Unraveling the Kashmir Dispute: A Historical Analysis of India-Pakistan Relations

The Partition of India in 1947 led to the creation of states like India, Pakistan, and Pakistan, causing a myriad of cracks and gaps that occasionally influenced relations between the newly formed nations. Of the many repercussions of the partition, one and the most controversial subject is one of them: the Kashmir dispute. It's remained the main source of hatred and bitterness between the two states and has stifled any chance of growth within either country. Despite the reality that both countries suffer from extreme poverty as well as other social issues, they invest a significant amount of their budgets in modernizing their military capabilities, at the cost of economic and social growth, as both have a suspicion of each other due to the events that have arisen from the partition. The issue is still a mystery since efforts on an international and bilateral level have not resulted in the consensus needed to solve the issue.

The conflict in Kashmir was not new before the partition because the people living in that region were deeply disturbed by the Dogra rule that had turned oppressive and unfair. Muslims were confronted with severe social and economic issues and were discriminated against. There was general anger and discontent about Maharaja's regime. However, the troubles started following the partition plan made public on June 3, 1947, by Lord Mountbatten. In addition to creating Pakistan and India, the plan stated that the princely states numbered 564 would have the option of joining either or both Pakistan or India if they considered geographical distance and the desires of their citizens.

The huge Muslim populace in Kashmir and its proximity to Pakistan and other religious, cultural, and ethnic connections with Pakistan have made it more open and open to Pakistan. But, Maharaja Hari Singh vacillated between joining or a country. Many people revolted against Maharaja's oppressive regime and began a movement for freedom that led him to request Indian assistance. India promised assistance contingent on Maharaja's accession to India. This was how the document for accession was secured, and India transported its soldiers by air to Srinagar and began to suppress the uprising with brutality. Mountbatten endorsed the accession, but with the condition that once the peace and order situation improved, the decision to join was to be to the people. The Indian soldiers began brutally killing Kashmiri residents, and within six months, about 80.000 people had been killed, and more than 7000 people had left their homes. This forced the tribal communities of the NWFP to assist their neighbors. Then Pakistani regular troops joined them in the fight against the invading Indians due to the refugees who flooded into the country's nascent state.

India is usually apathetic and unaware of UN resolutions, surprisingly was the first country to bring the issue to the UN Security Council and submitted an official complaint on January 1, 1948, regarding alleged Pakistani aggression and the abetting of those who fought tribal wars. India justified its actions by disproving any use of force to secure the document of accession. It also declared that it was supported by most of those Sheik Abdullah represented. India repeated its decision to hold a referendum after Pakistan had gone from Kashmir. In contrast, Pakistan refuted all these allegations, saying they were India responsible for the aggression against the Kashmiri population and that the referendum was a fraud; it had made it necessary for Junagadh, in addition to Hyderabad, to join India in a similar method. Thus, after weighing the two arguments on January 17 17, 1948, the UN issued its first resolution that urged both countries to rectify the situation and stop any activity that could worsen it. In the following days, the UN appointed a commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) assigned the responsibility of conducting research into the situation and normalizing the circumstances so that there would be an election to determine what happens to the Indian people. When the UN decided to adopt its resolution, the conflict over Kashmir had worsened, and both nations were in the midst of conflict. So, UNCIP deemed it necessary to establish a ceasefire between the two countries that was signed on January 1, 1949. When the ceasefire was declared, India was in control of two-thirds of the area, and the remainder, which Pakistan had advanced, was taken by Pakistan. In this resolution, the UN force was deployed to obstruct the ceasefire resolution's implementation, and it was repeatedly reiterated that the Kashmiri residents would determine their destiny.

However, the reality is that this referendum did not take place, which would have allowed the Kashmiri people the ability to determine their self-determination. India has flagrantly violated UN resolutions by allowing the referendum, as she was scared and did not want Kashmir to be a part of Pakistan. It did not recognize Pakistan as a genuine actor in the dispute and dismissed its constitutional right to be involved. In contrast, Pakistan declared that the conflict could not be resolved until all parties involved - Pakistan, India, and Kashmiri individuals - do not participate. The inability of UN resolutions could be explained by the inflexible and uncaring approach of India and also the fact that the resolutions were not legally to be interpreted as binding. Still, they were merely recommendations and didn't carry sanctions for non-compliance. The fact that the UN could only provide recommendations and provide advice and was not able to dictate its principles was enough for India to defy resolutions and go against its own rules. Another reason for India's rigidity was it was India was more robust and capable than Pakistan. The size of its territory and military power made it dominant in its approach. However, Pakistan was weak since the beginning, partly due to the inequitable Redcliff award and the denial of asset division that certainly aimed to put Pakistan out of Bud.

To conclude, the solution to the Kashmir dispute is essential for the peace of this region. Pakistan believed that it was neutral, and the power of the United Nations always regarded the execution of resolutions by the organization as being the sole solution to the conflict. However, the trust that was placed in it wasn't rewarded. Kashmiri citizens were not granted their fundamental human rights to ensure the protection and advancement of the principles upon which the UN was created. Although it is primarily an issue of territorial disputes between Pakistan and India, it also affects the Kashmiri people, who must be protected from their fundamental rights. If it can send a force of coalition against North Korean communists in the Korean War, then why it can't apply force or enforce sanctions to enforce its resolutions? So, the United Nations must bring back its reputation as a champion for human rights by paying adequate focus to the Kashmir problem and giving them the freedom of expression and to decide for themselves.