Pakistan protests India glacier tourism plan

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Oh don't you see ? By keeping the issue alive, Pakistan risks loosing PAK too, just as much as India risks loosing IAK in the future. Indian official maps still claim the entire Jammu and Kashmir as Indian territory. The water flows both ways.

Now when you say "risk losing" I assume we are only referring to a transfer of the territory to one country on the basis of the opinions and desires of the kashmiri people. The military option has been ruled out, the "international pressure" option has been ruled out (provided both economies continue developing rapidly), so that essentially leaves the Kashmiris as the "power players". A lot will depend upon the level of economic development in AK and IK. If you go by the most recent "independent" poll, then India, despite spending massive amounts of money, has an uphill battle to fight (87% support independence from India - supported by the CIA assessment of the region). If AK can keep pace on the economic development front, I believe there will be continued reason for the people of IK to covet what the people of AK have- both development and the "choice" of "national identity".

So India has to substantially surpass Pakistani efforts in AK to win this "war". Pakistan already has the overwhelming support of the kashmiris for its position - it just has to keep pace. The uphill struggle, for hearts and minds, is yours.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

How do you think that we will change our policy in future when Pakistan is not? What makes you confident that we won't adopt a tough policy in the future?

I don't - thats why I said "who knows". But if you don't change your position later, what has Pakistan lost by waiting?

If we accept your position now, we gain nothing more than we would by accepting your position later. Unless you can show me some advantage that Pakistan gains from accepting Indian demands now, why should we?

 

[Spring Onion]

Who the hell give you the authority to speak on behalf of Kashmir? If India is oppressing Kashmiris, then UN should do the business and not you. Get out of P-o-K, stop supporting them and UN will do the business.If there is state terrorism, then it UN's responsibilty, not yours...

UN lolz UN is a dead horse.
and there is no IF, its indeed India is doing State Terrorism in INDIAN HELD KASHMIR.

Legally Kashmir is part of India. Go and check the facts.

yes facts are that your forfathers brought the matter to UN promissing Kashmiris would be given self-determination if they want.

and who said Kashmir is part of India go and check, the world does not call it J&K rather IHK and Indian Administred Kashmir.
and check the statistics its LoC and not International Border.

 

[Always Neutral]

Now when you say "risk losing" I assume we are only referring to a transfer of the territory to one country on the basis of the opinions and desires of the kashmiri people. The military option has been ruled out, the "international pressure" option has been ruled out (provided both economies continue developing rapidly), so that essentially leaves the Kashmiris as the "power players". A lot will depend upon the level of economic development in AK and IK. If you go by the most recent "independent" poll, then India, despite spending massive amounts of money, has an uphill battle to fight (87% support independence from India - supported by the CIA assessment of the region). If AK can keep pace on the economic development front, I believe there will be continued reason for the people of IK to covet what the people of AK have- both development and the "choice" of "national identity".

So India has to substantially surpass Pakistani efforts in AK to win this "war". Pakistan already has the overwhelming support of the kashmiris for its position - it just has to keep pace. The uphill struggle, for hearts and minds, is yours.

Two biased facts in your post AM

1. 87 % Kashmiris want independence from India and Pakistan as per the survey whereas you say India only.

2. The CIA study was done in 1965.

Best Regards

 

[Bull]

because policies are changed according to circumstances and becasue continuing Pakkistan phobia by India wont help her get anything positive.
and because due to Indian recent edventur to add to her powers globally by siding with US, she had to coupe with coming challanges as a result of formation of possible new blocks arround the world. .

You have answered the following above.

Your own founding fathers had carried the issue of Kashmir to United Nations and your own forunding fathers Promised to give independence to Kashmiri people according to their wishes..

Its another matter that India is still continued with oppressing poor Kashmiris in Indian Held Kashmir..

Continued oppressions like, holding elections, promoting tourism, building rail line....

And indeed as you said you have the resources to keep millions of Indian soldiers in Held Kashmir to keep doing State Terrorism in IHK..

Our money, let us spend it.

Kashmir was never part of India hence no question of giving it as good will gesture rather Pakistan wants solution to this issue according to Kashmiri people. And for that we had even offered to accept an Independent Kashmir.

Who is asking you? Its Pakistan which goes crying everywhere. Mushraff has done all the bedning he is capable of but has managed nothing from India. 'Not an inch' howmuch ever you cry.

And next generation Indians would have too many social problems if people like you continue with such policies of oppressing, so they wont have time to ponder over Kashmir much.

What?!!!

 

[blitz]

Now when you say "risk losing" I assume we are only referring to a transfer of the territory to one country on the basis of the opinions and desires of the kashmiri people. The military option has been ruled out, the "international pressure" option has been ruled out (provided both economies continue developing rapidly), so that essentially leaves the Kashmiris as the "power players". A lot will depend upon the level of economic development in AK and IK. If you go by the most recent "independent" poll, then India, despite spending massive amounts of money, has an uphill battle to fight (87% support independence from India - supported by the CIA assessment of the region). If AK can keep pace on the economic development front, I believe there will be continued reason for the people of IK to covet what the people of AK have- both development and the "choice" of "national identity".

So India has to substantially surpass Pakistani efforts in AK to win this "war". Pakistan already has the overwhelming support of the kashmiris for its position - it just has to keep pace. The uphill struggle, for hearts and minds, is yours.

When i say 'risk loosing', it involves everything. From transfer of territory by peaceful means, to forcible occupation of territory in case of domestic or national crisis. You see as long as the tag of 'disputed territory' is still attached to PAK, a lot of options are available for a future Indian government. In my opinion it is from a position of strength that India makes the offer of making the status quo official.

If i were a hardcore nationalist, i would applaud the Pakistani government for not listening to reason and making a deal with our feeble central governments thus giving future generation of Indians the opportunity to retake what is right fully India's. You make the mistake of assuming that all future Indian governments will be the spineless coalitions that they are today. We have also produced the likes of Indira Gandhi and Lal Bahadur Shastri. It is one of those days, when keeping the issue of Kashmir alive will come back to bite Pakistan. Pakistanis take a spineless and weak willed India for granted and quite understandably, since so would i. But i would not assume that it will last perpetually.

 

[Bull]

UN lolz UN is a dead horse.
and there is no IF, its indeed India is doing State Terrorism in INDIAN HELD KASHMIR.

Illegal kidnapping, torture, extra judical killings, no right to self determination...well there is a better candidate which scores much higher in all these aspects. Did u understand what im pointing out.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Two biased facts in your post AM

1. 87 % Kashmiris want independence from India and Pakistan as per the survey whereas you say India only.

2. The CIA study was done in 1965.

Best Regards

I don't really care either way. An independent united Kashmir is still a strategically better option for Pakistan than the current scenario.

You are correct about the date, so let me rearange my sentence:

India has been incapable of winning "hearts and minds" despite spending enormous amounts of money as indicated by the CIA study done in 1965, and backed up by the recent "independent poll" that showed 87% desiring independence.

 

[Bull]

India has been incapable of winning "hearts and minds" despite spending enormous amounts of money as indicated by the CIA study done in 1965, and backed up by the recent "independent poll" that showed 87% desiring independence.

Well 'kashmir is oppressed' as per Pakistanis. How did the massive Indian army ( some say around 7,50,000 !!!) in kashmir or the Govt of India allow such a survey to happen there? With such 'massive spending and armed presence' India could have easily send a favourable survey out.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

When i say 'risk loosing', it involves everything. From transfer of territory by peaceful means, to forcible occupation of territory in case of domestic or national crisis. You see as long as the tag of 'disputed territory' is still attached to PAK, a lot of options are available for a future Indian government. In my opinion it is from a position of strength that India makes the offer of making the status quo official.

If i were a hardcore nationalist, i would applaud the Pakistani government for not listening to reason and making a deal with our feeble central governments thus giving future generation of Indians the opportunity to retake what is right fully India's. You make the mistake of assuming that all future Indian governments will be the spineless coalitions that they are today. We have also produced the likes of Indira Gandhi and Lal Bahadur Shastri. It is one of those days, when keeping the issue of Kashmir alive will come back to bite Pakistan. Pakistanis take a spineless and weak willed India for granted and quite understandably, since so would i. But i would not assume that it will last perpetually.

The Indian government will have no more options at its disposal later than it does now. If you were to believe Salim, a military campaign in Kashmir, by either side, would be futile. What is going to change that equation in the future if development in both countries keeps apace? The military balance will probably stay the same, barring some unheard of super-duper military tech. that India can get its hands on. So I do not see either side initiating war unless forced upon it (example, cutting off water to Pakistan), and merely talking war will not mean that India will win.

So whether your country becomes more bellicose or arrogant makes no difference. Victory through war will not be an option, victory through international pressure will not be an option. With respect to another Indira (a reference to 71 here?), the most that could be done, is probably already being done in FATA.

 

[Spring Onion]

Illegal kidnapping, torture, extra judical killings, no right to self determination...well there is a better candidate which scores much higher in all these aspects. Did u understand what im pointing out.

YES

INDIA aka BHARAT all these traits are India's halmark in Held Kashmir.

@Alway

dear we are even ready to accept that if Kashmiris want to be independent Musharraf even had agreed to that.
So its the Indians who are still trying to make extra-judicial killings of innocent Kashmiris by Indian troops as fair.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well 'kashmir is oppressed' as per Pakistanis. How did the massive Indian army ( some say around 7,50,000 !!!) in kashmir or the Govt of India allow such a survey to happen there? With such 'massive spending and armed presence' India could have easily send a favourable survey out.

I think I posted a news item in the thread about that poll that talked about the professor leading the survey getting fired for conducting the study.

Perhaps there has been a change in strategy on both sides - Development instead of guns to win hearts and minds. Regardless, an uphill task for India considering the sentiments in the region. I wonder if we will now see "terrorism" in AK? What better way to stifle development.

 

[IceCold]

Indian activity at Siachen violates Shimla accord

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan said on Monday it had lodged protests with Britain and India over a joint military exercise in the disputed Himalayan territory of Kashmir.

Britain's Royal Marines last week kicked off 25 days of joint high-altitude exercises with the Indian army in the northern Ladakh region.

"We have sent demarches to both the British government and the Indian government," foreign ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told a weekly briefing. A demarche is a formal diplomatic representation.

"This is not a legitimate activity because Jammu and Kashmir is internationally recognized disputed territory," she said, adding, "More than anybody else the British should be aware of it."

Britain ruled the Indian subcontinent until 1947 when it was split into Hindu-majority India and mainly Muslim Pakistan. Many here still blame Britain for failing to resolve the Kashmir issue before leaving.

Pakistan last week protested to India over a plan to allow trekkers to visit the disputed 6,300-metre (20,800-feet) Siachen glacier in Kashmir, where thousands of troops from both countries are stationed.

Aslam stepped up criticism of the move on Monday, saying the Indian presence in Siachen violated a 1972 accord.

"The Indian military's aggression into Siachen, its presence there and any activity that it sponsors in this area is illegal," she said.

 

[Always Neutral]

Indian activity at Siachen violates Shimla accord

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan said on Monday it had lodged protests with Britain and India over a joint military exercise in the disputed Himalayan territory of Kashmir.

Britain's Royal Marines last week kicked off 25 days of joint high-altitude exercises with the Indian army in the northern Ladakh region.

"We have sent demarches to both the British government and the Indian government," foreign ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told a weekly briefing. A demarche is a formal diplomatic representation.

"The Indian military's aggression into Siachen, its presence there and any activity that it sponsors in this area is illegal," she said.

Not a wise move as the British Govt. is unlikely to cancel the exercise and will give unnecessary brownie points to the Indian Army.

Best Regards

 

[Spring Onion]

Not a wise move as the British Govt. is unlikely to cancel the exercise and will give unnecessary brownie points to the Indian Army.

Best Regards

Well that is the only option at the moment let the world contact diplomatically and than

i think the foreign Office Should Issue an official Warning saying that as Siachin is part of Pakistan and India had occupied it illegaly hence Pakistan reserves the Right to open fire so all those indulging in this misadventurism should make sure they are stepping into our teritory and should not grumble afterwards.