Possible Solution of Kashmir issue...Your Opinion

[vsdoc]

@third eye

To be honest sir, I draw an excellent outline map of India.

And it always has the complete mukut on top.

Yes its not real. But any less than that is not India in my eyes.

 

[NHUDA]

What Pakistan considers or does not consider is of no consequence to India.

What matters to us is the areas under control of Hari Singh & his state which he signed to India.

My Answer was in response to Arranging a Plebiscite, if india / Pakistan agree to it ... it will not be difficult to get china on board due to demographics (Also read in addition to my Original post) !

 

[karan.1970]

No solution possible except status quo till one of the 2 countries ceases to exist in its present form

 

[third eye]

My Answer was in response to Arranging a Plebiscite, if india / Pakistan agree to it ... it will not be difficult to get china on board due to demographics (Also read in addition to my Original post) !

The inclusion of a 3rd party is a non starter.

For China to accept this would tantamount to their acceptance that the territory in question was not theirs to begin with.

 

[NHUDA]

No solution possible except status quo till one of the 2 countries ceases to exist in its present form

IF Both countries need to Move Forward ... thr has to be a solution ...


Anyone knows the sailent features of Musharraf Plan to Vajpaee for Kashmir here .. i google but couldn't find substantial info... Must have some substance as Vajpaayee almost agree to it !

 

[Bang Galore]

Agreed, Pakistan and Kashmir are generally a North Indian concern, South Indians that I have met were generally detached from the conflict maybe because they did not carry the psychological baggage of the partition.

Yes & no. I think that it can no longer be argued that S.Indians think very differently on Kashmir, it would of course differ with differing backgrounds. Secondly, unlike N.Indians, South Indians have no connection to & see Pakistan as a completely foreign entity. That has over the years has actually led many S.Indians to take much harder positions on Pakistan than N.Indians who would yo-yo on that depending on the prevailing mood.

S.Indian soldiers have died over the years in conflict, whether it be in Kargil or in the Kashmir insurgency. The change has happened. Many commentators, both Pakistanis & Indians have pointed to the 1996 world cup match between Pakistan & India which was played in Bangalore as an example. The crowd was extremely hostile towards Pakistan & that surprised many who didn't expect such a reaction from a S.Indian crowd. Nor are all S.Indian reactions the same, there is no monolithic S.Indian entity. A crowd in Chennai would likely be much less hostile than the one in Bangalore. A crowd in Punjab might be more well disposed depending on the circumstances.

The psychological barrier of partition is now history, the narratives we now have does not rest on that alone.

 

[ThaniOruvan]

India pushed for it. You asked for it, should have happened long ago.

That is because you are scared, as i have said before, India can't afford to take the chances, ever wondered why India doesn't want to talk on the issue? ciao.

Correction. India just asked for UN intervention. It did not expect the UN would advise both countries to conduct a plebiscite.
Thank god we nullified that resolution by signing bilateral accords with your leadership back in 1960s and 1970s.

 

[third eye]

You are completely wrong with the South Indian part of your comment.
Undermining south Indians patriotism is a foolish act. How many south Indians have you met so far ?
We respect and love our nation. Though we are different from other Indians in ethnicity and language we love India and love to be part of it unlike Balochs and Tribes who are like you (Pakistani's) but still want out....
Irony impounds......

He did not mean that S Indians are any less patriotic.

Were he any other Pak poster I would not have intervened . Having interacted with him I can vouch for his views.

@Icarus

 

[Jackdaws]

I believe that a solution like one which resulted in Ireland (Independent country) and North Ireland (part of UK) is the only viable long term solution. The Irish are free to move between both regions without let or hindrance - so too the Kashmiris should be able to move within Kashmir. Administratively, J&K can remain part of India and Article 370 can continue to guarantee their cultural insulation. The so-called Azad Kashmir can be a completely free country. From what I understand, Ireland still competes as one country in Cricket - players from both regions form part of the team. Such minor concessions would go a long way in bringing stability.

In the short-term I don't think Indians would be very happy with the idea of giving Kashmiris from Pak administered Kashmir access to Indian Kashmir. So, some sort of mechanism is required. This would work only if Pak is genuinely interested in the rights of Kashmiris rather than be on an ego-trip about wanting to avenge the loss of East Pakistan or calling it an "unfinished agenda of Pakistan" - or the missing "K" in their acronymic moniker.

 

[Bang Galore]

IF Both countries need to Move Forward ... thr has to be a solution ...

Anyone knows the sailent features of Musharraf Plan to Vajpaee for Kashmir here .. i google but couldn't find substantial info... Must have some substance as Vajpaayee almost agree to it !

Finalised with Manmohan Singh.

Essentially: No change of borders but with greater autonomy & interactions for the people of both sides of J&K.
Gradual demilitarisation. Both sides having a say in the area. Soft borders with free movement.

 

[karan.1970]

I believe that a solution like one which resulted in Ireland (Independent country) and North Ireland (part of UK) is the only viable long term solution. The Irish are free to move between both regions without let or hindrance - so too the Kashmiris should be able to move within Kashmir. Administratively, J&K can remain part of India and Article 370 can continue to guarantee their cultural insulation. The so-called Azad Kashmir can be a completely free country. From what I understand, Ireland still competes as one country in Cricket - players from both regions form part of the team. Such minor concessions would go a long way in bringing stability.

In the short-term I don't think Indians would be very happy with the idea of giving Kashmiris from Pak administered Kashmir access to Indian Kashmir. So, some sort of mechanism is required. This would work only if Pak is genuinely interested in the rights of Kashmiris rather than be on an ego-trip about wanting to avenge the loss of East Pakistan or calling it an "unfinished agenda of Pakistan" - or the missing "K" in their acronymic moniker.

 

[NHUDA]

Plebiscite will not happen. No matter who interferes.

The inclusion of a 3rd party is a non starter.

For China to accept this would tantamount to their acceptance that the territory in question was not theirs to begin with.

By Plebiscite i didn't meant a Lump Sum Region swinging one ... (i will again refer to my first Post i m new can't link it But it is on Page 3 of this thread)

I meant Sector Wise Vote & thn onward affiliation .... in my opinion ... Pakistan would get Gilgit Baltistan, India will get Jammu & Ladakh Regions while Kashmir Valley will decide to be independent .. (Much like Option 5 & 6) in the Opening Post ...

in case of such agreement the shaksgam valley (china controlled- bordering Pakistan GB) in question will not be of any significance and will remain with china .... wheras Askai Chin can be discussed in isolation among India & China !

 

[vsdoc]

Yes & no. I think that it can no longer be argued that S.Indians think very differently on Kashmir, it would of course differ with differing backgrounds. Secondly, unlike N.Indians, South Indians have no connection & see Pakistan as a completely foreign entity. That has over the years actually led many S.Indians to take much harder positions on Pakistan than N.Indians who would yo-yo on that. S.Indian soldiers have died over the years in conflict, whether it be in Kargil or in the Kashmir insurgency. The change has happened. Many commentators, both Pakistanis & Indians have pointed to the 1996 world cup match between Pakistan & Indian which was played in Bangalore as an example. The crowd was extremely hostile towards Pakistan & that surprised many who didn't expect such a reaction from a S.Indian crowd. Not all S.Indian reactions are the same, there is no monolithic S.Indian entity. A crowd in Chennai would likely be much less hostile than the one in Bangalore. A crowd in Punjab might be more well disposed depending on the circumstances. The psychological barrier of partition is now history, the narratives we now have does not rest on that alone.

Plus as @Icarus pointed out and as I have in a post in the past, we are into the 3rd and 4th generations post Partition now.

As a father of three kids, only one has had a full on war with Pakistan in his lifetime.

And in terms of conscious memory for all three, they only remember 26/11.

My dad and me are very clued in. On a personal level.

This generation is both distant and surprisingly more hostile at the same time.

 

[TruthPrevails]

To begin with Modi cannot declare the LOC into an IB by himself. He will have to take the nation into confidence, it would involve amending the constitution & much more.

I agree to the extent that the J&K issue has become an industry . An industry that keeps people & orgnisations relevant, keeps the money flowing .

It was a pragmatic NS who spoke at Ufa, it was the ' devils brigade' at home that set the cat among the pigeons.

Similarly, in India there will be a backlash - exploited by opposition ( never mind if they were about to do the same ) but far sighted , pragmatic & strong leaders on both sides are needed who have to bite the bullet for the sake of future generations.

One such leader exists on one side. He does not yet have the political strength .

Any possible solution to kashmir cannot happen overnight and that the fact that you have stated that only one strong leader in one side cannot do anything is very much true. To come to any possible solution both leader from both sides have to have strong political hold in his country and currently Pakistans "Devil Brigade" will not allow such thing to happen. I mean who would want to give away power and respect just like that. The day a pragmatic leader comes with majority support from both the sides, we can see some changes in Kashmir stance.

 

[Icarus]

@ThaniOruvan you troll again and I will ban you, keep it civil.

I never said South Indians are unpatriotic, I said they do not have a psychological attachment to the conflict. Being a hater does not make you more patriotic, it makes you a good mindless drone.
As to the question on how many South Indians I have met, several hundred when I was living in the UK.