Interlocutors' report moots expansion of trade and travel, joint plan for Indus basin
If the psychological trauma of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the last six decades is to end, a settlement to the disputes arising out of the division of different parts of the erstwhile princely State between India and Pakistan should apply on both sides of the Line of Control, according to a key recommendation of the Group of Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir.
The group identifies three aspects to the harmonisation of relations across the LoC: ensuring the same quantum of political, economic and cultural freedoms obtained in all parts of the erstwhile princely State; expansion of trade and travel; and resolution of the water-sharing issue.
The report, a copy of which is with The Hindu, was prepared by Dileep Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M.M. Ansari and submitted to Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram last October. It has yet to be made public.
Noting that the situation on the Pakistani side of the LoC was rather different from that on the Indian side, the final report of the group points to the lack of freedoms and autonomy in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and the Northern Areas or Gilgit-Baltistan. A large number of legal and constitutional reforms and changes on the ground will be required on the Pakistani side if the same political, economic and cultural freedoms are to be offered across the LoC. However, the report adds, the 2009 Gilgit-Baltistan reforms package brought the Pakistani side of the State closer towards harmonising relations with the Indian side.
On easing trade and travel, the report speaks of near-universal support in all parts of the former princely State to inter-Kashmiri trade and travel. In this context, the report referred to the recommendation of the Prime Minister's Working Group on Strengthening Relations across the LoC on opening more cross LoC routes and relaxation of restrictions on who could travel to include pilgrims, medical patients and tourists, if necessary, unilaterally by India.
At the same time, the report noted that the group had received a number of memoranda from traders' associations and from travellers on the bureaucratic difficulties in promoting trade and travel. “The permit procedures are extremely cumbersome, so much so that the buses often run at 10 to 20 per cent capacity. Trade has remained on a primitive barter basis, ironically in a world where money travels more easily than people or goods.”
Among the requirements identified in the memoranda were to open all routes across the LoC, such as Jhangani-Mirpur, Mendhar-Kotli, Jammu-Sialkot, Skardu-Kargil, Turtuk-Khapulu, Chamb-Nonian to Mirpur (across Munawar-Tawi), Gurez-Astoor-Gilgit and Titwal-Chilham (across the Neelam Valley), and to ease travel procedures. Measures to ease travel would include issue of travel permit on the strength of the Permanent Resident Certificate; completion of security clearance within a maximum period of 30 working days; provision of multiple entry-exit permits valid for one year; and permission to relatives to see off or receive travellers at the border post.
Also, in order to ease trade, the report suggested that fairs be organised in towns closest to the LoC on both sides. Annual or biannual haats or market fairs could be held between the check points on both sides of the LoC. The list of export and import items should be enlarged regardless of their provenance and without any restrictions on the quantity of traded goods. Customs duties should be exempted on a reciprocal basis for a period of three years. A unilateral decision to this effect could also be considered, the report added. Banking facilities should be provided on both sides of the LoC and the barter system done away with.
Besides, customs checks should be swift, especially for perishable items. Scanners should be used to clear trucks to save on time consumed in checking every item. Trucks should be allowed to go directly to their destinations, or alternatively transport depots should be created in areas adjacent to the LoC.
The report also recommends the setting up of consultative committees with members from each legislature on both sides, along with experts, to facilitate activities in areas such as agriculture, environment protection, tourism, exchange visits, and medical relief measures during epidemics and natural disasters.
On the waters issue, the report speaks of the potential for convergence. The India-Pakistan Indus Waters Treaty has had a grievously adverse impact on the State. The limitations imposed by the Treaty to enhancing water storage capacities on the rivers on the Indian side has curbed both the hydro-power generation capacity of the State as well as stymied efforts for irrigating land, the report pointed out. These factors, in turn, have failed to attract investment in the State.
The group argues that the answer to the waters issue does not lie in the abrogation of the Treaty, but in rendering it more effective. Under the Treaty, India was duty-bound to comply with the obligations as an upper riparian State, and in any case, it was next to impossible to unilaterally abrogate the Treaty as there is no exit clause. Even at the peak of hostilities towards India, the thought of nullifying the Treaty had not crossed minds in Pakistan, the report observed.
Among the proposals on the table for a solution to the waters issue is an integrated development plan for the conservation of the Indus Basin. This would take into full account the linkages between water, land, the users, the environment and the infrastructure. It would have to focus on better cooperative management of shared water resources. “Vast amounts of financial and technical resources would be needed to attain these goals,” the report said, “in addition of course to the political will of all stakeholders.”
Keywords: Kashmir interlocutors report, Kashmir dispute, Kashmir peace process, Cabinet Committee on Security, AFSPA amendments, AFSPA law, Indian constitution, Centre-State relations, Article 370






We in Kashmir consider these interlocutors as electrocutors and we do understand the way Kashmir is being messed up and entangled in huge controversies. Nothing will change our stand and people in India and Pakistan must realise that the souls of our two generations wiped out through state terrorism stare at us to remind us of our duty. We will fight for our rights by all means necessary to achieve our goal.
While the mundane exercise to move the issue forward towards a
resolution is commendable, the facts seem to be lost on the "expert"
team. Aside from the fact that the team carries no legitimacy to the
people of Kashmir, how does one address the democratic need of the
people of Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Jammu & Kashmir (outside their
jurisdiction) who want even more integration with the State of
Pakistan, while the people in Indian Occupied Kashmir want freedom
from the Indian state? The people of GB and AJK have what they want:
religious, cultural, economic, and political freedom; in addition to
security from the Indian army. How does one address the grave human
rights violations by India in IOK? The flagrant violation of
international law by New Delhi? No concrete answers from the panel.
New Delhi needs to take steps that address the trauma as a result of
India's brutalization of Kashmiri society. Ignoring the issue at heart
will not do. I fear this may be in vain.
Sick and tired of all these govt. appointed committees giving
impractical solutions and wasting all the money. How exactly can any of
these recommendations be applied to PoK, do these people really think
Pakistan and Hurriyat are ready for peace?
Similar committee recommendations were provided in case of Andhra
Pradesh, they wasted Rs.100 crore for one year and gave a list of all
the possibilities as solutions for the Telangana problem.
They are not appointed to list out options but to suggest a probable
practical solutions, for listing out options we can appoint 5 year
children for no cost.
If we don't make a fuss about J&K the problem will be lesser. Instead of continuously referring to the formerly princely state of Kashmir let's think about all other regions of India, everyone of them was a princely state. Everyone of them acceded to Indian federal control just like Kashmir and it was not done on the basis of religion. It is possible to fund every aspect of the development suggested in the report with Indian money to buy peace. The alternative is to buy arms from the large arms traders. Keeping the problem alive and festering makes money for all the stake holders who want to ensure a revenue stream buying selling and dealing in arms for defending each other. And when both sides buy the same arms what benefit does anyone side get? The fact that Nehru family comes from Kashmir keeps the problem alive and bubbling. If we get rid of any act that confers special status to Kashmir it will help in integration and reduce the feeling of alienation youth get in Kashmir.
Libralization in Kashmir will provide essential upliftmentin social life of the people in the state. That is one of the way to win harmony of native people that can be further used to promote trade, tourism ad economic growth in state. the benefit will be revenue and loyality of the people towards state. But, careful steps should be taken in the process as terrorist can take advantage of the situation.But,it is the cost we have to pay for sake of our brothers and sisters who are living a life of misery due to poor beuracracy and hard rules in the valley. So, in the scenario, this step is most welcome
why only Kashmir has this problem for the last few decades, psychological trauma, settlement to the disputes, harmonisation of relations etc.. why people forget that there was a division in Bengal which gave birth to West Bengal and Bangladesh, how about the most painful division of Punjab which tore apart people their tradition and culture with Sikhs losing their cultural city of Lahore to Pakistan, what about the hundreds and thousands of Hindu Sindhis who were kicked out and did not even get an inch of their land within the new borders of India and were forced to settle in Rajasthan, why only Kashmir then should receive this special attention ? is this a political drama between both the countries or is it because there are Muslims on both side of the border?
Just try selling these recommendations to Pakistan - it would take them and shove them up you-know-where! Pakistan has steadfastly maintained that it is yet to complete an unfinished part of the agenda of Partition namely, obtaining the Muslim majority Kashmir Valley. Despite our bending over backwards to please the Valley residents at the cost of depriving Jammu and Ladakh, their loyalty has always been with Pakistan. So, for India it is a lose-lose situation. Incidentally, what is our policy on Aksai Chin? Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai?!
Has the report anything to say about the J&K territory ceded to China
by Pakistan?
India is full of traitors, mainly in Congress, and there is no efforts is being made to bring the POK back to India, which Pakistan occupied illegally. Pakistan is full of militants and POK’s residents and also suffering due to those militants so it’s a responsibility of India to take Pakistan to international court and make them agree to surrender the POK part of Kashmir they occupied in 1948. Merge of Kashmir in India was as per the laws and Pakistan occupation on POK was always illegal. And also the way Pakistan is full of militants who are a threat to POK’s residents, they would free the occupied Kashmiris and let that part of Kashmir to come to India again.
What an entirely impractical report, not worth the paper it is printed on! Dileep Padgaonkar must be some kind of Alice in Wonderland.
Please Email the Editor