Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kashmir: A Grand Bargain?

[ashokdeiva]

indians as usual showing their inferiority complex.

Brother, of your 4240 post, you can find yourself that you have used the word "inferiority complex" repeatedly.
This shows that you are the one who is suffering from this disease

 

[Fireurimagination]

Pakistan can keep on dreaming about Kashmir and keep on supporting terrorism etc in Kashmir the thing is violence has failed and the violence levels which are at the lowest in Kashmir/booming tourism etc are there for everyone to see, India is doing just fine with or without any compromise, with a growing economy, huge market, huge human resource and military muscle India should look to increase it's sphere on influence

 

[Meengla]

1-Those Pakistanis who are complaining that Pakistan will never abandon Kashmiris need to realize that, effective sometimes in 2004, Musharraf has either fully stopped or greatly curtailed the artillery cover for fighters crossing into IoK. It took almost 15 years but the change since 2004 has largely ensured that the LoC is so much quieter. And that was done by GENERAL Musharraf--not Zardari; the latter can't even make the ISI come under the civilian rule, let alone make strategic policies.

2-Musharraf--and indeed Pakistani civil/military leadership have probably resigned to the LoC=IB solution but with strong guarantees for Kashmiris rights and for the water-rights of Pakistan. The OP here also hints at strong self-governance.

3- I am NOT unaware that Pakistan is like to have the upper hand in Afghanistan. The OP also acknowledges this. But, despite this, I don't see Pakistan ever gaining the kind of strength in Afghanistan which it had from about mid-90s and up to 9/11, UNLESS some kind of strong support is given by Russia, China and Iran to Pakistan. It could happen. But not likely. The more likely scenario is Afghanistan continues to be the same-old proxy-war ground for India-Pakistan. More bloodshed.

Ultimately, every Pakistani's goal is the betterment of life of all Kashmiris and all Pakistanis. So a 'grand bargain' backed up by international players like USA, Russia, and China which guarantees the internal-self-governance of the Kashmiris, the free-flow of people, the water-rights of all concerned is the best way forward. I don't see any way either Pakistan or India can grab full Kashmir. Even if Pakistan becomes very strong, I still don't think that will happen. Both countries have enough hot-heads and they would rather blow up the whole region then to face a 'historic' defeat.

LoC=IB is not some kind of betrayal. With proper international supervision and guarantees it will be a rational and only way forward. In time, moneys saved from not buying even one F-16 will pay for so much in the social sectors. There may be water-shortages every few years but the money from the peace-dividends will go a long way in providing solutions. Both Pakistan and India are not some barren lands. They can manage it all.

Finally, I say all this not because I think Pakistan is particularly unable to cope with India or that Pakistan will collapse without. If a tiny Sri Lanka can survive and then thrive later after a quarter century of gruesome terrorism then so can the resilient and resourceful Pakistani. But I really think that both Pakistan and India cannot do justice to large sections of their populations.

We only live once. And we should live well. Let's not let our egos and historic baggages take that right from us.

 

[KS]

^^ Can you elaborate on the 'international supervision' part ?

Its the historic/immutable position of India that Kashmir is an internal matter of India with Pakistan having 'strong' interests in it and consequently a 'bilateral' matter. Its also been our consistent stand that no 'third party' interference will ever be allowed or tolerated.

 

[Meengla]

@KS,
By international supervision I mean countries or a group of countries both India-Pakistan can be comfortable with to see that LoC=IB is implemented in letter and spirit: Demilitarization of both sides, freedom of civilians movements, water-rights ensured, maximal internal self-governance. No surprises are sprung upon by the other side. I believe, in time, prolonged-peace will remove a lot of distrust and peace-dividends will improve the lives of millions of people on all sides.

 

[nForce]

@KS,
By international supervision I mean countries or a group of countries both India-Pakistan can be comfortable with to see that LoC=IB is implemented in letter and spirit: Demilitarization of both sides, freedom of civilians movements, water-rights ensured, maximal internal self-governance. No surprises are sprung upon by the other side. I believe, in time, prolonged-peace will remove a lot of distrust and peace-dividends will improve the lives of millions of people on all sides.

I dont support any form of solution that advocates any kind of special status for the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir,like free civilian movement.If it has to be there,it must be closely monitored and not without limited visas.J&K is like any other state in India and everyone in India has to conform to a common law.

 

[Meengla]

@nForce,
Your founding fathers were wise-enough to grant Kashmir some special status in the Indian Constitution for some reasons--none of those were because of kindness of heart. If Kashmiris flared up a few years ago because a small track of land was to be given to Hindu pilgrims, taking maximalist position will not help the situation there.
One more thing I want to stress: It would be a grave miscalculation by Indians to think that Pakistan is being brought to its knees. Yes, the WOT has greatly hurt Pakistan. But it is becoming more and more likely that Pakistan will come out stronger in Afghanistan--much to India's loss. Also, don't forget that before 2007--when there was relative peace in Pakistan--the Pakistani economy was not doing too bad. It is the WOT which is hurting Pakistan's economy. Things are likely to turn around anyway once the WOT winds down and once there is change of leadership (hopefully, Imran Khan). Since the OBL raid Pakistanis have--for the very first in their history--starting to rethink India and Indians. It is not some Bollywood movies. It is the realization that distant powers are more dangerous than India.
Mistaking that for weakness will be a historic opportunity missed.

