The killings of Bukhari and Aurangzeb were meant to provoke New Delhi, which decided to be seen as tough

“If India and the US let domestic politics color their approach to the protection of human rights in the 70th year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it would prove that terrorism and illegal immigration have succeeded in making the two major democracies less liberal”, says the author.

The 47-member Geneva-based UN Human Right Council and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have been in focus the past week. First came an unprecedented report by the UNHCR Zeid al-Hussein on Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. While Pakistani knuckles were rapped mildly, the report, as conceded in its executive summary, is really about “widespread and serious human rights violations’’ in J&K from the death of militant Burhan Wani in July 2016 to April 2018.

Under separate headings it holds India guilty on account of lack of access to justice and impunity; military courts and tribunals blocking this access, excessive use of force and pellet-guns, arbitrary arrests, including of minors, torture and enforced disappearances, and sexual violence, etc. All through, even UN-listed terror outfits are referred to as “armed groups”. A former Indian diplomat writing elsewhere calls it more akin to a report by Organisation of Islamic Conference than a UN high official. India strongly rebutted it and could have probably ignored it, except that Zeid is on record saying he would recommend to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), which convened on June 18 for one of its three annual sessions, an investigation.

Two events impinge on this development. One, Jammu and Kashmir has been placed under Governor’s rule with the BJP withdrawing from the coalition government. Two, US Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley announced, at the State Department, US withdrawal from the UNHRC, alleging lack of reform and it having become a “protector of human rights abusers and cesspool of political bias”. Both need closer examination.

The Trump administration has been threatening to withdraw from the UNHRC for some time, but the decision came a day after Zeid slammed the US for separating children from parents on border with Mexico when apprehending illegal immigrants. The media is also reporting illegal immigrants from India, many from Punjab, held in detention centers under sub-human conditions.

Republican Senator John McCain, terminally ill with brain cancer but combative as always, tweeted that the “administration’s current family separation policy is an affront to the decency of the American people, and contrary to the principles and values upon which our nation was founded’’. He later went on to oppose Trump’s nomination of Ronald Mortensen to lead the US refugee and migration policy, alleging he lacked empathy for people fleeing oppression. Thus, while the US is right that election to the UNHCR of nations like Venezuela and Congo (though the US omitted mentioning China) hardly makes it the custodian of global conscience on human rights, but neither does the US by its xenophobic immigration control creating gulags for apprehended illegal immigrants qualify it to lecture the council.

The J&K imbroglio raises many similar questions about India’s trajectory in dealing with terrorism at home. The PDP-BJP alliance raised hope that their Agenda of Alliance would provide a template for resolution of the Kashmir issue. The death of Mufti Sayeed at the beginning of 2016 and a long hiatus before his daughter Mehbooba effectively took charge probably doomed the experiment, if at all had any chance to succeed.

At the root of the problem was the Modi government’s Pakistan policy of “no dialogue” unless terror ends. On the contrary, the PDP had got elected promising dialogue with Pakistan, more political space even for separatists and improved trade and people-to-people links with Kashmiris across the Line of Control (LoC). The Pakistan army exacerbated these fault lines by keeping up support to militancy, provocatively killing Indian soldiers and turning the LoC into free-fire zone. The Governor’s rule now denies India the argument that J&K has a popularly elected government which is a guardian of people’s rights scrutinizing, if not overseeing, counter-terror operations of security forces. Pakistan, currently a member of the UNHRC, shall use the High Commissioner’s tendentious report and collapse of the alliance to pillory India in coming weeks.

The Modi government must surely have assessed the profit-loss outcome of its decision. The domestic implications would dominate New Delhi’s thinking as the government heads into literally the last six months of effective rule before the Lok Sabha election process kicks-in. It needs to ensure that no major breakdown of security order in Kashmir occurs till election, particularly during the Amarnath pilgrimage.

There may be information that leading to parliamentary election in Pakistan in July its army, having a freer hand than normal with a caretaker government in position, is planning to fling every last terror asset across the LoC in a make-or-break gambit. The targeted killing of moderate journalist Shujaat Bukhari and the taped torture and execution of soldier Aurangzeb were intended to provoke New Delhi. A big attack on pilgrims, as has happened in the past, could make the Union Government look extremely ineffective. Governor’s rule is the counter-move to ensure that despite the debate in Geneva on India’s human rights record the Modi government is seen as strong at home.

If India and the US let domestic politics color their approach to the protection of human rights in the 70th year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it would prove that terrorism and illegal immigration have succeeded in making the two major democracies less liberal. The latest survey by Freedom House, a US think-tank, is called “Democracy in Crisis”. Last year was the 12th consecutive year when nations suffering democratic setbacks outnumbered those gaining. According to Democracy Index of The Economist Intelligence Unit, 89 countries regressed in 2017 and only 27 improved. Globalization and technology in the West and Pakistan-sponsored terror in South Asia are derailing the quest for liberal, law-based democratic rule. If a four-year political alliance between the PDP and BJP, representing disparate views on Kashmir, cannot develop a consensus for bridging the divide, the future is indeed bleak. A fresh attempt at reconciliation seems unlikely until after parliamentary elections in Pakistan and India. Till then, geopolitical haze in South Asia will be thick as the dust that enveloped northern India a week ago.

(The author is a former Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, India)