Kashmir: one territorial dispute and several accounts
Sovereignty
conflicts like Kashmir (in which several international agents claim sovereign
rights for different reasons over the same piece of land) have a particular
feature: their solution seems to require a mutually exclusive relation amongst
the agents because it is thought that the sovereignty over the third territory
can be granted to only one of them. Indeed, sovereignty is often regarded as an
absolute concept (that is to say, exclusive, and not shareable).
For
a sketch about sovereignty see this blog:
Kashmir
is a clear example of a zero-sum game, with many negative outcomes of different
sorts (e.g. social struggle, bad governance, inefficient exploitation of
natural resources, tension in international relations, and threat to local and
international peace).
Thus, while these conflicts are in principle confined to
specific areas and start with negative consequences primarily for the local
population, they tend quickly to expand to the regional and—even—the
international level (e.g. effects on international price of oil, arms
trafficking, terrorism, war). There are many issues at stake domestically and
internationally.
For
“issues at stake” in territorial disputes see this blog:
Today we include
references to articles from the media covering this territorial dispute. In all
cases, although this sovereignty conflict has been and is object of study of
many sciences (for example, law, political sciences, international relations,
only to name a few) these sciences do not share their developments and both different
approaches and different languages were applied.
Indeed, although multi and
inter-disciplinary studies are promoted in speeches everywhere, it is more a
nominal aim rather than an actual reality.
The
answer was very simple. Some problems are never solved because most look for
more problems, problems within a problem, or just simply give up or are so
self-centered they think that problem will not affect them and hence, why would
they even think about it. Ergo, some problems like Kashmir are never solved
because people (or their representatives) do not look for a solution.
The
Kashmir Observer published:
“[…] Both New Delhi and Kashmir Valley now deal
with the stereotypes of each other than the complex realities as they exist on
the ground. But this needs to change. And it is incumbent on the media to
present a correct picture of the state as for the union government to get
serious about the situation in the state […]”
Complete article at:
On
their territories profile’s section, BBC informs us about Kashmir:
“[…] Since India's
partition and the creation of Pakistan in 1947, the nuclear-armed neighbours
have fought two wars over the Muslim-majority territory, which both claim in
full but control in part.
Today it remains one of the most
militarised zones in the world. China administers parts of the territory […]”
Complete
article at:
Dr Nitasha Kaul is a Kashmiri novelist and an academic
based in London writes
“[…] There is a widening chasm between the narratives,
especially of Kashmiri Hindus (Kashmiri Pandits) and Kashmiri Muslims, that
serve the purpose of Hindutva ideologues in power in India, pro-India Kashmiri
politicians in Srinagar, and strategic interests of Pakistan.
The tearing apart of any pan-Kashmiri identity along
communal lines has been neither natural nor inevitable. It has been engineered
over time to serve a whole array of vested interests relating to electoral
advantage, weaponry, war, militarisation, tourism and media that gain
significantly from the indifference, ignorance, vengeance, resentment and
domination of divided Kashmiri communities […]”
“[…]What else, but truths and reconciliations,
recognition of the pain and suffering of each other as Kashmiris, solidarity
and creation of processes to speak to each other in order to realise a future
of peace and freedom, multiplying the representation of voices within a
framework of trustworthy mediated dialogue, honouring of principles of human
rights and self-determination, move towards alternative media that allows for
honest understanding of issues in all their complexity, growing of the voices
that speak for justice and humanity, and the writing of many, many stories that
can be heard by those who need to empathise […]”
Complete article at:
In
November 2016 Mirza Waheed writes for The Guardian:
India’s
crackdown in Kashmir: is this the world’s first mass blinding?
“[…]In
the past few weeks, the two nuclear states have, between them, killed two dozen
civilians and injured scores of others in exchanges of artillery fire across
the disputed border – known as the “line of control” – that divides Kashmir
into parts controlled by India and Pakistan […]”
“[…]
Most shocking of all has been the breaking up of demonstrations with
“non-lethal” pellet ammunition, which has blinded hundreds of Kashmiri
civilians […]”
Complete
article at:
More
related recent articles (only a very brief sample) and their weblinks below:
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: Kashmir and the egalitarian shared sovereignty
Thursday 03rd October 2019
Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez
Twitter: @London1701
No comments:
Post a Comment