Kashmir | News & Discussions.

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM, We have discussed a lot on this issue earlier but Alas! we still meet again on the same issue.

I am still waiting for any mail, gazetier or documents which has been send by Kashmiris to newly built Pakistan for merging with them. If you have then please share with us otherwise what so ever Tribal army did on your say was illegal.

What the Maharajah was doing, open discrimination and atrocities against Muslim residents that sparked a local rebellion against the dictator, was criminal. The Tribal invasion was spurred by those events in Kashmir, along with the recognition that a dictator willing to commit such oppression and atrocities against residents on the basis of their religion, would never listen to the 'voice of Muslims' in making the decision on accession.

The reports of the Maharajah's atrocities and oppression of local Muslim residents before and through 1947 have been documented by some Indian authors as well.

Regarding Hyderabad, Junagarh, Kashmir from our side or NWFP (yes I count that), Balochistan (Kalat), If you take a rational approach, then these all are due to flawed dissection of British India. Infact many areas in Punjab and Bengal were also flawed. The point was While Pakistan was denoted as nation for Muslims then there can't be a proper diversion of India. Reason was that, India was full of Hindus and Muslims in many areas including princely states hence diversion of its become many islandic type country (Lesotho around South Africa type).

Then another Second flawed part was to distribute area or selection of princely states based on religion. When all Indian Muslims dont want to migrate how come this logic is valid? If being Muslim only would be a criteria for a state to merge with any of the nation then I believe UP and Bihar would have been Pakistan rather than migrating many people in East and West Pakistan in comparison to Pakistan. If liking of a leader would be a choice then NWFp would be in India due to very good relations between Frontier & Indian Gandhi.

If Princely state sign is a problem then same goes with Kalat as well whose ruler wants to go with Pakistan but rest want an independant contry.

So rather than discussing all states mentioned above, lets focus on Kashmir and leave those points for general public to curse each other.

The accession of the NWFP was to be determined through plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of the voters (98% I believe) voted in favor of Pakistan. There is nothing to argue there, and you can read more details on the plebiscite in a thread on 'NWFP referendum' in the Military History section.

The Khan of Kalat did in fact accede to Pakistan, as did the rulers of various other States that formed the current province of Baluchistan. The rulers of Jungadh and Hyderabad did not accede to India and the former in fact acceded to Pakistan, so your attempt to contrast Indian invasions and occupations of those two States with NWFP and Baluchistan is invalid.

The point remains that Indian aggression against the States of Jungadh and Hyderabad (the former before the tribal invasion of Kashmir in fact) means India protestations against Pakistani military action in Kashmir and the argument that the Maharajah of Kashmir's accession to India makes it an 'integral part of India' are complete baloney and hypocritical.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

BTW, many posts have been deleted for off topic/trolling and personal attacks (primarily against Hawkish). I would recommend you check to see if your post was one of those deleted, because bans will follow with the next similar infractions.

 

[shekhar]

Pakistan already lost a lot of its territory in 1971, we are not willing to lose an inch more. Besides Azad Kashmir is very important to Pakistan strategically, it connects Pakistan to China. We will never give up that part of Kashmir.

If only India Occupied Kashmir becomes independent that can also be a problem for Pakistan especially in Azad Kashmir. Also I doubt that neighbouring nuclear powers will let India Occupied Kashmir stay an independent sovereign country.




We should let the people of Kashmir decide that in a referendum that was promised to them by the world in 1948.



According to UN resoultions, theres only 2 choices for Kashmiris, either be part of Pakistan or India. No independent option was passed in the United Nations and Pakistan will never agree on an independent option sorry.

If you are a Muslim Kashmiri you should want to be with Muslim majority Pakistan. Notice Hindus want to be India, sad that some Kashmiri Muslims want to divide the Ummah even more than it already is.

bold part thats not true muslim majority bangladesh separated from pak and if you say that it was because of india then u r wrong germany was divided by two superpowers and after 50 yeras wen they had chance to decide they became one country
india left bangladesh after war but still i dont c bangladesh as part of pakistan i believe they really wanted to separate from pak
it was an example to prove your bold part wrong
personally i believe that kashmiri have right to decide and if you talf about freedom they why only two option , choices should be india pakistan or separate country and i m 100% sure it will be separate country but being indian we will never allow that
as per my understanding GOI is will just lingering the process till become very strong player on world map i believe 2030 - 2035 india will be 3rd largest economy no country will dare to loose such a big trade partner and by that time petroleum will be about to finish from world so islamic countries will loose there importance (anyways today with petroleum all OPEC countries enjoying there money they are least bothered about any other muslim country in world example Palestine )
this is also a very good approach by GOI then we can mount huge international pressure on pak to accept LOC as internation border and about kashmiri freedom fighter they will die slowly with india growing economically (example china looks like no one in china is bothered about democracy beacuse they are busy in making money )

 

[shekhar]

What the Maharajah was doing, open discrimination and atrocities against Muslim residents that sparked a local rebellion against the dictator, was criminal. The Tribal invasion was spurred by those events in Kashmir, along with the recognition that a dictator willing to commit such oppression and atrocities against residents on the basis of their religion, would never listen to the 'voice of Muslims' in making the decision on accession.

The reports of the Maharajah's atrocities and oppression of local Muslim residents before and through 1947 have been documented by some Indian authors as well.


The accession of the NWFP was to be determined through plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of the voters (98% I believe) voted in favor of Pakistan. There is nothing to argue there, and you can read more details on the plebiscite in a thread on 'NWFP referendum' in the Military History section.

The Khan of Kalat did in fact accede to Pakistan, as did the rulers of various other States that formed the current province of Baluchistan. The rulers of Jungadh and Hyderabad did not accede to India and the former in fact acceded to Pakistan, so your attempt to contrast Indian invasions and occupations of those two States with NWFP and Baluchistan is invalid.

The point remains that Indian aggression against the States of Jungadh and Hyderabad (the former before the tribal invasion of Kashmir in fact) means India protestations against Pakistani military action in Kashmir and the argument that the Maharajah of Kashmir's accession to India makes it an 'integral part of India' are complete baloney and hypocritical.

i agree with you if kings decision matters then hyderabad and junagarh should be part of pak and kashmir part of india and if public opinion matters the these two should be part of india and kashmir goes to pak but india being a bigger country took advantage of oppurtunity (any country will do that) point is what happened in past leave it in past think what can be done to make future better i am sure that if GOI is doing anything in Baluchistan it will stop it the moment pak stops supporting terrorism in india accept LOC as internatinal border you have 1/3d of kashmir be happy with that if india is ready to accept LOC as border then why pak shouldnt do it
once kashmir issue is resolved we can move to other issues
pak claims that water flos from india to pak so india has advantage to check india in water front pak can let flow gas and petroleum from pak to india thus there will be a deadlock india wont be able to check pak and pak wont be able to check india and plus pak will get millions in rent only without investing a penny
similarly we can start trading in multiple fields i know that more that 80% pak population will not support terrorism in india its only 10 to 15 % but its in our country also
to be very frank and no offence but all pakistani rulers they lacked farsightedness while in india i c situation bit better compared to pak
if a man feels insecure he will get a dog for security not lion , because one day lion will kill him , india opted for dog for its security (indian military) pak opted lion (pak army) and ultimately your lion ate your country why am i bringing this in kashmir discussion is that any democratic country will fav democratic country over military rule when they have to decide about kashmir and this point pak lost the battle big time

 

[karan.1970]

Nonsense - had Pakistani forces not taken the territory Pakistan currently administers, India would have gobbled up the entire area as it is trying to do now with IOK.

Though I believe this logic is pure Conjecture on your part, but even in this situation, the case for a plebiscite would have been much stronger without the dispute of Pakistan having not fulfilled its plebiscite obligations.

Look at what India did in the Princely States of Junagadh and Hyderabad after all. In the former case the ruler acceded to Pakistan, yet India continued to support destabilization in the territory and eventually invaded and occupied the State. The same in the case of Hyderabad, where the ruler was leaning towards Pakistan or Independence, but India invaded and occupied the territory before a decision on accession or independence could be made.

Arguement point aside, both you and I know that geographical realities in the 2 areas you mention were very different from the state of Kashmir and hence the 3 are not comparable. Or else why doesnt a Kashmir like situation exist there today.

Given the above Indian actions, and the apathy of the world towards the Kashmir cause in general, there is nothing to substantiate the POV that a lack of Pakistani military action would have placed the Kashmir cause for self-determination in a stronger position.

Certainly it would have, if nothing else, more than now, because in that case the whole world and even India would know that Pakistan did not invade first. Right now, legalities of accession support India's POV. In the case Pakistan did not attack the state of Kashmir illegally, leading to maharaja signing the accession document, India would not have had any legal standing on the matter.

And even today, the indegenous Kashmiri movement (if one exists) is so damn diluted by the vested interest of Pakistani land grab, that its invisible to the world.

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

Omar supports interlocutors; says Pak cannot be ignored​

Reiterating his support to the Centre appointed interlocutors, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said Pakistan has a role in bringing peace to the Valley.

Supporting Centre-appointed interlocutors for their comments on involving Pakistan, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Monday said the neighbouring country has a role in Jammu and Kashmir which cannot be ignored.

“Nothing what the interlocutors had said with regard to Pakistan’s role in Jammu and Kashmir is wrong. After Shimla Agreement whenever talks were held with Pakistan, Kashmir has figured in it,” he told reporters here.

Parliament had passed a resolution in 1995 calling for withdrawal of Pakistani troops from ***, Mr. Omar said on the sidelines of a function here.

“Rightly or wrongly, is it not making Pakistan a party? Pakistan has a role in Jammu and Kashmir. How can you ignore it?” asked the Chief Minister.

Reacting to BJP criticism of Dileep Padgaonkar, head of the interlocutors’ team, for his comments, Mr. Omar said it was their habit to create an issue by listening to half the story.

“(Then Prime Minister Atal Bihari) Vajpayee went to Lahore and spoke about resolution of Kashmir,” he said.

On Sunday, the BJP slammed Mr. Padgaonkar for his comments on involving Pakistan in resolution of the Kashmir issue and demanded the PMO to clarify if this was part of the brief of the team.

Mr. Padgaonkar had stuck to his remarks saying what he had said about Pakistan was “obvious” and there was nothing new.

The Hindu : News / National : Omar supports interlocutors; says Pak cannot be ignored

 

[MYSTIC]

Manufacturing requires the following:

Technology
Capital (meaning Money)
Land
People

India has a problem of not having good labour which is disciplined and hard working.....The managers are fine but the workers are not. This impacts productivity and costs

India lags ability to produce 'low' to medium tech products as they are labour intensive and as in earliar point..its a problem

Land is the MOST DIFFICULT resource to acquire for manufacturing unless you have deep pockets, patience and connections to evict people if required.

Capital is nowadays least of the worries...but if you were an entrepreneur try raising the capital for a middle sized manufacturing outfit...

Now to performance..India exports about USD 200 Billion worth of goods and China about USD 1300 Billion...where's the comparison? I dont see any. Lets compare to South Korea. Thats more apt.

GOI tried to build SEZs for each vertical and thats failed as they have become land grabbing and money laundering tools.The only manufacturing thats worked is pure private enterprise dependent on foreign tech(atleast initially) and Indian managerial workers...eg Auto.

As far as land is concerned, it should be understood that 2/3 of China is mountainous and largely uninhabited. Most of the population and industries are found in the remaining 1/3 of the country. This makes it roughly the size of India. Owing to larger population than ours land is a graver issue in China than in India.

Regarding the managers, the best brains go to the service sector. No one wants to work in industries outside the city. Therefore, in most cases you have to use managers from smaller towns with decent bit of education. Semi-skilled and unskilled labor are found in plenty (in Gujrat and Maharashtra a lot of them come from UP and Bihar).

Capital will be problem if you do not have a bright idea. If you have a great idea and even better connections, you can raise plenty of money from the market.

There are two reasons why Chinese are better in foreign trade
1) Indian manufacturers greed
2) Chinese government export promotion

Even I was hoping for the SEZ's to work but sadly it just became a pipe dream in most states.

 

[Avatar]

Hawkish, I'm still awaiting your expert opinion on Aksai Chin.

 

[ChinaRocks]

You mean you would be worried if India were to ban these companies in reality. Good to know.

Remember the chinese telecom fiasco?india crying like little baby and the end result ? business as usual for huawei...lol
cheers to all my indian friends

 

[Patriot]

Crying appears to be a favorite pass time hobby of India.So much for peaceful country.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Is our Govt using P.O.K as an excuse to keep Chinese companies out?

I remember reading an article in ET about how Dong Feng electronics is gobbling up traditional BHEL market and customers.

 

[ChinaRocks]

Exactly why and how does India need China? The balance of trade between the two is heavily skewed in China's favor anyway which implies that India buys more Chinese products than vice versa. We are aware that the bulk of Chinese imports are cheap and unreliable low tech stuff. Therefore, a selective ban on non essential Chinese imports will definitely not hurt us, it may instead bring relief to many small scale industries feeling the pinch due to Chinese competition.

Regarding, China being made to take into account Indian sensibilities, by all means. How can they do business with us in India while hurting our interests elsewhere? No country can do that and expect to get away.

Gosh you think for a mere $50 billion trade china gonna listening to u india?Believe me if it gonna hurt china you indians would have done it long time no go

 

[oct605032048]

Yes we need Chinese Investment...but more than that... China needs markets for its economic well being and growth. Markets such as India are few...there are many countries that can fill the shoes of China in investment in India; however the reverse is not true

Markets such as India are few?

Come back to earth man. Even small state such as Skorea got almost the same size of economy compare to that of india. Economic tit for tat is a lose-lose strategy, so China will not start it, But how can China be intimidated by such tricks of india while they are playing the game that even Japan is not qualified to take part in.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

We want to know if it is acceptable to vaporize them instantly or should we accord them the privilege of appearing before a court system et al

well being an American, don't you apply an ''innocent until proven guilty'' approach and framework?

or are the rules changing?

Perhaps, the governments should make a PR argument by simply vaporizing these groups, so it sends a strong message to wannabes and future trouble makers? Or maybe the governments should work together and setup a global fund to eliminate terrorism wherever it and whatever guise it is? ]

you'd be naive to think that the threat of terrorism can be wished away, or that, despite measures being taken, it will vanish overnight

by the way, those Mexican drug cartels you've got along the border --those are your biggest internal security threat; not some Kashmiri 'outfit' that never even attacked your country or its citizens

i heard about what's happening in Arizona!

 

[StingRoy]

Markets such as India are few?

Come back to earth man. Even small state such as Skorea got almost the same size of economy compare to that of india. Economic tit for tat is a lose-lose strategy, so China will not start it, But how can China be intimidated by such tricks of india while they are playing the game that even Japan is not qualified to take part in.

It is not just the size of the economy, it is the amount of money that is being invested in infrastructure projects. Developed nations have already well established infrastructure and hence their spending amounts will be lesser compared to developing economies. This is not about intimidation, it is about playing by the rules set by India.