How did Jammu and Kashmir become a part of India? 9 facts on Accession Day

[Lincoln]

I know. The UN Resolution was not worth the paper it was printed on. It had holes in it big enough for a herd of elephants to charge through. And sure enough India did. The fact was Kashmi was lost from the day Pakistan failed to do "Polo" on the day India did a "Polo" on Hyderabad. Rest is history ....


And you tell me whose fault was that? Sardar Patel was only doing his job, so was Nehru doing his job for India. But what the fcuk were our leaders like "Quaid-e-Millat" doing. Showing fists ......

Ps. And we have a bagh in Rawalpindi named after this loser "Quaid-e-Millat"

Whatever the title, a mistake doesn't downplay or undermine other works for Pakistan, this person was nonetheless a significant part of the movement which advocated for a separate homeland. Whatever mistakes the earlier leadership made, instead of shifting blame on them, it is our job to complete it. But a valuable lesson which we still can't get through our heads is to stop trusting UN and enemies with their papers and words.

 

[Politico]

Under light of the UN Resolution and the fact that Nehru himself said at that time they will grant the people of Kashmir there wish, that is what you would expect.

Indians are trying to downplay the rebellion of Kashmiri people as Pathan invasion to distort reality, they should ask their fellow country men who have visited Kashmir, they will find that people hate India, the national anthem of India is not given any respect in the universities and colleges and neither is the flag given a platform to be hoisted without disturbance.

Kashmir is not a lost cause though.

We are discussing the history of the Indian annexation of Kashmir, not the current day scenario in Kashmir. TBH I have traveled to Srinagar on at least 3 occasions. On every visit there I see a thriving tourism industry. I never heard a gunshot whilst there. Not that I am claiming that the people are happy under Indian rule. Neither am I disputing that they are.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Anmd even if these few SF guys had not been identified what exactly were they going to do? Liberate all of the valley? You been watching too many American movies. The real battle for Kashmir was fought with tanks clashing against tanks. And we failed.

 

[Maarkhoor]

Hindu raja facilitated Hindu Army to occupy a Muslim land.

British sold Jammu and Kashmir just for 75000 nanakshahi (probably gold currency).

Before Indian invasion Jammu also had Muslim majority but local Hindus with the help of Indian army started massacre and these people took refuge in my city Sialkot because Sialkot city and Jammu have only 4 km distance, nearly all Muslim resident of Jammu migrated to Sialkot. Now Indian army wants same thing in Kashmir too and recently they started to kill any young Muslim men by labelling them terrorist / freedom fighters.

 

[waz]

1. Pull out it's troops from AJK
2. Leave behind Indian Army to oversee the plebicite

A few things here, why would the Azad Kashmir regiment pull out of its native land? The troops stay as they are not classed as tribesman or Pakistani nationals 'not normally resident'.

The Indian army would be required to "reduce to a minimum strength required" in reference to paragraph A which states "the minimum strength required for the support of civil power in the maintenance of law and order'

So it's a token force that is also under strict rules one of which is;

"That the presence of troops should not afford any intimidation or appearance of intimation to the inhabitants of the state".

After such steps

"Personal recruited locally from each district should so far as possible be utilised for the establishment and maintenance of law and order".

So locals take over.

It's not ideal but it's not as damaging either.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

this person was nonetheless a significant part

I have done enough reading to know that only two peope really mattered in the Pakistan independance. Jinnah, Allama Iqbal and nehru. I might even place the Nehru first. Rest were clingers and expandable. Taking any of them out would not have changed the thrust of history.

 

[TMA]

Whatever the title, a mistake doesn't downplay or undermine other works for Pakistan, this person was nonetheless a significant part of the movement which advocated for a separate homeland. Whatever mistakes the earlier leadership made, instead of shifting blame on them, it is our job to complete it.

A mistake of this calibre cannot be forgotten and responsibility cannot be brushed under the carpet.
If a great surgeon does fantastic work for 20 years of his career and then he makes a mountain of a mistake such as removing the wrong organ...do you think he will be working independently? No. Suspended until an investigation is done...and most likely he will never work as an independent consultant afterwards...well at least this is what usually happens in the UK....maybe in Pakistan there will be a cover up for the surgeon.

But you are right Pakistan has to try and complete it...but first she has to sort out the lands under her control first. And to do that she has to rid the traitors....and there are so many in all fields of the country

A few things here, why would the Azad Kashmir regiment pull out of its native land? The troops stay as they are not classed as tribesman or Pakistani nationals 'not normally resident'.

The Indian army would be required to "reduce to a minimum strength required" in reference to paragraph A which states "the minimum strength required for the support of civil power in the maintenance of law and order'

So it's a token force that is also under strict rules one of which is;

"That the presence of troops should not afford any intimidation or appearance of intimation to the inhabitants of the state".

After such steps

"Personal recruited locally from each district should so far as possible be utilised for the establishment and maintenance of law and order".

So locals take over.

It's not ideal but it's not as damaging either.

Who decides what is the minimum strength? And why in the hell did Pakistan agree to such unjust terms?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

A few things here, why would the Azad Kashmir regiment pull out of its native land? The troops stay as they are not classed as tribesman or Pakistani nationals 'not normally resident'.

True but it would lose most of it's logistics.

"the minimum strength required for the support of civil power in the maintenance of law and order'

Do you know how long a piece of string is? I think it's mile long. You might think it's inch long. Exactly what is "minimum" is entirely subjective? Battalion? Brigade? Division? Corp?

What did I say about having holes big enough for elephants to hurtle through???

Who decides what is the minimum strength? And why in the hell did Pakistan agree to such unjust terms?

Good lad !

 

[Soumitra]

The accession document doesn't mean $hit, the Indian army invaded Hyderabad under the pretence of a majority Hindu population shouldn't go to Pakistan, so it's null.
Kashmir is unfinished partition business, the state should have gone to Pakistan.
Pakistan should have invaded the moment that filth Hari Singh put forward his standstill agreement.

Could Haves and Should Haves dont make the world go round.

 

[waz]

Nope. Read some real history. India signed a standstill agreement with Hyderabad and honored it. It was Hyderabad which violated it. Kinda like Pakistan violated the Standstill Agreement with the independent State of Kashmir.

You should read up yourself, yes Hyderabad was accused by your government of violating the standstill e.g. by having a private army, meddling with traffic from India etc, but then you also imposed an economic blockade, so violating the agreement yourself.
Operation Polo also happened before Kashmir, so you set the standard....

 

[Lincoln]

I have done enough reading to know that only two peope really mattered in the Pakistan independance. Jinnah, Allama Iqbal and nehru. I might even place the Nehru first. Rest were clingers and expandable. Taking any of them out would not have changed the thrust of history.

Who were the people who convinced Jinnah to come back to the subcontinent from Britain and lead the movement?

 

[YeBeWarned]

Bollocks. 1965 was lost because of failure to second guess Indian counter attack on Lahore in event of Jammu being threatened by PA. A few traitors in Kashmir can't be reason for defeat in war.

depends on how you want to see it, SSG were inserted in the ranks of the on going protest which turned bloody .. if that protest has intensified with the help of SSG a lot more Kashmiri's would have risen against the IA, we cant just invade Kashmir and take it in modern ear, it has to be something like a Fall of Dhaka thingy , Kashmir needs a bloody civil war, unless there is one where IA forces are killed in every street on J&K, there wont be any victory here.

 

[Lincoln]

We are discussing the history of the Indian annexation of Kashmir, not the current day scenario in Kashmir. TBH I have traveled to Srinagar on at least 3 occasions. On every visit there I see a thriving tourism industry. I never heard a gunshot whilst there. Not that I am claiming that the people are happy under Indian rule. Neither am I disputing that they are.

It is unfortunate you didn't ask the people there how they feel about the Indian army and the indian country.

 

[TMA]

Who were the people who convinced Jinnah to come back to the subcontinent from Britain and lead the movement?

Allama Iqbal the Kashmiri.

 

[waz]

True but it would lose most of it's logistics.

But keep a force sufficient enough not be overwhelmed quickly.

Do you know how long a piece of string is? I think it's mile long. You might think it's inch long. Exactly what is "minimum" is entirely subjective? Battalion? Brigade? Division? Corp?

It wasn't subjective at the time, and numbers would have amounted to what local police and civil services had.


But anyway, we can agree that Pakistan royally messed up back then.