What's new

UN resolution on Kashmir 1948

knightmare

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 7, 2013
68
-1
53
Country
India
Location
France
U.N.Resolution August 13, 1948.
This is the most significant resolution passed by the UN on the state of Jammu & Kashmir. It clearly states that Pakistan was to vacate its troops from the whole of the state. It also mentions, albeit indirectly, that Pakistan had consistently lied on the question of whether or not its troops were involved in the fighting in Jammu & Kashmir. Once the then Pakistani Prime Minister conceded that Pakistani troops were indeed involved, the UN had no option but to ask for their withdrawal. That the withdrawal never took place, is another story.


The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan.

Having given careful consideration to the points of view expressed by the representatives of India and Pakistan regarding the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir; and

Being of the opinion that the prompt cessation of hostilities and the correction of conditions the continuance of which is likely to endanger international peace and security are essential to implementation of its endeavors to assist the Governments of India and Pakistan in effecting a final settlement of the situation;

Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following proposal:

PART I: CEASE-FIRE ORDER
A. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease-fire order to apply to all forces under their control and in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been accepted by both Governments.

B.The High Commands of the Indian and Pakistani forces agree to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. ( For the purpose of these proposals forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides.

C.The Commanders-in-Chief of the forces of India and Pakistan shall promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire.

D. In its discretion and as the Commission may find practicable, the Commission will appoint military observers who, under the authority of the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands, will supervise the observance of the cease-fire order.

E. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and maintaining an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further negotiations.

PART II: TRUCE AGREEMENT
Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both the Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their representatives and the Commission.
A.

1. As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.

2. The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour 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.

3. Pending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistani troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the commission.

B.

1.When the commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistani nationals referred to in Part II, A, 2, hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistani forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.

2. Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of the cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.

3. The Government of India will undertake to ensure that the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will take all measures within its powers to make it publicly known that peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human political rights will be granted.

4. Upon signature, the full text of the truce agreement or a communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.

PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the truce agreement, both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This text is just for the new members of the forum who aren't exactly aware of the content of this resolution

One interesting replies in one of the earlier threads that I found is also mentioned below:

And most importantly, the UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

Further here are the facts and myths. These facts, needless to say, will be trashed here as nothing but myths. But these are verifiable and is the reality - take it or leave it. Burying one's head in the sand is not the way forward. Here are the facts written by a Pakistani journalist:

Too many people have told us so much. And so many people have promised us too much. Consequently, today we are no more capable of distinguishing between reality and illusion and this is our collective tragedy!

What follows may hurt the sentiments of many but then there comes a time when someone has to take the risk and put forth certain irrefutable facts even if they sound sacrilegious. After all, is it not better for the community to be confronted with the harsh reality and reconcile, rather than live out a life of delusion and thus suffer each passing day!

So, let us start with the myths and realities related to of the Kashmir problem.

* Myth- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir being a Hindu had decided to join the Dominion of India.

* Reality- Authoritative sources now confirm that the Ruler of Kashmir was inclined to opt for independence and was trying to build up internal consensus by getting the pro Pakistan Muslim Conference and Pro India National Conference onto a common platform. In a bid to gain time for the same, he on 12 August 1947 sent telegrams bearing identical dates, asking for ‘Standstill Agreement’ to both the Dominions India and Pakistan which under the Indian Independence Act 1947, would guarantee continuation of all existing agreements as well as administrative arrangements till new agreements were made. Had the Maharaja wanted accession to India, he could have easily done so even before 15 August 1947 rather than get involved with ‘Stand Still Agreements’ and remain undecided till October.
* Myth-India obtained the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour by pressurizing the Maharaja.

* Reality- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir had not entered into any agreement with New Delhi till October 1947. However, it was the decision of the Pakistan army to invade Kashmir that virtually pushed the Maharaja into New Delhi’s lap and prompted him to seek Indian intervention. And so, New Delhi obliged, but not before obtaining the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour!

* Myth- Pakistan has always stood up for the ‘right of self determination’ of the Kashmiris.

