Theme III: Conflict and

Cooperation
Topic 3: Indo-Pakistani War
over Kashmir

CONTENT
PART 1: CAUSES
PART 2: IMPACT

PART 1
CAUSES

1. Legacy of British rule

9. Role of Cold War

politics

8. Kashmiri position on
the Kashmir dispute

7. Pakistans position
on the Kashmir dispute
6. Indias position on
the dispute

2. Ethnic and Religious

Differences

3. Ideological
Differences
4. Strategic / Economic
Importance of Kashmir
5. Kashmirs Accession
to India
4

2.1 LEGACY OF BRITISH RULE

Background of British
rule in India:
Recall British India
and the Princely
States

2.1 LEGACY OF BRITISH RULE

2.1.1 Partition

2.1.2 British failure to oversee satisfactory completion

Lack of satisfactory method

for integration of Princely
States in independent India
and Pakistan
6

Things to consider:
Laid foundations for dispute of Kashmir to
begin with
But the ill-conceived method of
decolonisation (ie partition) was made
problematic because of inherent
differences between the Muslims and the
Hindus.
7

2.2

ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES BETWEEN

AND WITHIN INDIA AND PAKISTAN
PROBLEMS WITH ETHNICITY AND RELIGION
India

Pakistan

Hindu majority of over 80%

Muslim majority of more than 95%

Hindu interests have been neglected to

safeguard minority interests?

Not a very coherent and cohesive Islamic

state

Relations between Hindu and Muslim

populations in India became strained as
Muslims were regarded by Hindus as being
sympathetic to Pakistan.

As part of nation-building efforts, Jinnah

(Pakistans founder) promoted a national
Pakistani identity based upon loyalty to
state, Urdu (the language) and Islam.

Hostility produced by communal massacres

and upheavals accompanying Partition
exacerbated ethnic and religious differences.

Things to consider:
Even within each country, the leaders faced
problems regarding national identity
Hence, needed to address them accordingly
But these ethnic/religious differences made no
sense without an understanding of the
ideological visions of each nation-state

2.3

IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INDIA AND

PAKISTAN

2.3.1
Indias One-Nation Theory vs Pakistans TwoNations Theory

2.3.2
Indias secularism (secular nationalism) vs
Pakistans theocracy (religious nationalism)

10

2.3.1 Indias One-Nation Theory vs Pakistans TwoNations Theory

Concerned with the problem

Kashmir has a right to exist at all.

whether

Conflict thus stems from the refusal of the

advocates of the one-nation theory to recognise
the full implications of Pakistan
and thus the right or legitimacy of Pakistan
to demand for Kashmir, since Pakistan does
not have the right to exist.
11

Indias One-Nation
Theory

Did not agree with Partition;

Pakistan is an affront and an
absurdity.

It did not prevent Pakistan from

coming into being but it did
guarantee that the relations
between Pakistan and India would
be subject to constant stress and
strain.

Pakistans Two-Nations
Theory

Founder of Pakistan, Ali Jinnah:

Hindus and Muslims are two
separate nations which cannot
ever live together in harmony.

Pakistan was formed on the basis

of the two-nation theory

Can never concede sovereignty of

the state to India

To do so would negate the validity

of the two-nation theory, and
hence the creation of Pakistan
itself.

12

2.3.2 Indias secularism (secular nationalism) vs

Pakistans theocracy (religious nationalism)
Indias secularism

Kashmir as the basis for nation

building.

Pakistans Theocracy

Pakistan tended to see Kashmiri

accession as integral to its
Islamic identity

o The voluntary decision of the

Muslim-majority Kashmir to join
India bolstered the secular
argument of the Indian government
o Given that Indian secularism has
been under attack from rightwing Hindu nationalist
organisations
o Secession of Jammu and Kashmir:
dangerous precedence for other
peripheral states

13

Things to consider
Why was the vision of a nation important?
Draw back to their independence struggles
Would you give an idea up, after such a
tumultuous journey?

And how would this impact other factors?

Consider, for example, the domestic problems
(ie nation-building)
14

2.4

STRATEGIC AND ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF

KASHMIR
For India

For Pakistan

Vital buffer

Economic importance for

Pakistan was greater than
for India.
Strategic importance grew
after 1947 because of the Major rivers flow through
creation
of
hostile
Kashmir before reaching
Pakistan.
Pakistan

Timber-rich
with Timber resources as well
headwaters of three major
as willow and resin
rivers.
15

Things to Consider
Was Kashmirs natural resources that
important compared to more
political/ideological considerations?
Kashmirs waterways:
precious to Pakistan insofar as it was in hostile
relations with India

16

2.5

KASHMIRS ACCESSION TO INDIA

Disagreement over the validity of the Instrument of

Accession to the Indian Union which the Maharaja of
Kashmir signed in October 1947.
India: based case for possession of Kashmir on the
validity of this transaction
Pakistan has consistently denied its legality.

Differences of opinion: from differing perspectives of

the events leading up to the accession.
17

2.5

KASHMIRS ACCESSION TO INDIA

Indian perspective

Pakistani tribes aided and

supported by Pakistani soldiers
entered Kashmir to force the
Maharaja out of power as he had
avoided a vote during partition.

According to India, the Maharaja

had voluntarily asked for Indian
military help and eventually cede
Kashmir to India.

Pakistani perspective
Essentially one of popular revolt
against the oppressive regime of
the Maharaja.
Indian troops had marched into
Kashmir to force the Maharaja to
accede.
The Maharaja acceded under
duress.

18

Things to consider
If the Instrument of Accession is invalid
according to Pakistan, what is?
When you read your BBC Timeline:
Consider the consequences of the war in 1947-48!
Pakistan requested a plebiscite to determine the wishes
of the people.

