home > by publication type > interviews > Interview with William Milam on Kashmir’s prospects for peace after Pakistan’s earthquake
Email
| Interviewer: | Esther Pan |
|---|---|
| Author: | William Milam |
October 11, 2005
India and Pakistan have disputed the mountainous territory of Kashmir since the end of British colonialism led to independence and the partition of the two states in 1947. India controls about 55,000 square miles of the territory, Pakistan about 32,000 square miles. The province is divided by an unofficial border known as the Line of Control. The majority of Kashmir’s 10 million residents are Muslim. Clashes over Kashmir have caused two of the three wars between the two countries in the last half-century; fighting in the region has killed at least 65,000 people since 1989. William Milam, former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan (1998-2001) and Bangladesh (1990-93) and currently a senior policy scholar on South Asia at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars talks to cfr.org’s Esther Pan about the impact of the recent earthquake on India-Pakistan relations.
Please give an assessment of the October 8 earthquake’s potential impact on relations between India and Pakistan.
It could go either way. India rushed to offer aid and Pakistan accepted, which will make things a little easier. But I’m not certain it will have much impact at all [in the long run]. I hope it does, but it’s not clear to me that it will help move things along. The difficulties are deep, and there are still hesitations on both sides.
Was it unprecedented for Pakistan to accept relief aid and food from India?
I don’t know if it’s ever happened before. It hadn’t happened in my time.
Why was Pakistan willing to accept relief supplies but not helicopters or helicopter flights from India? Was that a military issue?
Pakistan has always been very suspicious of letting Indians fly over their territory. There was a period when airplanes weren’t allowed to fly out of Delhi or even Islamabad; foreign airlines weren’t allowed to fly over some parts of Pakistan. I remember the flights had to go further north to get to Western Europe.
One of the leaders of an Islamic Kashmiri resistance group, the Hezb-ul-Mujahadeen, which is based on the Pakistani side of the Line of Control, called a ceasefire October 11 in areas of Indian-controlled Kashmir affected by the earthquake. What impact will that decision have?
It’s a nice move. One of the major issues for the Indians is the continuance of cross-border terrorism [across the Line of Control]. They keep bringing it up in the meetings with the Pakistanis.
Has there ever been this kind of ceasefire called?
I’m not certain the Hezb-ul-Mujahadeen has ever called a ceasefire. There have been ceasefires along the Line of Control between the two armies, and still are, but in terms of the insurgencies, I haven’t heard of it.
Do you think this earthquake could play the same role as the recent tsunami in Indonesia—that is, bring the two sides closer together and potentially lead to an agreement?
Both sides have to really change their mindset about the other side and about the situation in Kashmir. But it seems as if the cooperation and goodwill on both sides during this crisis will help move that mindset forward. On both sides, I might add.
What about the timing? India and Pakistan have been making quite a few friendly steps lately and the rhetoric over the last six months or so seemed much more welcoming than at other points in the past.
On the Pakistani side there’s a definite will to move beyond where they were two years ago, and I think there’s been a good deal of forward movement. I don’t like to say anything that kills so many people is opportune in any way, but the peace process was progressing anyway, slowly. Whether [the earthquake] will speed it up or not is unclear to me. The tragedy itself is so devastating, that’s where the focus will lie for the next few weeks.
You mentioned political will on the Pakistani side. Do you think the same political will exists on the Indian side?
I’m not an expert on Indian affairs. I can only tell you I’ve heard a lot of my Pakistani sources and friends keep wishing there was quicker movement on the Indian side to acknowledge there needs to be some mutually-agreed solution in the future.
And what about steps like starting the bus service across the Line of Control?
Those are all helpful, but I think many of the Pakistanis are concerned—and I don’t speak for them, of course—that while India is very willing to being forthcoming on things like bus and train and communication links, it seems not to have moved in an intellectual way on the core issue, which is [the fate of] Kashmir.
Is a major issue allowing Kashmiris to vote for which country they would like to join, as called for by the 1948 UN Resolution 47?
Not at all. Pakistan has already moved beyond the position of the UN referendum. I don’t want to put too much meat on those bones, but many thinking Pakistanis worry the Indians are not moving quickly enough with regard to the mindset they need to be in to have a final resolution of this Kashmir problem. It will take many years, anyway. It’s a long, drawn-out process.
But you feel like the willingness is there on the Pakistani side?
Willingness to move into a process, yes. I’m not sure the Pakistanis have yet understood—and may not for a long time—that there will have to be some trades on both sides.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.