Only UN can find the truth, say Pakistani dailies
Islamabad: Only the UN can find the truth behind the India-Pakistan clashes on the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir if the two countries cannot establish the facts themselves through cooperation, say two leading Pakistani dailies.
There was "no better forum" than a UN observer group for this task, the Karachi-based Dawn said in an editorial.
The News International, also from Karachi, said that considering the gravity of the dispute, it would support the Pakistani government's plan to have an independent enquiry through the UNMOGIP.
The first group of UN military observers arrived in January 1949 to supervise the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in Jammu and Kashmir after the hostilities of 1948. These observers are under the command of the military adviser appointed by the UN secretary-general and the monitoring group is more commonly known as UNMOGIP (UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan).
Stressing that New Delhi cannot "bypass" UNMOGIP this time, the Dawn said India keeps referring to the 1972 Shimla pact to keep away third parties in India-Pakistan conflicts.
The Shimla agreement, it said, aims to settle differences between India and Pakistan "by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon".
"Mercifully, the two governments have decided not to exacerbate matters," the Dawn said.
On Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar's statement that border clashes should not be allowed to derail the India-Pakistan peace process, it said: "That doesn't mean that the facts regarding these recent LoC (Line of Control) incidents should not be established."
"If Pakistan and India cannot establish the truth themselves through cooperation and in an impartial manner, then there is no better forum than the UNMOGIP to do so," it maintained.
The News International said it was "precisely this type of event that the (UN) group is best placed to adjudicate on".
Stressing that bilateral mechanisms were unlikely to produce "much beyond further disagreement", it said third-party oversight and analysis was appropriate.