- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
Many princely states have joined India, there was no plebiscite in those places. Why should be Kashmir so different??.
Kashmir conflict-India should act now?
- Thread starter Sabir
- Start date
- Joined
- May 29, 2009
- Messages
- 14,104
- Likes
- 63,370
Apologies.... Everyone is welcome...... It is not common for an Indian to meet a Swedish..... and who is very interested in Kashmir issue.
Please forget it.
Guys, Please maintain some respect.... we even respect to return the bodies for the invading soliders to the invading country in good condition.
To my knowledge this guy is decent.
I don´t know. But democracy is a rather new thing. Even in Sweden, if you go some hundred years back, the King decided most things. I thing we ought to be more enlightened today.
I would like to ask whether Indian forumites see any principle difference between the Kashmiri and Taiwanese issues. Because the arguments against Taiwanese plebiscit that I got from Chinese forumites (as long as I was not banned from their forums) were very similar to the arguments I read here.
^I don't think Taiwan and Kashmir can be compared. Both Taiwan and China are nationalists, but they have differing ideologies.
Kashmir is a different scenario, where many people have been misled by Islamist propoganda to a backward and destructive ideology.
Kashmir is a different scenario, where many people have been misled by Islamist propoganda to a backward and destructive ideology.
So you mean Taiwanese have not been mislead and therefore they should be allowed to have a plebiscit?
I can't say yuebaili. I am not aware of the latest political developments regarding Taiwan.
All I"m saying that the two scenarios are quite different.
Taiwan is a Seperate country now, They can decide what they need to do. None of India's Concern.
62 % of voter turnout says that they are Ok with India, And all these people lack education and employment and they can easily be brainwased.
Kashmir is an integrated part of India.... Periods... there is no need for India to hold a plebiscit.
Pakistan will fuel terrorism(Pakistan will fall only because of this same terrorism) We know how to defend our borders.
This has nothing to do with the latest political developments. This is a principle question: should people of a region or a state have the right to express their opinions in plebiscits? Or does it depend on their level of education, whether they have been brainwashed etc?
- Joined
- May 29, 2009
- Messages
- 14,104
- Likes
- 63,370
scroll to Permalink #92
http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/in...tical-military-developments-10.html#post45492
http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/in...tical-military-developments-10.html#post45492
No, I don't think a plebiscite is the magic bullet to cure all problems. A lot of the time, the majority is dead wrong.
The most universal example is belief in God. In most countries, the majority would agree that god exists, when infact there is no proof of the same.
However, public opinion is definitely ONE of the many ingredients that goes into running a successful state.
The most universal example is belief in God. In most countries, the majority would agree that god exists, when infact there is no proof of the same.
However, public opinion is definitely ONE of the many ingredients that goes into running a successful state.
I don't know how to express this to you.... Sweden is very small country and I hope that all of sweden should have same mother tongue and you will have same culture and same religion.
But in India it is so different.... As I told you earlier we are move divided by language, Religion, Caste, Sub-Caste, Sub-Sub-Caste.
Languages of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Religion in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am not allowed to marry a girl who is not in my sub-sub-caste.... This sub-sub-caste consists of 500,000 people.....
If you people want to hold plebiscits for kashmir, then my sub-sub-caste people also need a seperate country and India should hold plebiscits for my sub-sub-caste.
It may be possible for you, but not for us.
I am sure our Chinese forumites will not agree. They will say Taiwan is an inseparable part of China just like you say Kashmir is a part of India.
One important difference as I see it is that India, although with difficulties, but anyway somehow controls Kashmir while China does not control Taiwan.
In this aspect the situation of Kashmir is more similar to Xinjiang or Tibet. Of course a very important difference is that China does not allow any kind of democratic freedom.
Then No Kashmiri should have voted in 2009 Elections, 62% have voted..... reply to this point.
You're forgetting the main difference of consequence.
The Chinese have colonized Tibet and Xinjiang. They are no different from the European settlers in South America who imposed their culture and language on people who resented it.
India on the other hand, does not impose any language, culture, or ideology on the people of Kashmir. They are free to lead their lives as they see fit. Neither does India allow Indians from other parts to migrate into Kashmir and overwhelm the locals with their numbers.
So, trying to equate Kashmir with Tibet is rather disingenuous.
Also, Kashmir has played an important role in India's history. It has always been a part of the Indian cultural sphere, unlike Tibet which has remained a separate cultural sphere from the Han-Chinese one.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 43,132
- Likes
- 23,835
In three resolutions, the UN Security Council and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan recommended that as already agreed by Indian and Pakistani leaders, a plebiscite should be held to determine the future allegiance of the entire state.
As a prerequisite they required Pakistani nationals and tribesmen, who had come to fight in Kashmir, be withdrawn.
Plebiscite abandoned
But in the 1950s, the Indian Government distanced itself from its commitment to hold a plebiscite.
This was firstly because Pakistani forces had not been withdrawn and secondly because elections affirming the state's status as part of India had been held.
Pakistan has not withdrawn, so what Plebiscite?
The Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir
The Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir was primarily consituted of five different areas. The areas are - 1) Kashmir Valley, 2) Jammu, 3) Northern Areas, 4) Ladakh and 5) Aksai Chin. Among these, the valley is administered by both India and Pakistan. Jammu and Ladakh are almost entirely administered by India, Northern Areas are administered by Pakistan and the Aksai Chin was administered by Pakistan.
Plebiscite as a solution
The traditional proposal of plebiscite raises a lot of questions. The main question would be against linking the fate and aspiration of a Buddhist Ladakhi tied to a Sunni Muslim living in Sialkot. They live complete different lives. Moreover, after 60 years of independence, a lot of Kashmiris, who are legitimate stakeholders of the plebiscite, are living outside the region. A lot of people has also entered these regions (for example - people from Tibet entered Ladakh and people from NWFP entered Northern areas). It is difficult to conduct a plebiscite without bias - whoever conducts it. A role might be played by the vote with force. And at the end, whoever gets defeated, will perceive a loss and threaten to withdraw complaining a foul played by the other party. If, by any chance a lands do change ownership, it might result in a huge list of murdered and displaced people as the victor would in turn engage in routing out the anti-sentiments of the newly gained land.
As a prerequisite they required Pakistani nationals and tribesmen, who had come to fight in Kashmir, be withdrawn.
Plebiscite abandoned
But in the 1950s, the Indian Government distanced itself from its commitment to hold a plebiscite.
This was firstly because Pakistani forces had not been withdrawn and secondly because elections affirming the state's status as part of India had been held.
Pakistan has not withdrawn, so what Plebiscite?
The Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir
The Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir was primarily consituted of five different areas. The areas are - 1) Kashmir Valley, 2) Jammu, 3) Northern Areas, 4) Ladakh and 5) Aksai Chin. Among these, the valley is administered by both India and Pakistan. Jammu and Ladakh are almost entirely administered by India, Northern Areas are administered by Pakistan and the Aksai Chin was administered by Pakistan.
Plebiscite as a solution
The traditional proposal of plebiscite raises a lot of questions. The main question would be against linking the fate and aspiration of a Buddhist Ladakhi tied to a Sunni Muslim living in Sialkot. They live complete different lives. Moreover, after 60 years of independence, a lot of Kashmiris, who are legitimate stakeholders of the plebiscite, are living outside the region. A lot of people has also entered these regions (for example - people from Tibet entered Ladakh and people from NWFP entered Northern areas). It is difficult to conduct a plebiscite without bias - whoever conducts it. A role might be played by the vote with force. And at the end, whoever gets defeated, will perceive a loss and threaten to withdraw complaining a foul played by the other party. If, by any chance a lands do change ownership, it might result in a huge list of murdered and displaced people as the victor would in turn engage in routing out the anti-sentiments of the newly gained land.