* Reality- By sponsoring the Tribal invasion, Pakistan changed the perception of the Kashmir problem from an ideological issue into a geographical dispute and never felt it necessary to approach the UN for its resolution. It is thanks to India, which took up this issue with the UN that the UN passed resolutions on Kashmir calling for Plebiscite.

* Myth- India is legally bound to implement the UN resolution for determining the ‘right to self determination’ through Plebiscite.

* Reality- The UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

*Myth- India is evading the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution on Plebiscite in Kashmir while Pakistan has done its best to ensure that the UN resolutions on Kashmir are implemented.

* Reality- UN resolution of 13 August 1948 decreed that a plebiscite would be held in Kashmir only after the Commission's resolutions were implemented. This envisaged withdrawal of all Pakistani forces from those areas of Kashmir which it had occupied in 1948. By refusing to do so till date, Pakistan has given India a legally tenable and diplomatically advantageous position by shifting the onus for non implementation of UN resolutions on Pakistan. In an illuminating article titled ‘Understanding UN Resolutions on Kashmir’ (Greater Kashmir, 20 July 2012) Hashim Qureshi has quoted former UN General Secretary Kofi Annan as ascribing this as the reason “that the General Assembly cannot implement the resolutions of the UNCIP (on Kashmir)”.

* Myth- The principles applied to secure the accession of the erstwhile kingdom of Junagadh to India on the basis of a Hindu majority were not followed in the case of Kashmir which has a Muslim majority.

* Reality- In the case of Junagadh a Plebiscite was conducted in February 1948, in which approximately 99% of the people chose accession with India. So, by conducting a plebiscite, even if farcical, India ‘technically’ fulfilled its international obligations thus avoiding any criticism of its earlier strong arm tactics and portrayed to the world that it was ready to hold a Plebiscite in Kashmir once the stipulated conditions set by the UN had been fulfilled.

* Myth- A Plebiscite as envisaged in the UN resolutions can still be held in Jammu and Kashmir.

* Reality- By granting non Kashmiris the right to acquire land and settle down in PaK as well as seceding portions of PaK to China, Pakistan has virtually foreclosed this option. New Delhi has cleverly adopted the technically sound stance that ‘since the geography and demographics of the region have been permanently altered,’ Resolution 47 (calling for Plebiscite) is now obsolete.

It is thus evident that under the prevailing conditions, the scope of implementing the ‘right to self determination’ through a Plebiscite in Kashmir is virtually nonexistent.

And it is here that our leaders have to take a call on re-thinking their strategy for resolution of the ‘K’ Issue. We must realise that the UN resolutions on Kashmir have yielded nothing for over six decades and so our insistence and any further clamouring for implementation of the same, does not make diplomatic sense.

The implicit faith which our leaders put on Pakistan for resolving Kashmir too needs to be re-examined. While it is not intended to belittle Islamabad’s contribution in keeping the ‘K’ issue alive, its decision to add the militancy angle to the peaceful movement has caused irreparable damage to the cause. America, which once empathised with the Kashmiris, today steers clear of touching Kashmir with a barge pole.
 

sree45

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2013
1,731
1
2,548
Country
India
Location
India
U.N.Resolution August 13, 1948.
This is the most significant resolution passed by the UN on the state of Jammu & Kashmir. It clearly states that Pakistan was to vacate its troops from the whole of the state. It also mentions, albeit indirectly, that Pakistan had consistently lied on the question of whether or not its troops were involved in the fighting in Jammu & Kashmir. Once the then Pakistani Prime Minister conceded that Pakistani troops were indeed involved, the UN had no option but to ask for their withdrawal. That the withdrawal never took place, is another story.


The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan.

Having given careful consideration to the points of view expressed by the representatives of India and Pakistan regarding the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir; and

Being of the opinion that the prompt cessation of hostilities and the correction of conditions the continuance of which is likely to endanger international peace and security are essential to implementation of its endeavors to assist the Governments of India and Pakistan in effecting a final settlement of the situation;

Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following proposal:

PART I: CEASE-FIRE ORDER
A. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease-fire order to apply to all forces under their control and in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been accepted by both Governments.

