What's new

Discussion about Kashmir Issue by Back Benchers of UK Parliament.

WAR-rior

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 26, 2010
4,861
-15
4,667
Country
India
Location
France
London: The British government on Thursday condemned terrorism and violence and rejected mediation in the dispute between India and Pakistan on Kashmir in a debate in the United Kingdom’s parliament in which pro-India speakers among the MPs overwhelmed Pakistan supporters by almost three to one.

Replying at the end of a three-hour debate on the political and humanitarian situation in Kashmir, Tobias Ellwood, a junior minister in Whitehall’s Foreign Office, said, “Talks (between India and Pakistan) can only take place free from terrorism and violence.” This seemed to back the Indian position that export of jihadis by Pakistan into India must stop.

He reiterated there would be “no mediation” by Britain in respect of the differences between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.

The debate did not take place in the chamber of the House of Commons, but in a committee room and under the auspices of the Backbench Business Committee. In other words, it wasn’t a part of government business and there was no vote at the end of the debate. At the same time, it had official recognition and was recorded.

Of the 18 speakers who participated, only three clearly stood up for Islamabad’s cause - the mover of the debate, David Ward, who represented a Bradford constituency where most of the voters or their families hail from Mirpur in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, and two MPs of Pakistani-origin. In contrast, only two of the lawmakers who supported the Indian position were of Indian-descent.

Leading the charge for India, Barry Gardiner, a Labour party MP, stated, “Britain would be outraged if the Indian parliament debated the merits and demerits of the Scottish referendum.” He called the debate as “ill-judged”.

Paul Uppal, a Conservative party MP, poured scorn over “white middle-aged men lecturing India”. He reminded the house that Britain “carried imperial, historical baggage” and that it should have “more faith in the subcontinent”.

Virendra Sharma, Labour, commenced by saying he was “disappointed” the debate was taking place and described it as “divisive”. He explained he is elected from a diverse constituency (Ealing Southall) where there are Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims. He feared the debate could “inflame tensions” in his constituency. He asserted, “Jammu and Kashmir state was an integral part of India.”

Bob Blackman, Conservative, highlighted the issue of “ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri pundits”, their displacement and refugee status in their own country, which he felt was of the highest “humanitarian” concern. Speaker after speaker echoed this sentiment, thereby drowning out the Pakistani plea that Indian security forces were committing human rights violations against Muslim Kashmiris in Jammu & Kashmir.

Ward maintained, “We (Britain) have some part to play in Kashmir.” This, though, was roundly rejected by a majority of his fellow MPs. Those reflecting India’s stance on Kashmir were well prepared. Not only did they seem to have been well briefed, but had done their own home work. By comparison, the apologists for Islamabad indulged in ISI-inspired propaganda, including questioning the legitimacy of elections in Kashmir.

About one-third of the speakers were even-handed and did not categorically take sides.

Unlike past debates on Kashmir in the British parliament, the public gallery appeared to be equally divided between Indians and Pakistanis and not predominantly the latter community. Rumblings of discontent were heard from a section of the audience every time a speaker took up cudgels for India and correspondingly clapping from another segment, which were frequent as the strength of solidarity with India was unprecedented.

Had there been a vote, the pro-India lobby would have won hands down.

UK parliament rips apart Pakistan’s stand on Kashmir
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ON TOPIC :
Interesting turnaround after decades. So shud we assume comfortably that its end to Internationalizing Kashmir? Afterall UK was the last weapon in Pakistan's International support armory.
 

Dubious

RETIRED MOD
Jul 22, 2012
37,760
80
72,157
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
pro-India speakers
And the debate goes down the sink of biasness!


Interesting turnaround after decades. So shud we assume comfortably that its end to Internationalizing Kashmir? Afterall UK was the last weapon in Pakistan's International support armory.
And I thought we were free from foreign say/ rule looks like India still looks at mommy for approval/ appreciation ...
 

