Doslovný záznam ze zasedání

Úterý, 17. září 2019 - Štrasburk

18. Situace v Kašmíru (rozprava)

  President. – The next item is the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the situation in Kashmir (2019/2815(RSP)).

  Tytti Tuppurainen, President-in-Office of the Council, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, the tensions in the region have increased following the announcement by the Indian Government on 5 August of the revocation of Article 370 that grants partial autonomy to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. This step has been accompanied by restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms.

The Indian Government has deployed a significant number of additional military and paramilitary troops in Kashmir and along the Line of Control. The action was presented by the Indian Government as a means to prevent violent protests. Pakistan has also deployed additional troops on its side of the Line of Control. On both sides, the issue of Kashmir resonates strongly with internal political dynamics.

While some of the restrictions are reported to have been lifted, the situation has not returned to normalcy. There have been arrests of political leaders, activists and human rights defenders. The European Union has been following the situation closely since the early days of this escalation of tensions. In early August, High Representative Mogherini spoke on the phone with both her Pakistani and Indian counterparts. In both conversations, the High Representative underlined the importance of avoiding a further escalation and stressed that dialogue between India and Pakistan through diplomatic channels is crucial.

Our position on Kashmir remains unchanged. We encourage India and Pakistan to seek a peaceful and political solution, respectful of the interests of the Kashmiri population on both sides of the Line of Control. This remains the only way to solve a long-lasting dispute that for too long has caused instability and insecurity in the region.

We remain concerned about the situation on the ground with its restrictions on fundamental freedoms. It is crucial that freedom of movement and means of communication are fully restored, as well as access to all essential services. The High Representative conveyed these concerns to the Indian Minister for External Affairs, Mr Jaishankar, during their meeting in Brussels on 13 August. The Minister debriefed the High Representative on the state of play and on the security situation. Ms Mogherini reiterated the call to avoid an escalation of tensions and stressed the importance of steps to restore the rights and freedoms of the population in Kashmir.

The EU has also raised the situation in Jammu and Kashmir at the Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva in an Item 2 Statement on 10 September. In the Statement, we encourage the lifting of the remaining restrictions temporarily imposed and to maintain the rights and fundamental freedoms of the affected population. We continue to urge both parties to engage in direct dialogue with a view to a peaceful solution in full respect of their international human rights obligations.

In a moment of rising tensions in different regions around the world, no one can afford another escalation in Kashmir. Regional cooperation in South Asia is now more essential than ever and we will continue to encourage India and Pakistan to resume dialogue and find a peaceful solution to their disputes.

  Traian Băsescu, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, doamnă ministru, în mod categoric situația din Cașmir este alarmantă. Aș spune chiar și inacceptabilă. Încălcarea continuă a drepturilor omului, violență stradală, dispute politice și, mai ales, două puteri nucleare aflate aproape în conflict. Aceștia sunt parametrii în care lucrurile evoluează în Cașmir, fără ca în acest moment să avem speranța unei soluții rapide.

Am luat notă de poziția pe care o are președinția rotativă a Uniunii Europene și mi se pare înțeleaptă și eficientă. Aș vrea să fac, însă, o observație cu privire la noi, europenii. În această sesiune am discutat despre Hong Kong, despre incendiile din Amazon, despre Burkina Faso, despre situația din Columbia, despre situația din Cașmir, dar nu discutăm despre problemele noastre, uneori destul de dificil de rezolvat, probleme care adesea au nemulțumit cetățenii Uniunii Europene.

Mă refer la securitatea și inviolabilitatea frontierelor Uniunii Europene. Mă refer la migrație, la care încă nu am dat un răspuns pentru cei 500 de milioane de cetățeni. Mă refer la riscurile teroriste. Mă refer la lipsa de coeziune între statele membre atunci când discută cu China, cu Statele Unite, cu Federația Rusă, ceea ce vulnerabilizează poziția Uniunii Europene pe plan extern. Mă refer la abandonarea unor state care au devenit membre recent și care întârzie, pur și simplu, procesul de integrare, deși prin tratatul de aderare sunt obligate să adere la moneda euro. Mă refer la povestea lansată și neclarificată a creării armatei europene. Mă refer la necesitatea compatibilizării industriei de armament din (Președintele a întrerupt vorbitorul)... statele membre ale Uniunii Europene și, nu în ultimul rând, mă refer la lipsa de îndrăzneală pe care o avem... (Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)

  Maria Arena, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, depuis 1950 la constitution indienne accordait un régime particulier au Jammu-et-Cachemire. L'article 370 prévoyait davantage d'autonomie au Cachemire indien en lui octroyant une large marge de manoeuvre et en limitant l'intervention de la législation indienne dans la gestion du Jammu-et-Cachemire. La défense, les affaires étrangères et la communication étaient les seules matières qui relevaient du gouvernement central de New Delhi, le reste était administré par une assemblée législative locale. L'article 370 conférait également à l'État fédéré une constitution distincte.

Or, depuis le 5 août, date de la révocation par l'Inde, du statut d'autonomie du Cachemire, plus de 3 000 personnes ont été arrêtées de manière arbitraire, dont des responsables politiques, des militants, des universitaires. Tous les moyens de communication, téléphone, internet, ont été suspendus. Les services d'urgence, les hôpitaux sont confrontés à une pénurie de matériel et de personnel. Les journalistes étrangers, les ONG n'ont plus accès au territoire et cette situation se détériore avec le couvre-feu qui bloque la circulation des locaux, singulièrement des malades et des médecins. Des dizaines de milliers de soldats ont été envoyés en renfort dans cette région qui est l'une des plus militarisées du monde avec plus d'un million de soldats sur le territoire.

Déjà les rapports des Nations unies publiés en 2018 et en 2019 faisaient état de graves violations des droits humains à l'égard des populations civiles: kidnappings, assassinats, déplacements forcés, violences sexuelles. Mais évidemment ces violations étaient perpétrées aussi bien par les forces indiennes que par les forces pakistanaises. La décision unilatérale du premier ministre indien du 5 août dernier ne fait qu'envenimer cette situation déjà au bord de l'explosion.

L'Europe ne peut rester inactive, elle doit plaider pour la mise en place d'une enquête internationale indépendante et transparente sur les violences perpétrées au Cachemire. L'Europe doit peser de tout son poids dans ses relations avec l'Inde pour rendre au Cachemire le statut d'autonomie dont la région jouissait depuis 1950. Mais l'Europe doit aussi soutenir les démarches des Nations unies dans la recherche du dialogue entre l'Inde et le Pakistan, parce que c'est dans le dialogue que la solution sera trouvée.

  Shaffaq Mohammed, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, I would like to start by declaring an interest: that I was born in Kashmir, and moved to the United Kingdom at the age of four. However, it pains me to see what’s happening in Kashmir. Kashmir is in crisis: an international and human rights crisis. The people of Kashmir have suffered, and continue to suffer. The EU is an organisation which proudly stands for human rights, right across the world, and we must stand today with the people of Kashmir.

The ongoing crisis in Kashmir threatens the peace and security of the wider region – one of the most volatile in the world. It’s our responsibility to do something. The recommendations of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) offer a good starting point for their actions. We must support them and implement the findings of their reports, which they published last year in June and this year in July.

The institutions of the EU and their Member States exist not only to protect the human rights of citizens in the European Union, but they must also be defenders of human rights across the globe. The situation in Kashmir will not improve by trying to blame either side: all the while people try to apportion blame, the people of Kashmir are suffering and deserve better. The people of Kashmir should be the ones who decide their fate and their future. Self—determination and upholding human rights are fundamental values in our European Union, and we should demand no less from others around the world – particularly those that want to trade and have relationships with us.

