What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
My GOP never shown any childish blackmailing attitude to Google for calling Kashmir disputed area and not part of Pakistan.

:azn::azn: we are very fair. We wish Kashmir for Kashmiris as their country

Really? Then why on earth did GoP insist on removing 'independece' as an option for kashmiris in case of a referendum.

I'm sure you ARE aware that according to UN res. there's no such thing as 'independence' in the options. There's India and there's pakistan.

And it was your GoP which got this independence option excluded!

Where did this 'wish for free kashmir' go then? :coffee:

Let's accept it Jana, nobody is a saint here.

Your GoP/Army acts on cold-hearted interests and so does my GoI/Army
 
Exactly, and we will not think twice before killing or dying for that.

In that case you should have made your intentions clear to the Kashmiris before your leadership promised them the right to self-determination to decide their status as part of India or Pakistan, and then further committed to that position through committing to the UNSC resolutions.

Claiming 'integrity' by denying Kashmiris the right to self-determination, which India herself chose to argue was the primary means of determining accession, through her invasion and annexation of the State of Jungadh over a month after it had acceded to Pakistan, and which your own leadership promised them and committed to, is dishonest to say the least.
 
In that case you should have made your intentions clear to the Kashmiris before your leadership promised them the right to self-determination to decide their status as part of India or Pakistan, and then further committed to that position through committing to the UNSC resolutions.

1971 Shimla accord (which Pakistan agreed to) usurps the UN plebiscite mandate, so there is no point bringing up an obsolete UN resolution.

Claiming 'integrity' by denying Kashmiris the right to self-determination, which India herself chose to argue was the primary means of determining accession, through her invasion and annexation of the State of Jungadh over a month after it had acceded to Pakistan, and which your own leadership promised them and committed to, is dishonest to say the least.

That is your POV and you are entitled to it. I am sure annexation of Junagarh has been discussed multiple times in this forum before, bringing that in here is only going to confound the discussion.
 
In that case you should have made your intentions clear to the Kashmiris before your leadership promised them the right to self-determination to decide their status as part of India or Pakistan, and then further committed to that position through committing to the UNSC resolutions.

Claiming 'integrity' by denying Kashmiris the right to self-determination, which India herself chose to argue was the primary means of determining accession, through her invasion and annexation of the State of Jungadh over a month after it had acceded to Pakistan, and which your own leadership promised them and committed to, is dishonest to say the least.

and what about your GoP which insisted that 'independence' be excluded as an option in any referendum if it were ever to take place.

For rest of your post, since this is not the appropriate thread, I suggest you check my posts on the 'future of kashmir' thread on the last few pages.

AM, why do I always have to keep repeating myself.

Why do you guys behave as if you are 'doodh ke dhule' and we are evils.

Truth is, you are as much at fault as we are, if not more.

Accept it buddy, hamam mein sab nange hain. Nobody is a saint here.

Don't be emotional mate. It never helps while solving problems, be them of mathematics or foreign policy.
 
^^^ I see google demarcating J&K as disputed, along with Arunachal Pradesh:

pakistan - Google Maps

And stick to the topic and mind your language everyone
Google is clever I tell you. It simply doesn't comment on the whole issue and when you cry it appeases you for business and when we do the same, it appeases us too. :lol:
 
Yaar you'll be surprised how simple it became once mushy realised the ground reality. Trust me we were inches away from solving kashmir when Mushy was thrown out.

Mush was thrown out because of more than just Kashmir. Kasmir will never be easy for India and Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
I know, and you can blame uncle sam and Ghaddari for that one!

I don't believe in blame games mate.

To blame someone one has to be clean oneself. And boy how clean we south asians are!

I'm an optimist.

right not GoI is pretty unsure if talking to current zardari govt. will actually be fruitful or not. Simple hai yaar, kashmir will be solved only when army calls the shots in pakistan. Zardari or gilani neither have the army's sanction nor the public's support for solving something as BIG as kashmir.

GoI is, hence, merely buying time. MMS wants peace yes, but he also knows that talking to the current pusillanimous govt. of Pakistan is futile. MMS wants to talk to the real players, not the puppets.
 
