⚖️ Kashmir: Human Rights and Peace

Westminster Hall

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

The UK Parliament debated the ongoing human rights abuses and the lack of peace in Kashmir, highlighting the international community’s failure to enforce a UN resolution for a plebiscite that would allow Kashmiris to determine their future. MPs expressed concerns over the Indian government’s actions, including the revocation of Kashmir’s special status in 2019, which led to increased militarization and restrictions on freedom of speech and association. The debate also shed light on the severe impact on Kashmiri women, who face sexual violence and enforced disappearances, urging the UK to take a more active role in mediating the conflict. The UK government acknowledged the human rights issues but maintained that a resolution should come from dialogue between India and Pakistan, considering the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

Summary

  • The session focused on the ongoing human rights issues and the pursuit of peace in Kashmir, a long-disputed region between India and Pakistan.

  • Tahir Ali, a Labour MP, highlighted the failure of the international community to enforce a UN Security Council resolution from 1948, which called for a plebiscite allowing Kashmiris to decide their future.

  • Ali emphasized the severe human rights violations in Indian-occupied Kashmir, including unlawful killings, torture, and widespread sexual violence against women, which have caused immense suffering and trauma.

  • The revocation of articles 370 and 35A in 2019 by the Indian Government was criticized for removing Kashmir’s special status and autonomy, leading to increased militarization and repression.

  • Concerns were raised about media freedom, with reports of journalists being detained and harassed under anti-terror laws, and restrictions on international media in the region.

  • The debate touched upon the religious persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslims in Indian-administered Kashmir, highlighting the broader issue of religious freedom.

  • Several MPs, including Jim Shannon and Debbie Abrahams, called for the release of detained human rights activists and journalists and questioned the lack of international action.

  • The UK Government, represented by Minister Hamish Falconer, acknowledged the human rights concerns but maintained that the resolution of the Kashmir issue lies with India and Pakistan, encouraging them to engage in dialogue.

  • The Minister mentioned that the UK raises human rights concerns directly with both Governments and monitors the situation in Kashmir.

  • Despite calls for the UK to act as a mediator, the Government reiterated its position not to prescribe a solution or mediate but to support a political resolution that considers the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

Divisiveness

The parliamentary session on ‘Kashmir: Human Rights and Peace’ exhibited a moderate level of disagreement, primarily between the members who sought stronger action from the UK Government and the Minister’s responses which adhered to established government policy. Here are the key points and examples that shaped the rating:

  1. Criticism of Government Policy: Several members expressed dissatisfaction with the UK Government’s stance that the resolution of the Kashmir issue should be left to India and Pakistan alone. For instance, Tahir Ali stated his dissatisfaction with the view that it is a matter for India and Pakistan, while Ayoub Khan criticized the UK’s selective application of international law, suggesting it undermines Britain’s global position. These criticisms illustrate a disagreement with the Government’s position on non-intervention.

  2. Call for UK Mediation: Debbie Abrahams and Jim Shannon questioned why the UK could not serve as a mediator given its historical ties to the region. This suggestion was at odds with the Minister’s position, which emphasized that the UK should not prescribe a solution or act as a mediator but support India and Pakistan in reaching a compromise.

  3. Support for Plebiscite: Imran Hussain sought confirmation that the UK supports the UN Security Council resolutions for a plebiscite in Kashmir. The Minister acknowledged the need to take into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people but did not commit to supporting the plebiscite explicitly, showing a nuanced disagreement.

  4. Human Rights Concerns: There was agreement on the need to address human rights violations, with members raising specific cases such as that of Khurram Parvez and Yasin Malik. While the Minister responded sympathetically to these concerns and urged for investigations, there was disagreement over how assertively the UK should intervene, particularly in cases where due process was questioned, as raised by Yasmin Qureshi.

  5. Trade and Human Rights: Imran Hussain expressed concern over potential trade deals that could undermine human rights in the region. The Minister reassured that human rights concerns are raised directly with partner governments but did not confirm that trade deals would never be negotiated at the expense of human rights, indicating a disagreement on the prioritization of these issues.

Overall, while the disagreements were evident, they were expressed in a relatively courteous and structured manner, with the Minister maintaining a consistent government line throughout. The disagreements did not escalate into overt conflict, suggesting a moderate level of discord but still within the bounds of parliamentary debate.