Kashmir | News & Discussions.

[DavyJones]

AM - there was a lot going behind the scene in 1984. India was starting discussions on Siachen after hearing about the moutaineering expeditions. But Pak wanted to take over the area - evidence - when Indians went to buy high altitude equipment for Siachen - they found the Pakistanis were buying the same equipment from the same shop! That rang some alarm bells. The Pakistanis were intending to capture Siachen by surprise as well -I'm sure Pak soldiers of that time will back up this claim - they just got beaten to the heights. Possession is nine tenths of the law! Pak and India both know that! We kicked you out of Kargil - You tried hard in Siachen but we held on. Better move on and try dialogue. Lahore was spoiled and dialogue process stopped due to Kargil. Pak needs India to talk - you can't beat us in the battlefield - truth

 

[paritosh]

It seems through this discussion that India has no intention to end the bloodbath in Kashmir.
Respected Indian members do not tell me that you are unaware of the gross violations of basic human rights by your forces in Kashmir, do not tell me you still feel no pity for them(the Kashmiris), if you do then work to stop these violations and maybe Kashmiris will drop their demand of secession.
Simple............

two different issues...we don't support human rights violation of any kind...
there are atrocities committed by both the IA and the "freedom fighters"
as far as the ones caused by our side...yes punishment of tthe most severe kind must be dished.

 

[Hulk]

But people do not vote on a single agenda usually in domestic elections - they vote on multiple issues.

If India were to promise that if the separatists won the elections they would allow the UN to hold a referendum, then I could see the people voting in favor of a single issue.

Hard to believe that people who are waiting to get Independence from India for 60 years will not use this opprtunity to convey their message. I beleive it can be a good starting point towards resolution.

 

[Iggy]

Omar questions separatists' silence over killing of child


father in Shopian in South KashJammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah questioned the silence of separatist leaders over the barbaric killing of a three-year-old boy and his mir, terming their stand as "hypocritical".

"Why are separatist leaders silent on this issue?" Omar said while reacting to the killing of toddler Arif allegedly by militants of Hizbul Mujahideen along with his father in Shopian on Thursday.

Aslam Awam was fired upon indiscriminately by Hizbul militants and Arif was in his lap when the incident took place.

Hizbul Mujahideen were on a lookout for Aslam and had made an attempt on his life on the intervening night of April 14-15 also.

Though he managed to escape death, the militants killed his 60-year-old mother Reshma. "Where are Yasin Malik and other separatist leaders? This is the worst form of hypocritical politics", the Chief Minister said.

Omar said the situation would have been different, if the child had been accidentally killed in firing by security forces.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/omar-questions-separatists-silence-over-kil/493597/

 

[Iggy]

Where is Kashmir's conscience?

Is Kashmir's conscience dead? The answer, most definitely, seems yes. Recently, J&K CM Omar Abdullah hit the nail on its head when he lashed out at the separatists for their silence on the killing of a three-year-old by terrorists.

Why separatists alone, the whole of Kashmir should answer this question. Really, where are the protests now? Where is the Valley's anger – so visible, at the drop of a hat, all these years? Why, all of a sudden, has Kashmir forgotten to take to the streets -- stones in hands and tears in eyes? The same Kashmir, which burned with rage over the rape-cum-murder of two women in Shopian, has its eyes closed when the perpetrators of the crime are terrorists.

Don't get me wrong, no one is condoning the brutality in Shopian. Anyone who outrages the modesty of women should be punished. But what about these double standards? How about a little anger against the terrorists from across the border who have killed anywhere between 65,000 to 1,00,000 people since 1989? All in the name of freedom?

In an indirect attack on the separatists at a function in Srinagar, Omar said: "They prominently organize marches and give ‘chalo calls' to highlight violation of human rights...These elements resort to politics of hypocrisy." Fairness, morality and respect for human rights demand these elements should raise same voice whenever terrorists kill civilians, he said.

Bang on, Mr Abdullah. Or do human rights apply to terrorists alone? Maybe. The Shopian incident has resulted in prolonged protests. At the same time, the killings by terrorists have continued unabated. They, of course, go unnoticed. Why this anger against security forces and cops only? Against those same security men who, away from their families, are risking their lives to protect Kashmir? Why no thought before damaging public property, before attacking the people who are there to protect them?

The suffering doesn't seem to end. Repeated terror attacks have happened in Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore. No point mentioning which country these attacks are coming from. And all in the name of Kashmir. It's time the same Kashmir lent the country a hand. It's time the same Kashmir raised its voice as loud and clear as it raises it against the security forces.

Quite aptly, Omar's comments came on a day when SC questioned the Jammu & Kashmir High Court's order to arrest police officers for their alleged involvement in Shopian rape-cum-murder. The court also rapped the high court for its direction that the bail plea of the accused cops be filed only before it. The SC Bench said: “Anybody can be arrested. Anybody who has nothing to do with this case can be arrested. What material was there for arrest? Even now, they (state) have been unable to produce the material."

With power comes responsibility. If some jawans and policemen were involved in a heinous crime, they shouldn't go unpunished. But in no civilised society should action be guided by agitation and protests. And in the meantime, it's time for Kashmir as well to show some responsibility. And for our politicians to shed some hypocrisy.

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Free-Kick/entry/where-is-kashmir-s-conscience2

 

[Iggy]

So much for innocent freedom fighters..still any one claims they are freedom fighters???cold blood terrorists coming across the border..it also very much establishes that those separatists leaders were on a pay roll of Pakistan

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM - there was a lot going behind the scene in 1984. India was starting discussions on Siachen after hearing about the moutaineering expeditions. But Pak wanted to take over the area - evidence - when Indians went to buy high altitude equipment for Siachen - they found the Pakistanis were buying the same equipment from the same shop! That rang some alarm bells. The Pakistanis were intending to capture Siachen by surprise as well -I'm sure Pak soldiers of that time will back up this claim - they just got beaten to the heights. Possession is nine tenths of the law! Pak and India both know that! We kicked you out of Kargil - You tried hard in Siachen but we held on. Better move on and try dialogue. Lahore was spoiled and dialogue process stopped due to Kargil. Pak needs India to talk - you can't beat us in the battlefield - truth

There really is no credible confirmation from multiple sources of the 'Pakistan was buying suits from the same supplier' story. But the general point is that India had concerns over Pakistani actions, and should have under the Simla agreement chosen to raise the issue diplomatically and clear the air.

It did not do so and instead militarily occupied Siachen. Whatever excuses you use to justify that occupation, the fact is that India resorted to military force first and therefore violated Simla.

In kargil we didn't really try - we had, for the most part, a few hundred at most largely unsupported troops and militants, while the Indian military applied all of their military might to dislodge them, and even then most posts were in control of Pakistan and vacated by Pakistan following the decision by the GoP, and were not overrun by the Indian Military.

Siachen remains a more equally matched contest in that both sides are using whatever they have available openly.

As for dialog, it is not Pakistan that has refused to engage in negotiations on conducting a plebiscite in various formulations (all of J&K or parts of it etc.).

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Hard to believe that people who are waiting to get Independence from India for 60 years will not use this opprtunity to convey their message. I beleive it can be a good starting point towards resolution.

It wont be a good starting point because a separatist win in elections does nothing to advance the demand for a plebiscite, unless India accepts in principle that it will trigger a UN supervised referendum if the separatists win.

The GoI and most Indians realize that if given the choice Kashmiris will not choose India, that is why they refuse to hold a UN monitored plebiscite. So to argue that the separatists need to win an election to somehow 'show Indians' something is a canard. If you don't believe that the Kashmiris don't harbor separatist sentiment then why is India resisting a simple resolution to such a long festering international dispute and insurgency?

 

[deckingraj]

But people do not vote on a single agenda usually in domestic elections - they vote on multiple issues.

If India were to promise that if the separatists won the elections they would allow the UN to hold a referendum, then I could see the people voting in favor of a single issue.

What are you talking about AM...Every election is boycotted by Hurriyat and appeal is made to public for not voting(so far only three of their leaders participated in election with Sajjad Lone loosing in 2009)...Still if people come out and vote at a percentage which is even more than Delhi..Mumbai and other parts then what all we can infer from that??? I have few options which vary from absurd to somewhat logical.. Please have a pick and suggest why you think so???

- People are voting because they have no choice(though they can choose not to vote)
- People are voting because they want to merge with Pakistan
- People are voting becuase they want independent Kashmir
- People are voting because they want to stay with India
- People want a change. People don't care if they stay with India-Pak-Independet. All they want is better and secure future...Indian electoral gives them an opportunity to have a say and choose what they want for Kashmir(though obviously within the constituion of India)

To me the last option sounds logical...

P.S: It would be naive of me to suggest that there are no factions of people who vary from the desire to have Independent Kashmir...merge with Pakistan...Stay with India...However i strongly believe larger chunk don't give a **** and want economic progress...

 

[Fireurimagination]

Why are Indians so insistent on occupying a people and their land? Is this occupation not precisely what you struggled for against the British?

Your government and your leadership swore repeatedly to grant the Kashmiris the right to self determination, accepted the UNSC resolutions outlining that particular solution - do Indians not see the least bit of moral bankruptcy in violating that promise and occupying a people?

That's what I am saying Agno, for argument sake let's us accept India is occupying Kashmir illegally etc etc, how is then Pakistan any different than India, isn't it also holding on to Kashmir illegally, why can't Pakistan go for a referendum in azad Kashmir and make it in to an independent country? All I am saying is when it comes to Kashmir we are no different i.e. India and Pakistan

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That's what I am saying Agno, for argument sake let's us accept India is occupying Kashmir illegally etc etc, how is then Pakistan any different than India, isn't it also holding on to Kashmir illegally, why can't Pakistan go for a referendum in azad Kashmir and make it in to an independent country? All I am saying is when it comes to Kashmir we are no different i.e. India and Pakistan

That is not true - Pakistan and India are not the same on the Kashmir issue. Pakistan very clearly points out that it wants the Kashmiris in some formulation to be given the right to self-determination, while the Indians refuse.

We are for settling the dispute whereas India is for perpetuating the status quo and leaving Kashmiris and Kashmir divided.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What are you talking about AM...Every election is boycotted by Hurriyat and appeal is made to public for not voting(so far only three of their leaders participated in election with Sajjad Lone loosing in 2009)...Still if people come out and vote at a percentage which is even more than Delhi..Mumbai and other parts then what all we can infer from that??? I have few options which vary from absurd to somewhat logical.. Please have a pick and suggest why you think so???

- People are voting because they have no choice(though they can choose not to vote)
- People are voting because they want to merge with Pakistan
- People are voting becuase they want independent Kashmir
- People are voting because they want to stay with India
- People want a change. People don't care if they stay with India-Pak-Independet. All they want is better and secure future...Indian electoral gives them an opportunity to have a say and choose what they want for Kashmir(though obviously within the constituion of India)

To me the last option sounds logical...

P.S: It would be naive of me to suggest that there are no factions of people who vary from the desire to have Independent Kashmir...merge with Pakistan...Stay with India...However i strongly believe larger chunk don't give a **** and want economic progress...

You touch on the point I am making, though you draw somewhat different conclusions from it.

After 60 years of no progress, with India showing no sign of movement towards self-determination, the average kashmiri would vote on local issues of jobs, development etc, and not on a single separatist agenda. For the average kashmiri, how would voting in separatists change anything given India's blatant refusal to implement its promise of self-determination?

Only a referendum on choosing between India and Pakistan can resolve that issue, and Indian fears of where Kashmiri loyalties lie is precisely why India continues to refuse to allow self-determination. If you have so much faith in kashmiri loyalty to India, then why is the easiest means to resolving this international dispute and normalizing and dramatically changing the landscape of South Asia not being implemented?

 

[SSG VIPER]

That's what I am saying Agno, for argument sake let's us accept India is occupying Kashmir illegally etc etc, how is then Pakistan any different than India, isn't it also holding on to Kashmir illegally, why can't Pakistan go for a referendum in azad Kashmir and make it in to an independent country? All I am saying is when it comes to Kashmir we are no different i.e. India and Pakistan

Okay give me a simple answer
do kashmiris like u hindu indians ??
How many kashmiris are in ur army???
Why anti indi protests??
Why pro PAKISTAN RALLIES???
Why u have more then half a million troops in kashmir???
NOWLETS COME TO UR FAKE BASELESS AND ABSURD ACCUSATIONS ABOUT PAKISTAN
Have u ever heard of Anti Pakistan protest??
Have u ever heard of freedom or seperatist movement in AZAQD KASHMIR??
Does PAKISTAN HAVE SUCH A LARGE MILITARY PRESENCE IN AZAD KASHMIR\???
Any Murder or rapes by army in AZAD KASHMIR????????
Do u know about KASHMIRIS IN PAKISTAN ARMY????? AZAD KASHMIR REGIMENTS AND HOW MANY ARE IN PAK ARMY??????
If u havent then u should go and shut the bloody hell up and take ur kind out of OUR KASHMIR AND GET BLOODY LOST///////
FREE KASHMIR
GREATER PAKISTAN

 

[abbasniazi]

Kashmiris are by nature and geography Pakistanis, and the denial of this fact by india has provoked the hatred in both countries.

 

[DavyJones]

hmm.. AM fair points - just one concern -
1. Why was Pakistan hiding behind militants, freedom fighters in Kargil all the time? When it were troops from the NLI only and no militants (you have to agree on this -no lies on this one - no militants can operate at 4000m - mountain warfare specialists are required) India never said Siachen was occupied by "militants" it did so openly. Why did'nt Pak come out openly and say this is payback for Siachen!
My hypothesis - Siachen incursion is debatable - no one in the right. Pak by crossing LoC is definitely wrong - so it denied it!