Possible Solution to Kashmir Issue

[Rahi812]

Short of full scale war,which Pakistan is highly unlikely win, there will be no change in either of the nation's borders, each country has to learn to live with what they have and not, what they think they should have.

The only solution to Kashmir problem is lower your expectations, accept the reality and move on!!

I agree with you. Both sides have to be contended whatever they have. Instead of what they want and leave the rest on history.
History has decided about the Russian States and history has decided the East Pakistan. History will decide about the Kashmir.

But i doubt establishments on both sides leave this issue like this.
Burning Kashmir is the cash cow for them.

 

[kaykay]

What I have suggested means keeping some things as such, but taking those measures that would take huge burden off India to maintain army in Indian Kashmir, and truly help prevent terrorism as easily as possible by normalizing relationships with Kashmiris, and Pakistan. This is a practical medium term approach as opposed to keeping armies and quashing insurgencies by force which is expensive and difficult for both countries.

Realistically it can be seen by both countries as maintaining boundaries as such, but doing that at a very little economic burden and cost of human tragedies that comes with enforcing same decisions by armies.

You can read my proposal as what do we have to do to keep Kashmir on world map as it is today, in a way that Kashmiris are the greatest beneficiary, and the cost of keeping armies functional and alert and the associated human tragedies, and violence/terrorism are eliminated in a way that we earn only goodwill between the three parties.

I agree for what you are saying. May be your intentions are good too but problem is that we have a big trust deficit between both countries(past is not good when it comes to trust). So better that first we take measures to strengthen trust between us. Now the question is how is that possible? Okay first step should be that stop letting terrorists in from your side, if you do it then I see India getting serious for negotiation like it did during Musharraf era(even though Musharraf was the one who did Kargil but he got serious to solve Kashmir later with Bajpayee).

 

[Rahi812]

I agree for what you are saying. May be your intentions are good too but problem is that we have a big trust deficit between both countries(past is not good when it comes to trust). So better that first we take measures to strengthen trust between us. Now the question is how is that possible? Okay first step should be that stop letting terrorists in from your side, if you do it then I see India getting serious for negotiation like it did during Musharraf era(even though Musharraf was the one who did Kargil but he got serious to solve Kashmir later with Bajpayee).

People sitting on pdf has nothing other than 'time'. Which they are very generously giving to their neihgboring country's fellows.

All this issues, e.g. terrorist, guns, Kargil etc. etc. is the brainchild of establishments sitting on both sides

People can only do it don't buy establishment conspiracy theories.

 

[AhsanAmin]

Okay first step should be that stop letting terrorists in from your side, if you do it then I see India getting serious for negotiation like it did during Musharraf era(

Yes, I think this is what government of Pakistan has to make sure now and we can see the rest of good things might follow as a natural outcome of official talks between the two countries. Both countries have to show an honest and earnest intent to make peace and look for a better future and friendship between the two countries.

I really think current political leadership of Pakistan wants to make peace with India so they would want to take all steps to build trust when it comes to dealings with India.

 

[Kaniska]

Solution is simple....Kashmir is an Indian state and it should be treated like any other Indian state..Do you think that people from other state do not run their state affair not they do not have any indepedence? This is a silly argument by these separatist people...

 

[ExtraOdinary]

Only solution acceptable is making LOC the border.

By the way freedom fighter "Major Mast Gul", who burnt down Charaar-e-Sharif in 1995, accepted responsibility for the recent Peshawar bombing. Strategic asset indeed.

‘TTP Peshawar chief’ owns up to Tuesday’s sectarian attack - DAWN.COM

 

[kaykay]

Yes, I think this is what government of Pakistan has to make sure now and we can see the rest of good things might follow as a natural outcome of official talks between the two countries. Both countries have to show an honest and earnest intent to make peace and look for a better future and friendship between the two countries.

I really think current political leadership of Pakistan wants to make peace with India so they would want to take all steps to build trust when it comes to dealings with India.

I completely agree with you except last part of your post(as an Indian). If your govt was serious, we would not have seen sudden rise in militancy in Kashmir just after Nawaz came to power. Its also possible that may be certain things are beyond control of Nawaz Sharif. So I will wait for someone like Musharraf (who has complete control) than Nawaz.
PS: My views are completely my own, not neccessarly other Indians.

 

[livingdead]

this solution is mostly acceptable to Indians,was not musharaf's formula something similar? @AhsanAmin

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Make LOC the border, and open the border to some extent(with safeguards). Anything else, and we will be butchered.

Kashir is India, India is Kashir

 

[third eye]

I know India is a chutiya. jk Anyway no peace then it matters little to Pakistan.

6800 + posts and this ...?!! Reported.

@ subject, it is nice to see people thinking of finding an answer to a problem that has plagued us since 47.

To my mind , the only answer is to convert & accept the LC as an IB. Pak must be given an iron clad assurance thats its legitimate requirements for water shall be protected.

If Punjab & Bengal can be divided so can J&K.

The longer it takes to come to this conclusion the worse it shall get & both India & Pakistan shall lose more sons.

While this happens jobs & arms factories in US, China, Israel, Russia & EU to name a few shall remain secure thanks to what we buy.

 

[Jade]

Not on Kashmir again....

 

[OrionHunter]

Kashmir problem has to be solved on the following lines.
1. Kashmiris get maximum say in running their own matters within the jurisdiction of countries they currently lie in. Pakistan already has a separate government run by Kashmiris in Pakistani Kashmir.

But that is a sham. Kashmiris in Pak Administerd kashmir are not 'independent'. So-called Azad Kashmir has a President and Prime Minister. However, the powers of these two offices are less than those of the Deputy Secretary at the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs in Islamabad, itself one of the weakest ministries in Pakistan's federal government.’

The educational syllabus of so called Azad Kashmir is prepared and approved by bureaucrats of Islamabad. Why? The prime purpose of this is not to educate people; rather it is designed to make people obedient to Pakistan.

More importantly, 'Azad' Kashmiri leaders and other employees and aspirant must express their allegiance to Pakistan, as prescribed by Act 74 prepared and imposed by Islamabad, which states:

"No person or political party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to the ideology of the state's accession to Pakistan". All who want to stand for 'elections' have to sign this before participating in the electoral process!! Why? Is this 'Azadi'? Or is it a sham?

Both countries demilitarize Kashmir to normal extent, meaning army deployed in both parts of Kashmir to defend that part, must not increase a limit considered 'normal' in ordinary peacetime environment.

And what can be construed as 'normal'? What is normal for India may not be normal for Pakistan.

The military could only be increased beyond a certain minimum in both parts only if asked by their respective Kashmiri governments

How can a civilian government control military deployments? This is best left to the men in uniform where deployments are based on threat perceptions and not on the whims and fancies of some politicians.

However, the bottom line is that both India and Pakistan need to put their heads together with Kashmiris on BOTH sides to sort out this problem once and for all. However with the extremists and 'non state actors' in Pakistan needing an issue for their very survival, and having their own agendas, this one's going to be a tough one to crack.

 

[AhsanAmin]

And what can be construed as 'normal'? What is normal for India may not be normal for Pakistan.

This was a suggestion for something much more reasonable than military presence both countries currently have. The purpose was to suggest that no military is in a possible threatening stance so that we could also have a justification to decrease our military presence and related expenditure.

Keeping large Indian army does not help India's image either as related human tragedies in Indian Kashmir earn it a bad name everywhere even among many patriotic Hindu Indians in other states. And a huge military expenditure is a problem for your nation as well.

 

[third eye]

This was a suggestion for something much more reasonable than military presence both countries currently have. The purpose was to suggest that no military is in a possible threatening stance so that we could also have a justification to decrease our military presence and related expenditure.

Keeping large Indian army does not help India's image either as related human tragedies in Indian Kashmir earn it a bad name everywhere even among many patriotic Hindu Indians in other states. And a huge military expenditure is a problem for your nation as well.

Points raised by you are valid .

India would not like to have such a large permanent presence in J&K . However , given the levels of interference and resultant threat there is no other option.

The bottom line is that both nations have to reconcile themselves to their geography & move on. Gaining or losing an extra district will not materially effect either nation. Pak has concerns of its water, this can be addressed .

Unfortunately, the J&K issue has become an industry with stake holders on either side and also in the international world. Our animosity assures votes for the US President whose elections are funded by the arms industry besides others - this applies in equal measure to other countries too.

Can you imagine the economic impact of peace on Indo -Pak borders to them ?

 

[rockstarIN]

This was a suggestion for something much more reasonable than military presence both countries currently have. The purpose was to suggest that no military is in a possible threatening stance so that we could also have a justification to decrease our military presence and related expenditure.

Keeping large Indian army does not help India's image either as related human tragedies in Indian Kashmir earn it a bad name everywhere even among many patriotic Hindu Indians in other states. And a huge military expenditure is a problem for your nation as well.

Even if a solution worked is worked out, the army gonna stay in Kashmir. There are Kargil episode in the security force's mind as well as China on the other side. But you should understand unlike 1990s the army hardly involve in any policing in the state but stick to the barracks. Yes, Kashmir will be heavily militarized for ever just like any of our 'supposed to be' war frontier.