What's new

India ''protests'' to Beijing on Sino-Pak corridor

And that is a useless document my friend ..... It was not shown to UN .. nor to Pakistan ... So it carries no legal value for us or anyone else (except Indians)

useless for Pakistanis,priceless nonetheless.because,it is only document which "Legally" agrees to annex its land to a country,which neither Pakistan nor China holds.tell me,what is the legal document of "Integrating Kashmir" by Pakistan??do you have any formal documents??
 

^^Piece of crap .....


Let`s discuss it point by point , starting with the so called "Instrument of Accession"......

Although, at first glance, India’s claim to Kashmir appears consistent with international law, a more thorough analysis suggests otherwise !!


1) International law clearly states that every treaty entered into by a member of the United Nations must be registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations. "The Instrument of Accession" was neither presented to the United Nations nor to Pakistan. Hence India cannot invoke the treaty before any organ of the United Nations.


2) The legality of the Instrument of Accession may also be questioned on grounds that it was obtained under coercion. The International Court of Justice has stated that there "can be little doubt, as is implied in the Charter of the United Nations and recognized in Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that under contemporary international law an agreement concluded under the threat or use of force is void."..... India’s military intervention in Kashmir was provisional upon the Maharaja’s signing of the Instrument of Accession. More importantly, however, the evidence suggests that Indian troops were pouring into Srinigar even before the Maharaja had signed the treaty. This fact would suggest that the treaty was signed under duress.


3) The Maharaja had no authority to sign the treaty, hence the Instrument of Accession can be considered without legal standing . The situation on the ground demonstrates that the Maharaja was hardly in control of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Hari Singh was in flight from the state capital, Srinigar. And it is highly doubtful that the Maharaja could claim that his government had a reasonable chance of staying in power .....

Thus, an analysis of the circumstances surrounding the signing of the Instrument of Accession shows that the accession of Kashmir to India was neither complete nor legal, as Delhi has vociferously contended for over sixty years.


Alastair Lamb (in his book, Kashmir - A disputed legacy 1846-1990) points out that the Instrument of Accession could not have been signed by the Mahrajah on 26th October as he was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 Km). There is no evidence to suggest that a meeting or communication of any kind took place on 26th October 1947. In fact it was on 27th October 1947 that the Mahrajah was informed by his MC Mahajan and VP Menon (who had flown into Srinagar), the the Instrument of Accession had already been negotiated in Dehli. The Mahrajah did not in fact sign the Instrument of Accession, if at all, until 27th October 1947. This sheds doubts on the actions of the Indian regime


Moreover, further shedding doubt on the treaty`s validity, in 1995 Indian authorities claimed that the original copy of the treaty (letter of accession) was either stolen or lost !!!


The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), based in Geneva, passed a resolution in 1993 proclaiming Kashmir's accession to India as bogus and null and void.


Kashmir: not an integral part of India - thenews.com.pk

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Kashmir: The origins of the dispute

http://icj.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/...hmir-fact-finding-mission-report-1995-eng.pdf




Therefore, letter of accession is lost, if not lost, null (declared by ICJ, UN Resolutions and PM Jawaharlal Nehru), if not null, void by the very people its supposed to serve. Even if its not void, the provision of the letter of accession lets the people of J&K decide their fate (according to PM Jawaharlal Nehru)




In his broadcast to the nation over All India Radio on 2nd November, 1947, Pandit Nehru said,:
"We are anxious not to finalise anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide ------ And let me make it clear that it has been our policy that where there is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by the people of that state. It is in accordance with this policy that we have added a proviso to the Instrument of Accession of Kashmir".
 
we don't think IK as "Attot Aang",we think entire Kashmir(parts belongs to India,Pakistan and China,as a whole) is ours. :lol:


bwahahahahahahahaha there is NO BAN On day dreaming either

the same daydream like integrating entire India,one part at each step??like we divided Pakistan and now BD is our vassal???yes,it is. :D

BD turns up a nightmare for bharotis
 
Good one India.

China ko rokna tou door ki baat hai pehlay WB ko tou rok kai dikhao mega projects finance karnay sai Kashmir mai !!! :lol:
 
thats what happens when you read "False History".the choice was given to the various princely state to either join India/Pakistan or remain as independent.Kashmir was independent stae when Pakistan attacked.it has nothing to do with partition.

Blue Part-----

British Support(like what??)??American Supportin 1962(never happened.study more on this topic).and canadian support??please elaborate.and Pakistan didn't officially said it was their troops who invaded Kashmir in 1947.they were merely supporting an indigenous rebellion in Azad Kashmir and Northern Territories against repression.don't know how they became part of "Pakistan" in the first place.



we're as delusional as Pakistanis in this matter. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:



actually,your forces were in retreating when ceasefire came. :rofl:

see the vivid maps here..

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


You do not ask for or accept ceasefire,if and when your forces are advancing or do you?.
 
You do not ask for or accept ceasefire,if and when your forces are advancing or do you?.

Strategic Blunder.Unilateral Ceasefire and complain to UN was completely unnecessary.but Nehru,to improve his "Fai World Leader Status" did that. :hitwall: in another word,"Moronic".

read this..

Kashmir: Legal Documents

BD turns up a nightmare for bharotis

not really.do you really think these "Jamaatis" in PDF represents BD.hell no.tell me,which govt completely discards previous govt's attempt to "Harm India" and prosecute its own soldiers and "Intelligence Officers"??which Govt gives access for covert ops against terrorists??there are so many level where India and BD cooperates now,but never'll see the daylight until next govt comes.we still provide a massive amount of loan and cooperation to BD.
 
not really.do you really think these "Jamaatis" in PDF represents BD.hell no.tell me,which govt completely discards previous govt's attempt to "Harm India" and prosecute its own soldiers and "Intelligence Officers"??which Govt gives access for covert ops against terrorists??there are so many level where India and BD cooperates now,but never'll see the daylight until next govt comes.we still provide a massive amount of loan and cooperation to BD.

:lol: your name calling Muslim Bangladeshis is suffice to hint at what is your nightmare.

BTW it was not about PDF bangladeshis. Most of Indians hate BDeshies and call for kicking them out.

your dream of ruling their hearts is already shattered
 
"The Instrument of Accession" was neither presented to the United Nations nor to Pakistan.

sent to UN and Pakistan...

Kashmir: Legal Documents

India’s military intervention in Kashmir was provisional upon the Maharaja’s signing of the Instrument of Accession. More importantly, however, the evidence suggests that Indian troops were pouring into Srinigar even before the Maharaja had signed the treaty. This fact would suggest that the treaty was signed under duress.

wrong.India didn't intervene before Accession was signed.you can show me any documents which ever stated contrary.Maharaja signed the document on 26th while Indian forces' airlift was conducted on 27th.


The Maharaja had no authority to sign the treaty

then who has??Both Maharaja and Sheikh Abdullah,the opponent of the Maharaja agreed to the accession.in fact,Sheikh became first Head of the State.

plus,it has been done according to Indian Independence Act 1947 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia same act even Pakistan followed.so,why its "Null and Void" according to your logic while almost same rule was followed by both India and Pakistan during accession of any "Princely State"??
 
Last edited:
i believe it is a kind of win win situation for Pakistan. If Beijing pays heed to Indian concerns and let's suppose, corridor project is abandoned, Pakistan will have oppertunity to boost economy from other means by paying more attention to it's own industry rather than relying on the efficacy of Chinese industry along the corridor and toll collected and Gawadar port would be developed further by Pakistan itself. Yes it is a time taking job but at the end of the day Pakistan wouldn't have to look towards friends. In case Beijing turns down the New Delhi's request/ concerns, it is a short cut anyway but with a price of making Pakistan junkyard of Chinese industry and local industry would not flourish.
 
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), based in Geneva, passed a resolution in 1993 proclaiming Kashmir's accession to India as bogus and null and void.

couldn't find any such line in that document(India-human-righst-in-Kashmir-fact-finding-mission-report-1995-eng.pdf).kindly quote the line word by word.

Now India will go cry to its daddy USA and Russia. China and Pakistan are being mean.:lol:

Daddy USA??? :rofl::rofl:

first time I heard anyone can "Divorce" their own daddy and call him "Daddy of Someone else". :lol:

:lol: your name calling Muslim Bangladeshis is suffice to hint at what is your nightmare.

BTW it was not about PDF bangladeshis. Most of Indians hate BDeshies and call for kicking them out.

your dream of ruling their hearts is already shattered

wrong.we just want Bdeshis do not come "Illegally" as it creates complex political and demographic situations and sometime results in violence.it has nothing to do with BD as a country.
 
Back
Top Bottom