One shouldn’t presume that Beijing and New Delhi have always been on the opposite poles of the spectrum as serious attempts have always been made to facilitate discussion and promote diplomacy in its truest essence. From the Panchseel Agreement of 1945 to the recent Galway valley violence of 2020 – do these countries still believe in dialogue for peace’ as the belief that the Ministry of External Affairs holds or has– Hindi-Chinni Bhai-Bhai period already becoming into Hindi-Chinni bye-bye period.

While promising a stable bilateral relationship it is imperative to note how cross-cutting sensitive issues of the border dispute, country contours, diverging projections of geopolitical interest, security ties with other powers, close affiliations with Pakistan and the United States forces us to look at multiple vantage points in this already complicated affair – thus raising the burning questions whether as INDIA and China both take over the world stage are they willing to ‘confront’ and ‘concile’?

“Today, being the biggest developing countries in the world, China and India are both committed to developing their economy and raising their people’s living standards’’

– Li Peng

INTRODUCTION

The past 60 years of India- China relations have signalled that both countries have been making a concerted effort to embark on seeking mutually acceptable resolutions to the main contention relating to a boundary issue. The major provocations which confront this asymmetrical correspondence been to build mutual trust and confidence. The trust deficit which plagues both sides has decimated the robustness of bilateral relationships where the element of trust is an essential pillar in maintaining a sustained balance. Somehow, the lack of these essential components of confidence-building feigns grounds of hostility towards one – another and gives rise to biases dwelling on power dynamics.

The deepening of relations can be traced to the signing of the Strategic and Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity in 2005 and A Shared Vision for 21st Century in 2008 which serves as a reminder of our neighbourhood while laying foundations for a future that envisions us growing together; however it’s saddening to see how we are walking on eggshells now as our cordial relations reach a breakthrough.

Undoubtedly, India and China have emerged as the two rapidly growing economies and their bilateral relationship to a greater extent has assumed global and strategic relevance. The objective of this article will be to assess and analyze the broad overview of India-China relations, throwing light on issues that fragment them while we chart our future prospects of convergence. It is of utmost importance to questions what lies the way forward for both the ‘dragon’ and the ‘peacock’ as uncertain times dawn and reciprocal development is the need of the hour.

EVOLUTION OF RELATIONSHIP

Taking a glimpse of the past 70 years gone by, China-India relations have moved ahead despite wind and rain and have followed their own course of growth despite all odds. Since the 1950s, the leaders laid the stone to establish diplomatic relations between China and India, as they Cooperatively championed the ‘Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.’

As consensus was maintained in the era of initial cordiality the Panchsheel Agreement was signed which ascribed the ‘guiding principles’ of India-China bilateral relationship as its ideals of ‘non-interference in each other’s internal affairs while respect for territorial unity, integrity and sovereignty’ coursed through both nations.

However, it was Zhou Enlai’s trip to India in June 1954 which was a mark of China’s intent to uphold it promises while also reinstating another historic event where a communist head of government was making a peacetime visit to a non-communist state.

The animosity and hostilities gained momentum during the decade of 1959 – 1976, where this rough patch resulted in the infamous war of 1962. During this period, there was a sharp shift in the perception of China where negative connotations of it being seen as an aggressive neighbour that sought to humiliate a democratic India garnered headlines. A dramatic transference of ideologies as well as values of peaceful and friendly consultation,

established strategic and cooperative partnership for peace and prosperity, while achieving all-round development of bilateral relations marked the much of 1980s.

In the post-1998 scenario after India detonated a nuclear device, China was a staunch critic of this development thus putting a roadblock in their relationship. However, the situation changed after the realisation set in about each other’s contribution to the global economy and to a greater extent started broadening the then-existing bilateral ties. The strain in the relationship was replaced by an era of cooperation in the economic sphere while disagreements on respective political fronts.

