India's arguments on Kashmir why they don't want to hold a plebiscite

[Chandragupt Maurya]

Hindus waited for 1000 years to return favor and rule over Muslims.
Pakistan separation ruined that chance. Since then bhaktoras like are you are extremely desperate and your very words are a mirror of that desperation and inferiority complex.
Seems like indian Muslims are the only option now but they are also out of control for radicals like you.
You served us well in the past and now I don't think your elders will be proud of your behaviour

Even your Arab, Afghan, and Turk masters do not claim to have ruled over India. It's hilarious that Pakistani slaves, who have always been on the receiving end, can claim that Pakistanis ruled over India for 1000 years. It appears that Stockholm syndrome has set in, and you Pakistanis have begun to celebrate your pillage at the hands of invaders.

 

[TopGun786]

Even your Arab, Afghan, and Turk masters do not claim to have ruled over India. It's hilarious that Pakistani slaves, who have always been on the receiving end, can claim that Pakistanis ruled over India for 1000 years. It appears that Stockholm syndrome has set in, and you Pakistanis have begun to celebrate your pillage at the hands of invaders.

Same tantrum as a child.
Like I said many times before you Hindus cannot get over it. It is embedded in your mind.
The funny thing is many Bhaktoras decided to avenge some of 1000 slavery by expanding as ''Maha Bharat''.... but things are more likely going towards division of ''Bharat''.
I still have a soft corner for you because Mouriyas were very good servants and they served very well to my elders. If you wish I can take you in my custody also. I promise I will not be hard on you.

 

[third eye]

The funny thing is many Bhaktoras decided to avenge some of 1000 slavery by expanding as ''Maha Bharat''.... but things are more likely going towards division of ''Bharat''.

You obviously meant 1000 YEARS...

For the record, when did the 1000 years start and finish ?

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

Same tantrum as a child.
Like I said many times before you Hindus cannot get over it. It is embedded in your mind.
The funny thing is many Bhaktoras decided to avenge some of 1000 slavery by expanding as ''Maha Bharat''.... but things are more likely going towards division of ''Bharat''.
I still have a soft corner for you because Mouriyas were very good servants and they served very well to my elders. If you wish I can take you in my custody also. I promise I will not be hard on you.

If Indian Hindus were defeatist, They would have never resisted and kept Their heartland. If they lost, they would have never remained standing here. If their forefathers were cowards (like yours), they would all be wearing skullcaps, chanting Azaan and remain frozen in the teachings of a vile desert cult.

 

[TopGun786]

If Indian Hindus were defeatist, They would have never resisted and kept Their heartland. If they lost, they would have never remained standing here. If their forefathers were cowards (like yours), they would all be wearing skullcaps, chanting Azaan and remain frozen in the teachings of a vile desert cult.

Again babbling like a baby..... be a man!!!!
It is only pity that saves you from my wrath otherwise I would have beat the hell out of you disregarding the fact that Mouryas were once our slaves and did odd works for us.

 

[TopGun786]

You have no answers; a thousand years of defeat, humiliation, and slavery by the followers of a vile desert cult have corrupted your mind to such an extent that you have begun to claim bizarre things.

Defeat? Humiliation?
For who?
For Hindus?
Hindus do not have a sense of shame, humiliation, or defeat. They just accepted slavery from Muslims and Muslims have ruled over them (you) for some 1000 years.
Again... it is embedded in your DNA. You can forget it from your tiny brains and are obsessed with it. Good for us.

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

Defeat? Humiliation?
For who?
For Hindus?
Hindus do not have a sense of shame, humiliation, or defeat. They just accepted slavery from Muslims and Muslims have ruled over them (you) for some 1000 years.
Again... it is embedded in your DNA. You can forget it from your tiny brains and are obsessed with it. Good for us.

Your forebears included the Hindus who capitulated in fear, while those who courageously resisted and triumphed over Islam were the predecessors of today's Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists in the Indian subcontinent.

 

[TopGun786]

Your forebears included the Hindus who capitulated in fear, while those who courageously resisted and triumphed over Islam were the predecessors of today's Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists in the Indian subcontinent.

You are sooo funny.
I can take you again as my slave... O humble bhaktora

 

[MilSpec]

If you don't want to look silly, it's best to read the post before replying.

Nowhere did I say Pakistan completed the withdrawal, I said Pakistan began to withdraw its forces (as was required per UN Resolutions) but later halted the process due to the failure of UNCIP and India to reach an agreement over the withdrawal of the bulk of Indian forces. And that exactly is what UNCIP reports state

If Pakistan did not complete the withdrawal, it's in violation of the truce agreement. Plain and simple.

And then by Invading the contested territory twice, it violated the ceasefire order and the spirit of the resolution, and thus every Pakistani making this UN plebiscite argument starts by making a stupid premise.

There is no possibility of revisiting UNSC resolutions after the treacherous conduct of the Pakistani Establishment (read Army).

 

[M. Sarmad]

If Pakistan did not complete the withdrawal, it's in violation of the truce agreement. Plain and simple.

No, it's not

As confirmed by UNCIP itself on several occasions, Pakistan was not bound to unilaterally and unconditionally withdraw its forces from J&K. Its obligation was to initiate the withdrawal of its forces. Pakistan began withdrawing its regular troops, having already secured the withdrawal of tribesmen by February 1949, as acknowledged in UN reports.

However, this process was later halted due to the failure of India and UNCIP (and its successors) to reach an agreement on the terms and conditions of withdrawal of the bulk of Indian forces as India kept on rejecting each and every demilitarization proposal put forth by UNCIP, therefore, the UNCIP could not inform Pakistan about the terms and conditions of the Truce, leading to the withholding of further withdrawals. The details of these events can be found in UNCIP Interim Reports.

