Search results

Can you please post the original Karachi Agreement you are referring to. Because the Karachi Agreement I am referring to is from 'United Nations Treaty Series', Vol. 81, pg 273 and it doesn't, I repeat, doesn't have any 'Chapter 5' or any explanation that you are claiming.

One thing I forgot to mention is that ground positions, as described in Karachi Agreement were never physically demarcated. It was visually verified and the whole process ended on 3rd Nov, 1949.

Except that our physical occupation prevented you from leaving us with a fait accompli. There was no violation of LoC

Correct. NJ 9842 is not the terminus. It was the last point that was demarcated. The body text, however is clear that the CFL will not terminate at Khor, north of which is NJ 9842, but continue northward. It is this 'northward' portion that was not demarcated on ground.

CFL upto NJ 9842 was demarcated in detail. Detail maps are available at UN. Mind you, this map was the basis for demarcating LoC during 1972. LoC is CFL with minor adjustments.

So, although Part B/2(a)/III(d) of Karachi Agreement, 1949, states that CFL, shall run 'north to the glaciers', from 'Khor' it is still irrelevant simply because troops of either countries were not stationed there at the time of Agreement. And Pakistanis wonder why they loose almost all...

Pakistanis assess their 'victories' like teenagers assess school yard fisticuffs, after they get beat up. Kid #1: Hey, did you see how I took a swing at you. Kid #2: But I hit your face hard. Kid #1: So? Didn't I take a swing at you? Kid #2: Umm...but I broke your nose too. Kid #1: Pffff...I...

@Joe Shearer @Bang Galore @Roybot & @Karan1970 (Wherever you are) There are others from old times, but they don't post any more.

Explain then, if UN doesn't accept Pakistan's occupation as illegal, why is it that UN requires only Pakistan to withdraw completely and unconditionally, while allows India to maintain her presence.

India's position is that Pakistan is illegally occupying P0K and UN tacitly accepts that. However, till a final decision on withdrawal is made, Pakistan can hold it's position and on this point @HRK is correct.

OK. I get it now. I have to look into it before I can comment. I wonder if Pakistan as a State can enter into any agreement with AJK government, because, per UN, AJK doesn't even have a legal status.

I am terribly sorry. I meant Article 257.

I think, and I am saying this on the basis of a casual reading of Article 256, the two Articles are entirely different in scope. While Article 370 effectively makes J & K an autonomous region, Article 256 legitimizes J & K accession to Pakistan, if it should happen.

It still doesn't preclude deployment of troops.

UNCIP's 3rd Report, was dated 9 Dec, 1949, after Karachi Agreement. ...the Resolution […], as has been pointed out, draws a distinction between the withdrawal of Indian and Pakistan forces. Pakistan troops are to begin to withdraw in advance of the Indian troops and their withdrawal is not...

I don't think Article 257 precludes PA to be deployed in P0K.

The very act of withdrawal, whether under any 'International Mechanism' or otherwise, would be alteration of Karachi Agreement. What the eff are you talking about. As with implementation of Part II, UN is on record saying that Pakistan's obligation to withdraw is unilateral and unconditional...

Karachi agreement is very much valid. It only recognizes ground positions of the two sides as on that date. It does nothing else.

Part I: Establish CFL and maintain peace along that line. That's where Karachi Agreement comes in. Part II: Withdraw completely (among other things) So, if you want plebiscite in accordance to UN resolution, Pakistani will have to withdraw completely. How effing difficult is it to comprehend?

Nope. Try again.