What's new

Security forces outnumber voters in Kashmir elections

Resolution 91 (1951)
Concerning the India-Pakistan question submitted by the Representatives of
United Kingdom and United States and adopted by the Security Council on
March 30, 1951.
(Document No. S/2017/Rev. 1, dated the 30th March, 1951).

THE SECURITY COUNCIL,
Having received and noted the report of Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative for
India and Pakistan on his mission initiated by the Security Council resolution 80 (1950) of March
14, 1950.

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United
Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949,
and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the
United Nations.

..
Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its resolutions 47
(1948) of 21 April 1948, 51(1948) of 3 June, 1948 and 80 (1950) of 14 March, 1950 and the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January,
1949, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with
the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

Where it says that they can't participate in national elections.
 
Resolution 91 (1951)
Concerning the India-Pakistan question submitted by the Representatives of
United Kingdom and United States and adopted by the Security Council on
March 30, 1951.
(Document No. S/2017/Rev. 1, dated the 30th March, 1951).

THE SECURITY COUNCIL,
Having received and noted the report of Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative for
India and Pakistan on his mission initiated by the Security Council resolution 80 (1950) of March
14, 1950.

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United
Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949,
and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the
United Nations.

..
Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its resolutions 47
(1948) of 21 April 1948, 51(1948) of 3 June, 1948 and 80 (1950) of 14 March, 1950 and the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January,
1949, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with
the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

1. Resolution 47 was passed by UNSC under Chapter VI of UN Charter. Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

2. Resolution 47
On the India-Pakistan question submitted jointly by the Representatives for
Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, the United Kingdom and United States
of America and adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting held on
21 April, 1948.
(Document No. 5/726, dated the 21st April, 1948).


"Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council and appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan.

A - RESTORATION OF PEACE AND ORDER

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake:

(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and
Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes
of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of
material aid to those fighting in the State;"

We're still waiting for your withdrawal!! :P
 
Sorry for your habitual, in fact state sponsored BS. But just one arrest and a confession of someone in the custody of Indian forces isn't going to prove anything. At least it won't hide crimes of your forces who fire in day light with live bullets and target chest of the protestors with obvious aim to kill and not to disperse them. That's exactly what applies to you religious fanatics.

Tell me who's giving a flying fck about it.

We're still waiting for your withdrawal!! :P

Let's wait a little longer. Once they collapse internally, we can simply walk over and take the territory.
 
The cause for the very high number of security forces in certain parts of Kashmir during the election process and for the low voter turnout is simple- the Islamist scum who threaten any Kashmiri who would dare to vote with violence and the security forces are there to prevent these Islamist scum from attacking those who defy the threats and do go to the polling stations.


If not for these security forces these scumbags would see Indian elections reduced to the bloodbath that is Pakistani elections with daily suicide and bomb blasts.

Are the security forces harassing voters? Are they blocking people from exercising their democratic right? Rather the opposite, they are there to protect the innocent Kashmiris from these terrorist trash.


If the innocents of Kashmir feel that they would rather not risk going out that is their decision but you can't draw much more from this. This isn't a case of India suppressing democracy, they can't force people to vote- it is their choice and as a result they can't complain with whoever gets elected.
 
1. Resolution 47 was passed by UNSC under Chapter VI of UN Charter. Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

2. Resolution 47
On the India-Pakistan question submitted jointly by the Representatives for
Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, the United Kingdom and United States
of America and adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting held on
21 April, 1948.
(Document No. 5/726, dated the 21st April, 1948).


"Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council and appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan.

A - RESTORATION OF PEACE AND ORDER

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake:

(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and
Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes
of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of
material aid to those fighting in the State;"

We're still waiting for your withdrawal!! :P


Keep waiting.
 
Where it says that they can't participate in national elections.
.
.
This is the position of United Nations resolutions as well that any elections in Indian Occupied Kashmir are not an alternative to the exercise of their right to self-determination ...


It is necessary to analyze elections in Kashmir, given the fact that the Indian State continues to argue that such elections are a substitute for the promised plebiscite ....

The United Nations Security Council stated in its resolution 91 dated March 30, 1951 that it would not consider elections held only in Indian administered Kashmir to be a substitute for a free and impartial plebiscite including the people of the entire state Jammu and Kashmir.


