Army-set-to-roll-into-kashmir-to-restore-peace

[ebrahym]

Check out the shimla agreement plz

 

[zebra7]

Nope, first pakistan has to demilitarize, then india will remove majority of forces but will keep enough to defend another invasion by pakistan and only then will plebiscite be called for if UN is satisfied that there are no outsiders.
U have let punjabis settle in p0k, and given a pieace to china. While india has maintained the demographics thanks to section 370.
So the plebiscite is no longer viable.

Also according to the shimla agreement of 1972, kashmir is a bilateral issue. By calling for a plebiscite, you are breaking that agreement. So india will have the advantage and will be free from breaking all other agreements with u including the indus water treaty.
Thus this plebiscite cry u and ur govt keeps harping, well its just a cry. Pakistan knows pretty well it cant let the plebiscite happen otherwise they will be in deep shit. So they keep crying.

Small twist also. Since India was able to preserve the J&K population originality with Article 372, on the other hand Pakistan hadn't. So for the proper and fare plebiscite, only the original J&K residents from 1947 should be able to vote.

 

[Zibago]

Small twist also. Since India was able to preserve the J&K population originality with Article 372, on the other hand Pakistan hadn't. So for the proper and fare plebiscite, only the original J&K residents from 1947 should be able to vote.

Au contraire India setteled outsiders in Jammu and kashmir Pakistan,s populations has remained same well minus the hindus ofcourse

Nope, first pakistan has to demilitarize, then india will remove majority of forces but will keep enough to defend another invasion by pakistan and only then will plebiscite be called for if UN is satisfied that there are no outsiders.
U have let punjabis settle in p0k, and given a pieace to china. While india has maintained the demographics thanks to section 370.
So the plebiscite is no longer viable.

Also according to the shimla agreement of 1972, kashmir is a bilateral issue. By calling for a plebiscite, you are breaking that agreement. So india will have the advantage and will be free from breaking all other agreements with u including the indus water treaty.
Thus this plebiscite cry u and ur govt keeps harping, well its just a cry. Pakistan knows pretty well it cant let the plebiscite happen otherwise they will be in deep shit. So they keep crying.

Punjabis in Azad Kashmir proof
Or another rant?

 

[zebra7]

Au contraire India setteled outsiders in Jammu and kashmir Pakistan,s populations has remained same well minus the hindus ofcourse

Do you want to say, that the rest of the Pakistani could not buy land in Pakistani held kashmir and kindly give according to which article, rule, special provision.

 

[Zibago]

The first clause of the objective no. 1 reads as follows: “that the principles & purposes of the charter of United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.’’ So it begins by honoring the UN Charter without any exception. So, Simla reinforces the role of United Nations in the context of Pakistan & India, with Kashmir being no exception. The 2nd Clause, which India extrapolates, thus restricting Kashmir to bilateralism, indeed talks about solving issues bilaterally, but the sentence doesn’t end before it leaves the window open for other ways, by adding “or any other means’’. The Clause is as follows: “That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means, mutually agreed upon between them.’’ Now, we know that Simla agreement neither excludes the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir, nor does it limit Kashmir to bilateralism.
Well, this was one dimension to disprove the Indian claim about Simla agreement. Another angle to discredit the theory is more important, especially for those who know International Law. It runs counter to a standing principle of international relations which is set out in Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations (accepted by every Member of the United Nations, including India & Pakistan). The Article says: "In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail". So, no agreement- unilateral, bilateral or multilateral, about the issue for which resolutions have been passed by the UN, can supersede the UN resolutions. So, even if Simla agreement were to mean what India says, which by the way is not true either, it has no legal standing in front of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions.

Do you want to say, that the rest of the Pakistani could not buy land in Pakistani held kashmir and kindly give according to which article, rule, special provision.

No they cant its called the alienation of land law act you have to be a native of AjK to buy property that is one reason why big time housing projects by Pakistani tycoons like Malik Riaz are absent from AjK

 

[Mukunda Murthi Rao]

Punjabis in Azad Kashmir proof
Or another rant?

http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/archives/archives2007/kashmir20070306d.html

 

[OrionHunter]

ON Topic

The mix of political solution and iron hand tactics would do wonders under present conditions. Separatists needs to be dealt firmly but people also needs a bit of normalcy. It would make sense to relax curfew, ease the restriction and try to get back the businesses, shops and school/tution, bus services etc to operate normally. That posture will help much more.

Of course such moves would be resisted by elements who will create mischief.. need to deal with them firmly and ensure we can continue this back to normalcy roadmap.


Now, for some fun time...

Troll Mode On

No No No
J & K has 7,00,000 soldiers of IA stationed there to quash the freedom struggle .
This number was confirmed by Gen Musharaff
Presently with this article saying more Army men will move in, so this number should become officially 8,00,000 !!!

@hellfire - Pls note the number. This article now merits the review and upward revision of 7,00,000 Indian Army soldiers to 8,00,000. Now onwards pls dont question anyone who says such numbers

Troll Mode Off

Jeeez! 800,000 Indian Army in Kashmir? Lol! Do these Pakistanis even have the fainest clue about this highly exaggerated number? 800,000 troops means approx 53 Infantry divisions!! But India has a total of 40 divisions only which include Infantry divisions, Armored divisions, RAPID divisions, Mountain divisions, and Mechanised divisions! None of these except Mountain/Infantry divisions are in Kashmir which man the borders.

So then, according to Pakistani so called 'experts' and 'analysts' India should be having all the above divisions including armored and Mechanised divisions deployed in the Valley and more, which are busy committing 'genocide' in the Kashmir Valley! Lol!
These guys are beyond funny! Or stupid?

 

[Zibago]

http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/archives/archives2007/kashmir20070306d.html

Those are nothing but factually incorrect rants Alienation of land a t prevents settelments of outsiders in Azad Kashmir those living in Azad Kashmir are the same folks who inhabited this land for centuries well except kashmiri and afghan refugees

 

[Mukunda Murthi Rao]

The first clause of the objective no. 1 reads as follows: “that the principles & purposes of the charter of United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.’’ So it begins by honoring the UN Charter without any exception. So, Simla reinforces the role of United Nations in the context of Pakistan & India, with Kashmir being no exception. The 2nd Clause, which India extrapolates, thus restricting Kashmir to bilateralism, indeed talks about solving issues bilaterally, but the sentence doesn’t end before it leaves the window open for other ways, by adding “or any other means’’. The Clause is as follows: “That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means, mutually agreed upon between them.’’ Now, we know that Simla agreement neither excludes the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir, nor does it limit Kashmir to bilateralism.
Well, this was one dimension to disprove the Indian claim about Simla agreement. Another angle to discredit the theory is more important, especially for those who know International Law. It runs counter to a standing principle of international relations which is set out in Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations (accepted by every Member of the United Nations, including India & Pakistan). The Article says: "In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail". So, no agreement- unilateral, bilateral or multilateral, about the issue for which resolutions have been passed by the UN, can supersede the UN resolutions. So, even if Simla agreement were to mean what India says, which by the way is not true either, it has no legal standing in front of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the subcontinent so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their people.

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations.

(iii) That the prerequisite for reconciliation, good neighborliness and durable peace between them is a commitment by both the countries to peaceful coexistence respect for each others territorial integrity and sovereignty and noninterference in each others internal affairs, on the basis of equality and mutual benefit. That the basic issues and causes of conflict which have bedeviled the relations between the two countries for the last 25 years shall be resolved by peaceful means.

(v) That they shall always respect each others national unity, territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality.

(vi) That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, they will refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each other.



In order progressively to restore and normalize relations between the two countries step by step, it was agreed that:

(i) Steps shall be taken to resume communications, postal, telegraphic, sea, land, including border posts, and air links, including over flights.

(ii) Appropriate steps shall be taken to promote travel facilities for the nationals of the other country.

(iii) Trade and cooperation in economic and other agreed fields will be resumed as far as possible.

(iv) Exchange in the fields of science and culture will be promoted.

In this connection delegations from the two countries will meet from time to time to work out the necessary details.

In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the governments agree that:

(i) Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border.

(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.

(iii) The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this agreement and shall be completed within a period of 30 days thereof.

This agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.

Both governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto PresidentIslamic Republic of Pakistan

Indira Gandhi Prime MinisterIndia

Simla, the 2 July 1972.

— Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Indira Gandhi.[1]

So please check out the whole agreement instead of a selective reading
U have consistently failed the agreement by promoting insurgency and thr kargil war.

As far as ur argument for UN charter is concerned, it deals with the code of conduct between nations not the UN SC resolutions. Also it refers to other means if mutually agreed upon which india is not. Thus it is limited to bilateral negotiations only without interference by a third party.

Those are nothing but factually incorrect rants Alienation of land a t prevents settelments of outsiders in Azad Kashmir those living in Azad Kashmir are the same folks who inhabited this land for centuries well except kashmiri and afghan refugees

Will use ur own statement.
Can u back ur claim or is it a rant?

 

[Zibago]

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the subcontinent so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their people.

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

(i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations.

(iii) That the prerequisite for reconciliation, good neighborliness and durable peace between them is a commitment by both the countries to peaceful coexistence respect for each others territorial integrity and sovereignty and noninterference in each others internal affairs, on the basis of equality and mutual benefit. That the basic issues and causes of conflict which have bedeviled the relations between the two countries for the last 25 years shall be resolved by peaceful means.

(v) That they shall always respect each others national unity, territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality.

(vi) That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, they will refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each other.



In order progressively to restore and normalize relations between the two countries step by step, it was agreed that:

(i) Steps shall be taken to resume communications, postal, telegraphic, sea, land, including border posts, and air links, including over flights.

(ii) Appropriate steps shall be taken to promote travel facilities for the nationals of the other country.

(iii) Trade and cooperation in economic and other agreed fields will be resumed as far as possible.

(iv) Exchange in the fields of science and culture will be promoted.

In this connection delegations from the two countries will meet from time to time to work out the necessary details.

In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the governments agree that:

(i) Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border.

(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.

(iii) The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this agreement and shall be completed within a period of 30 days thereof.

This agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.

Both governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto PresidentIslamic Republic of Pakistan

Indira Gandhi Prime MinisterIndia

Simla, the 2 July 1972.

— Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Indira Gandhi.[1]

So please check out the whole agreement instead of a selective reading
U have consistently failed the agreement by promoting insurgency and thr kargil war.

As far as ur argument for UN charter is concerned, it deals with the code of conduct between nations not the UN SC resolutions. Also it refers to other means if mutually agreed upon which india is not. Thus it is limited to bilateral negotiations only without interference by a third party.



Will use ur own statement.
Can u back ur claim or is it a rant?

Section 4 of the AJK Alienation of Land Act 1995 (Bikrimi), no immovable property within Azad Kashmir could be transferred in favour of any non-state subject.
http://nation.com.pk/national/22-Jan-2013/no-pakistani-or-indian-can-buy-land-in-kashmir-watto-tells-na[URL]http://nasirlawsite.com/laws/ajkalr.htm[/URL]

 

[Mukunda Murthi Rao]

Section 4 of the AJK Alienation of Land Act 1995 (Bikrimi), no immovable property within Azad Kashmir could be transferred in favour of any non-state subject.
http://nation.com.pk/national/22-Ja...indian-can-buy-land-in-kashmir-watto-tells-nahttp://nasirlawsite.com/laws/ajkalr.htm

Alright, but can punjabi become a state sunbject of AJK if he stays there for a while?

 

[Zibago]

Alright, but can punjabi become a state sunbject of AJK if he stays there for a while?

I am not a law expert but there is law about only those who were nationals before 47 and Refugees from iok can become nationals.i dont know exact details of it
Even if a Punjabi stays for decades he will not be given ajk nationality (i am totally against it i want Bahria town in Mirpur )
Am i correct @django @krash ?

 

[hell9214]

Sweet and simple things fr our Pakistani babies they r in dreams that kashmir will get them from India nd u have to understand that now there was NT any power present in the whole world who take kashmir from India.... so stop saying anything about the things which r done by India in there states nd which ur own balochistan..

 

[Mukunda Murthi Rao]

I am not a law expert but there is law about only those who were nationals before 47 and Refugees from iok can become nationals.i dont know exact details of it
Even if a Punjabi stays for decades he will not be given ajk nationality (i am totally against it i want Bahria town in Mirpur )
Am i correct @django @krash ?

And what about GB?

 

[Zibago]

And what about GB?

The nationality laws are more or less same(have to be local no outsiders allowed to buy land) @unleashed @Mr.Meap but governence laws are different though now they are getting the same constitutional status of Azad Kashmir
That issue is a mini war b/w GB and AJK
Most GB,istanis want nothing to do with Kashnir amd they want to be not discussed in the Kashmir issue
They were an occupied part of an an un natural state the state of Kashmir was had multiple ethnicites and occupied a lot of regions from neighbouring states