While tracing the genealogy of Sino – Indian relations we come across the phase commenced by the Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi by initiating the concept of “hometown diplomacy” which ranged from informal summits in Wuhan and Chennai to strategic communication on long-term issues of global and regional importance while agreeing to facilitate development and close partnership

Today’s achievements of China-India relations embody the concise and regular efforts of several generations from whom we need to draw inspiration from the past as experiences of the present tragically make us critical of each other’s intentions.

As we stand on the brink of a new starting point present-day decision-makers should draw wisdom from our thousands of years of civilisations and explore authentic ways to stay true to the essence of ‘ brotherhood’ envisioned years ago as we look forward towards; “enhancing mutual trust, focusing on cooperation, managing differences and seeking common development”.

CHALLENGES TO THE INDIA-CHINA PARTNERSHIP

Indian President Ram Nath Kovind and Prime Minister Narendra Modi often resonate with the philosophy, where the whole world is seen as a family of the whole rather than functioning in splinters, which runs parallel with the Chinese philosophical concept of “universal peace” and “universal love” thus reiterating the belief that the “Dragon-Elephant Tango” does hold the potential to create a new chapter in building a community with a shared future if they agree to make credible and foresighted peaceful endeavours towards the issues of contention like :

• To devise an early settlement of the border problem and to prevent the enduring stalemate from completely undermining the confidence that remains between the two nations
• To reconcile regional strategies in South Asia, Central Asia, ASEAN, and the Indian Ocean;
• To promote confidence-building measures and eliminate misperceptions while avoiding the misreading of each other’s strategic intentions,
• To envisage each other’s core interests and strategic sensitivities
• To reinforce the bolstering effect of vibrant trade, economic links and developmental ties in sustaining a stable bilateral relationship;
• To breathe more substance into the existing framework of the declared Sino-Indian strategic partnership.

THE WAY THAT LIES AHEAD

This journey of facilitating change and strengthening the relationship needs to be steered by mastering the four keys of “leading, transmitting, shaping and integrating” – the basics of enhancing trust and to instil confidence amongst one – another.

“Leading” pertains to reaching consensus and guide the direction of the development of bilateral relations under the guidance of leaders. “Transmitting” means to transmit the leaders’ consensus to all levels as they get translated into tangible cooperation and outcomes. “Shaping” refers to go beyond the mode of managing differences while accumulating the positive momentum of shaping bilateral relations. “Integrating” at the end concerns strengthening exchanges and cooperation while promoting convergence of interests and achieve common development.

There is no doubt in saying that the levels of engagement between India and China have increased certainly but India, at the same time, requires to move forward with a sophisticated approach to deal with the emerging strategic challenges being emanating from China. Power dynamics often remain at the core of weak reciprocal agreements however this holds no vitality in the context here as, despite the fact that China has become increasingly assertive not only at the regional level but also at the global level, India has not shown any displeasure so far in strongest terms.

In the current circumstances, it is obvious that trade has come to be viewed as an increasingly important facilitator of relations especially in the shadow of lingering political mistrust as issues ranging from the long-running protracted border dispute to China’s close affiliations with Pakistan to India’s cordial allegiance with the US defies the purpose of simplifying the conflict.

The signing of an Agreement on “Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the Border Dispute”, by both India and China is a major stride in moving ahead in terms of reaching a consensus on this major irritant while also joining hands in a promise to maintain peace and tranquillity on the border front. But, at the same, it’s needless to highlight that this requires a careful assessment especially on the intent and declarations of outcomes.

China has always been a hardcore follower of following the tenets of the ‘Monroe Doctrine’. The attempt has always been to deny access to other powers in the region that it perceives as exclusively within its sphere of influence. As the time has come to breathe more substance into the existing framework of strategic partnership it is essential on the part of India to remind Beijing how these stipulated actions have been damaging the interests of other regions especially to the countries in the East and South-East Asia.

