What's new

Ideas for next years Kashmir uprising

I think we need to establish a baseline.

1. No terrorism. Lives of Kashmiri people come first.
2. Smart militancy - attacking high value military targets
3. Agreeing that India is the problem in Kashmir and solution in Kashmir will not be of India's liking
4. Supporting protests
5. No shelter down strikes or at least minimizing them.
6. Ensuring Kashmiris have access to envoys of the world. If India has a bigger vice than its stubborness its, their love for their name in the world.

But I think much of the above is going to happen anyway. And it will continue until someone in India goes back to Musharraf/Jaswant and agrees to at least make the deal public and adopt it as the first step toward a resolution.

See, Musharraf/Jaswant is not an end-state. It is an evolutionary path which creates an environment within which Kashmiris *can* make their own decision. Right now, you've got heavy militarization, Kashmir has been split asunder and no credible way to hold an immediate referendum is on the horizon. I don't disagree that ultimately a fair and free plebiscite should be held. I just don't think you can do that tomorrow without first going down the Musharraf/Jaswant path.

I am 100% convinced that the status quo in Kashmir is completely unsustainable. As I also mentioned earlier, if you trend the shifting demographics over the last 63 years and project them forward, the playing field is going to become harder for the Indian Armed Forces. Before much more blood is shed and treasures are lost, it would be best to pre-empt an unpleasant future and adopt Musharraf/Jaswant post haste.

Just my opinion. Let's see what the future holds.
 
We will. If you sum up the populations of people supporting independence/pakistan on both sides of the LoC and compare it with that oh those who do not, you'll see that the numbers don't favour us.

But then, since it's not in our interest, we will not do it. Let the Pakistanis shout howsoever much they like.

They have been shouting for past 63 years. What happened?

Independence is not an option under UN resolutions, and independence has never been supported by Pakistan.

Percentage supporting accession to Pakistan is 2%.
 
Independence is not an option under UN resolutions, and independence has never been supported by Pakistan.

Percentage supporting accession to Pakistan is 2%.

Yes and that's why they will chose Pakistan. For lack of options.

Their priority is as follows:

1. Independence.

2. Pakistan.

3. India.

In case option 1 is absent, they'll go for option 2.

That's precisely why we will never agree to a referendum. It doesn't suit us.
 
Percentage supporting accession to Pakistan is 2%.

And you know this because you conducted free and fair polls which gave you this result?

Please. Don't be disingenuous and don't go down a road which will reduce this thread to abusive rants. Pakistanis will tell you that the percentage of Kashmiris wanting their land to remain part of India is 0%, and then it will just degenerate from there.
 
Personally, I only prefer one solution. Total independence to J&K as a free country. Not even merger with Pakistan.

You realize when you talk about independence you are throwing away the UN resolutions, right?

Pakistan has never supported independence, why don't you protest against that. Why don't you force your rulers to free the part of J&K under your occupation.
 
Granting them independence would be a disaster for the region. Kashmir being a small land locked country with a small economy will be a breeding ground for terrorists and would become another Afghanistan.

I support Mushraff's proposal of making the borders insignificant. But will GB be a part of kashmir then?
 
And you know this because you conducted free and fair polls which gave you this result?

Please. Don't be disingenuous and don't go down a road which will reduce this thread to abusive rants. Pakistanis will tell you that the percentage of Kashmiris wanting their land to remain part of India is 0%, and then it will just degenerate from there.

Percentage doesn't matter.

I agree with you that in case of a referndum, India will lose it.

But then that is precisely why India will never agree to it, isn't it?

It's just not in India's interest.
 
And you know this because you conducted free and fair polls which gave you this result?

Please. Don't be disingenuous and don't go down a road which will reduce this thread to abusive rants. Pakistanis will tell you that the percentage of Kashmiris wanting their land to remain part of India is 0%, and then it will just degenerate from there.

Poll was conducted by Chatham House (aka Royal Institute of International Affairs), UK. The funding for the poll was provided by the son of President Muammar Gaddafi of Libya.
 
Granting them independence would be a disaster for the region. Kashmir being a small land locked country with a small economy will be a breeding ground for terrorists and would become another Afghanistan.


What it would become is immaterial sonce we will never leave it.

Millions of our people depend on Kashmir for its rivers.

Million of hindus have their most sacred religious shrines there.

Any compromise on India's territorial integrity is simply unaccceptable.

I support Mushraff's proposal of making the borders insignificant. But will GB be a part of kashmir then?

It has to be. Otherwise, the solution will be partial and not complete.
 
Yes and that's why they will chose Pakistan. For lack of options.

Their priority is as follows:

1. Independence.

2. Pakistan.

3. India.

In case option 1 is absent, they'll go for option 2.

That's precisely why we will never agree to a referendum. It doesn't suit us.

You are wrong there too. The percentage favouring full merger with India is higher than that favouring full merger with Pakistan.
 
What it would become is immaterial sonce we will never leave it.

Millions of our people depend on Kashmir for its rivers.

Million of hindus have their most sacred religious shrines there.

Any compromise on India's territorial integrity is simply unaccceptable.



It has to be. Otherwise, the solution will be partial and not complete.

Actually, people outside the Kashmir Valley don't consume the river waters. We just use the waters for hydroelectricity, without consuming it, as permitted by the Indus Water Treaty.
 
You are wrong there too. The percentage favouring full merger with India is higher than that favouring full merger with Pakistan.

Trust me dear. I've been there and I've seen it.

If you talk of all of J&K including that on the other side of LoC and including Gilgit-Baltistan, we're simply outnumbered.

But that doesn't matter. We'll never leave Kashmir anyways.
 
Granting them independence would be a disaster for the region. Kashmir being a small land locked country with a small economy will be a breeding ground for terrorists and would become another Afghanistan.

I support Mushraff's proposal of making the borders insignificant. But will GB be a part of kashmir then?

Actually, the sentiment for separation from India is mainly in the urban pockets of Kashmir Valley, and the Valley itself is a very small part of the state.
 
Actually, people outside the Kashmir Valley don't consume the river waters. We just use the waters for hydroelectricity, without consuming it, as permitted by the Indus Water Treaty.

That's not true.

There are so many rivers like Ganga, Yamuna etc. which originate from J&K.

We can't risk to lose the control of these vital rivers to either Pakistan or China or independent Kashmir.
 
Back
Top Bottom