Agenda:- Growth of NSA’s(Non State Actors) and the political

scenario of the Kashmir conflict

LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD:

Dear Delegates,
It is an honor to be serving as a part of the Executive Board of Special political
and decolonization committee (SPECPOL), at BJEM MUN 2019. Please
consider that the following guide, as the name suggests, is merely to provide you
with the background of the agenda and cannot serve as the credible source of
information. Your real research lies beyond this guide and we hope to see some
strong content and debate come our way. The agenda at hand is both vast and
complex, and a successful discussion on it would entail the collective participation
of all of you. It shall be your prerogative to decide the direction in which you want
to take this committee. At the outset, we would like to state that the agenda is to be
analyzed from a policy stand point as opposed to a emotional and communal one,
we expect you to keep it limited, enough to structure your argument/content related
to a policy. We hope to see a great level of effort and enthusiasm from you all, so
that we all can take back a great experience.
Do research the updated information on various news agencies but be careful of
quoting the credible sources only while presenting arguments/points.

Happy Researching.
Regards.

ARNAV PATNAIK NISHITA SAREEN

CHAIRPERSON DIRECTOR

On Behalf of Executive Board,

Special political and decolonization committee ( SPECPOL),
THE NATURE OF PROOF/EVIDENCE IN COUNCIL

The following kinds of documents (in the order of decreasing precedence) can be
admitted as proof in council:

1. UN Bodies:

SC (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/);
GA (http://www.un.org/en/ga/);
HRC (http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/HRCIndex.aspx) etc.
WHO (http://www.who.int/en/)

2. UN Affiliated bodies:

International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.iaea.org/);

World Bank (http://www.worldbank.org/);
International Monetary Fund (http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm);
International Committee of the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp); etc.

3. Treaty Based Bodies:

Antarctic Treaty System (http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm);

International Criminal Court (http://www.icccpi.int/Menus/ICC) etc.

3.1. State Reports- Any State's Report from their government portals or State
owned media

State Department of the United States of America

(http://www.state.gov/index.htm);
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
(http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/index.htm);
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of various nations like India (http://www.mea.gov.in/);
France (http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/ );
Russian Federation (http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/main_eng ), etc.
3.2. Permanent Representatives to the United Nations Reports
http://www.un.org/en/members/ (Click on any country to get the website of the
Office of its Permanent Representative).
3.3. Multilateral Organizations

NATO (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/index.htm);
ASEAN (http://www.aseansec.org/);
OPEC (http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/), etc.

4. Reuters reports on incidents: http://www.reuters.com/

NOTE: The probable problem with Reuters:

Reports claiming to quote an individual from any government will not
necessarily reflect the government's point of view in totality (should there be
a disagreement in the two view-points).

NB:
Reports from media houses like the ones mentioned below shall not be taken into
consideration as substantive proof but only as supportive/persuasive proof:

RIA Novosti (Russia) http://en.rian.ru/

IRNA (Iran) http://www.irna.ir/ENIndex.htm
BBC (United Kingdom) http://www.bbc.co.uk/
Xinhua News Agency and CCTV (P.R. Of China) http://cctvnews.cntv.cn/

Under no circumstances will sources like

Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/);
Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/);
Or newspapers like
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/);
Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/); etc. be accepted in the
Council.

Duly note each document’s source before its presentation in council.

Introduction
Long-term rivalry between India and Pakistan remains the crucial challenge in the
South Asian security environment. Despite some bilateral initiatives the prospects
for enhanced cooperation and stability in the Subcontinent remain rather elusive. In
the second decade of XXI century formidable trust deficit between the two states
prevails and it has brought a new wave of blame game on both sides. The
differences in the approach towards resolution of conflicts are clearly visible and
talks on big issues, such as Kashmir do not bring any noticeable results. Security
strategies of both countries and prospects for prosperity are unavoidably
interdependent because of geopolitical and economic reasons. India under BJP rule
continues its efforts to strengthen its regional position, emerge as strong world
power and counterbalance Chinese influences. Some experts are concerned by
growing Hindu nationalism and its possible impact on policy towards Pakistan.
Pakistan faces security challenges with curbing the activities of violent non-state
actors on top of it. Although military operation was launched in 2014, different
terrorist outfits still pose serious threat to internal and external security. Despite all
the problems it is widely recognized that peaceful Subcontinent and development
opportunities are within the interest of both countries.

