Arun Joshi
At the outset, let me admit that I have always admired Shashi Tharoor for his vast knowledge of global affairs and his articulation in sophisticated language, but his recent comments on the Jammu and Kashmir situation have triggered an animated debate, which needs to be seen in aproper perspective without any bias. During the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs’ visit to the two Union Territories of J&K and Ladakh, he told the media in Jammu that the panelhad come to study the situation vis-à-vis Indo-Pak and Sino-India relations, and it had nothing to do with the domestic situation.
Some of the recent geo-political developments, with top RSS leaders calling for opening doors to dialogue with Pakistan and a push by some of the Kashmiri leaders treading on the Vajpayee path, have shed a broader light on how the two regions are intertwined with country’s relations with China and Pakistan.
Vajpayee, in hisf amous speech in Srinagar on April 18, 2003, offered a hand of friendship to Pakistan at a time when anti-Pakistan sentiment was running high in the nation, and two armies were locked in an eyeball-to-eyeball situation. Certain words become immortal, and sodid Vajpayee’s: “ We can change our friends not neighbours.”
I think the idea was that we can talk to them even when aren’t talking to them. At that time, too, Vajpayee demanded that any handshake could become firm only if Pakistan rolled back terrorism. That home truth should never be lost sight of. It should also be recalled that this speech came less than a month after the Nadimarg massacre (March 24, 2003) in which 24 Kashmiri Pandits were shot dead .
Shashi Tharoor might have thought that his assessment of the Kashmir situation and a public statement might help adversaries in twisting his words to their advantage. And then, there always is a possibility that the words could have been deemed as talking about Kashmir in the international terms, which again would have helped Pakistan-based media to play it as part of their narrative. Since 2019, India’s effort has been to reduce the internationalisation of Kashmir, but there are certain facts which favour Delhi. No one could have articulated it better than Shashi Tharoor. His choice of words always is perfect .
The debate was an outcome of his remarks after meeting Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha. He stated that the situation in Jammu and Kashmir is showing “encouraging progress towards normalcy”, and that he left the meeting “feeling more positive than I have felt for a while.” It, however, took a lot of time what the greatly knowledgeable parliamentarian had stated to sink in.
This statement gave rise to a host of questions: How could Jammu and Kashmir – (not forgetting that it once included Ladakh) – be viewed in isolation of the relations with two neighbouring countries, as also how could assess the border situation without looking at the internal climate? While it is true that the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35 A and the 2019 bifurcation of the state into two UTs fundamentally shifted the geo political dynamics, certain ground realities remain hard to hide.
Nevertheless the visit brought out the importance of the region in determining India’s relations with two neighbouring countries, China and Pakistan. No one can be so naïve as to believe that the relations with these two countries don’t impact the internal situation of the two regions which were separated by the Centre in 2019.
In geopolitical terms, J&K and Ladakh are one entity, and in many ways China and Pakistan too have many things in common in their strategic interests and the way they impact the internal situation in the hyper-sensitive regions in the northernmost part of the country.
A fundamental truth is that all border states or Union Territories are affected by the situation on the borders. These truths are self-evident.
Before saying anything more on the issue, he and his team should have understood that foreign policy or international relations in Kashmir is not a subject reserved for elite to study and interpret. It is embedded in history and geography of the valley. They have their own romanticism with their self, somewhat over-exaggerated sense of their being pivot of the world. They, unlike some of their counterparts in other regions, are keen learners and absorb things fast.
After the 2019 decisions, Kashmiris have tuned themselves to the changed realities encrusted with new narratives, but at the same time they have not lost sight of the developments in the immediate neighbhour hood nor in the distant lands. Had the panel on external affairs asked a Kashmiri teenager whether in school or street, about the international developments, he or she would have given better analysis than many of the analysts of the international affairs.. This is their ingenuity, not the text book knowledge. They learn from their surroundings and home schooling where each parent is aware of things happening in fields and orchards to the developments in America, Middle East and closer home in China, Pakistan and Afghanistan. They have not drawn red lines in learning.
Shashi Tharoor led parliamentary standing committee, arrived in Jammu and Kashmir, a little overafter the first anniversary of Operation Sindoor, which is now the Indian template in mobilising world opinion how to deal with cross-border terrorism. The Parliamentarian from Kerala, who was part of the delegation that he led to make countries in the West, including the U.S. to know why military action against Pakistan under Operation Sindoor had become a necessity for India to fight against Pakistan-sponsored cross-border terrorism .