Resolution 91 (1951)
Concerning the India-Pakistan question submitted by the Representatives of
United Kingdom and United States and adopted by the Security Council on
March 30, 1951.
(Document No. S/2017/Rev. 1, dated the 30th March, 1951).

THE SECURITY COUNCIL,
Having received and noted the report of Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative for
India and Pakistan on his mission initiated by the Security Council resolution 80 (1950) of March
14, 1950.

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United
Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949,
and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the
United Nations.

Observing that on 27 October, 1950, the General Council of the "All Jammu and Kashmir National
Conference" adopted a resolution recommending the convening of a Constituent Assembly for the
purpose of determining the "future shape and affiliations of the State of Jammu and Kashmir";
observing further from statements of responsible authorities that action is proposed to convene such
a Constituent Assembly and that the area from which such a Constituent Assembly would be elected
is only a part of the whole territory of Jammu and Kashmir.


Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its resolutions 47
(1948) of 21 April 1948, 51(1948) of 3 June, 1948 and 80 (1950) of 14 March, 1950 and the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January,
1949, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with
the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

Affirming that the convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of
the "All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference" and any action that Assembly might attempt to
take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or any part thereof would not
constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above principle.


Declaring its belief that it is the duty of the Security Council in carrying out its primary responsibility
for the maintenance of international peace and security to aid the parties to reach an amicable
solution of the Kashmir dispute and that a prompt settlement of this dispute is of vital importance to
the maintenance of international peace and security.

Observing from Sir Owen Dixon's report that the main points of difference preventing agreement
between the parties were:

(a) The procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation of the State preparatory to the holding
of a plebiscite, and

(b) The degree of control over the exercise of the functions of Government in the State
necessary to ensure a free and fair plebiscite.

(1) Accepts, in compliance with his request, Sir Owen Dixon's resignation and expresses its
gratitude to Sir Owen Dixon's resignation and expresses its gratitude to Sir Owen for the great ability
and devotion with which he carried out his mission;

(2) Decides to appoint a United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan in succession to Sir
Owen Dixon;

(3) Instructs the United Nations Representative to proceed to the sub-continent and, after
consultation with the Governments of India and Pakistan, to effect the demilitarisation of the State of
Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and, 5 January, 1949;

(4) Calls upon the parties to co-operate with the United Nations Representative to the fullest degree
in effecting the demilitarisation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir;

(5) Instructs the United Nations Representatives to report to the Security Council within three
months from the date of his arrival on the sub-continent; if at the time of this report, he has not
effected demilitarisation in accordance with paragraph three above, or obtained the agreement of the
parties to a plan for effecting such demilitarisation, the United Nations Representative shall report to
the Security Council those points of difference between the parties in regard to the interpretation and
execution of the agreed resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949, which he considers
must be resolved to enable such demilitarisation to be carried out;

(6) Calls upon the parties, in the event of their discussions with the United Nations Representative
failing in his opinion to result in full agreement, to accept arbitration upon all outstanding points of
difference reported by the United Nations representative in accordance with paragraph five above.
Such arbitration to be carried 'out by an arbitrator, or a panel of arbitrators, to be appointed by the
President of the International Court of Justice after consultation with the parties;

(7) Decides that the Military Observer Group shall continue to supervise the cease-fire in the State;

(8) Requests the Governments of India and Pakistan to ensure that their cement regarding the
cease-fire shall continue to be faithfully observed and calls them to take all possible measures to
ensure the creation and maintenance of an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further
negotiations and to refrain from any likely to prejudice a just and peaceful settlement;

(9) Requests the Secretary-General to provide the United Nations Representative for India and
Pakistan with such services and facilities as may be necessary in carrying out the terms of this
resolution.

The Security Council voted on this Resolution on 30-3-51 with the following result:
In favour: Brazil, China, Ecuador, France, Netherlands, Turkey, U.K. and U.S.A.
Against: None
Abstaining: India, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia
 
"Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council and appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan.
A - RESTORATION OF PEACE AND ORDER

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake:

(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and
Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes
of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of
material aid to those fighting in the State;"

We're still waiting for your withdrawal!! :P


Your claim that Pakistan halted the process is a plain lie.


Here is the resolution (resolution 98)

"4. Urges the Governments of India and Pakistan to enter into immediate negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan in order to reach agreement on the specific number of forces to remain on each side of the cease-fire line at the end of the period of demilitarization, this number to be between 3,000 and 6,000 armed forces remaining on the Pakistan side of the cease-fire line and between 12,000 and 18,000 armed forces remaining on the India side of the cease-fire line, as suggested by the United Nations Representative in his proposals of 16 July 1952, such specific numbers to be arrived at bearing in mind the principles or criteria contained in paragraph 7 of the United Nations Representative's proposal of 4 September 1952;"


However, India did not reduce its troop number down to 18,000. It claimed it needed 24,000 troops. Pakistan had already agreed to reduce its troop numbers to 3,000-6,000. This is what halted the process.


Remember, UNCIP chief blamed India for the halt of the plebiscite process in Kashmir. That's who should know whose fault it was.

The London Economist stated that "the whole world can see that India, which claims the support of this majority [the Kashmiri people]...has been obstructing a holding of an internationally supervised plebis-cite." Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative to the UNCIP, reported to the Security Council that,

In the end, I became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any such form, or to provisions governing the period of the plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation, and other forms of abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled.

In this regard, India’s apparent efforts to obstruct the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir stand in violation of international law. !!

The matter of fact is Nehru was not serious in holding a plebiscite in Kashmir from Day 1 .... He was only trying to fool the people of Kashmir and the international community ...


Writing to the Chief Minister of West Bengal, B.C. Roy on 29 June 1953, Nehru confided “If there was a plebiscite, a great majority of Muslims in Kashmir would go against us.” They had “become frightened of the communal elements in Jammu and in India.” He had “this feeling of our losing grip in Kashmir.” [Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, vol. 22, pp.204-5]


In 1996 was published a Note Nehru had written to Sheikh Abdullah on 25 August 1952 from Sonamarg in Kashmir. It is a document of cardinal importance. It laid bare Nehru’s entire approach to the questions; his strategy and tactics. He revealed that “towards the end of 1948” he concluded that “there were only two possibilities open to us, continuance of the war in a limited way; (2) some kind of a settlement on the basis of the existing military situation”. He had accepted the UNCIP resolutions to get a ceasefire; not to hold a plebiscite. “We are superior to Pakistan in military and industrial power,” With the passage of time Pakistan will “accept a settlement which we consider fair, whether in Kashmir or elsewhere”.

He was not bothered about what “Pakistan did or what the United Nations might do.” But he was “worried to find that the leaders of Kashmir were not so clear in their minds about the present or the future.” He was not worried about the wishes of the people either. They were “not what are called a virile people. They are soft and addicted to easy living.” Like Indira Gandhi, he felt that they were interested in “an honest administration and cheap and adequate food. If they get this, then they are more or less content.” The State would retain its “autonomy in most respects.” The leaders must shed doubt as doubt “percolates to their followers.” His recipe was clear. “Make the people think that the association of Kashmir State with India is an accomplished and final fact, and nothing is going to undo it.” [Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, vol. 19, pp.322-330. ed. S. Gopal, Nehru Memorial Fund, OUP, Second Series.]

So preach your BS only to the ignorant fools in your own country , No one here will buy your non sense !!!
 
Last edited:
My Kashmiri friend once told that people were very happy the day Indian troops entered Srinagar in 1947 because all they wanted was to get rid of those marauding Pashtuns at any cost. But these Hurriyat Loonies remember the day as the invasion of Kashmir by Indians and they also want Ladakh for Pakistani masters because one of the Jugular veins(Indus) flows through Ladakh.
You forget to mention poonch rebellion
 
.
.



It is necessary to analyze elections in Kashmir, given the fact that the Indian State continues to argue that such elections are a substitute for the promised plebiscite ....

The United Nations Security Council stated in its resolution 91 dated March 30, 1951 that it would not consider elections held only in Indian administered Kashmir to be a substitute for a free and impartial plebiscite including the people of the entire state Jammu and Kashmir.


Resolution 91 (1951)
Concerning the India-Pakistan question submitted by the Representatives of
United Kingdom and United States and adopted by the Security Council on
March 30, 1951.
(Document No. S/2017/Rev. 1, dated the 30th March, 1951).

THE SECURITY COUNCIL,
Having received and noted the report of Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations Representative for
India and Pakistan on his mission initiated by the Security Council resolution 80 (1950) of March
14, 1950.

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United
Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949,
and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the
United Nations.

Observing that on 27 October, 1950, the General Council of the "All Jammu and Kashmir National
Conference" adopted a resolution recommending the convening of a Constituent Assembly for the
purpose of determining the "future shape and affiliations of the State of Jammu and Kashmir";
observing further from statements of responsible authorities that action is proposed to convene such
a Constituent Assembly and that the area from which such a Constituent Assembly would be elected
is only a part of the whole territory of Jammu and Kashmir.


Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its resolutions 47
(1948) of 21 April 1948, 51(1948) of 3 June, 1948 and 80 (1950) of 14 March, 1950 and the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January,
1949, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with
the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

Affirming that the convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of
the "All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference" and any action that Assembly might attempt to
take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or any part thereof would not
constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above principle.


Declaring its belief that it is the duty of the Security Council in carrying out its primary responsibility
for the maintenance of international peace and security to aid the parties to reach an amicable
solution of the Kashmir dispute and that a prompt settlement of this dispute is of vital importance to
the maintenance of international peace and security.

Observing from Sir Owen Dixon's report that the main points of difference preventing agreement
between the parties were:

(a) The procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation of the State preparatory to the holding
of a plebiscite, and

(b) The degree of control over the exercise of the functions of Government in the State
necessary to ensure a free and fair plebiscite.

(1) Accepts, in compliance with his request, Sir Owen Dixon's resignation and expresses its
gratitude to Sir Owen Dixon's resignation and expresses its gratitude to Sir Owen for the great ability
and devotion with which he carried out his mission;

(2) Decides to appoint a United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan in succession to Sir
Owen Dixon;

(3) Instructs the United Nations Representative to proceed to the sub-continent and, after
consultation with the Governments of India and Pakistan, to effect the demilitarisation of the State of
Jammu and Kashmir on the basis of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and, 5 January, 1949;

(4) Calls upon the parties to co-operate with the United Nations Representative to the fullest degree
in effecting the demilitarisation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir;

(5) Instructs the United Nations Representatives to report to the Security Council within three
months from the date of his arrival on the sub-continent; if at the time of this report, he has not
effected demilitarisation in accordance with paragraph three above, or obtained the agreement of the
parties to a plan for effecting such demilitarisation, the United Nations Representative shall report to
the Security Council those points of difference between the parties in regard to the interpretation and
execution of the agreed resolutions of 13 August, 1948, and 5 January, 1949, which he considers
must be resolved to enable such demilitarisation to be carried out;

(6) Calls upon the parties, in the event of their discussions with the United Nations Representative
failing in his opinion to result in full agreement, to accept arbitration upon all outstanding points of
difference reported by the United Nations representative in accordance with paragraph five above.
Such arbitration to be carried 'out by an arbitrator, or a panel of arbitrators, to be appointed by the
President of the International Court of Justice after consultation with the parties;

(7) Decides that the Military Observer Group shall continue to supervise the cease-fire in the State;

(8) Requests the Governments of India and Pakistan to ensure that their cement regarding the
cease-fire shall continue to be faithfully observed and calls them to take all possible measures to
ensure the creation and maintenance of an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further
negotiations and to refrain from any likely to prejudice a just and peaceful settlement;

(9) Requests the Secretary-General to provide the United Nations Representative for India and
Pakistan with such services and facilities as may be necessary in carrying out the terms of this
resolution.

The Security Council voted on this Resolution on 30-3-51 with the following result:
In favour: Brazil, China, Ecuador, France, Netherlands, Turkey, U.K. and U.S.A.
Against: None
Abstaining: India, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia

Azlu Bhaiya, where does it says they can't take part in the national election of India or can't have representation in India's Parliament. :sarcastic::sarcastic:BTW, do you know during election in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir every candidate is forced to take a pledge to remain under Pakistan's occupation. :woot:

You forget to mention poonch rebellion

I have read about Poonch rebellion although mainly exaggerated account. BTW, Indian Army wasn't involved in anything in Kashmir before it landed in Srinagar.
 
Back
Top Bottom