How Kashmir was stolen from Pakistan by Mountbatten

[Executioner]

We can win in any grounds battle, cricket, forum or UN.

 

[toxic_pus]

When the discussion took turn towards the aspects being discussed now, the bone of contention was that the resolution was crystal clear, black and white. And that there was no need to interpret its clauses any further or seek additional information and clarifications. And that it should have been implemented, being so clear and concise.

It still is.

Different interpretations, as interpreted by different posters here is indicative of the fact that even crystal clear clauses may have different meanings for one and different for the other.

Stick to Commission's interpretation. Not the anonymous posters on an Internet forum.

The mere fact that a commission was constituted to check and oversee the implementation of the resolution, confirms in my opinion, that there would have been ambiguities and differing interpretations.

Sure. But not everything was ambiguous.

In this case, the two parties had differing interpretations of same clauses, irrespective of the fact that both parties had agreed to the overall resolution. The formulated commission could offer its own opinion about the so-called sense of the UNSC resolution, but it was not granted the powers to effect a force-implementation.

Actually, of the three parties, two had the same interpretation, at least on the basic mechanism for withdrawal. Guess which one differed?

How could Pakistan have initiated withdrawal without knowing details of Indian Plan, as Indian withdrawal was linked to the withdrawal of Pakistan. You could not segregate the two and expect a smooth undertaking. And stating that this was not required is downright frivolous.

Not again. Pakistan's withdrawal was not, I repeat, not contingent upon Indian plan. The resolution is clear. The Commission had clarified.

Pakistan was not seeking direct parleys with the Indians and was interacting through the commission.

Pakistan was seeking exactly that, in a round about way.

The withdrawal of Indian forces would commence after the withdrawal of Pathans was completed. How would the Pathans withdraw. They also needed time and they being irregulars and civilians needed much more time to get organized and undertake a withdrawal. Due appropriation to this aspect was not adequately dealt with.

Is that a fact? Or may be you should read up on the whole issue of disbanding and disarming of Azad Forces and how Pakistan refused to comply.

The 7 weeks time period for Pakistan was also contentious. More time was needed by Pakistan as well. This was due to the deployment of troops far ahead of the existing road and track infrastructure. Coming down from the mountain based deployment to the road-head needed more time, though after arriving at the road-head, remaining travel was comparatively shorter. The staff checks conducted by the commission’s military adviser were highly contentious as well.

All of those were factored in.

Both sides were interpreting various constituent clauses of the resolution to suit their interests. What's wrong with this. These were two independent sovereign states, unless India perceived that Pakistan was somehow a lesser state of the two.

Good to know that you do not belong to the school of thought that blames India for not holding plebiscite.

Pakistan never intended to bypass the commission. Infact all negotiations were taking place through the commission. The commission was a mediation party and not a deciding authority. Certain proposals the commission made were not considered appropriate by Pakistan and Pakistan was well within its right to do so.

Actually the Commission was the deciding authority as well.

Part II/B/1 of Truce Agreement

When the Commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A 2 hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistan forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.​

Do you see the name of your country in any 'deciding' role? Food for thought.

 

[aanshu001]

Maybe there is a small minority of kashmiris who may be ambivalent about joining Pakistan or may want to become an Independent country, but most want to be with Pakistan. However there is no ambivalence about leaving India amongst Kashmiris. Every Kashmiri who introduces himself/herself says they are from Kashmir. They NEVER introduce themselves as Indians. That should tell you something.

how many times you had been to Kashmir...I had visited the state at-least 100 times (was involved in rehabilitation after Poonch earthquake) been member of panel for few development projects in J&K. I use to meet several Kashmiries of (*** or Azad Kashmir) who were surprised with the liberty in Indian part (One of them said your girls can go out so late in our place it is impossible) and development. Rajuri and Poonch (significant population of Sikh) sector are pro India and for fact if you divide J&K in Jammu, Kashmir & Ladakh then you will find Jammu & Ladakh will always be part of India.

 

[aanshu001]

Problem is you Indian growup with flase history. You are beyond fix.

There are 500k Indian army soldiers posted in Kashmir and you call it better?

Apparently Indian Kashmir is worst than Syria and is like this since last 60 years.

60 years are you nuts.....before late 80s Kashmir was haven on earth it was 1987 after that when Pakistan supported insurgency during time General Zia had sobbed this beautiful land in blood. It was Pakistan misadventure in 1947/48 cut this land in part. Than in 1965 operation Gibraltar was complete failure (no support by kashmiries), so Pakistan realized they can not take Kashmir by Power so started a proxy war and now we are facing the heat.

 

[aanshu001]

ap balochistan and fata aur karachi ki fikar chore den ....takr care about ur india now!!! ur economy is declinning and soon the war is coming .....

Ghoda kitan bhi sikur jaye Gadha nahi ban sakata..hamre paas economy to hai aapke paas kya hai udhar ka katora.

 

[SamantK]

@toxic_pus

Hats off for making the resolution so clear and putting out how Pakistan hijacked the the chances of plebiscite.

 

[aanshu001]

^^On what grounds India is occupying Hyderabad?

was waiting for it the first legitimate post to defend act of 1947 by Paksitan, but why India succeeded 1. People support ( which Pakistan don't had) 2. Better Planing & Professional Army (the biggest mistake which Pakistan had made to send Kabayalies which involve in looting & raping which had given India army enough time to advance and protect Srinagar) than push Pakistani Army back with Kabayalies. If Pakistan had used main army may be scenario would be different.

