How the world reacted to Article 370 abrogation, how SC verdict helps India

China said it did not recognise the “so-called union territory of Ladakh set up unilaterally and illegally by India”, and the western section of the China-India border has always belonged to China.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) reiterated its call to reverse “all illegal and unilateral measures taken since 5 August 2019 aimed at changing the internationally recognised disputed status of the territory”.

New Delhi responded that the OIC speaks at the “behest of a serial violator of human rights and an unrepentant promoter of cross-border terrorism” — a clear reference to Pakistan.

Four years ago

PAK & MUSLIM WORLD: After the special status of J&K was removed and the state was divided into two UTs, Pakistan recalled its ambassador (India followed suit), and stopped bilateral trade, and train and bus services.

In the Islamic world, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) said the decision was India’s “internal matter”, and Saudi Arabia called for a “peaceful settlement (of the J&K issue) in accordance with the relevant international resolutions”, but Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Malaysia’s Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad criticised India.

WESTERN POWERS: In the days before August 5, 2019, when there was palpable tension in the erstwhile state and security was tightened, several Western nations advised their citizens to avoid travelling to the Valley.

After the changes of August 5-6, the United States was extremely careful and nuanced in its comments. It said it was closely following the developments, and noted their broader implications, including the potential for increased instability in the region. It expressed concern over detentions and restrictions in J&K, but also called on all parties to maintain peace and stability along the Line of Control, including “taking firm and resolute steps” to combat cross-border terrorism.

The European Union (EU) too, was measured: it called on India and Pakistan to reopen dialogue, and reiterated the grouping’s backing for a bilateral solution on Kashmir.

RUSSIA: In what was seen as a ringing endorsement of New Delhi’s action, Russia underlined that the changes were carried out “within the framework of the Constitution of the Republic of India”. Moscow also stressed the “bilateral” nature of the J&K issue, and mentioned the Simla Agreement (1972) and Lahore Declaration (1999).

China & Pakistan

China complained that creating a UT of Ladakh undermined its territorial sovereignty, expressed “serious concern” over the situation in the region, and said “relevant sides need to exercise restraint and act prudently”.

The Ministry of External Affairs official spokesperson Raveesh Kumar retorted that “India does not comment on the internal affairs of other countries and similarly expects other countries to do likewise.”

Days later, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar travelled to China and met Chinese State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. On August 12, Wang put the onus of ensuring peace and stability in the region on New Delhi, and said Beijing was closely following “ramifications” of the tensions between India and Pakistan.

Jaishankar, who did not mention J&K in his public remarks, reiterated that the two countries have to manage their differences properly, and the future of the bilateral relationship will depend on “mutual sensitivity to each other’s core concerns”.

Jaishankar’s August 11-13 visit to China followed the August 9-10 visit of Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi who sought China’s support for Islamabad’s bid to take New Delhi’s move to the UN Security Council.

China tried to bring the issue to the UNSC, but was thwarted by the US, France, and Germany (which was in the UNSC then), who did not want it discussed. Poland, which had the UNSC Presidency at the time, made it clear that a solution should be found “bilaterally”. Only an informal meeting was held on August 16, and no statement was issued.

On August 19, then Defence Minister Rajnath Singh drew a hard line at a public meeting in Kalka in Haryana: “Whatever talks take place [with Pakistan], those will be on the issue of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. There will be no talks on any other issue.”

India’s diplomacy

India had reached out to both permanent and non-permanent members of the UNSC in the days after August 5. Then Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale briefed envoys in New Delhi, and Jaishankar rang some of his counterparts in UNSC countries.

In the third week of August, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told US President Donald Trump by phone that “extreme rhetoric and incitement to anti-India violence” by certain leaders in the region was “not conducive to peace” — a reference to Imran Khan of Pakistan, who had threatened to “teach Delhi a lesson”. Hours later, Trump asked Imran to “moderate” his rhetoric over J&K.

Modi visited Biarritz, France on August 25-26 for the G7 summit, and held talks with French President Emmanuel Macron. Macron stressed no outside interference was warranted in J&K, and that no one should incite violence over this issue.

Modi travelled to France from the UAE and Bahrain. In Abu Dhabi, he received the backing of Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and was honoured with the UAE’s highest civilian award.

In September, Jaishankar toured Europe and the US, and India categorically told the international community that the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution was its internal matter, and advised the world to “accept the reality”.

On September 26, Qureshi boycotted a meeting of SAARC foreign ministers in New York for the duration Jaishankar was present. Qureshi later called the Indian minister names, but it was apparent that Pakistan’s Interior Minister Brig. Ijaz Ahmed Shah (retd) had made the right assessment on September 13, when he said that “people (the world) don’t believe us, and rather believe India”.

Going forward

Fast forward to December 2023, and the endorsement from the Supreme Court has given ballast to New Delhi’s global diplomatic strategy to communicate to the world that Kashmir is India’s.

India’s position that J&K is an “internal issue” with no external repercussions has been more or less accepted. The only two issues that major powers had flagged were that the human rights of the people of J&K, which includes the right to free and fair elections, should be protected and, a possible escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan should be avoided.

The challenge for New Delhi is to now work on these counts. The Supreme Court has asked the government to hold elections by September 2024. The international diplomatic community, which has been taken on tours of J&K by the government over the last four years, will be watching that space closely.

Pakistan is expected to hold national elections in February next year, just ahead of India’s own elections in April-May. A window to move the ball in the direction of engagement could open up after that.