claim sovereignty over Kashmir. Ø Upon his release, Abduallh declared the accession issue to be secondary over the establishment of a popular government. Ø Coupled with the declaration of the formation of the Azad Kashmir government, this provoked Pakistan as it was viewed upon as a rejection of the possibility of Pakistan leadership. Ø This provoked the Pashtun Tribesmen Raid on 21 October as Pakistan sought to reclaim control over Kashmir. Ø Kashmir then turned to India for military assistance, thus drawing India into the conflict. Ø This set the stage for the Indo-Pakistan War in 1947. Ø By playing on the desire of both Indian and Pakistan to claim sovereignty over Kashmir, the Kashmiris were able to make use of both India and Pakistan to their advantage to maintain their independence, thereby contributing to the outbreak of the Indo- Pakistan war. By declaring the ideology for an independent JAK from both India and Pakistan, the Kashmiris added a new dimension to the Indo-Pakistan conflict as it was no longer dominated by clashes between India and icedvovos Page 9 27/11/12
Pakistan. Instead, Kashmiri actors began to play a more major role in the conflict. Ø Mass resistance to Indian rule boiled over and erupted in massive demonstrations in 1990 calling for Kashmir s azaadi from India in what became known as the Intifada. Ø However, India perceived this as a secessionist attempt as Kashmir was seen as part of India. Ø Therefore, the Intifada provoked Indian retaliation to retain the integrity of India. Crackdowns and curfews were imposed and even resulted in massacres of demonstrators such as in Srinagar. FAILURE TO RESOLVE THE CONFLICT 1. Indian Intransigence 2. Pakistani Aggression (refer to Role of India and Pakistan ) 3. Failure of UN The UN s lack of legislative authority rendered their efforts to resolve the Indo-Pakistan conflict toothless and ineffective, hence, emboldening both parties as they were certain that the UN was powerless to intervene. Ø Despite setting up the UNCIP, it had no legislative power. Ø 1951: SC passed Resolution 91 which imposed cease-fire and asked for withdrawal of troops from Kashmir. However, both sides failed to withdraw. Ø 1957: Resolution 122 reaffirmed the earlier resolution but was ignored again. Ø By 1958, the Security Council had held 104 meetings on the crisis without reaching a solution, hence proving its ineptness. UN s failed attempts at reaching an agreement with both parties further undermined efforts at resolving the conflict, thus prolonging it instead. Both parties then became bolder in their provocative actions to one another, as they knew the UN was powerless to stop them. This then caused the conflict to escalate further while also prolonging it. 4. Superpower Involvement The superpowers interests were represented in the provision of military aid, which strengthened the capability of both parties to carry out armed insurgencies and provocation. Hence, legitimizing their cause, making the conflict even harder to resolve. Ø 1954: USA signed military pacts with Pakistan, providing arms and training for their forces to stand up against USSR. (CW interests) icedvovos Page 10 27/11/12
Ø This caused Pakistan to be dependent on US aid to invade Kashmir. Evident in 1999 Kargil War, where US refusal to back Pakistan forced them to withdraw their forces. Ø 1955: Soviet leaders visited India and declared wholehearted support for the Indian false claim on Kashmir and Jammu. Ø USSR also started a program of economic and technical assistance towards India Ø 1971: India signed Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Co-operation with USSR, which was a military pact guaranteeing SU help if India went to war with Pakistan again. Ø This caused Indians to feel secure enough to provoke a war with Pakistan in 1971. Superpower involvement and support served to fuel the conflict and prolong it, providing the means for both sides to fight each other through military and financial aid. Superpower support also emboldened them to initiate more provocative actions. Finally, US and SU legitimized both causes as they had support of global leaders in their actions. Thus contributed to the prolonged conflict as both had the ability to draw on superpowers support to continue fighting. IMPACTS OF INDIA-KASHMIR CONFLICT 1. Domestic Impacts India Second Kashmir War Ø There was some outrage among the Indian population at the decision to agree a ceasefire as India seemed to have the upper hand. Ø However, the military successes were a welcome relief after the 1962 war with China; if anything, the position of the Indian premier Shastri was boosted by the war. Kargil War Ø The war boosted the BJP, boosted the stock market, produced a surge in patriotism and a major increase in military spending. Kashmir Insurgency Ø India: Led to sweeping anti-terror laws which are sometimes used against Muslim civil society movements, innocent Muslim civilians and petty Muslim criminals (negative impact on civil society). Pakistan Second Kashmir War Ø Disillusionment within Pakistan, especially within the military. President Ayub had raised very high expectations among the people icedvovos Page 11 27/11/12
of the superiority of its armed forces, but Pakistan's failure to attain its military aims during the war became a considerable political liability for Ayub. Army s reputation suffered as well. Ø Created a huge financial burden, thus Pakistan s economy, which had witnessed rapid progress in the early 60s, took a severe beating. Ø Growing resentment in East Pakistan (Bengal) over the obsession of the Pakistani government with Kashmir. Bengali leaders accused the government of not providing adequate security for East Pakistan during the conflict, even though large sums of money were taken out from the East to finance the war for Kashmir. This was to be of significance for the war that occurred in 1971. Kargil War Ø The military leadership is believed to have felt let down by the Prime Minister s decision to retreat and withdraw the remaining fighters. Ø The war produced a serious deterioration in relations between the military (specifically Musharaff) and the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, eventually resulting in a coup in October 1999 by which Musharaff came to power. Kashmir Insurgency Ø Pakistan: The fighting over Kashmir has legitimized military dictatorships and draconian anti-terror laws which are often used against dissidents and to suppress civil society movements 2. Impact on subsequent diplomatic relations India Second Kashmir War Ø Even though US had placed an arms embargo on both India and Pakistan (its ally), India saw US as biased since Pakistan had started the war and US did nothing to restrain her. Thus India started to align itself with USSR both politically and militarily. Kargil War Ø India-US: US appreciated Indian attempts to restrict the conflict to a limited geographic area. These ties were further strengthened following the 9/11 attacks and a general shift in foreign policy of the two nations. Ø India-Israel: Israel had aided in arming India with military technology, and their relations were bolstered following the end of the conflict. Pakistan Second Kashmir War Ø Taken aback by the lack of support from the US, who declared neutrality in the conflict. Thus Pakistan increasingly looked towards China as a major source of military hardware and political support after the war. Kargil War icedvovos Page 12 27/11/12
Ø Pakistan-China: Made diplomatic overtures during the conflict to China which were initially quite successful but once her culpability was revealed all the diplomatic consequences of the episode for her were negative and Pakistan was more isolated within the international community than before. Ø Pakistan-International Community: Though the Kargil conflict had brought the Kashmir dispute into international focus which was one of Pakistan s aims it had done so in negative circumstances that eroded Pakistan s credibility, since the infiltration came just after a peace process between the two countries was underway (in Feb 1999, both countries had signed the Lahore Declaration to provide a peaceful and bilateral solution to the Kashmir issue) 3. Nuclear Arms Race The drive to have a military edge over the other led to intense nuclear testing by India and Pakistan, thereby generating a nuclear arms race between them. By using nuclear arms as a resolution to the conflict, the accountability towards to use of weapons of mass destruction have subsequently decreased. Hence, signaling the looming threat of nuclear holocaust, which will impact the safety of countries in South Asia, and worldwide. Ø 1974: India tested a nuclear device in the Thar Desert Ø 1988: Detonated five nuclear devices and tested intermediate-range ballistic missiles in an assertion of its self-proclaimed status as a superpower. Ø This was read as an open display of India s superiority over Pakistan, thereby prompting Pakistan to start its own nuclear program. Pakistan eventually became well advanced in the development of a nuclear program By 1986, Western intelligence concluded that Pakistan had produced enough uranium to manufacture nuclear weapons within two weeks. Similarly, Pakistan had series of nuclear tests in May 1998. Moving from its former position of nuclear ambiguity to openly flaunting its nuclear capabilities. The intense nuclear arms race between the two states dramatically changed the security of its environment, bringing tensions between them to new heights and increasing the risk of open conflict substantially. Also, it increased the gravity of the subsequent conflicts such as the 1999 Kargil Crisis, as the threat of a nuclear holocaust sparked global concern and fears. Moreover, Pakistan s close links with radical Muslim regimes made their nuclear capabilities known as the Muslim Bomb. icedvovos Page 13 27/11/12
