The instrument of accession was signed AFTER the tribal invasion and AFTER the genocide perpetrated by the Maharajah.
India had already committed a second crime of invading and forcibly annexing Jungadh despite that State's accession to Pakistan in 1947.
Large scale violence in East Pakistan started AFTER India started pumping in the terrorists of the Mukti Bahini that carried out their own atrocities. The exponential increase in violence in East Pakistan increased as a direct result of Indian interference & support for terrorism there, whereas the genocide in Jammu was already well underway by the time the tribals marched in.
Finally, none of the above excuses CONTINUED Indian atrocities & occupation of millions of Kashmiris despite UNSC Resolutions clearly stating that the Kashmiris should be allowed to choose between India & Pakistan in a UN led plebiscite.
You can talk about historical events all you want, but the fact is that it is the petty, greedy and expansionist State of India (and millions of its citizens) that CONTINUE to support the forcible occupation of, and atrocities perpetrated upon, millions of Kashmiris in Indian Occupied J&K. That is your present - that is your reality - that is your nature as a country and a people - you support occupation by force, atrocities, torture, rape and massacres and then whine and cry when your soldiers, deployed by your corrupt & genocidal political elite to carry out that occupation of J&K and perpetrate those atrocities, get slaughtered.
Please allow me an opportunity to educate you. You seem to have your chronology wrong.
India signed IoA with J&K on
26th October. The second after India signed IoA, forward movement and violence committed by Pakistani sponsored non-state actors was terrorism in India.
India annexed Junagadh in
early November. You could argue that India had allegedly sealed the land borders between India and Junagadh before that, but closing borders is a sovereign right and no violence was carried out against Junagadh.
Pakistani actions predate Indian action and
started the whole chain of using non-state actors. I repeat for emphasis, Pakistan started the aggression. I hope you will remember that when you start accusations of 'India started xyz' tirade next time.
Now on to your second non-factual tirade of violence starting after India intervened. The internet is awash with sources documenting when and why Pakistani military started repression in East Pakistan. The Indian action was taken to prevent ethnic cleansing on the borders after repression started. I don't even need to bother responding to you.
Lastly, to your final point about the present reality. India acknowledges that there have been human right violations and actions have been taken in most if not all instances where such excesses have occurred. The unfortunate reality is that India has had to militarize Kashmir after repeated Pakistani attempts at grabbing territory and using jihadis it reared for Afghanistan to inflict violence on the state of Kashmir.
On a more personal note, I wish that the restrictions on the valley are lifted and political activities resume. I
don't agree with the lockdown that GoI has done and
don't agree that politicians can or should put under detention. I hope that the military is no longer needed there, however is
dependent on whether Pakistan stops using terrorism.
As far as plebiscite is concerned, the conditions outlined in the UN resolution need to be met - that includes first and unilateral withdrawal of the Pakistani military from entire J&K. Pakistan seems to be in no mood to comply.