B.The High Commands of the Indian and Pakistani forces agree to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. ( For the purpose of these proposals forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides.

C.The Commanders-in-Chief of the forces of India and Pakistan shall promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire.

D. In its discretion and as the Commission may find practicable, the Commission will appoint military observers who, under the authority of the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands, will supervise the observance of the cease-fire order.

E. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and maintaining an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further negotiations.

PART II: TRUCE AGREEMENT
Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both the Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their representatives and the Commission.
A.

1. As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.

2. The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour 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.

3. Pending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistani troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the commission.

B.

1.When the commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistani nationals referred to in Part II, A, 2, hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistani forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.

2. Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of the cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.

3. The Government of India will undertake to ensure that the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will take all measures within its powers to make it publicly known that peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human political rights will be granted.

4. Upon signature, the full text of the truce agreement or a communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.

PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the truce agreement, both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This text is just for the new members of the forum who aren't exactly aware of the content of this resolution

One interesting replies in one of the earlier threads that I found is also mentioned below:

And most importantly, the UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

Further here are the facts and myths. These facts, needless to say, will be trashed here as nothing but myths. But these are verifiable and is the reality - take it or leave it. Burying one's head in the sand is not the way forward. Here are the facts written by a Pakistani journalist:

Too many people have told us so much. And so many people have promised us too much. Consequently, today we are no more capable of distinguishing between reality and illusion and this is our collective tragedy!

What follows may hurt the sentiments of many but then there comes a time when someone has to take the risk and put forth certain irrefutable facts even if they sound sacrilegious. After all, is it not better for the community to be confronted with the harsh reality and reconcile, rather than live out a life of delusion and thus suffer each passing day!

So, let us start with the myths and realities related to of the Kashmir problem.

* Myth- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir being a Hindu had decided to join the Dominion of India.

* Reality- Authoritative sources now confirm that the Ruler of Kashmir was inclined to opt for independence and was trying to build up internal consensus by getting the pro Pakistan Muslim Conference and Pro India National Conference onto a common platform. In a bid to gain time for the same, he on 12 August 1947 sent telegrams bearing identical dates, asking for ‘Standstill Agreement’ to both the Dominions India and Pakistan which under the Indian Independence Act 1947, would guarantee continuation of all existing agreements as well as administrative arrangements till new agreements were made. Had the Maharaja wanted accession to India, he could have easily done so even before 15 August 1947 rather than get involved with ‘Stand Still Agreements’ and remain undecided till October.
* Myth-India obtained the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour by pressurizing the Maharaja.

* Reality- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir had not entered into any agreement with New Delhi till October 1947. However, it was the decision of the Pakistan army to invade Kashmir that virtually pushed the Maharaja into New Delhi’s lap and prompted him to seek Indian intervention. And so, New Delhi obliged, but not before obtaining the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour!

* Myth- Pakistan has always stood up for the ‘right of self determination’ of the Kashmiris.

* Reality- By sponsoring the Tribal invasion, Pakistan changed the perception of the Kashmir problem from an ideological issue into a geographical dispute and never felt it necessary to approach the UN for its resolution. It is thanks to India, which took up this issue with the UN that the UN passed resolutions on Kashmir calling for Plebiscite.

* Myth- India is legally bound to implement the UN resolution for determining the ‘right to self determination’ through Plebiscite.

* Reality- The UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

*Myth- India is evading the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution on Plebiscite in Kashmir while Pakistan has done its best to ensure that the UN resolutions on Kashmir are implemented.

* Reality- UN resolution of 13 August 1948 decreed that a plebiscite would be held in Kashmir only after the Commission's resolutions were implemented. This envisaged withdrawal of all Pakistani forces from those areas of Kashmir which it had occupied in 1948. By refusing to do so till date, Pakistan has given India a legally tenable and diplomatically advantageous position by shifting the onus for non implementation of UN resolutions on Pakistan. In an illuminating article titled ‘Understanding UN Resolutions on Kashmir’ (Greater Kashmir, 20 July 2012) Hashim Qureshi has quoted former UN General Secretary Kofi Annan as ascribing this as the reason “that the General Assembly cannot implement the resolutions of the UNCIP (on Kashmir)”.

* Myth- The principles applied to secure the accession of the erstwhile kingdom of Junagadh to India on the basis of a Hindu majority were not followed in the case of Kashmir which has a Muslim majority.

* Reality- In the case of Junagadh a Plebiscite was conducted in February 1948, in which approximately 99% of the people chose accession with India. So, by conducting a plebiscite, even if farcical, India ‘technically’ fulfilled its international obligations thus avoiding any criticism of its earlier strong arm tactics and portrayed to the world that it was ready to hold a Plebiscite in Kashmir once the stipulated conditions set by the UN had been fulfilled.

* Myth- A Plebiscite as envisaged in the UN resolutions can still be held in Jammu and Kashmir.

* Reality- By granting non Kashmiris the right to acquire land and settle down in PaK as well as seceding portions of PaK to China, Pakistan has virtually foreclosed this option. New Delhi has cleverly adopted the technically sound stance that ‘since the geography and demographics of the region have been permanently altered,’ Resolution 47 (calling for Plebiscite) is now obsolete.

It is thus evident that under the prevailing conditions, the scope of implementing the ‘right to self determination’ through a Plebiscite in Kashmir is virtually nonexistent.

And it is here that our leaders have to take a call on re-thinking their strategy for resolution of the ‘K’ Issue. We must realise that the UN resolutions on Kashmir have yielded nothing for over six decades and so our insistence and any further clamouring for implementation of the same, does not make diplomatic sense.

The implicit faith which our leaders put on Pakistan for resolving Kashmir too needs to be re-examined. While it is not intended to belittle Islamabad’s contribution in keeping the ‘K’ issue alive, its decision to add the militancy angle to the peaceful movement has caused irreparable damage to the cause. America, which once empathised with the Kashmiris, today steers clear of touching Kashmir with a barge pole.


Good one.

and as usual our neighbours would ignore this thread as it goes against what's thought in their textbooks.
 

punit

BANNED
Nov 26, 2010
6,950
-59
5,986
Country
India
Location
India
U.N.Resolution August 13, 1948.
This is the most significant resolution passed by the UN on the state of Jammu & Kashmir. It clearly states that Pakistan was to vacate its troops from the whole of the state. It also mentions, albeit indirectly, that Pakistan had consistently lied on the question of whether or not its troops were involved in the fighting in Jammu & Kashmir. Once the then Pakistani Prime Minister conceded that Pakistani troops were indeed involved, the UN had no option but to ask for their withdrawal. That the withdrawal never took place, is another story.


The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan.

Having given careful consideration to the points of view expressed by the representatives of India and Pakistan regarding the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir; and

Being of the opinion that the prompt cessation of hostilities and the correction of conditions the continuance of which is likely to endanger international peace and security are essential to implementation of its endeavors to assist the Governments of India and Pakistan in effecting a final settlement of the situation;

Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following proposal:

PART I: CEASE-FIRE ORDER
A. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease-fire order to apply to all forces under their control and in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been accepted by both Governments.

B.The High Commands of the Indian and Pakistani forces agree to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. ( For the purpose of these proposals forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides.

C.The Commanders-in-Chief of the forces of India and Pakistan shall promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire.

D. In its discretion and as the Commission may find practicable, the Commission will appoint military observers who, under the authority of the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands, will supervise the observance of the cease-fire order.

E. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and maintaining an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further negotiations.

PART II: TRUCE AGREEMENT
Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both the Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their representatives and the Commission.
A.

1. As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.

2. The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour 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.

3. Pending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistani troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the commission.

B.

1.When the commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistani nationals referred to in Part II, A, 2, hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistani forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of its forces from that State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.

2. Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of the cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.

3. The Government of India will undertake to ensure that the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will take all measures within its powers to make it publicly known that peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human political rights will be granted.

4. Upon signature, the full text of the truce agreement or a communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.

PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the truce agreement, both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This text is just for the new members of the forum who aren't exactly aware of the content of this resolution

One interesting replies in one of the earlier threads that I found is also mentioned below:

And most importantly, the UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

Further here are the facts and myths. These facts, needless to say, will be trashed here as nothing but myths. But these are verifiable and is the reality - take it or leave it. Burying one's head in the sand is not the way forward. Here are the facts written by a Pakistani journalist:

Too many people have told us so much. And so many people have promised us too much. Consequently, today we are no more capable of distinguishing between reality and illusion and this is our collective tragedy!

What follows may hurt the sentiments of many but then there comes a time when someone has to take the risk and put forth certain irrefutable facts even if they sound sacrilegious. After all, is it not better for the community to be confronted with the harsh reality and reconcile, rather than live out a life of delusion and thus suffer each passing day!

So, let us start with the myths and realities related to of the Kashmir problem.

* Myth- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir being a Hindu had decided to join the Dominion of India.

* Reality- Authoritative sources now confirm that the Ruler of Kashmir was inclined to opt for independence and was trying to build up internal consensus by getting the pro Pakistan Muslim Conference and Pro India National Conference onto a common platform. In a bid to gain time for the same, he on 12 August 1947 sent telegrams bearing identical dates, asking for ‘Standstill Agreement’ to both the Dominions India and Pakistan which under the Indian Independence Act 1947, would guarantee continuation of all existing agreements as well as administrative arrangements till new agreements were made. Had the Maharaja wanted accession to India, he could have easily done so even before 15 August 1947 rather than get involved with ‘Stand Still Agreements’ and remain undecided till October.
* Myth-India obtained the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour by pressurizing the Maharaja.

* Reality- The Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir had not entered into any agreement with New Delhi till October 1947. However, it was the decision of the Pakistan army to invade Kashmir that virtually pushed the Maharaja into New Delhi’s lap and prompted him to seek Indian intervention. And so, New Delhi obliged, but not before obtaining the ‘instrument of accession’ in its favour!

* Myth- Pakistan has always stood up for the ‘right of self determination’ of the Kashmiris.

* Reality- By sponsoring the Tribal invasion, Pakistan changed the perception of the Kashmir problem from an ideological issue into a geographical dispute and never felt it necessary to approach the UN for its resolution. It is thanks to India, which took up this issue with the UN that the UN passed resolutions on Kashmir calling for Plebiscite.

* Myth- India is legally bound to implement the UN resolution for determining the ‘right to self determination’ through Plebiscite.

* Reality- The UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

*Myth- India is evading the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution on Plebiscite in Kashmir while Pakistan has done its best to ensure that the UN resolutions on Kashmir are implemented.

* Reality- UN resolution of 13 August 1948 decreed that a plebiscite would be held in Kashmir only after the Commission's resolutions were implemented. This envisaged withdrawal of all Pakistani forces from those areas of Kashmir which it had occupied in 1948. By refusing to do so till date, Pakistan has given India a legally tenable and diplomatically advantageous position by shifting the onus for non implementation of UN resolutions on Pakistan. In an illuminating article titled ‘Understanding UN Resolutions on Kashmir’ (Greater Kashmir, 20 July 2012) Hashim Qureshi has quoted former UN General Secretary Kofi Annan as ascribing this as the reason “that the General Assembly cannot implement the resolutions of the UNCIP (on Kashmir)”.

* Myth- The principles applied to secure the accession of the erstwhile kingdom of Junagadh to India on the basis of a Hindu majority were not followed in the case of Kashmir which has a Muslim majority.

