Why is Kashmir issue unresolved yet with Pakistan?

tramp

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
1,464
Likes
580
Interesting development. Clear evidence that internal issues are forcing Pakistan to seek external recourse.

Resolving Kashmir issue vital for peace: General Raheel - Pakistan - DAWN.COM

Resolving Kashmir issue vital for peace: General Raheel
RAWALPINDI: Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif on Saturday said the resolution of Kashmir issue was imperative in order to establish sustainable peace in the region.

Addressing a passing-out parade held at Pakistan Military Academy in Kakul, the army chief said that the Kashmir issue should be resolved in light of United Nations resolutions.

At least 20 people have lost their lives on both sides of the LoC and the working boundary in recent skirmishes between the Indian and Pakistani armies.

The Himalayan territory of Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan by the UN-monitored de facto border of LoC but is claimed in full by both countries. Ceasefire violations along the LoC and working boundary between Pakistan and India have gone on intermittently during the past several days, with casualties reported on both sides.

Also read: Decision to exercise 'utmost restraint'

Speaking on the ongoing military operation in North Waziristan, General Raheel said the army's objective was to eliminate terrorism from the country and that the network of terrorists had been effectively tackled in North Waziristan.

He said Operation Zarb-i-Azb was continuing successfully.

Zarb-i-Azb was launched by the Pakistan army on June 15 following a brazen militant attack on Karachi's international airport and failure of peace talks between the government and Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) negotiators.

The Taliban and their ethnic Uzbek allies both claimed responsibility for the attack on Karachi airport, which was seen as a strategic turning point in how Pakistan was tackling the insurgency.

Nearly a million people fled the offensive in the North Waziristan tribal region, aimed at wiping out longstanding militant strongholds in the area, which borders Afghanistan. Of recently, the action against militants has been extended to the Khyber tribal region.
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
@Ray

sir, anyhow POK can't back to India until we separate migrants of rest of Pakistan so this chapter of the Article of post#41, looks closed now.....

and finally we find Indian Kashmir is part of India in the same way like how 'East Punjab' is part of India while the 'West Punjab' is part of Pakistan. similarly Sindh is part of Pakistan while Gujarat is in India. like how 'West Bengal' is part of India while the East Bengal (Bangladesh) is a separate country right now. as this is how partition of India occurred.........

similarly we may accept POK as part of Pakistan. simply because "International Borders Can't be Changed". a bottom-line fack :thumb:

and why not, if this is how most of the countries of world have international borders, while sharing the bordering states with each others.... for example, how we find Baluchistan is part of Pakistan and Iran both, while we do know that "Baluchistan was neither India nor Pakistan till 1947" :ranger:

we would consider the International border of India since 1951 only, as till then there were many states of India who joined India under the British's "Indian Independence Act 1947", passed by British parliament regarding partition of India. any war of India before 1951 is simply meaningless.
It is quite complicated, when the intentions on the other side and international politics is considered.

Had POK been a part of India, India would have got a trade corridor with Central Asia.

Indian International Border

further to your reply and my post regarding the fact that "International Border Can't be Changed", we have Official Map of India, showing the International Border as below :thumb:

here i remember, once i proposed to offer upto $60billion to Pakistan in return of POK (Gulam Kashmir), which is as much as its total foreign debt. but it would mean to withdraw all the immigrants of rest of Pakistan from POK. and its "Time Frame" would be sometimes when Pakistan won't be able to maintain control over Baluchistan. and in this case, they would better accept this offer and go ahead on a better future. and my proposal was mainly influenced by the news as below :ranger:

WASHINGTON: Seeking to fortify its strategic ties with China amid strains in relations with US, Pakistan is considering a proposal to lease the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan region to Beijing for 50 years, an eminent US-based think tank has claimed, citing local media. :facepalm:

Pakistan considering proposal to lease Gilgit-Baltistan to China: US think tank - Economic Times

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
Why Kashmir Issue is Unresolved

Some of the pertinent answers I came across :

India's new belligerence towards Pak is unhelpful: Christopher Snedden - The Times of India


There is no pressing need, great imperative, or dire circumstance compelling India and Pakistan to solve the Kashmir dispute.



( Very valid observation . For Pakistan it keeps the threat of India and Indian bogey alive. It gives reason dire for their nation to exist and for India the conflict is affordable and it has futuristic perspective - why settle the dispute at all . It may get settled on its own when Pakistan breaks up)

Both nations have functioned reasonably well since 1947 despite having limited contacts (which worsened after the 1965 war), despite having invariably poor relations, and despite maintaining heavily armed militaries along the India-Pakistan border and in J&K.

