leave my view, am not suggesting anything but was just wondering on what would the outcome be if referendum actually did take place and would it be in indias intrest.
i am more intrested in knowing your point of view on how to permenantly end the kashmir dispute once and for all.
The permanent solution to Kashmir is compromise but the point is that we already have executed our share of compromise. So, we can't be asked for more. And there can't be any solution till the other party recognises it and executes it's share of compromise, till then there can't be any 'permanent solution'.
Thus, permanent solution putting the 'action to be taken' only India is akin to trying to clap with one hand.
Referendum ( as per UN ) resolution had some explicit and few implicit (generic) conditions, which were to be met, try convincing Pak to implement them, then we can talk 'referendum'.
==============
Now, that you are a strong advocator of 'UN's role', could you answer what was UNMOGIP's action during OP Grand slam, OP Gibraltar, 1965 war. To remind you, in 1965 there was no Shimla Agreement. Or recently in 1999 Kargil War?