The Conflict
A cartoon published in an American newspaper in 2002 showed former President George W. Bush sitting behind his desk in the Oval Office, utterly confused by a news report he was reading about India and Pakistan going to war over Kashmir. “But why are the two countries fighting over a sweater,” he asked Dick Cheney, who stood by with his usual sly smile on his face.
Besides reflecting the intellectual capacity of the American president of the time, the cartoon was a realistic portrayal of the understanding that American leaders have generally shown of this longstanding dispute between Pakistan and India.
The unresolved Kashmir conflict has rocked South Asia for six decades. It has created an environment of distrust and acrimony, forced the people to sink into poverty with bulk of the resources consumed by the war machines and claimed lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, as well as soldiers who died in the three wars fought between India and Pakistan. India, whose forcible occupation of Kashmir in 1947 created the conflict, refuses to settle it. The other stake holders, the Kashmiri people and Pakistan, insist on a fair solution. The international community, including the US and the United Nations, played little or no role in diffusing it either. Consequently, the conflict has developed into one of the most intractable problems of international politics that remains a continuing threat to peace of the region.
Indian Brutalities and the International Reaction
India has not hesitated to use brutal force to maintain its hold on Indian occupied Kashmir and suppress revolt. The US, UN and other international organizations failed to take note of grave human rights violations. They failed to provide any specific, actionable proposals for a permanent solution. All they extended were diplomatic courtesies, suggested vague formulas and generalities that are open to multiple interpretations.
Although the US considers South Asia to be a sensitive and strategically important region from its geopolitical, security and economic standpoint and has expressed the desire to see peace prevail, yet it has so far paid only lip service to finding a permanent solution. It would not chastise India for human rights violations, which would have attracted its immediate attention if these were taking place in a country that it had chosen to punish, for fear of displeasing or alienating India which it has aggressively been courting in recent years.
This situation was compounded by the Indian dreams of regional hegemony that led it to dismember Pakistan in 1971 and go on to become a nuclear power, which forced Pakistan to develop its own nuclear deterrent for safeguarding its security.
Consequently, India has consistently and blatantly refused to honor the will of the people, negotiate Kashmir’s future status and stop the use of brutal force.
The Conflict Leads to the First Kashmir War
In the wake of the August 1947 partition of British India that brought into existence two sovereign states of the Indian Union and Pakistan, the British left after having midwifed the Kashmir dispute that has since bedeviled peace between the two countries. Essentially, the agreed principle that governed partition was that Muslim majority states to the east and west of British India would form Pakistan, while rest of the subcontinent was to form Indian Union.
Decisions by several Muslim rulers for accession of their states to Pakistan that had Hindu majorities (Hyderabad, Junagadh and Manavadar being cases in point) were rejected on the grounds that a Muslim ruler did not have the right to overrule the will of the Hindu majority population. But the decision of the Hindu Raja of the princely state of Kashmir, which was predominantly a Muslim majority state and should have acceded to Pakistan, was immediately accepted by the British viceroy and the Indian government, despite a popular Kashmiri revolt against his decision. Although an agreement of non-intervention in Kashmir had been signed between India and Pakistan, the new Indian government sent troops into Kashmir at the request of the Hindu ruler to enforce the instrument of accession and forcibly occupy the territory, in disregard of the agreed principle of accession applied elsewhere.
This led to the first Kashmir war in 1947 between India and Pakistan. In 1948 India sought cease fire, taking the issue to the UN Security Council, which passed resolution 47 on 21 April 1948, imposing an immediate cease-fire along the line of actual control of territory by both parties and calling on them to withdraw their troops. It also ruled that “the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.” The cease fire was enacted in December 1948, with both governments agreeing to hold the plebiscite in areas under their control. Ever since, India has been rejecting all resolutions of the Security Council and the proposals of the UN arbitrators for demilitarization of the region—all of which were accepted by Pakistan.