Pakistan is only relevant to India in case of conflict with China otherwise their military or their nucs etc are passé.


Both nations suffer from a major trust deficit and neither is prepared to make meaningful concessions that might lead to a resolution.



Specially so applicable for Pakistan. There has no been a single leader, military or political, in Pakistan who can even think of agreeing to give a concession to India. He can not survive. So let the status quo remain and both sides are happy with that. India has what is disputed and Pakistan has a dispute. It suits the military and politician of both the sides. Is not it ??

Additionally, there is little or no international interest in the dispute.

(yes, the global community has larger problems in hand to deal with rather than look at Kashmir. However, the irritable Pakis have been able to attract attention negatively on two counts - being the Terrorist State and being the most irresponsible Nuclear State - badnam honge to kya naam na hoga ?)

Finally, there aren't enough people in both nations publicly, forthrightly and persistently demanding that their leaders resolve this issue, and do so now.

(No wonder Aman Ka Tamasha was heavily funded from abroad !!)

If you read the article then read it with a pinch of salt as the author propagates the theory that Laskar Kassi in 1947 was due to Punch revolt and tries to absolve Jinnaha and Pakistan from the 1947 fiasco. One of our Pakistani member was trying that a few days ago in the forum.
 

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
7,417
Likes
12,935
Country flag
If Portugeese were Occupiers what abt MOGULS,SULTANATES or all Muslim rulers,they are also Occupiers

If Pork!stan created for Muslim rights why not Goa for Xians :rofl:
Some people of sub continent thought Muslims need a separate country and they are in large number( they thought even though they never won the elections). Indian leaders like Gandhi who wanted the people to be united wanted a united country. But Muslim league and other aristocrats wanted a separate country since residing in India will not give them autonomy or sharia law.

Then there are people within congress like Nehru who thought dividing the country is good for the future. Since there will always be a friction between conservatives and non conservatives. So partition.

This is not the case with Goans, They are Indians and there are no independence movements there based on certain ideologies of Christianity nor they are intolerant towards others. Only a Portugese wanted to snatch Indian lands and they were dealt accordingly.

Interesting thing is, the people who wanted separate country based on religion were majority from India and East Bengal who migrated to Pakistan.

Most of Punjab, FATA, Balouchistan and parts of Sindh are pro Congress and are tolerant. But Mohajirs and East Bengalis(Mostly Razakars and people from Bihar and UP) are the main people who are behind the Pakistani movement. These guys hang on to religion and cause most of the animosity.

Mugals are central asians not Punjabis or Sindhis, May be some Mohajirs do have their blood line, How many of the left over mugals know Persian language and Turkic traditions?? :lol:

By 18 Century Mugal power is in decline and Marathas are dominating India.
 
Last edited:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
@Srinivas_K @jus @Bhadra @Ray

Over 50% countries of world share Bordering states with Each Others

hmmmm, almost half of the countries of world have the bordering regions shared with each others, not just POK to Pakistan and Indian Kashmir to India. and the best example we have about Baluchistan shared with Iran and Pakistan both, which wasn't part of British India till 1947 itself. and you can't just start freeing the bordering states, like Western Punjab to Pakistan and East Punjab to India as a Punjab country as whole. West Bengal to India and East Bengal (Bangladesh) a separate countries, as partition of India occurred on religious ground in 1947, even if India remained a non-religious country while Pakistan took birth as a Islamic State....

we have example of the bordering states shared between Russia and China for what they have fought wars during 50s and 60s of 20th century itself. we have half of the ASEAN region countries claiming on the areas of each others on borders, while Japan-China keep fighting for the oil fields/islands in between them, just because they share "water border", the usual news we get :facepalm:

and in fact, freedom of Baluchistan, which is part of Iran and Pakistan both, has been a touching issue for India since the time of "Nawab Akbar Bugti", who was murdered by "air strike" at the age of 80+ during the time of Mr Musharraf, because of his freedom struggle. i always remember Nawab Akbar Bugti as a leader of Baluchistan, and asking help from India while saying "my dear Indian Brothers and Sisters", a unique way of talking he had......

Akbar Bugti - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and hence we have every reason to accept the India's border as how it was since 1951, the year when most of the states of Indian continent had joined to India under British's "India Independence Act 1947", most of borders of this region had been recognized till then, with accepting POK as part of Pakistan, similar to West Punjab to Pakistan and East Bengal as Bangladesh, as we have. my own personal view :thumb:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
In actuality, the Kashmir issue has become a very emotive issue and so rationale thinking takes wings.