The fighting in Kashmir has been going on for decades, but, in the end, the crisis is going to be ended only when people sit around the table and talk. The EU can be a natural facilitator in this role, and that allows both sides to talk. The people of Kashmir are crying out in the darkness. The EU must help them provide a light in that darkness.

  Gina Dowding, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, reports of serious human rights violations have been coming out of Kashmir for more than a month now. The accounts of raids, arrests, clashes and unlawful detentions are truly appalling – and all of this while mobile phone networks are still largely under lockdown. We UK Green MEPs demand that these human rights violations stop – not only for the sake of the population of Kashmir, but also for the hundreds of thousands of British citizens who are of Kashmiri origin.

No peaceful resolution to the Kashmir conflict is conceivable while these abuses continue. We demand that the Indian authorities restore the basic freedoms of the Kashmiri population, and we urge continued EU attention to this crisis.

  Bernhard Zimniok, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Die EU will und soll zur Lösung des Kaschmirkonflikts beitragen – ein Konflikt, der seit 70 Jahren existiert, der sich verfestigt hat, Kriege ausgelöst hat, ein Konflikt mit unzähligen Toten, mit Terrorakten, Repressalien und viel Leid. Dieses Problem kann aber nicht von der EU gelöst werden, sondern nur von den betroffenen Konfliktparteien selbst. Wir als Außenstehende können diesen Prozess nur begleiten, und zwar als neutrale Mediatoren.

Wenn ich nun der Presse entnehmen muss, dass Mitglieder dieses Hauses Partei ergreifen und sogar so weit gehen, Boykottmaßnahmen gegen Indien zu verlangen, dann werden sie selbst Teil des Problems und sind keine ehrlichen Makler mehr. Ich kann aus Erfahrung heraus nur sagen: Das funktioniert nicht. Sobald wir uns auf eine Seite schlagen – sei es jetzt auf die indische oder die pakistanische –, verlieren wir den Ruf des ehrlichen Maklers. Alle seriösen Bemühungen unsererseits zur Lösung des Konflikts verlaufen im Sande und werden konterkariert.

  Geoffrey Van Orden, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, Kashmir is one of the most beautiful areas of India and with security and stability could be so enormously prosperous, but for over 70 years it has had an unsettled status and has been under threat, afflicted by externally sponsored terrorism and extremism, and at last there is an opportunity to rectify the situation.

Legally, the whole territory should have been part of India from the start but instead it was invaded and partly occupied by Pakistan, which then allowed its special services to support subversion and terrorism, costing thousands of lives across the Line of Control into India. Tourism dried up, the economy was put in jeopardy, and under the temporary Article 370 of the Indian Constitution people lived under different locally imposed rules. Now the changes brought in by Prime Minister Modi will give the same rights to the people of Kashmir as those in the rest of India, and we should look at what’s happening in Pakistan if we really want to see abuse of rights, women, religious minorities and transgender people, and all the difficulties that they face in that country.

Our governments and the European Union support dialogue and constructive engagement between India and Pakistan.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 171(8))

  Fulvio Martusciello (PPE), domanda "cartellino blu". – Onorevole Van Orden, io sono d'accordo con il Suo intervento e Le voglio chiedere se ha letto la minaccia che è stata fatta dal Pakistan di usare le armi nucleari, perché questo è il vero tema di cui dovrebbe occuparsi il Parlamento europeo: l'utilizzo delle armi nucleari da parte del Pakistan e soprattutto il fatto che il Pakistan è un territorio che ha allevato – e la storia lo dice – nel corso di tutti questi anni numerosi terroristi, che hanno compiuto sanguinosi attentati in Europa, per non parlare poi di tutti i diritti umani violati in Pakistan.