The Operation Sindoor was conducted as a retribution to what had happened in Pahalgam on April 22, 2025. Had there been no Pahalgam massacre, there would have been no Operation Sindoor. It is as simple as that. Pakistan’s complicity was known from the first hour itself. The pattern and the motives behind the terror attack offered sufficient evidence that Pakistan was involved in it. The point is simple: Operation Sindoor was not just a determined military action against cross-border terrorism directed at terrorists and terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir, it was a big foreign policy statement that India wanted the world to hear behind the big bangs.
Post-Pahalgam, there was asharp decline in the Indo-Pak relations. Therefore, both Baisaran massacre in Pahalgam, and Operation Sindoor, happened because of the unfortunate incidents in Kashmir. India took this kinetic action because Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the country, and the nation believes that this territory has become fully Indian post 2019. There was much at stake. That resonated in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s words: “Unprecedented punishment will be meted out to the perpetrators and their backers” for this atrocity. He had made a vow, and he lived up to that, for sake of Kashmir, crown jewel of the country. His subsequent statement that “trade and talks will not go together” and “blood and water will not flow together.”
One of the reasons cited for abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019 was to put a halt to Pakistan sponsored terrorism and the growth of the mindset and actionof secessionism in Kashmir. Pakistan’s actions and secessionism are interlinked. That narration has remained unchanged. That should have been the solid reason for the parliamentary panel and Shashi Tharoor, in particular, to reflect on the external and internal dimensions .
He was right in describing that the internal situation in J&K has transformed. That is there, but the internalfault lines plaguing the territory because of the external factors should have been articulated. The concept of normalcy is a relative term. There is apparent normalcy. But Pakistan has made no secret of its intentions on Kashmir. This was more than infested in a seminar on the Indus Waters Treatywhere almost the entire Pakistani leadership threatened India with dire consequences if it did not reverse the suspension of the Treaty.
When Pakistan talks of the Indus Waters Treaty, it translates not only the waters of the three western rivers – Jhelum, Indus and Chenab – flowing from J&K and Ladakh to Pakistan, but the entire region that it argues belongs to it because of its geographical proximity and Muslim-majority character. Obviously, it is forgetting what is happening on its side of the LoC, where people are being subjected to untold atrocities. The population is being starved- the ration supplies have been disrupted and the people are on the verge of losing lives. Those protesting are being shot, tortured. Many have disappeared with no knowledge about their whereabouts. Since Indian stand is that the people in PoK belong to India because Maharaja Hari Singh had acceded the whole of princely state of J&K to India in October 1947.
Now comes China part. Can we ignore what happened in eastern Ladakh from April 2020 to October 2024. It was a war-like situation all along. China continues to maintain that it has right over areas. Eastern Ladakh was a virtual war theatre and it has impacted many things in the region and the overall spectrum of domestic and foreign policy. Union Home Minister Amit Shah launched vibrant villages.
The developmental spree launched in the region ever since V K Saxena assumed the office of Lieutenant Governor of the region has enhanced hope and the people feeling more confident. What is more, instead of throwing a wrench into the talks between the local leadership of the region-Leh Apex Body, Kargil Democratic Alliance and others – Saxena has actively facilitated the dialogue.
He has underscored the importance of the national interest and wedded that to the region’s aspirations. He understands the dynamics of governing a UT with a high level of sensitivity. Ladakh is not just what it looks like, it sits in the geostrategic core of the Indian nations, where the borders of China and Pakistan meet. These two countries continue to advance their shared geo-economic and geo-strategic interests, which threaten the nation’s security. That makes it very important to address the genuine concerns of the people without allowing them to be misled by exaggerated expectations by a few who have their own utopian thoughts and agenda.
Ii is the time that we make a realistic assessment of the foreign affairs and the impact on the internal situations. There is no escape from it. Shashi Tharoor, as an authority, knows it best. Let there be hope on all fronts .This thesis, as Chief Minister Omar Abdullah stated after meeting the visiting delegation, has to be viewed through the prism of the aspirations and challenges of the people of J&K. It is not an easy task in the current times when the narratives on the fault lines of yesteryear submerge the genuine aspirations.