“There are more ideas on earth than intellectuals imagine. And these ideas are
more active, stronger, more resistant, more passionate than ''politicians'' think.
We have to be there at the birth of ideas, the bursting outward of their force: not
in books expressing them, but in events manifesting this force, in struggles
carried on around ideas, for or against them.”

Throughout ancient times, the breathtakingly beautiful Valley of Kashmir has

stood for peaceful contemplation, intellectual advancement and religious diversity
coexisting in an atmosphere of tolerance for the most part. In the modern
geopolitical era, this same diversity, evident from the blend of Islam, Hinduism,
Sikhism and Buddhism in this single state, has made it a center of warfare rather
than cultural advancement. In the late 1980s, an insurgency in the valley threatened
not only to rip Kashmir apart, but also pull the rest of the world into a dangerous
war. In this paper, we will examine the major reasons for the insurgency, and why
it only gained momentum some 40 years after India’s partition. Finally, we will
explore some of the modern-day proposed solutions to the ongoing conflict over
Kashmir.
The roots of the conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian
Government are tied to a dispute over local autonomy. Democratic development
was limited in Kashmir until the late 1970s and by 1988 many of the democratic
reforms provided by the Indian Government had been reversed. Non-violent
channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused a dramatic
increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India. In 1987,
a disputed state election created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in
some of the state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups.
In July 1988 a series of demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian
Government began the Kashmir Insurgency, which during the 1990s escalated into
the most important internal security issue in India.

Political map
Background behind the conflict
" Before Deciding the future, learn about the past
We shall begin by discussing the origins of the independence movement in
Kashmir. There are two propagated pre-1947 histories of the Kashmir Valley. The
first, recounted by the minority Kashmiri Pandits, talk of the butchery perpetrated
under Afghan rule in the 18th and 19th centuries, in which tens of thousands of
them were either brutally murdered or forcibly converted to Islam. The second is
that of the majority Kashmiri Muslims, and the discrimination they faced under the
Dogra rule from 1846 to 1947.

The Dogra Rule

The Dogra Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, ruled by their Maharaja, had
originated from the Jammu region of the newly created state. The Dogras were a
neighbouring race of Hindus who paid the British in 1846 a lump sum to buy the
rights to the Kashmir Valley as part of the Treaty of Amritsar. There was a lot of
faith in the young Maharaja Hari Singh when he succeeded his uncle’s throne in
1925.6 However due to his reliance on his advisors he lost touch with his subjects
and became dangerously oblivious to their grievances.

The Muslim Conference

In 1931 a fierce propaganda campaign against the Maharajah’s rule was initiated
from Lahore, in neighbouring Punjab, by the Muslim press8. Leaflets and journals
spoke of the deliberate suppression of the Muslims and instigated the people to rise
against the Maharajah whom they claimed was influenced by his Hindu advisors.
They proclaimed that Islam was in danger.
Why is Kashmir disputed?

The territory of Kashmir was hotly contested even before India and Pakistan won
their independence from Britain in August 1947.Under the partition plan provided
by the Indian Independence Act of 1947, Kashmir was free to accede to India or
Pakistan. The Maharaja, Hari Singh, wanted to stay independent but eventually
decided to accede to India, signing over key powers to the Indian government – in
return for military aid and a promised referendum. Since then, the territory has
been the flashpoint for two of the three India-Pakistan wars: the first in 1947-8, the
second in 1965.In 1999, India fought a brief but bitter conflict with Pakistani-
backed forces who had infiltrated Indian-controlled territory in the Kargil area.In
addition to the rival claims of Delhi and Islamabad to the territory, there has been a
growing and often violent separatist movement against Indian rule in Kashmir
since 1989.

Accession to India

On October 22, an impatient Pakistan invaded Kashmir from the north with an
army of soldiers and tribesmen armed with modern weapons. The tales of the
invader’s brutal sackings of towns, and mass killings reached the people of
Srinagar soon after and created mass hysteria. Kashmir, without an army, was
under serious threat. The intention of Pakistan had been to install fear into the
Kashmiris so they would surrender quickly. Maharaja Hari Singh sent Sheikh
Abdullah as his representative to Delhi to seek India’s help, and in turn signed the
Statement of Accession. The next day, five days after the invasion began, Indian
troops were flown into the capital Srinagar and fought alongside the local
Kashmiris against the invaders, who had reached within a few miles of Srinagar.20
The war was not over until the end of 1948 and left the former Princely State of
Jammu and Kashmir split between India and Pakistan (Pakistan later gave a
portion. India and Pakistan have fought at least three wars over Kashmir, including
the Indo-Pakistani Wars of 1947, 1965 and 1999. Furthermore, since 1984 the two
countries have also been involved in several skirmishes over control of the Siachen
Glacier. India claims the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir and as of 2010,
administers approximately 43% of the region, including most of Jammu, the
Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier. India's claims are contested by
Pakistan, which controls approximately 37% of Kashmir, namely Azad Kashmir
and the northern areas of Gilgit Baltistan.
A Free Kashmir

Sheikh Abdullah had probably preferred an independent Kashmir himself in 1947,

for he would have undoubtedly become the leader. However due to the invasion by
Pakistan he too needed India’s help and thus promptly accepted the State’s
accession. It would be wrong to say that only the Kashmiri Muslims desired
independence. The famous writer and Kashmiri Pandit Premnath Bazaz published
“Freedom Struggle in Kashmir” in 1954 in which he also defended Pakistan's stand
in Kashmir. He had been banished from Kashmir along with another Kashmiri
Pandit, Kanhayalal Kaul, by Sheikh Abdullah in 1949.
Abdullah explained his reasoning for joining India in 1948 when he declared: “We
the people of Jammu and Kashmir, have thrown our lot with Indian people not in
the heat of passion or a moment of despair, but by a deliberate choice. The union
of our people has been fused by the community of ideals and common sufferings in
the cause of freedom". He also later reflected that the one million non-Muslims of
the State would have no place in Pakistan and as the Kashmiris had always
preached secularism their ideological home was India.
Initial Years in the Indian Union
In September 1951 the first ever elections were held for the Constituent
Assembly in the state. The National Conference won all 75 seats
unopposed.Article 37024 of the Indian Constitution was passed in 1952 and was
the compromise between the demands of Indian secularism and Muslim sub-
nationalism.But by 1953 Abdullah had become confrontational with his own
cabinet and began speaking of revoking the accession and forming an independent
Kashmir on several occasions. In August 1953 Sheikh Abdullah was arrested for
having turned corrupt and autocratic. He was replaced by his friend and deputy,
Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad, under whom the Constituent Assembly ratified the
State’s accession to India in February 1954.
Major conflicts Between the two state (India and
Pakistan) over the disputed territories of Kashmir.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947

After rumours that the Maharaja supported the annexation of Kashmir by India,
militant Muslim revolutionaries from western Kashmir and Pakistani tribesmen
made rapid advances into the Baramulla sector. Maharaja of Kashmir Hari Singh
asked the government of India to intervene. However, India and Pakistan had
signed a non-intervention agreement. Although tribal fighters from Pakistan had
entered Jammu and Kashmir, there was no solid legal evidence to unequivocally
prove that Pakistan was officially involved. It would have been illegal for India to
unilaterally intervene in an open, official capacity unless Jammu and Kashmir
officially joined the Union of India, at which point it would be possible to send in
its forces and occupy the remaining parts.
By the time Pakistani tribesmen reached the outskirts of Srinagar, the Maharaja
desperately needed military assistance. Before the tribesmen's arrived, India argued
that the Maharaja must complete negotiations to cede Jammu and Kashmir to India
in exchange for military aid. The subsequent cession agreement was signed by the
Maharaja and Lord Mountbatten of Burma. In Jammu and Kashmir, National
Conference volunteers worked with the Indian Army to drive out the Pakistanis.
until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council.
Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he
was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the
set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN
Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948. The measure imposed an
immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the
withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani
nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose
of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum
strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into
effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan. However, both
India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over
interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking
point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce
stage or at the plebiscite stage.
Sino-Indian War

In 1962, troops from the People's Republic of China and India clashed in territory
claimed by both. China won a swift victory in the war, resulting in Chinese
annexation of the region they call Aksai Chin and which has continued since then.
Another smaller area, the Trans-Karakoram, was demarcated as the Line of Control
(LOC) between China and Pakistan, although some of the territory on the Chinese
side is claimed by India to be part of Kashmir. The line that separates India from
China in this region is known as the "Line of Actual Control".

Indo-Pakistani War of 1965

The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965was a culmination of skirmishes that took place

between April 1965 and September 1965 between Pakistan and India.
This conflict became known as the Second Kashmir War and was fought by India
and Pakistan over the disputed region of Kashmir, the first having been fought in
1947. The war began following Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was
designed to infiltrate forces into Jammu to precipitate an insurgency against rule by
India. The five-month war caused thousands of casualties on both sides. It ended in
a United Nations (UN) mandated cease fire and the subsequent issuance of the
Tashkent Declaration The United States and the Soviet Union used significant
diplomatic tools to prevent any further escalation in the conflict between the two
South Asian nations. The Soviet Union, led by Premier Alexei Kosygin, hosted
ceasefire negotiations in Tashkent (now in Uzbekistan), where Indian Prime
Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistani President Ayub Khan signed the
Tashkent Agreement, agreeing to withdraw to pre-August lines no later than 25
February 1966.
With declining stockpiles of ammunition, Pakistani leaders feared the war tilting in
India's favour. Therefore, they quickly accepted the ceasefire in Tashkent. Despite
strong opposition from Indian military leaders, India bowed to growing
international diplomatic pressure and accepted the ceasefire. On 22 September, the
United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution that called for an
unconditional ceasefire from both nations. The war ended the following day.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1971

The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 was the direct military confrontation between
India and Pakistan during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. Indian,
Bangladeshi and international sources consider the beginning of the war to have
been Operation Chengiz Khan, when Pakistan launched pre-emptive air strikes on
11 Indian airbases on 3 December 1971, leading to India's entry into the war of
independence in East Pakistan on the side of Bangladeshi nationalist forces, and
the commencement of hostilities with West Pakistan. Lasting just 13 days, it is
considered to be one of the shortest wars in history.
During the course of the war, Indian and Pakistani forces clashed on the eastern
and western fronts. The war effectively came to an end after the Eastern Command
of the Forces signed the Instrument of Surrender, on 16 December 1971 in Dhaka,
marking the liberation of the new nation of Bangladesh. East Pakistan had
officially seceded from Pakistan on 26 March 1971. Between 90,000 and 93,000
members of the Pakistan Armed Forces including paramilitary personnel were
taken as Prisoners of War by the Indian Army. It is estimated that between
2,000,000 and 3,000,000 civilians were killed in Bangladesh. As a result of the
conflict, a further eight to ten million people fled the country at the time to seek
refuge in neighbouring India

Non State Actors in Pakistan

According to the USA (Rule of law in armed conflicts project 2012) , a plethora of
non-state armed groups have been engaged in violent struggle in Pakistan since
2001, including:

• Harkat-ul-Jihad-I-Islamia (HUJI)
• Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM)
• Hizb-I Islami Gulbuddin (HIG)
• Hizbul Mujahideen (HM)
• Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM)
• Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ)
• Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
• Sipah-e-Sahaba/Pakistan (SSP)
• Al-Islambouli Brigades of al-Qaeda

These NSAs have no common interest therefore the numbers. They, however,
seem to be caused by the both factors: on the one hand the inability of the country
to manage its political affairs while as on the other, they are sponsored some
Intelligence agencies or certain government institutions in other countries in order
to fulfill their short term goals. The ISI is believed to be aiding these organizations
in Pakistan in eradicating perceived enemies and those opposed to their cause,
including India. The FBI’s Satellite Imagery has suggested the existence of several
militant camps in Pakistan with at least one militant admitting that he is being
trained for fighting in India. Pakistan is being believed to be involved in supporting
separatist militias and giving shelter and training to different Jihadist organizations
in order to fight in India and raise insurgencies on Indian land. Many nonpartisan
sources have suggested that the officials within Pakistan’s ISI are providing aid to
Jihadists and adding that the “ISI has provide covert but well documented support
to terrorist groups active in Kashmir”. But the then Pakistani president Asif Ali
Zardari in clear cut had denied any kind of involvement in militant activities in
Kashmir and other parts of India and admitted that the previous Governments had
“deliberately created and nurtured militants as a policy to achieve some short-term
tactical objectives”

Mobilization of Public Opinion and controlling Pakistan’s Foreign Policy

The Non State Actors play a crucial role in mobilizing the people in Pakistan for
fighting against India in Kashmir as well as in other parts of India. In this way,
NSAs shape the foreign policy of Pakistan in the South Asian region as well as
internationally. In consultation and guidance of State organized institutions
lectures are being delivered and telecasted for mobilizing the youths. ISI and Pak
Military camps serve as training Institutions for training volunteers of the Non
State Actor groups like Sapeh-Sabha, Lashkar-e-jhangvi and hafiz Syed’s Jaish-e-
Mohammad . These Actors are wholly sponsored and funded by government in
order to fulfill and gain their short term ends without letting the world and
International organizations to know about their diplomatic warfare. They have
grown into powerful actors only with the backing of ISI and government. When
the Pak-government and the institutions feel that these actors are out of control and
are about to action against them, they mobilize people in the name of religion in
order to get the mass support and get rid of governmental operations.
Conclusion and scope of debate
India-Pakistan relations: the dynamics of contemporary security challenges

Dynamically evolving internal and external political factors should be taken into
consideration while discussing the prospects of improving the conflict-prone India-
Pakistan relations. This analysis enables to draw explicit conclusion: peace in the
Subcontinent is highly elusive and will remain so in the foreseeable future. The
major factors contributing to this fact are elaborated in the paper. The attention is
focused on issues which hinder progress in improving bilateral relations. The
following problems/questions will be raised: - The extremist non-state actors in the
context of rising terrorist threat. Prospects for curbing on the activity of terrorist
outfits in Pakistan with reference to the strategy of Pakistani military and civilian
leadership. - Growing religious radicalization and nationalism in both India and
Pakistan in the context of structural differences between the two states and its
impact on religious minorities. –
The significance of China/Afghanistan factors, with special reference to:
1). China-Pakistan joint security/trade related projects;
2). The strategy of India and Pakistan towards Afghanistan after NATO/ISAF
troops withdrawal.
Kashmir issue as the crucial point of reference in India's and Pakistan's regional
security strategy. The historically-inherited, protracted conflict has had a direct
impact on shaping security situation in South Asia since 1947. Although it entered
phases of escalation and de-escalation, both sides have not managed to come up
with solution acceptable for India, Pakistan and the Kashmiris. Moreover, it serves
as an excuse for those elements of establishments in both states which are not
interested in improving bilateral relations.