|
 |
Home >
South Asia >
Peace Processes >
Student Workshops >
Student Workshop IV
|
Student Workshop IV:
Frameworks for a Kashmir Settlement
|
|
Simulation focus: In May 2006, the Indian Prime Minister held
a Round Table Conference in Srinagar, the capital of Jammu and Kashmir,
at which five working groups were set up to produce ideas on how to move the
Kashmir peace process forward. The working groups are on:
|
|
| |
• |
|
CBMs with Pakistan, including cross-border and cross-LOC relations;
|
|
| |
• |
|
Center-State Relations;
|
|
| |
• |
|
Good Governance;
|
|
| |
• |
|
Infrastructure and Economic Development; and
|
|
| |
• |
|
CBMs within Jammu and Kashmir, including for widows
and orphans of the violence, return of displaced persons, and return of
people who crossed over during the insurgency.
|
|
|
|
|
This simulation was based on one of the working groups dealing
with Center-State Relations. This working group was chosen because it touched
on the crux of the problem: Kashmir’s political status.
|
|
 |
|
|
National Expert George Verghese, addressing students at Dibrugarh Assam.
|
|
|
The members of the working group were asked to look at:
|
|
| |
a. |
|
What should be the relationship between Jammu and
Kashmir and the rest of the Indian federation?
|
|
| |
b. |
|
Is there a case for internal devolution, and in this
context, what should be the
relations between Jammu, the Kashmir valley and Ladakh?
|
|
|
|
The questions they addressed were:
|
|
| |
|
|
Is there a solution based on devolution (interpreted in its widest sense)
that can be found directly between New Delhi and the people and
leadership of Jammu & Kashmir? If so, what is it?
|
|
| |
|
|
Or
|
|
| |
|
|
Do Pakistan, and Pakistani-administered Kashmir have to be a part
of the solution, and if so, in which ways?
|
|
| |
|
|
Can an agreement between New Delhi and Srinagar, or New Delhi,
Islamabad and Srinagar, bring about a lasting peace, or do
discussions on devolution have to include Jammu and Ladakh,
as well as regions of AJK, Gilgit and Baltistan?
|
|
| |
|
|
Finally, do the “azaadi” groups have to be a part of this process for
a solution to be arrived at, and if so, in which ways? Should/can
they be drafted into the working group? If not, should there be a
parallel track of discussion on this issue with them?
|
|
| |
|
|
Should the same options apply to the armed groups? If so,
should it be on condition that
they renounce violence/declare a ceasefire?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