In the long term, neither Indian nor Chinese defence strategists can rule out the possibility of a renewed confrontation over the disputed territory (Tibet, Kashmir, Myanmar, or the Indian Ocean ) as China becomes the other alternative unchallenged power and India continues to increase its circumference of influence thus signalling that a Sino-Indian rivalry in southern Asia may well be a dominant feature of future Asian geopolitics of the twenty-first century thus compelling the regional actors to choose sides. The nature of the rivalry will be facilitated by how domestic political and economic developments, as well as internal mechanisms of these two countries, affect their power, their outlooks, and their foreign and security policies on the international platform. On the flip side, it can also be noted that while they are competitors for power and influence in Asia, China and India also share interests in maintaining regional stability as well as exploiting economic opportunities while promoting regional cooperation – all of which could act as indispensable factors in influencing their relationship.

Last but not least, there comes a pressing necessity where one under these idealistic terms of co-operation, unity and oneness must not forget the real question where countries wonder: ‘WHETHER CO-OPERATION AND COMPARATIVE ELEMENTS IN BETWEEN POWERFUL WORLD POWERS COEXIST ?’

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Keshab, Chandra & Ratha, (2014); ‘India-China Bilateral Relations “

Kumar, R. (2007), “Cultural and Economic Relations between India and China”

Nehru, J. (1946), “The Discovery of India”, Oxford University Press; pp 30-42 .

The post INDIA-CHINA BILATERAL RELATIONS: CONFRONTATION & CONCILIATION appeared first on WISER WORLD.

While it has been regarded as a continuum of economic and developmental prospects for Pakistan, it has also, significantly, given birth to a series of domestic economic and political issues in Pakistan. It is an instrument whereby China seeks to establish its hegemony through the combined use of hard and soft power, relying greatly on its “debt-trap diplomacy”. The debt outcome of the CPEC project is already about $80 billion, with 90% of it to be paid for by Islamabad in the form of the national debt. Even though Islamabad is still presenting a rosy picture of CPEC and its developmental prospects for Pakistan, it is well known that it will not be able to pay China back and will eventually lose its sovereignty and become another linchpin in the Chinese debt trap strategy. Experts and media reports have already been referring to it as a “Trillion Dollar Blunder”.

This mega billion dollar project has turned out to be more of a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) for China than a boon, especially when the world has been badly hit by the pandemic. The CPEC has proven to be more of a bogus project that hardly offers any profits with lagging industrialisation efforts and only a quarter of the decided projects completed over the last five years. With China facing an economic slowdown and depleting dollar reserves, it is itself in desperate need of the USD and is trying to woo foreign investors to its financial markets. With the trade war with the US and the Chinese export market facing an all-time low due to the diplomatic distancing and the Western countries’ ire over China’s role in the spread of Coronavirus pandemic, a big blow has been landed on to the Belt and Road Initiative, especially the CPEC project that is greatly faltering and has turned out to be China’s biggest NPA. With the global supply chains being badly hit, the OBOR Initiative is no longer a marker of China’s long-term vision and magnanimity; rather it is regarded as an investment blunder of colossal scale. The CPEC, which sowed dreams of a developed Pakistan with the most profitable and developed infrastructure has and the region into a hub of trade and commerce has instead turned it into a centre of gargantuan infrastructure with negative profitability and zero utility. The Chinese banks and financial institutions have been shirking away from funding the CPEC, as it is evidently nil on profit, given Pakistan’s inability to repay the Chinese loans. 

There is a huge gap in the announced projects of 2015 and completed projects of 2020, with only 32 of the 122 announced projects seeing the light of the day. The CPEC project is lagging behind as it has been facing many shortcomings like lack of funds, trade asymmetries, domestic issues, bad loans for China which does not want to fund the CPEC projects and opposition from Baloch rebels and local who will be directly impacted by this rollout. Large energy projects have been shelved as this NPA faces major bottlenecks due to unsustainable debt levels. China is reluctant to provide assistance as the venture does not provide any returns and is a fund drain. Moreover, Pakistan’s long standing challenges have been aggravated by the CPEC; it entails economic, environmental, social and political costs the state which faces an exacerbated energy deficit, creating a greater dependence for fossil fuels that are harming the environment as well. The CPEC was roped in on its premise of turning Pakistan into a higher-value manufacturing hub, however, what is seen at present is that the huge majority of special economic zones (SEZs) are empty, and the information and communication technology (ICT) projects that were to provide the backbone have been halted and limited. 

Conclusion

Thus, the CPEC is a gamble for China and Pakistan, contrary to their narrative of completing the CPEC at all means. It has already increased Pakistan’s current account deficit and China does not want to invest more where there is no way of recouping their investment and the Return of Investment (RoI) rate shows a gloomy picture. For the Dragon, given the calamitous economic situation Pakistan is in, even the chances of recovery of principal amounts spent by the Chinese financial institutions is a far-fetched dream and thus, the “iron-brotherhood” may be in a jeopardy. The Chinese funds kept Pakistan afloat and prevented it from sinking into the economic doom, however with the funds getting halted and dried up, CPEC faces cost escalations being beneficial for none. Rather than an asset, it has become a liability and has been added to the list of China’s NPA.

References: 

Chinese banks’ reluctance towards CPEC hint towards their funding gap. (2020, August 27). Wion .

Afzal, M. (2020). “At all costs”: How Pakistan and China control the narrative on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Brookings.

Business Standard . (2018, April 17). Pak’s current account deficit rises due to CPEC: ADB report. Business Standard.

Hillman, J. E., McCalpin, M., & Brock, K. (2020). The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor at Five. CSIS.

The EurAsian Times. (2020, July 4). CPEC Project A ‘Trillion-Dollar Blunder’, Pakistan Calls It ‘Outstanding Initiative’. The EurAsian Times.

The post CPEC AT FIVE: A CRITICAL REVIEW appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Why and How are Drugs Reaching Kashmir?

With China and Pakistan axis at an all-time high, Pakistan has been stronger than before and has been using a variety of tactics to fund its terrorist activities in Kashmir by providing funds, assistance and substance abuse. The Sino-Pak Nexus is greatly dependent on the Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir (PoK) region and they have been using the region as a linchpin for stymieing India’s growth and fomenting issues in its Achilles Heel. Drug smuggling, thus, has become a great cause of concern in the Union Territory, creating security threats and weakening the International Border. Afghanistan and Pakistan have had a huge role to play in the on-goings in the region, as the former supplies drugs and well as men, material and training and their militant networks are strong enough to penetrate India’s borders through North Kashmir that has been lapped up by the persistent drug addiction and abuse and brainwashing. Moreover, post the abrogation of Article 370 in the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan has been strongly engaged in giving a fillip to the drug sponsored terrorism in Kashmir with help from Afghanistan, mostly through good quality heroin that is then sent to various parts of the country through their associates based in those areas.

Obscured among regular merchandise or in secret niches, these narcotics are sent from the drug corridor in North Kashmir to Punjab, Gujarat, Mumbai and Rajasthan in transportation trucks and vehicles. The cross-border drug menace has spread its tentacles far and wide in India, with drugs also making their way into Kashmir through Gujarat via sea route from Pakistan, in trucks carrying products from mountain salt to cumin seeds and apples.

Prior to Indian Government’s 2019 order for suspension of the cross border trade that took place via the LoC, the drug mafia was active through this route. Heroin has been found in consignments of dress material in Uri and hawai chappals that were later dumped in Lal Chowk area of Srinagar.

