India should accept defeat before Kashmiris’ struggle, says Nawaz

[-blitzkrieg-]

Oi, I resent that. What do you mean a perfect Indian? The one who parrots non-sense like which we accuse our neighbours of? Then, yeah, am not perfect..... but for me J&K's solution lies in between Article 1.1 of Indian Constitution and Article 370. Maybe I will stand for elections someday and then ask your vote and then will give you the political solution!!!

But have laid out the bitter facts. Read Chinese Campaign - Dalvi and Palit, you will call them traitors for what they write!!!!! One commanded the ill fated brigade and the other was in Military Operations.

Why is that it is so hard for both Pakistanis and Indians to accept the historical facts and make sensible decisions based on them??

On a side note: The Naga mess was much greater than Kashmir. In Kashmir we have an Instrument of Accession. But in Naga, they declared independence. To add insult to their injury, Nehru in his finite wisdom and infinite stupidity, gave the traditional grazing land of Nagas till Chindwin to Burma as a boundary settlement. That set off the most potent Insurgencies that India had ever known. We got two accords and the present Indian dispensation did exactly what we have been saying and our fellow nationals baying for our bloods over it - reach an accord granting autonomy to Nagas without change in boundaries. Things have settled. Modi signed it quietly on 03 August (I think)

When you can do that for Nagaland, why not for a state where you promised it? Anyways, that is moot point as already the state has that autonomy and it is only the Kashmiris themselves who run and manage the state government who are messing up by rampant corruption and poor administration.

I feel like I am in a round room which has no doors and looking for an exit



When you half read and follow it up with absence of comprehension skills, we get retard post like this.

Counter-Narrative for your above point ..

1. Where does it say that India has to hold a plebiscite as a binding resolution?

2. Where is the date given for a plebiscite?

3. Who gave the criteria of plebiscite as mandatory for acceptance of Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja of J&K?

4. If indeed plebiscite was the criteria, when was plebiscite held when you accepted the accession of Gilgit? It was not, merely the Gilgit Scouts mutinied and asked for accession .... at the point of a gun. Where was the plebiscite held when you signed the Sino-Pakistan Boundary Pact and ceded territories of Hunza State in Shasgam?

Another Professor of History, telling his-version of story!!!

Dont be personal.. If you find anything in the UN resolution that asks Pakistan Army to withdraw, please do share (withe document itself as source), else dont bother to comment.
Your first 3 questions show you dont know how the UN apparatus works on global conflicts.It says India has to facilitate UN body to conduct peliscite.Read the document..Why should UN decide a date that is not followable? Either you leave UN if you think its unfair or you follow its passed resolution. The criteria was agreed upon by the not Indians,not Pakistanis but by the body you adhere to for global conflicts.They were taskd to solve the issue just like they did for East Timor plebecite or the one in South Sudan and many other states.
For the last one
Through a jointly formed armed struggle of the local people, the Gilgit Scouts and the Muslim officers of the Maharaja’s army, the area was liberated on November 1, 1947 and an interim government constituted under Raja Shah Rais Khan of Gilgit. The government of Pakistan was invited through a telegram to take control of the areas. Responding to this request Sardar Muhammad Alam (A tehsildar in the NWFP government at that time) was appointed and sent to Gilgit on 16th November, as government of Pakistan’s political agent.

In April 1949 because of several administrative constraints an agreement was reached between the government of Pakistan and government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJ & K). Accordingly the administrative control of Gilgit and Baltistan was temporarily transferred to the former. Vide sub-clause 8 of section-3 of this Agreement, the affairs of Gilgit and Baltistan were brought under the control of Political Agent appointed by the government of Pakistan.

You should really read your history particularly your forefathers rebellion against Pakistan ,your so called Muslim saviors.

Thats why i said earlier...read teh document.figure out WHICH Pakistani nationals were being referred to. Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces?

Do you have difficulty in reading or comprehending English? May I have the pleasure of reproducing the Resolution and of rubbing your face in it? A 'yes' or a 'no' will suffice.

In case you didnt see, i posted the document way before you jumped in here. Like i said , would be a new thing i would learn unless its from state produced warped sources.

 

[Brickwall]

Thats why i said earlier...read teh document.figure out WHICH Pakistani nationals were being referred to. Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces?

Let me ask you simple question how does people join Pakistan army, Is being Pakistan citizenship still criteria ??

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Let me ask you simple question how does people join Pakistan army, Is being Pakistan citizenship still criteria ??

Read the document . Dont argue for the sake of an argument..How about you copy past the whole para which mentions the word Pakistani National.

 

[Brickwall]

Read the document . Dont argue for the sake of an argument..How about you copy past the whole para which mentions the word Pakistani National.

I would gladly re-read everything you put out , but answer me , I'm very much curious to know, Does in Pakistan everyone can join Pakistan military without even being citizen ??

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

I would gladly re-read everything you put out , but answer me , I'm very much curious to know, Does in Pakistan everyone can join Pakistan military without even being citizen ??

I asked you a question before you didnt reply so, i promise i will reply to your question once you reply to mine.

Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces in its resolution ?

 

[Hellfire]

Dont be personal

Being personal would be calling you names. Your post #152

Where does it say 'Pakistan Army' or ' Pakistan forces' in the resolution? IT DOESNT. The withdrawal only for the Indian forces. The troop withdrawal is only for Indians not Pakistanis.And the resolution is for J&K. not the other princely states of that time.Yes Pakistani nationals

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/india-should-accept-defeat-before-kashmiris’-struggle-says-nawaz.440188/page-11#ixzz4FJxuLi77

I merely pointed you out as a Professor of History - his-version of story.

Because, there are hundreds of wannabe like you who don't read and come here, trolling and wasting time and then making a dunce of themselves.

Read UN resolution 47

.. If you find anything in the UN resolution that asks Pakistan Army to withdraw, please do share (withe document itself as source), else dont bother to comment.

Read UN resolutions 38 , 39, 47. and then speak. Not here to teach you. Do your own work.

first 3 questions show you dont know how the UN apparatus works on global conflicts.It says India has to facilitate UN body to conduct peliscite.Read the document..Why should UN decide a date that is not followable?

You clearly missed sarcasm .... no surprises here.

For the last one
Through a jointly formed armed struggle of the local people, the Gilgit Scouts and the Muslim officers of the Maharaja’s army, the area was liberated on November 1, 1947 and an interim government constituted under Raja Shah Rais Khan of Gilgit. The government of Pakistan was invited through a telegram to take control of the areas. Responding to this request Sardar Muhammad Alam (A tehsildar in the NWFP government at that time) was appointed and sent to Gilgit on 16th November, as government of Pakistan’s political agent.

In April 1949 because of several administrative constraints an agreement was reached between the government of Pakistan and government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJ & K). Accordingly the administrative control of Gilgit and Baltistan was temporarily transferred to the former. Vide sub-clause 8 of section-3 of this Agreement, the affairs of Gilgit and Baltistan were brought under the control of Political Agent appointed by the government of Pakistan.

Blah blah blah blah blah .... where is the plebiscite I asked for? Did you hold one? If you didn't then you can as well keep your counsel of plebiscite to yourself. Your none acceptance of Instrument of Accession is in violation of Indian Independence Act of 1947 Para 3(a) and (b) hence untenable.

Don't give me non-sense. You have no locus standii to comment as Pakistanis in what is clearly an internal affair of a Dominion legalised by aforementioned statuette which also legalised your own state into existence. Go figure.

Thats why i said earlier...read teh document.figure out WHICH Pakistani nationals were being referred to. Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces?
In case you didnt see, i posted the document way before you jumped in here. Like i said , would be a new thing i would learn unless its from state produced warped sources.

Go read from threads where we have posted earlier .. don't give me your 'i posted the document way before you jumped in here'. We have been flogging this dead horse, then burying it and then exhuming it and again repeating the process since years.


FYI


RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND
PAKISTAN ON 13 AUGUST 1948. (DOCUMENT NO. S/1100, PARA 75, DATED THE
9TH NOVEMBER, 1948)

THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Having given careful consideration to the points of view expressed by
the Representatives of India and Pakistan regarding the situation in
the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and

Being of the opinion that the prompt cessation of hostilities and the
coercion of conditions the continuance of which is likely to endanger
international peace and security are essential to implementation of
its endeavors to assist the Governments of India and Pakistan in
effecting a final settlement of the situation.

Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and
Pakistan the following proposal

PART I

CEASE-FIRE ORDER

1. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective
High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease- fire
order to apply to all forces under their control in the State of Jammu
and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be
mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been
accepted by both Governments.

2. The High Commands of Indian and Pakistan forces agreed to refrain
from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of
the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (For
the purpose of these proposals "forces under their control shall be
considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting
or participating in hostilities on their respective sides).

3. The Commanders-in-Chief of the Forces of India and Pakistan shall
promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present
dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire.

4. In its discretions and as the Commission may find practicable, the
Commission will appoint military observers who under the authority of
the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands will
supervise the observance of the cease-fire order.

5. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to
appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and
maintaining an atmosphere favorable to the promotion of further
negotiations.



