What's new

India Asks UN Group to Vacate Rent-Free Office

Muhammad Yasin Malik , arrested in connection to a scheduled sit-in protest against India's action on closing UN group

JKLF to organise protest rally, sit-in today - Kashmir Times
He's scared to death about what will happen to butchers like him once the United Nations packs their bags.

not true - under the Geneva convention India has to release the POWs, plus housing / feeding 93,000 POWs was creating a huge logistic problem for India
At could have negotiated the whole issue with these prisoners of way but instead we let go of miles of land taken by lots of sacrifice.

Anyway why are you so concerned? Shouldn't you be whining about how isis discriminates shandy Tamil people or something? Are you not supposed to be crying for that or something being a Moor or whatever?
 
.
not true - under the Geneva convention India has to release the POWs, plus housing / feeding 93,000 POWs was creating a huge logistic problem for India
Yes under Geneva convention,Did pakistan consider Geneva convention on our soldiers or bangladeshis?
Why was Pakistani PM begging other nations for POW release? we could have imprisoned them long enough.They accepted Unconditional surrender and signed documents along with Simla Agreement that is the end of story for UN and pakistan.
In case your memory is short let me remind you how desperate were they to get back their POW's
pow 1971.png

and the Unconditional Surrender here it is.
simla aggree.jpg

The UN has no role in this after this agreement and Pakistan accepted the LOC as border.There no going back on that.,we will allow Indians to resettle there just as any other citizens of India are once we built our wall along the border which is already being built as i speak.
 
.
Why was Pakistani PM begging other nations for POW release? we could have imprisoned them long enough.They accepted Unconditional surrender and signed documents along with Simla Agreement that is the

Jyotindra Nath Dixit, the former foreign secretary,
The 93,000 POWs lived in pucca housing. Our troops guarding them lived in tents. For a year they lived in tents. Under the Geneva Convention you have to give certain facilities to POWs. It affected the morale of our soldiers. They thought we defeated the Pakistanis, but they are living comfortably while we are in slums. There was the tension of keeping 93,000 hostile soldiers. It was a complex predicament and we wanted to get rid of them.


India agreed to release the POWs on condition that Pakistan recognizes BD
The UN has no role in this after this agreement and Pakistan accepted the LOC as border.There no going back on that.,we will allow Indians to resettle there just as any other citizens of India are once we built our wall along the border which is already being built as i speak.

there was no formal agreement on Kashmir or LoC in the Simla Agreement

Indira-Bhutto ‘Agreement’ Should Be Made Formal | Asian Tribune
 
.
Jyotindra Nath Dixit, the former foreign secretary,


India agreed to release the POWs on condition that Pakistan recognizes BD


there was no formal agreement on Kashmir or LoC in the Simla Agreement

Indira-Bhutto ‘Agreement’ Should Be Made Formal | Asian Tribune
Agreed we had to take care of pow's but it was Pakistan which was bending backwards to get back their soldiers.
Why did Pakistan accept LOC as status quo after their surrender?
They recognized that LOC as de factor border and there cannot be any change in that stance, nor will india budge from its position,No country in the world can make India move from its stance in kashmir.
 
.
Agreed we had to take care of pow's but it was Pakistan which was bending backwards to get back their soldiers.
Why did Pakistan accept LOC as status quo after their surrender?
They recognized that LOC as de factor border and there cannot be any change in that stance, nor will india budge from its position,No country in the world can make India move from its stance in kashmir.

As a gesture of goodwill to Pakistan, Indian PM Mrs. Gandhi failed to get LoC converted to an international border in the parley held in Simla . Please bear in mind Simla Agreement is not the final solution to the Kashmir problem, Bhutto insisted the Kashmir issue be “frozen and tackled at a more propitious time”.

Vajpayee on the Simla Agreements

Pakistan several times earlier only to be thrown to the winds shortly thereafter. Besides, he argued that the agreement to settle the disputes by “other peaceful means” was likely to keep the doors open for a third party intervention.
 
.
not true - under the Geneva convention India has to release the POWs, plus housing / feeding 93,000 POWs was creating a huge logistic problem for India
Geneva conventions? You are cute. And you say we kill innocents regularly - does it not violate similar conventions? :D

Since when did India adopt 'civilized' forms of warfare? :azn: We fight with cruelty. The Pakistanis were shown mercy not for the adherence to the Geneva Conventions, but because of a mutual self respect between two armies - who shared and still do share a common history.

As for the Simla Agreement - pls stop lying -
Here is the text -
http://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/5541/Simla+Agreement
Both countries will "settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations".
Contrary to popular belief, the agreement did not agree over repatriation of prisoners of war (POW) and it was in 1974 in a separate agreement result into three way exchange of POW between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
.
As for the Simla Agreement - pls stop lying -
Here is the text -
http://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/5541/Simla+Agreement
Both countries will "settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations".
Contrary to popular belief, the agreement did not agree over repatriation of prisoners of war (POW) and it was in 1974 in a separate agreement result into three way exchange of POW between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan.

no where in the Simla Agreement does it state it intends to override the UN resolution and even if the agreement is accepted for mere argument sake - it calls for bilateral negotiations not an unilaterally decision taken by India .

That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.

Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations;
 
.
no where in the Simla Agreement does it state it intends to override the UN resolution and even if the agreement is accepted for mere argument sake - it calls for bilateral negotiations not an unilaterally decision taken by India .

That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.

Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations;
Well, what can I say, keep trying. :tup:
 
.
As a gesture of goodwill to Pakistan, Indian PM Mrs. Gandhi failed to get LoC converted to an international border in the parley held in Simla . Please bear in mind Simla Agreement is not the final solution to the Kashmir problem, Bhutto insisted the Kashmir issue be “frozen and tackled at a more propitious time”.

Vajpayee on the Simla Agreements
That's because Benazir bhutto went back on her fathers word and the agreement, Pakistan is in no position to dictate us nor can any nation dictate us in Kashmir.That is solely indias matter.Nobody has any stakes in kashmir except India.
UN is a paper tiger.
 
.
That's because Benazir bhutto went back on her fathers word and the agreement, Pakistan is in no position to dictate us nor can any nation dictate us in Kashmir.That is solely indias matter.Nobody has any stakes in kashmir except India.
UN is a paper tiger.

India too is in no position to dictate on Kashmir .
India and Pakistan have diverging views on the Simla Agreement , Indian position - bilateral negotiations is rigid as the clause allows for 'any other method mutually agreed upon'

bilateral negotiations have failed in the last 50 years and its time to facilitate UN intervention
 
.
India too is in no position to dictate on Kashmir .
India and Pakistan have diverging views on the Simla Agreement , Indian position - bilateral negotiations is rigid as the clause allows for 'any other method mutually agreed upon'

bilateral negotiations have failed in the last 50 years and its time to facilitate UN intervention

Ok..

.. and what in your opinion is the Pak divergent view ?

India does not have to ' dictate ' on J&K because it has it.

The UN can take a hop step & jump as far as India is concerned & thats been told to them in more ways than one.
 
.
Ok..

.. and what in your opinion is the Pak divergent view ?

why you asking me the obvious ? Pakistan's view is to uphold the Kashmiris right to self-determination in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council

India does not have to ' dictate ' on J&K because it has it.

The UN can take a hop step & jump as far as India is concerned & thats been told to them in more ways than one.

with over 1 million Indian soldiers stationed in occupied Kashmir and excessive HR violation , India loses its right to sovereignty in JK

Pakistan asserts Kashmir not an 'integral part of India' | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
 
.
why you asking me the obvious ? Pakistan's view is to uphold the Kashmiris right to self-determination in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council



with over 1 million Indian soldiers stationed in occupied Kashmir and excessive HR violation , India loses its right to sovereignty in JK

Pakistan asserts Kashmir not an 'integral part of India' | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
Yeah right.

We don't care what those outsiders think of our land. If they don't feel Indian, no one is stopping them to throw their passports into the trash and get out. Pakistan can keep crying. We can keep waiting.
 
.
India too is in no position to dictate on Kashmir .
India and Pakistan have diverging views on the Simla Agreement , Indian position - bilateral negotiations is rigid as the clause allows for 'any other method mutually agreed upon'

bilateral negotiations have failed in the last 50 years and its time to facilitate UN intervention
We built a fence, we will build a wall and who will stop us?Pakistan? or UN?
Views or no views we will do what we want in our land, no tom,dick,harry can do anything.

why you asking me the obvious ? Pakistan's view is to uphold the Kashmiris right to self-determination in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council



with over 1 million Indian soldiers stationed in occupied Kashmir and excessive HR violation , India loses its right to sovereignty in JK

Pakistan asserts Kashmir not an 'integral part of India' | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
You are a HR spokesman? Who cares about UN, they been told to pack their bags in Delhi recently.
Try making us lose our right if you can.
 
.
India's new Hindu nationalist government has asked a U.N. body overseeing military activity in divided Kashmir to vacate a government bungalow in the heart of the nation's capital that it has used rent-free for 40 years.

India and Pakistan both claim Kashmir in its entirety, and India discourages any intervention or criticism in the dispute. The two countries fought two of their three wars since independence in 1947 over Kashmir.

A U.N. official confirmed that the U.N. Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan was asked to vacate the bungalow.

"No reason was given. We were asked to vacate the bungalow," Maj. Nicholas Diaz said Friday at the bungalow, which is around the corner from India's Supreme Court in a coveted part of central Delhi.

A foreign ministry spokesman said the move was in line with efforts to rationalize the U.N. body's presence in India.

The decision was "consistent with India's long-standing view that UNMOGIP has outlived its relevance," said Syed Akbaruddin, external affairs ministry spokesman.

India maintains that the U.N. agency had no role to play after India and Pakistan signed a landmark agreement in 1972 on finding a bilateral solution to their dispute over Kashmir.

Diaz said a U.N. Security Council resolution calls for the body to monitor and observe the border and report violations of a cease-fire agreement between India and Pakistan.

India has never been comfortable with the presence of the U.N. body overseeing its borders and has often said that no third party can have a role in resolving the dispute over Kashmir.

"We have at best tolerated them because this is one of those byproducts of history," said Hardeep Singh Puri, a former permanent representative of India to the U.N.

"This was an issue of rationalizing. I don't know who had given them this largesse of free accommodation. They were not even paying normal rent for it, let alone market rent," he said.

The U.N. group also has an office in Srinagar, the main city in India's portion of Kashmir, which would continue as it is often the venue for protests by Kashmir separatist groups and human rights activists, officials said.

In Srinagar, nearly 100 activists of the pro-independence Jammu-Kashmir Liberation Front group protested Friday against the government's decision ordering the U.N. agency to vacate the building.

The protesters chanted slogans such as "Go India, go back" and "We want freedom," as they tried to march to Srinagar's the city center. They were later dispersed by police.

Diaz said the U.N. observer group would continue its operations in keeping with its original mandate and has started looking for new office space to rent.

Pakistan's foreign ministry spokesperson Tasnim Aslam said asking the U.N. observers to move out was "inconsequential" with regard to Kashmir's status.

"As long as the Kashmir dispute is not resolved, the U.N. Security Council mandate remains. These measures are inconsequential and they do not have any impact on the legal status of the dispute," Aslam told reporters in Islamabad.

The group also has offices in Islamabad and Muzaffarabad, the main city in the Pakistan-controlled portion of Kashmir.

Relations between India and Pakistan were frozen after an attack on Mumbai in 2008 in which Pakistani terrorists killed 166 people. A mild thaw since then has helped trade and people-to-people links, but the Kashmir dispute is far from resolution.



Prime Minister Narendra Modi took a tough line in his election campaign on Pakistan's role in sponsoring terror attacks in India. He softened his stand somewhat and invited Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to India for his inaugural.
India Asks UN Group to Vacate Rent-Free Office - ABC News
Its a very good move. It should have been done before.

Sinister move, similar situation in Tamil Eelam - by Lanka.

UN asked to leave to facilitate Lankan genocide of Tamils... expect similar action by the occupying forces after UN vacates its office
Its a very good move. It should have been done long before.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom