Asaduddin Owaisi tells Pakistan to stop meddling in Kashmir

[Great Janjua]

Just a gentle reminder - the people of the valley did no such thing. The people of west Jammu, now called Azad Kashmir, killed the state troops in their part of the state. So did the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. The only fighting in the Valley between the Valley citizens and soldiers of any side was between armed brigands who sacked Baramula, with no regard religion, age or sex when their killing started. The citizens resisted the invaders, not the defending Indian Army. Please look up Sherwani and see for yourself.



There is no court of law governing a sovereign other than his own courts of law. Surely you are aware of that outstanding legal principle.



Oh, my dear Sir, I request that you look closely at my assertion. It is very fairly worded. You may have overlooked it in your haste.



Try not to be vulgar.

Vulgar???? Depends on your mood[emoji12] [emoji12] [emoji12] that was a fucked up joke on my part

 

[Joe Shearer]

I know very well what the Indian position is, sir
But the fact remains that the UN has never accepted the Indian position, nor has it ever held Pakistan responsible for not fulfilling the pre-conditions of plebiscite (the main Indian argument)... However, we do have reports by UN appointed official mediators that blame India for halting the process. Do I need to remind you what Sir Owen Dixon had said?

Nor do I have to remind you that the entire thing is based on acts that are recorded by Pakistanis, including Pakistani general officers. While you pin your accounts on legalities manufactured to delay and to obfuscate, the facts speak for themselves. I suggest that you face the realities revealed by your own people. Not a single Indian among them.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Nor do I have to remind you that the entire thing is based on acts that are recorded by Pakistanis, including Pakistani general officers. While you pin your accounts on legalities manufactured to delay and to obfuscate, the facts speak for themselves. I suggest that you face the realities revealed by your own people. Not a single Indian among them.

Again, Individual accounts/autobiographies, no matter Pakistani or Indian, carry no legal weight
We cannot accept them at face value, can we?

 

[Joe Shearer]

I know very well what the Indian position is, sir
But the fact remains that the UN has never accepted the Indian position, nor has it ever held Pakistan responsible for not fulfilling the pre-conditions of plebiscite (the main Indian argument)... However, we do have reports by UN appointed official mediators that blame India for halting the process. Do I need to remind you what Sir Owen Dixon had said?



Sir, here we are discussing an International Dispute (under International Law) and Pakistan's and India's legal positions vis a vis J&K

That International Law in fact is not "Law" but "Morality" is an entirely different debate

I only wish to point out that by taking refuge behind the UN, in contradiction of your witnesses, you are being very convincing.

Sir, It is a FACT, not fiction, that Pakistan was NOT declared an aggressor state in Kashmir by the UN

Are you basing your entire position on the avoidance of the truthful account testified by your own people?

Again, Individual accounts/autobiographies, no matter Pakistani or Indian, carry no legal weight
We cannot accept them at face value, can we?

If you cannot accept your own people's testimony, who else can? Only you can judge the value of a Pakistani's account.

Vulgar???? Depends on your mood[emoji12] [emoji12] [emoji12] that was a fucked up joke on my part

Did I take it seriously? Just don't use that language. It might lead to some Indian losing his temper, and then the whole thing drifts into a war of words.

 

[M. Sarmad]

I only wish to point out that by taking refuge behind the UN, in contradiction of your witnesses, you are being very convincing.



Are you basing your entire position on the avoidance of the truthful account testified by your own people?



If you cannot accept your own people's testimony, who else can? Only you can judge the value of a Pakistani's account.

Sir, you are missing the point
What you or I personally believe is (or isn't) 'truthful' doesn't matter
Personal beliefs, individual accounts, etc have no bearing whatsoever on the legal status of Kashmir Dispute under the UN (and under International Law)

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir, you are missing the point
What you or I personally believe is (or isn't) 'truthful' doesn't matter
Personal beliefs, individual accounts, etc have no bearing whatsoever on the legal status of Kashmir Dispute under the UN (and under International Law)

Sadly, dear Sir, it is your personal beliefs and your individual actions that determine your country's position, not an abstract called the deep state. The deep state is composed of individuals just like you. Of individuals of honour and dignity, who lose their heads when they are in a group.

If you Pakistanis as individuals do not take a stand, who will?

 

[VCheng]

Sir, you are missing the point
What you or I personally believe is (or isn't) 'truthful' doesn't matter
Personal beliefs, individual accounts, etc have no bearing whatsoever on the legal status of Kashmir Dispute under the UN (and under International Law)

What about the status of Kashmir after Pakistan signed the Simla Agreement?

The Simla Agreement does not (and cannot) supersede UN Resolutions. Also, it does not preclude raising of Kashmir issue at the United Nations:

But what does the UN itself say about your interpretations?

By formal treaty, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan agreed that all outstanding matters between it and the Union of India would be resolved bilaterally. Where does the UN stand after that, in the absence of any further authorisation other than a recommendation?

The UN has clearly stated multiple times that it can use its good offices to revolve the dispute only if both parties agree (as stipulated under the Simla Agreement).

 

[M. Sarmad]

What about the status of Kashmir after Pakistan signed the Simla Agreement?

No change in 'legal status' of Kashmir as an unresolved International dispute on the agenda of the UNSC.
The final accession of Kashmir to India or Pakistan in accordance with the will of people of Kashmir remains to be decided yet, under International Law

 

[VCheng]

No change in 'legal status' of Kashmir as an unresolved International dispute on the agenda of the UNSC.
The final accession of Kashmir to India or Pakistan in accordance with the will of people of Kashmir remains to be decided yet, under International Law

I assume that the UN agrees with that interpretation? If not, why not?

 

[M. Sarmad]

I assume that the UN agrees with that interpretation? If not, why not?

You, of course, are free to "assume" whatever you want, just like the Indians
Facts remain unchanged, UN Resolutions remain valid

 

[VCheng]

You, of course, are free to "assume" whatever you want, just like the Indians
Facts remain unchanged, UN Resolutions remain valid

As are you free to assume as well, except that the UN itself may differ with you, on record.

 

[M. Sarmad]

As are you free to assume as well, except that the UN itself may differ with you, on record.

Please post those "on record" statements telling us that the UN Resolutions have become invalid, or that Simla Agreement supersedes UN Resolutions ...

 

[VCheng]

Please post those "on record" statements telling us that the UN Resolutions have become invalid, or that Simla Agreement supersedes UN Resolutions ...

I already have, many times before. Yet we keep going round and round this particular bush without Pakistan getting anywhere with it. I can only wish you luck with such interpretations influencing any UN Resolutions on Kashmir being enforced.

 

[M. Sarmad]

I already have, many times before....

No, you have never, not even once.
I am waiting ....
Please post those on record statements you always talk about but never post

 

[VCheng]

No, you have never, not even once.
I am waiting ....
Please post those on record statements you always talk about but never post

I have, and you know it.

It's okay, I sincerely wish you the best of luck in your position. I really do. (But there are none so blind as those who do not wish to see.)