That day i will love to wake up in Hell and make it a heaven, if you know what i mean. Radio Pakistan New Delhi
.......... ............
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That day i will love to wake up in Hell and make it a heaven, if you know what i mean. Radio Pakistan New Delhi
Well that is all so obvious, and I don't think it's too far from the truth. The fact that my fellow Pakistani members are jumping up and down shouting 'disputed' this and 'plebiscite' that, miss the wider picture.
There is near complete and total silence from the international community on this.
Even within Pakistan there seems to be Kashmir fatigue. I saw the ARY News main bulletin, and Kashmir was the 5th story to feature.
Yes I realise we've experienced our worst floods in decades, but there aren't protests or anything similar to express solidarity that I can see out on the streets. We have seen that previously.
So the issue is totally internalised, and that's where a solution to the current unrest will come from.
We know that people in 4 districts at best are against us. Most of these pictures come from Srinagar, just one city. Big deal.
Also rioters should be killed end of story.
I think they know what it means and they know what they want (multiple possible solutions), but the slogan of 'Azadi' resonates and is easier for people to latch on to and unify over. For example, at the rally led by separatists, there were people waving all sorts of flags - Kashmir flags and Pakistan flags.We don't know what they will ask for as the term 'azaadi' hasn't been explicitly explained from what I've read. It seems the separatists don't know what this means.
On the AFSPA, even the moderate separatists have rejected the AFSPA rescinding as enough, twice now, in the last few days.Then what you ask? Well, it's what we have now - a stalemate. Valiant_Soul has touched on it, and so have I in previous posts - it's all a matter of who will blink first.
The preconditions are in place for both sides. Both seem to be non-negotiable. In that case, we get the status quo: killings and protests.
I think this has gone beyond even taking steps like rescinding AFSPA. I doubt gestures such as those (which once looked meaningful) can pave the way for peace or normalcy.
K
i think its in india interest to let go kashmir and develop its people..... specially people living on footpaths.....
Please do not tax your brain. We will do our thinking for ourselves.Having flags of two countries & waving a third does not constitute internationalisation of the Kashmir issue. We are not in the habit of allowing others to decide what exactly is in our interest.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that the people are disenchanted with Indian occupation and are demanding (at least the kashmiris) that they be allowed to exercise their right to self-determination in some form?
The problem is you want to somehow criticize....I don't know about Pakistan but lets talk about India here....You are going from excuse after excuse to somehow link the unrest with 'lack of development' even going so far as to argue that professions in 'agriculture and husbandry' is the cause, never mind the fact that the majority of both India and Pakistan's economies, and that of many other developing nations, continue to be based on agriculture.
Where is the disenchantment over 'agriculture and animal husbandry jobs' in Pakistan? These are not youths who were unemployed for years that are taking up the baton of protesting Indian rule. Many of them are college and school going individuals, who have not even experienced any potential 'disenchantment with the job market'. This kind of absurd exercise in denying the fact that disenchantment over a violated commitment to deciding through plebiscite whether or not to be part of the Indian State is dishonesty with self.
Again your problem is being selective on the demands of Kashmiri's....Plebiscite is a very complex issue...One cannot solve it because Agno believes that is the right way to go....Inviting people to find out what they want shows a mature step and is being done on various platforms...Here is one such debate...An interesting one...Just now I was reading an Indian piece where the author recommended holding 'open houses', inviting the youth and leadership and listening to what they want. But what if they want a plebiscite to formalize their compact with the Indian State, a compact they never agreed to?
Seems like you know a lot about "kashmiri grievances".....May be you want to update your knowledge on that....People in valley do not represent state of Jammu and Kashmir...There are people in Jammu and People in Ladakh as well....Plebiscite is very compley topic that involvesIn all the potential issues the author though the youth might raise, he never considered the possibility of plebiscite. This isn't really 'listening to kashmiri grievances', its only listening to Kashmiri grievances that you have already pre-determined are acceptable to you, in which case it is a pointless exercise.
You are contradicting yourself - in the last line you argue that the Princely States were subject to boundary conditions, but in the beginning you argue that there was no legal framework agreed upon for accessions. If there was no framework agreed upon, then where did the boundary conditions come from? The boundary conditions were in fact not conditions, but suggestions, and they were not binding.You should be aware that a legal framework in complete agreements of the concerned parties were never reached (Read more here).
