External Intervention on Kashmir Issue

• 23 Jan 2020

Why in News

Recently, at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos Pakistan has reiterated the United Nations (UN) and United States(US) intervention in Kashmir issue.

Key Points

• Pakistan has demanded that UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) be allowed along the Line of Control(LoC).
• Pakistan also wanted US intervention in the Kashmir issue to help de-escalate tensions with India and prevent the possibility of nuclear conflict.
• India has always rejected the third party role in its bilateral relationship with Pakistan.

UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)

• It was established in January 1949.
• After the first war in Kashmir (1947-1948), India approached the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to bring the conflict in Kashmir to the notice of Security Council members.
• In January 1948, the UNSC adopted Resolution 39, establishing the three-member United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate and mediate the dispute.
• In April 1948, by its Resolution 47, the UNCIP was reconstituted as UNMOGIP.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 47

• It is concerned with the resolution of the Kashmir conflict.
• According to it, Pakistan was to withdraw its nationals who had entered the State for the purpose of fighting and to prevent future intrusions.
• The five member UNMOGIP reconstituted through this resolution urged India and Pakistan to hold a plebiscite after the restoration of law and order.
• UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) was meant to supervise the Cease Fire Line (CFL) established in Jammu and Kashmir in July 1949 under the Karachi Agreement.
• UNMOGIP is funded through the UN's regular budget.

Karachi Agreement

• After the 1^st Indo-Pak armed conflict in 1948,under the supervision of the UNCIP, military representatives of both Pakistan and India met in Karachi and signed the Karachi Agreement on 27 July 1949.
• It established a cease-fire line (CFL) in Kashmir.

India’s stand on Resolution 47

• India rejected the UNSC Resolution 47 and maintained that the resolution ignored the military invasion by Pakistan and placed both nations on an equal diplomatic ground was a dismissal of Pakistan’s aggression.
• The Instrument of Accession (IoA) signed by the Maharaja of Kashmir was ignored in the resolution.

Pakistan’s stand on Resolution 47

• It objected to even the minimum presence of Indian forces in Kashmir, as mandated by the resolution.
• It wanted equal representation in the state government for the dominant party in Pakistani-held Kashmir i.e the Muslim Conference.

Disagreement Over Role of UNMOGIP

• India’s stand on UNMOGIP:
  
  • The mandate of UNMOGIP had lapsed since it related specifically to the ceasefire line under the Karachi Agreement.
  • India has maintained that UNMOGIP has outlived its utility and is irrelevant after the Simla Agreement and the consequent establishment of the Line of Control (LoC).
  • Pakistan’s stand: Pakistan did not accept India’s position.
• UN’s Stand: Given the disagreement between the two parties over UNMOGIP's mandate and functions, the UNMOGIP could be terminated only by a decision of the Security Council.
• Despite their differences with the provisions of Resolution 47, both India and Pakistan welcomed the UNMOGIP and agreed to work with it.

Simla Agreement

• It followed from the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971 that led to the independence of Bangladesh.
• India and Pakistan signed it in July 1972.
• It established a Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir which, with minor deviations, followed the same course as the ceasefire line established by the Karachi Agreement.
• India and Pakistan mutually agreed on certain principles that both sides would adhere to while managing relations with each other.
  
  • These emphasized respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, respect for each others unity, political independence, sovereign equality, and abjuring hostile propaganda.
  • The two countries resolved to solve their differences by peaceful means, through bilateral means or other means mutually agreed upon by them.

Source: TH