Ex-Pentagon official highlights Pakistan's 'hypocrisy' on abrogation of Art 370

Pakistan's opposition to India's action of revoking the special status of Jammu and Kashmir only showcases its hypocrisy. Islamabad has been crying foul, saying rights of Kashmiris were subjugated even though it had stripped Pakistan occupied Kashmir of its special status decades ago, opined a former Pentagon official.

Michael Rubin, also a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog in an Op-ed asserted that India has always maintained that its action was "strictly internal". However, Pakistan, who has a history of using "terror" to achieve its aims at a relatively low cost, has no one else blame as "India likely never would have changed the status quo of J and K had it not been for decades of overt Pakistan-sponsored terrorism."

"Terrorism is a tactic the states use to achieve aims at a relatively low cost. In this case, the Pakist gamble backfired, and Khan, as well as Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, have no one but themselves to blame. Lost in the Pakist criticism of India's actions, however, is recognition of Pakistan's own hypocrisy. For four and a half decades before India revoked Article 370, Pakistan stripped both Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir (as Pakistan calls the portion it occupies) of their special status," wrote Michael Rubin in Washington Examiner.

Since India has announced its decision to revoke the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan has ramped up its rhetorics against New Delhi.

Islamabad since then has approached several countries seeking support in order to make a strong case against India. It also approached the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) with the help of China. However, at the end of the UNSC meeting, last week, China and Pakistan stood isolated as members refused to endorse their position.

Rubin in his opinion piece continues to highlight Pakistan's hypocritical approach. He asserts that Islamabad's double-standards have been evident since its creation.

"From the beginning, it (Pakistan) has cried that Kashmir's inclusion in India is "illegitimate". However, according to Rubin, the Pakist occupation of Gilgit-Baltistan "appears illegal, even under Pakist law".

Substantiating his claims, Rubin added, in 1992, a Kashmir Court ordered the PoK government to assume control of Gilgit-Baltistan since it found that Gilgit-Baltistan was part of Jammu and Kashmir.

The author citing the Pakist constitution also mentioned that, Article 257 of the Pakist constitution, confirms that Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory which does not belong to Pakistan.

However, on the contrary, Rubin adds that it is Pakistan which appoints governor in the region and that the real decision-making ability remains with the appointed governor rather than the chief minister or elected assembly.

Further underlining Islamabad's dual standards over its claim, that New Delhi revoked article 370 accorded to Jammu and Kashmir to change the demography of the Muslim majority region, Rubin in his article states that "Pakistan tried to change the demography of the Shiite-dominated region by transferring Sunni Muslims."

"While politics hamper accurate censuses, in 1948, the Gilgit-Baltistan region was at least 85 per cent Shiite and Ismaili Shiite; after the 1974 State Subject Rule abrogation, the region is only 50 per cent Shiite," he added.

( With inputs from ANI )