Landmark Case Study: Attari Border (2019)

The heroin haul in a Pakistani truck at the Attari border in Amritsar on June 26, 2019 by the Customs Officials, is a landmark event to show how narco-terrorism became well-embedded in the fabric of Kashmir. The truck driver had unloaded six hundred bags of pink salt which seemed suspicious to the officials and after investigation, it turned out to be 15 bags containing 532 kilograms of heroin worth Rs 2000 crores. The case was handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) which found out that there was huge involvement across the border, from Afghanistan and Pakistan, in the narcotics racket; the profits from the scandal being used for funding the terror module in Kashmir. The NIA found linkages between Amritsar-based businessman, Gurpinder Singh for whom the consignment was apparently meant and a Kashmiri man, Tariq Lone who had linkages with the Noor and Noor Company based in Pakistan. From various interrogations, what came to light was that the drug cartel passed through various channels through Afghanistan-Pakistan and Kashmir. Loads of packages of other goods and mundane consignments prior to this recovery must have contained these shipments of heroin, according to the investigating authorities who discovered an ostentatious network of hawala operators helping the narcotics lobby. The huge network had linkages to Dubai and Kashmiris who had crossed over to Pakistan to become terrorists.

The Inside Story: A Look Into Other Case Studies

The persistent issue of drug abuse in Kashmir again came to limelight on the fateful evening of June 11, 2020 when the police personnel in Handwara town in North Kashmir stopped a car sans a registration plate. The passenger seat of the car had a black coloured bag safely tucked under it, which on further investigation contained over six kilograms of heroin and twenty lakhs in cash. The occupant of the seat was identified as Abdul Momin Peer and subsequent raids point out that the drug syndicate spans his entire family. His father-in-law, Ifthikar Andrabi and brother were arrested in successive raids, with 21 kilograms heroin and Rs 1 crore cash recovered from various properties in the family’s name. The seized drugs are estimated to be worth Rs 100 Crores. The story of poppy and guns of Kashmir was transferred to the NIA who found that Peer’s father-in-law has a number of relatives across the LoC in Pakistan occupied Jammu and Kashmir, close to North Kashmir (Handwara region). It has been established by the agencies that they have links with the terrorist outfit, Lashkar-e-Toiba through which the high-level narcotic consignments have been sourced by the family from the Afg-Pak belt and then sent to other states in India from Kashmir, hereby, the profits of the narco-trade being used for furthering terrorism in the valley.

The profits of a recent drug consignment of Rs 5 crores to Amritsar wherein more than three crores were distributed among the ground workers in the valley and the terrorists of Lashkar-e-Toiba has been an important case study of the investigation of this drug scandal. According to the intelligence agencies, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the J&K especially North Kashmir’s drug romance and its narco-terrorism. The rampant drug trade has been a major source of funding to the terrorism in Kashmir as the recent cases have highlighted and outfits like Lashkar-e-Toiba Jaish-e-Mohammed, the Hizbul Mujahideen operating in the valley have been seen to be greatly involved in this narco-terrorism tête-à-tête. With further investigations and newer facts being unearthed, the NIA found another key player in the drug peddling from Hyderpora, Kashmir: Afaq Ahmad Wani from whom they recovered Rs 30 lakhs in cash and three kilos of heroin. Interestingly, the accused is a bank manager by profession.

Conclusion

As evident from the various interrogations and recoveries made by the investigation agencies, North Kashmir has, hence, become a safe haven for the terrorist outfits and the narco-terrorism is on its peak in the region, the profits from the drug consortia providing the basis for the development and deepening of the terrorist activities and associations in the valley. Moreover, the issue does not end here as the drug peril is spreading its roots in various parts of India, creating an appalling security threat for the state. The drug issue has extremely dark undertones to it and the need is for a coordinated and strategic approach by the authorities and government, to stem the issues at the ground level.  

References:

Ahuja, N. B. (2020, July 18). Cross border narco-terror becoming a major concern for India. THE WEEK. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/07/18/cross-border-narco-terror-becoming-a-major-concern-for-india.html

Hussain, A. (2020, June 27). ‘Narco-terror’ module busted in Kashmir, 2 held with Rs 65 crore narcotics and weapons. Hindustan Times, Srinagar.

Pandita, R. (2020, September 11). Guns and Poppy. OPEN, pp. 26-31.