19

The next 3 points reflect the

positions of the parties involved.
Should not be studied in isolation to
the development of the conflict (ie
protracted conflict and attempts at
negotiations) which will be covered
in the 2nd half of the lecture notes.
20

2.6

INDIAS POSITION ON THE KASHMIR DISPUTE

Indias unwillingness to hold elections in Kashmir

1947: India brought up Kashmir issue to UN.
Pakistan denied involvement and suggested that a
plebiscite in Kashmir should take place under UN
supervision.
A UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP)
appointed to carry out the UN mandate in Kashmir.
India accepted plebiscite but insisted that this plebiscite
take place following the total withdrawal of the tribal
invaders and other Pakistani sponsored forces from
Kashmir.
21

2.6

INDIAS POSITION ON THE KASHMIR DISPUTE

Indias resistance to third party involvement or

mediation
India rejected repeated UN pressure for
plebiscite because of Pakistani refusal to
vacate its part of Kashmir.

legal possession of the state of Jammu and

Kashmir because of the Instrument of Accession
22

From Indian Embassy

The provision for accession made in the Government of India Act of
1935, as adapted under the Independence Act of 1947, says: "An
Indian State shall be deemed to have acceded to the Dominion if the
Governor General has signified the acceptance of an Instrument of
Accession executed by the Ruler thereof".
The law did not provide that the Instrument of Accession could be
conditional. Once Accession was accepted the particular
Princely State became an integral part of one or the other of the
two Dominions, India or Pakistan.
The law had no provision for consulting the people of the Princely
States. The rulers decision was final. Nor was there any provision
in the law that the accession had to be ratified by ascertaining the
wishes of the people of the acceding State. There was also no
provision of law taking into account the religious complexion of the
population of any of the Princely States.
23

2.7

PAKISTANS POSITION ON THE KASHMIR DISPUTE

Kashmir as unfinished business of partition

Always considered that Kashmir would at least form part of the new
Islamic state.
When the name Pakistan was first coined, the letter K was
intended to stand for Kashmir.
Prior accession, Kashmir had agreement with Pakistan
Pakistan authorised to operate Kashmirs posts and telegraphs
Obligated to supply food and other necessities.

Absence of any formal agreement between India and the Maharaja

of Kashmir

24

2.7

PAKISTANS POSITION ON THE KASHMIR DISPUTE

Pakistans Call for Plebiscite and Adherence to UN

Recommendations
Pakistan requested that the Security Council set up a Commission
which would arrange for a ceasefire in Kashmir followed by the
withdrawal of all outside troops, whether coming from India or
Pakistan.
Holding of a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri
people.
Could only take place fairly after Indian troops withdraw
completely and come under some kind of effective United Nations
supervision.

25

Things to consider
Issue of plebiscite after the 1947-1948 war (upon
Kashmirs accession)
India: Did not want to hold plebiscite because Pakistani troops
still in Kashmir + Instrument of Accession
Pakistan: Wanted plebiscite only after Indian troops withdrew
UN could not force plebiscite; was only invited by India to
recommend (India was more concerned with UN aiding a
ceasefire)

Thinking pt: Who was being an unwilling party?

26

2.8

KASHMIRI POSITION ON THE KASHMIR DISPUTE

Split in Kashmiri Politics Between the

Progressives (Favouring Secularism) and the
Conservatives (Favouring an Islamic State)

All you really need to know:

On the eve of the crisis of partition, there were 3

main strands of opinion:
The Maharaja (with the support of Hindus)
who wanted to retain autocratic regime.
National Conference (predominantly Muslim
but with significant Hindu and Sikh support)
looked towards a liberal, secular and
independent Kashmir.
Muslim Conference who believed the best
hope of Kashmiri Muslims lay in Pakistan or
in close association with Pakistan.

No domestic
consensus
amongst leaders
regarding
accession upon
independence of
India and
Pakistan.

27

2.9

ROLE OF COLD WAR POLITICS IN DELAYING A

PLEBISCITE IN KASHMIR

The penetration of Cold War politics into the Subcontinent had a role
to play in the Indias refusal to a plebiscite in Kashmir later.
Pakistan: periphery of SU and ME, thus the US offered a security
alliance to Pakistan.
Rather than pull out troops from Kashmir, Pakistan would actually
bolster its armed forces in Kashmir.
Soviet Union began supporting Indias stand in the UN and could
veto any resolution passed against India.

Pakistan who was receiving US support also did not have to pull
out of Kashmir.
Cold War politics and superpower interests rendered the initial
UNCIP resolution irrelevant and unworkable.

28

2.9

ROLE OF COLD WAR POLITICS IN DELAYING A

PLEBISCITE IN KASHMIR

A plebiscite could not take place because its prior conditions could
not, and would not, be met.
In 1956, Nehru withdrew the offer of a plebiscite on three grounds
that:
For a plebiscite to take place under UN supervision, Pakistan
had to first withdraw from Kashmir
Kashmirs Constituent Assembly had approved the merger with
India and accepted Indias Constitution
The insertion of the Subcontinent into Cold War security
alliances had changed the objective situation drastically, for it
reflected Pakistans desire to seek military solutions, something
intolerable and a sign of bad faith.

29

Things to consider
Superpower rivalry dictating local conflict?
Or local conflict using superpower rivalry?

30

Things to consider
Tashkent Declaration (1966):
Indias ally brokering the peace
Also, Tashkent Declaration as 1st time India
and Pakistan sat together for negotiations
over Kashmir.

31

Conclusion
Consider the following:
Who/Which party/what was most responsible
for the conflict?
For laying the foundation?
For exacerbating?

32