What does Pakistan bring to the table on Kashmir, Siachen?

[American Pakistani]

It is in Pakistan's short as well as long term interest to solve the Kashmir issue. India can play the waiting game longer than them and the Indian govt is more than happy to maintain the status quo.

Nope...Pakistan is just doing fine without the solution of Kashmir...so it's not like that it is only in Pakistan's interest. Yes as a peace loving nation Pakistan has the will to solve this issue & Pakistan had shown much flexibility in the past but it seems like India wants to keep it delaying & so it pushes for trade relation & insists to leave Kashmir issue for next generations. If India needs trade relations it need to spit away arrogance & be serious to solve the issue.

The only solution which might be acceptable to GoI is accepting the LOC as the international border and recognizing present ground positions in Siachen and drawing the IB accordingly. Even this will need some ground work but I think they will be able to convince the Indian public on this.

What is this? If this was the solution it would've done 3 decades ago already. Accepting LoC as IB will be second defeat for Pakistan after 71...ever wonder no one, no journalist/political member has even talked about it ever. Not only that, it will also be defeat for Kashmiris.

I dont know what gave you the idea that I am trolliing, it was straight forward question and still remains one.

Either a dumb person otherwise a person with trolling mood will post that nonsense. How on earth did you get the idea that Pakistan will give up it's nukes in return of IOK? Iran a country who is not even a nuclear power didn't give up it's nuclear ambitions when it was slapped with tough sanctions after sanctions by the world & you are talking about Pakistan who is a nuclear power & handling it for 2.5 decades will give up it's nukes just for the sake of a third world country. Grow up & talk some sense.

Best solution would be that India can continue holding Ladakh and Jammu. While Pakistan can be given the valley part which is the most anti-India region of Kashmir.

That is like gifting them everything for nothing. I don't think most Kashmiris & even Pakistanis will agree on that.

 

[Developereo]

Point#2 is not viable; at worst (or best), some re-adjustment of the LOC can take place.

Once the provinces break off, India will pull a 'Sikkim' on Kashmir, i.e. seed it with pro-India elements and eventually have it join India formally.

Point#5 seems impossible; there is no reason that the people of Sind (regardless of internecine battles) will ever want to accept subservience to India.

The people of rural Sindh are slaves to the feudals. The feudals, for their part, will be more than happy to form an Indian protectorate as long as they get to keep their estates and can get fat selling their mangoes, wheat and whatnot. India will be happy to have an impotent, medieval, agrarian feudal state next door. The people of rural Sindh will be the only losers.

I think, you are upset due to the situation in Pakistan today...But i feel that Pakistan as a nation and the concept of Pakistan is a evolving process till now...You have done so many good works limited resources....Your team is lacking a good leader like Jinnah..And 2nd thing what i like to see in Pakistan is for once an all, dude you have to move away with framing your policy with baggage of some foreign nation like US and SA....They may be your friends...But i can see your friends interere in your national affair more than your enemy like India..I mean my point is you have to understand your invisible challenges to your nation.

I fear the problem is deeper than that.

Imran Khan is not perfect -- his views on the US relationship and the TTP are native, for example -- but he was right on the money on many domestic issues.

The core problem is that, despite all the talking, the people of Pakistan don't want change.

 

[jaunty]

Nope...Pakistan is just doing fine without the solution of Kashmir...so it's not like that it is only in Pakistan's interest.

If the current situation in Pakistan is what you call "doing fine" then your definition of "doing fine" is different from mine.

Solving Kashmir would be beneficial for both the countries. India being the bigger and more resourceful country can afford to keep it as it is and solving it does not bring any short term benefits to India. India will continue to spend on its military because of the China factor. The market access to CAR is not assured given the internal situation in Pakistan. However there will definitely be long term benefits for India from this. As I said before Pakistan would reap both short as well as long term benefits. PA can channel its resources which is massively India-centric now to tackle domestic issues.

What is this? If this was the solution it would've done 3 decades ago already. Accepting LoC as IB will be second defeat for Pakistan after 71...ever wonder no one, no journalist/political member has even talked about it ever. Not only that, it will also be defeat for Kashmiris.

There is no other solution that would be agreeable to both parties. Pakistanis don't talk about it because of the fear of backlash and it's kind of taboo to talk along that lines in Pakistan but I assume many in Pakistan have realized this. I have seen Pakistani commentators alluding to this in talk shows, but they can't clearly state it as it is. If you set aside your ego and think pragmatically this is about the only possible "peaceful" solution.

 

[Bang Galore]

To be honest we would offer you nothing on Siacehn. Considering the fact even you haven't achieved anything expect occupying a frozen wasteland. I don't think we would be able to give anything for this futile exercise except making it a peace park or something like that. Siachen hasn't give anything to India either except casualties and expenses and false bravado. Neither you can target KKH. Nor you can threaten any populated region of GB like Skardu.

So if we can offer you anything on Siachen. We can offer you to withdraw our troops if you withdraw your troops and make Siachen a peace park or something like that. We are also ready for third party meditation for this issue, which we know you won't agree to.

That is the point. You want something, India doesn't. Do you see many Indians talking about the necessity to solve Siachen? The reason is simple, we have control. If you want something to be done to the status quo, it is incumbent on you to explain why. We are happy with the status quo.

Best solution would be that India can continue holding Ladakh and Jammu. While Pakistan can be given the valley part which is the most anti-India region of Kashmir. In return we can accept Indian sovereignty on Ladakh and Jammu and LOC can be turned into IB. Or else like today you can continue lame as$ "Kashmir is India's integral part" rant and in return we can give you confusion, destabilization, deaths and threat of war. We might not war but then we are responsible for act of any jihaidi if India continues with its ignorant attitude.

This is a standard Pakistani position of wanting something for nothing. You want a portion of Indian controlled territory & in return, you are proposing that India can keep other parts of Indian controlled territory. Maybe that seems logical in your head but is plain silly to anyone else. The question was why India should agree to any of your proposals & what will you offer India in return. Trade/better relations will/may/can follow or otherwise, they will not be the determining factor in any agreement. India will not give up territory for better trade prospects, that kind of thinking betrays a lack of realism and logic. The question was what will you bring to the table to get India to want a deal, not what your laundry list of pipe dreams is.

 

[IceCold]

When we talk about Kashmir, its not just the Indian Kashmir, obviously that includes Kashmir under Pakistan's control as well. So its not like we are not bringing anything to the table. Yes India may be happy with the status quo for now but what about foreseeable future?

Now that both countries are nuclear and one small misunderstanding can lead the faith of billions to ashes, isn't that a reason big enough to solve disputes between both nations? Now Indian fellows might want to call this a nuclear blackmail but than again you guys know deep within that its more than blackmail its something that could turn into a horrific reality.

Instead of asking what Pakistan can bring to the table, the question should be how can solution of Kashmir be possible?

What Pakistan can and should do:

1) Pakistan should give India the status of MFN
2) Invite Indian giants to invest in Pakistan, this will have long term effects on Indian policy as they will have a stake in Pakistan
3) Pakistan should tighten its border controls, making sure no body slips over
4) Now that the sanctions on Iran are easing up and already the US has said that India, China are not subjected to sanctions while dealing with Iran, Pakistan should Invite India to join the IP gas pipe line. India needs quick access to energy and Pakistan can prove to be helpful in this.

These things can and will help change the mindset of Indian masses about Pakistan and Indian government will have the breathing space to make tough decisions without political suicide.

 

[livingdead]

Fine. Then you should be fine with any militant or terror activity in Kashmir or in India. After all it is part and parcel of the "peace" that your country is comfortable with.

Of course, and I am sure you will be fine with whatever you get in return.

 

[Jade]

When we talk about Kashmir, its not just the Indian Kashmir, obviously that includes Kashmir under Pakistan's control as well. So its not like we are not bringing anything to the table. Yes India may be happy with the status quo for now but what about foreseeable future?

Now that both countries are nuclear and one small misunderstanding can lead the faith of billions to ashes, isn't that a reason big enough to solve disputes between both nations? Now Indian fellows might want to call this a nuclear blackmail but than again you guys know deep within that its more than blackmail its something that could turn into a horrific reality.

Instead of asking what Pakistan can bring to the table, the question should be how can solution of Kashmir be possible?

The problem with your approach is you are keeping a gun ( billions to ashes) on India's head and asking it solve Kashmir. No self respecting country would appreciate this approach, forget India. You cannot threaten someone to peace.

If things come to such a situation as you describe, India is ready for a nuke war.

We will bring gun to the table!

We have 10 times more powerful gun than you!

 

[Joe Shearer]

The question will become moot in 50 years.

I seriously doubt Pakistan will exist in its current form as a united political entity late into this century.

(OK, I am feeling unusually disillusioned after the election of the usual vampires, but my prediction isn't completely far-fetched).

Et tu, Brute? This is really depressing. If you get put off by the usual vampires, what do you think you'd do if you were Indian? (Don't reach for the barbiturates yet, it's just a rhetorical question).

Well, I don't want to deviate from the thread, but I really don't feel it is as far-fetched as I would have hoped.

Baluchistan and KPK will become Afghanistan #2 and #3: lawless wastelands where Iran/Arabs/US/everyone will jockey to install their favorite puppet.
Kashmir will be gobbled up by India.
Punjab will get the bulk of Pakistan's military might.
Karachi will become a city state like Monaco or Luxemburg.
Sindh will become a vassal state of India like Nepal or Bhutan.



It's not about what India wants, but what Pakistan will do to itself, all by itself.



As I wrote above, this is about internal dynamics of Pakistan. India doesn't need to do anything.

The capable, nationalist leaders are few and far between. The field is dominated by ethnic and self-serving politicians who act more like regional governors (or worse) than national leaders.

I really hope that you're wrong, and that one day, my friends Dan, Usman, Saad, Adnaan and Naveed can come with their families to visit me, and I can go and visit them and see the places they call home. All in peaceful circumstances, with no violence in either country against the respective minorities, with a free and easy feeling taking them around the Char Minar area, or scoffing tunda kababs in Lucknow, or freaking out on Nizam's kaathi rolls and on nihari in Calcutta, or soaking in the sights, sounds and, yes, I'm a foodie, tastes in the Nizamuddin area in Delhi.

Why do you want to crush my dreams?

 

[Developereo]

Et tu, Brute? This is really depressing. If you get put off by the usual vampires, what do you think you'd do if you were Indian? (Don't reach for the barbiturates yet, it's just a rhetorical question).

By rights, I should give the "new" guys a fair shake, but can a leopard ever change his spots?

At best, Pakistan will muddle through. At worst, well, ...

I really hope that you're wrong, and that one day, my friends Dan, Usman, Saad, Adnaan and Naveed can come with their families to visit me, and I can go and visit them and see the places they call home. All in peaceful circumstances, with no violence in either country against the respective minorities, with a free and easy feeling taking them around the Char Minar area, or scoffing tunda kababs in Lucknow, or freaking out on Nizam's kaathi rolls and on nihari in Calcutta, or soaking in the sights, sounds and, yes, I'm a foodie, tastes in the Nizamuddin area in Delhi.

Why do you want to crush my dreams?

Hopefully, you would be able to do that one way or another. It's just that you might have a different stamp on your passport.

 

[livingdead]

When we talk about Kashmir, its not just the Indian Kashmir, obviously that includes Kashmir under Pakistan's control as well. So its not like we are not bringing anything to the table. Yes India may be happy with the status quo for now but what about foreseeable future?

Now that both countries are nuclear and one small misunderstanding can lead the faith of billions to ashes, isn't that a reason big enough to solve disputes between both nations? Now Indian fellows might want to call this a nuclear blackmail but than again you guys know deep within that its more than blackmail its something that could turn into a horrific reality.

Instead of asking what Pakistan can bring to the table, the question should be how can solution of Kashmir be possible?

What Pakistan can and should do:

1) Pakistan should give India the status of MFN
2) Invite Indian giants to invest in Pakistan, this will have long term effects on Indian policy as they will have a stake in Pakistan
3) Pakistan should tighten its border controls, making sure no body slips over
4) Now that the sanctions on Iran are easing up and already the US has said that India, China are not subjected to sanctions while dealing with Iran, Pakistan should Invite India to join the IP gas pipe line. India needs quick access to energy and Pakistan can prove to be helpful in this.

These things can and will help change the mindset of Indian masses about Pakistan and Indian government will have the breathing space to make tough decisions without political suicide.

All things remaining same, I would argue that pakistan gives up pak occupied kashmir voluntarily to us as nuke war is as bad for you as for us.
Indians are as fatalist as pakistanis( possibly more) and possibility of nuke war does not change ordinary people's opinion. It might work on back of mind of GoI while making decision.
And GoI cannot possibly take decisions without taking us on board, especially about kashmir.

 

[IceCold]

The problem with your approach is you are keeping a gun ( billions to ashes) on India's head and asking it solve Kashmir. No self respecting country would appreciate this approach, forget India. You cannot threaten someone to peace.

If things come to such a situation as you describe, India is ready for a nuke war.

We are not holding a gun to anyone's head but the nuke thing is a reality. We Pakistani's never doubt India's resolve and naturally that means if nukes does go off, billions will die on both sides.......my whole point was at what cost........Kashmir?

Kashmir is neither yours nor ours, it belongs to the people of Kashmir. The land is disputed and needs a resolution, a resolution that is acceptable to all parties and not just India. You guys make it sound as if we are asking for an Indian territory, we are not however if no progress is made, eventually hot heads from both sides (Modi for example in India's case) can and will take matters into their own heads which could result into catastrophic tragedy.

All things remaining same, I would argue that pakistan gives up pak occupied kashmir voluntarily to us as nuke war is as bad for you as for us.
Indians are as fatalist as pakistanis( possibly more) and possibility of nuke war does not change ordinary people's opinion. It might work on back of mind of GoI while making decision.
And GoI cannot possibly take decisions without taking us on board, especially about kashmir.

Kashmir does not belong to India so why should Pakistan voluntarily handed over to you? If it needs to be handed over to anyone, they are the kashmiris and this can be done if only India decides to voluntarily handed IOK to the people of Kashmir as well. In fact Pakistan did offered this to India. Lets withdraw forces, make the region demilitarize but never got the response from India.

Whole point is we can move forward once India stops considering kashmir as its "atoot aung" and genuinely feels the issue needs to be resolved.

 

[livingdead]

Kashmir does not belong to India so why should Pakistan voluntarily handed over to you? If it needs to be handed over to anyone, they are the kashmiris and this can be done if only India decides to voluntarily handed IOK to the people of Kashmir as well. In fact Pakistan did offered this to India. Lets withdraw forces, make the region demilitarize but never got the response from India.

Whole point is we can move forward once India stops considering kashmir as its "atoot aung" and genuinely feels the issue needs to be resolved.

I am refering to @Bang Galore 's original question which avoids taking stand on who actually kashmir belongs to.
What we are discussing is, if there is a negotiation to be had with pakistan, what exactly pakistan will get us.
Saying it never belongs to us avoids that question.

 

[bronxbull]

india doesn't feel so,so nothing.

 

[Bang Galore]

We are not holding a gun to anyone's head but the nuke thing is a reality. We Pakistani's never doubt India's resolve and naturally that means if nukes does go off, billions will die on both sides.......my whole point was at what cost........Kashmir?

Kashmir is neither yours nor ours, it belongs to the people of Kashmir. The land is disputed and needs a resolution, a resolution that is acceptable to all parties and not just India. You guys make it sound as if we are asking for an Indian territory, we are not however if no progress is made, eventually hot heads from both sides (Modi for example in India's case) can and will take matters into their own heads which could result into catastrophic tragedy.



Kashmir does not belong to India so why should Pakistan voluntarily handed over to you? If it needs to be handed over to anyone, they are the kashmiris and this can be done if only India decides to voluntarily handed IOK to the people of Kashmir as well. In fact Pakistan did offered this to India. Lets withdraw forces, make the region demilitarize but never got the response from India.

Whole point is we can move forward once India stops considering kashmir as its "atoot aung" and genuinely feels the issue needs to be resolved.

The point here is not what Pakistan's wishes are but what might it bring to the table in any discussion. Pakistan can hope India will simply give up & go but that's hardly realistic. India won't be going anywhere, no matter how much Pakistanis may wish otherwise. The absolute absence of a clear Pakistani perspective on what they can realistically achieve, either on Siachen or In Kashmir generally is what makes any debate flounder. You have to be clear in what India will get from any concession, peace is not just beneficial to India alone. If status quo has to be changed, what exactly can it be changed to & why should India agree to any such change.

 

[IceCold]

I am refering to @Bang Galore 's original question which avoids taking stand on who actually kashmir belongs to.
What we are discussing is, if there is a negotiation to be had with pakistan, what exactly pakistan will get us.
Saying it never belongs to us avoids that question.

Actually it doesn't. The whole thing is interrelated. You see you are asking for a trade, where as there is none in this case because Kashmir does not belong to India, though India has control over it, but then again having control doesn't make it yours and hence my point.
And i have answered OP's question in my initial post.