US administration’s recent move to include Kashmir’s largest and indigenous militant outfit Hizbul Mujahideen in the list of banned outfits highlights yet another aspect of American government’s pathetic and irrational policy towards the region. The US decision came weeks after the Hizb chief and chairman of UJC Syed Salahuddin was designated a global terrorist. For Kashmir-watchers and foreign policy analysts, the much anticipated move was not what could be termed as a bombshell; however, it has further cemented the perception that instead of adopting a reasonable approach to help resolve the lingering dispute the US and its policy making institutions are so brazenly using Kashmir as a bargaining instrument to pursue its long cherished economic and strategic interests in South Asian region.
The policy, as a matter of fact, goes contrary to its claims of espousing and standing for democratic principles of liberty and justice. Historically, the US has always encouraged Pakistan and India to engage in dialogue to seek settlement of all disputes including the Kashmir dispute. It goes without saying that the US had played a significant role in adopting the historic UN resolution that grants Kashmiris’ the right to self-determination.
So far as the disputed status of Jammu & Kashmir is concerned, there is no change in America’s official policy, but the latest move, perceived as an act of injustice, had sent shockwaves in Kashmir where decision is being seen as having the potential to dent the image of Kashmir’s freedom movement at the global level. In view of the peaceful mass uprising in Kashmir, it was expected that the simmering situation in the region and rising tensions across the line of control would prompt the US government to adopt a pragmatic and sensible approach to bring an end to soul-shattering era of injustice, state-oppression and cruelty in Kashmir by playing an arbitrator’s role in negotiating a peaceful settlement of the dispute, however, the lopsided approach adopted by the sole superpower has deeply hurt the collective psyche of Kashmiri people who have been worst victims of the conflict since 1947.
Expressing its dismay over the decision Pakistan termed the move as “completely unjustifiedâ€. Foreign office spokesman Nafees Zakrias during his weekly press briefing said, “The designation of individuals or groups supporting the Kashmiri right to self-determination as terrorists is completely unjustified,†He said the US decision did not take into account the 70-year struggle of Kashmiris. “We are disappointed (with the US decision) in view of the fact that Kashmir is an internationally recognized dispute with UNSC resolutions pending implementation,†he said.
The Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir while expressing his anguish over the contentious move said that the “un-justified decision†had badly disappointed Kashmiri people who are engaged in a legitimate struggle against India’s illegal and forcible occupation.
“How ironic is it that an oppressor [India], which is continuing its brutality and oppression in Kashmir for the past 70 years, is not designated as a terrorist State but the people who raise their voices against the repression and continuous oppression are labeled as terroristsâ€. The US decision he said violates the UN ruling that guarantees the right to self determination to those states fighting against foreign occupations.
In a rebuttal to the US state-department notification designating HM as “terrorist organization†United Jihad Council, made it clear that Hizb is an indigenous organization, engaged in a legitimate struggle for the right to self determination enshrined in UN Security Council resolutions. The UJC said that it cannot be dubbed as a terrorist organization by any stretch of the imagination.
Regardless of how America will play its cards to pursue its own regional agenda, the changes sweeping across the region have, apparently, pushed the two main stakeholders [Pakistan & Kashmiris] in a tight spot. Although the UN resolution 3314, clearly says that the states under foreign occupation have right to armed struggle. But for Pakistan a gigantic challenge ahead is to persuade the international community that, as an occupied nation, Kashmiri people have every right to struggle for their right to self-determination by all means at their disposal.
Pakistan, having championing Kashmiris’ right to self-determination at international level, will have to put in extra efforts at diplomatic level to defend the legitimacy of Kashmiris’ freedom movement besides sensitizing the international community about the early settlement of the dispute. Whereas, Hurriyat leadership, representing Kashmiris’ genuine aspirations, will have to devise a comprehensive strategy to maintain the indigenous character of the rights movement as India has always tried to hoodwink international community by portraying the ongoing resistance movement in Kashmir as a “foreign funded movementâ€.
So for as the American’s see sawing policy is concerned, the US defense analyst David S. Chu has summed up the whole story just in one sentence i.e. “as long as the shadow of China threat lingers in the mind of US policy makers Washington will treat New Delhi as its natural partnerâ€.