The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[KS]

@ toxic_pus:

Excellent reply factually refuting all his claims...but surely a reply in vain.

 

[harish]

This entire debate with Xeric, stimulating as it has been, has proved to me beyond doubt that all Pakistan really wants is the land of Kashmir. The people of Kashmir are simply a convenient and acceptable front for the true motive in coveting Kashmir. You may couch your excuses and words in any which way, but the facts are indisputable. Kashmir will remain with India. If you are concerned about the people of Kashmir, then you are welcome to those who appreciate your concern. The sentiment on the ground is clear, and will polarize increasingly against you the more you send across your proxies who claim to be freedom fighters, but who have been killing more civilian Kashmiris than they have Indian forces. Pakistan can either come to the table and solve the problem with a solution that involves no loss of face to both nations, or it can continue the path it has been leading to date. Either way, India is prepared and ready. If you feel you have the capability to fight us for and over Kashmir and have demonstrated that in the past, I am sure you no doubt appreciate that we would have the same if not superior capability, as too we have demonstrated in the past. So forget about confrontation with India. Its not worked for you in the past and its off the table for good now. Come forward to work out a solution that does not start on the premise of territorial exchange. Anything else is mere lip service and rhetoric, playing to an increasingly troubled and disillusioned gallery.

 

[Xeric]

To this I will say the same thing I had said to a friend of yours a while back.

This is called cognitive dissonance. A self-serving version of ‘reality’ has been drip fed to you by your State and you have convinced yourself that it is the truth. So when you are faced with the real ‘reality’ that completely contradicts your perceived ‘reality’, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for you to rationalize the dichotomy between what you perceive it should be and what you see it really is. Instinctively, you just reject the real ‘reality’, out of hand and cling on to your perception, because it is easier for you to rationalize your perception than the dichotomy.


It appears that your appetite for embarrassment is insatiable.

Infact as you have gone immune to to 'embarrassment' you try to cloak it by posting it all over others. As we have also seen that you have been short of logic lately, so you instead of posting any relevant details, resort to these yaps in order to gain cheap popularity. It aint working doc!

Firstly, Article 2 of the Lease agreement recognizes that Gilgit was part of ‘dominions of His Highness, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir’ and undertakes, accordingly to ‘honour’ the tradition of the land and to hoist ‘the flag of His-Highness’ at the ‘official headquarters of the Agency, throughout the year’. It reads:

In recognition of the fact that the said territory continues to be included within the dominions of His Highness the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, salutes and customary honours shall be paid in the said territory by the administration on the occasion of the birth day of His Highness, Baisakhi, Dussehra, Basant Panchmi and on such other occasions as may be agreed upon by His Highness and the Viceroy and the Governor-General of India. The flag of His-Highness will be flown at the official headquarters of the Agency throughout the year.​

Clearly, except for restricting it, the lease didn't end Maharaja's sovereignty over Gilgit. Also, the fact that the Brits took the lease from the Maharaja and not from any Afghans, Pathans, Sikhs or any pink giraffe under my bed, is an attestation of Maharaja's ownership of Gilgit.

Secondly, the lease agreement was officially terminated on 1st August, 1947, just before the transfer of power and Gilgit reverted back to the Maharaja. So when the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession he had complete ownership of Gilgit and as such the legal rights passed over to India on signing of the Instrument.

Thirdly, even if the lease agreement hadn’t been terminated just before the date of transfer of power, it still wouldn’t have made any difference, because according to Section 7(1)(b) of Indian Independence Act, 1947, all outstanding agreements between the British India and the Princely States stood automatically terminated.

For an even better and thorough debunking of your amusing claim, you may read this.

So soldier boy, are we done yet?

Speaking frankly your post doesnt merit a refutation as you already did that by doubting and vacillating betwixt and between the 'termination of the lease', anyway here's what Subroto Roy has to say about the events:

The actions of the then-new British Dominion of Pakistan with respect to Gilgit in August-November 1947 were tantamount to ending the status in international law of the old State of Jammu & Kashmir that had originated in 1846. The then-new British Dominion of India did not ever have de facto control of Gilgit as a result. Hence, Gilgit never belonged to India. Due to Pakistan’s action in Gilgit and then later the attack commencing October 22, the old State of J&K disintegrated between August and October 1947 into an ownerless entity in international law. Its territories came to be annexed by military decision by the new Pakistan and new India, and hence we have the LOC being the valid demarcation in international law.

Face-palm!

Apart from above the the following says the same thing but as it comes from an independent source, it might be able to push some sense into you Islamic Republic of Gilgit 1947 (Pakistan)

A closer look at the above mentioned link would also refute some of the claims (especially the one saying: As far as the formation of an “Islamic Republic of Gilgit” in 1947 is concerned it was not recognized by anybody, not even by the government of Pakistan. The latter, however, entered into what came to be known as Karachi Agreement on April 28, 1951) as infact, The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.

Face palm-2!

-----

BTW, let's be clear on this atleast; what exactly have you been trying to prove since the day you landed here in this thread? Is it that once (upon a time) Gilgit was part of J & K or that the 'happening's post 1935 and especially 31 July 1947 by virtue of which Giglit became Pakistan is the point that bothers you? Seriously i find your posts quite intuitionalized!

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

I was just listening to the song ''Regulators'', by Warren G.

Xeric I don't personally know you -- but you were the first person that come to my mind.


to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes (i stress the plural)

To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.

Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour.

Any resistance you meet there is purely Kashmiri phenomenon in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.


for God's sakes, you even arrest a Pakistani pigeon and put it in detention center......hysteria and paranoia will only cause you to grow more gray hairs and maintain certain psychological complexes that keep you from ''running smoothly''





any valuable intel from ''pigeon'' ?? Has the serum been administered, and if so, is the little bugger talking yet?


LOLLLLLLLLLLL

 

[Xeric]

I was just listening to the song ''Regulators'', by Warren G.

Xeric I don't personally know you -- but you were the first person that come to my mind.

to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes (i stress the plural)

Infact the most easy thing to do when you yourself cant play is to bar others from playing too. The easiest thing one can do when he cant justify his claim is to post ostentatious replies and earn that cheap acknowledgments from his likes. The easiest thing to do when one cant prove the actual point is to pour in irrelevant BS and instead of discussing the matter at hand, argue over nondescript details!

To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.

We have been trying this since long, but then someone on the east is shrewd enough to find an excuse to jeopardize the entire peace process.

Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour.

What bothers me is the the blatant refusal of crime against humanity that had been commited by india forces in Kashmir, moreover instead of mending ones own house they have the cheeks to tell the freedom fighters not to finger them. Infact the indians have mastered dirty-tactics and we see that evident in every move made by india. They probably think that by extorting the innocents they may subdue the fight against aggression, but they forget (as you very correctly have pointed out) that they would reap what they have always sown!

Any resistance you meet there is purely Kashmiri phenomenon in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.

i think they have forgotten the time when the regular indian forces at the LoC used to turn their faces away from the infiltrating fighters (so that they dont have to engage them - or should i say, the infiltrators should spare their poor lives).

for God's sakes, you even arrest a Pakistani pigeon and put it in detention center......hysteria and paranoia will only cause you to grow more gray hairs and maintain certain psychological complexes that keep you from ''running smoothly''





any valuable intel from ''pigeon'' ?? Has the serum been administered, and if so, is the little bugger talking yet?


LOLLLLLLLLLLL

And they tell us that GB is not part of Pakistan today

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

like i said, let them keep day-dreaming. They have no locus standi on GB matters, they have no locus standi on Kashmiri affairs.

it's good to dream sometimes. But to be numb and ignore realities, tis a crime!

 

[KS]

to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes (i stress the plural)

Sorry not interested...we r fine with the ground realities in Kashmir and we know how to deal with them.

To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.

Absolutely my friend....we need good relations to move forward...but if that forward growth is at the cost of the territorial integrity of my country...sorry we r not interested in that "moving forward".
I (whole of India) would not like/let the blood of countless martyrs who spilled their blood in the 4 wars and in terrorist acts go in vain.

Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour.

Comeon....we all know better..Pakistan has its lifeline (rivers) flowing thru Kashmir and thence controlled by India.
So please dont try to mask ur strategic interest in Kashmir with a benevolent goal.
If so concerned abt ppl of Kashmir pls take note its because of the cross border infiltration the IA is there in Kashmir and hence the "so called" state terrorism,human rights violations etc etc.
Stop supporting cross border infiltration...IA will have no reason to be in Kashmir and hence everything turns out to be good.

Any resistance you meet there is purely Kashmiri phenomenon in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.

I think LeT,JeM are as Kashmiri as OBL is American...So wats their business in Kashmir..?
And regarding the pure Kashmiri phenomenon thing....I just have one word...Dont get fooled by thinking the whole of Kashmir is Geelani type.

@ ALL

P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it.
Till tat as u guys say P-O-K and NA will be parts of Pakistan and J&K will be part of India.Period.

 

[Nihat]

P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it.

Absolutly not - referrendum was out of the question when the armed insurgency began. All pro-India elements in Kashmir were brutally rooted out , be it Kashmiri pundits or pro-India groups of Muslim origin, the only ones allowed to survive were those who had seperatist agendas or were direct proxies of Pakistan.

Violence and armed movement meant an end to the possibility of referrendum.

 

[toxic_pus]

Infact as you have gone immune to to 'embarrassment' you try to cloak it by posting it all over others. As we have also seen that you have been short of logic lately, so you instead of posting any relevant details, resort to these yaps in order to gain cheap popularity. It aint working doc!

Not on you, I know.

Let me answer your last question first.

BTW, let's be clear on this atleast; what exactly have you been trying to prove since the day you landed here in this thread? Is it that once (upon a time) Gilgit was part of J & K or that the 'happening's post 1935 and especially 31 July 1947 by virtue of which Giglit became Pakistan is the point that bothers you? Seriously i find your posts quite intuitionalized!

I am responding to your very specific claim that any reference to J&K doesn’t include GB. For example:

… the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown OUT of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my post # 1082, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!

Since you wanted a map, I had given you one right from the horse’s mouth – The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908). You found it so hard to explain away that you started narrating history from the troglodyte era.

Anyway, my point is that since Pakistan considers entire Kashmir as something ‘pending final solution’, GB, being a part of Kashmir, is therefore, not yet a part of Pakistan. This in turn means that by virtue of Instrument of Accession, legally it still belongs to India, irrespective of history of Kashmir, during the era of troglodytes. Now if Pakistan wants to reach a ‘final solution’ as envisaged by UN resolutions, GB must also come under plebiscite. But before that, the preconditions to plebiscites, viz complete withdrawal of Pak nationals and army from GB has to be performed in the same manner as it is to be performed in AJK.

I am least bothered by what goes on in GB and frankly I wouldn’t give an ant’s azz if Pak incorporates GB as part of Pakistan. But when Pakistanis, such as yourself, scream and shout about plebiscite as per UN resolutions I feel like reminding them that it would put Pakistanis in greater discomfort than Indians.

Now coming back to your claim that GB was never a part of Kashmir and by extension India do not have any locus standi on GB. Before that let me remind you that on 31st July, 1947, Pakistan didn’t exist for GB to be part of it. Amusing part is that you don’t know the date of your country’s birth and here you are debating about Kashmir’s history.

Speaking frankly your post doesnt merit a refutation as you already did that by doubting and vacillating betwixt and between the 'termination of the lease'...

It was you who referred to that lease as a last ditch attempt to make your point that Gilgit wasn’t a part of Kashmir, at least not at the time of transfer of power. Little did you know that the lease agreement explicitly recognized the Maharaja’s sovereignty over Gilgit and the Brits had eventually retroceded Gilgit to Maharaja right before transfer of power. You would refute if you knew how to.

anyway here's what Subroto Roy has to say about the events:

The actions of the then-new British Dominion of Pakistan with respect to Gilgit in August-November 1947 were tantamount to ending the status in international law of the old State of Jammu & Kashmir that had originated in 1846. The then-new British Dominion of India did not ever have de facto control of Gilgit as a result. Hence, Gilgit never belonged to India. Due to Pakistan’s action in Gilgit and then later the attack commencing October 22, the old State of J&K disintegrated between August and October 1947 into an ownerless entity in international law. Its territories came to be annexed by military decision by the new Pakistan and new India, and hence we have the LOC being the valid demarcation in international law.

Mr Roy is right that India never had a de facto control over Gilgit. But then India didn’t have de facto control over any part of Kashmir between August and October, 1947. On and from 26th Oct, 1947 India got de jure ownership of Kashmir by virtue of Instrument of accession. However it was only upto the current LoC that India could establish de facto control and the rest of Kashmir to the west of LoC has remained de jure. This is actually a strawman argument since no Indian claims de facto ownership and control of NA and AJK. It is the de jure ownership that India claims of.

Apart from above the the following says the same thing but as it comes from an independent source, it might be able to push some sense into you Islamic Republic of Gilgit 1947 (Pakistan)

A closer look at the above mentioned link would also refute some of the claims (especially the one saying: As far as the formation of an “Islamic Republic of Gilgit” in 1947 is concerned it was not recognized by anybody, not even by the government of Pakistan. The latter, however, entered into what came to be known as Karachi Agreement on April 28, 1951) as infact, The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.

This is called shooting in the foot, just like your reference to that lease. I will come to it shortly. If simply ‘taking over’ the area from the current ‘owner’, who had forcefully taken over that piece of land, is enough to be considered as part of Pakistan, then how come acceding on the basis of Instrument of accession, signed by the current owner of Kashmir and vetted by the largest opposition party in Kashmir, is not a valid way of acceding Kashmir to India? Both the cases are principally same – ‘taken over’ from the ‘owner’ without a plebiscite (although in India’s case it is based on a recognized legal set up).

Nevertheless, it is again invalid argument, since the de jure ownership had already passed on to India on 26th Oct, 1947 and the calendar I follow shows Oct to precede Nov.

Now about foot shooting. The article opens thus:

‘In August 1947, the Governor-General of the Union of India, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, negotiated with the Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, the accession of his domain to the Union of India, that included the Northern Area, known commonly as Gilgit-Baltistan, which were assigned by the British only recently to the Maharaja of Kashmir.’​

This is the second time I have used your source to disprove your claim that Gilgit-Baltistan is/was not a part of J&K.

If I start facepalming, I have to do that for so many times I might just end up hurting my face. So pardon me if instead of facepalming I do a whole lot of ROFLOL.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Sorry not interested...we r fine with the ground realities in Kashmir and we know how to deal with them.

what is this nonsense? If everything is fine, then why are the issues not solved or addressed yet?


''sorry not interested''

Absolutely my friend....we need good relations to move forward...but if that forward growth is at the cost of the territorial integrity of my country...sorry we r not interested in that "moving forward".

the rebellion and freedom fighting are local phenomenon. Shed away with that burden!

I (whole of India) would not like/let the blood of countless martyrs who spilled their blood in the 4 wars and in terrorist acts go in vain.

yes they fought for their freedom. Glad you recognize the price of the blood of Kashmiri freedom-seekers.

hopefully the curfews, targetted killings and other forms of terrorism and hard tactics will cease once you give Kashmiris the rights to what is absolutely theirs.

Comeon....we all know better..Pakistan has its lifeline (rivers) flowing thru Kashmir and thence controlled by India.

tis true! So stop building dams and limiting our water. As it is our ''lifeline'' we will do anything to fight for our survivial.


anything.....

So please dont try to mask ur strategic interest in Kashmir with a benevolent goal.

that would be inhuman, and a violation of our religion and our culture and upbringing.

If so concerned abt ppl of Kashmir pls take note its because of the cross border infiltration the IA is there in Kashmir and hence the "so called" state terrorism,human rights violations etc etc.
Stop supporting cross border infiltration...IA will have no reason to be in Kashmir and hence everything turns out to be good.

indians are always exaggerating these infiltrations. Even bird cannot fly without being harassed.

I think LeT,JeM are as Kashmiri as OBL is American...So wats their business in Kashmir..?

I have no information on these groups. My point is that civil disobedience is considered terrorism in Kashmir, and your state condones heavy handed tactics on the peoples of Kashmir.

And regarding the pure Kashmiri phenomenon thing....I just have one word...Dont get fooled by thinking the whole of Kashmir is Geelani type.

I do think majority of Kashmiris do not want to be part of hindustan.



(by the way, that was 12 words )

P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it

indians will just find a distraction to stray the ''audience'' away from referendum. Why? Because you know the ruling would not be in your favour.

Till tat as u guys say P-O-K and NA will be parts of Pakistan and J&K will be part of India.Period.

J&K were never parts of hindustan to begin with. Like us, you didnt even have a country until 1947 -- a day after we got ours

 

[psychedelic_renegade]

what is this nonsense? If everything is fine, then why are the issues not solved or addressed yet?


''sorry not interested''

Indeed things weren't perfect but not so messed up like today until u tried to replicate an Afghanistan in Kashmir! death by 1000 cuts, wasn't it the call?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Indeed things weren't perfect but not so messed up like today until u tried to replicate an Afghanistan in Kashmir! death by 1000 cuts, wasn't it the call?

baseless emotional propaganda

come back when u are ready for proper discussion

 

[Xeric]

Not on you, I know.

Let me answer your last question first.

I am responding to your very specific claim that any reference to J&K doesn’t include GB. For example:

Since you wanted a map, I had given you one right from the horse’s mouth – The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908). You found it so hard to explain away that you started narrating history from the troglodyte era.

You are a thickhead as ever. If i would pick up a map of the 1700s it would still probably show the 13 Colonies under the English control!

So, welcome to the real world! Its 2010!!

Face-palm.

Anyway, my point is that since Pakistan considers entire Kashmir as something ‘pending final solution’, GB, being a part of Kashmir, is therefore, not yet a part of Pakistan. This in turn means that by virtue of Instrument of Accession, legally it still belongs to India, irrespective of history of Kashmir, during the era of troglodytes. Now if Pakistan wants to reach a ‘final solution’ as envisaged by UN resolutions, GB must also come under plebiscite. But before that, the preconditions to plebiscites, viz complete withdrawal of Pak nationals and army from GB has to be performed in the same manner as it is to be performed in AJK.

You are again just shyting out just anything that land on your head.

Pakistan dont have 'entire Kashmir' phrase in its dictionary. It's just Kashmir that includes the present occupied territory of J & K by the indian army that commits atrocities at a vast rate and that too on daily basis.

Two, GB is something that was part of Pakistan since 16 Nov '47.

Three, you can frame, varnish and bullet proof (like that of Mona Lisa's) that I of A (a BS) that too which india found difficult to 'create' (and if for instance we assume that it was real), because on 1 Nov '97 Gilgit was an Independent Republic and just after 16 days it was in safe (Pakistani) hands. So much for the I of A. Keep rolling and playing with THE paper

Four, Pakistan have no tribals and freedom fighters anywhere in "Kashmir", however it would keep on providing the necessary assistance in terms of Pakistan Armed Forces to its provinces and the AK (as provided in UNCIP.)

I am least bothered by what goes on in GB and frankly I wouldn’t give an ant’s azz if Pak incorporates GB as part of Pakistan. But when Pakistanis, such as yourself, scream and shout about plebiscite as per UN resolutions I feel like reminding them that it would put Pakistanis in greater discomfort than Indians.

So now you feel defeated, get up boy we still have to go a long way.

As for the plebiscite, well it may not happen (though it must happen), but then you can continue to kill and rape and get killed and rape (use your imagination) in Kashmir.

Now coming back to your claim that GB was never a part of Kashmir and by extension India do not have any locus standi on GB.

It was Abu

Take another sip of that something you were drinking

Before that let me remind you that on 31st July, 1947, Pakistan didn’t exist for GB to be part of it. Amusing part is that you don’t know the date of your country’s birth and here you are debating about Kashmir’s history.

What a d!c...

Since 31st July '47 the process which ultimately resulted into the inclusion of Gilgit in Pakistan had started. As you have a weak memory and a thicker skull, here let me help you out (i hope you could figure out at what point of time during this 'process did india born):

~ 31st July '47 - Hari Singh’s Governor arrived to find “all the officers of the British Government had opted for service in Pakistan”

~ The Gilgit Scouts’ commander, a Major William Brown, and his adjutant, a Captain Mathieson, planned openly to engineer a coup détat against Hari Singh’s Government.

~ Between August and October - Gilgit was in uneasy calm. (india, Pakistan take birth)

~ At midnight on 31 October 1947 - the Governor was surrounded by the Scouts and the next day he was “arrested” and a provisional government declared. (I of A goes for a SIX!!! )

~ On November 1,1947 - the Islamic Republic of Gilgit was proclaimed with Raja Shah Rais Khan, (member of the local ruling dynasty) as its president. The flag of the new republic was raised over the governor's mansion and the new government claimed the area of Gilgit-Baltistan, several princely states, Kargil and Ladakh as its territory. with the aim of joining the Dominion of Pakistan.

~ On 4 November 1947 - Brown raised the new Pakistani flag in the Scouts’ lines.

~ November 16,1947 - with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.

~ 16 Nov 1947 onwards - Face-palm!

It was you who referred to that lease as a last ditch attempt to make your point that Gilgit wasn’t a part of Kashmir, at least not at the time of transfer of power. Little did you know that the lease agreement explicitly recognized the Maharaja’s sovereignty over Gilgit and the Brits had eventually retroceded Gilgit to Maharaja right before transfer of power. You would refute if you knew how to.

It was due on 1 Aug, did it happen?

Mr Roy is right that India never had a de facto control over Gilgit.

You got that right.

And here goes your de jure down the gutter:

But then India didn’t have de facto control over any part of Kashmir between August and October, 1947. On and from 26th Oct, 1947 India got de jure ownership of Kashmir by virtue of Instrument of accession. However it was only upto the current LoC that India could establish de facto control and the rest of Kashmir to the west of LoC has remained de jure. This is actually a strawman argument since no Indian claims de facto ownership and control of NA and AJK. It is the de jure ownership that India claims of.

First, i have already 'praised' this I of A for quite some time now. For the latest one just see above.

Ok, having for an instance assumed that the I of A was something of the real world (which was infact 'lost' and then magically recreated - as per Alitar Lamb), india got the owner of Kashmir as it is of today less there was no AK at that time. Gilgit was at that time under rebellion and soon after it was an independent entity. The I of A can go take a walk as Gilgit got itself liberated and was the rest of Kashmir OCCUPIED by india. If india could play jungle jungle, so did we, infact the jungle jungle thing stands guud for india only as the struggle in Gilgit was indigenous and that in the REST of Kashmir was from and oppressor, aggressor and occupant!

So much for the the de jure - face palm combo!

This is called shooting in the foot, just like your reference to that lease. I will come to it shortly. If simply ‘taking over’ the area from the current ‘owner’, who had forcefully taken over that piece of land, is enough to be considered as part of Pakistan, then how come acceding on the basis of Instrument of accession, signed by the current owner of Kashmir and vetted by the largest opposition party in Kashmir, is not a valid way of acceding Kashmir to India? Both the cases are principally same – ‘taken over’ from the ‘owner’ without a plebiscite (although in India’s case it is based on a recognized legal set up).

Nevertheless, it is again invalid argument, since the de jure ownership had already passed on to India on 26th Oct, 1947 and the calendar I follow shows Oct to precede Nov.

Above, is something palaver and intellectually vacuous; ignored!

Now about foot shooting. The article opens thus:

‘In August 1947, the Governor-General of the Union of India, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, negotiated with the Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, the accession of his domain to the Union of India, that included the Northern Area, known commonly as Gilgit-Baltistan, which were assigned by the British only recently to the Maharaja of Kashmir.’​

This is the second time I have used your source to disprove your claim that Gilgit-Baltistan is/was not a part of J&K.

Like i said you are such a cherry picking anal-retentionist that you would even pick up a comma that would suite the indian dream dwelling claims and post/reproduce it with all the pomp and shine that idiots among here would start thanking you profoundly, but it doesnt come handy always, here allow me to offer you another facepalm. The SAME article ends thus:

On November 1,1947 the Islamic Republic of Gilgit was proclaimed with Raja Shah Rais Khan, (member of the local ruling dynasty) as its president. The flag of the new republic was raised over the governor's mansion and the new government claimed the area of Gilgit-Baltistan, several princely states, Kargil and Ladakh as its territory. with the aim of joining the Dominion of Pakistan. The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.​

If I start facepalming, I have to do that for so many times I might just end up hurting my face. So pardon me if instead of facepalming I do a whole lot of ROFLOL.

You mean like this: ..??

Go ahead, may be this exercise could make your brain twitch!


--------


BTW, ooooo.. it looks so guud when we run in circles....

 

[RollingStones]

Absolutly not - referrendum was out of the question when the armed insurgency began. All pro-India elements in Kashmir were brutally rooted out , be it Kashmiri pundits or pro-India groups of Muslim origin, the only ones allowed to survive were those who had seperatist agendas or were direct proxies of Pakistan.

Violence and armed movement meant an end to the possibility of referrendum.

Well, actually you have to go before to the very genesis of the UN resolutions themselves. There is an unwritten rule in International Law, akin to the Statuette of Limitations. If you dont act upon a resolution or a treaty within some years, then the treaty or the resolution dies. It can be established in Law that neither Pakistan nor India intended to act upon the UN resolutions and therefore the resolutions are void. This type of judgment is a well established concept in law. Unfortunately, for Pakistan, it has failed to establish a legal intent to pursue the UN resolutions and therefore it has unwittingly contributed to it becoming void. I am reminded of other international treaties that Pakistan was about to lose - maritime rights and orbital slots for satellites. Pakistan needs to get international law professionals in its government. So, does India. No point crying over spilt milk.

 

[Xeric]

indians are always exaggerating these infiltrations. Even bird cannot fly without being harassed.