New Delhi: Pakistan on Monday (December 11) swiftly shrugged off the Indian Supreme Court’s ruling validating the ‘reading down’ of Article 370.
However, amidst the continuing diplomatic tension, a glimmer of possibility emerges. Some informed observers suggest that the apex court’s nod to the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood could be the strategic opening Pakistan needs to extend an olive branch to India for talks in the future.
On Monday, the Supreme Court affirmed the legitimacy of the Union government’s August 2019 decision to abolish the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 of the constitution.
The dilution of Article 370’s status had triggered Pakistan to downgrade diplomatic ties, cease all trade with India and suspend cross-border transport services.
Therefore, it was not surprising that Pakistan’s immediate response was to dismiss the judgement on Monday.
International law doesn’t recognize India’s unilateral and illegal actions of 5 August 2019. The judicial endorsement by the Indian Supreme Court has no legal value. Kashmiris have an inalienable right to self determination in accordance with the relevant UN SC resolutions.
— Jalil Abbas Jilani (@JalilJilani) December 11, 2023
“The judgement is yet another manifestation of the pliant judiciary under India’s ruling dispensation,” caretaker foreign minister Jalil Abbas Jilani said at a press conference in Islamabad.
He underlined that Pakistan does not recognise the dominance of the Indian constitution over Jammu and Kashmir, reiterating its international status as a disputed region.
“Pakistan categorically rejects the judgement announced by the Supreme Court of India on the status of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir is an internationally recognised dispute which remains on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council for over seven decades,” he said.
Stating that India doesn’t have the right to make “unilateral decisions”, Jilani, a former Pakistani acting high commissioner to India, stated, “The final disposition of Jammu and Kashmir is to be made in accordance with the relevant UNSC and it is to be made in accordance with the aspiration with the Kashmiri people”.
The Supreme Court also said that the statehood of Jammu and Kashmir should be reinstated as soon as possible.
However, unlike the deadline of September 30, 2024 to conduct elections to Jammu and Kashmir’s legislative assembly, no clear timeline was provided for the restoration of its statehood.
Despite the strong dismissal by Pakistan to the Supreme Court judgement, two former Indian high commissioners to Pakistan believed that the restoration of statehood as per the top court’s judgement could provide space for Islamabad to reach out to India after elections next year.
“After elections in both countries in 2024, it might give Pakistan a reason to come to the discussion table. But for the moment Pakistan will reject the significance of the decision,” said India’s former envoy to Pakistan, Ajay Bisaria.
Also Read: Four Important Takeaways From the Supreme Court Ruling on Jammu and Kashmir
He was the last Indian high commissioner posted in Islamabad, as Pakistan downgraded ties to the deputy high commissioner-level in August 2019.
Less than a year after India revoked Article 370, the staff strength in the high commissions was halved as India chose to recall numerous officials.
This decision came in response to Pakistan detaining two Indian diplomatic officials following New Delhi’s expulsion of Pakistani diplomats over alleged ‘espionage’ activities.
Sharat Sabharwal, who had been India’s high commissioner to Islamabad from 2009 to 2013, also concurred that the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, as mentioned by the apex court in its judgement, could create an opportunity for Islamabad to normalise relations with New Delhi.
“When they are through with their elections, then it could offer them a face-saving way out to come out of the corner in which they had got themselves into,” he said.
He added that unless there was a change geopolitically and the United States returned in a “big way”, the Pakistani economy would remain in the doldrums, which has led to rising interest to improve ties with India.
“It is my assessment that they would like to come out of that situation and stabilise things a little more with India. They have not been able to do so because, politically, everyone has been scared due to polarisation and other factors, ahead of elections,” said Sabharwal.
Former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who recently returned from exile and is widely seen to be back in the good books of the Pakistani military, is thought to be the favourite to win the elections in February next year.
However, it remains to be seen whether the Pakistani military will back any move by Sharif to restore trade ties. During his last term as prime minister, Sharif’s efforts to give most-favoured nation status to India as per WTO rules was stymied by the establishment.
Also Read: Nawaz Sharif Faces an Uphill Battle Upon Return to Pakistan
Expressing a slightly divergent perspective, Shreyas Deshmukh, a research associate at the Delhi Policy Group, contended that the recent Supreme Court judgement would have no impact on India-Pakistan relations.
He argued that if the newly elected Pakistani government sought engagement with India, “both parties could achieve this by setting the Kashmir issue aside and initiating discussions on crucial matters, such as trade.”
“There is a decline in Pakistan’s international standing, and there are no immediate geopolitical issues that could shift attention to the country. The evolving circumstances are compelling Pakistan to adapt due to economic challenges, political instability and a precarious security situation, leaving them with little room to dictate terms,” he explained.
He also pointed out that Pakistan has been in a conundrum over its position for the restoration of Article 370, given that it was an article in the Indian constitution. “If Pakistan wants to revert to Article 370, for Kashmiris to get back some powers, it means it is accepting the fact that Kashmir is a part of Indian Union.”
Deshmukh expressed concern that there were chances of extremist elements in Kashmir and Pakistan exploiting the Supreme Court judgement to aggravate the security situation.
“We may see an uptick in infiltration attempts from the Pakistan side and attacks in J&K in the coming days or months,” he cautioned.
The Supreme Court judgement also upheld the separation of Ladakh from Jammu and Kashmir and its status as a Union territory. However, China, which had deemed the move as “unacceptable”, is yet to react as of the time this article was written.
When moving the constitutional amendment Bill for reading down certain provisions of Article 370, Union home minister Amit Shah had said that both PoK and Aksai Chin were integral parts of India’s Jammu and Kashmir.
China claims Ladakh due to the continuing dispute over Aksai Chin. The Chinese had reacted by saying that the 2019 reorganisation would “impede China’s sovereignty”.
Less than a year later, Chinese troops began to intrude into eastern Ladakh at several points, which resulted in the first fatal clash at the border in forty years.
The two Asian countries have yet to fully resolve the military stand-off, despite multiple rounds of talks over the last three-and-a-half years.
