KASHMIR DISPUTE: WITH OR WITHOUT THE UNITED STATES?

BY MARIA SAIFUDDIN EFFENDI*

INTRODUCTION

India and Pakistan are undoubtedly two chronic hostile states of South Asia. They have been quarrelling with each other over various disputes for the last fifty-three years. Needless to mention that the jinxed "K" of Pakistan is one of the core issue of the their mutual hostilities and difference. The beautiful saffaronic soil has seen two major wars and continuous genocidal violence, with zero results – Zillions of tools and techniques have been used for the resolution of this conflict but they remain unsuccessful. In this scenario, the past and present role of the sole super power the U.S, cannot be ignored. The primary concern of this research paper is to answer the following questions:

a. Why doesn't the US use its influence over India in resolving the Kashmir dispute?

b. Are there any national interests of US the behind the resolution of this dispute?

c. If US involves itself as a mediator, what would be the consequences?

d. Does this problem have a near future solution?

Well before responding to such questions, it is better to have a realistic look of American ties with the two rival states

US and Pakistan

 Gone are the days when Pakistan was used to be a pretty darling of US. Their superb camaraderie ended with the collapse of Soviet Union with which Pakistan had to fight for the US. Scenario changed, and interests differed. The dictionary of US in cold war and post cold war era, therefore, varies too. The former "Mujahideen" are now coined as "Terrorists". At last, the most allied ally' had lost its strategic, even its over all position in the American eyes.

US and INDIA

 After divorcing her strategic spouse, the US moved towards India which now serves as her commercial partner for mainly two reasons:-

1. Export based economy of India especially its software industry allures the US greatly.

2. The increasing threat of China which might challenge the US superiority in the near future. India would definitely serve as mere player for the US in this game of power.

WILL US, WON'T US!

 Coming back to the main focus of this paper i.e., the US mediation in Kashmir Resolution, one might ask why should the US mediate in this particular issue? What are its interests behind this resolution? Well, the only visible interest of US, is that the immense investment of US in the Indian market needs peace around South Asia in general and India in particular. Nevertheless, due to Kashmir, which has become a nuclear flash point, peace seems to be in doldrums. For this reason, one can find some possibilities for US mediation. But the process is undeniably, being delayed and dawdled - Mediation starts when both parties agree – India considers Kashmir as her "ATOOT ANG" (integral and constituent part) and sticks to the context of Simla Agreement 1972 which emphasizes bilateralism. On the contrary, Pakistan staunchly believes in the overechoed slogan of "Kashmir Banay Ga Pakistan, and is ready for trilateral talks especially with the US as a mediator. US doesn't influence over India in resolving the problem due to some very basic reasons. If US persuades India, it would definitely lose its trade partner. In this type of situation, relationships would worsen and US cannot use India as a counterweight to China – Investment, in other circumstances, can be done somewhere else, but to avert Chinese threat, India as regional economic hegemony is essential for US on the other hand, the huge market of India cannot be ignored also. First of all US won't play a role of mediator as President Bill Clinton, openly says "We are not mediator" why?. Simply because their national interests are attached with India not with Pakistan. US doesn't seems to be very eager or anxious in deciding the future of burning Kashmir. If one assumes US role, so the "pro Indian" resolution would neither weird nor mind-boggling (as having Indian favor is the foremost objective of US foreign policy).

LAST WORD

 The future of Kashmir is obscure. Predictions won't work but suggestions can. By analyzing such facts, it is easy to grasp the final conclusion that Kashmir conflict can be resolved bilaterally. This would only be possible in the trustful atmosphere. The only  thing US should do in this regard is to serve as a bridge between the two for their peaceful co-existence at least if it cannot resolve it. This would lead to the progress regarding their table talks. India and Pakistan should give up their cussed attitudes. It definitely requires volition especially political will. The need of hour for them is to realize that no one would come from outside to resolve it because international polities revolves around interests and political opportunism.

* Maria Saifuddin Effendi is student of B.A (Hons) IIIrd Year at the Department of  International Relations, University of Karachi.

All content (C) Department of International Relations, Karachi University

Website designed and maintained by Techdorado Web Technologies Inc.
Disclaimer Email Webmaster, KUIRD.org