This, coupled with the rise of RF, caused greater instability and posed a greater religious, military and security threat to the region and worldwide. 4. Rise of militancy and terrorism in Kashmir Emergence of extremist and terrorist groups in Kashmir were essentially rooted in the Indo-Pakistan dispute, where the possession of Kashmir was concerned. This caused a rise in the desire for autonomy in Kashmir, and the escalation of violence as Kashmiri militants utilized violence and terror to draw attention to their goals. Note the related role of Pakistan in the rise of terrorism in Kashmir as well. Ø Pakistan actively supported Kashmiri insurgents, and by 1987, many Pakistan-supported groups have sprung up, such as HUM, and proindependence groups such as Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). Ø HUM sought for Kashmir to join Pakistan on Islamic grounds; JKLF aimed for Kashmir independence on the grounds of ethnicity. Ø Emergence of such groups increased the terrorist activities in Kashmir: 1998 Wandhama massacre of Kashmiri pandits by militants disguised as Indian Army officers. Ø Pakistan was the conduit of overt and covert international military aid to Afghanistan, training and supplying Afghani mujihadeen and other Islamist volunteers. Ø Many fighters, drawing on their experience in insurgency operations, later moved their operations to Kashmir, which Pakistan actively encouraged. 5. Rise in religious fundamentalism The Kashmir conflict has also seen a rise in Islamic and Hindu fundamentalism in Kashmir, leading to the subsequent rise of terrorism in the region. This ultimately disrupted peace and security in Kashmir, and resulted in loss of innocent civilian lies due to the violence of the fundamentalists attacks. Ø Foreign Islamic jihad fighters called mujahideen had infiltrated the Kashmir valley, comprising of members from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Egypt, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Sudan. They were responsible for terrorist activities like the destruction of the Muslim shrine of Sheikh Norrud-Din Wali at Charar in 1995. Ø Another Islamic fundamentalist group in Kashmir was the LeT, which was the principal armed group in Kashmir with its origins in Pakistan. LeT attacked an Indian army base in Poonch in 1993 Ø Hindu fundamentalism also arose from the Kashmir conflict icedvovos Page 14 27/11/12
Ø Kashmiri pandits and a large section of the Jammu Hindus aligned themselves with Hindu fund groups like the VHP and the BJP, which demanded full integration of Kashmir with India. The rise of fundamentalist groups, both Islamic and Hindu, spawned from the Indo-Pak conflict and subsequently disrupted stability and peace in Kashmir. It also increased nationalistic militant fervour amongst the Kashmiris, which attracted the funding and involvement of religious groups. These groups supported their own faction to propagate the influence of respective religions in Kashmir. 6. Impacts on development of the conflict 1971 Conflict Raised questions on Pakistani irredentist claims on Kashmir + Effects on Kashmir Ø How could Pakistan lay claim on the Muslims in Kashmir when it could not even keep its two wings together on the basis of religious faith? (weakened Pakistan s religious argument on its rightful claim over Kashmir Ò defeat of the two nation theory ) Ø Pakistan was thus dismembered not by what India had done, but by what was done by its own armed forces against the Muslim population in East Bengal. The Indian army was hailed by the Bengalis as the liberation army, while the Pakistan army as the occupation army. It was proved once again that religious bonds were not enough to keep people together. Ø Defeat of the Pakistani army and, more importantly, the defeat of the two nation theory had a dramatic effect on Jammu and Kashmir. Ø The pro-pakistan, anti-india and pro-independence lobbies lost whatever support they had amongst the Kashmiri people. icedvovos Page 15 27/11/12