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.

1. (l) 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 endeavor 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.

2. (1) When the Commission shall have notified the Government of India
that the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A 2
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.

3. (1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or
communiqué 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.


*The UNCIP unanimously adopted this Resolution on 13-8-1948.

Members of the Commission: Argentina. Belgium, Columbia,
Czechoslovakia and U.S.A.

*RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT THE MEETING OF THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND PAKISTAN ON 5 JANUARY, 1949. (DOCUMENT NO. S/1196, PARA IS, DATED THE 10TH JANUARY, 1949)
Having received from the Governments of India and Pakistan in Communications, dated December 23 and December 25, 1948, respectively their acceptance of the following principles which are supplementary to the Commission's Resolution of August 13, 1948;
The question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite;
A plebiscite will be held when it shall be found by the Commission that the cease-fire and truce arrangements set forth in Parts I and II of the Commission's resolution of 13 August 1948, have been carried out and arrangements for the plebiscite have been completed;

RESOLUTION 91 (1951) CONCERNING THE INDIA-PAKISTAN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF UNITED KINGDOM AND UNITED STATES AND ADOPTED BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 30, 1951. (DOCUMENT NO. S/2017/REV. I, DATED THE 30TH MARCH, 1951)

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949, and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/kashmir-...rity-council-resolution.215581/#ixzz4FK3SYZ5a


Go to the thread and start from there if you want. Don't waste time posting half baked into

 

[Joe Shearer]

Dont be personal.. If you find anything in the UN resolution that asks Pakistan Army to withdraw, please do share (withe document itself as source), else dont bother to comment.

It is curious that you should say this so brazenly, because that is perhaps one of the most emphatic conditions of the Resolution. Are you referring to the fact that the Pakistan Army is not mentioned by name? This would imply that the Pakistan Army was constituted of citizens of other countries, according to you, since citizens of Pakistan are clearly and explicitly mentioned.

You are sure, dear student, to dispute this extract below, so let me inform you in advance that the PDF version of the Resolution will be available later, because the site is under maintenance. Meanwhile, from public and not very reliable sources, here is a first read for you.

And, before you say that the actual wording never mentions the Pakistan Army, you should be aware that the Pakistani delegation denied the involvement or presence of the Pakistan Army; it was only when the Plebiscite Commission sat and investigated on the ground that it was shocked to find the Pakistan Army present in strength.

Adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting, on 21 April 1948 ([1])

The Security Council,

Having considered the complaint of the Government of India concerning the dispute over the State of Jammu and Kashmir,

Having heard the representative of India in support of that complaint and the reply and counter-complaints of the representative of Pakistan,

Being strongly of the opinion that the early restoration of peace and order in Jammu and Kashmir is essential and that India and Pakistan should do their utmost to bring about a cessation of all fighting,

Noting with satisfaction that both India and Pakistan declare that the question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite,

Considering that the continuation of the dispute is likely to endanger international peace and security,

Reaffirms its resolution 38 (1948) of 17 January 1948;

Resolves that the membership of the Commission established by its resolution 39 (1948) of 20 January 1948 shall be increased to five and shall include, in addition to the membership mentioned in that resolution, representatives of . . . and . . . , and that if the membership of the Commission has not been completed within ten days from the date of the adoption of this resolution the President of the Security Council may nominate such other Member or Members of the United Nations as are required to complete the membership of five;

Instructs the Commission to proceed at once to the Indian subcontinent and there place its good offices and mediation at the disposal of the Governments of India and Pakistan with a view to facilitating the taking of the necessary measures, both with respect to the restoration of peace and order and to the holding of a plebiscite, by the two Governments, acting in co-operation with one another and with the Commission, and further instructs the Commission to keep the Council informed of the action taken under the resolution; and, to this end,

Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council are appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan:

A. Restoration of peace and order

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavours:

(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State;
(b) To make known to all concerned that the measures indicated in this and the following paragraphs provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste or party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, and that therefore they should co-operate in the maintenance of peace and order.
2. The Government of India should:

(a) When it is established to the satisfaction of the Commission set up in accordance with the Council's resolution 39 (1948) that the tribesmen are withdrawing and that arrangements for the cessation of the fighting have become effective, put into operation in consultation with the Commission a plan for withdrawing their own forces from Jammu and Kashmir and reducing them progressively to the minimum strength required for the support of the civil power in the maintenance of law and order;
(b) Make known that the withdrawal is taking place in stages and announce the completion of each stage;
(c) When the Indian forces have been reduced to the minimum strength mentioned in (a) above, arrange in consultation with the Commission for the stationing of the remaining forces to be carried out in accordance with the following principles:
(i) That the presence of troops should not afford any intimidation or appearance of intimidation to the inhabitants of the State;
(ii) That as small a number as possible should be maintained in forward areas;
(iii) That any reserve of troops which may be included in the total strength should be located within their present base area.
3. The Government of India should agree that until such time as the Plebiscite Administration referred to below finds it necessary to exercise the powers of direction and supervision over the State forces and police provided for in paragraph 8, they will be held in areas to be agreed upon with the Plebiscite Administrator.