And ideology was the grand basis of partition, the only one actually. The ML chose both the ideology for division and also the regions.
"Muhammad Ali Jinnah espoused the Two Nation Theory and led the Muslim League to adopt the Lahore Resolution[7] of 1940, demanding the formation of independent states for Muslims in the East and the West of British India. "
"The province of West Pakistan was created on 14 October 1955 by the merger of the provinces, states and tribal areas of the western wing. The province was composed of twelve divisions and the provincial capital was established at Lahore. The province of East Bengal was renamed East Pakistan with the provincial capital at Dhaka. The federal government moved in 1959 from Karachi to Rawalpindi (provisional capital until Islamabad was finished), whilst the federal legislature moved to Dhaka."
This was the agreed geography of Pakistan. The princely state, though free to choose the new dominions, were subject to boundary conditions, which the Nawabs of Junagadh and Hyderabad did not took into consideration.
You did not 'keep Junagadh and Hyderabad', India invaded and occupied them. In the first case the State had acceded to Pakistan, in the latter the ruler was not allowed to make any decision. There was nothing indicating an agreement to limit the accession of States to Pakistan to only Muslim States.Based on the ideology of Pakistan creation and the regions demanded by Pakistan, India was just in keeping Junagadh and Hyderabad. And there were other "at-that-time" circumstances as well that well justifies these actions, for example the rise of communal violence, future governance, etc.
I agree on the part about 'same logic', and I do not dispute resolving all three contested States through plebiscite, but where is the plebiscite in Kashmir? India now refuses to even consider it.The same logic was applied to Kashmir and India accepted the case of plebiscite.
Explicit pre-conditions, such as the ones India wants, were never formalized as part of the UNSC resolutions. The fact is that after India's hostile actions in Junagadh and Hyderabad, Pakistan was never going to vacate J&K and allow India to deploy troops to occupy the State, especially when there was no enforcement mechanism to force India to comply with the UNSC resolutions.As is relevant from that thread, India's acceptance to plebiscite was subject to pre-conditions. And an agreement to those pre-conditions were never reached by both sides. The issue hangs in limbo and so the best thing to do now is to live with what we have.
Further stretching the idea of India-Pakistan partition, that Muslims and Hindus who want to exchange sides can do so, the solution to current Kashmir valley crisis become quite clear. Those who want to go to Pakistan can do so, but demand of a separate state is neither feasible nor acceptable, even to the whole of Kashmir (as only the valley wants separation and even they are divided).
I disagree there. We've not been able to muster a sustained backing on our position for as far back as I can remember.The reason from Pakistan is obviously due to lack of leadership in Pakistan and Internationa;l Comunity always come into play when the GoP highlights the issue. So no response from teh GoP means no response from the Intl Community. Another reason is the sale of MRCA which will keep a lot of FMs to openly speak about Kashmir.
Last but not least, silence from Pakistan is a blessing in disguise because now everyone can see that this is not a Pakistan inspired issue and more improtantly Indian masses need to realize that even without the help from Pakistan, Kashmiris are very capable of asking for an independence.
I think they know what it means and they know what they want (multiple possible solutions), but the slogan of 'Azadi' resonates and is easier for people to latch on to and unify over. For example, at the rally led by separatists, there were people waving all sorts of flags - Kashmir flags and Pakistan flags.
Azadi in its simplest meaning for all of these people means the 'Azadi to decide their future'.
This is the only formulae that will work and we will end up having majority happy....people of valley will find themselves not directly under GOI control as border will be invisible, People of Jammu and Ladakh will find themselves alligned with GOI since borders are there though invisible and P-O-K people will find them free to move in and out in various parts of J&KPerhaps time to explore the Musharraf formula again, it appeared to satisfy many on both sides, though at this point the Kashmiris will have to be involved as well IMO.
Kashmir is India's internal matter now and always....all political solutions and economic packages is between the people affected in kashmir and the GOI...and there is no room at all for any outside notice from any nation or organization....
actually even before our super power status this has always been our position and it shall always continue to be so......even now when we hear on an all party meet ....it inevitably means parties in India...GOI , the other political parties, even the hurriyat factions....but no other country is referred.....
Pakistan and China can keep on insisting on the resolution of the dispute forever more but we shall neither tolerate nor engage in any discussions on our sovereignty.....the territorial integration of India is non negotiable.....