 

[Developereo]

I don't understand how you can have 'free movement of people' across an international border in Kashmir. This is not the US-Canada border we are talking about.

 

[bandit]

I don't understand how you can have 'free movement of people' across an international border in Kashmir. This is not the US-Canada border we are talking about.

I don't think after you give Azadi to Pakistani occupied part they will have any trouble visiting the valley Kashmiris.

I can't imagine if India will object to having open borders with Republic of Kashmir.

 

[KS]

@KS,
By international supervision I mean countries or a group of countries both India-Pakistan can be comfortable with to see that LoC=IB is implemented in letter and spirit: Demilitarization of both sides, freedom of civilians movements, water-rights ensured, maximal internal self-governance. No surprises are sprung upon by the other side. I believe, in time, prolonged-peace will remove a lot of distrust and peace-dividends will improve the lives of millions of people on all sides.

Again intervention of any third country in Kashmir will be seen as 'violation of sovereignty' by us (not the Govt, but by the people themselves) and that is just bad, very bad for any Govt that has to come to us after every 5 years.

At most this issue can be a bilateral issue. There is no scope for any third party involvement. And I dont think of a single 'mutual friend' (facebook parlance) at the moment.

@nForce,
Your founding fathers were wise-enough to grant Kashmir some special status in the Indian Constitution for some reasons--none of those were because of kindness of heart. If Kashmiris flared up a few years ago because a small track of land was to be given to Hindu pilgrims, taking maximalist position will not help the situation there.

There should have been no Article 370 in the first place. Nehru was dumb enough for that.

Looking at what Chines are doing in Tiibet,East Turkestan..Lankans are doing in the North and East , if we had allowed unbridled movement and settlement of all Indians from other parts in Kashmir there would be no insurgency of demand for azadi in the first place. Perhaps the Bhaiyas would have taught the Kashmiris a lesson or two in behaviour

We lost a golden opportunity..or have we ?

 

[Alchemy]

Pakistan's stance on Kashmir makes sense.

Afghanistan is not going anywhere.

Pakistan already has the advantage in Afghanistan due to the religious factor. India cannot compete with Pakistan when it comes to Afghanistan. Americans really don't know Asia very well.

All pakistan is doing in Kashmir is Stance , stance and some more stance ! You know well and so do i that Pakistan cannot get an inch in kashmir beyond what it currently has by force or otherwise !
Status quo is the best way forward and for that reason converting LOC into IB will make so much sense , Pak and India can live in peace and harmony ... and in return India can assure that Pak has its "influence" in Afghanistan ... Its a win win for both and will ensure lasting peace in the region ...

If you want to Influence Afghanistan "religiously" please feel free India wants nothing out of Afghan except its friendship !

Just by STANCE do you really think you can get Indian portion of Kashmir ? Think over ... this article makes sense!LOC for IB will solve the problem for ever !

 

[Ahmad]

Why not make everyone happy and have a combined large country from Herat to Karachi. After all, its your Pashtun Afghan President who said that Pakistan and Afghanistan are conjoined twins. And Pakistan will also soon have a Pashtun leader, Imran Khan

Karzai and Imran Khan should make everyone's dreams come true and just combine Afghanistan and Pakistan into one huge country and then we will free Kashmir together.

Karzai's recent remarks were nothing but begging you not to back the militants. Secondly, if he as a pashtun is in love with Pakistan, then ask him or any other Pashtun to abondan their claim on KPK.

 

[Rafi]

We are getting contacts with other ethnics in Afghan, people who deal with Afghans are shocked at, how willing they are ready to sell each other and their country out, if this does not change, then the pitiful state of that unfortunate country will continue.

 

[Fireurimagination]

10 years back, Kashmir was boiling and India had 0% scope in Afghanistan now things have changed and I believe India should build on the same, Kashmir problem will be solved with time just like in Punjab or Assam when some morons will understand that they can't out gun IA in firepower and resources and India needs Afghanistan for passage to Central Asia and the Port India is gonna use in Iran, also a military base or some kind of military presence in Afghanistan in the future won't hurt

 

[Omar1984]

10 years back, Kashmir was boiling and India had 0% scope in Afghanistan now things have changed and I believe India should build on the same, Kashmir problem will be solved with time just like in Punjab or Assam when some morons will understand that they can't out gun IA in firepower and resources and India needs Afghanistan for passage to Central Asia and the Port India is gonna use in Iran, also a military base or some kind of military presence in Afghanistan in the future won't hurt

India will leave Afghanistan the exact same day America leaves Afghanistan because Afghan Taliban always supported Jihad in Kashmir.

India shouldve spent all that money feeding millions of its poor people than building a port for Iran. Oh well, maybe Iran can use the port to carry goods to Tehran. Still it wont benefit India in any way

Even U.S. has trouble keeping its military base in Afghanistan and here indians are dreaming of setting a military base in Afghanistan