UN OCHA and Kashmir

Thinking beyond the UNMOGIP, and its mandate

Arjimand Hussain Talib

A spokesperson for the United Nations (UN) Secretary General said last week that their office was closely monitoring the on-going situation in Kashmir. He further said they were in regular touch with the UN Military Observers’ Group (UNMOGIP) office in Srinagar. But what beyond that?

The unrest and the civilian killings in Kashmir over the last one month are colossal in scale. The state actions in containing demonstrations of unarmed civilians are extraordinary. The use of live ammunition on unarmed protesters, army deployment prolonged curfews, widespread detentions, media and communications curbs, etc. signal to an extraordinary political and humanitarian situation. Although the unrest has received some degree of international media attention, yet the international community remains as oblivious to the happenings in Kashmir as ever before.

There are basically two reasons why the international community is not so concerned about the current Kashmir situation. One reason is that there is almost negligible advocacy at international level for an international intervention. If at all there is some advocacy by a handful of groups that is symbolic and ill guided. Globally, Kashmiri Diaspora is largely ill-organized. Facebook activism is no substitute to other recognized methods of advocacy.

Another reason has surely something to do with 9/11. Kashmir has acquired an image of a place which is part of the “problem”, read “international terrorism”. There are fewer takers for the argument that Kashmir’s unrest is driven by a peaceful nationalist movement – seeking a change in political status quo and tight military control. There are hardly any takers for the argument that if unaddressed Kashmir will impact Pakistan and Afghanistan’s stability.

On another plane, the current international indifference has also something to do with the obsession of Kashmir’s political groups in looking exclusively at the UN’s political resolutions on Kashmir. It is a fact that the UN continues to portray Kashmir as a disputed region in all its maps. Its communications also recognize it as such. But there is a technical difference between depiction of a region as ‘disputed’ and ‘conflict affected’. The ‘disputed’ status, despite its own political significance, does not necessarily underline humanitarian urgency. Designation of Kashmir as a ‘conflict zone’ would do that.

The question here is why hasn’t such thing happened so far? Naturally, the governments in New Delhi and Srinagar would not do that. Those advocating for Kashmiri right to self determination and safeguarding of their human rights at home and abroad have missed an important point over the years: the role of UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Kashmir. And also the absence of the UN Cluster System and a Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) in Kashmir

The United Nations’ Military Observers’ Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), based in Srinagar and Muzaffarabad, has a limited mandate. Their primary work is to report any violations or change in the status quo of the Line of Control (LoC).

OCHA as an arm of the UN Secretariat which has a broader mandate - to “mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action” to alleviate human suffering in emergencies, which includes conflict situations. Importantly, one of its missions is also to “advocate for the rights of people in need.”

Beyond humanitarian coordination, what is required in Kashmir today is underlining the urgency for some urgent political initiatives to ensure that the trouble in Kashmir does not spill over to the larger South Asian region. That urgency would come if there are credible situation reports from a body like the OCHA, which are taken more seriously by the international community. Today Kashmir needs situation reports by impartial international actors who would depict the real humanitarian situation there.

Although the European Commission (EC) some days back announced an emergency aid of 2 million euros ($2.5 million) for the victims of the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir, it was not a special initiative in response to the current situation. The EU’s low scale humanitarian aid for Kashmir has been pouring in for some eight years now, addressing the longer term impacts of the conflict.

The UN Resolution 46/182 which serves as the basis of the OCHA mandate is clear that the “responsibility for people affected by emergency lies – first and foremost - with their respective states”. But it also says that the “states in need are expected to facilitate the work of responding organizations.” Given the UN’s recognition of Kashmir as a disputed territory, the definition of the governing ‘State’ cannot be normal in meaning and scope.

There are people who argue that since there is no UN OCHA office in India, its ambit of work cannot be extended to Kashmir. That is not a convincing argument. UN OCHA has directly and indirectly responded to many emergency situations in India. One example is the Gujarat earthquake.

Then there is a full-fledged UN OCHA office in Pakistan, whose area of work includes Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK). UN OCHA has played, and continues to play, a key role in the coordination of the government and the international emergency response efforts in PAK.

The UN OCHA has a strong presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) as well. Humanitarian actors, donors, and diplomatic missions alike rely on OCHA for its wide range of information and analytical products in the OPT. These include bridging the gaps in humanitarian needs, weekly and monthly humanitarian updates, briefings and field tours. One of its key functions is the regular reporting on the overall humanitarian situation, and routine monitoring, reporting on, advocating for, and facilitating humanitarian access in the OPT.

Looking at the dire humanitarian situation in Kashmir today, especially the highly inadequate infrastructure to treat the casualties, UN OCHA has a strong case in Kashmir. Its case is also strong for the fact that people are dying for lack of timely medical aid and treatment. The death of two women last week just because their travel to hospital was hindered by troopers serves as a grim reminder. There must be many more instances which go unreported.

The policy of widespread detainment of civilians, including children, on frivolous charges is also a matter of serious concern. These state actions raise serious questions related to juvenile justice. The detainment of prominent human rights defender and President of Kashmir High Court Bar Association, Mian Qayoom, on highly questionable charges, is a grave matter too.

All these matters where the rule of law has hit a low of unacceptable limits in international law deserve international attention. And UN-OCHA could just be apt to do that.