Autonomy Under Indian Constitution: An Old Pragmatic Approach To Kashmir or a Recipe for Disaster?

[Joe Shearer]

Grant a large degree of autonomy to J&K: Chidambaram
PTI | Jul 20, 2016, 09.44 PM IST

NEW DELHI: Proposing a radical solution to the situation in Kashmir, senior Congress leader and former home minister P Chidambaram on Wednesday night advocated restoring the "grand bargain" under which Kashmir had acceded to India by granting a large degree of autonomy, warning that otherwise the country will have to pay a "heavy price".

"I think their approach is wrong. We have ignored the grand bargain under which Kashmir acceded to India. I think we broke faith, we broke promises and as a result we have paid a heavy price," he told Karan Thapar on India Today.

He said the best solution, according to him, was that New Delhi should give an assurance to the people of Kashmir that the "grand bargain" promised during the time of Kashmir's accession "will be honoured fully".

Chidambaram said, "I may be wrong, I may be right but what is necessary is to give the assurance that the grand bargain will be fully honoured. Let them (people of Kashmir) frame their own laws as much as possible and as long as it does not conflict with the Constitution.

"We have to assure that we will respect identity, history, culture, religion..."

Citing India's advice to Sri Lankan on devolution of asymmetric powers to Tamil areas of the north and east, the former minister said implement what we are preaching to Sri Lanka.

Chidambaram said the situation in Kashmir has been mishandled by successive governments in Srinagar and New Delhi.

"We (UPA government) did mishandle. But we corrected ourselves in 2010. Now, both the governments in Delhi and Srinagar mishandled (it) very, very badly," he said.

Asserting that Kashmir "required a unique political solution", Chidambaram blamed the ruling PDP-BJP alliance for the present crisis saying they (alliance) should have never come to power.

"The alliance itself is a grave provocation for the valley. It is a legitimate government. They have the numbers. The legitimacy of the government has not taken away the fact that these two partners forming government has given a sense of fear among people of Kashmir."

Asserting that 'Azadi' means different things to different people, Chidambaram said what is necessary is to give an assurance that grand bargain will be fully honoured.

"Let them frame their own laws as long as it does not conflict with the Constitution. As much as possible we have to assure that we will respect the identity, history, culture, religion.... and allow them to be part of India."

Asked if Prime Minister Narendra Modi can implement such a proposal as he is known as a doer, he said "I don't know what his fundamental beliefs are. If his fundamental belief is that India must be a majoritarian state whatever I said will be a complete waste on him."

He said that the decision of former Chief Minister Mufti Mohammed Sayeed to allign with the BJP was a "blot" on his political career. "It was a serious mistake," he said.

Chidambaram rued that for a long time the the Corps Commander of the Army was the overall incharge of security of Kashmir and not the chief minister or the director general of Jammu & Kashmir Police.

"... handing over security to defence ... making GOC virtually the overall command ... these shifts should not have happened ... it happened over the period. I found that GoC was overall incharge not CM or DGP ... but CM's writ does not run ... We pulled back considerably but there was no follow up," he said.

Chidambaram said when he was the home minister he wanted to move the Army and paramilitary forces to border areas, abolish the controversial AFSPA or at least amend it and make the state police overall incharge of law and order situation.

As many as 10,000 personnel of the forces were moved out. "However, it was not followed up," he said.

Chidambaram admitted that he could not push forward a proposal for withdrawal of AFSPA from parts of the state because of opposition from the defence establishment.
"I could not convince the defence establishment and political leadership. Opinion within the government was sharply divided. Political leadership could not overrule the defence opinion even though paramilitary forces came on board," he said.

He regretted that no follow up action was taken on the reports of the interlocutors for Kashmir appointed when he was the Home Minister.

"I think the interlocutors reports should have been acted upon. We have not implemented bulk of the recommendationm..," he said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...my-to-JK-Chidambaram/articleshow/53306302.cms

@Joe Shearer Tagging you for your comments sir. Merge it somewhere if need be.

@kaykay @Omega007 @Arsalan@Stephen Cohen @Levina @SrNair @Nair saab

I can only smile.

What else have I said, in post after post? Go back to the bargain, keep the pact, undo the morsel at a time subterfuge of decades, remove the dead hand of the central bureaucracy from the reins of power?

J&K is like another state of india and there shouldn't be much difference in it with other states

It is precisely and unmistakably in law and under our Constitution unlike any other state of India. And that is precisely and unmistakably why there is the necessity to keep our word and the sanctity of our Constitution.

Agreed. But then we can hear the counter-narrative. That is why have stuck it into Seniors Cafe.

I could not disagree more. Read A. G. Noorani for clearing the mind of our misconceptions.

 

[JanjaWeed]

Easy to make such statements when not in power. PC is just trying to add fuel to the fire by advocating greater autonomy! What is the limit to this 'grand bargain' within Indian constitution? There's never going to be an end to the wish list by the separatists, & this 'grand bargain' is never going to be grand enough for them!

Plausible solution would be the one from other side of extreme! How about doing away with article 370 & provide equal opportunity to Kashmir like any other state in India? Why deprive the state from developing with the help of external resources & ideas? This will be more beneficial to ordinary Kashmiris than allowing few elites to set the rules for the rest.

 

[Joe Shearer]

From members. Many members from India also fail to appreciate that the issue needs more of a political settlement instead of a perpetuation of the military solution which we use. Chidambaram has rued the power given to GOC 15 Corps directly, yet has aimed at Northern Army Commander Lt Gen KT Parnaik who refused to toe his line and concur to withdrawal of troops and AFSPA from valley, a gimmick by the gentleman at the time as Home Minister which was reminiscent of Gujral's foolishness of withdrawing forces from vale in 1997-98 period (by thinning out troops seeing decrease in militant activity saying that as bigger power and neighbour we need to be magnanimous or something to that effect), while absolutely keeping mum on the failure of the politicians to achieve a political settlement even after the interlocutors were sent to valley and also he has failed to justify the failure of UPA to reach a permanent agreement with Pakistan which was rumoured to be almost finalised with Musharraf.

Chidambaram was and will in future be, if he returns to power, a high-handed ruler: the memoirs of Subba Rao bear testimony to that.

But what he has said is independent of that, and is tainted if we club his statement with Gujral and other half-witted and addle-brained idiots.

In every case of a civil discontent culminating in armed uprising, commanders of the force of state who have been responsible for quelling the uprising have, if successful, been dependent on longer term success on the efforts of politicians in particular and of the civil administration in general to undo the conditions that led to the uprising in the first place. Look what we did with Sheikh Abdullah; spoilt child of the freedom struggle though he was, whose fault was it that he did not get a sharp warning when first he started going to the rulers of Pakistan direct for a settlement, without even consulting the Indians?
Why was his administration overthrown in such an outrageous manner?
Why was he replaced by a ridiculous, unrepresentative coxcomb?
Why did Delhi try to rule the Valley indirectly for decades after this?
Why were efforts not made to develop Kashmir to the same extent as other parts of India?
Who was responsible for the seventy-year old failure to make her earn a fortune through development of her hydel generation potential?
Why is the education level so poor?
Why does the vast majority of funds granted disappear without a ten percent survival on the surface?
Why did the centre delay in bringing Seshan's electoral reforms to the state?
Why was Farooq Abdullah brought back to power through crooking the elections, without allowing the dissidents to contest fairly?

I could go on, but the facts are clear.

The problem in Kashmir is not Pakistan. It is not the Hurriyat. It is not the obstinate refusal to be reasonable of the man in the street. It is not the Kashmir Police, or the CRPF, or the BSF, forget about the Indian Army. The problem in Kashmir is the dead hand of the bureaucracy in Delhi, and it is the infantile incompetence of minister after minister at the centre. And it is the total corruption and unreliability of the local politicians.

That's the main issue, Kashmiris want plebiscite and Indian thugs are trying to seduce them with lolly pops within Indian Constitution frame work.

Kashmiris don't want plebiscite, they want good governance and they want freedom to be ruled by the rule of law.

Not just removal of Pakistani forces from Azad Kashmir but indian forces from IOK also.
And UNO peace keeping forces shall br introduced in the Valley so that plebiscite could take place.

Stick to the Resolution and its terms and conditions. Thinking up new innovations is not going to work.

Indian attitude and intentions stops Pakistan. Pakistan has never declared that it won't withdraw forces from Azad Kashmir.

But First india should inform UNO that they are ready to hold plebiscite in Kashmir and then it will be the UNO peace keeping forces who will replace Pakistan's and Indian forces on both sides.

Yes, it has. At the meetings of the Plebiscite Commission: you are probably not even aware that the body existed and that it met and that Pakistan then proceeded to put a spoke in its wheels.

And the Resolution clearly mentions that Pakistan should withdraw totally, and India should withdraw partially, retaining enough troops to maintain law and order.

What you are suggesting is a new formula, imposed on the situation that the UN had then considered, and is precisely the way Pakistan has blocked a solution. By putting up her own set of terms and conditions after accepting an international body's settlement.

That will not solve any problem, because the separatists in Kashmir, the 'Sunni-Muslim segment of the Kashmir Valley' are NOT looking for greater autonomy, they are wanting to get out of the Indian union and in all probability wanting to join their religious brotherhood of Pakistan.

Rather, it will only embolden the separatists and encourage them to launch a more militant campaign of separatism.

Please understand that the problem may appear to be a political one, but at its core it is a religious one, they are looking forward to create their own little 'Khilafat', an Islamic state there, giving them greater control of the state's political matters and administration, greater autonomy, won't at all address the real problem.

Today that is what it has become.

This is not what it was.

The symptoms have become the disease.

Though you are saying that; but check Bhutto's provocative speech probably in 1989, it clearly highlights the religious fault line, it is an unfinished business of 1947 at least in the minds of the Pakistanis and the Muslims in Kashmir Valley. Check her every word:

First, that UN resolution was non-binding in nature.(1)

Second, Pakistan has already given away any option of UN intervention by signing the Simla agreement and agreeing to bilateral solution of all pending issues.(2)

Third, Pakistan not only required to withdraw all the security forces from Pak occupied Kashmir region, but they are also required to remove all the people who have settled in P-O-K after 1947, and the part they have given away to China (Shaksgam valley) also needs to be a part of the plebiscite.(3)

Fourth, India has the legal document of accession of Kashmir, it is Pakistan that is technically an illegal occupier of the parts of Kashmir that is in their control, so I think only Pakistan needs to remove its troops from P-O-K, India need not remove its troops from its part till the results of that supposed plebiscite go against India. Maybe @Joe Shearer can give us a clearer picture on this point.(4)

(1) Yes. India has voluntarily surrendered every advantage, and still faces criticism for blocking a settlement.
(2) The most cynical act by the most cynical family of Pakistan. ZAB signed away any invocation of external or multilateral institutions, BB fanned the flames that her father had doused, and Baby B is breathing fumes already, and practising flaming.
(3) Pakistan is not 'required' to do these things, but they are the obvious things that ought to be done.
(4) Technically impeccable, but this will never be accepted.

Easy to make such statements when not in power. PC is just trying to add fuel to the power by advocating greater autonomy! What is the limit to this 'grand bargain' within Indian constitution? There's never going to be an end to the wish list by the separatists, & this 'grand bargain' is never going to be grand enough for them!

Plausible solution would be the one from other side of extreme! How about doing away with article 370 & provide equal opportunity to Kashmir like any other state of India? Why deprive the state from developing with the help of external resources & ideas? This will be more beneficial to ordinary Kashmiris than allowing few elites to set the rules for the rest.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to do away with Article 370.

Please read Noorani and work it out for yourself.

 

[Hellfire]

I can only smile
.

And that is why have tagged you on it sir!

Thought that you shall have a thread wherein you can collate your thoughts and give an insight to the issue for ignorants like me (and this piece of news provided an opportunity) and the alternative approach, wherein the wishes of the people of Kashmir are managed in accordance with Indian principles of democracy and constitutional guarantees accorded them (which somehow do not differ that greatly from even the 6th Schedule of Indian constitution as valid for North Eastern sister states, except for the governance model as granted to J&K). Your eloquence and knowledge on the said subject made me tag you as it is infuriating to see both Pakisani and Indian members messing up the Kashmir issue with their own perception of what the problem of a Kashmiri is. The jingoism and nationalism obfuscates the facts as they stand.

@Rain Man The video you have posted, it was at the start of the JKLF led movement of armed struggle, which saw the religious intonations being used to exhort an armed struggle led by Kashmiris and backed by cadres being shifted in from Afghanistan, it was not sunni led or divided on sunni-shia lines as is now (hence my contention of 2007 as the year of changeover). It was an attempt to mobilize the Islamic volunteers from the world over to fight a jihad in Kashmir, a direct offshoot of the perceived success of ISI and Pakistan in Afghanistan.

They tried to replicate the model without realizing that the conditions were different - in Afghanistan there was a foreign power which was increasingly being resented by the local population (and indirectly by Afghan National Army) and in J&K, it was India, which was and still is not seen as an enemy by majority of Kashmiris.

 

[war&peace]

The only solution of Kashmir's problem is the unconditional withdrawal of Indian army and plebiscite under auspices of UNO.

 

[Hellfire]

Chidambaram was and will in future be, if he returns to power, a high-handed ruler: the memoirs of Subba Rao bear testimony to that.

But what he has said is independent of that, and is tainted if we club his statement with Gujral and other half-witted and addle-brained idiots.

In every case of a civil discontent culminating in armed uprising, commanders of the force of state who have been responsible for quelling the uprising have, if successful, been dependent on longer term success on the efforts of politicians in particular and of the civil administration in general to undo the conditions that led to the uprising in the first place.

Look what we did with Sheikh Abdullah; spoilt child of the freedom struggle though he was, whose fault was it that he did not get a sharp warning when first he started going to the rulers of Pakistan direct for a settlement, without even consulting the Indians?

Why was his administration overthrown in such an outrageous manner?

Why was he replaced by a ridiculous, unrepresentative coxcomb?

Why did Delhi try to rule the Valley indirectly for decades after this?

Why were efforts not made to develop Kashmir to the same extent as other parts of India?

Who was responsible for the seventy-year old failure to make her earn a fortune through development of her hydel generation potential?

Why is the education level so poor?

Why does the vast majority of funds granted disappear without a ten percent survival on the surface?

Why did the centre delay in bringing Seshan's electoral reforms to the state?

Why was Farooq Abdullah brought back to power through crooking the elections, without allowing the dissidents to contest fairly?

I could go on, but the facts are clear.

The problem in Kashmir is not Pakistan. It is not the Hurriyat. It is not the obstinate refusal to be reasonable of the man in the street. It is not the Kashmir Police, or the CRPF, or the BSF, forget about the Indian Army. The problem in Kashmir is the dead hand of the bureaucracy in Delhi, and it is the infantile incompetence of minister after minister at the centre. And it is the total corruption and unreliability of the local politicians.

Regarding Chidambaram, you are indeed polite!!! Chidambaram tried to ram down AFSPA withdrawal without consideration of the inputs of GOC 15 Corps and against the better advice of even the Kashmir hands in MHA. In Gen Bikram Singh he had a pliable Chief who was amiable to the suggestions (for apparent reasons; his ascent as Chief was not a clean affair howsoever one may justify it; the gentleman had an Intelligence observation on account of his daughter-in-law being a Pakistani citizen). It was only on the insistence of the Northern Army Commander Lt Gen KT Parnaik (his coursemate) who bluntly refused to back the move, that the views of the Northern Army Commander became important.

The questions you have raised above will be difficult for any of our die hard patriot countrymen to answer. They are difficult as there are simply no reasons which can justify the long list of stupidities. I really want our fellow countrymen to ponder on these questions. Until and unless we get our own house in order, we are bound to get a drubbing everytime and at every forum.

The only solution of Kashmir's problem is the unconditional withdrawal of Indian army and plebiscite under auspices of UNO.

You signed that away in 1972 when you signed the Simla Agreement, the UN resolutions became null and void as you also accepted to settle it bilaterally.

Even if that is taken as a solution, my previous posts can be read by you .. will Pakistan undertake an unilateral withdrawal from all territories, remove Chitral from NWFP and re-incorporate territories of erstwhile princely state of J&K ceded to China as part of boundary settlement in Northern Areas?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Regarding Chidambaram, you are indeed polite!!! Chidambaram tried to ram down AFSPA withdrawal without consideration of the inputs of GOC 15 Corps and against the better advice of even the Kashmir hands in MHA. In Gen Bikram Singh he had a pliable Chief who was amiable to the suggestions (for apparent reasons; his ascent as Chief was not a clean affair howsoever one may justify it; the gentleman had an Intelligence observation on account of his daughter-in-law being a Pakistani citizen). It was only on the insistence of the Northern Army Commander Lt Gen KT Parnaik (his coursemate) who bluntly refused to back the move, that the views of the Northern Army Commander became important.

The questions you have raised above will be difficult for any of our die hard patriot countrymen to answer. They are difficult as there are simply no reasons which can justify the long list of stupidities. I really want our fellow countrymen to ponder on these questions. Until and unless we get our own house in order, we are bound to get a drubbing everytime and at every forum.

What gets my goat is that we had the moral high ground and pissed it away. Thanks to half-wit politicians being too clever by half.

An aside: everyone knows about Bikram Singh's daughter-in-law. There was a routine report, which was met with mild amusement and even milder regret. What people were worried about was whether or not JJ Singh had cleared a path for him, using the date hungama. Anyway, VK Singh turned out to be such a shit that those worried people became more worried about his staying on, and more sudden troop movements in the middle of the night. That, on top of everything else, was difficult to contain. Towards the end, there was some very serious bad weather headed his way.

 

[Hellfire]

What gets my goat is that we had the moral high ground and pissed it away. Thanks to half-wit politicians being too clever by half.

An aside: everyone knows about Bikram Singh's daughter-in-law. There was a routine report, which was met with mild amusement and even milder regret. What people were worried about was whether or not JJ Singh had cleared a path for him, using the date hungama. Anyway, VK Singh turned out to be such a shit that those worried people became more worried about his staying on, and more sudden troop movements in the middle of the night. That, on top of everything else, was difficult to contain. Towards the end, there was some very serious bad weather headed his way.

We digress. Sorry I moved off. The troop movements were a joke in comparision (will exchange notes someday sir) to what transpired after Antony gave orders for mobilization post Hemraj incidence. Chief comes out from his discussion with the RM and shortly PA had mobilized; a two star flagger in MO was 'escorted' subsequently.

You and I know that 35 is sufficient to wrap up any government in India and 9 and 22 sit in Meerut if need be.

@LadyFinger You can have an interesting conversation with @Joe Shearer ... he has managed to rile Indian members and also Pakistani with his bipartisan and dispassionate analysis as also eloquence and erudition on Kashmir. Just don't quote propaganda figures or baseless nonsense, my request ... @Joe Shearer sir an enlightened member who is willing to listen to counter narratives other than official nonsense, may I request your indulgence? Thanks

 

[Joe Shearer]

And that is why have tagged you on it sir!

Thought that you shall have a thread wherein you can collate your thoughts and give an insight to the issue for ignorants like me (and this piece of news provided an opportunity) and the alternative approach, wherein the wishes of the people of Kashmir are managed in accordance with Indian principles of democracy and constitutional guarantees accorded them (which somehow do not differ that greatly from even the 6th Schedule of Indian constitution as valid for North Eastern sister states, except for the governance model as granted to J&K). Your eloquence and knowledge on the said subject made me tag you as it is infuriating to see both Pakisani and Indian members messing up the Kashmir issue with their own perception of what the problem of a Kashmiri is. The jingoism and nationalism obfuscates the facts as they stand.

@Rain Man The video you have posted, it was at the start of the JKLF led movement of armed struggle, which saw the religious intonations being used to exhort an armed struggle led by Kashmiris and backed by cadres being shifted in from Afghanistan, it was not sunni led or divided on sunni-shia lines as is now (hence my contention of 2007 as the year of changeover). It was an attempt to mobilize the Islamic volunteers from the world over to fight a jihad in Kashmir, a direct offshoot of the perceived success of ISI and Pakistan in Afghanistan.

They tried to replicate the model without realizing that the conditions were different - in Afghanistan there was a foreign power which was increasingly being resented by the local population (and indirectly by Afghan National Army) and in J&K, it was India, which was and still is not seen as an enemy by majority of Kashmiris.

Very precisely put.

We digress. Sorry I moved off. The troop movements were a joke in comparision (will exchange notes someday sir) to what transpired after Antony gave orders for mobilization post Hemraj incidence. Chief comes out from his discussion with the RM and shortly PA had mobilized; a two star flagger in MO was 'escorted' subsequently.

You and I know that 35 is sufficient to wrap up any government in India and 9 and 22 sit in Meerut if need be.

@LadyFinger You can have an interesting conversation with @Joe Shearer ... he has managed to rile Indian members and also Pakistani with his bipartisan and dispassionate analysis as also eloquence and erudition on Kashmir. Just don't quote propaganda figures or baseless nonsense, my request ... @Joe Shearer sir an enlightened member who is willing to listen to counter narratives other than official nonsense, may I request your indulgence? Thanks

I'm going off-line with this one.

 

[Nilgiri]

The only solution of Kashmir's problem is the unconditional withdrawal of Indian army and plebiscite under auspices of UNO.

The only solutions for Pakistan are as follows:

1) Tear up the simla agreement (so the UN can be involved in the first place) and be prepared for the other consequences of that

2) Review the UN resolution thoroughly and withdraw from its occupied side of Kashmir (stipulated as the FIRST cause by the resolution)

3) You will then have passed the ball to India (which then has the onus to conduct the plebiscite). Right now its still in your court. If you want to keep the ball in your court and preach other "solutions" that do not involve points 1 and 2.....it is a fools errand.

Or you can be mature and talk bilaterally as stipulated by the Simla agreement and leave the UN and its resolution out of it altogether (since that can at least mean Pakistan can keep troops on its side)....but you will have to get preconceived solutions out of your head for that to work.

 

[war&peace]

You signed that away in 1972 when you signed the Simla Agreement, the UN resolutions became null and void as you also accepted to settle it bilaterally.

Even if that is taken as a solution, my previous posts can be read by you .. will Pakistan undertake an unilateral withdrawal from all territories, remove Chitral from NWFP and re-incorporate territories of erstwhile princely state of J&K ceded to China as part of boundary settlement in Northern Areas?

First it has be to a principle agreement on plebiscite and all the steps need to be bilateral. However the modalities can discussed afterwards through committees under a commission.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Rain Man
@JanjaWeed
@hellfire

A quick summary of Noorani on 370.

I am saying this from memory, as I haven't unpacked even my ready-use books after shifting out of NALSAR to Alwal.

Pointwise:

1. The Maharaja signed over ONLY Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communications to India through his accession letter.
2. He asked that a constituent assembly of his state subjects should form a constitution for the state, and that the constitution would decide where the other administrative heads should go.
3. The Indian Constitution makers - the Indian Constituent Assembly, which met earlier than the J&K State constituent assembly - made allowance for this by stating in Article 370 that nothing in the State List could be transferred to the Concurrent List or the Central List, without the concurrence of the J&K State Legislature.
4. It allowed for the J&K State Assembly to dissolve or withdraw Article 370, after defining the State subjects.
5. The J&K Constitution calls J&K an integral part of India, defines the state subjects as all those not signed away by the Maharaja, and dissolves itself, rather than adjourning sine die.
6. So Article 370 can be taken out by the J&K constituent assembly only, and it no longer exists!!!

First it has be to a principle agreement on plebiscite and all the steps need to be bilateral. However the modalities can discussed afterwards through committees under a commission.

LOL.

That was what the UN tried to do in 1948, and for which the committee sat. And that was what Pakistan effortlessly stopped in its tracks by refusing to cooperate with it.

 

[JanjaWeed]

The only solutions for Pakistan are as follows:

1) Tear up the simla agreement (so the UN can be involved in the first place) and be prepared for the other consequences of that

2) Review the UN resolution thoroughly and withdraw from its occupied side of Kashmir (stipulated as the FIRST cause by the resolution)

3) You will then have passed the ball to India (which then has the onus to conduct the plebiscite). Right now its still in your court. If you want to keep the ball in your court and preach other "solutions" that do not involve points 1 and 2.....it is a fools errand.

Or you can be mature and talk bilaterally as stipulated by the Simla agreement and leave the UN and its resolution out of it altogether (since that can at least mean Pakistan can keep troops on its side)....but you will have to get preconceived solutions out of your head for that to work.

This interaction comes to my mind whenever I hear people talk about UN resolution, plebiscite & all that malarkey.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Rain Man
@JanjaWeed
@hellfire

A quick summary of Noorani on 370.

I am saying this from memory, as I haven't unpacked even my ready-use books after shifting out of NALSAR to Alwal.

Pointwise:

1. The Maharaja signed over ONLY Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communications to India through his accession letter.
2. He asked that a constituent assembly of his state subjects should form a constitution for the state, and that the constitution would decide where the other administrative heads should go.
3. The Indian Constitution makers - the Indian Constituent Assembly, which met earlier than the J&K State constituent assembly - made allowance for this by stating in Article 370 that nothing in the State List could be transferred to the Concurrent List or the Central List, without the concurrence of the J&K State Legislature.
4. It allowed for the J&K State Assembly to dissolve or withdraw Article 370, after defining the State subjects.
5. The J&K Constitution calls J&K an integral part of India, defines the state subjects as all those not signed away by the Maharaja, and dissolves itself, rather than adjourning sine die.
6. So Article 370 can be taken out by the J&K constituent assembly only, and it no longer exists!!!

LOL.

That was what the UN tried to do in 1948, and for which the committee sat. And that was what Pakistan effortlessly stopped in its tracks by refusing to cooperate with it.

Can't the constitution be amended through the 2/3rds majority clause (in each house independently) through article 368 which comprises addition, variation and repeal of any previous provision?

 

[war&peace]

LOL.

That was what the UN tried to do in 1948, and for which the committee sat. And that was what Pakistan effortlessly stopped in its tracks by refusing to cooperate with it.

Why would Pakistan not cooperate? It does not make any sense. Pakistan has always maintained that Kashmir issue needs to be resolved as per wishes of the people of Kashmir. Whether to want to join India or Pakistan. This has been the official stance.