{"id":2081,"date":"2014-06-10T09:23:37","date_gmt":"2014-06-10T03:53:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/?p=2081"},"modified":"2014-06-10T09:28:46","modified_gmt":"2014-06-10T03:58:46","slug":"silence-of-iran-on-kashmir","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/editors-take\/silence-of-iran-on-kashmir\/","title":{"rendered":"Silence of Iran on Kashmir?"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/fb:like>

Z.G. Muhammad<\/p>\n

During summers, for diplomats of various countries stationed in New Delhi Kashmir has been an important destination. Of all the countries, diplomats of European Union and USA have been routinely visiting the state to assess the situation in this highly strategically located State. It had gained added significance during the cold war. The United States has been at the centre of the Kashmir narrative, since it co-sponsored the UN resolution on Kashmir in 1948. It has made its presence felt at all critical junctures in the history of Jammu and Kashmir. The number of visits of the US and European Union envoys to Kashmir multiplied during early nineties when the movement for right for right to self-determination assumed an armed dimension. Compared to them diplomats from embassies of the OIC member countries have been taking less interests in the Kashmir affairs. Nevertheless, Iranian diplomats compared to many other Muslim counties are familiar with the political situation in Kashmir- but of late it has been dithering to mention Kashmir.
\nA week back Iran\u2019s Ambassador to India Ghulam Raza Ansari was in Srinagar in connection with a seminar on Imam Khomeni. The visit was not of any significance, at best it could have found a mention in newspaper as a single column on the back page. Nevertheless, he created news only by maintaining an intriguing silence on Kashmir in his main presentation at a local hotel. Interestingly, the audience comprised \u201cleadership\u201d that sees Iran is an ardent supporter of \u2018right to self-determination\u2019 for people of state- and struggle for the same. Iranian Ambassador sounded more like a broker when instead of recognizing resolution of the Kashmir dispute as means for bringing lasting peace in South-Asian he saw execution of Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline as solution of India-Pakistan disputes. In his speech he said, \u201cThe purpose of pipeline was not just to fulfil the needs of these countries but also to help them better mutual relations and resolve their domestic dispute\u201d. Knowing Kashmir is the core issue between the two countries, it could be construed from his speech that Iran has drifted away from its stand on Kashmir and it no more recognizes it as an \u201cinternational dispute\u201d.
\n If it is not reading too much in the statement. On the face of it sounds a paradigm shift in Tehran\u2019s Kashmir policy. But question arises, what prompted Iranian Ambassador to ignore Kashmir in his entire presentation. Is Iranian government also confused about foreign policy of new government in Delhi? To quote from the editorial of the latest issue of Seminar on India\u2019s \u201cExternal Engagements\u201d for Modi having given \u201clittle thought to the global or regional strategic contexts. Or it has hyphenated its Kashmir policy to its relations with Pakistan that have not been cordial for their clash of interests in Afghanistan.
\nIs Raza Ansari\u2019s \u201cignoring Kashmir connected with withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and Iran looking for a partner in India for \u201csqueezing away from Pakistan literal, notional or strategic space\u201d in Afghanistan. To quote a Pakistani commentator Shahzad Chaudhry \u201cThe Iran-Indian relationship can only go from strength to strength as India deepens the Chahbahar port in eastern Iran for handling heavy boats, and prepares to build a railway connection between the port and the hinterland along the Zaranj-Dilaram Highway that India has previously built to connect with Afghanistan\u2019s Farah province and the Herat-Kandahar highway.\u201d
\nMuch before coming to the question if Iran should hyphenate its Kashmir policy to its relations with India or Pakistan or look it as in an important problem, a nuclear flashpoint in South Asia that continues to be on the agenda of the United National Security Council as the oldest problem there is need for relooking at its role during late eighties and early nineties. Traditionally, Iran has been supporter of right to self-determination for people of Jammu and Kashmir. In international forums, it largely sided with Pakistan on the question of Kashmir.
\nIn 1993, Kashmir was attracting screaming headlines across the globe. Many international and Muslim organization held conference for finding out solution of the Kashmir Dispute. \u201cIn Khartoum an international conference was arranged by \u2018The popular Arab and Islamic Congress (PAIC) in 1993. It devoted several sessions to the plight and liberation struggles of Islamic minorities in Asia particularly in Kashmir\u2019. Accusing India of human rights violations in the state and conference had supported Pakistan for supporting Kashmir struggle.\u2019 Iran also had sided with Pakistan. Iran also had \u201clooked at Kashmir crisis as one component of an all-out assault on Islamic world. That manifested itself in oppression of Muslim, \u201cespecially in Kashmir, Palestine, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Tajikistan and Afghanistan.\u201d Iran did not stop at expressing support to Kashmir at international forums but had also reacted very harshly. \u201cTo show its displeasure for human rights violation in Kashmir it once had asked Indian Foreign Minister, Mr. Inder Kumar Gujaral to postpone his visit to their country.\u201d
\n\u2018In 1993, when Pakistan Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto had visited Iran. The country had extend full support to her on Kashmir. In the Joint communiqu\u00e9 issued at the end of the meeting between Benazir and Iranian President Rafsanjani Kashmir had been describes as \u2018source of acute tension in the region and had called for its resolution according to relevant UN resolution. It also had called for end of repression in the state.\u2019
\nIn 1993, after a gap of almost thirty years United States had proactively involved itself for finding a solution of the dispute. In this column, it is not possible to recap the statements made by the United State or role played by it for impressing upon India and Pakistan to resolve the Dispute. The newspaper reports and columns of the period enables one to understand the embarrassment caused to GOI by the statements of the State Department during the period. Emboldened by the US support Pakistan introduced a resolution in 50th Session of Human Rights Commission. Iran was worried about increasing role of US in the region to checkmate US role, Iran President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjan offered to mediate between the two countries. On his assurance Pakistan withdrew the resolution and after withdrawal of resolution Indian Foreign Secretary K. Srinivasan categorically denied of having assigned role of mediator to Iranian leader and called it his own initiative. In fact, it was after this diplomatic debacle Iran except some occasional ritualistic statements on human rights violations almost preferred not to even mention Kashmir dispute. And after 2010, it fully dovetailed Kashmir to its Pakistan policy- except supporting OIC resolutions on Kashmir\u2026. <\/p>\n<\/fb:like><\/span>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Z.G. Muhammad
\nDuring summers, for diplomats of various countries stationed in New Delhi Kashmir has been an important destination. Of all the countries, diplomats of European Union and USA have been routinely visiting the state to assess the situation in this highly strategically located State. It had gained added significance during the cold war. The United States has been at the centre of the Kashmir narrative, since it co-sponsored the UN resolution on Kashmir in 1948. It has made its presence felt at all critical junctures in the history of Jammu and Kashmir. The number of visits of the US and European Union envoys to Kashmir multiplied during early nineties when the movement for right for right to self-determination assumed an armed dimension. Compared to them diplomats from embassies of the OIC member countries have been taking less interests in the Kashmir affairs. Nevertheless, Iranian diplomats …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2081","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-editors-take"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2081"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2084,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081\/revisions\/2084"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2081"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2081"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peacewatchkashmir.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2081"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}