“Pakistan’s message is loud and clear: Peace, but with equality”, said Khalid Ibrahim.
Sardar Khalid Ibrahim hails from one of Azad Kashmir’s most respected families. A renowned politician in his own right, he is the son of Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan – the founder of Kashmir’s freedom struggle. Khalid Ibrahim has served as President of the Jammu and Kashmir People’s Party which may be called a breakaway faction or the now-independent Kashmir chapter of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party.
Unlike most politicians, Khalid Ibrahim is not a populist. He is a strict adherent of political morality regardless of whether or not it wins him state patronage. He is genuinely concerned about the deteriorating reputation of politicians and, in embodying honesty in both thought and action, is doing his part to set things straight. His hope in Kashmir’s future is unfaltering, it is also refreshing.
Q: You come from a well-recognized political background. Tell us about your father.
Khalid Ibrahim: My father was basically a democrat. He was a freedom-fighter. His being a student of Politics and Philosophy helped him through. The resolution for Azad Kashmir’s incorporation into Pakistan was signed at his home. He has also been Azad Kashmir’s representative at the UN. He was disturbed in the later years, yes. But we’re heading in the right direction today, and at good pace. The sanctity of the vote may be lost but at least people are talking about it.
Q: Why did you resign from the Legislative Assembly twice, and give up opportunities to assume higher political offices?
KI: These decisions are not for me to make, they are for the people. We stand for elections every 5 years and it is up to the people to decide if they want us to assume office. I have been to the Legislative Assembly four times but have never been part of the government. I have my reasons. I was earlier part of the Pakistan Peoples Party – it’s a mainstream political party. Then, after I developed differences with the leadership, I established my own party that is confined to Azad Kashmir.
But it was never just about making it to the office. It was about participating in the actual decision-making process. Unfortunately, Pakistani political parties reserve that right to themselves. They do all our decision-making and we are expected to tow along.
People, not just in Pakistan but around the world, have lost all trust in politicians. It is owing to negligence of meritocracy and of the mandate of the people.
Q: Interests of the global hegemon tend to be more influential than any international laws or UN resolutions. What impact do you think growing US-India relations would have on the Kashmir issue?
KI: Nothing much, really. These are short-term policies shaped by an era of market-economy. India has a population advantage over us. This may cause a short-term setback to the Kashmir issue but nothing in the long-term.
We’ve had the upper hand since 1949. The UN resolution has given us that leverage. India, on the other hand, has been on the back foot. It’s evident in how its call for permanent membership of the UN Security Council is rejected. How can it claim entitlement to a veto, when it still hasn’t fulfilled its obligations under a resolution passed nearly seven decades ago?
Q: Don’t these relations have the potential to win India a significant position in Afghanistan?
KI: They do. The US wants to increase Indian presence in Afghanistan but that is unacceptable for us. We are contiguous to the state and it is we who have borne the brunt of its turmoil for the past thirty years. Bypassing us today and establishing another state’s influence there – especially one we consider hostile to us – is a non-viable option. It will have great costs. We cannot put our existence in jeopardy. We cannot afford Indian presence on both our eastern and western fronts.
Q: What policy do you suggest Pakistan should have towards India?
KI: Our policies should be consistent. India has institutionalized its struggle but it hasn’t made much of a difference. We are still fighting the struggle for our survival. And where they have the greater defence budget, we are the fastest growing nuclear arsenal. So we’re even.
Q: How should Pakistan respond to India’s aspirations for regional hegemony in South Asia?
KI: Pakistan’s foreign policy from day one has been resistant to the rise of a regional hegemon. Aman, barabari k saath. We want peace with equality. If you consider China, the interests are mutual. There is no subordination.
I concede that this has also been damaging, but that is how it is. We resisted the ascent of Russia, first, and the resulting dismemberment was only reciprocal. Today, our strategic position remains the same. We will resist the rise of India. Pakistan’s message is loud and clear: Peace, but with equality.
Q: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants to abolish Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. Do you think that would be a task easily achieved?
KI: The Indian government cannot lose its leverage in Kashmir. It’s hardly been s week since the BJP formed a coalition with Mufti Sayeed’s People’s Democratic Party, and look what message they sent with the release of Masarat Alam. The government wouldn’t want to further ruin its mandate, 370 is a far cry.
Q: Recently it has been reported that a sizeable number of Hindus have migrated to Kashmir which can have a decisive impact on any future referendum or plebiscite. How should Pakistan react to this?
KI: If you ask my opinion, there cannot be a migration of that scale. Such claims are made to gain political mileage. India says the same about Azad Kashmir. To tell you the truth, there are more Afghanis in Kashmir today than Pakistanis. Pakistanis go there only as tourists.
If India does this for political mileage, it isn’t going to win them any. It could’ve, back when they had leaders like Sheikh Abdullah, but not today. They have no man in Kashmir today to support such a move.
Q: Should Pakistan hold its ground on the Kashmir issue, or is compromise necessary for conflict resolution?
KI: We must not lose sight of our main goal – the right of self-determination. The stance of the political parties is softening. But as long as we have institutions like the Pakistan Army on our side, this struggle will continue. The Army has given unparalleled support to Kashmir, it has fought for us on the international platform. The politicians, barring Quaid e Azam and Liaquat Ali Khan, never did that. Ayub Khan once said to the Kashmiris, there will come a time when the people and political parties of Pakistan will forget you, but the Pakistan Army never will. And that is exactly what has happened.
As for compromise, it’s more important that we accept each other first. You cannot bring about peace between two parties who are hostile to the very existence to each other. It took Europe 200 years to learn this lesson, they learned it the hard way. Let’s see how we learn it. But we cannot learn it overnight, either.
Q: If you had to give one message to the people of Kashmir, what would it be?
KI: We don’t give messages, we take messages. That’s our job. We listen to what the people have to say. But the Kashmiris need to work on something – they need to learn to compromise. They’re not ready to compromise.
Write-up credits: Naima Shahab
In the Mainstream 