Indian Defence Review

The UNHCR Report on Kashmir has been in the news. Since it has been cited as the “first” report, a second one will likely follow, if not more.  It needs no elaboration that the 49 page document titled “Jammu and Kashmir, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit and Baltistan” struck India as a bolt from the blues. The jolt was more because the Indian government and the media was periodically self-aggrandizing how successfully India had isolated Pakistan diplomatically at various global platforms, including at the United Nations, for generation and exporting terrorism.

It may be recalled that when Pakistani Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi speaking at the UN General Assembly in September 2017 accusing India of “war crimes” in Kashmir, Eenam Gambhir, India’s First Secretary to the UN gave a befitting reply in saying it was “extraordinary that the state which protected Osama Bin Laden and sheltered Mullah Omar should have the gumption to play the victim. Pakistan is now Terroristan with a flourishing industry producing and exporting global terrorism.”

The first surprise was the contents of the UN Report. Covering period between July 2016 and April 2018, it alleged 145 civilians killed (without mentioning terrorists including Pakistani terrorists) by security forces and up to 20 civilians killed by “armed groups”.  UNHCR Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein called for maximum restraint and denounced the lack of prosecutions of Indian forces in J&K due to a 1990 law giving them what he called “virtual immunity” (read AFSPA), calling for a commission of inquiry by the Human Rights Council, opening a three-week session in Geneva on June 18, 2018,  into all violations, and investigation of  mass graves Kashmir Valley and J&K.

The report is malicious and mischievous without doubt because reference to Pakistan can best be described as in passing, mentioning no figures, as done in case of India. There is no mention whatsoever of Balochistan where Pakistani genocide is unabated and mass graves have been discovered in the past. There is no mention of Pakistani export of terrorism either. It doesn’t even mention the extra judicial killings in Gilgit-Baltistan and their military courts that are unconstitutional. Besides, the preamble to the 1949 UN Convention of Kashmir called upon Pakistan to withdraw its forces from POK, thereby acknowledging Pakistani aggression.

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) has periodically named Pakistan-based terrorist terrorists groups undertaking terrorist attacks in Afghanistan. Stands to reason, that a UN report on Kashmir should have mentioned Pakistan’s proxy war in J&K; naming the terrorist groups.

India has rightfully rejected the report terming it “fallacious, tendentious and motivated”, questioning intent in bringing out selective compilation of largely unverified information to build a false narrative. India has further said the report: violates India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, entire state of J&K being integral to India, with Pakistan illegally occupying part through aggression – repeated calls  upon Pakistan to vacate occupied territories; incorrect description of Indian territory is mischievous, misleading, unacceptable; Pakistan’s cross-border terrorism, aimed at suppressing will of people of J&K, disrupting its political and social fabric and undermining India’s integrity, conveniently ignored;  disturbing to note UN-proscribed terrorist entities termed “armed groups” and terrorists as “leaders”,  undermining UN-led consensus on zero tolerance to terrorism; fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution to every Indian citizen, including in the state of J&K (also protected by independent judiciary, HR commissions, free media and active civil society ignored.

India has also informed UNHCR its deep concern over individual prejudices being allowed to undermine the credibility of a UN institution, that such  malicious reports cannot undermine the will of India and that all measures necessary to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country from cross border terrorism will be taken. But this takes us to the second surprise that no one wants to talk about. Diplomacy is all about being pro-active, not resting on past laurels.

So how come our mission to the UN had no prior inkling that such a report was being cooked up? Were we resting on our laurels that we had successfully nailed Pakistan for terrorism at global forums? Were we not aware that China and Pakistan are both part of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), their anti-India nexus, and China’s persistent efforts at UN to protect Pakistani radical mullahs from being branded “terrorists”? Have any inroads been made into UNHRC-UNHCR over the years for monitoring and advance warning?  Isn’t this a diplomatic failure of sorts?

While continuously engaging UN human rights institutions, China works aggressively to silence criticism of its human rights record before UN bodies and has taken actions aimed at weakening some of the central mechanisms available in those institutions to advance rights – buying off the integrity of these systems through every possible means. In April 2017, security officials at the UN HQ forced out Chinese-origin ethnic Uyghur Dolkun Isa,  who was accredited as an NGO participant, was attending a forum on indigenous issues. No explanation was provided. Human Rights Watch queries to the UN elicited no response.

Again in January 2017, for President Xi Jinping’s speech at UNSC, UN officials closed parking lots and meeting rooms, packed home approximately 3,000 UN staff, and barred NGOs from attending the speech – unprecedented action for address by any country head. These are just two of many such incidents but clearly UN handling of such  situations blatantly favours China for thwarting UN scrutiny of her dismal human rights record.

China has harassed activists, primarily those from China, by photographing and filming them on UN premises in violation of UN rules, and restricting their travel to Geneva, also using its membership on the Economic and Social Council’s (ECOSOC) NGO Committee to block NGOs critical of China from being granted UN accreditation, and seeking to blacklist accredited activists to bar their attendance. Behind the scenes, Chinese diplomats, in violation of UN rules, have contacted UN staff and experts on treaty bodies and special procedures (independent experts focusing on specific human rights issues), including behavior that at times has amounted to harassment and intimidation. Suffice to say that where everything is fair in love and war, same is applicable to diplomacy.

In a manner, the report was also no surprise. Take the top 10 members of the UNHRC; Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, Cuba, Qatar, Venezuela, Pakistan, UAE, Congo and Algeria. Examine relationships of most of these countries (not all) with China-Pakistan, their involvement and contribution to spread of wahabism and terrorism, and overarching influence of China; and the picture becomes clearer of an Islamist agenda under Chinese tutelage.  Notwithstanding the Modi-Xi Wuhan Summit, it is in China’s interest to continue protecting Pakistan and show India in poor light, including weakening India’s case for UNSC membership.

As for UNHCR Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, first prince of Jordan and obvious Islamist, he is no novice to terrorism. As far back as December 2011, Paul Joseph Watson had reported that just as Al-Qaeda terrorists were used to oust Gaddafi, hundreds of Libyan rebels with Al Qaeda willing members were being airlifted into Syria from Jordanian territory to aid opposition in carrying out attacks against government forces. Israeli intelligence outlet DebkaFiles had backed these reports. Zeid’s mischievous report may well be part of his Islamist agenda as well as due indirect backers, like China-Pakistan with Pakistan mentioned superfluously to avoid suspicion. Despite UN Military Observers for India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), in August 2016, Zeid demanded India and Pakistan give “independent observers” access to Kashmir. He obviously had an agenda linked with the killing of Burhan Wani – again on China-Pakistan behest?

US and Israel have both pulled out from the UNHRC, after US Ambassador Nikki Haley called it “an organization that is not worth its name”, adding, “We take this step because our commitment does not allow us to remain a part of a hypocritical and self-serving organization that makes a mockery of human rights”.

Rajiv K Chander, permanent representative of India in the UN, highlighted that governments in the state are elected through free and fair elections and are sworn to protect the Constitution, the bedrock of all freedoms. He also pointed out that the recent gruesome assassination of journalist Shujaat Bukhari and the abduction and killing of Indian Army rifleman Aurangzeb were chilling reminders of the cross-border terrorism that the UN sought to endorse.

But if the UNHCR report aimed false perception building, it has succeeded to some extent with articles condemning Indian actions in J&K, without mentioning Chinese and Pakistani human rights violations. India needs to take all these issues into consideration.