In so far as the eastern borders of India are concerned, maybe it is time to ensure a rationalisation of the enclaves that has caused untold miseries to the one who live there where they neither of the ghat nor the ghar.
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
@Ray

we would consider the International border of India since 1951 only, as till then there were many states of India who joined India under the British's "Indian Independence Act 1947", passed by British parliament regarding partition of India. any war of India before 1951 is simply meaningless.
It is quite complicated, when the intentions on the other side and international politics is considered.

Had POK been a part of India, India would have got a trade corridor with Central Asia.

Indian International Border

further to your reply and my post regarding the fact that "International Border Can't be Changed", we have Official Map of India, showing the International Border as below :thumb:

here i remember, once i proposed to offer upto $60billion to Pakistan in return of POK (Gulam Kashmir), which is as much as its total foreign debt. but it would mean to withdraw all the immigrants of rest of Pakistan from POK. and its "Time Frame" would be sometimes when Pakistan won't be able to maintain control over Baluchistan. and in this case, they would better accept this offer and go ahead on a better future. and my proposal was mainly influenced by the news as below :ranger:

WASHINGTON: Seeking to fortify its strategic ties with China amid strains in relations with US, Pakistan is considering a proposal to lease the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan region to Beijing for 50 years, an eminent US-based think tank has claimed, citing local media. :facepalm:

Pakistan considering proposal to lease Gilgit-Baltistan to China: US think tank - Economic Times


further, i prepared a post as below too, which may have a place here too, i think :thumb:

=>

Indian Democracy and it Values, we Proud on

The meaning of Independence India got in 1947

in short i may say,

"as part of our freedom, there is no law in India which makes difference among the people based on religion/ race/ language/ state etc, there is no super human like British anymore in India, and now we pay taxes to that Indian government which use it for the purpose to help the people based in India, not for the WW1 and WW2 to help Britain. with providing Equal Rights to all and more opportunities to the weak part of Indian society like Dalits/ Women, in terms of reservations in jobs/competitive exams and that's fair. at the same time we proud to say that we had many minorities Presidents/ PMs/ Chief Ministers/ Governors/ Chief Justice/ IAS topper/ Bollywood superstar/ Cricket Team Captain etc, and we proud to say that we got this type of country from our elders who fought for our freedom and we are responsible to give the same type of country to our coming generation too. we just can't compromise our "Independence" for any reason. and we have to defend our Independence from any type of external threat, which we are currently facing in terms of Sectarian War mainly in North East, from the Bangladeshi infiltration..."
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...minal-gangs-new-challenge-delhi-police-2.html

"We now pay tax to that Indian government which use the tax money to help the people based in India itself, develop infrastructure in India to improve life of the people based in India, while before that we were paying tax to that British Government to help them in their wars. Mr Gandhi struggled to have Industries in India, who may then provide jobs to Indians and hence pay taxes to Indian government for the purpose to use this tax for the people based in India. and yes we have got that 'freedom', and trying to improve. and we now proud to say that we have made a place where the most deserving people get higher success, regardless in which family they took birth, (of any religion/ race/ language/state etc). and we hope India will become one of the best place to live by using their talent/ knowledge this way" :india:

the above statement used the word "super human British" before 1947, frequent use of "freedom", "independence", as i prepared my above statement on 15th August last year........ the above statement has a clear sense to demonstrate "democratic structure" of India on the world platform, in terms of "Equal Rights" for all, "more opportunities" for weak part of society like Women/Schedule Caste in different exams/ jobs, as we have. with putting concern over the growing threats of "Sectarian Wars" in north east region due to Bangladeshi Infiltration. here, Freedom/ Independence of India is defined in terms of "Non-Religious Foundation" of Indian Democracy of Hindu Majority, and our Independence/ Freedom has the main threats from 'Sectarian Wars', fueled and funded by rogue neighbors of India......
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SANITY

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
695
Likes
305
I read some disturbing acts of Indian military in Kashmir

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_abuses_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir

I also read that military enjoy special freedom and are free from any kind of prosecution and thus capable of committing henious crimes without fear.

Why can't we scrap stupid Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958?
 

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
31,715
Likes
146,976
Country flag
I read some disturbing acts of Indian military in Kashmir

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_abuses_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir

I also read that military enjoy special freedom and are free from any kind of prosecution and thus capable of committing henious crimes without fear.

Why can't we scrap stupid Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958?
No we should not be scrapping AFSPA, that is what is keeping the peace in areas it is implemented.
 

SANITY

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
695
Likes
305
No we should not be scrapping AFSPA, that is what is keeping the peace in areas it is implemented.
Are we supposed to assume inhumane, unethical, immoral acts as a necessary mean to keep peace?

Shouldn't we atleast remove the clause giving absolute freedoms to military men who just harm,kill and rape or murder people just to get promotion along with those whi join army without any patriotism and disgrace humanity ?
 

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
Are we supposed to assume inhumane, unethical, immoral acts as a necessary mean to keep peace?

Shouldn't we atleast remove the clause giving absolute freedoms to military men who just harm,kill and rape or murder people just to get promotion along with those whi join army without any patriotism and disgrace humanity ?
Firstly, you should come out of the closet.

Secondly, Army operates under Army Act which is more stringent than the acts applicable to others.
Thirdly, There is no "absolute freedom" to military. It only gives immunity to Army from trying its personnel by the local authorities without sanction of the Central Government.
Fourthly, many Army men have been tried and punished under Army Act for their wrong doings.

Fifthly, AFSPA has been imposed there with the consent of the state government which is given in the law.

Thirdly, it only empowers the Army to arrest, search and take life in performance of the duty.

How have you concluded : "inhumane, unethical, immoral "...when every thing is covered by law ..

The issue of the legality of the Act has been deliberated by the highest court of the land and they have upheld its application.

Lastly, when the terrorist take life those who fight them under law have the same right - take life in the defense. I hope you know that is what is called natural justice.
 
Last edited:

singleboy56

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2014
Messages
23
Likes
0
Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

1947 resolution order to ensure the impartiality of the plebiscite Pakistan withdraw all tribesmen and nationals who entered the region for the purpose of fighting and that India leave only the minimum number of troops needed to keep civil order. The Commission was also to send as many observers into the region as it deemed necessary to ensure the provisions of the resolution were enacted. Pakistan ignored the UN mandate, did not withdraw its troops and claimed the withdrawal of Indian forces was a prerequisite as per this resolution.[5] Indian claim is that Subsequently Pakistan refused to implement the plebiscite until India accedes to it and continued holding on to the portion of Kashmir under its control
So, What is your opinion about Kashmir Issue? Can UNO find the solution of this issue or not?
 
Last edited:

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
7,417
Likes
12,935
Country flag
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

Bilateral talks is the right way !!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

No, the UN has no role to play.

It is a bilateral issue as per the Simla Agreement.
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

Pakis has habit of not getting off land once they are there.

*** edited with views for another time
 
Last edited:

Vishwarupa

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
2,438
Likes
3,600
Country flag
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

The only way to resolve Kashmir issue is, pakistan has to hand over the remaining Kashmir to India. In return India should pay pakistan some money as settlement( may be equal to its current GDP - $ 240billion) in installments.

No UN or islamic world or US is required, its a bilateral issue between India & pakistan.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,080
Likes
40,077
Country flag
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

The UN cannot solve the Kashmir issue. They can't rule "India must hand over Kashmir to Pakistan" or "India must grant autonomy to Kashmir." That's not going to happen to countries as big, as monied, and as armed as India. Likewise, Pakistan will not comply with "give India PoK" or "give autonomy to PoK" rulings. At best, UN can resolve tiny border disputes between African nations.

All Pakistan hopes to achieve by internationalizing the Kashmir issue is to hurt India economically, by damaging its global PR, so the ISI chief can fill his I-screwed-India-this-much quota, as he approaches retirement. Pakistan wants investors to ask their companies why they're investing in the oh-so-evil India with its baby-eating Modi leader. That is Pakistan's goal, not anything close to 'wresting' Kashmir from India.
 
Last edited:

jamesvaikom

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
367
Likes
293
Re: Can UNO find the solution of Kashmir?

If extremists in Kashmir protest against our Govt. then Pakistan will claim that people of Kashmir are with them. But if minorities in Pakistan faces problems then we will simply give them citizenship. This should stop. We should claim that Pakistani minorities are with us and we should demand plebiscite of places in Pakistan with large number of minorities. We don't need their land. But raising claims for those lands will force Pakistan to stop claiming for Kashmir. If Pakistani people can protest against our Kashmir in England then why can't we protest against human rights violations against minorities in Baluchistan and other parts of Pakistan? Also its a shame on RAW that PoK remain peaceful compared to other parts of Pakistan. How can they claim that PoK is Azad Kashmir when it is occupied by Pakistan? We should fund freedom fighters in PoK and demand Pak Govt. to withdraw troops from so called Azad Kashmir.
 

SANITY

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
695
Likes
305
@Bhadra : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_abuses_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir

read the paragraph under heading "Fake Envounters", " Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958" and "Mass Graves" on the above wikipedia page and give me your opinion.

Also explain me what you mean by " Firstly, you should come out of the closet.".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top