4. After the plan referred to in paragraph 2 (a) above has been put into operation, personnel recruited locally in each district should so far as possible be utilized for the re-establishment and maintenance of law and order with due regard to protection of minorites, subject to such additional requirements as may be specified by the Plebiscite Administration referred to in paragraph 7.

5. If these local forces should be found to be inadequate, the Commission, subject to the agreement of both the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, should arrange for the use of such forces of either Dominion as it deems effective for the purpose of pacification.

B. Plebiscite

6. The Government of India should undertake to ensure that the Government of the State invite the major political groups to designate responsible representatives to share equitably and fully in the conduct of the administration at the ministerial level while the plebiscite is being prepared and carried out.

7. The Government of India should undertake that there will be established in Jammu and Kashmir a Plebiscite Administration to hold a plebiscite as soon as possible on the accession of the State to India or Pakistan.

8. The Government of India should undertake that there will be delegated by the State to the Plebiscite Administration such powers as the latter considers necessary for holding a fair and impartial plebiscite including, for that purpose only, the direction and supervision of the State forces and police.

9. The Government of India should, at the request of the Plebiscite Administration, make available from the Indian forces such assistance as the Plebiscite Administration may require for the performance of its functions.

10. (a) The Government of India should agree that a nominee of the Secretary-General of the United Nations will be appointed to be the plebiscite administrator.

(b) The Plebiscite Administrator, acting as an officer of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, should have authority to nominate his assistance and other subordinates and to draft regulations governing the plebiscite. Such nominees should be formally appointed and such draft regulations should be formally promulgated by the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
(c) The Government of India should understand that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir will appoint fully qualified persons nominated by the Plebiscite Administrator to act as special magistrates within the State judicial system to hear cases which in the opinion of the Plebiscite Administrator have a serious bearing on the preparation for and the conduct of a free and impartial plebiscite.
(d) The terms of service of the Administrator should form the subject of a separate negotiation between the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Government of India. The Administrator should fix the terms of service for his assistants and subordinates.
(e) The Administrator should have the right to communicate directly with the Government of the State and with the Commission of the Security Council and, through the Commission, with the Security Council, with their Governments of India and Pakistan and with their representatives on the Commission. It would be his duty to bring to the notice of any or all of the foregoing (as he in his discretion may decide) any circumstances arising which may tend, in his opinion, to interfere with the freedom of the plebiscite.
11. The Government of India should undertake to prevent, and to give full support to the Administrator and his staff in preventing, any threat, coercion or intimidation, bribery or other undue influence on the voters in the plebiscite, and the Government of India should publicly announce and should cause the Government of the State to announce this undertaking as an international obligation binding on all public authorities and officials in Jammu and Kashmir.

12. The Government of India should themselves and through the Government of the State declare and make known that that all subjects of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, regardless of creed, caste or party, will be safe and free in expressing their views and in voting on the question of the accession of the State and that there will be freedom of the press, speech and assembly and freedom of travel in the State, including freedom of lawful entry and exit.

13. The Government of India should use and should ensure that the Government of the State also use their best endeavours to effect the withdrawal from the State of all Indian nationals other than those who are normally resident therein or who on or since 15 August 1947 have entered it for a lawful purpose.

14. The Government of India should ensure that the Government of the State releases all political prisoners and take all possible steps so that:

(a) All citizens of the State who have left it on account of disturbances are invited, and are free, to return to their homes and to exercise their rights as such citizens;
(b) There is no victimization;
(c) Minorities in all parts of the State are accorded adequate protection.
15. The Commission of the Security Council should at the end of the plebiscite certify to the Council whether the plebiscite has or has not been really free and impartial.

C. General provisions

16. The Governments of India and Pakistan should each be invited to nominate a representative to be attached to the Commission for such assistance as it may require in the performance of its task.

17. The Commission should establish in Jammu and Kashmir such observers as it may require of any of the proceedings in pursuance of the measures indicated in the foregoing paragraphs.