The post TERRORISM IN KASHMIR AND ITS DRUG TRYST appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Kulbhushan Jadhav is a retired navy officer of India. He was arrested by Pakistan on 3^rd March 2016 on the suspicion that he was a spy sent by India. India received the news on 25^th March which was after a delay of 22 days. India asserted that Jadhav who was carrying on a business in Iran after retirement was abducted and falsely charged on the grounds of ‘terrorism and espionage’. In April 2017, The military court of Pakistan awarded the death sentence to Jadhav. After this judgement by the Pakistan court, India approached ICJ asking for consular access to Jadhav and challenging the sentence by the Pakistan court. 

Senior Advocate Harish Salve was the lead counsel in the case from India at the Heage based ICJ. In July last year when the ICJ pronounced its judgement, it asked Pakistan to ‘review and reconsider’ its decision on death sentence and allow India access to Kulbhushan without any delay. However, in an online meeting this year Harish salve from London said that India needs to decide as to whether it wants to go back to ICJ for consequential remedies as Pakistan has failed to comply with the judgement. To this Pakistan Spokesperson, Aisha Farooqi replied that Pakistan has complied with the judgement and is firm on continuing to do so as the case proceeds further, she also stated that they have granted consular access and are reviewing the death sentence. 

WHAT IS THE KULBHUSHAN CASE?

Kulbhushan Jadhav is an Indian retired navy officer who is on death row in Pakistan. His father is a retired Mumbai police officer, his family resides in Mumbai and includes his two children and wife. He is charged on grounds of sabotage and espionage activities against Pakistan at the command of Indian Intelligence agency. India refuses to accept the allegations. 

Pakistan claims that Jadhav was arrested by Pakistan officials in Balochistan on 3^rd March 2016, where he entered using a fake passport which showed his name as Hussain Mubarak Patel. While India maintains that he was abducted from Iran, where he was carrying on business after he was retired from the Indian navy. India got the news about his detention on 25^th March, which was after 22 days from detention. After a month of his arrest, a video was released by Pakistan in which Jadhav was shown confessing that he’s a spy from India and had been carrying out activities in Balochistan and Karachi, still working with the Indian navy. The video was condemned by India. 

When Pakistan denied consular access to Jadhav under article 36 of the Vienna Convention and its military court sentenced him to death, India approached ICJ against Pakistan’s judgement and requested the release of Jadhav. On 17^th July 2019, the ICJ allowed consular access to Jadhav but denied his release. It ordered Pakistan to reconsider the death sentence. Consular access was allowed by Pakistan and Indian officer met Jadhav in Pakistan on 2^nd September 2019.

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE JUDGEMENT

ICJ pronounced the judgement in India’s favour with a ratio of 15:1. Some of the salient features of the Judgement are:

Admissibility– The court denied Pakistan’s objection on the admissibility of the matter, based on Article I of the Vienna convention whereby compulsory settlement of disputes to the Vienna Convention on consular access of 24^th April 1963 is provided. The court in a ratio of 15:1 said that the claim of non-admissibility by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is not valid and India can access the court. 

Breach of obligation by Pakistan– The court said that Pakistan has breached its obligation incumbent upon it by Article 36 paragraph 1(b). It did not inform Kulbhushan about his right under article 36 and thereby deprived India of its right to consular access to the Individual Concerned. 

Deprived India of its Right– By not allowing India to have communication with Jadhav and denying access, Pakistan deprived India of its right to meet Jadhav and arrange Legal Representative for him and thereby breached Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) and (c) of Vienna Convention on Consular Access. 

Pakistan under Obligation to inform Jadhav without any delay about his right under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. 

Review and Reconsideration– The court observes that Pakistan needs to review its decision, through its choosing, to ensure that weight is given to the violation under article 36 while taking into consideration article 139, 145 and 146 of the Vienna convention. 

Essential stay– The court said that the stay on execution is essential for the effective review and reconsideration by Pakistan. 