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR), blue-card answer. – Pakistan has been a source of nuclear proliferation. It has given sanctuary to terrorist organisations and terrorist leaders, and it promotes terrorism across the Line of Control into India. Yes, we are talking about two nuclear-armed states, but I don’t think that is relevant to this particular matter at this time. If the European Union wants to be helpful, it should not be carping. The High Representative should listen more closely to Foreign Minister Jaishankar and what he had to say, because you are getting a very distorted picture from the contributions we’ve heard in this Parliament so far.

  Idoia Villanueva Ruiz, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, no podemos encuadrar la situación de Cachemira como un asunto conflictivo interno de la India, sino en el resurgir nacionalista encarnado por Modi en conexión con Trump, Bolsonaro y la internacional reaccionaria. Modi ha llegado al Gobierno atacando a las ONG y cercenando las libertades públicas. Frente a esto, la Unión Europea no puede seguir haciendo policy as usual.

Necesitamos posicionarnos con un discurso alternativo, abierto, basado en derechos humanos y actuar condicionando la acción exterior y las relaciones bilaterales en el mismo. Hoy eso significa condicionar el acuerdo estratégico a un cambio sustancial en los derechos humanos en Cachemira, apostar por una solución pacífica del conflicto negociada entre la India y Pakistán. Si no hacemos esto, Cachemira será un nuevo ejemplo de los límites del voluntarismo de la Unión Europea.

Hoy necesitamos definir el tipo de actor mundial que queremos ser. Nosotras apostamos por que sea un actor político independiente, con autonomía, que pueda dialogar en pie de igualdad sobre derechos humanos, gobernanza multilateral, comercio y tecnología con los grandes países.

  Milan Uhrík (NI). – Mr President, since this is an issue of foreign policy I’m going to speak in English. Many of you are talking about violations of human rights and some other bad things happening in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. However, we are once again relying only on secondary information because no one here really and truly knows what is happening in India.

When I had a debate with the Indian ambassador in the Slovak Republic, I asked him how many times had the Indian Parliament interfered or condemned any European country for its internal policy. It had never happened and we should do the same. We should respect the sovereignty of India because it’s not our task to interfere in the internal affairs of countries 6 000 kilometres away. We are here to solve the problems of Europe, so please, let’s do that.

  Richard Corbett (S&D). – Mr President, let me also declare an interest, in that I visited Azad Kashmir last month.

The unilateral action by India revoking the autonomy that it granted to the part of Kashmir that it controlled – splitting the territory into two, sending in thousands of extra troops, instituting a media shutdown and arresting many local politicians – has inflamed an already volatile situation.

This conflict has gone on for nearly 70 years now. It cannot be in India’s interest that it continues. It costs India a fortune. It’s a stain on its international reputation. It’s time to press for a solution, but frankly there is only one viable long-term and peaceful solution and that is self-determination for the people of Kashmir. That is what the United Nations laid down in 1947, when India took the dispute to the UN Security Council. It’s time to implement that, and the EU should use the combined diplomatic leverage of its 28 countries and its own powers on trade, and so on, to press for that outcome. It’s not too late.

  Phil Bennion (Renew). – Mr President, Kashmir joined India only on the condition that it retained its autonomy, and this included a clause denying India the right to change that arrangement unilaterally. The Indian Supreme Court has upheld this principle in previous judgments, and it’s interesting that opposition politician Shashi Tharoor has today described the actions of the Indian Government as unconstitutional.

I do not deny that there have been terrorist problems, and that has provoked some action. In Geneva last week, I took the trouble to discuss this with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, and I asked him that Pakistan do more to clamp down on insurgents. Others have described the situation on the ground, and I think it’s important to know that I’ve been discussing this with people who were in Srinagar at the time.

