Amnesty's J and K report pretends that history begins where geography wants to go

Voices

Amnesty International’s (AI) report on Jammu and Kashmir released this week has fallen into the classical trap of allowing geography to decide where history begins. Entitled “Denied: Failures in accountability for human rights violations by security force personnel in Jammu and Kashmir,” the 70-page report documents what it say are obstacles to justice faced in several cases of human rights violations “believed to have been committed by Indian security force personnel” in J and K. The documentation begins in 1990s and even though it goes back and forth in time, it does not go to the heart of the problem which is Pakistan’s illegal occupation of Indian land. The report has a special focus on Section 7 of the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 (AFSPA) which it says grants virtual immunity to members of the security forces from being prosecuted for what AI calls “alleged human rights violations.” What it leaves out is more important than what it includes. I will come to that in a minute. Read - Amnesty calls for end to impunity in Jammu and Kashmir, urges trials in non-military courts The first thing that people writing research papers and scholarly books do when a new publication is out is to check the back pages for references, first to see if they have been cited and second to see who has been included or left out. Reporters covering the United Nations (UN) whether at the headquarters in New York or its European headquarters in Geneva have a slightly different but similar practice. Inured to country and thematic resolutions they know where to begin. How a report captures historical data is ample indication of what follows. I have been a reporter at the UN in Geneva for 15 years. I have also been on the other side as a diplomat with a UN agency involved in the process of consulting experts, writing reports and engaged with member states in the process of drafting resolutions. For example, a UN resolution against Cuba would be blocked by Russia and another against Saudi Arabia would be blocked by the United States (US). The fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 changed some of that math, but the broad lines remain. The methodology described by AI roughly mirrors work that UN diplomats do. The AI report cites several United Nations (UN) resolutions as well as reports of India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to bolster its moot point that India is blind to custodial and extra-judicial killings and even abetting it in J and K. In the historical background chapter, the report says the following: “Throughout the 1990s and the 2000s, there were grave human rights abuses committed by security forces as well as armed opposition groups”. I have highlighted the last three words to show that AI calls Pakistan-funded terrorists armed opposition. Who arms them and what are they opposing? The most important document on the Jammu and Kashmir issue established by the UN is its Resolution 47, adopted in New York on April 21, 1948. To restore peace and order in the state, the UN asks Pakistan to do the following: "To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State." Read the resolution here. I have written often about how framing an issue is very critical to finding a solution. I will repeat myself again – frames decide what is at stake, who is responsible and where solutions must come from. Yes, there have been major human rights violations in the state, yes, AFSPA is an issue, yes, militancy has to be addressed squarely and sternly, yes Kashmiri Hindus are refugees in their own land and yes, people have to be judged and punished. I have enough faith in the Indian system to hope that all of the above will happen sooner rather than later. I have less faith in AI’s impartiality that leans heavily on many UN resolutions. I am not surprised at AI’s selective reference to historical data. But they should seriously try something else as it is getting tedious to pretend that history begins where geography wants to go.

Show us some love! Support our journalism by becoming a TNM Member - Click here.