DEVELOPMENTS AFTER JUDGEMENT

Indian counsel in the Kulbhushan case on 3^rd may 2020 said that they are hoping to persuade Pakistan to release Jadhav from the backchannel on humanitarian grounds or whatever they want to call it, we want them to let him go. Salve commented that India might consider going back to ICJ due to non-compliance of the order by Pakistan; However, Pakistan on Sunday denied the allegations made by salve and said they are baseless and inaccurate. Pakistan’s spokesperson said that it is ‘regrettable’ that salve made statements which misrepresent facts adding that Pakistan has complied with all international obligations. 

Pakistan on 14^th may say that it is taking necessary steps to review the case as per the directions of ICJ and has already granted consular access to India.  On 16th of July, Pakistan allowed India consular access to Jadhav, which as per the officials was neither meaningful nor credible. On 7th August, Pakistan court constituted a three-member bench in response to the petition filed by the government to appoint a representative for the death row prisoner. The decision came after the Islamabad high court passed the directions to set up a larger bench to hear the dispute. The next hearing on the case is scheduled on 3rd September. The developments come after an argument between the foreign spokesperson of Pakistan and India, while the former claimed that India has been communicated through diplomatic means to appoint a lawyer for Jadhav the latter denied receiving any such communication. A spokesperson from the ministry of external affairs said that Pakistan is not only violating ICJ’s judgement but its own ordinance too.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

`India and Pakistan share this long history. Amidst this, when an Indian retired officer was arrested by Pakistan on charges of espionage chaos took place. While Pakistan says that Jadhav is a spy, India maintains its stand that he was abducted by them from Iran where he was carrying business activities post-retirement. When the Pakistan court sentenced Jadhav to the death penalty, India decided to approach ICJ. India argued at ICJ that it had been denied consular access and was notified about the arrest 3 weeks later, it also put forth the request that kulbhushan is released by Pakistan. While ICJ directed Pakistan to review its decision it denied India’s request to order the release of kulbhushan. ICJ acknowledged the fact that Pakistan violated the International norms of consular access and did not inform Jadhav about his rights; Conviction and detention of Jadhav are not violative of Article 36 of Vienna convention as per ICJ. Appeals and Review petitions are not allowed on ICJ verdicts. After the verdict, Pakistan has assured that it will comply with ICJ’s judgement. On 2^nd September Pakistan allowed consular access to India and an Indian diplomat met Jadhav at the Pakistan jail for an hour, the entire proceeding was recorded in the presence of Pakistan officials; India contended that Jadhav seemed to be under immense pressure. India is demanding independent access to Jadhav because the capital punishment was awarded to him in a secret trial therefore, any information from Jadhav can help India. 

The Vienna Convention was signed to regulate diplomatic relations. A consular access treaty was also signed in the year 1963. The treaties were formed under the auspices of the United Nations. Once India is granted Independent access, it can arrange the best legal service for Jadhav allowed under Pakistan laws. Since the Pulwama attack tensions have been there between the two countries. After India struck down Article 370, new tensions have developed. Pakistan by holding a free and fair trial can ease the tensions. If a civil court conducts the trial help can be provided but if the military court continues to govern the case little can be done. If Pakistan denies following ICJ’s verdict, India might severe diplomatic relations and use International pressure, but all these measures must be used cautiously to maintain peace. 

CONCLUSION

The ICJ has given its verdict, Both countries have assured to follow the judgement. While Pakistan granted consular access to India, it was not entirely free from control. From the statements delivered by Harish salve, it seems that India might approach ICJ once again to remind Pakistan about the judgement. In reply to statements given by Advocate Salve, Pakistan’s spokesperson said that the statements are false and misrepresent the facts, and assured that Pakistan is following up with the verdict and will continue to abide by further pronouncements as the case proceeds. India’s co-operation would be required to ensure justice, thus both countries need to mutually co-operate to conclude. 

The post ANALYSIS: ICJ JUDGEMENT ON KULBHUSHAN JADHAV appeared first on WISER WORLD.