Asaduddin Owaisi tells Pakistan to stop meddling in Kashmir

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That kind of assumption and hope remains confined to the domains of the PDF, I assure you.

Outside of such assumptions and hope (of a Pakistani stagnation or regression), the 'getting ducks in a row' idea you posited seems rather far fetched.

My riposte, sir, remains, how many more instances of violation of your own solemn undertakings through multiple treaties signed, right from the formation of an independent State of Jammu & Kashmir (and entering into a standstill agreement with them) as a sovereign lawful state, will you continue to record and then assume a posture of invoking treaties/resolutions/negotiations as a mechanism of conflict resolution?

Has Pakistan, in any instance since the first day of formation of J&K as an independent state under the Maharaja, accepted it's own flagrant violation and aggression against what was technically an independent country formed by the very same act that gave legal status to Pakistan?

As many violations as India has undertaken. We can keep going back through history and tallying up the violations, but at the end of the day neither side is innocent. India and Pakistan have only one 'mutually agreed upon means of resolution of the J&K Dispute', which are the UNSC Resolutions. India reneged on them and one could argue that subsequent military attempts to alter the status qou by Pakistan were a response to India's violation of her international commitment to the UNSC Resolutions.

Were the two territories acceded to and incorporated territories of Pakistan?

Junagadh acceded to Pakistan and its accession was accepted by Pakistan in 1947. Munavadh, I don't recall.

 

[VCheng]

But that should not discourage an appreciation of the stout defence put up by Sarmad Sahib, and his very intelligent reading of history and re-interpretation to favour the Pakistani case.

I admire his efforts, but unfortunately such a stance only serves to harden the misguided zealots' resolve to continue to force the issue when in fact Pakistan's legal position is clearly untenable in this matter. The world clearly sees this, including the UNO. However, realpolitik would dictate that my suggested outcome in the one most likely to be realized, however long it takes, which actually would be a win for Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Allegations and counter-allegations only?
I quoted what your own PM had said

Pakistan Army entered Kashmir only after the Indian invasion of Oct 27th. Get your facts straight, mate

Er, yes and no, Sir. Pakistan-led tribals, with Akbar Khan in charge, crossed over on 22nd October.

The country of Azad Kashmir was declared in the territory of Pakistan, on the 24th of October. The invading tribals were entertained at Muzaffarabad and refreshed, before the tribals went on to Baramula, spent two days there, in rest and recreation, and fought their losing battle outside Srinagar Airport on the 27th/28th October. That puts the tribals, commanded by Akbar Khan and others in mufti, in the Azad Kashmir territory several days before, and crossed the state border on the 22nd.

Since the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession only on the 26th October, there can hardly be a question of having violated the Stand Still Agreement that had already been breached multiple times by Pakistan by then.

Regards

 

[M. Sarmad]

Er, yes and no, Sir. Pakistan-led tribals, with Akbar Khan in charge, crossed over on 22nd October.

The country of Azad Kashmir was declared in the territory of Pakistan, on the 24th of October. The invading tribals were entertained at Muzaffarabad and refreshed, before the tribals went on to Baramula, spent two days there, in rest and recreation, and fought their losing battle outside Srinagar Airport on the 27th/28th October. That puts the tribals, commanded by Akbar Khan and others in mufti, in the Azad Kashmir territory several days before, and crossed the state border on the 22nd.

Since the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession only on the 26th October, there can hardly be a question of having violated the Stand Still Agreement that had already been breached multiple times by Pakistan by then.

Sir, I have read what the best of your diplomats had said/argued on this issue. And the response of Pakistani diplomats (and the UN)

With all due respect, It's you who is trying to re-interpret (rather re-invent) history.


Krishna Menon in his record 8 hours marathon speech in UN on Kashmir alleged that Pakistan violated the standstill agreement 'first' by stopping the train service and then by helping the rebels, and therefore the Maharaja too had the right to violate the Agreement and accede his state to India .... and therefore the Accession of Kashmir to India had become valid and complete.

This position was rejected by the UN outright.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir, I have read what the best of your diplomats had said/argued on this issue. And the response of Pakistani diplomats (and the UN)

With all due respect, It's you who is trying to re-interpret (rather re-invent) history.


Krishna Menon in his record 8 hours marathon speech in UN on Kashmir alleged that Pakistan violated the standstill agreement 'first' by stopping the train service and then by helping the rebels, and therefore the Maharaja too had the right to violate the Agreement and accede his state to India .... and therefore the Accession of Kashmir to India had become valid and complete.

This position was rejected by the UN outright.

Yes, Sir, 'he said' and then 'they said', and all that. But do you have any different interpretation of the facts as you, and as all others, know them?

Sir, I have read what the best of your diplomats had said/argued on this issue. And the response of Pakistani diplomats (and the UN)

With all due respect, It's you who is trying to re-interpret (rather re-invent) history.


Krishna Menon in his record 8 hours marathon speech in UN on Kashmir alleged that Pakistan violated the standstill agreement 'first' by stopping the train service and then by helping the rebels, and therefore the Maharaja too had the right to violate the Agreement and accede his state to India .... and therefore the Accession of Kashmir to India had become valid and complete.

This position was rejected by the UN outright.

This is not from any reading of diplomatic addresses but from a simple reconstruction of the situation from facts that we all know.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yes, Sir, 'he said' and then 'they said', and all that. But do you have any different interpretation of the facts as you, and as all others, know them?



This is not from any reading of diplomatic addresses but from a simple reconstruction of the situation from facts that we all know.

Wouldn't any 'reconstruction of the situation from facts' also have to take into account the parallel Indian process of blockading and subsequently forcefully annexing the Princely State of JUnagadh that had signed both a Standstill Agreement and Instrument of Accession to join Pakistan (neither of which is disputed by India).