----------------
** The UN Commission had assured Pakistan as follows:

• In accordance with the provisions of the truce proposals of the 13 August 1948 resolution: (1) After Pakistan had made the beginning in the withdrawal of its forces from Kashmir there was to be a relation between the further withdrawals of all the Pakistan forces and the beginning withdrawals of the bulk of the Indian forces from Kashmir in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.
  ​

​

And then by Invading the contested territory twice, it violated the ceasefire order and the spirit of the resolution, and thus every Pakistani making this UN plebiscite argument starts by making a stupid premise.

There is no possibility of revisiting UNSC resolutions after the treacherous conduct of the Pakistani Establishment (read Army).​

Regardless of whether or not the claims of ceasefire violations by Pakistan (or India for that matter) are true, the fact remains that the UN Resolutions do not specify that the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir is contingent upon the observance of a ceasefire on LOC. Try again​

 

[MilSpec]

No, it's not

As confirmed by UNCIP itself on several occasions, Pakistan was not bound to unilaterally and unconditionally withdraw its forces from J&K. Its obligation was to initiate the withdrawal of its forces. Pakistan began withdrawing its regular troops, having already secured the withdrawal of tribesmen by February 1949, as acknowledged in UN reports.

However, this process was later halted due to the failure of India and UNCIP (and its successors) to reach an agreement on the terms and conditions of withdrawal of the bulk of Indian forces as India kept on rejecting each and every demilitarization proposal put forth by UNCIP, therefore, the UNCIP could not inform Pakistan about the terms and conditions of the Truce, leading to the withholding of further withdrawals. The details of these events can be found in UNCIP Interim Reports.

----------------
** The UN Commission had assured Pakistan as follows:

• In accordance with the provisions of the truce proposals of the 13 August 1948 resolution: (1) After Pakistan had made the beginning in the withdrawal of its forces from Kashmir there was to be a relation between the further withdrawals of all the Pakistan forces and the beginning withdrawals of the bulk of the Indian forces from Kashmir in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.​

​

Ok lets review What resolutions of 13 Aug 1948 and 5th Jan 1949 says

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;

Now lets go to 13 Aug 1948



*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.



So without completion of the withdrawal there is is no scope for India to initiate anything. . The Agreement is sequential: and 1. literally spells it out for you:

. (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. (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.

Pakistan never withdrew it's forces and militia. If anything they commissioned thier para mil forces like gilgit scouts into NLI. Pakistan did not Withdraw it's combatants for India to initiate anything.

Regardless of whether or not the claims of ceasefire violations by Pakistan (or India for that matter) are true, the fact remains that the UN Resolutions do not specify that the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir is contingent upon the observance of a ceasefire on LOC. Try again​

Now if this just ignorance , following will help: (Verbatim


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;

The highlighted above is not my opinion but the USNC resloution literally refutes your claim that Plebiscite is not contingent upon Cease-fire agreement. )


But if it's just the usual intellectual dishonesty, you can try cherry picking and mangling the resolutions to putforth the same BS that has been pummeled to death on this forum.

 

[VkdIndian]

Regardless of whether or not the claims of ceasefire violations by Pakistan

What about full fledged offensive?

 

[M. Sarmad]

Ok lets review What resolutions of 13 Aug 1948 and 5th Jan 1949 says

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;

Now lets go to 13 Aug 1948



*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.



So without completion of the withdrawal there is is no scope for India to initiate anything. . The Agreement is sequential: and 1. literally spells it out for you:

. (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. (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.

Pakistan never withdrew it's forces and militia. If anything they commissioned thier para mil forces like gilgit scouts into NLI. Pakistan did not Withdraw it's combatants for India to initiate anything.


Now if this just ignorance , following will help: (Verbatim


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;

The highlighted above is not my opinion but the USNC resloution literally refutes your claim that Plebiscite is not contingent upon Cease-fire agreement. )


But if it's just the usual intellectual dishonesty, you can try cherry picking and mangling the resolutions to putforth the same BS that has been pummeled to death on this forum.

You didn't have to copy paste the entire UNCIP resolution desperately trying to defend the indefensible Indian position regarding those Resolutions. Read my post again, carefully. I have quoted UNCIP itself, not my personal opinion or Pakistani POV. The UNCIP had made it clear that there was to be a relation between further withdrawal of Pakistani forces and the withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces. Pakistan was under no obligation to withdraw it's forces unilaterally and unconditionally. Read it again, and again until you comprehend this simple fact

 

[M. Sarmad]

Now if this just ignorance , following will help: (Verbatim


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;

The highlighted above is not my opinion but the USNC resloution literally refutes your claim that Plebiscite is not contingent upon Cease-fire agreement. )


But if it's just the usual intellectual dishonesty, you can try cherry picking and mangling the resolutions to putforth the same BS that has been pummeled to death on this forum.

Again, using bright and large fonts won't prove you right. The ceasefire you are talking about had come into effect even before the passing of the 5th Jan 1949 Resolution. Ceasefire line was also established following it and the same ceasefire line (LOC) continues to exist even today. The UN still maintains its military observers (UNMOGIP) in the region to observe ceasefire line (and violations) as agreed upon by both countries in 1949.

You need to do you homework first if you want to participate in serious debates on this topic

What about full fledged offensive?

Should be reported to the UN. They keep their military observers in the region for this very reason

 

[Skull and Bones]

Kashmiris needs to be shows about the current protest and suicide sprees happening in Pakistan daily on regional TV channel. Subconscious brainwashing should be state sponsored.