China-Pakistan economic corridor violates India’s territorial integrity: India to UN

[MultaniGuy]

PART II
TRUCE AGREEMENT

Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as
outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission.

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Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A2 hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the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the Pakistan forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the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.

C.

(1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.


PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/uncom1.htm


The Indian representatives did not accept any demilitarization plans proposed by the Commission, therefore no Truce Agreement could be concluded.

Pakistani representatives on the other hand had not only accepted those plans but also made it clear to the Commission that they were ready to begin withdrawing their troops as soon as the Commission notified them.

But the Commission never notified Pakistan as India didn't accept any plan proposed by the UN

The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement

Hope that helps

Ignore the Indian buffoons here. These so called Indian internet warriors have not read the UN resolutions themselves on the Kashmir dispute.

They are idiots.

It was India that took the matter first to the UN. And when it became clear they would lose Kashmir, they backed out of the United Nations. Hypocrites they are.

 

[axisofevil]

India has a point..... you can't build anything thru disputed areas......

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Indian claim over Gilgit Baltistan (GB) is legally invalid.

At the time of the alleged accession to India, Kashmir was, in effect, divided into three distinct sectors: Azad Kashmir, "Legal" Kashmir and the Gilgit region. (Now GB)


The Maharaja did NOT exercise sovereignty over Gilgit Region, which constituted one-third of Kashmir. By the 1890s, it was the British Agent at Gilgit who wielded the real authority there. In 1935, the British leased Gilgit from Kashmir for sixty years, but surrendered their lease on the eve of partition." In theory, sovereignty reverted to Kashmir, but the Maharaja was never able to make this sovereignty effective in any way. When the Maharaja sent a governor to Gilgit, the Gilgit Scouts imprisoned him and turned the territory over to Pakistan. In light of this fact, it is clear that the Maharaja did not perform the activities of a territorial sovereign in the Gilgit region.

As such, the Maharaja had never exercised sovereignty over the region, and as per international law, could not transfer more rights than he possessed. Therefore, India did not receive the Gilgit region, now possessed by Pakistan, under the Instrument of Accession



Under International Law, A state can intentionally acquire sovereignty over any such territory that is not under the sovereignty of another state. The occupied territory must have, been terra nullius, without owner, and the occupation must have been real or "effective." ... Effective occupation occurs when there is an announced intention to acquire the territory, and actual settlement or occupation with the assertion of governmental authority has taken place.


The British surrendered their lease on the eve of partition, the Gilgit region was a terra nullius. At the time of accession, under the August 1947 Standstill Agreement, Pakistan alone was responsible for administering services in Kashmir such as the post, telegraph and railways. These services were the beginning of Pakistan's establishment of government authority over the region. This process was completed after the territory was transferred to Pakistan by the Gilgit Scouts. Since this time, Pakistan has claimed the Gilgit region, formerly a terra nullius, as part of its territory, keeping it beyond the control of the Azad Kashmir authorities and making it an integral part of Pakistan. In doing so, Pakistan has established governmental control sufficient to provide security to life and property. Thus, Pakistan effectively occupies the Gilgit region to the exclusion of India.



Pakistan's claim on GB is legally valid and justified. However, if (and when) needed, Pakistan is ready to hold a referendum in GB as well.

Thank you for the information, brother.

PART II
TRUCE AGREEMENT

Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as
outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission.

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.

C.

(1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.


PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/uncom1.htm


The Indian representatives did not accept any demilitarization plans proposed by the Commission, therefore no Truce Agreement could be concluded.

Pakistani representatives on the other hand had not only accepted those plans but also made it clear to the Commission that they were ready to begin withdrawing their troops as soon as the Commission notified them.

But the Commission never notified Pakistan as India didn't accept any plan proposed by the UN

The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement

Hope that helps

Great work.

Indians are going to cry and scream, but they can't do much when facts are presented to them.

 

[Rusty]

Sure - follow the agreed upon rules and we will hold a plebiscite.



It is amazing how often and how easily some of you lie or seem utterly ignorant.

https://undocs.org/S/RES/47(1948)

This is the UN Document - look at the step by step process.

You people are the deluded liars.
I never said that that was not in the UN document.
I said that Pakistan never agreed to it.
You people however, signed a treaty with the Maharajah that you will hold a plebiscite and you never did.

 

[Jackdaws]

PART II
TRUCE AGREEMENT

Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as
outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission.

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.

C.

(1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or communique containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.


PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/uncom1.htm


The Indian representatives did not accept any demilitarization plans proposed by the Commission, therefore no Truce Agreement could be concluded.

Pakistani representatives on the other hand had not only accepted those plans but also made it clear to the Commission that they were ready to begin withdrawing their troops as soon as the Commission notified them.

But the Commission never notified Pakistan as India didn't accept any plan proposed by the UN

The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement

Hope that helps

Exactly! The first part of the truce agreement needs the immediate withdrawal of Pakistani troops since it constitutes a material change.

So what is the argument?

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Exactly! The first part of the truce agreement needs the immediate withdrawal of Pakistani troops since it constitutes a material change.

So what is the argument?

Do you think we are fools? Even a young child can see right through you.

You are butchering Kashmiris on your side, shooting at Kashmiris on our side, repeatedly attacking our checkposts, and bragging about fabricated sur-gik-kal istrikes.

Withdrawal will be done by both sides, at once, under UN supervision.

 

[Jackdaws]

Do you think we are fools? Even a young child can see right through you.

You are butchering Kashmiris on your side, shooting at Kashmiris on our side, repeatedly attacking our checkposts, and bragging about fabricated sur-gik-kal istrikes.

Withdrawal will be done by both sides, at once, under UN supervision.

I don't know whether you are fools or not. I am merely stating what is agreed upon by both sides which specifies that Pakistan needs to completely withdraw its troops and India needs to maintain a minimum force.

You can't change clauses because you feel like it.

You people are the deluded liars.
I never said that that was not in the UN document.
I said that Pakistan never agreed to it.
You people however, signed a treaty with the Maharajah that you will hold a plebiscite and you never did.

Of course Pakistan agreed to it. Don't make stuff up.

There isn't any, this @M. Sarmad made it up or read from some Pakistani source. The resolution only had the first pre-requisites, like withdrawal of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals from AJK and GB, then after UN verified these, India will reduce the troops to a minimum level and so on.

Yes. But if I have missed a point, I am happy to be corrected.

Pakistan actually had a very valid and legal case in Junagadh. I wonder why they didn't bother pursuing it.

 

[Rusty]

I don't know whether you are fools or not. I am merely stating what is agreed upon by both sides which specifies that Pakistan needs to completely withdraw its troops and India needs to maintain a minimum force.

You can't change clauses because you feel like it.


Of course Pakistan agreed to it. Don't make stuff up.


Yes. But if I have missed a point, I am happy to be corrected.

Pakistan actually had a very valid and legal case in Junagadh. I wonder why they didn't bother pursuing it.

your telling me that Pakistan agree to withdraw for no reason and then never did it?

Tell me, what possible benefit would Pakistan get from agreeing to that?

We are not Indians, we don't sign agreements and then not do them like you guys and the plebiscite.

India wanted Pakistan to withdraw, but we never agreed to withdraw.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

India raised the issue of Pakistan and China violating India's territorial integrity at the 39th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Ambassador Virander Paul, Deputy Permanent Representative of India to UN in Geneva on Friday brought to the attention of the Council the issue of an intervention made by Pakistan mentioning "China-Pakistan Economic Corridor" (CPEC) during a discussion on 'Report of the Working Group on the Right to Development'.


Ambassador Paul said that such an intervention went against the principles enshrined in UNGA Resolution 41/128. "Regarding the so-called 'China-Pakistan Economic Corridor', which is being projected as the flagship project of the 'Belt and Road Initiative' (BRI), the international community is well aware of India's position. No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity", he said.

Reaffirming India's commitment to the implementation of the 'Right to Development', the Indian diplomat said, "India shares the international community's desire for enhancing physical connectivity and believes that it should bring greater economic benefits to all in an equitable and balanced manner."

Earlier, the representative of Pakistan spoke of that country's multifaceted approach towards development, including structural reforms, investment-friendly policies and social safety nets for the vulnerable.

