What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
The UN resolution referred to an undivided Pakistan that was a different entity than it is today. The successors to that Pakistan is today's Bangladesh and what remains of western Pakistan and calls itself Pakistan today.

So any reference to that resolution is inadmissible today since the parties to the dispute have changed.
 
Its something else if you people don't accept Nehru or discard him to be one of your leaders.

I know democracy is a less understood concept in Pakistan, but unlike dictatorships, in democracy, leaders are not above the people. And the people of India have spoken about Kashmir. Do whatever you will with that..
 
The UN resolution referred to an undivided Pakistan that was a different entity than it is today. The successors to that Pakistan is today's Bangladesh and what remains of western Pakistan and calls itself Pakistan today.

So any reference to that resolution is inadmissible today since the parties to the dispute have changed.

hmm. interesting. I never thought it in this way. Bangladesh should have the same claim as Pakistan. But it does not matter. Bangladesh has not claimed any part of Kashmir.
 
The UN resolution referred to an undivided Pakistan that was a different entity than it is today. The successors to that Pakistan is today's Bangladesh and what remains of western Pakistan and calls itself Pakistan today.

So any reference to that resolution is inadmissible today since the parties to the dispute have changed.

Interesting. Does Pakistan now need a No Objection certificate (;) ) from Bangladesh to pursue the Kashmir matter in the UN?
 
Kashmir is much more a Pakistani land than an indian land. Muslim majority Kashmir is far from the center of india, while its attached to Pakistan and is just a few miles away from the capital of Pakistan, Islamabad.


pakadmin.jpg

The most nonsense argument I have heard from any Pakistani on any forum, till date. Give Afghanistan their land of Pashtuns first, and then your nonsense arguments will have some credibility.
 
India is shooting its own foot. Pakistan and China wants to keep India busy in Kashmir ,on the other side of political coin, India is losing its grip on other states. 20 percent of India is lawless. Communist are slowly taking over huge chunk of India. Where army need to play its role to control armed insurgency is not thier. Indian army is totally concentrating on Kashmir and few sensitive Indo-China post.

The maoist war used be against corruption and under-development. Lately they have acting like dacoits. They have started to attack civilians. Before it used to be just government properties. It is not a separatist movement with cross border infiltration like Kashmir. The home ministry has made it clear that the army will not be used to crush the maoist rebellion.
 
Kashmir is much more a Pakistani land than an indian land. Muslim majority Kashmir is far from the center of india, while its attached to Pakistan and is just a few miles away from the capital of Pakistan, Islamabad.

By that logic you should claim Uighur province in China as well. Illogical.
 
By that logic you should claim Uighur province in China as well. Illogical.


Who will bell the chinese cat? Certainly not Pakistan!
 
The UN resolution referred to an undivided Pakistan that was a different entity than it is today. The successors to that Pakistan is today's Bangladesh and what remains of western Pakistan and calls itself Pakistan today.

So any reference to that resolution is inadmissible today since the parties to the dispute have changed.
That is the current BR bull$hit.

The same way as India inherited British India, and Pakistan(undivided) became a new domain, requiring fresh application to be the member at UN, Pakistan(current) inherited - if I can use that term - western half of Pakistan(undivided), while Bangladesh became a new domain, inheriting eastern half of Pakistan(undivided), requiring fresh application to be the member of UN. Accordingly all outstanding disputes/legal obligations, concerning the western half of Pakistan(undivided) continued to be Pakistan's (current) liability while those concerning the eastern half of Pakistan (undivided) became Bangladesh's liability.

I hope you are not saying that IWT also comes under Bangladesh's purview, since, if I'm not mistaken, IWT refers to Pakistan and not West Pakistan.
 
Interesting. Does Pakistan now need a No Objection certificate (;) ) from Bangladesh to pursue the Kashmir matter in the UN?

Well, if the Pakistanis want to hold us to the book, we can play the same game just as well.

There's no such thing as a NOC that applies to international disputes.

From what I understand, UN resolution 47 refers to two parties as defined by that date in 21 Apr 1948. Of those two parties, one does not exist as of now. The rump state of what used to be "West Pakistan" may claim to be the successor, but India has to recognize that first.

We have no incentive to do that. The alternative (for Pakistan) is to get the UN to pass a fresh resolution. Good luck with that.
 
Had your nation not accepted it to be disputed, then Nehru uncle would not have promised the Kashmiris their right for plebiscite and free will to let the Kashmiris decide what they want.
Nehru uncle didn't promise plebiscite as a result of our nation accepting it to be disputed. He did that long before partition and continuously argued in favour of people's choice over ruler's choice even before Junagadh or Kashmir became a bone of contention, or before he went to UN. It was the grand daddy of Pakistan who continuously refused to accept the principle of plebiscite.