The Security Council Steps In
Although the resolutions of the Security Council were regarded as the ‘documents of reference’ for a durable and internationally acceptable solution, no steps were ever taken for their implementation. This was because in technical terms these were not enforceable—not having been based under Chapter VII of the Charter. This allowed India to get away, dashing the false expectations of the Kashmiris as to the possible role of the United Nations as facilitator of a solution to the Kashmir problem.
This injustice to the Kashmiri people was intrinsically linked to the veto privilege of the permanent members of the Security Council and the lack of unanimity between them for enforcement measures according to Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter. Their plight is similar to that of the Palestinians, in whose case also resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) that call upon Israel to withdraw from occupied Arab territories are not based on Chapter VII and have hence enabled the occupying country, Israel, to ignore them.
That the United Nations Organization follows double standards was clearly visible when it adopted compulsory resolutions in other conflict situations, such as in case of the occupation of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990-1991, where the US—a permanent member, having an interest in the matter, was able to force the hand of other permanent members to do its bidding.
The cease fire line between the Indian and Pakistani sides of Kashmir has since become the Line of Control and continues to be monitored by UN observers.
India Annexes the Disputed Occupied Kashmir
Thereafter, ignoring the Security Council resolutions, disregarding the internationally accepted ‘disputed’ status of the state and defying the will of the people, India went on to annex Occupied Kashmir into the Indian Union through an amendment to its Constitution, claiming it to be an integral part of India. For its part, Pakistan continues to regard the part of Kashmir under its control as disputed territory and allows it self-rule. It continues to plead for a final settlement taking the position that the people of Kashmir on both sides must get the right to choose their future through self determination.
People of Kashmir Demand the Right Of Self-Determination
The people of Kashmir had begun to wage a struggle against the Hindu Raja’s rule as far back as in 1931 and refused to accept Indian occupation from the day it was imposed in 1947. Their struggle has since intensified and they have called for accession of a united Kashmir to Pakistan. Rejecting their demand, successive Indian governments have tried to suppress the struggle by use of force.
Writing in Kashmir Watch of July 11, 2010, a Kashmiri academic, Dr. Manzoor Alam, urged world bodies like the Arab League, OIC, Asia watch, human rights organizations and the European Union to make a paradigm shift in their policies and move from ‘mere condemnation’ to throwing their political weight and resources behind the Kashmiris in their freedom struggle: “[W]we are talking about freedom from India which is our basic and fundamental right and this right was promised to us by Jawaharlal Nehru on June 26, 1952. We make an earnest and urgent appeal to the conscience of the world to act promptly to save Kashmir and her people. It is time for the United Nations to wake up to its responsibilities. It has to assume its duty in saving millions of Kashmiri lives. Enough is enough.”
Grave Human Rights Violations
Indian troops in combination with paramilitary forces and state police have let loose a consistent and massive reign of terror on unarmed civilians. Men, women, and children, young and old, are being indiscriminately killed, injured and maimed and women are being raped with impunity.
A recent report on Human Rights violations states that that between 1989 to June 30, 2010 the number of Kashmiris killed at the hands of Indian security forces stands at 93,274. Additionally, there have been 6,969 custodial killings, over 107,351 children have been orphaned, 22,728 women widowed and 9,920 women gang raped. In June 2010 alone, 33 people were killed including four children, 572 people were tortured and injured and 8 women were molested, 117,345 people were arrested and 105,861 houses or structures in the use of the communities were razed or destroyed.
Human rights groups blame the culture of impunity among security forces in Kashmir on a controversial 1990 national law granting soldiers the right to detain or eliminate all suspected terrorists and destroy their property without fear of prosecution. Critics call this provision a license to kill as it does not clearly define “terrorists”.
The murky cycle of violence is picking up speed. The killing of innocent civilians draws protests in all nooks and corners of the state by enraged people which in turn provoke the security forces to indulge in more killing. More recently, the state has remained on a knife’s edge since June 11, when angry protests began against the killing by Indian security forces of three 11th grade teenagers without provocation. This continues to happen also because the state or the federal government does not believe in explaining their actions or carrying out investigations and punishing those who use excessive force. Instead, the Indian government proudly calls all of these achievements as successful counter-insurgency operations.
