Kashmir Conflict - Who is Right, India or Pakistan?

[JonAsad]

So it proves pakistani people or you cant look beyond the religion.

dont be naive or act stupid, let me say it again the partition of subcontinent was baised on religion, you or the hindus at that time included.

 

[riCoh]

Kashmir Conflict - Who is Right, India or Pakistan?

One of the most intractable and long standing conflicts in the world is the conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. This conflict started in 1947, on the day after India and Pakistan simultaneously became independent. Three major wars have been fought over this and thousands and perhaps even more than a million people have died. The result so far is that India controls almost two-thirds of Kashmir and Pakistan controls one-third. China controls the rest. The conflict continues.
I and, I believe, most scholars who have studied this issue feel that Pakistan has the stronger case. However, India has more people and therefore more who advocate their point of view.

I have never read a cogent, logical explanation from anybody taking the Indian side until I received a letter from somebody in India a few days ago. Therefore, I have decided to post my view and his view and ask readers to write me their opinions.

Briefly stated, when British India was given its independence, India was supposed to be divided into two countries: India and Pakistan. All areas which were more than 70% Muslim were suppose to go into Pakistan. The rest would be India.

However, the "princely states" would be left to decide on their own. They could join Pakistan or India or they could remain independent.

The way I am directly concerned with this issue is that my wife was from the Princely State of Chitral, which is in the extreme Northwest corner of what is now Pakistan. The rulers of Chitral were for a time not sure if they wanted to join Pakistan or India. Eventually, they came to be considered part of Pakistan, but retained their autonomy. The princes continued to rule. However, on January 1, 1971, the rule by the Prince of Chitral was abolished by the Government of Pakistan. This was a popular move, as the long suffering people of Chitral had gotten fed up with their princes. The princes were not entirely unhappy either, because they were given some money and minor positions in the Government of Pakistan. The Prince of Chitral is still in the Foreign Service of Pakistan to this day. Older people in Chitral still say "I am going to Pakistan" when they are going there.

Although the matter of Chitral was resolved peacefully, in neighboring Kashmir, there was immediate war.

According to the Indians, Pathan troublemakers from the Northwest Frontier (places like Chitral and Peshawar) were causing riots and agitation in Kashmir. As a result, the Maharaja of Kashmir joined India and requested the assistance of the Indian Army. The Indian Army arrived immediately, the same day, and Pakistan attacked the next day.

Thus, according to the Indians, India has the right to all of Kashmir. When Pakistan built a road to China known as the Karakorum Highway, India protested to the United Nations and everywhere else that a road was being built across "their territory" without their permission.

However, Pakistan has a different view. The "Pathan agitators" were not from Peshawar. Rather, they were local Kashmiris who did not want to be part of India. Furthermore, the Maharaja of Kashmir had no right to call in the Indian Army, because the Maharaja of Kashmir was not a heredity ruler. He was merely a British appointee. There had been no such position as the "Maharaja of Kashmir" prior to British rule. Finally, the agreement was that any areas more than 70% Muslim would go to Pakistan. Kashmir has more than 90% Muslims and therefore clearly should have been part of Pakistan.

The main reason why I and most others take the Pakistan side is that numerous polls have been taken of the people of Indian Kashmir. Every one of these polls has had a similar result. Some want an independent Kashmir. Some (usually slightly fewer) want to join Pakistan. Almost none at all want to stay in India. The few who do want to stay in India are recent arrivals, primarily Hindus, who do not have long heredity links to Kashmir.

Nobody on the Pakistan side of Kashmir wants to join India, but a few would like to have independence.

Such matters are often determined by economics. Pakistan has a much higher standard of living and the people are financially better off there than they are in India.

Finally, I must add that the British were at fault for not resolving this issue before pulling out in 1947.

Ismail Sloan

Kashmir Conflict - Who is right, India or Pakistan?

the whole article is flawed, piece of crap.

 

[JonAsad]

When It Comes To Education, Pakistan Can Learn Democracy From India

India and Pakistan were both poor countries in 1947; both were countries divided by colonial opportunism, and religious bigotry. Both had similar problems, India just had more of them because of its diverse population and scale.

But India prioritized its focus on higher education and people were conscious enough to keep their elected leaders honest. One can arrive at the conclusion that democracy is what Pakistan should learn from India’s somewhat success in education.

There is hardly any difference between the two countries, statistically speaking, in their educational development, or lack thereof. But where India scores much higher is in a few of its select academic institutions. These institutions raise the educational quotient of the country to a high, world class level, and by their very presence, they tend to pull up other institutes of learning simply by peer pressure.

Pakistani Education System, Statistics and Demographics

The Pakistani education system is divided into the primary, secondary, and high school levels. Following High School, plenty of private and government-sponsored colleges/universities operate with the charter of Higher Education Commission (HEC). Generally speaking the provincial governments are responsible for the day-to-day management of education; while the federal government have the onus-ensuring budget and quality.

If one was to believe government released statistics, literacy rate in Pakistan increases by 10% with every passing generation, with male literacy rate of only 68%, and the female rate of 48% percent.
Literacy rate alone is not a strong indicator of education.

A better indicator is enrollment in higher education; about 5% of Pakistani men and 3% of Pakistani women have a college education. To further complicate this situation most of the colleges and universities are not of international standard.

Between 1947 and 2003, Pakistan did not have a single university that could be ranked as world class. But in last seven years, Times Higher Education Rankings have ranked the National University of Science and Technology at No 376, while 3 universities have been ranked in the top 300 in the field of natural sciences.

This progress, one might suggest is significant keeping in mind that Pakistan spends only about 3% of its GDP on Education. Tremendous gender disparity further skews any quantitative analysis. The disparity has not been helped by the enforcement of a ban on female education by the Taliban, notably in the scenic Swat valley.

Indian Education System, A Chronicle of Moderate Progress

According to latest figures, the literacy rate of India stands at 64.84%; male literacy is 75.26% and female literacy stands at 53.63%. About one-third of the population, 30 million Indians, is absolute non-literates.

The government spends about 3.5% of the nation’s GDP on education. There are about 400 universities and 16000 colleges in the country, with a system of academic institutions covering technology, management, and medical sciences.

As for higher education, about 9% of Indians have a college education. The figure is about 4 times higher for urban areas. This is about 4% higher than in Pakistan; still not a huge difference.

Statistical and Other Metric Comparison | Centers of Excellence

There is hardly any difference between the two countries, statistically speaking, in their educational development, or lack thereof.

Admittedly, the literacy rate is higher in India by about 8 percentage points; the female literacy rate is about 7% higher as well. Enrolment in higher education is about 4% more overall, in India. It is still nothing compared to, say the US, which has 29% of its people with a college degree.

But where India scores much higher is in a few of its select academic institutions. These institutions raise the educational quotient of the country to a high, world class level, and by their very presence, they tend to pull up other institutes of learning simply by peer pressure.

In science and technology, there were a few institutions like the various IITs (Indian Institute of Technology) and the IISc (Indian Institute of Science) that had made a name for themselves in the world academic arena even 30 years ago. At a time when the economy was closed and the present day “economic stability” was unimaginable, these few institutions still used to bring out world-class talent.

Most of this talent had to go out of the country to establish themselves; and it was their overseas presence, that gave their alma maters global reputation.

Over time several other institutions become ‘world class’ in science and technology. IITs of India has raised the bar for various RECs (Regional College of Engineering) and the BITS Pilani institute, the Tata Institutes of Education (TIFR), and even a few state-run universities are slowly making a name for themselves in technological fields.

In the management and finance domain, the ISB is ranked number 12 among world MBA schools by the Financial Times of London. Besides, the various IIMs and a few other b-schools also rank very high. Similarly, in the medical field, the AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences) has been at the forefront in the development of medical treatment in India, and has spawned, by sheer peer pressure, a number of best of breed medical institutions.

The Situation in Pakistan

When it comes to higher education, Pakistan has not been able to make its mark. Although a few institutions (I am thinking HEJ, IBA and LUMS) can be recognized as emerging leaders – because of highly educated faculty, intelligent management, and above all an intellectually stimulating, liberal environment. But, these institutions also acquiesced to the religious zealots and allowed conservatism to slowly creep-in.

HEC has also failed – it has failed to establish centers of excellence: standards without monitoring and compliance cannot yield results. There is nothing comparable to the IITs, there is nothing comparable to the IIMs and other b-schools.

Although the statistics put Pakistan and India in very close affinity when it comes to literacy rates, Pakistani students do not have the opportunity to attend top-notch colleges/ universities

Democracy in India has provided opportunities to some who were neither generals nor feudal lords, and these middle class and lower-middle class public servants had the foresight to nurture the few higher institutes of learning.

Religious extremism has destroyed whatever institutions Pakistan had pre-Zia-ul-Haq. And, things have gotten even worse with Talibanization – a large population not willing (or afraid) to send its women to go to schools. I know it sounds cliché but it is absolutely true: when you teach a woman you teach a village.

What Pakistan Can Learn From Indian Education

Paulo Freire, a Brazilian philosopher of education, contended that given the history of European imperialism, an emancipatory education of the oppressed involves a dismantling of colonial structures and ideologies.

Independence of nation states, such as Pakistan and India, from the clutches of colonial master was not the end of the colonial culture that supported foreign, non-representative, and repressive rule of colonial power.

Independence from colonial rule was only the beginning of the process of nation building and decolonization. Pakistan, after independence, failed to establish representative and participatory governance and became a non-representative and repressive government. The dictatorial regimes in Pakistan banked on the pre-existing colonial culture and political support of colonial masters to maintain their autocratic rules.

Colonial culture is built and maintained on master-slave relationship between the ruler and the subjects. The dictatorial regime survives as long as this relationship of ordering and obeying is practiced. Master uses coercion as a tool to discipline the slaves. A slave must obey or gets whipped, this has been the law since time immemorial and it still prevails in Pakistan.

Frantz Fanon in his book “The Wretched of the Earth” demands anti-colonial and modern education for native populations. Humanistic society alone can truly be an anti-colonial society.

One can arrive at the conclusion that democracy is what Pakistan should learn from India’s somewhat success in education.

The link is Pakistani:ibrahimsajidmalick.com/tag /iit/

India is the biggest so called democracy, atleast we are not claiming that, India should learn honesty from Pakistan

 

[S3xy B0y]

India is the biggest so called democracy, atleast we are not claiming that, India should learn honesty from Pakistan

Pakistan is only honest to China.
No one else.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Pakistan is only honest to China.
No one else.

India is honest to none............ not even its millions of unprivileged people.

 

[Prometheus]

However, Pakistan has a different view. The "Pathan agitators" were not from Peshawar. Rather, they were local Kashmiris who did not want to be part of India. Furthermore, the Maharaja of Kashmir had no right to call in the Indian Army, because the Maharaja of Kashmir was not a heredity ruler. He was merely a British appointee. There had been no such position as the "Maharaja of Kashmir" prior to British rule. Finally, the agreement was that any areas more than 70% Muslim would go to Pakistan. Kashmir has more than 90% Muslims and therefore clearly should have been part of Pakistan.

I have a question.............can anyone answer my querries???????

According to Pakistanis Maharaja of Jammu was not true ruler of Kashmier as it was made by british.

So that mean true ruler should be the ruler before the Maharaja................ISNT IT CORRECT?

So we have just do is to find any surviving member of that royal family........

wait a minute ..........noone is alive..............King Duleep died long tine ago........
and her Daughter was not give any importance By Pakistanis when she came to Lahore in 1950,s..............

so can any general of King Duleep or King Ranjit singh work at his place????

 

[Jade]

^^ thats mostly because you are not a Muslim, isnt it?

That is utter nonsense, I have a classmate who is from Srinagar and a Muslim, and he considers himself as much Indian as I am or any other Indian member here.

 

[karan.1970]

India is honest to none............ not even its millions of unprivileged people.

And here it comes.. the standard off topic rant..

 

[Ammyy]

India is honest to none............ not even its millions of unprivileged people.

You are right

Thts the reason countries sharing their top end technology with us not you.

 

[AR]

India is honest to none............ not even its millions of unprivileged people.

why should be we honest to some one.....
we are honest to our self thats enough for us

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

You are right

Thts the reason countries sharing their top end technology with us not you.

Money talks....... or else.... u know wat nixon and kissenger were sayin... dont cha?

@Karan.... my post was a rant while ur s3xy boys(look at tht guys username) post was an example of indian hypocrisy?

Pakistan is only honest to China.
No one else.

Anyways.... lets not go offtopic... Bye.

 

[Ammyy]

Money talks....... or else.... u know wat nixon and kissenger were sayin... dont cha?

@Karan.... my post was a rant while ur s3xy boys(look at tht guys username) post was an example of indian 2 faced culture?

Anyways.... lets not go offtopic... Bye.

If only money talk so can China buy US defense products ????

It faith nothing else

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

If only money talk so can China buy US defense products ????

It faith nothing else

US considers china a threat?

Also i heard the american werent even giving full TOT with their fighters running for MRCA tender... Think again.

 

[Man of Thoughts]

Not India nor Pakistan

I think we should ask Kashmiris about this......

If they don't want to join Pakistan this isn't mean they are very happy with India they only got worries with you

Let them decide what they want.

I think that you are now not feared that kashmiris will join Pakistan if there is some kind of resolution in Kashmir.....You are feared of being rejected and certainly you will be ..........

 

[Ammyy]

Not India nor Pakistan

I think we should ask Kashmiris about this......

If they don't want to join Pakistan this isn't mean they are very happy with India they only got worries with you

Let them decide what they want.

I think that you are now not feared that kashmiris will join Pakistan if there is some kind of resolution in Kashmir.....You are feared of being rejected and certainly you will be ..........

Why this rant again and again
I can say same thing for lots of Pakistani areas also
But now Kashmir is purely India`s internal matter