Not every person in India-administered Kashmir wants to pick up a gun. I knew a young man whose late father was Kashmiri and whose family runs a handcrafts store. There are perhaps a dozen other Kashmiri crafts shops in my city. And there is a Kashmiri traveling clothing salesman who annually comes to my house to sell clothing items to my mother.
And there are of course the prominent new Kashmiri youth leaders - Shehla Rashid and Shah Faesal. No guns with them too.
Firstly, thank you for turning this thread back to a discussion bigger than Kashmir. That was the thread's part intention.
But no, what I wrote is not alternate history but a possible current / future which can be realized if people sit at the table and talk of radical change. Many societies have brought revolutionary change by simply sitting, thinking and talking.
And if India and Pakistan were formed on certain principles in 1947 should those principles be continued forever with no thought of change just because they were founded on certain principles in the past ?
But I did not understand your mention of an Indian united superstate. That was not my intention for this thread.
I think you fail to see what you have proposed, for Nations to change their principal of statehood is not very easy task.
To say India and Pakistan being extremely-defensive of their state function to one day "discuss" it out is for me personally a bit farfetched.
I have seen plenty of "revolution" springing across the nation, even you might be very familiar of the Socialist movements in this region vis-à-vis The socialist movement being very close knittined in the Subcontinent and are in regular contact.
They may seem full of potential, but for me when I watch them I can only sell in essence the samw things and the religious Fundamentalists and the Liberal minority. Optimistic, fairly naive and romanticized beliefs. These people when in discussion are more intolorent then any religious fundamentalist I have ever met.
And to a fair extent such people will lead your movement in both state, and in respects to Pakistan will prove to be same in principal action as to Zia's true "Islamic Pakistan".
Then there are those who have shed their blood for the current status quo. Will Gilgit-Baltistan ever accept any thing less than to be part of Pakistan certainly no, the forefathers and the people now have lost to many for this cause and it would be a betrayal to their life.
We dont need any convoluted way of new government systems and a bit far fetched ideas.
Allow ladakh and lethals to be part India and Gilgit-Baltistan to Pakistan hold a plebiscite in Kashmir and AJ&K let Indian occupied Kashmir to either be part of india or be independent and AJ&K to either be part of Pakistan or independence.
None of the party are staking more than the other, Both can easily preach it to the mass with much ease. The people would much prefer such and agreement.
I have recommended such an agreement as India has always preferred the status quo and eventual integration into its state much like Ireland which does not suit Pakistans outlook