To punish the Muslim population of Jammu and Kashmir for the uprising, the state machinery is economically strangulating it through the ruthless action of road blockades that have resulted in acute shortages of foodstuff, medicines and other critical items of daily use in the valley. Protestors were fired upon earlier this month, resulting in the loss of hundreds of innocent lives, including some prominent leaders.
India Attempts Demographic Changes
Under a well thought out plan, India has brought about a demographic change in Jammu after the Hindu rule was imposed in October 1947. Muslims constituted 62% of the population there according to a 1941 census, a percentage that now stands in the 30s. The Indian government is now focusing on the Kashmir valley where land allotments to Hindus from outside the state are being made to encourage population transfer in order to reduce the Muslim majority.
India Cold Shoulders Pakistan’s Out Of the Box Solutions
Pakistan’s willingness, as stated by Pakistan’s former President Pervez Musharraf, to get away from old paradigms and launch fresh proposals for a just and durable solution, did not draw any bold steps or a concrete response from India. Although he went so far as to say that for the sake of a settlement, options that are “unacceptable to either side” should be set aside and he went on to float the idea in December 2005 of a “United States of Kashmir” that would include all regions, India did not show any interest in engaging in a meaningful dialogue. India has continued hedging the core issue and has instead been raising peripheral issues one after the other as an evasive tactic. It has been demanding confidence building measures before any dialogue could seriously get underway but even these CBMs initiated by Pakistan did not prove enough. The track II diplomacy has also not been able to achieve much. This causes frustrations, not only for Pakistan but also among the Kashmiris, causing a very volatile climate, further raising the political temperature.
In Search Of the Solution
After six decades of bloodshed and armed confrontation, Indian leaders should realize the impossibility of sweeping the issue under the carpet or keeping the Kashmiris subjugated through force, an option which has acquired an entirely new dimension due to India and Pakistan having become nuclear powers. It is now time that India should move, and move with sincerity, towards resolving the dispute with the following in mind:
(a) A solution must be pursued not only on the basis of bilateral approach involving India and Pakistan but also on the tripartite level that would take into account the wishes of the people of Kashmir.
(b) Kashmir must be treated as an issue of basic human rights, which forms part of the jus cogens of general international law. Kashmir is also an issue of religious rights and identity where the majority Muslim community has been adversely affected by the partition along the “Line of Control”.
(c) Kashmir is not only a regional issue in terms of territorial claims by three states, including China, but it is, at the same time, a matter concerning the international community since it has implications for global peace and security. The nuclear potential of the three powers actually controlling parts of the disputed territory can simply not be ignored.
(d) The struggle of the people of Kashmir must not be confused with the so-called “global war on terror”, which happens to be a superpower agenda that is alien to this conflict. Instead of falling in this trap and making this issue further intractable, India needs to understand the dictum: “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”
(e) In the interest of finding a durable solution, India will have to move away from the police and military approach, or as India likes to put it, as “a battle against terrorists”. Instead of dealing with symptoms, it must address the root cause of the conflict—the question of self-determination.
(f) Police brutalities, rape and other human rights violations will have to come to an end and have to be prosecuted with full determination and without bias. At the same time, deliberate attacks on civilians will have to be terminated once and for all.
(g) The legacy of the Security Council resolutions 38 and 47 (1948) as well as the resolutions adopted by the UNCIP in 1948 and 1949 cannot be discarded, in spite of the time that has elapsed since their adoption, as these have neither become obsolete, nor invalid nor have they been recalled by the Council at any stage. On the other hand, ten years after the initial resolutions, Security Council resolution 122 (1957) reaffirmed the same democratic principle as basis of a just solution. India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru is on record fully endorsing this principle when on November 2, 1947 he said: “We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given […] not only to the people of Kashmir but the world. We will not, and cannot back out of it. We are prepared when peace and law and order have been established to have a referendum held under international auspices like the United Nations.”
It is time for Indian present leadership to listen to its founding fathers, if it does not wish to listen to the rest of the world.
