The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[Zob]

i guess they want to follow MUJIB's example of win and then ask for seperation not sit at home and ask for seperation!!!

 

[Gabbar]

Learn from Lone: Abdullah to Hurriyat

Srinagar: National Conference on Thursday asked Hurriyat Conference leaders boycotting the polls to emulate Sajad Gani Lone, who joined the electoral process, to help relieve the people of Jammu and Kashmir of "exploitative elements."

"Hurriyat leaders should follow the foot steps of Sajjad as positive politics will help relieve the poor people of the state of exploitative elements," party chief Farooq Abdullah told an election rallies at Surasyar and Raithan, 32 kms from here in Budgam district of Srinagar Lok Sabha constituency.

Sajad, the chairman of breakaway faction of People's Conference, had parted ways with the separatist camp and jumped into the election fray. He is seeking election
to the Lok Sabha from Baramulla constituency going to polls in the last phase on May 13.

Abdullah, party nominee from Srinagar seat where polls would be held on May 7, said "Sajjad has understood that the last two decades of uncertain situation has thrown the people into a cesspool of misfortune."

 

[luoshan]

Commission Names 13 Countries as Religious Freedom Violators

By Dan Robinson
Washington
01 May 2009

The latest annual report by the independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom names 13 countries as serious violators of religious freedom. The commission expresses concern about increasing extremism in many countries, including sharp criticism for Pakistan, saying extremism poses a particular threat to religious freedom.

The 13 countries named as Countries of Particular Concern (CPC) in this year's report are Burma, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Eritrea, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. …………………..

On Pakistan, {USCIRF Head Felice} Gaer said while government leaders "acquiesced" to the rule of Taliban-associated extremists in some regions, members of civil society, particularly women, have courageously objected.

Commission member Elizabeth Prodromou says the situation in Pakistan, a CPC country since 2002, has worsened because of the "largely unchecked growth" of Taliban-associated extremist groups:

"Pakistan's central government in Islamabad has ceded effective control of more and more of the country to these Taliban-associated extremist groups, notably of course, in the Swat Valley and its neighboring districts. At the same time, sectarian and religiously motivated violence continues apace. Particularly acute are violations against Shia Muslims, Amhadis, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs," she said. ……………………..


VOA News

Pakistan, for the seventh year in a row, named as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

 

[luoshan]

^ You cant force an entire group of people to leave their homes. Even today many Sikhs/Hindus live in Pakistan. Our land is ours we've been living in our land for generations only a minority of Muslims came from India to Pakistan during partition, most decided to stay in India and we have no problem with that.

Kashmir is different because no one asked the people of Kashmir what they want for their own land thats why its recognized by the international community as a disputed territory. This is not about Indian Muslims because Indian Muslims are a different group of people from Kashmiris. Thye've decided long time ago they dont want to be part of Pakistan so they dont concern us. We have to hear from Kashmiris what they want for their own land. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiri people.

Any solution to the problem, which is acceptable to Pakistan involves Pakistan gaining territory in J&K at the cost of India. Now, why would India want to accept such a loosing proposition, especially when its in stronger position than it ever was in last 60 years? What can Pakistan offer to India in return?
From India's point of view, continuing the present status quo is its best option. Presently, there is nothing Pakistan/Kashmir can do militarily,politically or diplomatically (Pakistan has tried all these before) to force India to give up any territory under its control. After all that has happened in the last 60 years, its foolish to expect that India will give away Kashmir to Pakistan for nothing in exchange. That leaves Pakistan with only option of barter, exchange of Indian controlled territory for something India wants.
Communal harmony is what India wants at present to achieve its developmental goals and aspirations of being a global economic and political power. Almost 14% (~150 million) of Indian population is Muslim. As per the 'two nation theory' (the basis for creation of Pakistan) Muslims and Non-Muslims cannot co-exist harmoniously as one nation. Pakistan was created as a safe sanctuary for all Muslims on the Indian sub-continent. Even then a large chunk of south-Asia's Muslim population decided to stay back in Secular India instead of migrating to the newly formed 'Islamic republic of Pakistan', thus rejecting the two nation theory. Now, this population of Muslims in India is contributing to a large extent to the occasional communal disharmony in the country, which is not good for India's international image or growth prospects. Pakistan could offer India to take this Indian Muslim population in exchange for gaining territories in J&K. Also, If Pakistan so desires India should take the non-Muslim population of Pakistan. This solution has many benefits, like:

1. This would be acceptable to even the most right wing Hindutva elements in India. Most Indians distrust the sovereign affiliations of the Indian Muslims. They would bear to loose Kashmir to get rid of Muslims from India.

2. Pakistan will get something it wanted since its creation. The issue which has been devouring a major chuck of Pakistan's resources (economic, military, political & diplomatic) will be resolved once and for all. Peace with India will reduce the role of Pakistan's military in domestic affairs and can bring real democracy to Pakistan.

3. With the addition of Indian Muslims, Pakistan will become the largest Muslim nation of the world. This will give Pakistan a larger say in the international arena and may be the leadership of the Islamic world.

4. Data shows that Indian Muslims are slightly better educated than their Pakistani brethren. This will contribute to Pakistan's growth and development. Also, Pakistan will gain a rich, diverse and talented population of movie stars, sportsmen, scientists, artists, poets etc. Just imagine what a person like Dr. A.P.J Adul Kalam, the father of India's strategic defense programs can do to Pakistan.
Indian Muslims are all over the country and have very diverse and cosmopolitan nature. They could contribute in reducing the sectarian and inter-provincial problems in Pakistan. The dominance of one province (Punjab) in Pakistan will be over.

5. Pakistanis believe that Indian Muslims are subjected genocide, discrimination and misery at the hands of the Hindus. The migration of these suffering Muslim lot to Pakistan will solve their problems.

6. With all the Muslims of India (including Kashmiri Muslims) moving into Islamic Republic of Pakistan (by gaining territory and population migration), The 'two nation theory' as proposed by the founders of Pakistan will be finally implemented 100%. Finally there will be two seperate nations in the sub-continent, one for muslims and other for the non-muslims, exactly as envisaged by the founders of Pakistan.

So in my opinion, the two nation theory which caused the problem of Kashmir, can also be applied to arrive at the solution.
Just my 2 cents

 

[luoshan]

Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever. India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.

Ever wonder why the Indian Muslims are silent about the issue of Kashmir? They start demonstrations/riots for any and every, real and imaginary atrocity against Islam/Muslims anywhere in the world. But I have never seen, heard or read about Indian Muslims speaking or doing something about the so called atrocities committed Hindus on their Kashmiri brethren.
Is it because they see through Pakistan's game? Or, is it because if they support the Kashmiri Muslims, the two nation theory will come to bite them in their backsides?
why isn't there much support for the Kashmiri Muslims even in the global Islamic world. Kashmir issue doesn't even a small part of the coverage that Palestine issue gets, even though comparatively Kashmir's territory and population is much larger.

 

[Nemesis]

Honestly the only viable solution is to turn the L.O.C into a soft border. With both parts of Kashmir having some sort of autonomy - a constitution separate from both India and Pakistan. Kashmiris will be free to elect their own rulers, frame their own laws, etc. However, their security will be managed by both India (JnK) and Pakistan(P.O.K). Something similar to Monaco.

 

[Zob]

Burma, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Eritrea, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan


LUSHOUN....tell me something is this a list of countries we hate by the US...or countries we lost to....i don't see afghanistan in it...well atleast not yet...and what happened to cuba i guess the leader...as for LIBYA...i guess they called their peace with the US....

 

[Zob]

Now, this population of Muslims in India is contributing to a large extent to the occasional communal disharmony in the country, which is not good for India's international image or growth prospects. Pakistan could offer India to take this Indian Muslim population in exchange for gaining territories in J&K.

LUSHOUN....are you from the RSS by any chance....???

1. This would be acceptable to even the most right wing Hindutva elements in India. Most Indians distrust the sovereign affiliations of the Indian Muslims. They would bear to loose Kashmir to get rid of Muslims from India.

I am getting convinced....


4. Data shows that Indian Muslims are slightly better educated than their Pakistani brethren. This will contribute to Pakistan's growth and development. Also, Pakistan will gain a rich, diverse and talented population of movie stars, sportsmen, scientists, artists, poets etc. Just imagine what a person like Dr. A.P.J Adul Kalam, the father of India's strategic defense programs can do to Pakistan. Indian Muslims are all over the country and have very diverse and cosmopolitan nature. They could contribute in reducing the sectarian and inter-provincial problems in Pakistan. The dominance of one province (Punjab) in Pakistan will be over

YES a JEW MADE OUR BOMB....ofcourse!!!

 

[luoshan]

Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever. India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.

No one asked whether the Muslims were welcomed to stay in secular India during partition. It was just taken for granted. Muslims of south-Asia demanded and got a exclusive country for themselves. The Kashmiri Muslims are asking for the same. The non-Muslims of south-Asia don't have a similar choice.
If and when a plebiscite is done in Kashmir, a similar plebiscite/referendum should also be done all over India on whether Muslims should be allowed to continue to stay in India, and Pakistan should be made a party to the outcome of this plebiscite.
Like the south-Asian Muslims have a right to live in their exclusive Islamic nations, non-Muslims also should be given the right to live in non-Muslim nation. This is only fair thing to do. The two nation theory should not be allowed to be one sided, which is favoring only the Muslims in their demands. The presence of the large population of Muslims in India is anathema to the two nation theory.
The solution to the Kashmir problem lies in the implementation of the two nation theory 100%.

 

[luoshan]

LUSHOUN....are you from the RSS by any chance....???

I am getting convinced.....
Zob...
Does it matter whether I'm a member or RSS or you are a member of Taliban? I suppose this forum is to discuss issues and not to discuss about each other.
btw... I'm not even a Hindu, leave alone be a member of RSS

4. YES a JEW MADE OUR BOMB....ofcourse!!!

.

I didn't understand this part of your response. Care to explain?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No one asked whether the Muslims were welcomed to stay in secular India during partition. It was just taken for granted. Muslims of south-Asia demanded and got a exclusive country for themselves. The Kashmiri Muslims are asking for the same. The non-Muslims of south-Asia don't have a similar choice.
If and when a plebiscite is done in Kashmir, a similar plebiscite/referendum should also be done all over India on whether Muslims should be allowed to continue to stay in India, and Pakistan should be made a party to the outcome of this plebiscite.
Like the south-Asian Muslims have a right to live in their exclusive Islamic nations, non-Muslims also should be given the right to live in non-Muslim nation. This is only fair thing to do. The two nation theory should not be allowed to be one sided, which is favoring only the Muslims in their demands. The presence of the large population of Muslims in India is anathema to the two nation theory.
The solution to the Kashmir problem lies in the implementation of the two nation theory 100%.

That's a flawed argument - the Muslims in the territories comprising Pakistan and what is today Bangladesh determined their destiny was as a separate nation - that had nothing to do with whether non-Muslims could or could not live in Pakistan. Jinnah's quotes on the status of on-Muslims and their rights in Pakistan is testament to that.

So if you want to hold a plebiscite in all of India, go ahead, but Pakistan has no obligation to participate in it since the partition process of British India is over, except in Jammu & Kashmir.

So if you want to conduct a plebiscite and give the remaining Muslims the choice of another independent nation out of today's India, go ahead, that is your internal issue.

 

[saiko]

What can Pakistan offer to India in return?
From India's point of view, continuing the present status quo is its best option. Presently, there is nothing Pakistan/Kashmir can do militarily,politically or diplomatically (Pakistan has tried all these before) to force India to give up any territory under its control. After all that has happened in the last 60 years, its foolish to expect that India will give away Kashmir to Pakistan for nothing in exchange.

This post pretty much sums up the entire problem. What Pakistan wants or needs is irrelevent. This is about self-determination for the Kashmiri people. India has blocked an internationally monitored referendum forever - it makes a mockery of Indian attempts to boast about its democratic process.

 

[luoshan]

That's a flawed argument - the Muslims in the territories comprising Pakistan and what is today Bangladesh determined their destiny was as a separate nation - that had nothing to do with whether non-Muslims could or could not live in Pakistan. Jinnah's quotes on the status of on-Muslims and their rights in Pakistan is testament to that.

My argument is very sound and is based on the 'two nation theory' espoused by the Muslims of south-Asia themselves. No one forced this on them. What Pakistan/Bangladesh wish to do with their non-Muslim population is their prerogative. The very logic of creation of Pakistan (and Bangladesh) is that Muslims cannot co-exist with non-Muslims (as per 2 nations principle).

So if you want to hold a plebiscite in all of India, go ahead, but Pakistan has no obligation to participate in it since the partition process of British India is over, except in Jammu & Kashmir.

The very logic of Pakistan being party to the Kashmiri plebiscite, if any, also holds good when applied to the whole of India. The partition is incomplete without deciding the fate of J&K and Indian Muslims.

So if you want to conduct a plebiscite and give the remaining Muslims the choice of another independent nation out of today's India, go ahead, that is your internal issue.

Independent Muslim nation(s) have already been already given to the muslims of South-Asia, exactly as demanded by Muslims. It is for the Muslims of South-Asia to decide how to fit into these nations (plus Kashmir as an independent nation or as part of Pakistan).
The bottom line is that the Muslims of South-Asia cannot have their cake and expect to eat others' piece too..

 

[luoshan]

This post pretty much sums up the entire problem. What Pakistan wants or needs is irrelevent. This is about self-determination for the Kashmiri people. India has blocked an internationally monitored referendum forever - it makes a mockery of Indian attempts to boast about its democratic process.

If Pakistan is irrelevant to the Kashmir Dispute, what is all this noise all about? The Issue then is only between the people of Kashmir and Indian federation. Pakistan has no locus-standi in this issue.
Please read your history. Pakistan is partially responsible for the UN sponsored plebiscite not taking place (by not de-miltarising the Kashmir under its control). Pakistan has relinquished any demand for Kashmir plebiscite by forcing a military solution (and failing) in 1965 by initiating the war.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The very logic of creation of Pakistan (and Bangladesh) is that Muslims cannot co-exist with non-Muslims (as per 2 nations principle).

Wrong - the idea behind Pakistan was to provide a homeland for the Muslims of the territories comprising Pakistan, and any others who wished to move there, where Muslims could live as they saw fit and control their affairs independent of a non-Muslim majority.

There is a difference between not being able to coexist with non-Muslims (which is an idea debunked by reading through Jinnah's quotes) and not trusting a non-Muslim majority to address Muslim grievances and/or allow Muslims to govern themselves as they saw fit.

The very logic of Pakistan being party to the Kashmiri plebiscite, if any, also holds good when applied to the whole of India. The partition is incomplete without deciding the fate of J&K and Indian Muslims.

The Indian Muslims had their chance when partition occurred, to move to Pakistan, and millions did move (and many still migrate to Pakistan through legal channels), but the process of partition is now over, except for in Jammu&Kashmir, where the people were not given the right to determine which nation they wished their territory and themselves to be a part of - a right recognized by India, Pakistan and the world community in the UNSC.

Independent Muslim nation(s) have already been already given to the muslims of South-Asia, exactly as demanded by Muslims. It is for the Muslims of South-Asia to decide how to fit into these nations (plus Kashmir as an independent nation or as part of Pakistan).
The bottom line is that the Muslims of South-Asia cannot have their cake and expect to eat others' piece too..

There are Muslims of Pakistan, Muslims of Jammu & Kashmir and Muslims of India - the first category have their nation, the second have had their rights denied them, and the third are India's problem (or not).

If the Indian Muslims cannot fit in India, they can apply for citizenship in Pakistan through official channels, as any other foreign national, but the chance to emigrate en masse was over once the process of partition was over.