Kashmir polls

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Cessation is Not an option. They have to learn to live with the things as they are-or they might choose to go to the ballot box and ensure that Kashmir develops in a great manner.
If they become peaceful and vote then the military will gradually decrease its presence in Kashmir, otherwise if there is more militancy, there will be more troops which itself is troublesome to the people there.

In both the cases, there is no cessation.

The result of Pakistan becoming a global terrorist transit center has been India swamping the valley with troops. What do you think the militancy accomplished apart from troubling Pakistan? Nothing. And when you talk of J&K-Jammu and Leh/Laddakh are quite separate from Kashmir. They will stay on-its a fight for the Valley only.

Should this generation refuse to accept this, the next one will and if the next one refuses, then the one after that will. Cessation is not an option.

The question isn't one of 'cessation' anyway, it is one of a territorial dispute with Pakistan.

Declaring an outright refusal to implement international commitments such as the UNSC resolutions India herself initiated and agreed to, along with her commitment to the rules of partition that require a plebiscite to determine the will of the people in any contested state, and was a definite condition attached to the IoA accepted by India, does not provide any indication that India is a responsible state.

Calling Pakistan a 'global terrorism center' is nothing but a tired canard to distract from the moral and legal bankruptcy of India's position. The fact is that Pakistan has won the idealogical battle with this generation for kashmiris as well, and we will with the next, and the one after that, if it continues that long. Once again, Quebec comes to mind.

India and Indians supporting the occupation have nothing but irrational nationalism and the use of force to suppress and occupy left in the defense of their occupation. They have no legal defense,no moral defense, nothing - and that is exactly what you see regurgitated in various forms on this forum and elsewhere.

But rest easy with clutching on to your inhuman, immoral and illegal position in Kashmir - and Logic had the gall to suggest that 'the Hindu cares more for humanity than those following the Abrahamic faith'.

 

[Flintlock]

Pakistan cheated in the "ideological battle". The results are invalid.

Also, the first principle that India has to remain true to - is her territorial integrity. Everything else comes second.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan cheated in the "ideological battle". The results are invalid.

Also, the first principle that India has to remain true to - is her territorial integrity. Everything else comes second.

hee hee , yes, we used 'bottle caps'.

The territorial integrity itself is not defined, or rather the argument does not apply, in the case of Kashmir since the accession is invalid and illegal without a plebiscite and is disputed. India herself accepted the UNSC resolutions declaring J&K disputed and to be resolved through the will of the people.

 

[Flintlock]

hee hee , yes, we used 'bottle caps'.

The territorial integrity itself is not defined in the case of Kashmir since the accession is invalid and illegal without a plebiscite, and India herself accepted the UNSC resolutions declaring J&K disputed and to be resolved through the will of the people.

That ship has sailed a long time ago. It was a time of flux, boundaries were still being decided.

Now that the boundaries of India have been firmly established as per Indian law, that's the way its going to stay.

If you really stretch it, the best possible scenario is "soft" borders being established.

However, I really don't see either side giving up any territory in the future.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That ship has sailed a long time ago. It was a time of flux, boundaries were still being decided.

Now that the boundaries of India have been firmly established as per Indian law, that's the way its going to stay.

If you really stretch it, the best possible scenario is "soft" borders being established.

However, I really don't see either side giving up any territory in the future.

Indian law doesn't cut it - there are bilateral and international obligations and commitments to be considered before any final border settlement. Otherwise any expansionist aggressive regime could go around conquering territory of other nations and annexing it under 'local law'.

Soft borders are a good interim step, and it might lessen the more hardened attitudes on either side. But even now there is little agreement and cooperation on issues like water sharing that shouldn't even be issues given how well defined each sides obligations are under the IWT.

Heck, even after the issue is settled, and India agrees to compensate with water, the IWC is indicating it will go to the WB for arbitration due to Indian procrastination. This doesn't bode well, especially on such a vital issue, and the blame here is completely India's.

 

[Flintlock]

Indian law doesn't cut it - there are bilateral and international obligations and commitments to be considered before any final border settlement. Otherwise any expansionist aggressive regime could go around conquering territory of other nations and annexing it under 'local law'.

Sure, except that Indian laws are not expansionist, and therefore not a threat to the world.

For any country, the Constitution comes first, and that includes India.

Whether that country is expansionist or whatever is upto the world to decide.

Soft borders are a good interim step, and it might lessen the more hardened attitudes on either side. But even now there is little agreement and cooperation on issues like water sharing that shouldn't even be issues given how well defined each sides obligations are under the IWT.

Soft borders is the final step - and even that is not going to happen unless Pakistan demonstrates that it is serious about a peaceful Kashmir.

Attractive as it sounds, India is not going to open its borders to mujahideen of every colour.

Heck, even after the issue is settled, and India agrees to compensate with water, the IWC is indicating it will go to the WB for arbitration due to Indian procrastination. This doesn't bode well, especially on such a vital issue, and the blame here is completely India's.

India has no obligation to supply a fixed amount of water to Pakistan. If the amount of water available in the river goes down, then Pakistan has to accept a smaller amount. We cannot starve our people in order to ensure that you get enough.

 

[Nihat]

Plus , I don't think the treaty has been Ratified for some strange reason.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sure, except that Indian laws are not expansionist, and therefore not a threat to the world.

For any country, the Constitution comes first, and that includes India.

Whether that country is expansionist or whatever is upto the world to decide.

It is expansionist when you claim that disputed territory is 'Indian' under "Indian law', that is the same as having physical possession of conquered/occupied territory and annexing it through the constitution of the occupying country.

And the world has decided, and India agreed, through the UNSC resolutions. Plus India's own agreement to the rules of partition, a plebiscite is required.

Soft borders is the final step - and even that is not going to happen unless Pakistan demonstrates that it is serious about a peaceful Kashmir.

Attractive as it sounds, India is not going to open its borders to mujahideen of every colour.

Soft borders are already being discussed, through trade etc. I am not sure how you can consider that a final step, since that can only come about when a final resolution is agreed to by both sides. And Pakistan has to show nothing, 'soft borders' aren't something we are begging for, its a possible bilateral CBM in the interests of the Kashmiris.

India has no obligation to supply a fixed amount of water to Pakistan. If the amount of water available in the river goes down, then Pakistan has to accept a smaller amount. We cannot starve our people in order to ensure that you get enough.

That water isn't for India to use anyway, so the question of 'starving' doesn't arise. The reduction of water was downstream in Pakistan, because of how India chose to fill the reservoir, and therefore she did violate her obligations.

If there was a reduction in seasonal rains, and therefore water flow, the filling of the reservoir should not have taken place, or should have taken place over a longer time.

However, the water debate can continue on the relevant thread.

 

[daredevil]

India slams Pakistan's comments on Jammu and Kashmir polls

PTI | November 21, 2008 | 19:51 IST

India reacted sharply to certain comments by Pakistan on the Jammu and Kashmir polls, saying it indicates Islamabad is not interested in playing a "responsible role" in the region which it should in its "own interest".

External Affairs Ministry spokesman Vishnu Prakash termed as "most unfortunate" the comments by Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Muhammad Sadiq that polls in Jammu and Kashmir do not reflect "authentic" expression of aspirations of the people of the state.

"We strongly object to these remarks. It is in Pakistan's own interest to play a responsible role in the region. Comments such as these hardly suggest that it is prepared to do so," Prakash said.

His reaction came a day after Sadiq said that "the ongoing elections in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be construed
as authentic expression of the real aspirations of the Kashmiri people."

Seven-phase elections are underway in Jammu and Kashmir amid tight security to thwart any attempt by militants to
disrupt the polling process which is boycotted by separatists.

In the first phase on November 17, electorate turned up in large numbers braving freezing temperatures and ignoring
separatists' boycott call and recorded a turnout of 55 percent.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

India puts Kashmir toll at 47,000

Afp, Srinagar

The nearly two-decade old insurgency in Indian Kashmir has left 47,000 people dead, more than 20,000 of them civilians, according to official figures released Friday.

The figure did not include those labelled as having "disappeared" in the region since the unrest began in 1989 and a prominent human rights group said the real toll was certainly far higher.

Kashmir Chief Secretary S.S. Kapur said in a statement that more than 20,000 civilians and 7,000 police and security personnel had died in what he described as "incidents of terrorism" in the past 20 years.

The same period had witnessed "the neutralisation" of 20,000 militant separatists seeking to end Indian rule in divided Kashmir.

The region's leading human rights group, the Coalition of Civil Society, said the real toll stood at more than 70,000 dead.

"Our figures are based on a proper survey," senior group official Khurram Pervez said, citing 8,000 people believed to have disappeared after their arrest by security forces.

Kashmiri separatists say nearly 100,000 people have died in the unrest.

Violence had declined since India and Pakistan, which control the divided halves of Kashmir but claim the region in full, started a peace process in January 2004.

The nuclear-armed rivals have fought two of their three wars over Kashmir.

:The Daily Star: Internet Edition

 

[Captain03]

this election is nonsense
all numbers are made up and this election is fixed or the majority of kashmiri people would not have oppose to it
someday a day will come where kashmiris finally decide their own fate

 

[johnee]

this election is nonsense
all numbers are made up and this election is fixed or the majority of kashmiri people would not have oppose to it
someday a day will come where kashmiris finally decide their own fate

strangely........pakistan could not even achieve this much in kashmir that it holds.......!

 

[daredevil]

New face: Kashmiri youth keener on polls than azaadi
Mufti Islah
CNN-IBN


POLL MODE: A majority of Kashmir youth are supporting polls than seeking Kashmir resolution.
Ganderbal (Srinagar): From Amarnath agitation to polls, the perception among the Kashmir youth is fast changing, with a majority of them supporting elections rather than seeking Kashmir resolution.
It’s the new face of agitation — a vibrant group of youngsters wrapped in party flags seeking fresh solution to the Kashmir dispute, this time through the process of the ballot.
Twenty five-year-old Showkat, nicknamed Sanjay Dutt in his village Ganderbal, is ecstatic and much more involved today than two months ago when the Amarnath agitation had swept through the region.
“When azadi (independence) comes, we will see. It is up to our leader to resolve the Kashmir issue. Right now we want to choose a good leader,” Showkat says.
Showkat supports National Conference president Omar Abdullah's campaign trail in Ganderbal which will vote on November 23.
A family bastion for the Abdullahs, Ganderbal constituency was won by Omar's grandfather Sheikh Abdullah and father Farooq on several occasions.
In 2002, Omar was trounced by a People's Democratic Party candidate but this time in a road show where women dance and sing, and children wave party flags, Omar promises to deliver.
“Like a school kid, I have learnt the lesson for six years. Last time you chose Qazi Afzal, please choose me this time,” Omar says.
The direct appeal seems to have gone down well to the youth.
“Farooq Abdullah has given us a word that he will fight for autonomy,” Altaf Ahmad, another youth from the village, says.
Emboldened by the massive turnout in the first phase of polls, youngsters are enthusiastically taking part in party campaigning. They hope to get jobs and see better infrastructure after this election.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

strangely........pakistan could not even achieve this much in kashmir that it holds.......!

Strangely, some people still do not know that elections are held in Azad Kashmir.

 

[Flintlock]

Strangely, some people still do not know that elections are held in Azad Kashmir.

Aha...thank you Agno. Yes, Indeed they were held in 2006.

Now let me remind you that in those elections, the "separatist" political parties who actually WANTED to contest, like JKLF, APNA, were barred from doing so.

Also, there were a lot of allegations that the polls were rigged by Musharraf.