You are here mixing things up & showing ignorance from the ground realities
Are you short of arguments ... ???
Pakistan categorically rejected the resolution of 21st April, 1948. All your own presentations reveal that. I even posted the letter of rejection.
1- You have quoted in your
post # 182 the Letter of Sir Zafar Ullah Khan (S/735) dated 30 April 1948:
For which I replied:
Sir Zafar Ullah in his letter dated 30 April 1948, rightly objected at Article 1(A), as at that time as no Truce was agreed between India and Pakistan, so unilateral withdraw was not possible.
further I have shown you the the Indian objections as under:
But UN Security Council
rejected the objections & concerns of both of the governments of India & Pakistan under the resolution of
3 June 1948
I posted a different letter of Sir Zaffar Ullah in a different context replying to your another point, read it again that might clear you up a little bit.
The resolution is therefore irrelevant,
Indian delusion.
forget about Pakistan obeying it.
Are any of the Tribesmen present in Azad Kashmir .... ???
how conveniently you ignored my question raised
previously .....
As per the UN resolution Pakistan had to facilitate the withdrawal of Tribals and Pakistan national who were generally not the resident there, plz tell me any tribal is there .... ???
The relevant resolutions are the one passed at Security Council on 13th Aug, 1948
Resolution of 13 Aug 1948 was adopted by UN
commission for India and Pakistan
-clarification of which, not of 21 April, 1948, was being sought by Zafarulla Khan in that letter -
Exactly, I don't know how you implied earlier that the attached letter is in reply of 21 April resolution, in para 6th it is clearly mention that letter was seeking clarification regarding the 13th Aug 1948 resolution of the UN commission
And Interesting thing to be noted here that commission agreed that "The resolution does not contemplate the '
DISARMENT or
DISBANDING' of
AZAD KASHMIR FORCES'.
and the one passed on 5th January, 1949. These are the only two resolutions that were accepted by both India and Pakistan in entirety.
The very first clause of 5 Jan 1949 resolution states:
I am seriously unable to grasp the logic of your argument that India & Pakistan only agreed to '2 resolutions' adopted by
UN commission for India & Pakistan, which was formed under the resolutions of UN security council (21 April 1948 in among one of those resolutions), but not with the resolution of 21 April 1948; in short it is a behaviour similar to:
'
BAAP SE NAFRAT, OLAAYAD SE PYAR'
I have already shown in this post that UN security council
had rejected the concerns and objection of both Governments in one of its resolution of 3 Jun 1948
And pursuant to these two resolutions cease fire was negotiated and finally codified as Karachi Agreement 1949, in July that year.
Agreed now concentrate on dates
1- Truce Agreement
13 Aug 1948
2- Karachi Agreement
27 Jul 1949
Both were facilitated by UN Commission for India & Pakistan, in Truce agreement It was decided that Pakistan will withdraw its forces along with Tribesmen & other Pakistani National who were not the resident there.
Pakistan agreed to that and facilitate the withdrawal of Tribesmen and Pakistan National; but as highlighted earlier in this post In respond to Sir Zafar Ullah Letter dated
6 Sep 1948 Commission Clarify that
"
The resolution does not Contemplate the DISARMENT or DISBANDING' of AZAD KASHMIRFORCES'.
Under the Karachi agreement dated 27 July 1949, India agreed with Pakistan's right of Troops deployment at Ceasefire Line for Defensive purpose
I have mention its number of time previously and in this thread as well, once again check the Karachi Agreement.
As per the clause 3 presence of Pakistani troops at the Ceasefire line is a separate issue not related to Part-II of the 13 Aug 1948 resolution known as Truce Agreement.
Secondly, keep in mind that Karachi agreement was signed almost after the one year of Truce agreement, which mean at time of signing of Karachi agreement under the facilitation of UN commission for India - Pakistan,
Indian government didn't term or question the presence of Pakistani troops as the violation of truce agreement or any of the resolution of UN Security Council regarding Kashmir.
but now Indians to score points adopt this stance which is not correct, even according to the circumstantial evidence as stated above,
further note that in 1950 Indian government negotiated with Sir Owen Dixon about the different the proposals regarding the Plebiscite in Kashmir (Sir Owen Dixon Letter to UN Security Council President)
The relevant part of the resolution of 13th Aug, 1948:
PART II
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 Pakistan 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 Pakistan 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
Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A2 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
Pakistan forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the
Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the 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 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 their power to make it publicly known that
peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human and political rights will be
guaranteed. [
Link]
Pakistan is in agreement to this on principle grounds, but as stated earlier presence of Pakistani troops at Cease fire line / LOC is not the violation of Truce agreement, other than this Tribals had withdrawn from Kashmir after the Truce Agreement.
Clearly - to those who have rudimentary understanding of English - UN required complete withdrawal of Pakistani forces, along with her citizens, from the territory they were occupying and hand over administration to the Local Authority. Wherease India was allowed to remain where she was, although with reduced strength.
The fact that Pak Army is still within P0K and a large part of P0K is still being administered by Pakistan, is a direct violation of the resolution that Pakistan had accepted to fulfill.
Indian could not used the presence of Pakistani troops at the Cease Fire Line / LOC (as per Karachi agreement ) as the base of their refusal of Plebiscite.
Unfortunately I don't know 'Sanskrit' otherwise I would have presented my opinion in that which might be understandable to Indian members, as far as english is concern i think my replies are very much clear & understandable 'to those who have rudimentary understanding of English'
What 'truth' are you talking of? Can you be a little less cryptic?
read my reply in response of your VISA argument which was not directly related to this debate but brought it in this discussion .....