18. The Security Council Commission should carry out the tasks assigned to it herein.

Your first 3 questions show you dont know how the UN apparatus works on global conflicts.It says India has to facilitate UN body to conduct peliscite.Read the document..Why should UN decide a date that is not followable? Either you leave UN if you think its unfair or you follow its passed resolution. The criteria was agreed upon by the not Indians,not Pakistanis but by the body you adhere to for global conflicts.They were taskd to solve the issue just like they did for East Timor plebecite or the one in South Sudan and many other states.
For the last one
Through a jointly formed armed struggle of the local people, the Gilgit Scouts and the Muslim officers of the Maharaja’s army, the area was liberated on November 1, 1947 and an interim government constituted under Raja Shah Rais Khan of Gilgit. The government of Pakistan was invited through a telegram to take control of the areas. Responding to this request Sardar Muhammad Alam (A tehsildar in the NWFP government at that time) was appointed and sent to Gilgit on 16th November, as government of Pakistan’s political agent.

In April 1949 because of several administrative constraints an agreement was reached between the government of Pakistan and government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJ & K). Accordingly the administrative control of Gilgit and Baltistan was temporarily transferred to the former. Vide sub-clause 8 of section-3 of this Agreement, the affairs of Gilgit and Baltistan were brought under the control of Political Agent appointed by the government of Pakistan.


Thats why i said earlier...read teh document.figure out WHICH Pakistani nationals were being referred to. Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces?

For starters, because Pakistan denied the presence of the Pakistan Army. Here, read another account (I know that you will promptly deny this as authentic, and will compel me to drag out the original proceedings of the Commission, and slap you in the face with Pakistan's own words and statements, but let us play along with you; the humiliation at the end will be sharper).

Kashmir And The United Nations

By Wajahat Ahmad

27 August, 2008
Countercurrents.org

Kashmir, along with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the war in Korean Peninsula, was among the first crisis that the United Nations had to confront in the post-World War II period. Sixty years have passed by since Kashmir conflict was first debated in the U.N and yet the conflict continues to elude a solution.

The U.N involvement in the Kashmir Conflict largely lasted for 17 years (1948-65).After the Indo-Pak war of 1965, the U.N engagement with Kashmir continued at a very nominal level till the 3rd Pakistan-India war of 1971 and completely ended with the signing of the Simla Agreement in 1972, an Indo-Pak peace agreement, which laid emphasis on adopting a bilateral framework to solve the Kashmir imbroglio and kept the U.N out of the picture afterwards.

During the course of its engagement with the Kashmir Conflict, spanning 23 years (1948-1971), the U.N passed a number of resolutions, which were aimed at mediation and resolution of the conflict. Between 1948 and 1971, the U.N Security Council passed 23 resolutions on Kashmir Conflict.

The U.N resolutions regarding the Kashmir issue are not self-enforceable. In other words the resolutions are recommendatory in nature and can be enforced only if the parties to the dispute, viz. India and Pakistan, consent to their application. Indian refusal to implement the U.N resolutions on Kashmir was to relegate them to the margins of the conflict.


India lodged a complaint under Article 35 (Chapter VI) of the U.N Charter in the U.N Security Council on January 1, 1948, charging Pakistan with 'aiding and abetting' the Pakistani tribal invasion in Jammu and Kashmir. In the United Nations, India claimed that all the territories of the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir legally belonged to her by virtue of the treaty of accession signed by the Hindu king of the Kingdom with the Indian Union. Two weeks later, Pakistan responded to the Indian complaint with counter charges. Pakistan denied having aided the raiders, accused India of annexing Kashmir and of trying to throttle Pakistan in its infancy The first U.N debate on Kashmir started under the rubric of "Kashmir Question". However, the Pakistani delegation argued that the Kashmir Question had to be seen in the context of India's attempts to negate the existence of the newly born State of Pakistan and that the conflict in Kashmir was threatening the very survival of Pakistan. The Pakistani argument was to prevail and the debate in the U.N shifted from "Kashmir Question" to "India-Pakistan dispute". The U.N Military Observers Group that was later established in the divided territories of Kashmir- with offices in both Indian-occupied-Kashmir and Pakistan occupied-Kashmir- was to be known as "U.N Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan" (UNMOGIP) and not as "U.N Military Observer Group in Kashmir". The job of the group was to monitor, investigate and report complaints of cease-fire violations along the "cease-fire line" in Kashmir to the United Nations.


After hearing Indian and Pakistani representatives, the U.N Security Council passed its first resolution (Resolution 38) on Kashmir Conflict on January 17, 1948, calling India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on January 20, the Security Council passed another resolution (Resolution 39), creating the United Nations Commission for Indian and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the dispute and mediate between the two countries.