* Reality- In the case of Junagadh a Plebiscite was conducted in February 1948, in which approximately 99% of the people chose accession with India. So, by conducting a plebiscite, even if farcical, India ‘technically’ fulfilled its international obligations thus avoiding any criticism of its earlier strong arm tactics and portrayed to the world that it was ready to hold a Plebiscite in Kashmir once the stipulated conditions set by the UN had been fulfilled.

* Myth- A Plebiscite as envisaged in the UN resolutions can still be held in Jammu and Kashmir.

* Reality- By granting non Kashmiris the right to acquire land and settle down in PaK as well as seceding portions of PaK to China, Pakistan has virtually foreclosed this option. New Delhi has cleverly adopted the technically sound stance that ‘since the geography and demographics of the region have been permanently altered,’ Resolution 47 (calling for Plebiscite) is now obsolete.

It is thus evident that under the prevailing conditions, the scope of implementing the ‘right to self determination’ through a Plebiscite in Kashmir is virtually nonexistent.

And it is here that our leaders have to take a call on re-thinking their strategy for resolution of the ‘K’ Issue. We must realise that the UN resolutions on Kashmir have yielded nothing for over six decades and so our insistence and any further clamouring for implementation of the same, does not make diplomatic sense.

The implicit faith which our leaders put on Pakistan for resolving Kashmir too needs to be re-examined. While it is not intended to belittle Islamabad’s contribution in keeping the ‘K’ issue alive, its decision to add the militancy angle to the peaceful movement has caused irreparable damage to the cause. America, which once empathised with the Kashmiris, today steers clear of touching Kashmir with a barge pole.

amazing article. It will increase the consumption of burn treatment ointments though !!
 

GR!FF!N

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 11, 2012
8,706
-4
8,478
Country
India
Location
India
I remember,I spurred with a Pakistani Think Tank on this same topic a long time ago....he didn't agree that Pakistan's "Donation" to China foreclosed all such "Resolutions".
 

PlanetWarrior

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 23, 2009
6,096
-2
8,795
Country
India
Location
Zimbabwe
Pakistan's new found buddy on the "Kashmir issue" namely the "great former Ottoman Empire" should perhaps offer the Pakistani government reading lessons instead of "mediation on the Kashmir issue". The Turks are better off promoting their educational institutions. Their unfounded remarks on the Kashmir issue with respect just makes them look stupid and ignorant on South Asian issues :undecided:
 

dabong1

<b>PDF VETERAN</b>
Nov 28, 2006
4,417
1
1,240
A One line answer,

Simla Agreement supersedes the UN Resolution. :coffee:

Even if the above was true, Simla Agreement is null and void once the indian army invaded sachin and broke the treaty

Simla Agreement

(ii) In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line.
 

janon

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 19, 2011
9,895
2
18,180
Country
India
Location
India
Even if the above was true, Simla Agreement is null and void once the indian army invaded sachin and broke the treaty

Simla Agreement

(ii) In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line.
Can you show me the line of control on Siachen?

LoC by definition is the line heldby each side's army. Siachen glacier was an uninhabited place far north of LoC, that Pakistan was trying to sneak into. India learnt this through an intelligence masterstroke, and pre-emptively reached there. Pakistan tried several times after that to recapture Siachen, and failed comically each time.

In short: Shimla agreement is still valid.
 

knightmare

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 7, 2013
68
-1
53
Country
India
Location
France
I guess the most important fact to keep here in mind is that plebiscite in Kashmir has no legal standing till Pakistan withdraws their forces and mujahids from Kashmir soil, even if all the other later agreements which make it a bilateral issue are set aside for the moment. More importantly only the original residents of J&K are allowed to vote. Since, on the Pakistani side because their was no rule preventing the settlement of non-Kashmiris, the plebiscite in that portion is no longer possible. 'Donation' of aksai chin is another issue.

So, since Pakistan has already made messed up this issue so much, I wonder on what legal background does it keep asking for plebiscite. I feel that there should be a realization on both the sides of the border that re-drawing of LOC is not an option and it should be converted to an international border, so that atleast the future generations of the two nations, especially Pakistan can move on and start focusing on what is really important for their prosperity and well being
 

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


Top Bottom