Iggy

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 1, 2009
8,300
2
12,151
Country
India
Location
Oman
And I thought we were free from foreign say/ rule looks like India still looks at mommy for approval/ appreciation ...
Really, I thought it was Pakistan who brings Kashmir issues in all international arena and now you are saying we need mommy to settle our disputes? :P
 

WAR-rior

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 26, 2010
4,861
-15
4,667
Country
India
Location
France
And the debate goes down the sink of biasness!
Let me request you to understand definition of debate. :) . It a phenomenon where people take sides and put their points forward. Ohh wait. U confused between Debate and Discussion? :coffee:

And I thought we were free from foreign say/ rule looks like India still looks at mommy for approval/ appreciation ...
Yes we were and we are. But wait a second. Let me request you to go back and find out who asked the Brit Parliament to hold this debate? :)
 

syedali73

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 2, 2008
6,067
60
13,695
Country
Pakistan
Location
Malaysia
UK would never support Pakistan, why would she? It was UK itself that was/is responsible for Kashmir dispute. Nobody in Pakistan expected that something tangible would come out of that debate, hence this event never found a place in print or electronic media in Pakistan.
 

WAR-rior

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 26, 2010
4,861
-15
4,667
Country
India
Location
France
Lol. End of story.
pro-India speakers among the MPs overwhelmed Pakistan supporters by almost three to one

Ohh wait. Did u assume that British Parliament only has Pakistan Supporters? :rofl:

Bubbly burstedy.

UK would never support Pakistan, why would she? It was UK itself that was/is responsible for Kashmir dispute.
Well. Then why do Pakistan always go to UK with Kashmir issue even after Shimla Accord?
 

Areesh

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 30, 2010
38,823
3
79,520
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
pro-India speakers among the MPs overwhelmed Pakistan supporters by almost three to one

Ohh wait. Did u assume that British Parliament only has Pakistan Supporters? :rofl:

Bubbly burstedy.
Who cares. The word pro India ends the "news" right there and then.
 

Mythal

FULL MEMBER
Aug 12, 2012
607
-5
827
Country
India
Location
United States
And the debate goes down the sink of biasness!



And I thought we were free from foreign say/ rule looks like India still looks at mommy for approval/ appreciation ...
In a world that is becoming a global village and all the internationalization going on the importance of what other countries think is increasing day by day.
 

WAR-rior

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 26, 2010
4,861
-15
4,667
Country
India
Location
France
Who cares. The word pro India ends the "news" right there and then.
Why am I getting this feeling that either u dint get the jist of the article or u are purposely acting ignorant. Well just curious?

Point is, Pak called for a debate and in any debate people take sides. In this debate, MPs with Indian stand (pro India) killed the argument of Pakistani side (pro Pakistan). And to add, only 2 out of the 18 were on Indian origin. What does it explain?

Damn maan. Dont make me explain kindergarten stuff. Seriously.

A third country is discussing your "atoot ang" and integral part in their parliament and you guys are happy.:lol:
NO NO. We are happy that Pakistan ran to the third country with aspirations and were sent back packing for once n all. Case Closed. :)
 

Dubious

RETIRED MOD
Jul 22, 2012
37,760
80
72,157
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
He reiterated there would be “no mediation” by Britain in respect of the differences between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.
Yet here we see this...

Leading the charge for India, Barry Gardiner, a Labour party MP, stated, “Britain would be outraged if the Indian parliament debated the merits and demerits of the Scottish referendum.” He called the debate as “ill-judged”.
And we see why they needed to make India happy :D


Really, I thought it was Pakistan who brings Kashmir issues in all international arena and now you are saying we need mommy to settle our disputes?
Well it is India who keeps saying go take it to international courts...and also it was UK who caused the dispute in the 1st place yet you want to use the same country to "resolve" the issue?
 

Areesh

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 30, 2010
38,823
3
79,520
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
NO NO. We are happy that Pakistan ran to the third country with aspirations and were sent back packing for once n all. Case Closed. :)
Kashmir issue is internationalized. Good enough for us. No atoot ang here. :lol:

Why am I getting this feeling that either u dint get the jist of the article or u are purposely acting ignorant. Well just curious?

Point is, Pak called for a debate and in any debate people take sides. In this debate, MPs with Indian stand (pro India) killed the argument of Pakistani side (pro Pakistan). And to add, only 2 out of the 18 were on Indian origin. What does it explain?

Damn maan. Dont make me explain kindergarten stuff. Seriously.
And there were more pro Indians than pro Pakistani. So what? We would take it again to the UK parliament and again and again. We don't need a gora to tell us about Kashmir issue. We just want your "intergral part" to be discussed by others. Good enough for us.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom