India should accept defeat before Kashmiris’ struggle, says Nawaz

[Brickwall]

Why a Pakistani document? I have been asking for a UN document, thats what we ve been originally talking about?

I mean if you can fake our currency and put it in our market, what good would be this document?

Man this is amazing , you have more trust in UN then in your country.

Off topic but could not resist Lets for argument sake ,we are so smart and devil, that we replace official Pakistan Document what the hell is stopping us from changing UN document..

 

[Joe Shearer]

You are unnecessarily making it look like an ego issue, which is not really my way.
Just present what you need to prove my argument wrong instead of making it melodramatic

Oh, I will, I will. I will take time because retrieving that set of documents, the submissions in original before the Commission is a time-consuming task. As a matter of fact, the last time I retrieved it, it was for publication in this forum itself, several months ago. I notice that it is now a habit of Pakistani and Indian interlocutors to ask again and again for the same documents, as their doubts come in a kind of cycle.

You mentioned that it is not an ego issue. No, probably not. It is a quibble based on the faint hope that your reading of the wording of the resolution would be accepted by people who do not know that Zafrullah Khan vehemently denied in his submission to the UN that any Pakistani troops were involved. He did so because India complained of Pakistani aggression, an armed attack; Pakistan side-stepped - all this is in the written, existing record of the discussions and submissions - by claiming that India was strangling Pakistan at birth! The UN took Pakistan at its word, took its side-step at face value and asked the two sides to come to a settlement - not to allow the fighting to go on, in other words. In view of Pakistan's flat denial of the involvement of its troops, it included the precise wording that you have so triumphantly pointed out, that citizens and those not normally resident in those areas should be withdrawn. It also formed the Plebiscite Commission.

It was this Commission that went out and got one shock after another. First, it found that the Pakistanis, having accepted everything in New York, were in full intransigent form in India. They first refused to withdraw; when pressed, they reluctantly admitted the presence of their Army, and went on to argue that the Indian Army would intimidate voters during a plebiscite, thereby fixing in stone for ever the respective positions of the two sides. For any presence, according to the Pakistani interpretation of the world of realpolitik, would inevitably mean a favourable vote in favour of that presence; it was nothing to do with the wishes of the voters, but had to do with the presence of force majeure.

It is not a coincidence that this has been the ideology of the Pakistan Army ever since. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. As always.

 

[danger007]

@Joe Shearer Sir you mentioned Abu Zolfiqar earlier ... the same gentleman who had the Mig-27 falling dead right on the spot which got me into a nice chat with him the other time ... and he was so peeved at being termed "First Line Of Nonsense" that he gave me a negative rating ... LOL

Now the gentleman who is not interested in reading papers and is online only to make an as5 of his esteemed self, even after I wasted 3 minutes collating the thread which has exhaustively discussed the issue with your presence in it, is aiming for a similar treatment.

May I seek you indulgence? i really need to get off the net for a couple of months .. except for the stroll and occasional interesting inputs and pointers from you as you keep giving me .... please be nice with @-blitzkrieg- , this von Mannstein fan ... bet he will credit blitzkrieg to Guderian ... and argue about it too.



Opps sorry .. you are right .....

Man I wish we had their mobilisation capability .. the one which they attribute to us .. we wouldn't be doing a cold start .. just a mere cold fart would suffice.. So long

Happy Hunting am off on my sojourn ... for a few weeks.

First read what I said... I was just referring to the 7 00 000 soldiers comment..

 

[Joe Shearer]

You are unnecessarily making it look like an ego issue, which is not really my way.
Just present what you need to prove my argument wrong instead of making it melodramatic


Why a Pakistani document? I have been asking for a UN document, thats what we ve been originally talking about?

I mean if you can fake our currency and put it in our market, what good would be this document?

That is your own admission that you lied in the UN, that Zafrullah Khan lied in his submission, that it was these lies that the UN accepted in good faith, and incorporated into the resolution, instead of doing what you imagine it should have done, taken your official delegates to be a pack of liars, and checked the situation on the ground and including mention of your Army and its precise formations.

The first clue that the UN got was these admissions by the Pakistani side. That is what you will get.

 

[Hellfire]

First read what I said... I was just referring to the 7 00 000 soldiers comment..

Read and hence my sarcasm on them .... come out of your serious mode, the dimwits being those who quote a number of Indian troops wherein we have left whole of India uncovered .. ciao

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer Sir you mentioned Abu Zolfiqar earlier ... the same gentleman who had the Mig-27 falling dead right on the spot which got me into a nice chat with him the other time ... and he was so peeved at being termed "First Line Of Nonsense" that he gave me a negative rating ... LOL

Now the gentleman who is not interested in reading papers and is online only to make an as5 of his esteemed self, even after I wasted 3 minutes collating the thread which has exhaustively discussed the issue with your presence in it, is aiming for a similar treatment.

May I seek you indulgence? i really need to get off the net for a couple of months .. except for the stroll and occasional interesting inputs and pointers from you as you keep giving me .... please be nice with @-blitzkrieg- I like his Shooting Shit With Confidence attitude (seems like a law student, trying to give an argument like that anyways without reading the necessary paragraphs explicitly highlighting it) , this von Mannstein fan ... bet he will credit blitzkrieg to Guderian ... and argue about it too.



Opps sorry .. you are right .....

Man I wish we had their mobilisation capability .. the one which they attribute to us .. we wouldn't be doing a cold start .. just a mere cold fart would suffice.. So long

Happy Hunting am off on my sojourn ... for a few weeks.

If you drift down south towards Hyderabad, specifically, towards the cantonment, be sure to look up @jbgt90 and yours truly.

 

[Hellfire]

If you drift down south towards Hyderabad, specifically, towards the cantonment, be sure to look up @jbgt90 and yours truly.

am in your vicinity ALWAYS, I mentioned being around your neighbourhood, enjoying the superb weather presently in the twin city area .. told you, will look you up before leaving here. You know why I am still obscure... will contact someday sir.

regards

 

[Joe Shearer]

am in your vicinity ALWAYS, enjoying the superb weather .. told you, will look you up before leaving here. You know why I am still obscure.

regards

Yes, I didn't mention the location, because I thought you were sensitive.

 

[Hellfire]

Yes, I didn't mention the location, because I thought you were sensitive.

Wilco sir.

regards.

 

[hassamun]

Friends, just want to share a video here from BBC India interviewing people in Kashmir...

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1220427201334974

 

[Hellfire]

@hassamun nothing new

I have said it oft. Those who have opinion (which are few in kashmir) want azadi. There is no sentiment pro-pakistan which is in numbers that amount to that more than pro-India.

But the bulk is too poor ... to have any opinion. @LadyFinger This is what I was referring to the other day when I answered you

Thanks


A Counter point before I move out sorry for some delinquent captioning .. ignore the rant of the captions but listen to the video

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Oh, I will, I will. I will take time because retrieving that set of documents, the submissions in original before the Commission is a time-consuming task. As a matter of fact, the last time I retrieved it, it was for publication in this forum itself, several months ago. I notice that it is now a habit of Pakistani and Indian interlocutors to ask again and again for the same documents, as their doubts come in a kind of cycle.

You mentioned that it is not an ego issue. No, probably not. It is a quibble based on the faint hope that your reading of the wording of the resolution would be accepted by people who do not know that Zafrullah Khan vehemently denied in his submission to the UN that any Pakistani troops were involved. He did so because India complained of Pakistani aggression, an armed attack; Pakistan side-stepped - all this is in the written, existing record of the discussions and submissions - by claiming that India was strangling Pakistan at birth! The UN took Pakistan at its word, took its side-step at face value and asked the two sides to come to a settlement - not to allow the fighting to go on, in other words. In view of Pakistan's flat denial of the involvement of its troops, it included the precise wording that you have so triumphantly pointed out, that citizens and those not normally resident in those areas should be withdrawn. It also formed the Plebiscite Commission.

It was this Commission that went out and got one shock after another. First, it found that the Pakistanis, having accepted everything in New York, were in full intransigent form in India. They first refused to withdraw; when pressed, they reluctantly admitted the presence of their Army, and went on to argue that the Indian Army would intimidate voters during a plebiscite, thereby fixing in stone for ever the respective positions of the two sides. For any presence, according to the Pakistani interpretation of the world of realpolitik, would inevitably mean a favourable vote in favour of that presence; it was nothing to do with the wishes of the voters, but had to do with the presence of force majeure.

It is not a coincidence that this has been the ideology of the Pakistan Army ever since. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. As always.

Lot of time and energy there...Your version of story..No one gives two hoots. till you make it official at UN and its documented . If you didnt iw ould say your country did a great disservice to your people.

That is your own admission that you lied in the UN, that Zafrullah Khan lied in his submission, that it was these lies that the UN accepted in good faith, and incorporated into the resolution, instead of doing what you imagine it should have done, taken your official delegates to be a pack of liars, and checked the situation on the ground and including mention of your Army and its precise formations.

The first clue that the UN got was these admissions by the Pakistani side. That is what you will get.

How about you start believing other Pakistani documents as well

 

[Hellfire]

Survey shows preferences across Kashmir
The Milli Gazette
Published Online: May 30, 2013
Print Issue: 1-15 July 2010
The first-ever survey on both sides of Kashmir by Robert W Bradnock, a senior fellow at Chatham House, UK's most influential think-tank, has shown that only two percent of people in Jammu and Kashmir want to join Pakistan while 43 percent prefer independence. The survey 'Kashmir: Paths to Peace' has been sponsored by Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi's son, Dr Saiful Islam.

Bradnock has been quoted as saying that the idea of conducting survey in Kashmir was decided upon after several rounds of discussions between him and Dr. Saif. “We first came in touch when Dr. Saif was running a charity in Libya which was trying to help Kashmiri refugees, mainly in Pakistan.” The opinion poll was commissioned by Dr Saif in May 2009 and administered in September-October, the same year.

“This is the first poll to be conducted on both sides of LoC that has separated Indian and Pakistani administered Kashmir since UN-brokered ceasefire on 1 January 1949”, says the survey. It added that the purpose of the poll was to establish current attitudes in Kashmir on both sides of the LoC to alternative scenarios for the resolution of the conflict.

The survey quotes, “81 percent [66 percent in Pakistan administered Kashmir (PaK) and 87 percent in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K)] say unemployment is most significant problem facing Kashmiris. Government corruption (22 percent in PaK and 68 percent in J&K), poor economic development (42 percent in PaK, 45 percent in J&K), human rights abuses (19 percent in PaK and 43 percent in J&K) and Kashmir conflict itself (24 percent in PaK and 36 percent in J&K) are all seen as major problems”.

It observed that 80 percent of Kashmiris feel that the dispute is important to them, personally. “The two questions envisaged under UN resolutions of 1948/49, which proposed a plebiscite, were restricted to choice of whole of former princely state of J&K joining India or Pakistan. This poll shows that preference for those options is highly polarized. 21 percent of population said they would vote for whole of Kashmir to join India and 15 percent said they would vote for it to join Pakistan. Only one percent in PaK says they would vote to join India whereas only two percent in J&K say they would vote to join Pakistan”.

Referring to further polarization between districts, it says “the option of independence has been widely promoted on both sides of LoC over the last 20 years. Although 43 percent of the total population support independence, in only five out of 18 districts the majority prefers independence of entire Kashmir”.

These results, says the survey, support an already widespread view that plebiscite options are likely to offer no solution to the dispute. “Nor is there evidence that an independence option could offer a straightforward alternative. Any solution will depend on Indian and Pakistani governments' commitment to achieving a permanent settlement”. The poll suggests that such a settlement will depend critically on engaging fully with all shades of Kashmiri political opinion.

Dr. Bradnock and Ipsos MORI designed the poll. Ipsos MORI administered the poll in conjunction with FACTS Worldwide, which conducted fieldwork in India and managed Aftab Associates Pvt Ltd, which carried out fieldwork in Pakistan. On the basis of quota sampling, 3,774 face-to-face interviews were completed with adults aged over 16.

Of the total respondents, 2,374 were in 11 of 14 pre-2008 districts of J&K. The districts excluded were Doda, Pulwama and Kupwara. 1400 were in seven of eight districts in PaK. The district of Neelum was excluded, along with Gilgit-Baltistan (the Northern Areas). The data was weighted (by district, urban, rural, age and gender) to reflect population profile according to the most recent Census on each side of LoC.

“For practical reasons, sample in both countries was predominantly from urban areas, but quotas were set to ensure that 40 percent of sample in each country were from rural areas”, said the survey. Questionnaires were administered in Dogri, Urdu, Koshur (Kashmiri) and Hindi”.

The survey observed that 36 percent across LoC believed that militant violence would be less likely to solve Kashmir dispute compared to 24 percent who thought it would be more likely to.

In response to options for political future, an overwhelming wish for change and resolution of dispute was found. “Less than one percent in either PaK or J&K said that they would vote for no change and to keep status quo”.

It found preference for independence was fairly uniform across districts in PaK but it was uneven in J&K. In Kashmir valley division it was between 75 to 95 percent; none in Poonch, Rajauri, Udhampur and Kathua of Jammu division and in Jammu itself it was just one percent. In Ladakh division, it was 30 percent in Leh and 20 percent in Kargil”.

With reference to the option for whole Kashmir to join India, 21 percent said they would vote to join India. “In PaK one percent said they would vote to join India and 28 percent in J&K said they would vote to join India”. It further observed 50 percent in PaK voted for whole J&K to join Pakistan. “In J&K, two percent said they would vote to join Pakistan”.

It quotes, “The two options for entire Kashmir to join either India or Pakistan were envisaged under UN resolutions proposing a plebiscite in 1948/49. Yet there is no evidence that either joining India or Pakistan would come close to obtain more than a quarter of total vote”.

The survey pointed that one percent in PaK say they would vote to join India and 28 percent in J&K indicated an intention to vote to join India. “But that 28 percent is itself polarized. In Kashmir division support for joining India ranged from 2 to 22 percent. In four districts (Kargil, Leh, Kathua and Udhampur) a majority say they would vote to join India. There is even less support across entire Kashmir for joining Pakistan. In PaK, the intention to vote for this option is just 50 percent, in J&K it istwo percent”.

“This poll, in common with two preceding polls in J&K shows that setting aside all other political obstacles, it is difficult to see how plebiscite proposed in UN resolutions of 1948/49 could play any part today in the resolution of the dispute. There is no clear majority in the prospect for independence either. In J&K there is a majority in favour of outright independence for entire Kashmir in only four districts, all in Kashmir valley division and in five other districts the support for independence is one percent or less”, reports the survey.

About alternative scenarios, the survey observed that making LoC a permanent border received 14 percent of support and was preferred option for nearly all of those in Poonch and Rajauri. In other districts of PaK and J&K hardly any would prefer this as an option, with exception of Jammu and Udhampur where those who prefer it are still in minority.

The remaining options, the survey added, received minimal support. “Joint sovereignty attracted a total voting intention of two percent, status quo less than one percent”. It added that 58 percent of respondents were prepared to accept LoC as a permanent border if it could be liberalized for people and trade to move across it freely.

The study found 76 percent of respondents supporting the removal of all mines on both sides of LoC. It also observed that 66 percent in J&K think removal of Indian security forces will help bring peace.

(Afsana Rashid)


http://www.milligazette.com/news/7376-survey-shows-preferences-across-kashmir

http://www.bbc.com/news/10207909

http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/the-survey-in-kashmir-was-saif-gaddafis-idea/265666



@Joe Shearer Pertinent to note that the sample was urban, it gets skewed in favour of better job opportunities and infrastructure if one takes areas across Shamshabari namely Karen , Machchal, Gurez and right across till Mendar. The people in these areas have no interest either in azadi or Pakistan.

@Levina @Stephen Cohen @Omega007 @Soumitra @LadyFinger @hussain0216 @graphican @Areesh @Tamilnadu @Windjammer @Waqkz

Tagging you all for this interesting piece



@Nair saab @nair @SrNair

 

[hassamun]

@hassamun nothing new

I have said it oft. Those who have opinion (which are few in kashmir) want azadi. There is no sentiment pro-pakistan which is in numbers that amount to that more than pro-India.

But the bulk is too poor ... to have any opinion. @LadyFinger This is what I was referring to the other day when I answered you

Thanks


A Counter point before I move out sorry for some delinquent captioning .. ignore the rant of the captions but listen to the video

Thank you for sharing the video brother...It clearly states that Kashmir wants neither India nor Pakistan...only Independence...To be honest my personal belief is that there should be no problems if Kashmir becomes Independent.

 

[Hellfire]

Thank you for sharing the video brother...It clearly states that Kashmir wants neither India nor Pakistan...but Independence...To be honest my personal belief is that there should be no problems if Kashmir becomes Independent.

I have said it a number of times. Just posted a write up for you.

On the other hand, the problem with Kashmiri independence is the Chinese claim which lies dormant till as such time India has a claim. I want you to look at the Chinese tendency of claiming all territories even briefly occupied by them sometime in history, collate with the history of the Kashmir region AH Dani is a good source as @Joe Shearer has pointed out to me ... read in History of Civilisations of Central Asia, and extrapolate it into Chinese geostrategic thinking as evident in SCS and think will Kashmir be allowed to be truly independent even without India?

Also consider two points with an open mind:

1. Even if India was to withdraw, the Pakistani strategic imperative is to secure their water resources. The game being played by China on Yang-tse or Brahmaputra as we call it, is an indicator of what would happen in an independent kashmir. There is simply no way that Pakistan will allow Kashmir to remain independent.

2. When I say the above points, also keep in mind the Sino-Pakistan boundary agreement is only a temporary one, with clause to re-negotiate upon settlement of Kashmir issue.

These are two strategic loopholes and potential traps for either India or Pakistan ... the Chinese factor is extremely pertinent for both.

It is also acknowledged by those minuscule kashmiris who understand the strategic importance of Kashmir to all three concerned. Unfortunately or fortunately the best bet for Kashmiris remains India .. atleast they can throw stones on us!

But do you know that actually under Article 370 the government of J&K is working as per Indian context. But on ground, it is not and the blame is being shifted to Delhi ... that is where my oft stated comment on the politician-separatist nexus crippling the state and making the life of a common Kashmiri a misery at best and hell lately.

On Chinese, they will simply shoot them and then starve you of water to force concessions ..... you have the Indus water treaty here. It works howsoever we may quarrel