Will the Army's retreat from J&K be suicidal ?

[johnee]

you can fool some people all of the time, all the people some of the time but you can't fool everbody all the time.



quite correct



Border mgmt, and certain coin ops are for the army only.

I would suggest a largely local kashmiri paramilitary unit for coin ops, largely local kashmiri cops, indian army manning the border and playing a supporting role.

I agree with everything you just said. But didnt understand why you said that ppl cant be fooled all the time. Were you saying that the separatists are actually telling the truth?

Anyway, one may not be able to fool all ppl all the time. At the same time we also need to remember that ppl willingly believe what they inherently want to believe. So, if Kashmiris want to believe that India is bad, then separatist can 'fool' them into believing it with minimum evidence. A temporary land transfer during Amarnath was enough to 'convince' some Kashmiris that New Delhi was trying to change the demographics.

 

[Vinod2070]

I think we should be bold in trying initiatives to win the trust of our Kashmiri brethern. Let's deal with the worst separatists (with the violent streak) in the only language they understand but let's also be ready to deal with the genuine grievances of the people who are disaffected but are not anti-India per se.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

maybe we should execute the leaders as traitors like israel does to much of this soft policy, start killing there traitors they are useless to society anyway. Indian government needs to put out rewards for the leaders dead or alive many loyal separatist will take the offer and get rid of the leaders and reward their followers.

 

[Singh]

this will be interpreted by the state sponsored jihadi infrastructre in pakistan as a sign of weakness, obama should dismantle the infrastructure first then talk about this i hope it is just rhetoric, i don't see it as a good move at this point in time.

Moving army out of cities and towns and shifting them to the barracks and border is a win-win move for India.
By killing local cops in Kashmir, the terrorists will lose more support and inspire many more youth to join police and army instead.
And by shifting troops India will restore confidence in Kashmiris, and bolster the number of pro-India kashmiris.

I agree with everything you just said. But didnt understand why you said that ppl cant be fooled all the time. Were you saying that the separatists are actually telling the truth?

Anyway, one may not be able to fool all ppl all the time. At the same time we also need to remember that ppl willingly believe what they inherently want to believe. So, if Kashmiris want to believe that India is bad, then separatist can 'fool' them into believing it with minimum evidence. A temporary land transfer during Amarnath was enough to 'convince' some Kashmiris that New Delhi was trying to change the demographics.

You totally misconstrued my post.
The Amarnath protests etc. all point to the fact that Kashmiris have simmering anger which is ignited at the drop of a hat.
The separatists were able to fool the people in terrorism but today most Kashmiris are against terrorism, but the fact that they still adhere to the calls of protests and bhands means that India still has a long way to go in winning the minds and hearts of the people.

I think we should be bold in trying initiatives to win the trust of our Kashmiri brethern. Let's deal with the worst separatists (with the violent streak) in the only language they understand but let's also be ready to deal with the genuine grievances of the people who are disaffected but are not anti-India per se.

Absolutely.

maybe we should execute the leaders as traitors like israel does to much of this soft policy, start killing there traitors they are useless to society anyway. Indian government needs to put out rewards for the leaders dead or alive many loyal separatist will take the offer and get rid of the leaders and reward their followers.

APHC is riddled with internal rifts. The nameless leaders in Pak is whom we should be targetting but more than that we should first negate conditions which the anti-Indian brigade is able to exploit.

 

[Yusuf]

The army has made it clear that it's not going to leave in any hurry and has already told that to that government.
My take on all this is that the govt is playing with the US with the statement coming at a time a secret letter was handed over to the PM from Obama. When it comes to Kashmir, India has never given an inch and expect that to continue. I would give the govt the benifit if the doubt as far as the statement to withdraw is concerned.

 

[Rage]

I would suggest a largely local kashmiri paramilitary unit for coin ops, largely local kashmiri cops, indian army manning the border and playing a supporting role.

The problem with that however is rooted in the reality that Kashmiris, if the recent (and historical) spate of protests is any indication, are still considerably sympathetic to the pakisthanie-sponsored 'separatist cause', and that therefore COIN ops would be more susceptible to penetration by miscreants than if they were peronnelled by the CRPF.


Interestingly, I came across this useful quote excerpted from an article in 2007 when there was also talk about "demilitarization" from the blog Offstumped: for all things right of centre:

"Talk of “Demilitarisation” is a self goal for it lends credence to the “occupation theory” and makes India defensive and fumbling for excuses to argue against it. It takes the focus away from measures to remove percieved alienation [in Kashmir] as it reinforces the myth that a war-like situation exists in Kashmir and the occuppier must leave for normalcy to return.

The focus in Kashmir ought to be on why the “percieved alienation” is a myth and why but for border restrictions to a part of Kashmir, Kashmiris enjoy more autonomy, freedoms and opportunities than ordinary Indians and on how they can do even better by fully immersing themselves in the Rising India Growth story.

[...]

It is ironic that talk of “Demilitarisation” comes from the Military Dictator of Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf.

Demilitarisation specifically got injected into the discourse when on 27th October 2004 Mian Musharraf called for a radical new approach to “change the status” of Kashmir when Musharraf called for “Demilitarisation” and threw in the carrot of “dropping all talk of Plebiscite”.

In the figurehead Manmohan Singh Government, Musharraf saw an opportunity to change the discourse on Kashmir and hence brought back talk of “Demilitarisation” - a long forgotten and largely irrelevant term to fundamentally alter the terms of the debate.

It was now no longer about terrorism in Kashmir but suddenly it was about making democratic India the bad guy and about putting India on the defensive in all dialogue on Kashmir.

[...]

Since then “Demilitarisation” has found a permanent place in all public debate on Kashmir with doves like Mirwaiz Umer Farooque to wily Mufti Mohammad Sayeed using it as leverage at every opportune occassion.

[...]

It is no wonder Kashmir Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad has been opposing it for to him it is about the “minimum strength required to maintain civil law and order”, which is the legitimate right of any sovereign nation.

The only kind of Demilitarisation India should care about is Demilitarising Politics and Governance in Pakistan."

 

[Singh]

The problem with that however is rooted in the reality that Kashmiris, if the recent (and historical) spate of protests is any indication, are still considerably sympathetic to the pakisthanie-sponsored 'separatist cause', and that therefore COIN ops would be more susceptible to penetration by miscreants than if they were peronnelled by the CRPF.

Separatist cause is not pak-created or sponsored but exploited by pak. Many Kashmiris have genuine grouses.

CRPF is not involved in COIN ops. Rashtriya Rifles is involved in COIN ops, and many locals to have joined RR and there are defections and double agents in the ranks.

Interestingly, I came across this useful quote excerpted from an article in 2007 when there was also talk about "demilitarization" from the blog Offstumped: for all things right of centre:

India has never said it will demilitarize Kashmir but as per PC shift troops from the cities and towns to the border and barracks and let the local police perform policing duties instead of the army.
A demilitarised zone would mean zero presence of military, what PC is recommending is zero presence of military in densely populated areas.

 

[Rage]

Separatist cause is not pak-created or sponsored but exploited by pak. Many Kashmiris have genuine grouses.

The separatists are armed and funded by Pakistan. Do we disagree on that?

The sentiment may be endogenous, perhaps even spontaneous, but insofar as the 'separatist cause' - as a violent, purposefully and strategically-exacerbated, tangible, militant phenomenon is concerned - it is a "pakisthanie-sponsored" prodigy, to use my own words.

CRPF is not involved in COIN ops. Rashtriya Rifles is involved in COIN ops, and many locals to have joined RR and there are defections and double agents in the ranks.

That is incorrect. The CRPF have been involved in COIN ops in J&K's urban conglomerations after having taken over from the BSF, ever since the composition of counter-insurgency forces was changed in 2004. The RR is involved in intensive patrolling and COIN ops in the adjacent countryside.


Confirmation from the members of Bharat Raxak (cached):

Bharat Rakshak • View topic - BSF,CRPF and other Paramilitary Forces Discussion.


And from the following articles:

http://in.rediff.com/news/2003/nov/21jk1.htm

http://in.rediff.com/news/2003/nov/17george.htm

India has never said it will demilitarize Kashmir but as per PC shift troops from the cities and towns to the border and barracks and let the local police perform policing duties instead of the army.

Whoa! "Demilitarization" does not have to mean complete troop withdrawal. It also refers to the reduction of a nation's army, weapons, or military vehicles to an agreed minimum.


And successive governments have indeed alluded to a "demilitarization" of Kashmir in that sense on account of "falling terrorist violence", on various occasions in the past. See for example:


India begins Kashmir troop withdrawal | World news | guardian.co.uk
Kashmir troop withdrawal to be decided by a central committee
Reuters AlertNet - India considers Kashmir troops cut as violence eases


And the blog from whence the excerpt of that article was derived:

Talk of Troop Reduction in Kashmir is a Self Goal for India ? - Blogger News Network

A demilitarised zone would mean zero presence of military, what PC is recommending is zero presence of military in densely populated areas.

Quintessentially incorrect. A demilitarized zone does not have to mean "zero presence of military". Soldiers from both sides may patrol inside the DMZ on the Korean border for instance, although they may not cross the Military Demarcated Line (MDL).

And while Mr. C may have recommended the "zero presence" of the military in densely populated areas, it is poignant to keep in mind three things:


- There has been no timeline set for troop withdrawal; infact, as a prelude to troop withdrawal from urban conglomerations, the troop presence will merely be "diminished.... because militant violence in Kashmir has declined" (VOA News - India Proposes to Phase Troops Out of Towns in Kashmir). This leaves things, how should I put it, very much to our "convenience"/

- The J&K state police will not be left to their own devices; central paramilitary forces will be deployed (ostensibly in large numbers) to "aid and assist the state police"

- The Army are bound to raise a din (already Gen. Deepak Kapoor has expressed his reservations), and eventually a compromise will be reached between the Home Ministry and the Armed Forces: either a protracted solution, which given the volatile nature of the region, could prescribe the redeployment of troops there in that capacity in the near-future; or a "demilitarization" to the extent that troops are only reduced - perhaps significantly - from townships, but not completely withdrawn.

 

[Singh]

The separatists are armed and funded by Pakistan. Do we disagree on that?

No.
Though funds for Kashmir come from other nations too. And these days a good percentage of the terrorists are non-Kashmiri.

The sentiment may be endogenous, perhaps even spontaneous, but insofar as the 'separatist cause' - as a violent, purposefully and strategically-exacerbated, tangible, militant phenomenon is concerned - it is a "pakisthanie-sponsored" prodigy, to use my own words.

Separatism or the call for Azadi in Kashmir has been existent since the 40s,
insurgency is Pak's creation.

That is incorrect. The CRPF have been involved in COIN ops in J&K's urban conglomerations after having taken over from the BSF, ever since the composition of counter-insurgency forces was changed in 2004. The RR is involved in intensive patrolling and COIN ops in the adjacent countryside.
Confirmation from the members of Bharat Raxak (cached):

Bharat Rakshak • View topic - BSF,CRPF and other Paramilitary Forces Discussion.


And from the following articles:

CRPF to replace BSF in Kashmir by March 2004

Special force to tackle Naxal menace

Looking at your sources, and some other sources, it appears that at present,

CRPF is concerned with law and order/policing in Kashmir Valley and secondary/urban COIN(CT) ops by virtue of them being in an "urban agglomeration" ie a densely packed valley, the prime target of terrorists. PC wants this policing functions to be done by JK Police in the Valley instead of CRPF, staffed by mostly IPS officers.

RR's primary and perhaps the only role in Kashmir is COIN ops. It is based in border districts where a majority of infiltration and coin ops take place.

CRPF’s lead role in J&K may end soon
BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR: Volume 3(2)

Whoa! "Demilitarization" does not have to mean complete troop withdrawal. It also refers to the reduction of a nation's army, weapons, or military vehicles to an agreed minimum.

Quintessentially incorrect. A demilitarized zone does not have to mean "zero presence of military". Soldiers from both sides may patrol inside the DMZ on the Korean border for instance, although they may not cross the Military Demarcated Line (MDL).
And successive governments have indeed alluded to a "demilitarization" of Kashmir in that sense on account of "falling terrorist violence", on various occasions in the past. See for example:

India begins Kashmir troop withdrawal | World news | guardian.co.uk
Kashmir troop withdrawal to be decided by a central committee
Reuters AlertNet - India considers Kashmir troops cut as violence eases
And the blog from whence the excerpt of that article was derived:
Talk of Troop Reduction in Kashmir is a Self Goal for India ? - Blogger News Network

some more definitions...

Definition of DMZ
S: (n) demilitarized zone, DMZ (a zone from which military forces or operations or installations are prohibited)
WordNet Search - 3.0
Definition of Demilitarize
# S: (v) demilitarize, demilitarise (do away with the military organization and potential of)
# S: (v) disarm, demilitarize, demilitarise (remove offensive capability from)
WordNet Search - 3.0

DMZs (De-Militarized Zones) would guarantee the security of Pakistan and weaken India's defences, since there is no suggestion that terrorist militias are going to be "demilitarized". Should the Indian army leave the Kashmir valley to the mercy of well-organized, finely-trained, generously-financed indiscriminate organisations?

The US advice on Kashmir is lunacy - The Siege Within - MJ Akbar - Columnists - Opinion - The Times of India

General Pervez Musharraf has once again extended offer for conversion of Kashmir into demilitarised zone and changing its status for the sake of resolution of this issue...... convert it into demilitarised zone besides changing its status. It can be possible only if there is no army, no terrorism and nor any freedom movement there and Kashmiris monitor their own security, he added.

Musharraf Again Offers For Conversion Of Kashmir Into Demilitarised Zone

In case of Kashmir, Musharraf and America are implying at a zone which is for all practically purposes largely bereft of military assets and capabilities.

And while Mr. C may have recommended the "zero presence" of the military in densely populated areas,

PC wants to hand over policing duties in Kashmir to JK police. Continued presence of heavily armed troops, many of whom are non-locals is resented by many a Kashmiri. Locals donning Police uniforms will be more acceptable and a move in the right direction.

it is poignant to keep in mind three things:[
- There has been no timeline set for troop withdrawal; infact, as a prelude to troop withdrawal from urban conglomerations, the troop presence will merely be "diminished.... because militant violence in Kashmir has declined" (VOA News - India Proposes to Phase Troops Out of Towns in Kashmir). This leaves things, how should I put it, very much to our "convenience"/

Troop increase or reduction is an internal matter of India. We will do as we see fit.

- The J&K state police will not be left to their own devices; central paramilitary forces will be deployed (ostensibly in large numbers) to "aid and assist the state police"

Yep,the paramilitary forces and the army will be stationed in Kashmir but not actively involed in policing in the valley. Complete takeover JK Police will take some years.

- The Army are bound to raise a din (already Gen. Deepak Kapoor has expressed his reservations), and eventually a compromise will be reached between the Home Ministry and the Armed Forces: either a protracted solution, which given the volatile nature of the region, could prescribe the redeployment of troops there in that capacity in the near-future; or a "demilitarization" to the extent that troops are only reduced - perhaps significantly - from townships, but not completely withdrawn.

I believe in a few weeks PC will come out with a plan, which will be further refined as per the experiences gained in this experiment.
I don't think there will be any significant troop reductions in the future.

 

[Flint]

Has that worked for Israel? Its the Is-Pal dispute any closer to resolution? if anything, Israel has to work harder and harder each year to ensure its security.

Anyways - offtopic.

maybe we should execute the leaders as traitors like israel does to much of this soft policy, start killing there traitors they are useless to society anyway. Indian government needs to put out rewards for the leaders dead or alive many loyal separatist will take the offer and get rid of the leaders and reward their followers.

 

[johnee]

We need a velvet glove and iron fist policy. Right now, our policy is only velvet glove. Anyone who advocates at public rallies, the separation must be punished by law(and I dont mean house arrests). If they dont listen, then take them out. Scrap article 370. Try and relocate Kashmiri Pandits to the valley and give them financial support to establish themselves there.
At the same time, we must also have J&K police doing the law and order job. Even peacekeeping missions are preferably carried out by the Kashmiris themselves, that means inducting Kashmiris more in CRPF and other such orgs. Normalise Kashmir......

 

[F-14]

Johnee what you are saying is right we need to scrap article 307 and stop giving them any special pamapring but let them toil and make it in to a swiss stly economy bring back the Pundits and re establish them but then remember the sudo-seculer cum appesment establishment will huts us like dogs for this suggesting such a thing

 

[Singh]

We need a velvet glove and iron fist policy. Right now, our policy is only velvet glove. Anyone who advocates at public rallies, the separation must be punished by law(and I dont mean house arrests).

Unless India advocates strong nationalistic laws, such will not happen. On top of that Kashmir is an accepted disputed region internationally and India has signed many binding resolutions to this effect.

IMO, If we have full control of Kashmir or if we let go off occupied Kashmir then only could've we easily enact such laws.

In any case this only proves that we are confident in our nationhood, and defeat after defeat of anti-Indian brigade in elections proves us a point. The Silent majority lets their vote do the talking.

BTW Have you seen the dead militants in Kashmir? the surrender of thousands? What will you call that?
India is known for its iron hand in dealing with terrorists, compare Indian response with Pak response to Taliban. They were forced to attack, we attack with force.

If they dont listen, then take them out. Scrap article 370.

I believe a 2/3rd vote of parliament is required and on top of that a leader and common citizens strong enough to weather the ensuing storm.

What I purpose instead is holding referendum in all of Kashmir on whether to abolish or continue with Article 370, and on that basis divide Kashmir. There is a strong possibility Jammu, Ladakh regions will vote differently from Kashmir, and this can provide Indian an excellent opportunity to strangle the last remaining separatists.(Plan copyright Singh )

Try and relocate Kashmiri Pandits to the valley and give them financial support to establish themselves there.

I wonder what has happened in 20 years that will make Kashmiri Pandits prefer death over a few Rs.

At the same time, we must also have J&K police doing the law and order job. Even peacekeeping missions are preferably carried out by the Kashmiris themselves, that means inducting Kashmiris more in CRPF and other such orgs. Normalise Kashmir......

What do you mean by peacekeeping missions, and no matter how many Kashmiris are inducted into CRPF it will retain its multi-character.
I purpose JK police be staffed by mostly Kashmiris, Baltis, Ladakhis and Dogris followed by similar groups like Tibetans, Gurkhas, Paharis and Punjabis.
Merging certain battalions of RR, JAKLI, Ladakh scouts, Dogra Regiments, Punjab regiments(has quite a lot of Dogras) and making the ammalgamation into a primary COIN force for Kashmir.
BSF, CRPF, RR and IA in the barracks and border in a secondary / assisting role.

 

[johnee]

Unless India advocates strong nationalistic laws, such will not happen. On top of that Kashmir is an accepted disputed region internationally and India has signed many binding resolutions to this effect.

IMO, If we have full control of Kashmir or if we let go off occupied Kashmir then only could've we easily enact such laws.

In any case this only proves that we are confident in our nationhood, and defeat after defeat of anti-Indian brigade in elections proves us a point. The Silent majority lets their vote do the talking.

BTW Have you seen the dead militants in Kashmir? the surrender of thousands? What will you call that?
India is known for its iron hand in dealing with terrorists, compare Indian response with Pak response to Taliban. They were forced to attack, we attack with force.



I believe a 2/3rd vote of parliament is required and on top of that a leader and common citizens strong enough to weather the ensuing storm.

What I purpose instead is holding referendum in all of Kashmir on whether to abolish or continue with Article 370, and on that basis divide Kashmir. There is a strong possibility Jammu, Ladakh regions will vote differently from Kashmir, and this can provide Indian an excellent opportunity to strangle the last remaining separatists.(Plan copyright Singh )



I wonder what has happened in 20 years that will make Kashmiri Pandits prefer death over a few Rs.



What do you mean by peacekeeping missions, and no matter how many Kashmiris are inducted into CRPF it will retain its multi-character.
I purpose JK police be staffed by mostly Kashmiris, Baltis, Ladakhis and Dogris followed by similar groups like Tibetans, Gurkhas, Paharis and Punjabis.
Merging certain battalions of RR, JAKLI, Ladakh scouts, Dogra Regiments, Punjab regiments(has quite a lot of Dogras) and making the ammalgamation into a primary COIN force for Kashmir.
BSF, CRPF, RR and IA in the barracks and border in a secondary / assisting role.

Paaji,
I agree with your last suggestion. You know better about it than me on that.

Relocating Kashmiri Pandits is extremely imp from India's point of view and we must do it. If we dole out some freebies to Pandits and provide them extra security, so be it.

