Skip to main content

The Doable Concept of 'Azaadi'



The IK Group

The concept of independent Kashmir measures the aspiration among the masses in abidance as the present political arrangement is not recognized by international structures i.e UNCIP etc.The gradual erosion of 'Azaadi sentiment' has been through unfair diplomatic means .Over the years, leaders have failed in institutionalizing the claims of the people.The legislative bodies developed on both sides are marketed as a substitute for self determination.Leaders have embedded the right of self determination' into respective legislative assemblies,thereby eroding the aspirations of the masses.Without signing the 'written affidavit' of allegiance to both countries,no political institution is allowed to take part in the election.The present spatial attributes of resolution are clear-A relationship should continue to be based on centralized power structure from New Delhi and Islamabad.

The current arrangement directly or indirectly predetermines the accession to Pakistan and India respectively . Several international independent analysts have stated that elections have never been held freely.Election commissions have sponsored manipulated and spoofed elections, especially in 1987 elections. At the same time, there have been no international voices to condemn these practices. How do we expect a resolution possible or Kashmir to develop, when the conditions created are hostile for safety by both India and Pakistan? The communal twist flavored and mood of hostility created by leaders on both sides will soon turn Kashmir into a wild fanatic state by creating another Taliban with Ak47 as the major export.

Endorsement of legal powers in accord with international conventions which safeguard rights-liberties and redistribute attributes of sovereignty is needed through genuine evolution from actors of both countries.Post 1996,the 'Azaadi sentiment' has acquired a major role in ensconcing the dispute for the process of accommodation.But the biggest hindrance faced by the people is that the leaders have succeeded in evolving a 'trait of flexibility' for the fear of getting irrelevant.The reason for that has been the 'lust for power and wealth'.This has unfortunately created an environment of 'mistrust' and 'social fragmentation'.

The concept of 'Azaadi' should address Indian stands,Pakistani Stands as well as Kashmiri stands through a tripartisan solution by balancing the political,legal and social persuasions of the people.'Internal sovereignty' is more important than concepts of autonomy and self rule.This is the main reason why many attempts regarding implementation of prevailing ideas have failed. An accomplishable resolution can be implemented through enabling an environment of demilitarization , developing new prototype political structures within the region and through shared economic integration(drafted in one economic union) between three parties.Joint institutions created would co-ordinate newly formed relationships.The state of India and Pakistan have failed to genuinely address the issue so far because they have been provided a 'liberty of multiple interpretations'.


The only substitute for dialogue is violence.Every day when these leaders delay talks, at least 20-30 people add up to the list of casualties. The best method in decreasing level of violence is through peaceful negotiations. It is a long term concept for establishing peace.However, there have been no hints of an international intervention-their role has been resisted to mere spectators.Violence has fretted the essence of 'Azaadi' by hijacking our social domain. Leaders are slaves of the prevailing sentiment and have crossed all ideological extremes to facilitate an invalid democratic establishment.This is a harsh reality.Massive human right violations have alleviated the scope for armed and non armed secessionist movements as a result of failure initiated by both countries.

The methodology that would facilitate a resolution would be:

A)Identifying the roots of conflict.

B)Revering the sacrifices rendered.

C)Democratic evaluation by initiating the right of self determination.

D)Redefining political and military institutions in the new state of affairs.

E)Making independent homeland as the most important element in the resolution process.

F)Outmost sincerity and dedication in pursuing the resolution.

G)Involving leaders in an 'inclusive process' from all strands of political thought.

Popular posts from this blog

Kashmir's Geo-Strategic Position

Also published on viewpoint, Rising Kashmir

Kashmir is gifted with strategic leverages for emerging nations. That’s why, it’s is a vale of caged aspirations. The current geo strategic position for Kashmir is dictated by three emerging nations, which are bred with Secular, Islamic and Communist ideologies.
Kashmir is a mountainous valley and is surrounded by a hilly and mountainous terrain. The land of Jammu, Muzafarabad, Gilgit, Baltistan and Ladakh constitute an area of highlands. They border Pakistan, Afghanistan, Xinjiang, and some parts of Chinese administered Tibet. Kashmir also has proximity to Central Asian Republics. With the nature of increased arm strengths developed by India, Pakistan and China, the geo strategic position of Jammu and Kashmir continues to get importance.
Throughout history, all the political changes that have occurred outside of Kashmir, have had a direct strategic impact on the territorial integrity. The wars of foreigners throughout centuries intensified th…

Scanning The Dixon Plan

Sir Owen Dixon was a judge from the Australian High Court, whose meticulous report drafted to UN in 1950 received a commendation for the obstinacy of his analysis of the Kashmir resolution from the Security Council. He is regarded as an Australian scholar of impeccable credentials. 

Infact Major William Alan Reid, who was an observer with the U.N Military Observers Group in  Kashmir (UNMOGIP) got inspired by his work for his B.A Honours thesis titled “Sir Owen Dixons Mediation of the Kashmir Dispute” (July 2000) for which the writer is greatly indebted.  Reid is currently working on the doctoral thesis for the same subject. He has even consulted his notes, some of his fifty interviews, his diary and personal correspondence as well as the Australian archives, besides other published works.  To add more facts, there has been a tradition of Australian scholarship on India represented by Professors like Robin J Moore, Ian Coplan and B. Millar to name a few. 
Academia studying Kashmir confl…

Calling Off Kashmir Dispute

There has been no transparency in discussions arising from bilateral talks on Kashmir. From the last few years, calling off the Kashmir dispute has been the favourite argument arising out of Indian media commentators and political leaders. It is because of existing narration of implanting fervent Indian nationalism inside Kashmir valley.
Economic development, financial incentives and being part of India’s GDP growth have been other reasons given to call off Kashmir dispute. But is it fair? Why did India and Pakistan make attempts to reconcile through international agreements in the past at the first place, despite several wars fought on the borders?
British research has also deemed instrument of accession controversial. Importantly, what makes India run away from its moral responsibility when thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in the conflict? When were economic grants more sacrosanct than human lives? Maybe, when it comes to Kashmir, all humanist ideals, which Indian poli…