I'll post all my posts in future of kashmir thread over here. As it is, I believe my posts have become overshadowed by usual troll kiddies from both india and Pakistan.


MY POST NO.1

India kabhi kashmir nahin chhodega.

Kyun?

1. Hamare north India kee kai lifeline rivers kasmir se nikalti hain. Jinnah said "Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular". Well, kashmir is our jugular too. Water alone is a reason strategic enough to make us kill or die for kashmir.

2. Hamne jis din kashmir chhoda, us din har tom, dick and harry will raise a shout for a seperate state. India was founded on the very principle of 'unity in diversity'. That principle will be negated and then it'll be impossible for GoI to suppress voices of silly dissent.

3. Kahmiris are themselves divided about what they want. Jammu and Ladakh have no grudges whatsoever. It's only a few people in the valley who have a problem.

4. In modern world big and powerful nations do not permit redrawing of boundaries so easily. USSR case was different. They broke up from inside. Not as a result of any foreign aggression.

SO WHAT's THE SOLUTION?

mujhe sirf ek hee realistic solution dikhta hai,

India apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). Pakistan apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). LoC will be made irrelevant permitting people to people contact just like in a single state. In short, kashmir will be united but under firm control of India and Pakistan.

A few modalities of the arrangement (such as seperate flag, constitution, currency etc.) can be worekd out. The three subjects Defence, Foreign Policy and communication will be controlled by India and Pakistan in their respective parts of the state.

It will be a very complex and detailed solution which will require huge concessions from both India and Pakistan.

And trust me guys India and Pakistan were willing to accept this very solution during talks between Mushy and MMS.

In the end,

India: happy because it controls the water, the land validating the 'unity in diversity' principle

Pakistan: happy because it gives them legitimate control of their part of kashmir in an internationally recognised way. Promised better relations with India, access to Indian market and what not. Just think about the economic opportunity it will bring for Pakistan.

Kashmiris: happy because it will give them the seperate identity they are seeking while getting economic benefits from both India and Pakistan.

Trust me friends, isse zyada kisi bhi party (India, Pakistan or Kashmiris) ko kuch nahin mil sakta.

Yahi ek solution bacha hai. Pasand hai toh accept karo. Nahin pasand.....well.....toh 63 saal se toh hum dekh hee rahe hain...........

MY POST NO.2


Jiski laathi uski bhains.

I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!

As of now, pakistan is in no position whatsoever (either internally or externally) to enforce its will on India.

MY POST NO. 3

who says India wants p0K back? P0K is a bargaining chip. Whenever u raise Indian kashmir, we'll raise Pakistan Occupied Kashmir!

The part of kashmir that is strategically most important is firmly under India's control and isn't going anywhere.

MY POST NO. 4


Let me elaborate my point

first and foremost, I accept, that India has made mistakes when it comes to kashmir. We're all humans, we are not infallible. We made mistakes.

1. We should never have taken it to UNSC
2. We should have given kashmiris full autonomy they were promised at the time of accession to India

Apart from these two we made small mistakes here and here but mostly matters were beyond our control since after 1989, Pakistan involved itself into kashmir by supporting the insurgency etc. (we all know what followed). What GoI did after that was an after effect and not a proactive policy.

We HAD TO deploy army after 1989. There was none earlier

And my dear friend, let's accept it, an army is a very lethal weapon and when employed to control populations or revolts, there are bound to be human rights violations. A case in point being the Pakistan army whose genocide in east pakistan is well documented. (please use google, I could post genuine videos from CBS, NBC etc. but this is not the thread)

So there have been human rights violations. Now after 1989, seperatists also arose and hence became another angle of the problem.

Years went by and things continued like this. Slowly and slowly, people got fed up with all this violence which ruined their lives and what stone pelters you are seeing now are those youth who are disgruntled because all their lives they have seen only violence and bloodshed.

In the meantime, India started becoming economically stronger. This increased our influence in world affairs and now we are heard all over the world.

To cut long story short, there will be two aspects of solution as far as India is concerned.

1. External aspect:- This will be vis a vis Pakistan and for this solution you can refer to my earlier post.

2. Internal aspect:- This will be direct fallout of the external settlement with pakistan. India will grant autonomy (bordering azaadi) and kashmiris will have to be content with the prospects of being associated with a rising star called India.

One very important part which people often don't talk about is the will of the kashmiris is itself very divided.

In short,

Jammu and ladakh don't want to have anything to do with any prospect that alienates them with india. They are integral parts of india in true sense of the word. They will never...never ever agree to leaving India neither for joining pakistan nor for independence.

That leaves us with people in and around kashmir valley. Like I said, they will have to tone down somewhere as will India and Pakistan.

All three, India, Pakistan and Kashmiris of the valley will have to make concessions.

A referendum is not possible for two reasons:

1. It goes directly against our interest.
2. jammu and ladakh wil never...never ever...want to leave India. So a referendum will leave kashmiris divided which they themselves do not want.

"Kisi ko mukammal jahan nahin milta, kisi ko zameen toh kisi ko asmaan nahin milta"

All of us will have to make concessions. That's the only way forward.

Trust me, none of us can go beyond this. So let's move forward.

MY POST NO. 5

The new Pak army establishment has taken a harder line as compared to Musharraf. Now, to be frank, India is simply buying time. Once the realisation that dawned upon Mushy, makes its way to the current PA establishment, the issue will be resolved in days. MMS is very very eager to bury this issue before leaving office. Trust me on this!

MY POST NO. 6


And what about the free will of over a billion Indians?

Let's accept it. No body is a saint here. Neither am I, nor are you.

There's no such thing as free will when it comes to nations protecting their interests. The stand of pakistan "AWWWW...Poor Kahmiris, look Cruel India is killing them, suppressing them." is utter bullshit.

It's a game of chess, a game of cold-hearted interplay of interests and interests only. Here governments are the players and common man is the pawn. Like it always happens everywhere.

Pakistan has no more affinity to kashmiri people than it had towards east pakistanis. That's solely the reason why Pakistan actually insisted that independence be excluded as an option if and when a referendum occurs. DO answer my question, why did pakistan insist that independence not be made an option? Where did this free will go then?

100 baaton kee ek baat. Pakistan wants kashmir for it's own interest. India wants kashmir for its own interest. We have reached a deadlock. Dialogue is the only solution and that too of only one kind is possible. For that, you may refer to my earlier posts.

Problems are not solved by being emotional my friend. An emotional doctor only kills the patient!
 
I don't believe in blame games mate.

To blame someone one has to be clean oneself. And boy how clean we south asians are!

I'm an optimist.

right not GoI is pretty unsure if talking to current zardari govt. will actually be fruitful or not. Simple hai yaar, kashmir will be solved only when army calls the shots in pakistan. Zardari or gilani neither have the army's sanction nor the public's support for solving something as BIG as kashmir.

GoI is, hence, merely buying time. MMS wants peace yes, but he also knows that talking to the current pusillanimous govt. of Pakistan is futile. MMS wants to talk to the real players, not the puppets.

I'm an optimist.

I was too until a year ago.. nothing will change...
 
Losing the Idea of India

Sometimes alienation can be addressed the usual way. Sometimes not. In this rather special case, maybe it’s time to begin all over again: by listening

6474.6462article-kashmir-moneyillusion.jpg


A thought provoking article. I can not but agree to the bolded part and hope a constructive discussion happens over it.

At the height of terrorism in Punjab, KPS Gill is said to have remarked that it was a battle between Jutt Sikhs. As a Jutt Sikh—those who sneer at such categorisation live in an India that exists only in their imagination—I can only add that Punjab is still part of the Indian State because there were an overwhelming number of Jutt Sikhs who felt that the Idea of India was worth defending.

For this very reason, the years of terror in Punjab left me with disdain for the movement’s fellow travellers in Delhi. Many of them used the rhetoric of ‘Rights’ in defence of AK-47 wielding murderers. This language in the guise of liberalism managed to hide the truth about fundamentalism even as Punjab moved on with a full realisation of the disaster that had been averted. But today, in the context of Kashmir, I cannot but agree with the same people who I believe were so wrong about Punjab.

The difference between the two situations goes back to the question of why so many Jutt Sikhs had and continue to have a stake in the Idea of India. For many of them, the attachment to the idea was pragmatic, it offered material prosperity, but for others such as me it was the attraction of an inclusive idea of India, however imperfectly realised, over any refuge of the faithful where those not of the faith would be second class citizens.

The different histories of Punjab and Kashmir have ensured that very few Kashmiri Muslims feel so. It can be argued whether the fault lies with the Indian State or Kashmiri Muslims, but surely no community can arrive at a feeling of belongingness on its own.

This is why we have jawans of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) recruited from Bihar and UP facing Kashmiri youth on the streets of Srinagar. India could not be the villain in Punjab if Jutt Sikhs were fighting Jutt Sikhs. In Kashmir today, it is, and justifiably so. If day after day Indian troops are allowed to go on killing adolescents armed only with stones (you can find no parallels in Punjab), I for one am burdened with the feeling that very soon there may be little left to defend in the Idea of India.
It is far too easy to blame this on Omar Abdullah’s failings. About one year earlier, after the **** and murder of two women in Shopian, the Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) responded to the anger of Kashmiri crowds much as he now has—by withdrawing from the public and letting the police and CRPF assert control. Basharat Peer, a close observer of the state and author of the critically acclaimed Curfewed Night, was scathing then and what he said is no less valid right now: “The Kashmir he [Omar Abdullah] lived and lives in is a secured, isolated castle. In his Kashmir, you don’t stop at a check post; you don’t raise your hands and show your identity card; you don’t squat in an empty ground in a crackdown with the rest of your town; you don’t feel the anger and fear when your classmates go missing and never return.” A year has passed since, and J&K’s young CM still remains isolated from popular sentiment in the Valley.

But Kashmir was a problem long before Omar Abdullah ever fought an election. Between Atal Behari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh, we have witnessed nine Prime Ministerial visits to Kashmir over this decade and the announcement of two ill-thought-out economic packages totalling Rs 36,700 crore. This has made no difference. Committing more troops to the Valley has proved pointless, as has throwing more money at the problem. Bereft of ideas, it is no wonder that at this critical juncture India’s Prime Minister is virtually in hiding.

He is not the only one living in denial. A colleague in office, as we argued over Kashmir, rather impassionedly claimed that the young men out on the streets did not know what they want. I think what is far more pertinent is that they clearly do know what they don’t want. And maybe we should pay attention to that.

I hold no brief for those young men—I don’t agree with them in the least. If their idea is of a homogeneous Kashmir made up only of Kashmiri Muslims, it arouses little sympathy in my mind. Neither have they faced up to the complicity of their own in the violence that was directed against Kashmiri Pandits and led to their mass exodus from the Valley. But when we raise these questions, we hold them to far higher standards than we have imposed on ourselves.

They don’t want the Army. For anyone who has travelled to any region of this country where the Army’s writ runs, this is not very surprising. This has nothing to do with questioning the patriotism of those who serve in the Indian Army, it is the very nature of the institution.

We have over the years become inured to horror stories in Kashmir, and by failing to react we readily concede the point the angry young men are making. They are different. They have been made so by their experiences. We can’t even begin to understand what they have undergone.

They don’t want to be ignored by the political process. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hopes to pen an agreement with Pakistan or the Hurriyat Conference and achieve a solution. It may already be too late for that. There is no one in Pakistan who exercises a hold over these young men, and the Hurriyat itself is not leading but is being led by them. If the election of Omar Abdullah to power held out only a brief hope, it was only because what the young men expected of him was not within his power to deliver, and that became obvious rather soon.

There are the usual arguments to rebut these claims. In sum, they amount to nothing more than the Sangh Parivar’s territorial argument for Akhand Bharat, as if our attachment is only to the mountains and valleys of Kashmir and not the people residing there.

This, then, is the reality of Kashmir. Like those young men out on the streets of Srinagar in their tens of thousands, I am not sure what I want. I do not think an independent Kashmir is a feasible or realisable idea, but short of that, India should be willing to go to any extent possible. But like those young men, I do know what I don’t want. When CRPF jawans acting in ‘self defence’ end up killing a nine-year-old boy on the street, I don’t want it said that they are doing it in my name. I don’t want it said that they are doing it to safeguard an Idea of India. An inclusiveness enforced by outsiders at gunpoint is not much of an idea.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom