What's new

Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable

I hope that the Kashmiri people do not agitate against the temporary use of land. This will help in showing their magnanity.

The land issue was an excuse if you will - it allowed the Kashmiris to vent their frustration and dislike with the much larger resentment of being occupied and not having their right to self determination - it is a frustration and anger from 60 years of occupation, and violation of the agreement to allow them through referendum to determine their future.

I'd say its far more appropriate to demand that India show its 'magnanimity', and adhere to its legal and moral obligations, by implementing the conditions and principle of self determination outlined in the IoA and the UNSC resolutions.
 
Last edited:
The land issue was an excuse if you will - it allowed the Kashmiris to vent their frustration and dislike with the much larger resentment of being occupied and not having their right to self determination - it is a frustration and anger from 60 years of occupation, and violation of the agreement to allow them through referendum to determine their future.

I do not know what are you talking about? If situation being created and at aprticulat time, if you ask people in Pakistan to self determine then perhaps Pakistan will be divided in more that 2 to 3 pieces. So do not give irrelevent logic of self determination........
 
I do not know what are you talking about? If situation being created and at aprticulat time, if you ask people in Pakistan to self determine then perhaps Pakistan will be divided in more that 2 to 3 pieces. So do not give irrelevent logic of self determination........

Please - that argument has been debunked dozens of times, on this thread alone.

The people of pakistan did decide, through referendum, provincial assembly votes, and Jirga's, to be part of the Pakistani Federation.

On top of it all, no area in Pakistan is disputed territory, unfinished business from partition, like Kashmir is, and no area in Pakistan (save for Kashmir) has unfulfilled conditions from partition - the condition of plebiscite in the Instrument of Accession for Kashmir, and the referendum advocated by the UNSC resolutions when the two parties (India and Pakistan) took the dispute to the UN, and agreed to implementing its resolutions.

This argument, of we should let every province in every country decide its future, is a bogus one, since the legal conditions surrounding Kashmir, and the disputed status of the territory, make the situation unique.
 
I do not know what are you talking about? If situation being created and at aprticulat time, if you ask people in Pakistan to self determine then perhaps Pakistan will be divided in more that 2 to 3 pieces. So do not give irrelevent logic of self determination........

I do not in which world do you live. There is no libration movement going on in Pakistan, no militancy except in couple of districts of Balochistan and in Fata/Swat (that too is thanks to US WOT). So given a refrendum the most likely outcome shall still be a Pakistan in its present form. Balochistan militancy too is because of vested interests of some of our neighbours and our best friend whoes WOT we are fighting. This situation too has started showing signs of improvement. People have started fighting against taliban in Fata/Swat along with security forces. In Balochistan a process of reconciliation has been started and hoepfully situation shall improve. After the loss of BLA important commanders it is a dying force.

However on the contrary I can name a dozen or soo movements going on in India where if people are allowed to excercise their right to self determination India might loose those areas. Some of the areas are Kashmir, Punjab, Jharkhand, Manipur, Sikim, Nagaland. I do not wish to start a tit for tat conversation. Just posted it because you posted a comment.
 

SRINAGAR: India, the world’s largest democracy, detains protest leaders without charge, shoots dozens of demonstrators dead, beats and intimidates ordinary citizens and raids homes without warrants.

Welcome to Indian-held Kashmir, where the biggest separatist protests in two decades have clashed with the might of the state.

“They are ruthless, trigger happy,” said Ghulam Rasool Bhat, a labourer who says he was beaten by the federal police after he tried to buy milk for his two nephews under a curfew in Srinagar. He lay in a bed, both legs bandaged where a soldier, shouting “Get your milk from Pakistan” had smashed a rifle into his shins. His legs felt, he said, as if in a continuous cramp.

Police have shot dead at least 35 Muslim protesters in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley after a row over forestland for a Hindu shrine spiralled into marches and strikes against Indian rule.

More than 1,000 people have been wounded in clashes over three weeks, hospital officials and police say. Hundreds of people have suffered police baton beatings and bullet wounds, doctors say.

“The government of India does not have a strategy,” The Hindu diplomatic editor said Siddharth Varadarajan said. “It is relying heavily on coercion, arresting top and middle-level leaders in the hope it will break the back of unprecedented protests.”

In rare criticism last week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights asked India to avoid using excessive force. The commissioner drew a rebuke from India for interfering in its affairs.

But as protests spiralled in August, the government sent in battalions of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), a federal police force of mainly Hindus who do not speak Kashmiri. Strangers to Kashmir, most residents appear to despise them.

One surgeon, who asked to remain anonymous because of fear of retribution from Indian authorities, said he has received around 400 wounded people in three weeks, 150 of them hit by bullets.

“These are target killings. It’s simple to see,” said the doctor, explaining that many of the chest wounds were from weapons such as AK-47s. “Most of these were intended to kill. They were not to disperse a crowd.”

The police firings drew criticism from Human Rights Watch. “To end this cycle of tragedy, the government should order security forces to act with restraint,” it said in a statement. Dukhtaran-e-Milat chief Asiya Andrabi, who had led some of the protests, has been detained under the Public Safety Act that allows for a year in jail without trial. reuters
 
Karim,

Every argument in your post has been raised and debunked in this thread and others, and your points are almost identical to those raised by Flint earlier.

Extend the other posters the courtesy of at least reading the thread before regurgitating the same arguments that have been answered. If you do not like the answers, then respond to that particular post, rather than repeat the same old arguments.

You have also been asked to post links with your posts - which you haven't, not surprising since some of your posts are sourced from BR. So how about we drop the charade with teh Pakistani flags?

Quite pathetic and childish behaviour really. Your arguments are open to criticism (if one disagrees) irrespective of what nationality you try to present yourself as.
 
Last edited:
Why is P * O * K censored here??!

Because there's no Pakistan Occupied Kashmir outside Indian dictionaries. Its called Azaad Kashmir.

The answer to your previous post (#377) is yes, yes and yes indeed. If GoI allows pleb to be held in IHK GoP will do the same as the UN resolution applies to both sides of the territory. Mind you that its Pakistan who's been pushing to hold pleb as we're confident that in worse senario Kashmiris will opt for independence rather than joining India. We're ready to let go as AK isn't officially integral part of Pakistan yet, we've 'liberated' it from what can be best described from our point of view as 'ilegal occupation' by India.

The strategic importance of Kashmir now is no longer about territory but water. An independant Kashmir is workable for us since we no longer will have to depend on Water Treaties with India except for Sutlej which will remain the only major river coming from India.
 
Last edited:
Karim,

Every argument in your post has been raised and debunked in this thread and others, and your points are almost identical to those raised by Flint earlier.

Extend the other posters the courtesy of at least reading the thread before regurgitating the same arguments that have been answered. If you do not like the answers, then respond to that particular post, rather than repeat the same old arguments.

You have also been asked to post links with your posts - which you haven't, not surprising since some of your posts are sourced from BR. So how about we drop the charade with teh Pakistani flags?

Quite pathetic and childish behaviour really. Your arguments are open to criticism (if one disagrees) irrespective of what nationality you try to present yourself as.

Imho someone is really confused about his nationality or even the colors if his flag. ;)
 

Voice of America

3 Sep 2008

The U.N. peacekeeping mission in Kashmir was set up in 1949 to monitor a cease-fire between India and Pakistan. The two fledgling nations had just emerged from two years of war for control over the scenic Himalayan region. But since a U.N.-backed line of control was set up in 1972 that divided Kashmir in two, India says the U.N. mission is no longer necessary. But that is not the end of the story, as VOA's Raymond Thibodeaux explains from Srinagar, Kashmir's summer capital.

The U.N. peacekeeping mission in Indian-controlled Kashmir came under heightened scrutiny in recent weeks as tens of thousands of Kashmiri protesters sought to march to the U.N. compound in Srinagar to deliver a memo outlining their grievances with India.

A much smaller delegation of protesters was allowed to deliver the memo, but the episode put the spotlight on one of the U.N.'s oldest peacekeeping missions, leaving many to question what it is still doing there 60 years into its mission. Its budget is now nearly $17 million a year.

Since a U.N.-backed line of control was set up in 1972, India contends that the U.N. mandate in Kashmir has lapsed. And despite of the mission's 44 military observers, there have been numerous cease-fire violations between Indian and Pakistani troops along the line-of-control - the latest last month.

Omar Abdullah is a member of India's parliament and president of the National Conference, a mainstream political party in Kashmir.

He says that when it comes to the U.N. mission in Kashmir, India is in a bind. It does not want the peacekeepers there, but it will not petition the U.N. Security Council to end to their mandate.

"I think the government of India has taken the view that it would probably be more troublesome to get rid of them than to just have them here sitting, doing nothing. Getting rid of them would require another discussion in the United Nations and the government of India does not want that," said Abdullah. "Because then it opens up the whole question of Kashmir and a discussion of Kashmir in the United Nations again."

The issue of Kashmir is complicated. Some see Kashmir as the unfinished partition between India and Pakistan. Both countries claim it in its entirety and have fought two wars over it. The United States intervened in 1999 to stop a third one.

In several resolutions by the U.N. Security Council and the U.N. Commission on India and Pakistan, India had agreed to hold an election in Kashmir to let Kashmiris decide whether they wanted to stay with India, side with Pakistan or become an independent country.

That election, or plebiscite, has never been held. For many Kashmiris, that is at the heart of the issue.

Sajad Lone is seen a voice of moderation in Kashmir's struggle for self-rule.

"Why would India take so much international embarrassment and so many protests if it knew that a small, democratic exercise of plebiscite would solve their problem? They know the results of the plebiscite and that is why they are trying to ensure that no plebiscite takes place," said Lone.

If a plebiscite were held, several analysts say that India would lose Kashmir. Faced with that possibility, they say India prefers the status quo.

But that creates a Catch-22 situation for U.N. peacekeepers in Kashmir. The peacekeepers are stuck in a kind of administrative limbo. India will not let them carry out their mandate, and the U.N. will not end their mandate until India follows through on its promise to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir.

Lone says India has overstepped international law by not allowing the Kashmir referendum.

"India is a party to the dispute, it is not the judge. They are just being arrogant and belligerent," added Lone. "The U.N. has to assert its role and not become a passive participant to any massacre that might take place."

Many Kashmiris criticized the U.N. for standing by as Indian security forces recently fired into crowds of protesters, killing at least 35 civilians.

The U.N. human rights office called for an investigation into India's handling of the largely peaceful demonstrations.
 
Karim,

Every argument in your post has been raised and debunked in this thread and others, and your points are almost identical to those raised by Flint earlier.

Extend the other posters the courtesy of at least reading the thread before regurgitating the same arguments that have been answered. If you do not like the answers, then respond to that particular post, rather than repeat the same old arguments.

You have also been asked to post links with your posts - which you haven't, not surprising since some of your posts are sourced from BR. So how about we drop the charade with teh Pakistani flags?

Quite pathetic and childish behaviour really. Your arguments are open to criticism (if one disagrees) irrespective of what nationality you try to present yourself as.

Imho someone is really confused about his nationality or even the colors if his flag. ;)

It was banned Indian member called Ghatak, made his re entry under the Pakistani flag and a muslim name.
Dumbas$! :lol:
 
Let Kashmiris decide their future: Dan Burton

* Congressman says Kashmir’s political status disputed almost since 1947
* UN has not lived up to responsibilities for Kashmir solution

By Khalid Hasan

WASHINGTON: Congressman Dan Burton told a meeting this week that Kashmir’s political status has been disputed almost since 1947 and the United Nations had rejected India’s claim of the state’s accession by declaring that its future would be determined by its citizens through a free and impartial plebiscite, and one that had ever been held.

Speaking on the sidelines of the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America, Burton said India claims to be the world’s largest democracy and so its soldiers must be held to a higher standard of conduct. Yet, India’s insistence on resolving a political problem by force has dragged it down into a campaign of essentially lawless state terrorism.

UN: The UN has not lived up to its responsibilities, he noted, while urging both the UN and the US to get involved in the Kashmir dispute to resolve it according to the satisfaction of the people of the state.

Yusuf Buch, a former aide to the UN secretary general, told the meeting organised by Ghulam Nabi Fai of the Kashmiri-American Council, “The posture of admitting no wrong which remains habitually Indian is receiving much encouragement from the very world powers that loudly swear a commitment to human rights. The encouragement is afforded by the very potent means of studied silence over the violations being committed in Kashmir, no matter how rampant. Let me cite an example. How many times, in and out of season, we have been reminded of a particular occurrence in Tiananmen Square some years ago? The reported wrong committed there on that ill-fated day has taken place, even though in a different manner, a number of times in and out of Srinagar. Have we heard a word, even a whisper, about gardens being turned into graveyards, about young women being raped and their mothers being forced to witness the atrocity, about young men being crippled and maimed for life, about the great numbers of fake disappearances which are continuing to this day in occupied Kashmir?”

Harsh Mander, an Indian human rights activist, told the meeting, “Even in small towns in Kashmir, you encounter even today bullet-proof tanks stationed on busy market squares … we are forced to stand at our posts with our guns from early morning till late into the night. But worse still is that the local people hate us so much. We are therefore always worried for our lives.’ ”

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

-----------------------------------------------------------

The GoP has to have some sort of tacit understanding with the GoI on Kashmir, there is no other way to explain the silence on Kashmir otherwise, when the moral stance of allowing the Kashmiris to determine their future could not have been more receptive and acknowledged on the global stage.

That or the US is forcing puppet Zardari to stay quiet, as it did with the 123 agreement.

Either way, it is an opportunity lost from a diplomatic perspective to deliver to the Kashmiris their right of self determination.
 
Dan Burton was caught asking for money from a Pakistani Lobbyist. Not surprising.
 
Dan Burton was caught asking for money from a Pakistani Lobbyist. Not surprising.

Because "Letting Kashmiris decide their future" is so morally wrong that you would need to pay people to even say the phrase?

Do you listen to yourself?
 
Because "Letting Kashmiris decide their future" is so morally wrong that you would need to pay people to even say the phrase?

Do you listen to yourself?

Indeed it is morally wrong, in more ways than one.

Dan Burton is an opportunist, one cannot possibly take his words at face value.
 
Back
Top Bottom