Events in 1947 in J&K were not occurring in a vacuum.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Wouldn't any 'reconstruction of the situation from facts' also have to take into account the parallel Indian process of blockading and subsequently forcefully annexing the Princely State of JUnagadh that had signed both a Standstill Agreement and Instrument of Accession to join Pakistan (neither of which is disputed by India).

Events in 1947 in J&K were not occurring in a vacuum.

Very true; but these violated the conditions laid down by the British, not the Indians, for the right to exercise accession. Why blame India? Second, there was no forceful annexation; while Indian troops were in subsidiary possessions of Junagadh that declared for India (just as Chitral, while a subsidiary of Kashmir, acceded to Pakistan), the actual occupation was by an Indian civil servant to whom the last Dewan handed over the keys before following his Nawab, and wrecking Pakistan through his son.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Very true; but these violated the conditions laid down by the British, not the Indians, for the right to exercise accession.

I'm assuming you're referring to the 'condition' of geographic contiguity, which Pakistan argued it had via sea/ocean.

The ruler of Junagadh signed a Standstill Agreement and Instrument of Accession and it was accepted by Pakistan. Blockading the territory and fomenting unrest that forced the ruler to flee does not justify the subsequent forced Indian annexation of Junagadh.

You can't excuse away Indian subterfuge and military action in violation of the very agreements you are arguing Pakistan violated in J&K. I alluded to this earlier in my response to Vibrio, that we can all go back and drag out every single skeleton from our respective closets to malign the other with. The fact remains that India was not innocent in 1947. The events unfolding in Junagadh certainly gave Pakistan no confidence in Indian intentions.

 

[Nilgiri]

I was pleasantly surprised when checking into how this thread is running (expecting a full on flamebait jibber jabber kind of thign)...having left it earlier at page 3 or such....but instead...nice material and perspectives, some of which I did not know before.

Appreciate the discussion from coherent Pakistani members here. Thank you.

@M. Sarmad @saiyan0321 @AgNoStiC MuSliM @VCheng

 

[M. Sarmad]

Yes, Sir, 'he said' and then 'they said', and all that. But do you have any different interpretation of the facts as you, and as all others, know them?



This is not from any reading of diplomatic addresses but from a simple reconstruction of the situation from facts that we all know.

Sir, as everyone knows, India and Pakistan have seldom agreed what the Facts and Events were/are.
Reading of diplomatic addresses is helpful in understanding how a country adjusts its aims to domestic and foreign restraints while advancing those strategic and tactical aims. While the Indian 'Atoot Ang' mantra maybe easily acceptable domestically, Indian diplomats haven't been successful in earning international recognition/UN acceptance of India laying claim upon Kashmir as its integral part (and not a disputed territory). This too is a fact, the most relevant one in fact, which you and other Indians choose to ignore so conveniently.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir, as everyone knows, India and Pakistan have seldom agreed what the Facts and Events were/are.
Reading of diplomatic addresses is helpful in understanding how a country adjusts its aims to domestic and foreign restraints while advancing those strategic and tactical aims. While the Indian 'Atoot Ang' mantra maybe easily acceptable domestically, Indian diplomats haven't been successful in earning international recognition/UN acceptance of India laying claim upon Kashmir as its integral part (and not a disputed territory). This too is a fact, the most relevant one in fact, which you and other Indians choose to ignore so conveniently.

I am not asking, dear Sir, that you should agree to 'Indian' facts. I am asking that you should use facts from common sources, neither Pakistani nor Indian.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

And what of the Indian support for unrest in Junagadh and Munavadh, setting the stage for military intervention by India and annexation of those territories?

You're dealing with an extremely crafty nemesis....

The biggest deception of Satan is to convince mankind that he doesn't exist - a line from the movie The Usual Suspects

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

I would suggest that India is already doing whatever it can to encourage the Baluchistan issue reach a boil. Where we are heading next will become clear once the US position in Afghanistan is finalized. It won't be long.

Are the Pak General Staffs oblivious to the Baluchistan issue???? Their War College, Infantry Training School etc. are all located in Baluchistan for a reason. Even they tested their nukes live over there. Baluchistan is no BD for it's an arid land where traitors can't grow like mushrooms. And, the Pak commanders are no colonial era whisky sipping bridge playing drawing room officers!!!! They're molded with fire, thanks to the US paid WOT, for a change!!! Successes against the best trained/funded terrorist proxy traitors (both in Shelvar and tailor cut suits) or the defense of the Haremain or IK etc. don't occur in vacuum...

 

[Nilgiri]

You're dealing with an extremely crafty nemesis....

You betcha!

The biggest deception of Satan is to convince mankind that he doesn't exist - a line from the movie The Usual Suspects

We're nowhere near that good at it though. That too I think Keyser Soze frankly gave even Satan a run for his money.

 

[GHALIB]

The question that
Yes pakistan is

Er, yes and no, Sir. Pakistan-led tribals, with Akbar Khan in charge, crossed over on 22nd October.

The country of Azad Kashmir was declared in the territory of Pakistan, on the 24th of October. The invading tribals were entertained at Muzaffarabad and refreshed, before the tribals went on to Baramula, spent two days there, in rest and recreation, and fought their losing battle outside Srinagar Airport on the 27th/28th October. That puts the tribals, commanded by Akbar Khan and others in mufti, in the Azad Kashmir territory several days before, and crossed the state border on the 22nd.

Since the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession only on the 26th October, there can hardly be a question of having violated the Stand Still Agreement that had already been breached multiple times by Pakistan by then.

Yes this is true.