Kashmir root cause of terrorism in S Asia: Maleeha

LONDON: Pakistan’s former ambassador to the UK & USA, Dr Maleeha Lodhi, has said the youth-led unprecedented protests in the Indian-held Kashmir have exposed the spectacular failure of India in the valley.

Referring to the on-going street rage against Indian security forces, Dr Lodhi, a known academic and journalist, said terrorism in the South Asian region was the consequence of the Kashmir problem and it was highly critical to deal with the causes and not just the symptoms of the problem.

Dr Lodhi was speaking at an event in the House of Commons organised by Commonwealth Journalists Association (UK) and also addressed by Brian Hanrahan, BBC Diplomatic Correspondent; M J Akbar, Editor, India on Sunday and Sunday Guardian, and Sir Hilary Synnott, Consulting Fellow International Institute for Strategic Studies, author and former diplomat.

Maleeha briefed the audience that India’s belligerence and its refusal to look beyond its own paradigm had led to the failure of last week’s peace talks or what she described as a protracted diplomatic dance held between Pakistan and India and it also reinforced the pattern of the inability of both neighbours to manage differences.

Dr Lodhi said the attitude of India towards Pakistan was similar to the one that is adopted by Israel and Palestinians where the mighty power always tries to arm-twist and dictate its own terms for dialogue. “You cannot hold Pakistan hostage to your own demands and seek a favourable outcome,” she said in reference to India’s total focus on the 26/11 terror attacks in Mumbai while throwing on backburner the core issues.

She highlighted the West shares the blame for not taking the issues seriously and convincing India for a political solution of the dispute. She reminded the US and its Western allies that the reason why they didn’t enjoy popularity in the conflict-ridden states, despite spending billions in aid through the elite, is they are not seen on

the side of equity, fairness and justice for the oppressed.

Dr Lodhi maintained that India had ruled out a return to what was known as the composite dialogue that proceeded during 2004-08 and had sought to recast the dialogue around terrorism by adopting a selected approach. On the other hand, she said Pakistan had shown willingness to make the issue of terrorism an important part of the dialogue process on a wider level talks so that the core concerns of both sides are dealt with. She said India also refused to include Kashmir, peace and security and Siachin in an agreed timeframe for future talks.

Dr Lodhi spoke of the three possible scenarios for the near term: a prolonged diplomatic deadlock with fruitless talks continuing but with realisation of the actual issues; a scenario of managed tensions where differences continue but are managed through diplomatic means; and the third being the most desirable scenario where both countries adopt a problem-solving approach to find a resolution of their disputes.

She cautioned India to abandon the threat of punitive strikes or war everytime there is a terrorist incident. The speakers agreed that the latest wave of popular uprising in the held valley was a result of the continuing sheer mismanagement in the valley and the failed opportunities by the successive governments to introduce true democracy in Kashmir. They also agreed that both countries knew there was no military solution to the Kashmir problem.

But M J Akbar insisted that Kashmiri youths’ rage didn’t mean that there was a hatred for India. “The Kashmiri youth are eager to join India in security services, they want to be a part of the entertainment industry and it was imperative they were accommodated.”

Sir Hilary Synnott mentioned how the Western officials are carpeted by the Indian government if they mention the “K” word ever. He said the Western officials were careful and on-the-guard not to use the name of the disputed territory.

He saw no chance of any Western power playing a role leading to the resolution of Kashmir dispute. The speakers agreed that it was in the best interests of both countries to engage in a meaningful dialogue to resolve the differences leading to the unlocking of the true potential of both India and Pakistan.