Led by Britain and the United States, the U.N Security Council passed another resolution (Resolution 47) on April 21, 1948, which enlarged the membership of the UNCIP from 3 to 5 , called for cessation of hostilities between India and Pakistan, withdrawal of all Pakistani troops and tribesmen and bulk of Indian troops(except for a minimal number required for maintaining law order),allowing return of refugees, release of political prisoners and holding of a U.N supervised Plebiscite in the (Princely)State of Jammu and Kashmir to determine the aspirations of her people. The Plebiscite was to be held by a U.N appointed Plebiscite administrator. The U.N Security Council passed another resolution on June3, 1948, which reaffirmed the previous resolutions and asked the UNCIP to proceed to the "disputed areas" to carry out its mission as stated under Resolution 47 of April 21, 1948.


The UNCIP reached the Indian sub-continent in July 1948 and after deliberations with Indian and Pakistani leadership, produced a proposal, which called for an immediate ceasefire and a truce agreement between India and Pakistan, withdrawal of all Pakistani tribals and nationals and bulk of India's troops. India rejected the proposals on the basis of the argument that the proposal did not opportune any blame on Pakistan-which India considered as the aggressor in Kashmir- whereas Pakistan rejected the plan as the Interim administration of Valley of Kashmir and the territories that had fallen under Indian control had been assigned to Sheikh Abdullah's control. Sheikh Abdullah, who had become the Prime Minister of the autonomous J&K State on March 5, 1948, was considered by Pakistan as India's ally and by implication could influence the plebiscite in India's favour. Pakistan also rejected the agreement on the ground that it was supposed to withdraw all its forces from the State whereas India was allowed to retain some of its troops to maintain order, which could potentially lead to coercion or intimidation of voters by Indian forces to influence the outcome of the proposed plebiscite.


On August 14, 1948, the UNCIP submitted proposals to the Indian and Pakistani governments, which for the first time contained an acknowledgment from Pakistan about the presence of its troops in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. The proposal envisioned the withdrawal of Pakistani troops and nationals and bulk of Indian troops from the State, subsequent to their withdrawal the administration of the territory was to be run by the Commission.

On December 11, 1948, the UNCIP laid out a new set of proposals that elaborated on the question of Plebiscite in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. As per the proposals "The question of accession to India or Pakistan was to be decided by a free and impartial plebiscite, which was contingent upon having a cease-fire".


The two countries accepted the cease-fire plan and allowed the U.N to observe the ceasefire from January 1, 1949.The ceasefire-line "went through the western part of Jammu and the eastern part of Poonch, leaving the capital city of Poonch on the Indian side of the line, then crossed the Jhelum River at a point west of Uri and made a large sweep following the valley of the Kishinganga River. From there, it proceeded to Kargil, which also remained on the Indian side, and then north-west to the Chinese border. Hunza, Gilgit, Baltistan, Chilas, the great part of Poonch, and the smaller part of Jammu remained in control of Pakistan and Azad Kashmir".

 

[Brickwall]

I asked you a question before you didnt reply so, i promise i will reply to your question once you reply to mine.

Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces in its resolution ?

This is silly we are really going at same thing, let me try one time with mathematics

Pakistan Nationals == Pakistan Armed Forces + Pakistan Tribals + Pakistan citizens.

Does UN need more explicit mention of pakistan armed forces then ??


If we take your argument, World over instead of saying country citizens we have to specify this country armed forces, this country business houses, or everywhere we will be arguing you didn't explicitly mentioned theirs name.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I asked you a question before you didnt reply so, i promise i will reply to your question once you reply to mine.

Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces in its resolution ?

Please don't be smart, because if you insist on taking this line in the slim hope that records will not be found that prove you to be concocting a false state of affairs, you will be in error and in danger of humiliating yourself grossly.

The record exists, in the submissions of the Pakistani delegation to the UN Commission, and I have read it. It is difficult to retrieve, but if you really wish for a public shaming, I will take the trouble and retrieve it.

Tell me what you want.

This is silly we are really going at same thing, let me try one time with mathematics

Pakistan Nationals == Pakistan Armed Forces + Pakistan Tribals + Pakistan citizens.

Does UN need more explicit mention of pakistan armed forces then ??


If we take your argument, World over instead of saying country citizens we have to specify this country armed forces, this country business houses, or everywhere we will be arguing you didn't explicitly mentioned theirs name.

Yes, that's what he wants.

He is being silly, because that would mean having to say in public what all of us who have read the original documents know: that Pakistan vehemently denied the presence of its military in Kashmir until long after the Commission had begun its work. At which point, it made a shame-faced admission of this. If he wants an airing of that unlovely episode, he is welcome.

