UN Human Rights Council’s report on Kashmir is so fatally flawed.
Debating its accuracy, fairness, methodology or motive is a waste of time as it merely gives another reason for India and Pakistan to fight.
Why is the report flawed?
In many ways, the Kashmir situation is back to the perilous 1990s.
Content - The report pricks India for its human rights record in Kashmir and equally questions Pakistan with allegations of supporting terrorism.
But neither allegation is likely to have any impact - as India believes that it is fight a nasty proxy war, and Pakistan believes that it is on a moral campaign.
Notably, such accusations are already aplenty and both countries wear them like badges of honour rather than disgust.
It swears by false hopes, which would to lead to greater polarisation of the issues with both India and Pakistan likely to harden their stands.
Incompetence - The UN report is hence at best lacklustre and is wholly superficial with little groundwork and insufficient knowledge of the situation.
The report is a clear case of UN delegating its responsibilities to NGO-type activists with little administrative oversight.
While activists taking the lead is welcome, it is a dangerous precedent for the UN to abdicate from its supervisory role altogether.
The report can also potentially damage those it sets out to defend and is an indication of the extent of UN incompetence.
How were the previous situations in Kashmir handled?
Violence- 1989-1994 is regarded as the worst phase of Kashmiri unrest, which was triggered due to a weak coalition government at the centre.
The government headed by V.P. Singh and propped up by BJP and the Communists from outside, both of had radically different views on Kashmir.
While the BJP wanted a muscular approach, the left and the others within the government wanted a softer and reconciliation oriented approach.
This led to indecisiveness, and helped Kashmiri extremism gain steam, and precipitated in a cruel and violent campaign against Kashmiri Pundits.
Suppression - The situation slowly morphed into a full-fledged proxy war against the Pakistani–insurgents, which engulfed much of Kashmir.
It was only after a clear sighted and hard fisted campaign under next PM Narasimha Rao, that the kashmiri situation was brought under control.
Notably, Mr. Rao had given the military a free hand, and his reign was when there were large scale accusations of human rights abuses.
International Action - Akin to today, the 1990s also saw intense pressure on India from the UN and multiple human rights groups.
Back then, the union government had got a resolution passed unanimously in the parliament for full recovery of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir.
A bipartisan delegation led by opposition leader A.B. Vajpayee, proceeded to the UN and won the historic Geneva vote on the same.
Notably, the current episode of UN involvement is also seeing opposition closing ranks with the government, mainly due to the irresponsible report.
What is the current political situation?
India has rejected the UN report for formally asking for self-determination of Kashmiris, which implies giving credibility to secessionists.
Interestingly, Pakistan too hasn’t accepted self-determination and it also wasn’t part of the UN’s 1948 resolution on Kashmir.
Notably, the 1972 Shimla Agreement (between India and Pakistan) also redefined Kashmir as a purely bilateral issue, and left little scope for plebiscite.
Kashmiri politics has currently lost credibility, human rights pressures are increasing, and LoC remains tense due to border aggression.
Despite the brute majority of the Modi government, the Kashmir policy seems to be faltering due to lack of strategic thinking and planning.
Hence, the ground situation sounds like a return to the 1990s unrest.