Hyderabad, Junagar or Goa were well planned & executed not like Pakistan haste ( even for Siachen Islamabad ordered Arctic-weather gear from a supplier from London, unaware that the same supplier provided outfits to the Indians which gave Indian head start and result is know).

 

[aanshu001]

Last thing which I want to add before going to bed....population of all minorities in India had increased ( except Babari Demolition & Op Blue Star) no major religious symbol had been affected ( Golden Temple had been rebuilt) but is it same for Pakistan? is rights for other minorities is secure? had any one with bleeding heart on Kashmir problem had looked on demographic figures of Pakistan. In India their are more Muslim Millionairess than Pakistan, education level is higher and more safer. We do had problems and clashes as all countries do but my friends just check the data how many Muslims died in riots compare to bullets send by beloved Pakistanis for their freedom.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Last thing which I want to add before going to bed....population of all minorities in India had increased ( except Babari Demolition & Op Blue Star) no major religious symbol had been affected ( Golden Temple had been rebuilt) but is it same for Pakistan? is rights for other minorities is secure? had any one with bleeding heart on Kashmir problem had looked on demographic figures of Pakistan. In India their are more Muslim Millionairess than Pakistan, education level is higher and more safer. We do had problems and clashes as all countries do but my friends just check the data how many Muslims died in riots compare to bullets send by beloved Pakistanis for their freedom.

seems like you need to do more bedside reading....

you forgot about attacks on Christians and Churches in Orissa in 2008

 

[Ticker]

@toxic_pus

Sir,

Have you seen the information desk in a library. If you haven't, please kindly look in the mirror.

 

[Ticker]

how many times you had been to Kashmir...I had visited the state at-least 100 times (was involved in rehabilitation after Poonch earthquake) been member of panel for few development projects in J&K. I use to meet several Kashmiries of (*** or Azad Kashmir) who were surprised with the liberty in Indian part (One of them said your girls can go out so late in our place it is impossible) and development. Rajuri and Poonch (significant population of Sikh) sector are pro India and for fact if you divide J&K in Jammu, Kashmir & Ladakh then you will find Jammu & Ladakh will always be part of India.

Sir,

If you type B u t together as a word as I believe you have, the PDF thinks that you are typing 'the other side of midnight', gets affronted and converts it surprisingly, in to three stars.

The plebiscite is to be held for the whole of Kashmir and the vote of majority counts.

Ghoda kitan bhi sikur jaye Gadha nahi ban sakata..hamre paas economy to hai aapke paas kya hai udhar ka katora.

Alas, we don't have an aunty who is seeking balls to become an uncle.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Oh God, still on this subject I see. Can't we just move on and realise that debating whatever happened will make no difference to the final solution on Kashmir?

LoC as the border is that solution, so why continue to cover old ground? Totally pointless.

As a matter of fact, there is a very major truth concerning the Pakistan-India relationship which is exposed by this discussion, more than by other parallel discussions which may have taken place earlier. Have patience; it is going towards an objective, and not meandering aimlessly, much though it may seem to be doing so. Perhaps a better simile would be that it reveals that truth to a greater extent with every single exchange of views.

Please follow the exchanges very closely, and a surprising conclusion will soon become apparent.

 

[SamantK]

As a matter of fact, there is a very major truth concerning the Pakistan-India relationship which is exposed by this discussion, more than by other parallel discussions which may have taken place earlier. Have patience; it is going towards an objective, and not meandering aimlessly, much though it may seem to be doing so. Perhaps a better simile would be that it reveals that truth to a greater extent with every single exchange of views.

Please follow the exchanges very closely, and a surprising conclusion will soon become apparent.

Sir,

I already see a pattern emerge, India itseems wrt to Pakistan is in such a situation that either action or inaction warrants suspicion and blame! (Looks dangerous cause even if a few people in Pakistan and India want peace, it is impossible because of what I think to be a stalemate)

(I would have asked what pattern or conclusion you see, but then I think you are waiting for the 17th or so.. )

 

[Executioner]

60 years are you nuts.....before late 80s Kashmir was haven on earth it was 1987 after that when Pakistan supported insurgency during time General Zia had sobbed this beautiful land in blood. It was Pakistan misadventure in 1947/48 cut this land in part. Than in 1965 operation Gibraltar was complete failure (no support by kashmiries), so Pakistan realized they can not take Kashmir by Power so started a proxy war and now we are facing the heat.

Man enjoy the Independent Days. Now it's 65 yr still no luck, so they keep shouting Allah hu Akbar and we will keep shouting them sending to there Kbar.

 

[clmeta]

Yes. One leader married his best friend's daughter.

Let us just say, Pakistani leaders were Gentlemen and not as devious and immoral as the Indian ones.

Everybody knows about the affair Nehru was having with Mrs. Mountbatten ( a married woman).

I don't care about the Kashmiris you met. A vast majority of them are patriotic.
We will not partition our nation on the basis of religion again.
Never.

Maybe there is a small minority of kashmiris who may be ambivalent about joining Pakistan or may want to become an Independent country, but most want to be with Pakistan. However there is no ambivalence about leaving India amongst Kashmiris. Every Kashmiri who introduces himself/herself says they are from Kashmir. They NEVER introduce themselves as Indians. That should tell you something.