Article 370 must be scrapped. Period. If we hold a referrendum and treat Jammu differently from Kashmir, then the separatists will be strengthened. Becoz Kashmir alone would be given a special status(which is indirectly agreeing to Pak and Separatists' POV). We must scrap Article 370 and use iron fist against all resistance, later we can pamper them. But scrapping Article 370 would be a deathblow to separatism in the long run.

I dont agree with your first para. We can enact those laws if we have the political will and media support. If the 'world'(US) makes noise, let them do it. They have been exposed by NoKo. US has weakened and this is the time to go ahead with tough measures in Kashmir(and not yield ground). Separatism is on its deathbed and we need to give it a knockout punch.......

 

[Singh]

Paaji,
I agree with your last suggestion. You know better about it than me on that.

Relocating Kashmiri Pandits is extremely imp from India's point of view and we must do it. If we dole out some freebies to Pandits and provide them extra security, so be it.

Johnee merey bhai, the question is do the pandits want to relocate ?

Article 370 must be scrapped. Period. If we hold a referrendum and treat Jammu differently from Kashmir, then the separatists will be strengthened. Becoz Kashmir alone would be given a special status(which is indirectly agreeing to Pak and Separatists' POV). We must scrap Article 370 and use iron fist against all resistance, later we can pamper them. But scrapping Article 370 would be a deathblow to separatism in the long run.

I dont agree with your first para. We can enact those laws if we have the political will and media support. If the 'world'(US) makes noise, let them do it. They have been exposed by NoKo. US has weakened and this is the time to go ahead with tough measures in Kashmir(and not yield ground). Separatism is on its deathbed and we need to give it a knockout punch.......

Its not that India doesn't want to but legally its a minefield.
Here is a simple lucid explanation

"article 370 was introduced to abide by the terms of J&K's accession. The accession of J&K was conditional.
India desperately wanted to prove 2-nation theory wrong and wanted a muslim majority region under its fold, also the strategic significance of Kashmir and willingness of Kashmiri leaders to have separate state for themselves (under protection of India) were the main reasons why India went ahead for accession of J&K.
When Instrument of Accession was signed, constitution of India was not ready. As per clause 7 of the Instrument of Accession, J&K was not committed to accept the future Constitution of India.
In 1949 november when all the princely state heads and provincial heads of Indian dominion were supposed to issue proclaimations making Constitution of India operative in their respective states and provinces, J&K refused such proclaimation refering to the clause 7 of Instrument of Accession. This is because the draft form of constitution refused separate constitutions for the states and J&K always wanted their own separate constitution.
There was a legal imbroglio in this situation, the accession issue was already with united nations and in such situations India has to abide by its promise. This lead to Article 306-A of the draft Constitution of India (which became article 370 in the actaul constitution).
Considering the overall situation prevalent, Article 370 was a major step forward at that time. The Article at least paved the way for the Republic of India to make several laws and provisions of the Constitution of India applicable to Jammu & Kashmir State beyond the strait jacket of the Instrument of Accession. Besides, Article 370 was conceived as a temporary arrangement, with hopes of a full integration in time to come.'
Indian Opinion: Article 370

Article 370 is tied to referendum. But a referendum on Article 370 could be an innovative approach.

Though in hindsight, India could've acted tough like China.... but we like doing things our way.

 

[Ray]

There are two issues that must be considered before it is suggested that the Indian Army be thinned down in Kashmir.

• The Pakistani mindset and attitude towards India
• The rationale for the Indian Army’s presence in Kashmir.

Jinnah’s dreamt of a Pakistan that encompassed areas that are currently Pakistan, Bengal, parts of Bihar, Hyderabad, and Junagad. However, he inherited a moth eaten dream.

Even though his address to the Constituent Assembly on 11 August 1947 did appear pragmatically secular, yet feudal elements, the Army (consisting of a Punjabi majority) and basically less educated was apprehensive of the Mohajirs, the refugees from India, since they (the Mohajir) were the educated ones and also were of the business class and hence they grabbed all the levers of power i.e. bureaucracy and business. This is the genesis of the power struggle that has seen the musical chair in the govt formation that goes on with the civilians and the Army.