There is no way for India to give up on J&K. It is naive for anyone to think otherwise. All dispute resolution attempts are essentially to get Pakistan and the Kashmiris to accept the status quo and move on. This is the eventuality everyone must (and eventually will) accept!
Well it was Pakistan that first invaded the state of J&K in 1948 using the cover of irregulars and Mujahideen that led to the Maharaja accede to India. The local Kashmiris and the Indian Army together fought back the invading tribals/Taliban that wreck havoc on the valley killing and raping women. In the elections that followed under Sheikh Abdulla, the state of J&K acceeded to India as per the wished of the people of J&K.
But Pakistan should also give freedom and politcal rights to those living in gilgit Baltistan which according to UNHCR and Freedom House is still considered not free. Moreover the HR violations in Balochistan is much worse at present than in Kashmir.
Other than the Pakistan army and ISI, no one in Pakistan is too concerned with Kashmir as their own day to day lives is at stake. It is the arrogance of Pakistani Army and the ISI which is rocking south asia and AFghanistan.
Dear wani,
by reading your comments i became fan of urs.your sinciere and rational thinking made me extremely happy.this is the thinking which every muslims residing in india should have because it is their country.nation comes first irrespective of cast,creed and religion.
The fact which you depicted through your comments shows that one should go through the evidence which may or may not support the hypothetication then they should come to an coclusion.
You are an idiot.
There is no “Letter of Ascension”. It does not exist. The Indian govt can not produce it.
It is a proven historical fact that the Indian Army entered Kashmir illegally BEFORE any tribesmen from Pakistan.
The so-called elections under Sheikh Abdullah were a sham and internationally acknowledged to be rigged by the Indian govt.
You bias is evident in your fabrications and lies.
It is you who is an IGNORAMUS.Had the ”Letter of Accession” not been in existence as you state,Pakistan would have taken the matter to the International Court of Justice in the Hague.Also by the way Ascension is an island in the mid central Atlantic ocean!
ps:As things stand,if Pakistan were to take this matter to court,it would be thrown out .The document of Accession is a LEGAL DOCUMENT.Pakistan’s claim to Kashmir(valley only) is based solely on the basis of religion.This theory was debunked by the formation of Bangladesh in 1971.I’am a Sindhi want to have nothing to do with Muslim Punjabis.”PAKISTAN NA KHAPPAY”.
Kashmir is an inseparable part of India. So paki please stop thinking about Kashmir
india is a rogue and a bully. it wasnt that long ago when indians were going around begging for their freedom from colonial rule. what short memories they have
Ash,
In the struggle for freedom from British rule there were also many people who went on to become Pakistani’s. i.e Jinnah.
So i do not understand your point?
Mr Shahid R Siddiqi is constantly repeating the lies of the pakistani army and pakistani nation that have failed even after 60 years to build a cohesive Islamic state and is an economic basketcase. I would like to correct some grave errors that Mr Siddiqi has made:
1) India did not invade Kashmir, it was pakistan that did. The invasion of kashmir by pakistan happened through pashtun tribesemen. Mr Siddiqi should also know the background under which the invasion happened. When the partition of India took place, it was universally accepted that the will of people would be supreme and people would decide which state to go to. That is why people of Hyderabad and Junagarh decided to go to India and world community accepted it. It was in this context that Jinnah spoke to Sheikh Abdullah who was then considered the genuine representative of kashmiris and asked him to merge his state with Pakistan which sheikh refused as he was wise to foresee the consequence of merging kashmir with a failed state like pakistan. It was only after his refusal that Pakistan invaded kashmir and it was sheikh abdullah as the genuine representative of kashmiris who asked the king (against whom he was ironically fighting) to ask Indian army to come to kashmiris recue. Kashmiris then were in-fact supporting Indian army against tribal invaders.In fact it was India that went to UN to ask for a referendum and The UN asked Pakistan to withdraw its tribesemen and army from Kashmir -a condition not fulfilled yet by pakistan. Pakistan has no moral authority to question India on Kashmir. Moreover the basis that underlined the state of pakistan has since then ceased to exist after more than half of population in pakistan asked for separation from it. Please see inside your own house before you throw stone at others.
Right to self determination basically means that the majority rules and the minority goes to hell.Just as the way pakistan enthnically cleansed the minorities after 1947. First the hindus were eliminated and later the bengalis were targeted leading to the creation of Bangladesh. And now we have the Taliban Ideology in which the Shias and Ahmedeis are being Targeted.
It is an extension of Hitler supermacist policy taken over by islamist fundamentalists or say any other fundamentalist.
In todays world nationhood is a outdated concept. Peace and economic cooperation for prosperity is the rule.
A society only progress when there is tolerance and equal rights to the minorities.
Hurriyet is nothing but a group of radical fundamentalist suni muslim kashmiri oraganisation which has taken the identities of Kashmir. They dont even talk about the half a million Kashmiri Pandits who were ethnically cleansed through a campaign of rape, murder by these Islamic terrorists.
Accordingly the bulk of the human rights violations were conducted by these terrorist and Indian nation has no option to but to defeat them.
It is neccesary for India to move forward with police reforms, judicial reforms, and other reforms so as to become a real democracy rather than kleptocracy which leads to alternative fundamentalist destructive ideologies to emerge.
Pakistan reform to become a true democracy free from military, mulah nexus will determine its success as a nation. Or it downward spiral will continue.
India is acting foolish by lying to its people about Kashmir. Kashmir was never a part of it. In case India wants a special place in world affairs it has to acknowledge the dispute and resolve it according to the wishes of the people of the region. That is the most democratic option available. The Western world should also realize its responsibility towards people of Kashmir and play their role. India has kept kashmir in its fold by sheer force. It has close to half a million regular army troops stationed there besides hundreds of thousands of other security personnel making it one of the highest militarized regions in the world. In the valley itself the ratio of military to civilian is 1 trooper for every 10 civilians. Imagine life of an ordinary Kashmiri in such an environment. Yet India has not been able to contain the aspirations of the people. India should instead spent the money it is spending on occupying Kashmir by force on its own citizens half a billion of whom are living on less than a dollar a day. India has nothing to lose if it gives up Kashmir. Its esteem in the world politics will surely rise.
thats a good joke you illiterate
“rajatarangini” more than 3000 year book of kalhan telling about history of kashmir clearly indicating kashmir part of india since 5000 year
@Shafqat Kasmiri people want to be part of pakistan. What a historic and pathetic error of judgement. India has given more powers to Kashmiri people than all its other states. All the separatist parties of Kashmir are just implementers of the policies of the ISI. Recently this nexus was exposed when separatist leader was taped talking to his handler about instigating the violence further and have atleast 15 more people killed.
u are a big fool. kashmir future lies with india.kashmiri girls are safe in indian hand idiot otherwise paki are waiting to rape them.
The author has made many factual inaccuracies in the whole write-up. Problem was that at that time in J&K a party called national conference was there who were opposed to Maharaja and Mr. Jinah & Sheikh Mohd Abdullah (SMA) chief of National conference did not see eye to eye on Kashmir, more so he termed the personality of Mr. SMA as a rogue. Second Maharaja himself was undecided. It may come as a surprise to you Pakistan accepted the Accession of State of Junagarh to Pakistan despite being a Hindu majority state that means . she accepted the prerogative of the ruler and not the masses as is evident in this case. It may also come as a surprise to you that India did held a plebiscite in Junagarh and settled the issue but Pakistan opposed it?
Second let us now come to Kashmir, there was a standstill agreement in place & it is also true all the supplies to J& K were coming to Kashmir via Pakistan, here the strangulation was begun by Pakistan with the premise that Kashmir is land locked with Pakistan and India has no access to State of J&K and it cannot but accede to Pakistan. . here was the big game played by Pakistan as it wanted too get hold of Junagarh , Hyderabad etc as Kashmir was in its pocket, as Mr. Jinnah was confident of, but when Gurudaspur was awarded to India, things changed.
Politically Mr. jinnah & didn’t see eye to eye with each other on Kashmir, for Jinnah was convinced that he would take Kashmir with help of his renewed Muslim conference people like chudri abbas & mirwaiz yousuf Shah, the former mates of Sheikh Abdullah in Muslim conference which he later changed to National conference. Chaudri abbas was a non-kashmiri from mirpur and moulvi Yousuf shah had influence in small pockets of old Srinagar city? And why moulvi yousuf shah and sheikh fell apart was because former was receiving honorium from maharaja’s govt as Mirwaiz of Kashmir & still being part of Muslim conference. So politically Mr. Jinnah was not on with the leader of the largest political party in Kashmir.
Nehru did no act to see that Kashmir should be part of India? Ironically SMA was in jail when India & Pakistan gained independence and was released in sept 1947. It was invasion of Pakistan regulars & irregulars (tribal) that put Kashmir where it is today, they entered Kashmir on 22nd Oct 1947 Muzzafarabad massacre of Hindus happened, Pakistan recognized a so-called govt of Kashmir on 24th headed by Sardar Ibrahim khan and then started the March towards Srinagar with loot and plunder, you can ask the generation who were witness to those events. Pakistan sent SMA to winds out of window. Indian army entered afterwards on 26/10/2010 when the instrument of accession was signed. . Had the people of Kashmir not sided with Indian Army it was not possible to drive away the Tribal invaders…….. Second if you read the letter that Mountbatten wrote to hari singh accepting the instrument of accession it said ONCE THE LAND HAS BEEN CLEARLED OF THE RAIDERS (means whole of J&K is cleared of invading forces) it will be put to the will of people. Again if you read the UN resolutions also you will find that Pakistan had to withdraw from the part of J&K it had occupied & UN had to conduct plebiscite in whole of erstwhile State of J&K, that has not happened so neither UN resolution was accepted by Pakistan not did stand the Mountbatten’s promise? Now Pakistan says Nehru promised plebiscite but in which part, whole of J&K or where?
Let us go one step further, this means that instead of holding discussions with political representatives of Kashmir Pakistan invaded Kashmir with its regulars and irregulars in 1947. Come 1989 the same thing was started by this time jihad had become a part of the Pakistanis state policy after soviets had entered Afghanistan and USA did all material supporting to Pakistan, let us not forget Osama bin laden & CIA fought shoulder in shoulder against the soviets, (was US not Infidel that day to Bin Laden is a separate story.) So in 1988 stated the jihad training of boys from Valley and thus started the reign of terror. It is here where that catch lies, Pakistan feels that with gun running the shots Kashmir must be discussed with it, it has so-called it freedom movement but as it may came as a fact to you it is cessation based on religion as other religious groups do not support this because their political aspirations are different. This may be of interest to you on the Pakistan side of Kashmir 100% people are Muslims, there were any Hindus of Sikhs they were converted to Muslims? On Indian side, you have three regions Kashmir is Muslim majority , with Jihad running the streets Hindus were driven out and massacred in 1990, Jammu is Hindus majority and Ladakh is Buddhist dominated, so you will find multi-religious people on Indian side unlike the Kashmir under Pakistanis occupation.
Your are an ignorant fool.
India exploded a nuclear bomb in 1974, more than 3 decades before Pakistan.
Freedom for Kashmir.
There is no “Instrument of Accession” or letter.
It does NOT EXIST.
It is a fabrication of the Indian govt. Produce the original document.
This propaganda is there from Pakistanis side, when alister lamb was writing his book he was so much frustrated by the Indian Home ministry officials that he was not provided copy of it and hence the thesis he is writing?
It is there on the website of Indian home ministry also.
If that was the case how did UN accept the India case at all, they were all fool? It would have said get out; you do not even have the instrument of accession at all?
you Indian fools If u truly believe
ur lies
then we the Kashmirs challange u
give us a right to self determination
n see for urselves that
we never wanted to be a part of
ur fucked up country n we never
will be one day u will leave Kashmir
with ur heads tucked in ur asses
u yellow belly chickens
wht do u say to that
India does not understand the language of peace.
People who do not understand background of Kashmir question make all sorts of statements. firstly kashmir was a Hindu majority land till 13th century. The very word kashmir comes from the word kashyap who was a rishi who first settled in kashmir. Srinagar was a city founded by Ashoka in 3rd century BC before Islam even came into existence. The Muslim majority fighting India is only confined to a small region of the state called kashmir valley and most of them in fact are people who came from Iran to escape Mongol invasion and were treated as guests by the native population in kashmir. Now the owners of Kashmir that is the hindus are called occupiers and guests have become freedom fighters. what a joke. The Indian army would knock the wind out of these central asians in the valley . Given that jammu and Ladakh are already Hindu and Buddhist majority and Poonch and Doda are Gujjar majority who support India, the turks will be killed in their homes.
These seems like a very one sided article written by a Paki officer. Unfortuantely Pakistan is a hell hole, teeming with terrorist and relegated to begging for money from China. First Pakistan needs to put its house in order, stop exporting terrrorism to neighbouring countries and grow its economy. Most of the pakistan is under the boots of the punjabis. and you would expect them to do unto Kashmir what they have done unto Pakistan. Do not understand why the FJP should provide precious space to the dim-wit one sided article, which completely fails to understand the nuance of the issue and is nothing but a baseless tirade against India. Jai Hind.
If you’d like to write a counter-argument from the Indian POV, I’d be more than happy to consider it.
I don’t understand why intelligent Indians are wasting their time trying to calm down rabid dogs from Pakistan. These dogs will never listen to reason. Its not worth spending a minute on them. Just let them be what they are rabid. We will tackle them when they come to bite as we did in 1965, 1971 and in Kargil. We need to focus more on our corrupt leaders who embarrass us most of the time.
Of the 47000 dead in Kashmir in last 20 years of insurgency. 5000 are roughly security forces and 20000 were terrorist mostly Pakistanis trained and send across by ISI. 2000 were roughly civilians killed by security forces or they died in crossfire with terrorists. Rest 20000 civilians were killed by the terrorists.
You say a just cause for independence. First Kashmir is multiracial, multiehnic, multicultural society just like rest of India. How you can justify a majority community with a violent minority be the voice of all Kashmiries.
A insurgency has its life of 15-20 years when it ebbs. A terrorist when picks a gun and starts killing people losses all its humanity and becomes just like an animal indulging in debauchery, loot and murder. The rural population in Kashmir having been the victim these terrorists have turned against them and report there movement to security forces who eliminate them.
The human right violations committed by these terrorists are hundred times more than that of security forces as there is no command and control,no punishment leading to them being law to themselves.
The myth being spread by Pakistani propaganda that 750000 troops are being used to suppress the Kashmir struggle is totally false. Around 70000 CRPF along with local police numbering 32000 are deployed for policing duty. Around 30000 RR of Indian army is deployed for jungle warfare in Hinterland against terrorist. Around 250000 IA deployment is against external aggression of which 20000 troops are deployed on LOC to check infiltration from Pakistani side. Further CRPF will move out of Kashmir Valley with proposed recruitment of 30000 additional local population into Kashmir Police. It is less than half of the propaganda of 750000 troops.
The same is with death toll. It is just doubled with all lies. An armed terrorist dies in battle,he is an innocent civilian and all the murders committed on civilians by the terrorist are blamed on security forces.
It was in Pakistani establishment mind that the situation will explode just like in former east Pakistan but Indian army is disciplined and professionally trained army and not like Pakistan army which killed half a million Bengali’s in East Pakistan in the worst genocide after second world war and doing again in Kashmir and Afghanistan through their suicidal covert terrorist war of which Pakistan itself is paying a terrible price. In short Pakistan army is the worst enemy of Muslims as their policies have killed more Muslims than anyone else which they describe as martyr for a just cause.
Remember a violent society leads to its own self destruction.
Another shallow ,biased and hypocritical ranting full of misleading information and omission of important details..
