The RSS seems to be blissfully ignorant about what the various political parties of Pakistan said
in their respective election manifestos about their stand on Jammu &
The political parties in Pakistan around the 2013 elections had turned so hostile towards India that they had included Jammu & Kashmir in their respective election manifestos very prominently.
The political and religio-political parties of Pakistan had made the so-called Kashmir issue the cornerstone of their foreign policy vis-à-vis India.
On 8 April, RSS
ideologue Rakesh Sinha, who represents the RSS and defends BJP’s policy towards
Pakistan and Jammu & Kashmir on a daily basis in TV debates debunked the
assertion of Major General (Retd) G D Bakshi that “there is no change in the
Pakistan’s policy towards India as far as Jammu & Kashmir is concerned” and
that “it would be suicidal for the bleeding India to pin faith in unscrupulous
and rogue Islamabad”.
Rakesh Sinha emphasised and reemphasised that “there is a sea change in the Pakistan’s attitude towards Jammu & Kashmir” and to make his point he said that “the Pakistan’s political parties didn’t make Jammu & Kashmir an election plank in the 2013 Pakistan National assembly elections” (“Sab Se Bada Sawal”, News 24, April 8, 2016).
Rakesh Sinha, it seems, is blissfully ignorant about what the various political parties of Pakistan said in their respective election manifestos about their stand on Jammu & Kashmir. Had he or any other RSS ideologue cared to monitor the 2013 general elections in Pakistan, they would not have said what Rakesh Sinha Sinha said to counter Major General (Retd) G D Bakshi.
The truth, in fact, is that political
parties in Pakistan around the 2013 elections had
turned so hostile towards India
that they had included Jammu & Kashmir in their respective election
manifestos very prominently. The election was held on 11 May, 2013. One of
their major election planks was this part of Jammu & Kashmir.
these election manifestos had highlighted the Kashmir
issue as one of the major components of their foreign policy. A common feature
in these manifestos was that they had described this part of Jammu &
Kashmir as a “disputed” territory and the “right to self-determination” as the
“inalienable right of Kashmiris” (read Kashmiri-speaking Sunnis, who do not
constitute even 10 percent of the population of the State of Jammu &
Kashmir, as it existed on August 15, 1947.)
The people of
Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (POJK), including the Shiite
Muslim-dominated Gilgit-Baltistan, which has become the hub of anti-India
activities being indulged in by both Pakistan and China for decades now to
weaken India’s position on the strategic northern frontiers, is a region of
They are ethnically different from the people who
inhabit the very small Kashmir Valley, the epicenter of anti-national
activities willfully engineered by the vested interests in the political
establishment and outside to promote the Pakistani communal
The 110-page election
manifesto of the Pakistan Muslim League–Nawaz (PML-N) said:
will be made to resolve the issue of Jammu & Kashmir in accordance with the
provisions of the relevant UN resolutions (read August 13, 1948 resolution)…
and in consonance with the aspirations of the people of the territory for their
inherent right of self-determination.
The manifesto of
People’s Party (PPP) said:
We will pursue the goal of stability and
peace-building in the region as a specific policy priority without sacrificing
our diplomatic and moral commitment to the people of Jammu & Kashmir. Kashmir is a core issue for us.
The election manifesto of cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) said, “Identifies the resolution of Kashmir conflict as one of the core national interests” and that “progressive detente can help both the countries if centered on conflict resolution”.
The manifesto of
former President General Pervez Musharraf’s All Pakistan Muslim League Party (APMLP),
which was insignificant in the political scene, said:
There would be no peace
in the region without the resolution of outstanding issues with India,
including disputes over Kashmir, Siachen and Sir Creek… No peace is possible
unless the Kashmir dispute is resolved, along
with the Siachen and Sir Creek issues.
The approach of
other religio-political formations in the fray, such as Jamaat-e-Islami (JI),
Jamait Ulama-e-Islam (Fazal-ul-Rehman), Mutahida Quomi Movement (MQM) and
similar outfits towards Jammu & Kashmir was no different. All those
formations had held out a solemn commitment in their respective manifestos that
they will work with single-minded devotion for the resolution of the Kashmir issue in accordance with the “aspirations of
The JI had gone to the extent of saying that it would not accept
anything short of a “plebiscite” in this part of Jammu & Kashmir. The most
significant aspect of the whole political situation in Pakistan was what the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) had
said. It had said, ‘All the political parties of Pakistan
have a clear policy on the issue( of Kashmir)‘.
In other words, they were one against India
(just as all Palestinians, without exception, are one against Israel.)
Thus, the political and religio-political parties of Pakistan had made the so-called Kashmir issue the cornerstone of their foreign policy vis-à-vis India. The PPP leader and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari also had not lagged behind. Taking an anti-India plunge and openly interfering in our internal affairs, on 17 April , 2013 he declared-
Pakistan will continue to highlight the Kashmir ‘cause’ at
international forums” and that “the hanging of Afzal Guru through the abuse of
judicial process has further aggravated and angered the people of
Zardari, considered the most corrupt politician in Pakistan, raked up the execution of Afzal Guru in his address to the joint session of the sham Islamabad-controlled POJK Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council.
All this is for the information of
Rakesh Sinha and other RSS and BJP ideologues and spokespersons. It is hoped
that they would revisit Pakistan
of April-May 2013 and revise their opinion about the aggressor Pakistan.