dabong1
<b>PDF VETERAN</b>
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,417
- Reaction score
- 1
I haven't, but you seem to forget that Kashmir was not a provincial state but a princely-state and under the terms of partition, the rulers of the princely state were allowed to decide their own fate.
And I think it is unfair to draw parallels between Hyderabad and Kashmir because the Indian government tried to resolve the dispute over this region for more than a year through diplomatic channels. And the Nawab of Hyderabad never signed an Instrument of Accession to Pakistan, but the maharaja of Kashmir did sign such a document with India - so India has every right to claim Kashmir. And even then, Pakistan holds 85,846 km2 area of Kashmir and India has repeatedly made aware of its intention to give up claim over this region for the sake of regional peace.
And what about Goa? It was under Portuguese control, not British. The terms and circumstances were completely different.
It does not matter how you spin it......muslim majority areas where to go to pakistan.