The Punjabis are not ready to allow the Mohajirs their space and likewise the Mohajirs are not ready to budge. Punjabis and others there are sons of the soil, while the Mohajirs are rootless people! To overcome this disadvantage, they (the Moahjirs) sagaciously worked on a hate India mindset and promoted the singularity of Islam as a cloak to diminish the discrimination that is natural towards non son of the soils and who are better than the indigenous people (the Mohajirs are still discriminated). The Kashmir issue came handy for the Punjabis. They turned the Mohajir promoted issue to their advantage, wherein they projected that the only way to save Pakistan from India was by having a strong Army. That ensured their supremacy as also garnering the perks and privilege.

Pakistan also ‘reinvented’ their ‘history’ and indoctrinated the Pakistani youth into fanatically hating India. One could read “The Subtle Subversion The State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan Urdu, English, Social Studies and Civics Editors: A. H. Nayyar and Ahmad Salim to realise the extent of distortion and hate, apart from reading the Report on Pakistan Education by Hoodbhoy (I don’t remember the exact title).

Therefore, given the above, can a leopard change its spots overnight?

If not, is it wise for India to drop its guard?

The rationale for the Indian Army’s presence in Kashmir is simple. Pakistan cannot be trusted. She has attacked India four times and lost. In 1971 she got a hiding of her life, signed a surrender amidst international spotlight and emerged truncated. Will she ever forget this shame and humiliation where in addition 90,000 of their best were PsW? Therefore, will she not try every gambit to avenge?

Pakistan has always interfered in Kashmir, including using the religion card, through its agents in the political and other circles of Kashmir. The secessionists are thus not a new phenomenon. Having repeatedly failed to annexe Kashmir, they are using the unemployed terror machine of Afghanistan to keep the Kashmir issue alive. They are ably assisted by India’s new found friends like the US and UK. In this connection Milliband’s and Obama’s pronouncements of ‘solving the Kashmir issue’ are pertinent. One wonders why the UK (a third rate power piggy backing on the US) and the US cannot solve their Pakistani origin Muslim and Mexican issues or their War on Terror first or the Palestinian Israeli issue, before pontificating?

What is the guarantee that Pakistan will move its troops from the LC or Siachen? What is the guarantee that Pakistan will stop terrorism? They are not even in control of their own country and so their being capable of stability that brings peace is most doubtful.

This DMZ issue is living in a Fools Paradise!

 

[Yusuf]

Brigadiers Sir,
The Indian government by announcing its intent to reduce troops along the LoC is doing to the US and the West as such, what Pakistan has been doing all along. Provide comforting words with very little action.
As you post mentions, there are too many questions to be resolved (if at all they ever will be) for the troops to move back.
So its just that the government is uttering words that sound music to Obama and the likes while actually not doing anything.

 

[Vinod2070]

Jinnah’s dreamt of a Pakistan that encompassed areas that are currently Pakistan, Bengal, parts of Bihar, Hyderabad, and Junagad. However, he inherited a moth eaten dream.

He also dreamed of united Punjab and the whole of Bengal in his Pakistan with the Pakistani borders reaching up to Gurgaon near Delhi!

He negotiated with some Hindu Rajahs in Rajasthan to join Pakistan on favorable terms.

Obviously he was not ready to consider the wishes of minorities in these areas as he wanted the "wishes of the Muslim minorities" fulfilled. I don't know any other name for this but I will not spell out what I think.

This is what Jinnah wanted or at least some of the people who were in the process of dividing the motherland!

 

[johnee]

Basically, British dreamt of a completely divided India that would be easy to colonise in future......

Jinnah was a mere pawn.

 

[Yusuf]

He also dreamed of united Punjab and the whole of Bengal in his Pakistan with the Pakistani borders reaching up to Gurgaon near Delhi!

He negotiated with some Hindu Rajahs in Rajasthan to join Pakistan on favorable terms.

Obviously he was not ready to consider the wishes of minorities in these areas as he wanted the "wishes of the Muslim minorities" fulfilled. I don't know any other name for this but I will not spell out what I think.

This is what Jinnah wanted or at least some of the people who were in the process of dividing the motherland!

Parts of Sri Lanka too? And the A&N Islands?
How exactly did he think would he manage to hold this country together with chunks being surrounded by India?
As Junaghad and Hyderbad showed, not possible. India gobbled them up.