CPEC, according to the Pakistani representative, is a "key" regional initiative for connectivity and the shared prosperity of nations and was a practical example of the realization of the right to development by fuelling economic growth in the region. The representative tried to highlight that similar regional projects could promote international cooperation for development and operationalize the right to development.

For India, CPEC and the BRI (as CPEC is a part of China's BRI) are both violative of India's territorial integrity as the projects in CPEC run through Pakistan Occupied Territory (Azad Kashmir) which India claims as part of undivided Jammu and Kashmir which is an integral part of India.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/sto...rial-integrity-india-to-un-1340215-2018-09-15

Yet again? I thought objection to CPEC was a closed chapter when India became silent on this issue since last few months.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Exactly! The first part of the truce agreement needs the immediate withdrawal of Pakistani troops since it constitutes a material change.

So what is the argument?

Read again, carefully.

First a Truce Agreement had to be concluded/reached which was supposed to govern withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani troops ... It's details were to be made public, and then withdrawal would have followed.

But the Indian representatives didn't agree with the UN commission on the "terms and conditions" of the withdrawal (maximum number of troops, stages of withdrawal etc.) therefore the Commission didn't notify the Pakistani representatives and no withdrawal took place.

Do you get it now ??

I am merely stating what is agreed upon by both sides which specifies that Pakistan needs to completely withdraw its troops and India needs to maintain a minimum force.

And that "Minimum number" was to be decided between Indian Representatives and the UN Commission (read the UN Resolutions carefully). But no agreement was reached as India didn't accept the numbers proposed by the UN Commission and insisted on unreasonably high numbers instead !!

Pakistani had to begin withdrawing its forces once the Commission notified it regarding the terms and conditions of withdrawal ...

Pakistan was under no obligation to withdraw its forces unilaterally and unconditionally ...

 

[Jackdaws]

your telling me that Pakistan agree to withdraw for no reason and then never did it?

Tell me, what possible benefit would Pakistan get from agreeing to that?

We are not Indians, we don't sign agreements and then not do them like you guys and the plebiscite.

India wanted Pakistan to withdraw, but we never agreed to withdraw.

Yes - Pakistan agreed to withdraw. Read the UN Resolution. It then reneged. You need to answer why.

 

[Crystal-Clear]

Sure - follow the agreed upon rules and we will hold a plebiscite.
.

already following . .

 

[Jackdaws]

Read again, carefully.

First a Truce Agreement had to be concluded/reached which was supposed to govern withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani troops ... It's details were to be made public, and then withdrawal would have followed.

But the Indian representatives didn't agree with the UN commission on the "terms and conditions" of the withdrawal (maximum number of troops, stages of withdrawal etc.) therefore the Commission didn't notify the Pakistani representatives and no withdrawal took place.

Do you get it now ??



And that "Minimum number" was to be decided between Indian Representatives and the UN Commission (read the UN Resolutions carefully). But no agreement was reached as India didn't accept the numbers proposed by the UN Commission and insisted on unreasonably high numbers instead !!

Pakistani had to begin withdrawing its forces once the Commission notified it regarding the terms and conditions of withdrawal ...

Pakistan was under no obligation to withdraw its forces unilaterally and unconditionally ...

1. Can you give me the link to the said document regarding this? It would be something new for me.

2. From what I understand India insisted on 20,000 troops and 0 Pakistani troops. And the UN kept insisting on about 3-5k Pak troops.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Pakistani had to begin withdrawing its forces once the Commission notified it regarding the terms and conditions of withdrawal ...

Pakistan was under no obligation to withdraw its forces unilaterally and unconditionally ...

Exactly. I don’t understand the nonsensical demands of these Indian posters here.

It’s obvious to anyone that Indian forces would invade Pakistani Kashmir if unilateral demilitarization ever took place.

Our negotiators were well aware of this fact. This is how India took half of Kashmir in the first place, with deceit, under duress, and threat of force.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Who TF cares what Road sh..ters think heck the UN would not care its useless personally I think had it not been for the UN,Kashmir would have been solved a while while ago.India cant really do much here but this is just more media warfare and sadly on the PR and Media front they are kinda winning because of their strongly connected diaspora and frankly their shitty films as well