Crisis in Kashmir

The Pakistan Embassy’s information minister makes biased and unsubstantiated assertions in his letter (Feb. 23) on the crisis in Kashmir.

In an amnesic denial of fact, he fails to recognize that it was the ruler of Kashmir who acceded to India on Oct. 26, 1947, before the Indian army was dispatched to repel the invasion by Pathan tribals, backed by the Pakistani army. The U.N. Commission for India and Pakistan, in its resolution of Aug. 13, 1948, stipulated that the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir be ascertained only following a complete withdrawal of Pakistani forces from Kashmir. He harps on about a “plebiscite,” knowing very well that Pakistan is occupying a third of Kashmir.

Irfan Husain, in his zeal to champion the cause of Kashmiri separatists, forgets that Pakistan is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighboring country. He also forgets that while Pakistan languished under the yoke of one dictator after another, the people of Jammu and Kashmir enjoyed the same rights as all other citizens of a secular India where religion and state are separate, and where free and regular elections have taken place.

In 1972, Pakistan and India signed the Simla Agreement, whereby the two nations agreed to resolve differences by bilateral negotiation. Pakistan would be well-advised, particularly since it has separatist movements, not to fuel the flames of secession in Jammu and Kashmir. In a world moving towards reconciliation, Pakistan should encourage dialogue with India to resolve all differences between the two culturally identical countries. Husain’s verbiage would be well spent in advising his government to follow this course leading to peace and harmony in South Asia.

PARVIN D. SYAL

Glendale