Scars of separation as Kashmir insurgency winds down

[karan.1970]

Well no the sure shot way would be through plebiscite

May be

- to which the people of that region have a sure shot right to through the UN.

No

 

[livingdead]

Its a false propaganda, or skewed reporting - in the internet/youtube world, India's own massive human rights violations have gone down and hence the need for an armed struggle has subsided to a political struggle.

Previously the common man on the street didn't go around slapping Indian police/army men, there weren't any hoisting of Pakistani flags previously, all that has changed. The lack of violence does not mean there is acceptance of India, but since India is slowly unable to conduct mass murders, the need to fight them has gone down too.

I think you are seeing the chain of events backward.
Under pressure to stop supporting terrorism in J&K, pakistan reducted its involvement considerably, I dont know wether it was part of a CBM leading upto a proper solution (some say musharraf almost did it).
That led to decrese in violence, which meant reduction in Indian army deployment there. Now many of the day to day fight is led by J&K police, not army.

Pakistani flags flying, slapping army/police was always there (infact more during initial pro pakistan period of the struggle), that is hardly a sign of India losing anything.

Indian army was deployed since long, the human right violations happened only when the bloody insurgency started.
That is hardly an excuse for abuse.

Terrorism has gone down because of lack of support after 10 years, even a small perceived/real grievence can lead to terrorism(if properly funded), you dont need mass grave for it.

 

[rockstarIN]

Denials will always be there from across the border.

But the important line is

'Now I do not care about independence, I wanna go home'. Subsequently they will find that this side is better, being an Indian citizen than a refugee at a so called friendly country.

 

[Bhairava]

The underlying point is Jammu and Kashmir is going to be with India for the forseeable future. The sooner people from various nationaalities accept the fact, the better its for all.

 

[Contrarian]

Its a false propaganda, or skewed reporting - in the internet/youtube world, India's own massive human rights violations have gone down and hence the need for an armed struggle has subsided to a political struggle.

Previously the common man on the street didn't go around slapping Indian police/army men, there weren't any hoisting of Pakistani flags previously, all that has changed. The lack of violence does not mean there is acceptance of India, but since India is slowly unable to conduct mass murders, the need to fight them has gone down too.

Stop bull$hitting. The militancy has gone down because of 3 reasons:
1. Indian army has over the decade increasingly shot the militancy leaders first. Initially they were focussing on killing all terrorists, then changed that later to even letting lower rung militants go to kill the bosses.
2. Pakistan was forced by the world to stop sponsoring terrorism and break ties with terrorists after 9/11.
Pakistans precarious financial position also makes it hard for them to seriously finance this anymore coupled with terrorism at home in what can only be called karma.
3. Increasing fencing and electrification as well as deploying technology at the border to make infiltration vastly more difficult than it used to be in the 90's.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Well no the sure shot way would be through plebiscite - to which the people of that region have a sure shot right to through the UN.

Asim, its time to get real. There is nothing 'sure-shot', either about the Plebiscite or its expected result.
Even the Plebiscite happening is not even 'sure-shot', simply because the actions enjoined in the UN Resolution on both sidesof the dispute have not even been fulfilled yet.

The only thing that is 'sure-shot' now is the Kashmiris' general weariness with violence and the International community's apathy to the events occurring there.

Time and events have moved on since 1947. That conclusion can be 'sure-shot'.

 

[Awesome]

Stop bull$hitting. The militancy has gone down because of 3 reasons:

In civil societies its called a difference of opinion, not bullshitting. Also I'm not overstretching any truths, the indian POV however is.

If there was even an iota of confidence in the way the Kashmiri people would vote you would have the plebiscite right now.

That my friend makes your commentary stinkable not mine.

1. Indian army has over the decade increasingly shot the militancy leaders first. Initially they were focussing on killing all terrorists, then changed that later to even letting lower rung militants go to kill the bosses.

If anything when LeT n all used to just concentrate their attacks on Kashmir they have gotten emboldened enough to attack elsewhere as well. Pakistan has only stopped aiding groups who attack India outside of Kashmir. Attacking Indian military in Kashmir is fair game.

2. Pakistan was forced by the world to stop sponsoring terrorism and break ties with terrorists after 9/11.
Pakistans precarious financial position also makes it hard for them to seriously finance this anymore coupled with terrorism at home in what can only be called karma.

Pakistan's position has been consistent, we want a peaceful solution but given that Indian army is deployed in Kashmir, first blood has always been drawn by India and from there on we have a right to defend Kashmiris from Indian occupation.

However that may be. If political works better now, thats well and good.

3. Increasing fencing and electrification as well as deploying technology at the border to make infiltration vastly more difficult than it used to be in the 90's.

These are only cosmetic things, as long as the old Kashmiri woman who gets up and slaps Indian officers on the face is alive, as long as the youth that make occupation forces cower under a barrage of stones are alive, as long as the motivated population that hoists Pakistan's flags in broad daylight in Kashmir are still standing, the Kashmiri freedom struggle will go on.

 

[SpArK]

These are only cosmetic things, as long as the old Kashmiri woman who gets up and slaps Indian officers on the face is alive, as long as the youth that make occupation forces cower under a barrage of stones are alive, as long as the motivated population that hoists Pakistan's flags in broad daylight in Kashmir are still standing, the Kashmiri freedom struggle will go on.

A few slaps and a flag hoist is whats left on keeping the "spirits" alive.

And stones,....... there are more stones thrown at policmen in kerala during strikes than in kashmir. True Story.

 

[RPK]

In civil societies its called a difference of opinion, not bullshitting. Also I'm not overstretching any truths, the indian POV however is.

If there was even an iota of confidence in the way the Kashmiri people would vote you would have the plebiscite right now.

That my friend makes your commentary stinkable not mine.


If anything when LeT n all used to just concentrate their attacks on Kashmir they have gotten emboldened enough to attack elsewhere as well. Pakistan has only stopped aiding groups who attack India outside of Kashmir. Attacking Indian military in Kashmir is fair game.


Pakistan's position has been consistent, we want a peaceful solution but given that Indian army is deployed in Kashmir, first blood has always been drawn by India and from there on we have a right to defend Kashmiris from Indian occupation.

However that may be. If political works better now, thats well and good.



These are only cosmetic things, as long as the old Kashmiri woman who gets up and slaps Indian officers on the face is alive, as long as the youth that make occupation forces cower under a barrage of stones are alive, as long as the motivated population that hoists Pakistan's flags in broad daylight in Kashmir are still standing, the Kashmiri freedom struggle will go on.

That is not fair game it got another word

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well no the sure shot way would be through plebiscite - to which the people of that region have a sure shot right to through the UN.

Which Pakistan took away from them, remember?

For Pakistan to talk about a plebiscite is sheer hypocrisy. You could have made it happen, but you had no idea what to expect. And now, once all other routes have been ruled out, now that the tribals with the Gilgit Scouts and the Chitral forces failed, now that Operation Gibraltar failed, Operation Grand Slam failed, now that twenty years and more of subsidizing terror have failed, you yearn wistfully for a plebiscite? Did India show herself reluctant in other cases? In Junagadh, or in Sikkim? Or anywhere else? Were we the ones to wreck the situation when we had ourselves proposed it, secure in the support of the people?

Think about it.

 

[illusion8]

I have this nagging doubt that the US wants to see a free Kashmir i.e. free from India and Pakistan including parts that are with both of us.
The reason is if they achieve that they can be quite influential in Kashmiri affairs as they are in Pakistan and Afghanistan and they intend to have a base there to monitor both India and China and the general region similar to what they intend to do from Afghanistan and Iraq.

Solution is if both of us i.e. India and Pakistan hold on to our respective portions and have a semi open border so that Kashmiri's can move on both sides and this is what was most probably proposed by Mushy and was largely accepted by Vajpayee. Doing this will negate the US's plan of acquiring a base right bang in the center of India, China, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

 

[karan.1970]

If there was even an iota of confidence in the way the Kashmiri people would vote you would have the plebiscite right now.

You had your chance in 1948, but refused to remove your forces per the UN resolution.. Now that resolution is not worth the paper on which its been written..

If anything when LeT n all used to just concentrate their attacks on Kashmir they have gotten emboldened enough to attack elsewhere as well. Pakistan has only stopped aiding groups who attack India outside of Kashmir. Attacking Indian military in Kashmir is fair game.

Based on which UNSC resolution ? You can create your own definitions on this forum, but they really do not apply in the real world.

Pakistan's position has been consistent, we want a peaceful solution but given that Indian army is deployed in Kashmir, first blood has always been drawn by India and from there on we have a right to defend Kashmiris from Indian occupation.

However that may be. If political works better now, thats well and good.

That's a fairy tale really... It was Pakistani forces that occupied Kashmir in 1947 and never left since then.. Hence its a bit of a poppycock that India drew 1st blood. And about your right to defend Kashmir, well, you can chose to believe whatever as your rights, but formally or informally, outside of Pakistan, those rights are not recognized by anyone..

These are only cosmetic things, as long as the old Kashmiri woman who gets up and slaps Indian officers on the face is alive, as long as the youth that make occupation forces cower under a barrage of stones are alive, as long as the motivated population that hoists Pakistan's flags in broad daylight in Kashmir are still standing, the Kashmiri freedom struggle will go on.

Think about it.. An old woman in India can slap a soldier in Kashmir and other things that you mentioned can be done by a few misguided souls.. And then you call Indian army an occupying force.. If that is the definition, then whole of Pakistan is occupied by Pakistani Army where journalists who write against them disappear..

 

[jha]

Wait for few more years and the scars will be for everyone to see.. Only issue is that GoI wants the status quo to continue.
Am sure some money can be arranged for a reverse kashmir struggle on the other side if need be.. Shias in Gilgit region are not at all happy with influx of outsiders and massacring them.

 

[livingdead]

If anything when LeT n all used to just concentrate their attacks on Kashmir they have gotten emboldened enough to attack elsewhere as well. Pakistan has only stopped aiding groups who attack India outside of Kashmir. Attacking Indian military in Kashmir is fair game.

We all know the game played by both sides. I dont know what Indian side considers fair game in pakistan,may be a fair amount of quid-pro-quo action.

 

[Hulk]

We should help them come back, if Pakistan agrees, we should allow the to back through land.

We should provide them shelter for 6 months and work to earn.

I feel they should be helped.