Geography of Kashmir

[ghazi52]

Geography of Kashmir

 

[Rusty]

Kashmir only has 2 geographies.
Freedom and Oppression.
Everyone knows which is which.

 

[ghazi52]

 

[Agnihotra]

Kashmiri
Dogra
Ladaki
Gilgiti
Balti
Punjabi(Azad Kashmir/AJK)

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

Geography of Kashmir

Gilgit/ Baltistan were seperate princely states. Nothing to do with Kashmir

 

[Path-Finder]

when is CoK being freed? any Indian member?

 

[jamahir]

Three pilots arrested ??

 

[Cobra Arbok]

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Cobra Arbok
@jamahir

Please look at the first post, with the map.

1. West Jammu, that declared itself as Azad Kashmir, has been coloured the same as Gilgit;
2. Gilgit and Baltistan have been similarly clubbed together, and that is anomalous; the ethnicity was different, at the time;
3. There is no Pir Panjal Peak; there is the Pir Panjal range, and there is the Pir Panjal Pass, a pass within the Pir Panjal range along with other strategic locations such as the Haji Pir Pass, the Banihal Pass, and, much further south-east, Rohtang La. Zoji La also belongs here, and is a most strategic pass.
4. There is no point location named Ladakh; there is the region of Ladakh, one of the wazirats of the Maharaja, and its capital city, Leh.
5. Baltistan today is divided into two, one in Pakistani occupation, forming part of their so-called Northern Area, centred on Skardu, one administered by India, centred on Kargil.
6. Aksai Chin is in Chinese occupation, but truthfully should never have been shown as Kashmiri. It is a long story, and sordid. One of the few blemishes on Nehru's record.

Please ignore the ill-educated hyper-patriots who claim that Gilgit-Baltistan were not part of the princely state of Kashmir. No point in arguing with them, just ignore them.

I write this solely for your edification, and shall ignore any further comment by anyone further to this.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Geography of Kashmir

Indian lies and propaganda

Pakistan didn't cede any territory to China in 1963.

To quote the famous Indian scholar A G Noorani: Almost every scholar holds that, to the contrary, it was Pakistan which acquired 750 sq. miles of administered territory.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/what...-know-the-sino-pak-boundary-agreement.310842/

Source please

Please ignore the ill-educated hyper-patriots who claim that Gilgit-Baltistan were not part of the princely state of Kashmir. No point in arguing with them, just ignore them.

Sir, waiting for you ( since Sept 5, 2017) to refute this position :

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.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Indian lies and propaganda

Pakistan didn't cede any territory to China in 1963.

To quote the famous Indian scholar A G Noorani: Almost every scholar holds that, to the contrary, it was Pakistan which acquired 750 sq. miles of administered territory.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/what...-know-the-sino-pak-boundary-agreement.310842/



Source please



Sir, waiting for you ( since Sept 5, 2017) to refute this position :

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.

Indian census. Should have mentioned that, my apologies. However, I did not use the official map because it includes GB and AJK as a part of Jammu and Kashmir, which seems to trigger many members here.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Indian census. Should have mentioned that, my apologies. However, I did not use the official map because it includes GB and AJK as a part of Jammu and Kashmir, which seems to trigger many members here.

The map you have posted shows Leh as >90% Buddhist.
As per 2011 Census, Buddhists made up 66.4% of the population of Leh district.
Which Indian census are you referring to?