Dr. Parasaran Rangarajan, Consultant
for South Asia Analysis Group and Editor-in-chief for the International Law
Journal of London, in the abstract about his paper “A Kashmiri Equation” summarises
the answers to the questions posed by our previous post (Post 11)
A
Kashmiri Equation
Abstract
"The issue of the Kashmiri question is the longest
dispute as of today going back to the formation of the United Nations in 1947.
There have been many solutions put forward to find a solution which has been
suggested involving all five stakeholders in this complex equation; The
Republic of India, The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, The People’s Republic of China,
Azad Kashmir, and independence organizations with each having its own claim to
a part of this region.
In addition, the newly formed BJP led government of
India would like to have a debate on Article 370 of the Constitution of India
and possibly abrogate it since it gives autonomy and special territory status
to the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir. Questions such as are what are the
legal repercussions of removing the article for the Indian side of the border considering
Indian national legislation such as The Delhi Accord (1952) or 1974
Indira-Sheikh Accord? Is there any future for the current bi-lateral treaties
(ex: The Simla Agreement (1972) or Washington Accord (1999)) between India and
Pakistan to play a role in the final status of Kashmir taking into account The
Vienna Law of Treaties (1969) under international law?
Will the Jammu & Kashmir
of India’s we have known it be left without any link to the Union if Article
370 is abrogated, therefore, liberating it? Or will it default to the Union
like an automatic resulting trust would when there is no certainty on the subject
matter are valid and good questions to ask. The Pakistani side of the border of
the once Kingdom of Jammu &Kashmir; namely Gilgit-Baltistan’s (aka formerly
known as “Northern Areas”) relationship with Pakistan is also examined and how
that will factor into a political equation considering the political parties operating
there and local aspirations. Will separatist movements gain anything by
sustaining or abrogating Article 370 or executing the bilateral treaties to
find a political solution?
To what extent does China’s role extend to with its claim
to Aksai Chin in the context of an entire political solution? We will examine
the legal implications of abrogating Article 370 first including the validity
of bi-lateral treaties and second, examine a political solution which was endorsed
by pro-Indian Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir's
first Prime Minister before the position was abolished in the 1965; namely a
“condominium” based on the principles of “joint sovereignty” under
international law with considerations to a “coregency” as well.”
NOTE:
This post is based on Jorge Emilio Núñez, “Territorial Disputes and State
Sovereignty: International Law and Politics,” London and New York: Routledge,
Taylor and Francis Group, 2020 (forthcoming)
Previous
published research monograph about territorial disputes and sovereignty by the
author, Jorge Emilio Núñez, “Sovereignty Conflicts and International Law and
Politics: A Distributive Justice Issue,” London and New York: Routledge, Taylor
and Francis Group, 2017.
NEXT
POST: Territorial disputes, What do Kashmiris want?
Tuesday 01st October 2019
Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez
Twitter: @London1701
No comments:
Post a Comment