Talk of ulta chor kotwal ko datein.

Plus, we have sufficient proof in the UN resolutions which make it pretty much a disputable territory.
Mind you, claim of 'sufficient proof' is yours. Now back up the following. Where did UN question the sovereignty of Kashmir?
Man, when Indians go on overdrive about Kashmir, they pretty much forget lot of things.
Yeah right.
 
Accordingly all outstanding disputes/legal obligations, concerning the western half of Pakistan(undivided) continued to be Pakistan's (current) liability while those concerning the eastern half of Pakistan (undivided) became Bangladesh's liability.

It is not automatic like you imply. India is required, as is Bangladesh to ratify that they recognize the successor state as such. Like I mention, in this case, we have no incentive to comply.

I hope you are not saying that IWT also comes under Bangladesh's purview, since, if I'm not mistaken, IWT refers to Pakistan and not West Pakistan.

Good counterpoint. Again, India has chosen out of goodwill, to adhere to the IWT even during wars and conflicts. Not out of force, out of goodwill. That does not translate into automatic recognition. If Pakistan wants to renegotiate IWT, as the talk goes over there, they will start from a fresh slate.

New player, new rules.
 
From what I understand, UN resolution 47 refers to two parties as defined by that date in 21 Apr 1948.
Except for the introductory part of that resolution, leading to the appointment of UNMOGIP, the rest became inoperative after resolution of 13th Aug, 1948 and 5 Jan, 1949.

The rump state of what used to be "West Pakistan" may claim to be the successor, but India has to recognize that first.
You mean India still needs to recognize the western part of erstwhile Pakistan as current Pakistan? Really?

UN resolutions are dead as dodo, but not for the reasons you mentioned.
 
It is not automatic like you imply. India is required, as is Bangladesh to ratify that they recognize the successor state as such. Like I mention, in this case, we have no incentive to comply.



Good counterpoint. Again, India has chosen out of goodwill, to adhere to the IWT even during wars and conflicts. Not out of force, out of goodwill. That does not translate into automatic recognition. If Pakistan wants to renegotiate IWT, as the talk goes over there, they will start from a fresh slate.

New player, new rules.
I will not go into the legal details but mention just this - Pakistan has its own embassy in India. Do you know, when and how a country can have an embassy in another country?
 
UN Resolution #47 text:

Adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting, on 21 April 1948

The Security Council,

Having considered the complaint of the Government of India concerning the dispute over the State of Jammu and Kashmir,

Having heard the representative of India in support of that complaint and the reply and counter-complaints of the representative of Pakistan,

Being strongly of the opinion that the early restoration of peace and order in Jammu and Kashmir is essential and that India and Pakistan should do their utmost to bring about a cessation of all fighting,

Noting with satisfaction that both India and Pakistan declare that the question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite,

Considering that the continuation of the dispute is likely to endanger international peace and security,

Reaffirms its resolution 38 (1948) of 17 January 1948;

Resolves that the membership of the Commission established by its resolution 39 (1948) of 20 January 1948 shall be increased to five and shall include, in addition to the membership mentioned in that resolution, representatives of . . . and . . . , and that if the membership of the Commission has not been completed within ten days from the date of the adoption of this resolution the President of the Security Council may nominate such other Member or Members of the United Nations as are required to complete the membership of five;

Instructs the Commission to proceed at once to the Indian subcontinent and there place its good offices and mediation at the disposal of the Governments of India and Pakistan with a view to facilitating the taking of the necessary measures, both with respect to the restoration of peace and order and to the holding of a plebiscite, by the two Governments, acting in co-operation with one another and with the Commission, and further instructs the Commission to keep the Council informed of the action taken under the resolution; and, to this end,

Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council are appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan:

A. Restoration of peace and order

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavours:

(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State;

(b) To make known to all concerned that the measures indicated in this and the following paragraphs provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste or party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, and that therefore they should co-operate in the maintenance of peace and order.

2. The Government of India should:

(a) When it is established to the satisfaction of the Commission set up in accordance with the Council's resolution 39 (1948) that the tribesmen are withdrawing and that arrangements for the cessation of the fighting have become effective, put into operation in consultation with the Commission a plan for withdrawing their own forces from Jammu and Kashmir and reducing them progressively to the minimum strength required for the support of the civil power in the maintenance of law and order;

(b) Make known that the withdrawal is taking place in stages and announce the completion of each stage;

(c) When the Indian forces have been reduced to the minimum strength mentioned in (a) above, arrange in consultation with the Commission for the stationing of the remaining forces to be carried out in accordance with the following principles:

(i) That the presence of troops should not afford any intimidation or appearance of intimidation to the inhabitants of the State;
(ii) That as small a number as possible should be maintained in forward areas;
(iii) That any reserve of troops which may be included in the total strength should be located within their present base area.

