India terms OIC resolution on Kashmir ''completely unacceptable''

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, as you already know, no third party intervention is allowed per Shimla Agreement, so OIC resolutions are irrelevant.

*runs and hides*

Yeesh - you guys are thick headed aren't you, requiring repeated debunking of the same claim again and again and again ...

First, the OIC expressed a position completely in line with the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir and the Simla Agreement. Nothing in the Simla Agreement prevents the OIC from issuing a resolution or taking a position on the Kashmir dispute. In case you didn't notice, the OIC is not a party to the Simla Agreement and therefore doesn't give a flying f*** about what India thinks about the positions it takes.

Second, the language of Simla does not preclude 3rd party involvement;
1. By reiterating a commitment to the UN Charter Simla in fact reiterates the commitment of both countries to abide by the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir

2. Outside of the UN, the language of the Simla Agreement leaves open third party mediation provided both India and Pakistan agree to it.

 

[nik22]

Hafiz Saeed of PDF.
You know who, right?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It's funny that you take it to mean that India's "rejection" is futile, when the reality is that it's their resolutions that are futile and inconsequential.

OIC resolutions were never meant to do anything more than state a position on the Kashmir dispute - the continued restatement of that position, however, makes clear that India's position on the Kashmir dispute (that it's an integral part of India) has very few takers in the international community.

 

[ayesha.a]

OIC resolutions were never meant to do anything more than state a position on the Kashmir dispute - the continued restatement of that position, however, makes clear that India's position on the Kashmir dispute (that it's an integral part of India) has very few takers in the international community.

The OIC is not "the international community". The only reason that a country is part of the OIC, is because of shared religion - and India has more muslims than most countries of the OIC put together. So I'm not really sure why India should care about a statement from a community that is a community solely because of religious commonality, but are more divided than any other group on earth in reality.

So yes, a joint statement by Syria and Saudi and Syria and Lebanon and Qatar about Kashmir, when they are duking it out on the battlefield among themselves - how seriously would one take it? In the middle of an India-Pakistan war, if the two countries issued a joint statement about the Falklands, how seriously would anybody take it? Then of course, there are giants like Togo and Ivory coast and Guyana. Not to mention Maldives, who's security is actually guaranteed by India, and hosts listening posts and mini bases for the Indian armed forces.

The fact that other than a pointless statement ritually delivered every year, nobody in the international community - or even in the OIC - does anything about it whatsoever, and treats India in exactly the same manner they would with or without a Kashmir issue, should tell you that nobody cares. It makes Pakistanis feel proud that those great Arabs and the great ummah said one sentence about Kashmir - but that's the only real world impact. The OIC knows it, India knows it, the real "international community" knows it.

But hey, if it cheers the hearts of Pakistanis, I say deliver this statement every year. It would help Pakistan live in perpetual delusion about how much others care for them.

 

[nik22]

Yeesh - you guys are thick headed aren't you, requiring repeated debunking of the same claim again and again and again ...

First, the OIC expressed a position completely in line with the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir and the Simla Agreement. Nothing in the Simla Agreement prevents the OIC from issuing a resolution or taking a position on the Kashmir dispute. In case you didn't notice, the OIC is not a party to the Simla Agreement and therefore doesn't give a flying f*** about what India thinks about the positions it takes.

Second, the language of Simla does not preclude 3rd party involvement;
1. By reiterating a commitment to the UN Charter Simla in fact reiterates the commitment of both countries to abide by the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir

2. Outside of the UN, the language of the Simla Agreement leaves open third party mediation provided both India and Pakistan agree to it.

You Sir, I am highly impressed by your arguments. Unfortunately a thick headed Indian like me and many other Indians can make anything complex.

Please Sir, give me address of your madarassa/school. We will try to start an exchange program. Hope you will not be averse to idea and help me for betterment of India. Thank You!

 

[HttpError]

Great we needed to bring up the Kashmir issue and we have successfully made it the center of attention. Now let the game begin.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The OIC is not "the international community". .

It is not the 'entire international community', but it does represent a good chunk of it. And of course the UNSC Resolutions continue to remain in effect.

And yes, continued reiteration by the international community of a position that is in line with the government of Pakistan's stated position on the dispute of Kashmir is welcome, since it is a continued reminder of the illegitimacy of the Indian position on the dispute.

 

[ayesha.a]

Great we needed to bring up the Kashmir issue and we have successfully made it the center of attention. Now let the game begin.

As told repeatedly, OIC has been making this statement every year for decades. You may have only just started reading the news. But it's nothing new. Here, from 1993:

Waxing Of The Crescent. OIC Trains Its Guns On Kashmir by Girilal Jain - Girilal Jain Archive

You can find this statement every single year. Much good has it done to you.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You Sir, I am highly impressed by your arguments. Unfortunately a thick headed Indian like me and many other Indians can make anything complex.

Please Sir, give me address of your madarassa/school. We will try to start an exchange program. Hope you will not be averse to idea and help me for betterment of India. Thank You!

You don't need an address for a madrassa - from the content of your posts it's apparent you're enrolled in one already.

Your comments here are a typical response/attitude from a particular kind of Indian poster when confronted with arguments they can't counter - hijack the thread, throw out ad hominems ... anything but offer a counter-argument.

 

[Brickwall]

Great we needed to bring up the Kashmir issue and we have successfully made it the center of attention. Now let the game begin.

whats with pakistanis and bringing kashmir issue to center of attention, u ask anyone they will say we did this or that to bring kashmir issue to center of attention.

Can somebody explain, does kashmir changes its alignment after evry week or so, that it has to be brought center

 

[desimorty]

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Relations with the OIC ----------------------

¶10. (C) J/S Singh dismissed the idea that India maintained hope to join the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), explaining that since Pakistan "hijacked" the OIC to use it to condemn India, other nations have begun to use it in the same way. The OIC has been a "reactive talk shop," he continued, and does not generate serious ideas. If Pakistan were to change its views of India's participation, the first "straws in the wind" would be the grant of MFN trade status to India. Until then, Singh commented, there will be no chance of Indian participation. He admitted, however, that New Delhi sees signs that Saudi Arabia and Malaysia are beginning to "reappraise" the role of the OIC in the Muslim Ummah, and could reform the OIC to be more relevant. In that case, he continued, the OIC may be willing to look at the example of democratic and secular India, where Muslims "do well," despite being in the minority, and where there is little enticement to fundamentalism or radicalism.

On the whole OIC seems to be toothless, irrespective of its capability.

Interestingly China seem to have good control over OIC.

(C) Egyptian Embassy Officer Haitham Safey (protect) told PolOff July 30 that PRC efforts to quash a proposed statement by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) condemning the Chinese government's response to the July 5 unrest in Xinjiang and its treatment of Muslim Uighurs (reftels) had succeeded. He said that the effort, led at China's behest by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, had led to the cancellation of debate on the subject scheduled for July 21, and the concept of a declaration on Xinjiang was now dead. He added that China had lobbied Turkey on the issue as well, dispatching an MFA Department Director General fluent in Turkish to Ankara to seek to reduce Sino-Turkish tensions and head off the proposed statement.

¶2. (C) Safey reported that, in the negotiations over the proposed statement, China had agreed to invite OIC Secretary-General Ihsanoglu to visit Xinjiang and assess the situation of Uighurs there on behalf of the OIC, a concession that China had initially opposed. He said that China had since attempted to delay the scheduling of Ihsanoglu's travel, using the upcoming Ramadan period as a reason to delay the visit at least through the end of September. He suggested that China would attempt to further delay the visit after the conclusion of Ramadan.

¶3. (C) Safey added that international fallout from the Xinjiang violence had prompted China to seek observer status in the OIC, but he speculated that prospects for this effort were dim due to the high bar for granting observership as well as concerns among member countries that the PRC might seek to use the organization as a forum for justifying the abuse of Muslim minorities. GOLDBERG

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Exactly. Such "resoultions" don't matter a whit.

lol as an occupational force it doesnt matter what u think! yr foreigners here not others.

 

[HttpError]

As told repeatedly, OIC has been making this statement every year for decades. You may have only just started reading the news. But it's nothing new. Here, from 1993:

Waxing Of The Crescent. OIC Trains Its Guns On Kashmir by Girilal Jain - Girilal Jain Archive

You can find this statement every single year. Much good has it done to you.

Stop copying my style you copy cat.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I know. And after the bloody massacre, he was rewarded with a promotion by your army - instead of being courtmartialled, as many saner voices in your country asked for.

And you know that ? How,

Except that a foreigner on a training mission does not have to heed "orders" to attack anybody on behalf of that country. Yes, he was their as a trainer - the same training you were earlier boasting about providing to Palestinian security forces - when he eagerly commanded a Jordanian armoured division to massacre Palestinians. He didn't have to do it, not being under their command, but he did it enthusiastically. And was rewarded with a promotion.

He wasn't on a "training mission"... Pak military forces/individuals in ME countries aren't on training missions ... Back than they were deployed to secure these countries and capacity building... Under mandate given by those countries !


Do a little reading in the so called "Palestinian militants in Jordan".. It was a civil war initiated by PLO against the Jordanian state .. A civil war to control or overthrow the Jordanian govt ... Which wasn't just supported by 1 brigadier from Pak but by neighbouring Arab countries like Egypt etc aswell..

If you don't know these things better stuff it!

Helpless people would accept support from anybody. The middle east should teach you at least that much, if nothing more.

Oh please save me the nonsense !

Anyway the point is that India does not have Palestinian blood on its hands, and our position has always, consistently, been statehood for Palestine. This despite all that Israel has to offer us, and despite our friendship with them - we have put principle ahead of pragmatism, at least one of the very few countries to do so vis-a-vis the middle east.

And how many times has india raised the issue at UN ? Has indian even condemned the mass killings in Gaza ? I only see your people supporting Israelis on this forum ?

A few shallow statements are good for people like yourself but hold no importance on the world stage.