What should happen now? Well, the curfew should be lifted, the Kashmiri Regional Government reinstated and political prisoners released, and UN observers should be allowed access. For the long term, we call on Pakistan and India to agree on an independent mediator to facilitate talks that includes Kashmiri people from both sides of the Line of Control.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 171(8))

  Bernhard Zimniok (ID), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ich möchte den Sprecher nur kurz fragen, wie er sich denn eine Autonomie unter Eigenregie, unter Verwaltung der Kaschmiris vorstellt, denn dieses Land würde mit Sicherheit am Tropf der Gemeinschaft hängen. Sie haben ökonomisch nichts zu bieten; sie müssen sich Indien oder Pakistan oder geteilt, wie auch immer die Lösung ist, anschließen. Alles andere ist eine Illusion. Selbst die Kaschmiris selbst würden diese Lösung nicht wollen. Ich war dort vier Jahre als Diplomat tätig. Ich habe die Region zigfach bereist, und ich glaube nicht, dass Sie dafür irgendeine Mehrheit finden würden.

  Phil Bennion (Renew), blue-card answer. – Certainly we don’t know whether there would be a majority, because it hasn’t been tested. But I think the assertion is that this is a very undeveloped and backward area. Despite the fact that this has been an area of conflict for 70 years, and we know that conflict actually does depress the economy, if you actually look at the indicators – and I have actually looked at virtually every indicator in terms of well-being, incomes, literacy; virtually every indicator you can think of – Kashmir comes out better than the rest of India, and as one of the top areas of India.

  Klaus Buchner (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! In den Berichten über Kaschmir wird nur viel zu selten über die massiven Menschenrechtsverletzungen berichtet, die dort von beiden Seiten – von Pakistan und Indien – begangen werden. Das darf uns nicht kalt lassen. Aber wir stehen auch am Rande eines Krieges zwischen diesen beiden Nuklearmächten.

Meiner Meinung nach gibt es nur einen Weg, einen solchen Krieg und auch die Menschenrechtsverletzungen zu verhindern: Das ist die Durchsetzung der UNO—Resolutionen zu diesem Thema – zugegeben, vielleicht etwas optimistisch von meiner Seite. Aber wir können das einfach nicht so laufen lassen, und das bedeutet, dass die UNO hier tätig werden muss, dass sie – notfalls auch mit einer Friedensmission – dorthin muss, im Einklang mit beiden Seiten, was schwierig ist, das gebe ich zu. Aber es gibt nur diese Lösung. Wir können nicht zulassen, dass es so weitergeht. Deswegen bitte ich die Hohe Vertreterin dringend, hier tätig zu werden.

  Silvia Sardone (ID). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la situazione in Kashmir era difficile anche prima, ci sono situazioni di violenza note negli anni.

Trovo questa discussione un po' squilibrata: penso che il dialogo si faccia non attaccando una parte o esprimendosi a favore dell'altra. Stiamo parlando di una regione del mondo dove da tempo ci sono gruppi terroristici legati all'estremismo islamico, dove ci sono fenomeni di radicalizzazione assolutamente preoccupanti. In quest'area sono state viste bandiere dell'ISIS e ci sono violenze da troppo tempo. Allora forse bisognerebbe analizzare il contesto storico, basarci su fonti e informazioni realmente autorevoli e, in generale, sostenere chi combatte i terroristi.

Centinaia di migliaia di indiani, dagli anni Novanta, hanno lasciato questa regione a causa delle violenze. Mi chiedo perché non discutiamo delle numerose vittime di attentati e di scontri e perché non parliamo delle minacce e delle discriminazioni religiose portate avanti dal Pakistan.

In generale penso che noi, come Europa, dovremmo rispettare la sovranità degli Stati e rispettare e stare vicino a chi porta avanti misure di sicurezza per contrastare i fenomeni terroristici.

  Nosheena Mobarik (ECR). – Mr President, we in the European Parliament uphold the principles enshrined in the Treaties. Therefore, I am ashamed by the lack of resolution on Kashmir.

There will always be those who will support India in deflecting the world’s attention away from its shortcomings and placing blame on others, their perceived foes. But, on this occasion, India alone is responsible for revoking Article 370 and for the current deplorable, bellicose and destructive situation in Kashmir.

If we profess our belief in human rights and religious freedom, then why are we silent? The most fundamental right, the right to self-determination, has been denied to the Kashmiris for more than 70 years. How long do we stay silent? How bad does it have to get?

Let us put aside our apathy, or indeed our eagerness to conclude a free-trade agreement, and examine our conscience: democratic principles, peace and stability are ultimately in the interests of India too.

  Neena Gill (S&D). – Mr President, to those Members who have spoken today of their indignation towards India, I am astonished by your partiality, oversight and lack of any real empathy with the Kashmiris.

Why do I say partiality? When Pakistan took the same measures in Gilgit and Baltistan, we didn’t speak up. When they gave away territory that wasn’t theirs to China we didn't speak up. Or when Sikh and other minority women are abducted and forced to convert, we don’t speak up. The fact is that there are human-rights violations in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and very many honourable colleagues look the other way.

Let me be clear: the solution to Kashmir is not going to be found in this Chamber. The solution to Kashmir will come when state-sponsored terrorism and global misinformation by Pakistan ends, then dialogue will follow. Pakistan may talk the talk, but it does not walk the walk when it comes to human rights, and it beggars belief that it has GSP+ status.

And I say to those colleagues concerned about the rescinding of Article 370, you are focusing on one part and ignoring the other issues that are dear to the hearts of many of us. Not only will this improve the rights of LGBT people, women and minorities, it will also improve environmental and other protection measures, and ban the outrageous ‘triple talaq’ divorce. Why should Kashmiris have fewer rights than those enjoyed by Indians elsewhere?

  Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Monsieur le Président, le premier ministre indien, Narendra Modi, a décidé de révoquer, le 5 août dernier, le statut d’autonomie du Cachemire. Cela s’explique par le fait que les forces de sécurité indiennes ont récemment été victimes d’attaques perpétrées par des groupes islamistes au Cachemire, revendiquées la plupart du temps depuis le Pakistan.

Il est de notoriété publique que le Pakistan, à plus forte raison depuis l’accession au pouvoir d’Imran Khan, soutenu par les partis islamistes, a une attitude plus que bienveillante pour les groupes terroristes au Cachemire, contre le gouvernement indien.

La volonté de reprise en main de Narendra Modi témoigne de sa volonté de lutter contre le terrorisme islamiste et de mettre face à ses responsabilités le Pakistan, dont les services secrets ont longtemps été les protecteurs de Ben Laden.

Au Pakistan, des manifestations ont été organisées par l’ensemble des mouvements islamistes et encouragées par le gouvernement, pour protester contre la décision du gouvernement indien.

Le Cachemire, faut-il le rappeler, est une région faisant partie de l’Union indienne. On s’étonnera, une fois de plus, de la réaction du secrétaire général de l’ONU, stigmatisant la position de l’Inde. Alors que ce pays maintes fois victime du terrorisme au Cachemire, comme dans l’ensemble de son territoire, par exemple à Bombay en 2008, n’a jamais bénéficié du moindre soutien dans les moments où il a dû faire face au péril islamiste.

Comme l’a rappelé notre collègue Thierry Mariani, à la commission AFET, le Cachemire est indien. La question du Cachemire est par conséquent une question interne à l’Union indienne et rien de plus. On n’ose croire entre ces murs que Bruxelles puisse, à ce sujet, adopter la dialectique du Pakistan.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Przypomnijmy ważny fakt – Indie to największa demokracja świata. A także – w kontekście naszej demokracji – powiem, że to chyba nasz jedyny demokratyczny sojusznik w tej części Azji. Myślę, że trzeba spojrzeć szerzej, trzeba spojrzeć na szereg aktów terrorystycznych, które miały miejsce w Indiach, także w Dżammu i Kaszmirze. I ci terroryści, oni nie spadli z księżyca, oni niestety przychodzili od sąsiada. Należy widzieć to także w tym kontekście.

W moim przekonaniu my, jako demokracja europejska, powinniśmy wspierać demokratyczne Indie. Ten sąd, który odbywa się tutaj nad Indiami, mnie osobiście się nie podoba. A pan Corbett, który właśnie przed chwilą wyszedł, powiedział to, co powiedział, tak jakby nie pamiętał, że siedemdziesiąt parę lat temu jego kraj, Wielka Brytania, przestała już mieć hinduską kolonię. Indie nie są kolonią Wielkiej Brytanii.

  Giuliano Pisapia (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la situazione in Kashmir, come tante altre nel mondo, necessita di un intenso lavoro diplomatico, fondato sul diritto internazionale e sul rispetto dei diritti umani.

Da un lato vi è una modifica costituzionale, approvata a larga maggioranza dalla Camera alta e dalla Camera bassa. Dall'altro, è del tutto mancata la consultazione dei cittadini del Kashmir. Ricordo le parole di Jawaharlal Nehru: "abbiamo dato la nostra parola d'onore per una soluzione pacifica, va rispettata".

Il primo rapporto ONU sui diritti umani in Kashmir prevedeva una commissione d'inchiesta per le violazioni commesse da ambo le parti. I diritti umani sono la stella polare che guida tutte le iniziative dell'Unione.

Come Unione europea e come Parlamento europeo, abbiamo il dovere morale e politico di mettere a disposizione la nostra esperienza per trovare una soluzione pacifica che promuova la democrazia e la pace. Auspico e confido che questa sarà la strada che percorreremo insieme.

  Julie Lechanteux (ID). – Monsieur le Président, les critiques à l'égard de l'Inde, la plus grande démocratie au monde, entendues dans cet hémicycle se fondent sur une représentation des faits qui est mystificatrice.

On se focalise sur la réforme constitutionnelle, mais on oublie la poussée séparatiste et la question de sécurité. La situation au Jammu-et-Cachemire s'est aggravée. Une série d'attaques islamistes a eu lieu contre les forces de l'ordre, comme le 14 février, quand une voiture piégée a tué 40 policiers, ou le 2 août dernier, avec la découverte d'un arsenal qui aurait dû servir pour commettre un attentat contre les milliers de pèlerins hindous qui se rendent chaque année dans la grotte sacrée d'Amarnath.

Dans ce cadre, les mesures de sécurité prises par Narendra Modi, le premier ministre indien, visent à garantir la sécurité du pays, la protection de ses concitoyens et l'étanchéité de la frontière avec la République islamique du Pakistan qui, depuis 2018, se retrouve à nouveau sur la liste américaine des États à l'attitude ambiguë à l'égard du péril terroriste. Voilà les faits.

  Anthea McIntyre (ECR). – Mr President, 43 days ago the Indian Government revoked Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution, removing at a stroke the guarantee of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomy. We’ve seen a huge surge in the number of troops deployed there, a total communications blackout, curfews and house arrests. We hear continually of violations of human rights, including the use of shotguns against civilians.

Take the case of Asrar Ahmed Khan. Despite denials by the Indian Government, medical records released by the hospital present clear evidence that he died as a result of a shotgun pellet to the head. I visited Azad Kashmir last year and heard accounts of even infants being fired at with shotguns. There can never ever be any excuse for killing, maiming and blinding small children.

I really cannot understand why a great nation like India, which prides itself on the strength of its democracy, behaves in this way. India aspires to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Events of the past month are not the actions of a credible candidate.

  Dinesh Dhamija (Renew). – Mr President, India is the largest functioning democracy in the world. There are 200 million Muslims who live peacefully with others in India, and it’s also a member of the G20. There are two Supreme Court actions going on: the continued stopping of mobile and internet services in 7% of Jammu and Kashmir, and the setting aside of Article 370 and Article 35A. The EU does not want to appear neo—colonial on matters that are sub judice. The Indian Supreme Court is independent and does a really good job.

According to Indians, there are 40 new laws that will now apply to Kashmiris: a ban on the triple talaq divorce that is terrible for women, prohibition of child marriage, protection of women from domestic violence, etc. – are these not human rights? There are 40 of them. So, please, look at the other side. There was a mention of the UN plebiscite that they asked for in 1947: I have a video to show the US State Department why this plebiscite didn’t happen – because the Pakistani troops wouldn’t move back from the Line of Control.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Søren Gade (Renew). – Hr. formand! (mikrofon slukket) I de sidste 70 år har Kashmirområdet været plaget af vold og ustabilitet. Mange af de fremskridt, Indien i mellemtiden har gjort hen imod det moderne demokrati, er ikke fulgt med under Kashmirs særstatus. Det gælder blandt andet en uafhængig retsstat, beskyttelse af mindretal, herunder seksuelle minoriteter, sikring af uddannelse af børn og sikring af kvinders grundlæggende rettigheder. De betydelige midler, som Indien i årevis har postet ind i Kashmir, er stort set blevet stjålet af en korrupt elite, og dette er sket for næsen af en fattig lokalbefolkning.

Det jerngreb, som artikel 370 i årevis har holdt Kashmirs befolkning i, har aldrig været dem til gavn. Jeg opfordrer til, at vi fra Parlamentets side og som fortalere for grundlæggende demokratiske værdier og menneskerettigheder fokuserer på de positive sider for Kashmirs befolkning, for deres kvinder og for deres mindretal, som denne nye situation også kan give anledning til.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, el Parlamento Europeo tiene una reputación por debatir problemas de violaciones flagrantes de los derechos humanos en latitudes que no han conocido jamás la democracia, ni rastro de ella.

No es el caso de la India. Es —como se ha dicho— una democracia constitucional, con su Constitución de 1950, y sucede que es la democracia más extensa en población del mundo. Integra la diversidad de un orden federal de gran complejidad y ha garantizado esa convivencia de distintas minorías, incluida la minoría musulmana, en un país con mayoría de otras religiones.

En el caso de Jammu y Cachemira, por tanto, creo que el Parlamento Europeo hace bien en manifestar una autocontención prudente a la hora de valorar una suspensión de la autonomía, garantizada por el propio orden constitucional, de acuerdo con la propia Constitución —en su artículo 370—, y en la medida en que además está desplegando un esfuerzo importante por prevenir la radicalización del islamismo que vive y late dentro de la enorme complejidad del rompecabezas indio.

  Chris Davies (Renew). – Mr President, I really welcome the words of the Minister in her introductory remarks. We know we have a divided house but I think the position taken by the High Representative in expressing concern for human rights is the right balance.

India is a great country, a great democracy, but you can’t ignore the fact that Kashmir is a disputed territory, recognised as such by the United Nations. It’s effectively been under military occupation with an army that’s been allowed to maim and murder without any proper supervision or jurisdiction. And communication bans, loss of any sort of sense of self—determination must feed a sense of injustice in Kashmir.

It is because we are friends of India that we have to ask this great democracy – which we know, where Prime Minister Modi has the support of his country; he knows there is majority support for the actions he’s taken – but we have to question whether this is the right course of action and whether it will result in positive benefits.

So I have to ask the Minister: words have been very good, will there be any actions to follow them up?

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Tytti Tuppurainen, President-in-Office of the Council, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, this exchange of views was very useful and timely. I would like to thank the honourable Members for their contributions, comments and suggestions. I can only conclude that the EU will continue to monitor the situation closely, with our key focus on de-escalating a situation involving two nuclear powers. We must make every effort needed to avoid an escalation of the conflict.

  President. – Thank you very much, Minister Tuppurainen, and thank you for coming to Parliament especially at this late time in the day.

The debate is closed.