FOLLOWING Operation Sindoor and the announcement of the ceasefire in the India-Pakistan conflict, the Congress while questioning the role of the US in the cessation of hostilities, demanded that a 1994 resolution adopted by Parliament on Pakistan Occupied Kashmir be passed unanimously again.
“The Congress party has been demanding, for long, a special Parliament Session… We should repeat the resolution of 1994 when all the parties unanimously agreed and passed the resolution that Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and we will take it back,” Congress Working Committee (CWC) member Sachin Pilot said at a press conference Sunday.
The 1994 resolution came at a critical time in India-Pakistan relations, and came as show of unity by then Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao (Congress) and Leader of the Opposition A B Vajpayee (BJP).
The context
In his book The People Next Door: The Curious History of India-Pakistan Relations, T C A Raghavan, the former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, lays out the situation at the time.
The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had returned to power in the 1993 elections in Pakistan, with Benazir Bhutto at the helm. This led to “a brief attempt to resume some engagement” in talks between the neighbouring countries, writes Raghavan.
In January 1994, the foreign secretaries of the two countries held a meeting. As per the former envoy, “the meeting was doomed to failure even before it took place” as it was “foregrounded by events in the Kashmir Valley”.
While militancy held sway in Kashmir, the Valley was still recovering from the mid-October 1993 incident at the Hazratbal shrine, when a group of militants had “holed themselves in… holding some 150 pilgrims, including women and children, as hostages”. They “demanded safe passage, threatening otherwise to blow up the mosque along with the sacred relic of the Holy Prophet”, writes Raghavan.
The seige ended in November 1993 after a complex negotiation. Many in the Kashmir valley saw it as a “successful conclusion” with the surrendering of militants and no damage to the shrine. In India, however, many saw it as “humiliation”, says Raghavan, with Pakistan viewing it as “another step towards victory and Kashmir’s impending integration with Pakistan”.
“The stage was being set for a different kind of contest,” Raghavan says, with Kashmir now “ostensibly back in the United Nations after a long gap”.
In February 1994, Pakistan approached the UNHRC, alleging human rights violations in Kashmir.
The resolution
Amidst this, Raghavan writes, the Indian government “transformed a high-voltage diplomatic exercise into a national endeavour”. A part of this was the decision to adopt a resolution in Parliament, with members across parties holding a meeting and deciding to pass this with consensus.
Introducing the resolution, then Speaker Shivraj Patil said: “Each word and sentence of this resolution has been seriously considered by the government and the leaders of the Opposition parties.”
Condemning terrorism in India originating in Pakistan and PoK, the resolution said: “This House notes with deep concern Pakistan’s role in imparting training to terrorists in camps located in Pakistan and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, the supply of weapons and funds, and assistance in infiltration of trained militants including foreign mercenaries into Jammu and Kashmir, with the avowed purpose of creating disorder, disharmony and subversion.”
The resolution called upon “Pakistan to stop forthwith its support to terrorism” and added that the Indian State would guarantee “the promotion and protection of human rights of all its citizens”. “The state of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is, and shall be an integral part of India, and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means,” the resolution said.
It added: “India has the will and capacity to firmly counter all designs against its unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, and demands that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir which they have occupied through aggression.”
All attempts “to interfere in the internal affairs of India will be met resolutely”, the resolution said.
What followed
“This parliamentary articulation of a position hitherto implicit or left understated was, in fact, a bigger change than many at that time saw,” Raghavan writes.
In another crucial move, Vajpayee, who had served as foreign minister in the past, was asked to lead the Indian delegation to the UNHRC to counter Pakistan’s claims. The other members included National Conference leader and former J&K CM Farooq Abdullah and then Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs Salman Khurshid.
“This was a show of symbolic and real bipartisanship. It was a politically astute move by Prime Minister Narasimha Rao but also showed how high the stakes were,” writes the former high commissioner.
Then foreign secretary K Srinivasan recalls in Raghavan’s book that in the weeks leading up to the vote, PM Rao “became very shaky”. “Was there some other way out, he asked me anxiously … I assured him that the numbers were on our side. He looked very dubious,” Srinivasan is quoted in Raghavan’s book.
Finally, Pakistan withdrew the UNHRC resolution, anticipating a defeat.
“For the Indian camp, this was a resounding victory,” Raghavan writes, adding that on return, Vajpayee and Khurshid received “a euphoric welcome usually given to victorious cricket teams”.
PM Narasimha Rao was at the helm when the resolution was adopted in 1994. (Express archive photo) 
Share