Dont be personal.. If you find anything in the UN resolution that asks Pakistan Army to withdraw, please do share (withe document itself as source), else dont bother to comment.
Your first 3 questions show you dont know how the UN apparatus works on global conflicts.It says India has to facilitate UN body to conduct peliscite.Read the document..Why should UN decide a date that is not followable? Either you leave UN if you think its unfair or you follow its passed resolution. The criteria was agreed upon by the not Indians,not Pakistanis but by the body you adhere to for global conflicts.They were taskd to solve the issue just like they did for East Timor plebecite or the one in South Sudan and many other states.
For the last one
Through a jointly formed armed struggle of the local people, the Gilgit Scouts and the Muslim officers of the Maharaja’s army, the area was liberated on November 1, 1947 and an interim government constituted under Raja Shah Rais Khan of Gilgit. The government of Pakistan was invited through a telegram to take control of the areas. Responding to this request Sardar Muhammad Alam (A tehsildar in the NWFP government at that time) was appointed and sent to Gilgit on 16th November, as government of Pakistan’s political agent.

In April 1949 because of several administrative constraints an agreement was reached between the government of Pakistan and government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJ & K). Accordingly the administrative control of Gilgit and Baltistan was temporarily transferred to the former. Vide sub-clause 8 of section-3 of this Agreement, the affairs of Gilgit and Baltistan were brought under the control of Political Agent appointed by the government of Pakistan.


Thats why i said earlier...read teh document.figure out WHICH Pakistani nationals were being referred to. Why would UN shy away to take name of Pakistani Army or forces?



In case you didnt see, i posted the document way before you jumped in here. Like i said , would be a new thing i would learn unless its from state produced warped sources.

Very well, then. I was trying to save you this: I have good friends in this forum, and I wanted to spare them the embarrassment.

You will be shown your own state's admission that it had been lying all along. Remember, you asked for it.

 

[ito]

Nawaz had a chance to bring India to table and he blew it away. Instead he choose to rile India using the recent unrest in Kashmir. Nawaz can now forget Indo - Pak talks for next 5 years.

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Being personal would be calling you names. Your post #152

Where does it say 'Pakistan Army' or ' Pakistan forces' in the resolution? IT DOESNT. The withdrawal only for the Indian forces. The troop withdrawal is only for Indians not Pakistanis.And the resolution is for J&K. not the other princely states of that time.Yes Pakistani nationals

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/india-should-accept-defeat-before-kashmiris’-struggle-says-nawaz.440188/page-11#ixzz4FJxuLi77

I merely pointed you out as a Professor of History - his-version of story.

Because, there are hundreds of wannabe like you who don't read and come here, trolling and wasting time and then making a dunce of themselves.

Read UN resolution 47




Read UN resolutions 38 , 39, 47. and then speak. Not here to teach you. Do your own work.




You clearly missed sarcasm .... no surprises here.



Blah blah blah blah blah .... where is the plebiscite I asked for? Did you hold one? If you didn't then you can as well keep your counsel of plebiscite to yourself. Your acceptance of Instrument of Accession is in violation of Indian Independence Act of 1947 Para 3(a) and (b) hence untenable.

Don't give me non-sense. You have no locus standii to comment as Pakistanis in what is clearly an internal affair of a Dominion legalised by aforementioned statuette which also legalised your own state into existence. Go figure.




Go read from threads where we have posted earlier .. don't give me your 'i posted the document way before you jumped in here'. We have been flogging this dead horse, then burying it and then exhuming it and again repeating the process since years.

Why should i go and read the documents?.Just quote the relevant stuff here and and post the document URL as a source since you make the claim that im wrong...Now i have to spoon-feed you on how to present your point over a forum?

Gibberish..
Give me a UN document URL that says 'Pakistan forces' need to withdraw period

 

[Joe Shearer]

Why should i go and read the documents?.Just quote the relevant stuff here and and post the document URL as a source since you make the claim that im wrong...Now i have to spoon-feed you on how to present your point over a forum?

Gibberish..
Give me a UN document URL that says 'Pakistan forces' need to withdraw period

You will be shown an official Pakistani document.

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Please don't be smart, because if you insist on taking this line in the slim hope that records will not be found that prove you to be concocting a false state of affairs, you will be in error and in danger of humiliating yourself grossly.

The record exists, in the submissions of the Pakistani delegation to the UN Commission, and I have read it. It is difficult to retrieve, but if you really wish for a public shaming, I will take the trouble and retrieve it.

Tell me what you want.



Yes, that's what he wants.

