Kashmir | News & Discussions.

toxic_pus · Feb 11, 2010

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:
The negotiations were primarily stalled on troop levels and the withdrawal conditions. The UN, through its commission, endorsed the proposal of 3000 troops on the Pakistani side and 18000 on the Indian side. Pakistan agreed, India did not.

First, Pakistan was sanctioned 6,000 troops, without armour. Second, Pakistan agreed because it had a huge number of armed and trained non-regular force, which included PA regulars as well. India would have been left grossly outnumbered, even on a proportionate basis.

The Indian excuse was that it wanted a full withdrawal of Pakistani forces - think about that without an Indian bias for a second. In a military conflict, why would any nation expect the other to unilaterally withdraw and leave open the possibility of the land being negotiated over to be occupied by the other side?

India's demand was not out of line and was very much within the ambit of the Cease Fire agreement, which required Pakistan to withdraw its military (as well as citizens and tribesmen) completely from the occupied land. India demanded that after the demilitarization, 21,000 of her troops should be left in area, with armour, while Azad Kashmir would be left with a civil force of 4,000 troops of which 2,000 should be unarmed.

Pakistan on the other hand demanded that 4,000 troops shall remain on either side, but agreed a 'slight disparity in favour of India'.

As regards, why should another country unilaterally withdraw, well, because UN required that, and Pakistan had agreed in principle. The evacuated area was to be administered by a local authority under the auspices of the Commission.

A.3 of Part II of Truce Agreement:

Pending a final solution the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission.

Edited to Add:

The core of the UN resolutions was that the dispute would be resolved through plebiscite, the demilitarization of the State was in order to allow the Kashmiris to vote in an atmosphere free of the threat of coercion and force from the military of either side. IMO India deliberately stonewalled these negotiations because she had no intent of conducting a plebiscite.

The 'core' of the UN resolutions changed with passage of time. The 'core' of the Cease Fire agreement was to immediately cease hostilities. This is recorded in the explanatory notes to the resolution. That is why Part III of the Agreement merely mentions of plebiscite and doesn't expand on it. Later it shifted to holding of plebiscite. But Sir Dixon suggested that it was meaningless to discuss plebiscite before the pre-conditions to plebiscite were not dealt with, viz. withdrawals and de-militarization. Dr Frank Graham was appointed for this purpose, who submitted 5 reports on the issue of demilitarization. UN could never proceed beyond that. Plebiscite was never at the 'core' of any discussion.

Pakistan was equally responsible for 'stonewalling' the talks. Dr Graham in his 5th report notes:

'It appears obvious that India under the two resolutions has some larger responsibilities on her side of the cease-fire line than the local authorities have in the evacuated territory on the other side of the cease-fire line.' (Para 19)

Pakistan successfully scuttled that negotiation by quoting an incredibly low figure of 4,000 armed men on either side with 'slight disparity in favour of India', knowing well that India would disagree. When Pakistan finally agreed to the figure of 21,000 troops on Indian side and 6,000 troops on Pakistan's side, they had already raised and reinforced the Azad Kashmir force, which had become a mammoth size of '80,000' men.

Jackdaws · Feb 11, 2010

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:
The tribal invasion was in response to the brutalities of the dictator Maharajah.

There was an indigenous movement for freedom by local Kashmiris against the dictator, before the tribal invasion, that was brutally suppressed by the Maharajah. Entire villages were burnt down and men, women and children massacred by the Maharajah's forces in cracking down on the rebellion against his dictatorship.

Subsequently, tens of thousands of refugees poured out of Kashmir into Pakistan. This coincided with the partition massacres and news of entire trains full of massacred Muslims arriving from India.

That is what led to the tribal force being organized to defeat the dictator Maharajah, and the subsequent low level Pakistani support for that tribal force.

Sources for this claim of "entire villages burnt down and men, women and children massacred"??? or even for the refugees?

Jackdaws · Feb 11, 2010

LOL...posessions in 9/10ths of the law. You invaded Kashmir unilaterally - we did not. You launched Operation Grand Slam / Gibraltar to annexe Indian Kashmir - we did not try any such move w.r.t. Pakistani Kashmir. You ceded park of Kashmir to China, we did not.

Hammy007 · Feb 11, 2010

what the F :woot:

you just told the forumers the biggest indian joke, congrats :tup:

maybe its time for you to compete in the indian laughter challenge

Creder · Feb 11, 2010

rpraveenkum said:
The Hindu : News / National : 'Stone-pelting turns into a ‘lucrative business’ in J&K'

'Stone-pelting turns into a lucrative business in J&K'

Police on Friday arrested a person, alleged to be the kingpin of stone-pelters in the Kashmir valley, and claimed to have found documents which suggest this has fast turned into a lucrative business for unemployed youths offering their service for a price.

Police had launched a massive drive against stone-pelters in the valley and their investigations led to a house in Bemina colony on the outskirts of the city after which they found several documents suggesting his involvement in stone-pelting business for nearly last two years, official sources said here on Friday.

The arrested person identified as Irshad Ahmed was interrogated by the police and they recovered dozens of SIM cards, threat letters, fake press identity cards, cheque books and well maintained account registers which state the expenditure for stone-pelting incidents in various parts of the valley.

The first register contained 294 names along with their photographs and mentions the details of money paid to them for their stone-pelting activities in the last one year in the downtown city, the sources said.

Police claimed to have recovered sketches of roads leading from Ganderbal to Leh, a route used by the Army personnel to maintain essential supplies to Ladakh division, they said.

Business worth lakhs of rupees is estimated to be generated through this activity.

Separatist groups, especially those owing allegiance to Pakistan-terror outfit Hizbul Mujahideen and Lashker-e-Taiba, are alleged to have formed several groups comprising a minimum of dozen people, sources in the interrogation team said.

These groups are paid an amount ranging between Rs five to eight lakh, they said, adding a part of this money is handed over to another group known as initiators who pick up stones and start pelting on police and paramilitary forces.

The groups, which are alleged to have been receiving funds from a political party as well, have stationed their people in various localities and other districts of the valley, the sources said. This could be the reason for stone-pelting incidents occurring in a synchronised manner throughout the valley during agitations and protests, they said.