@oceanx
I am not following you here. Just three points
1. It was you who raised the joint administration point. And I said that why joint adminstration of the Indian part of J&K alone. Why not the entire historical state of J&K since the entire territory is disputed. Its unfeasible but I just wanted to highlight that point to you. This is not Enlargment of the conflict. This is the conflicted territory as per UN resolutions.
2. Gilgit Baltistan is a part of historical J&K and hence part of the disputed terriroty. Hence a resolution would involve a resolution of this as well. PLA troops are there to help out flood victims and all but that was not what I was talking about
3. There are protest in Xinjiang/East Turkistan,Tibet as well. There are protests in other parts of India as well. There have been five full fledged insurgencies in Balochistan Pakistan demanding independance. If media coverage was to define which territory belongs to who, then we would have changing borders all the time.
-------------------
Now let me say that India-China relationship are not in a freefall or anything. But the point I am raising is what does China get in these visa tactics. You yourself have expressed scepticism, so you can understand how unnecessary and provacative it would look to Indian officials.
That is the main issue here. Resolution of J&K is a bilateral matter between India and Pakistan where China does not have any role to play as acknolwdged by its own spokesperson.
I agree with your final thrust that the "resolution of J&K is a bilateral matter between India and Pakistan where China does not have any role to play as acknolwdged by its own spokesperson."
However, I am not sure what China would or would not do if specifically requested to show certain "gestures".
I will not speculate on the wisdom of showing these "gestures" along the lines of stapling visa. I will say, however, that if these were "unrequested", spontaneous gestures from the CCP upper echelons, then no doubt in my mind they were dumber then I could give them credit for.
Dumb people are everywhere as you know.
So there. I will reiterate that I am more than skeptical of the PRC's little game of stapling visas. As an inconsequential individual, I in fact personally disapprove of them.
Having said that, let's not forget, by being a bi-national issue between India and Pakistan, Kashmir's status is internationally un-determined.
So in a legalistic sort of way, PRC was not "infringing" on Indian soverignty when they did the visa stapling bit.
And for a third time, the above notwithstanding, I don't like it personally.
Now back to the "joint administration" ... why only in Kashmir Valley? I don't know. I am not even saying that. Heck who am I to propose that? I am just throwing out ideas ... that's all.
Finally, "joint administration of Kashmir Valley" is not a gesture to Kashmir per se (I know it's not a politically correct thing to utter), but it is a gesture to Pakistan.
What's more important?
The cake in making peace "with" Kashmir is not making peace with Kashmir, but to make peace with Pakistan, which you know better than any. This separates this conflict from all other "protests" in India, or in Pakistan or China for that matter.
In Balochistan, who is Pakistan to realistically "jointly administer" with? With Iran? They sure are not asking for it.
With the CIA perhaps ... just like Kurdistan, xxxstan ...
First let's strive for "practical" righteousness, then hopefully "moral" righteousness.
No?
Here India could be a leader.