3. The Government of India should agree that until such time as the Plebiscite Administration referred to below finds it necessary to exercise the powers of direction and supervision over the State forces and police provided for in paragraph 8, they will be held in areas to be agreed upon with the Plebiscite Administrator.

4. After the plan referred to in paragraph 2 (a) above has been put into operation, personnel recruited locally in each district should so far as possible be utilized for the re-establishment and maintenance of law and order with due regard to protection of minorites, subject to such additional requirements as may be specified by the Plebiscite Administration referred to in paragraph 7.

5. If these local forces should be found to be inadequate, the Commission, subject to the agreement of both the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, should arrange for the use of such forces of either Dominion as it deems effective for the purpose of pacification.

B. Plebiscite

6. The Government of India should undertake to ensure that the Government of the State invite the major political groups to designate responsible representatives to share equitably and fully in the conduct of the administration at the ministerial level while the plebiscite is being prepared and carried out.

7. The Government of India should undertake that there will be established in Jammu and Kashmir a Plebiscite Administration to hold a plebiscite as soon as possible on the accession of the State to India or Pakistan.

8. The Government of India should undertake that there will be delegated by the State to the Plebiscite Administration such powers as the latter considers necessary for holding a fair and impartial plebiscite including, for that purpose only, the direction and supervision of the State forces and police.

9. The Government of India should, at the request of the Plebiscite Administration, make available from the Indian forces such assistance as the Plebiscite Administration may require for the performance of its functions.

10. (a) The Government of India should agree that a nominee of the Secretary-General of the United Nations will be appointed to be the plebiscite administrator.

(b) The Plebiscite Administrator, acting as an officer of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, should have authority to nominate his assistance and other subordinates and to draft regulations governing the plebiscite. Such nominees should be formally appointed and such draft regulations should be formally promulgated by the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

(c) The Government of India should understand that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir will appoint fully qualified persons nominated by the Plebiscite Administrator to act as special magistrates within the State judicial system to hear cases which in the opinion of the Plebiscite Administrator have a serious bearing on the preparation for and the conduct of a free and impartial plebiscite.

(d) The terms of service of the Administrator should form the subject of a separate negotiation between the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Government of India. The Administrator should fix the terms of service for his assistants and subordinates.

(e) The Administrator should have the right to communicate directly with the Government of the State and with the Commission of the Security Council and, through the Commission, with the Security Council, with their Governments of India and Pakistan and with their representatives on the Commission. It would be his duty to bring to the notice of any or all of the foregoing (as he in his discretion may decide) any circumstances arising which may tend, in his opinion, to interfere with the freedom of the plebiscite.

11. The Government of India should undertake to prevent, and to give full support to the Administrator and his staff in preventing, any threat, coercion or intimidation, bribery or other undue influence on the voters in the plebiscite, and the Government of India should publicly announce and should cause the Government of the State to announce this undertaking as an international obligation binding on all public authorities and officials in Jammu and Kashmir.

12. The Government of India should themselves and through the Government of the State declare and make known that that all subjects of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, regardless of creed, caste or party, will be safe and free in expressing their views and in voting on the question of the accession of the State and that there will be freedom of the press, speech and assembly and freedom of travel in the State, including freedom of lawful entry and exit.

13. The Government of India should use and should ensure that the Government of the State also use their best endeavours to effect the withdrawal from the State of all Indian nationals other than those who are normally resident therein or who on or since 15 August 1947 have entered it for a lawful purpose.

14. The Government of India should ensure that the Government of the State releases all political prisoners and take all possible steps so that:

(a) All citizens of the State who have left it on account of disturbances are invited, and are free, to return to their homes and to exercise their rights as such citizens;

(b) There is no victimization;

(c) Minorities in all parts of the State are accorded adequate protection.

15. The Commission of the Security Council should at the end of the plebiscite certify to the Council whether the plebiscite has or has not been really free and impartial.

C. General provisions

16. The Governments of India and Pakistan should each be invited to nominate a representative to be attached to the Commission for such assistance as it may require in the performance of its task.

17. The Commission should establish in Jammu and Kashmir such observers as it may require of any of the proceedings in pursuance of the measures indicated in the foregoing paragraphs.

18. The Security Council Commission should carry out the tasks assigned to it herein.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom