According two some documents de-classified after 60 years, the western powers especially the Anglo-American Block had played a great game in the 1948 crisis in Kashmir. Last year Rakesh Ankit published a research paper on the basis of the de-classified documents titled, “The Cold War and its Impact on the Evolution of the Kashmir Crisis, 1947-48” in the Journal of the Oxford University History Society. According to him, ‘Power Politics’ made a large contribution to the evolution of the Kashmir crisis. He concludes that while the dispute emerged for local, regional and religious reasons its evolution and eventual ‘internationalization’ bears the stamp of concerns which had nothing to do with the individuality of the crisis and the merits of the cases of the two protagonists. In other words, while the events in and around the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir from August 1947 to January 1949, a period which saw an entire range of conflict, from local skirmishes to full-fledged invasion to pitched defensive warfare, were manufactured by a set of circumstances, personalities and concerns, which were all essentially local or regional and sub-continental or religious in nature, once the crisis erupted it was manipulated by the British-led Western Block, as far as possible, in the pursuit of its own vital interests stretching from the Middle East to Central Asia to the Far East. These vital interests can be broadly categorized as defensive, strategic and geo-political (aimed at the former Communist USSR) and ideological or religious (aimed at the Islamic Middle East). In fact, Rakesh has quoted extract from Bevin’s letter to Marshall which states, “Kashmir was on the Soviet frontier. Russia might well intervene as she had in Greece and China, playing on the tribes and on communal feeling. Whoever controlled the valley of Kashmir controlled the strategic and commercial communications between India, Pakistan and Central Asia.” The main western interest was the access to Central Asia and containment of the Communist Russia.

A number of American and British strategists opined that Pakistan would be more useful to them than India as they could manipulate its rulers easily. In fact, it was decided in a meeting in Paris between Bevin and Marshall that the Anglo-American interests would be best served by keeping the Kashmir corridor passing through Gilgit with Pakistan as India could create problems. The ceasefire and the extent of areas under each country too were decided by the western powers as both the armies at that time were controlled by the British Officers. As per the research paper and according to some documents de-classified sometime back, the American and British strategists were advising their respective Governments that Pakistan would be a better choice for them to back. They were also apprehensive that India will wipe out Pakistan unless the West came to its assistance in a big way. All the subsequent military alliances like SEATO and CENTO were a result of this advice. Pakistan was fully supported as long as their interest demanded and when there was a clash of interest, it was dumped on the roadside!

It is often said that a lot of time has passed and the global priorities have now changed. Russia is no longer a threat it used to be for the west. However, new centres of power and alliances have developed which have made the famous Kashmir corridor more important now. Emergence of China as a super power and an economic giant. The break up of Soviet Union and emergence of a number of independent Central Asian countries with extensive resources of energy have made the Anglo-American block shift their focus towards this area. This has prompted them to design newer “Blue Prints” which will safeguard their primary interests. Their aim is now to contain China and have a grip on the Central Asian Energy Pie! The recent statement from a top official of the US State Department is quite intriguing. Robert Blake, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Central and South Asian Affairs sometime back revealed to the media that there already exists a “Blue Print” for the solution of Kashmir dispute. According to him this “Blue Print” had been discussed and agreement was also reached on it between the contending parties but the same had only to be endorsed. However, he did not disclose the exact details of the “Blue Print”. According to him Kashmir comes up in every discussion and it is very prominent. He rejected the often quoted premise that it is impossible for India and Pakistan to make progress. He stated that both the countries had made significant progress towards the resolution of the issue during the period 2004 and 2007. But the question is what the “Blue Print” is? Most probably, Robert Blake was referring to General Musharraf’s four point formula. In fact, the famous journalist Kuldip Nayar had also mentioned about this “Blue Print” in an article in Tribune in November, 2004. He wrote, “General Musharraf has set the ball rolling. He first told two Indian journalists that the solution of Kashmir lay in identifying the area, demilitarising it and giving it a status. Subsequently, he gave shape to his proposal by specifying seven areas: the plains, including Jammu, the foothills up to 7,000 feet, Pir Panjal, the valley, the Great Himalayan zone, the upper Indus valley, and the Northern Areas, the Karakoram, parts of which are with China. For the first time, a Pakistan ruler has proposed independence for Kashmir, besides joint control or UN mandate. General Musharraf must have done the rethinking after talking to the Indian journalists, including myself. At that time, when he said that the Kashmiris wanted independence, he meant that they would "step back" once concrete proposals were on the table. This might still happen. But independence is an option as of now.” The General himself had highlighted this “Blue Print” in a televised speech. One can safely bet that the formula did not come to General Musharraf from divine sources or emerge from his discussions with Indian journalists. It must have been suggested as usual by our western “Friends” who have been “Helping” us in resolving this problem for last 63 years or so! However, the moot point is whether these “Friends” of the sub-continent are really interested in sorting out the problem to the advantage of the two countries and the local people? As pointed out by Rakesh Ankit their priority number one is their own global interest.

One fails to understand why we are always looking towards west to give us a “nudge” to settle our disputes? Why can’t the people of the sub-continent take their own initiatives to settle our problems? Why do we allow ourselves to be colonized again in a different way? The best initiative is for the inhabitants of the sub-continent, the Indians, Pakistanis, and above all the Kashmiris to work out our own “Blue Prints” which would suit the well being and peace in our area. Looking to outsiders having multiple motives is not going to solve any of our problems but only compound these as has been the experience of last more than half a century. It is a pity that in spite of our past experience we continue to look westwards for a solution. Unless we sincerely and honestly realize this and take our own initiatives, we will put many more of our future generations in perpetual bondage to the west!