He is being silly, because that would mean having to say in public what all of us who have read the original documents know: that Pakistan vehemently denied the presence of its military in Kashmir until long after the Commission had begun its work. At which point, it made a shame-faced admission of this. If he wants an airing of that unlovely episode, he is welcome.



Very well, then. I was trying to save you this: I have good friends in this forum, and I wanted to spare them the embarrassment.

You will be shown your own state's admission that it had been lying all along. Remember, you asked for it.

You are unnecessarily making it look like an ego issue, which is not really my way.
Just present what you need to prove my argument wrong instead of making it melodramatic

You will be shown an official Pakistani document.

Why a Pakistani document? I have been asking for a UN document, thats what we ve been originally talking about?

I mean if you can fake our currency and put it in our market, what good would be this document?

 

[danger007]

Oi, I resent that. What do you mean a perfect Indian? The one who parrots non-sense like which we accuse our neighbours of? Then, yeah, am not perfect..... but for me J&K's solution lies in between Article 1.1 of Indian Constitution and Article 370. Maybe I will stand for elections someday and then ask your vote and then will give you the political solution!!!

But have laid out the bitter facts. Read Chinese Campaign - Dalvi and Palit, you will call them traitors for what they write!!!!! One commanded the ill fated brigade and the other was in Military Operations.

Why is that it is so hard for both Pakistanis and Indians to accept the historical facts and make sensible decisions based on them??

On a side note: The Naga mess was much greater than Kashmir. In Kashmir we have an Instrument of Accession. But in Naga, they declared independence. To add insult to their injury, Nehru in his finite wisdom and infinite stupidity, gave the traditional grazing land of Nagas till Chindwin to Burma as a boundary settlement. That set off the most potent Insurgencies that India had ever known. We got two accords and the present Indian dispensation did exactly what we have been saying and our fellow nationals baying for our bloods over it - reach an accord granting autonomy to Nagas without change in boundaries. Things have settled. Modi signed it quietly on 03 August (I think)

When you can do that for Nagaland, why not for a state where you promised it? Anyways, that is moot point as already the state has that autonomy and it is only the Kashmiris themselves who run and manage the state government who are messing up by rampant corruption and poor administration.

I feel like I am in a round room which has no doors and looking for an exit



When you half read and follow it up with absence of comprehension skills, we get retard post like this.

Counter-Narrative for your above point ..

1. Where does it say that India has to hold a plebiscite as a binding resolution?

2. Where is the date given for a plebiscite?

3. Who gave the criteria of plebiscite as mandatory for acceptance of Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja of J&K?

4. If indeed plebiscite was the criteria, when was plebiscite held when you accepted the accession of Gilgit? It was not, merely the Gilgit Scouts mutinied and asked for accession .... at the point of a gun. Where was the plebiscite held when you signed the Sino-Pakistan Boundary Pact and ceded territories of Hunza State in Shasgam?

Another Professor of History, telling his-version of story!!!



Another dimwit. Unfortunately we have a few on our sides too. I enjoyed it till about 02 days back. And now @Dash et al have decided am not 'perfect' indian ... lol what is that?

I have faced retarded ones from our side.... anyway ... why just 7 00 000 soldiers.. they can increase it to 10 00 000 over night.. anything possible in pdf... whom you are calling dimwit...

 

[Hellfire]

@Joe Shearer Sir you mentioned Abu Zolfiqar earlier ... the same gentleman who had the Mig-27 falling dead right on the spot which got me into a nice chat with him the other time ... and he was so peeved at being termed "First Line Of Nonsense" that he gave me a negative rating ... LOL

Now the gentleman who is not interested in reading papers and is online only to make an as5 of his esteemed self, even after I wasted 3 minutes collating the thread which has exhaustively discussed the issue with your presence in it, is aiming for a similar treatment.

May I seek you indulgence? i really need to get off the net for a couple of months .. except for the stroll and occasional interesting inputs and pointers from you as you keep giving me .... please be nice with @-blitzkrieg- I like his Shooting Shit With Confidence attitude (seems like a law student, trying to give an argument like that anyways without reading the necessary paragraphs explicitly highlighting it) , this von Mannstein fan ... bet he will credit blitzkrieg to Guderian ... and argue about it too.

I have faced retarded ones from our side.... anyway ... why just 7 00 000 soldiers.. they can increase it to 10 00 000 over night.. anything possible in pdf... whom you are calling dimwit...

Opps sorry .. you are right .....

Man I wish we had their mobilisation capability .. the one which they attribute to us .. we wouldn't be doing a cold start .. just a mere cold fart would suffice.. So long

Happy Hunting am off on my sojourn ... for a few weeks.