1. the principle of muslim majority areas going to pakistan was only in case of britsh india.
It does not apply to princely states. the rulers of princely states were given two choices -india or pakistan and asked to make subjective decisions based on factors like geographical contiguity, population nature etc.
Junagadh and mansoravar lacks geographical contiguity with pakistan.
hyderabad is a joke located in the far south.the ruler was encouraged by pakistan to create trouble for india. i don’t think he ever acceded to paksitan.
2. and it was pakistan that accepted the accession of a hindu majority state in spetember 1947 and then hypocrtiically claims foul when it was bitten back in kashmir one month later .
The ruler acceded to india because pakistan sent tribal invaders to annex it by force.it shows the ethics of the author in omiting this crucial piece of information.
and india didn’t send armed raiders into junagadh to grab it by force
3. Pakistan is a muslim homeland. india is not a hindu homeland. we are a multicultural democracy.we don’t recognise religion based politics or religion based nations.
pakistan and some islamic states are living in the pre enlightenment age following archaic poltical systems and worldview.
any wonder they are known for regressiveness and intellectual decadence?
we do not recognise the two nation theory.we granted pakistan only to avoid civil war.
4.India’s case on kashmir is legally air tight . Instrument of accession is a mechanism recognised by international law(vienna convention)
The UN resolutions under chapter 6 are nothing more than recommendations and as the author recognises not enforceable under chapter 7.
5. The author shamelessly tries to mislead readers by saying india was sent against the people’s wishes.he fails to highlight the shameful method of pakistan which sent the tribal raiders to grab kashmir by force.
is it the author’s case that the people loved this tribal gangs which indulged in looting and rape?
and also sheikh abdullah, the sworn enemy of maharaja, cast in his lot with india not pakistan! there was no major politcal front from kashmir supporting pakistan except the armed intruders and their supporters.
The state forces continued to handle many of the battles.
6. as for people’s will,. what are the credentials of a consistent tin pot dictatorship like pakistan and its sham democracy? a big ZERO
A sunni muslim popualtion in places like pakistan is only interested in an islamic state, sharia and blah blah and are the greatest haters of democracies like USA and india. . democracy? my foot!
how sick can you get ,using values followed by those you hate!
and pakistan has resorted to war in 1947, 1965, 1999. also kashmiri terroists have been following a barbaric conduct in the valley.
they are a ruthless unethical gang using whatever claims they find self serving!
7. And these author’s rubbish claim about india killing so many people is a work of fiction. these lying pakistanis will see figure like 90000 and put all casualties arbitarily at india’s door.pathetic unethical lot.
8 The immorality and the bigotry of kashmiri sunni muslim sepratism is reflected in the fact that the terrorists and seperatists are exclusively
sunni muslims. the involvement of shia muslims is minor and nonmuslims in their right senses are not going to support a bigoted islamic campaign.
its purely based on bigotry and an attempt to subjugate shia muslims and nonmuslims in kashmir into second class status.
its therefore an illegtimate political aspiration and a pure terrorist struggle that deserves condemnation from all right thinking people.
politcal islam as represented by the bigoted and terroist state of pakistan is destructive and evil.
What?s Taking place i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I’ve discovered It absolutely helpful and it has helped me out loads. I hope to contribute & assist different customers like its helped me. Great job.
En effet, dans les magasins des Galeries Lafayette Soldat, instrument voir stands des des collections de luxe cherte marques de de votre choix option superieure. Il est egalement necessaire de obligatoire requises. Quant a ses signes, vous fera Testament Galeries Lafayette du Ville Ville Berlin. Donc, pour un Le mariage, un cadeau talents de naissance relation ou rendre le une de modification, pratique, prelasser style voyageur
Hey! I know this is kinda off topic however I’d figured I’d ask. Would you be interested in trading links or maybe guest authoring a blog post or vice-versa? My site goes over a lot of the same subjects as yours and I believe we could greatly benefit from each other. If you’re interested feel free to send me an e-mail. I look forward to hearing from you! Awesome blog by the way!