Pakistan is under no obligation to unilaterally withdraw its troops from Kashmir. The demilitarization of Jammu and Kashmir was to take place in a synchronized manner on both sides of the ceasefire line. It was India which refused to implement the process of demilitarization.
Thanks for the reply
I'm not aware of India refusing to implement the process of demilitarization
for the referendum to take place. A link will be appreciated.
BTW, I never said Pakistan has to unilaterally pull out the troops. I only asked why Pakistan isn't implementing the UN pre-conditions of pulling out the troops. Of course it has to be done by both but the difference is that
Pakistan has to pull out everyone from disputed area (including those who were allowed to settle in there by you). On the other hand,
India will reduce the troops to minimum to maintain the law and order.
India doesn't have to pull out entire troops from there.
- In the first step, Pakistan was asked to use its "best endeavours" to secure the withdrawal of all tribesmen and Pakistani nationals, putting an end to the fighting in the state.
- In the second step, India was asked to "progressively reduce" its forces to the minimum level required for keeping law and order. It laid down principles that India should follow in administering law and order in consultation with the Commission, using local personnel as far as possible.
Here's a link to UN website:
http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/1948.shtml
That's the precondition which Pakistan never met. Why?
The proof of Indian refusal to demilitarize is to be found in the report of Sir Owen Dixon (an eminent Australian Jurist and United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan) to the Security Council, contained in Document S-1971, in which he concluded as follows:-
"In the end, I became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any form or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion, permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperilled."(Para 52 of Document S/1971).
I'm not aware who that guy is and why does it even matter what he says. Why? Because the pre condition isn't met by Pakistan. Then why should we care what a foreigner has to say about us? How can you blame us for something which comes later in the second step when the
first step isn't even met?
From 1949 to 1952 eleven proposals (for demilitarization) were made by the UN which were accepted by Pakistan but rejected by India. Pakistan was even prepared to pull out its troops in favor of the UN troops irrespective of the Indian reaction to such a proposal and told the UN that it made no conditions.
Please give me a link for this part, I'll read it and then comment on it. In the meantime, if may ask, what do you mean by "in favour of the UN troops?"
And you guys still have the audacity to blame Pakistan !!
We blame Pakistan because
1) Pakistan didn't complete the precondition for the Kashmir referendum to take place.
2) Pakistan allowed non Kashmiris to settle in the disputed area (please note India have NEVER done this).
3) Instead of respecting the UN resolution, Pakistan started supporting those who subscribe to violence in the valley and we consider it as an act of terrorism. Why? Because if you're serious about resolving this issue then why not follow the process which is already in place to solve it (UN resolution)? Why do something which is never AGREED UPON?
India have now switched to "Kashmir is India's inseparable part" because your actions displayed that you aren't serious to solve the problem. You didn't stick to what you agreed to. So why should we care, really? Blaming India for the current scenario is just being dishonest, Sir.
. Thank Zia.
