desiman
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 3,957
- Reaction score
- 0
i said least poor sate.not the poor
lol sorry may have read you the wrong way. getting to used to people crying over the same things on this forum, apologies from my side.
Kashmir | News & Discussions.
- Thread starter foxhound
- Start date
lol sorry may have read you the wrong way. getting to used to people crying over the same things on this forum, apologies from my side.
eric_cartman
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2010
- Messages
- 105
- Reaction score
- 0
Ladakh is full of people of Buddhist faith like Tibetan who are basically non voilent and believe in destiny.
I have my own vision.... I am completely against war but at some stage you have to go for it. kashmir need same thing.
Pakistan already have enough part of kashmir. Now whatever we have should be with us. Be prepare for any type of conflict. I am dam sure nothing gonna change with diplomacy. you can Bet.
Pakistan already have enough part of kashmir. Now whatever we have should be with us. Be prepare for any type of conflict. I am dam sure nothing gonna change with diplomacy. you can Bet.
Well the blame is on western media.
Indian media is highlighting the plight of Kashmirs much more than even the Pakistani media. So shouldn't THAT be appreciated?
There are almost 24 hours reporting on the Kashmir situation and every paper has a front page story on Kashmir. There are thousands of voices that are raising the voices for a humane and just treatment. The only way to talk about justice to Kashmiris is not asking for them to merge with Pakistan.
Yes, Indian media rightly highlights it more than the western media or even Pakistani media because J&K is a part of India.
On a side note, we should have seen the same level of outrage when 190+ Uighur Muslims were killed in three days. Nine of them executed and then another 20 executed after 3 months.
Atleast in India foreigners and media are given a free hand in reporting can we say the same for China ? Outrage should be equally directed.
Indian media is highlighting the plight of Kashmirs much more than even the Pakistani media. So shouldn't THAT be appreciated?
There are almost 24 hours reporting on the Kashmir situation and every paper has a front page story on Kashmir. There are thousands of voices that are raising the voices for a humane and just treatment. The only way to talk about justice to Kashmiris is not asking for them to merge with Pakistan.
Yes, Indian media rightly highlights it more than the western media or even Pakistani media because J&K is a part of India.
On a side note, we should have seen the same level of outrage when 190+ Uighur Muslims were killed in three days. Nine of them executed and then another 20 executed after 3 months.
Atleast in India foreigners and media are given a free hand in reporting can we say the same for China ? Outrage should be equally directed.
Pride
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,850
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
I dont know if foriegn media reports it properly for Kashmir but our media always raises concern for both the side. If you are not agreed with me, Please look past 3-4 days news paper "The Hindu". The only point is they don't and won't write your POV which is no where near the reality.
Regarding unrest in Kashmir, It will always be on untill there are few democratic leaders leave blindfold of religion and Independance for their political profit and come on to table for discussion as well as insurgency from neighbours will stop. Remember one point, This will always be 2 way discussion between separatist leaders & GoI and will not included Pakistan on the same.
Regarding unrest in Kashmir, It will always be on untill there are few democratic leaders leave blindfold of religion and Independance for their political profit and come on to table for discussion as well as insurgency from neighbours will stop. Remember one point, This will always be 2 way discussion between separatist leaders & GoI and will not included Pakistan on the same.
Pride
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,850
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Yes Batman, I have been Kashmir some 1 year ago. I tell you what are the major issues as per discussion with Kashmiris and my understanding:-
1) There are few separatist leaders who talks about "Independance" for their political benefit as well as monetatry benefit they recieve from neighbours.
2) There are few misguided youth who in influence of these leaders and lucrative offers from insurgents go and take training from neighbouring Kashmir.
3) No doubt, in many part of Kashmir's people don't want IA but GoI needs them so there are no repetition of insurgency like 1948, 1965 and 1999.
4) The biggest problem is development in Kashmir. Article 377 from Indian constitution does not give us liberty for starting business apart from this as PETA act has been applied then Pashmina Shawl business of Kashmir is also doomed. They need earning to run their buisness. Many of them either migrate to other parts of India or involved with tourists in Vaishno Devi, Amarnath Yatra & in Srinagar.
5) There are notorious elements in IA and Police which seek easy way to get promotion by encountering few youths. There are few such cases has observed in past. This is also a biggest reason to oppose IA in few area.
Pride
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,850
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
We all mourn their loss no matter what flag they raise.
Btw, Im surprised you don't know how your flag looks like. I think you missed the white strip. This green flags with cresencts just has a muslim connatation to it and you will see them in dargas e.t.c around India and other parts of the world. So no need to mistake it as Pakistani flag.
Check this out for comparison
Good point buddy.. apart from Green color flag, I have also seen same flag with Red color.. does that mean many Indians want to go to Turkey??
Pride
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,850
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Yes buddy.. 2 jawans from IA get up early in the morning and bet that see today I am going to kill 10 Kashmiris.. second says 20 Kashmiris.. so by evening 30 Kashmiris are finished just for bet...
Get a life buddy........
GUNNER
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 1,489
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Kashmir: no ideal solution
By Kuldip Nayar
What is happening in the valley lends credibility to the Kashmiri diaspora that met in Washington a few days ago to ask for an early, peaceful solution to the Kashmir problem.
I was one of the participants at the conference which was convened by the Kashmiri-American Council and Association of Humanitarian lawyers. Emotions apart, the diaspora was concerned over the future of the land of their origin.
All agreed, as is the general belief in India, that a delayed political solution of the Kashmir problem is responsible for the eruption of occasional violence or protests in the state. The participants expressed grave concern over the deteriorating human rights situation in Kashmir and demanded the appointment of a commission to investigate the causes of the current violence in the valley, where 43 people have died since June 11 when the present wave began.
I have no doubt that the mishandling of the situation and violation of human rights have contributed to the spread of defiance and destruction in the valley. But the youth were equally determined to pelt stones on security forces.
In fact, the reason behind such occurrences is the alienation of Kashmiris from India and New Delhis assumption that the people will ultimately come round to accepting the status quo if they were to find the governance just, honest and working for the betterment of the state. The situation has gone beyond that.
There is validity in the argument that the separatists are not allowing the situation to settle down. But the fact remains that people in Kashmir have given Srinagar and New Delhi many chances the recent one being the year-old election in which they participated to the extent of 60 per cent to sort out the problem of autonomy. But the two did not do so.
Where did things go wrong? My experience tells me that the more a political party, or the administration at Srinagar, goes nearer to India the greater is the resentment of people who want to preserve their own identity. A government which is seen challenging New Delhi is liked because it gives them a vicarious satisfaction of being independent.
Sheikh Abdullah, a popular Kashmiri leader, understood this. He did not question Kashmirs accession to India but placated the Kashmiris by criticising New Delhi for eroding the states autonomy. For example, he would say that the Kashmiris would prefer to stay hungry if the atta from India was meant to trample upon their right to stay independent. It may have been a fiction but it worked.
Even Jawaharlal Nehru, the Sheikhs friend and supporter in political battles against the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, did not understand his rhetoric and detained him without trial in southern India for some 12 years. Still Nehru realised rather late that tampering with autonomy had taken the shape of separation and a strong pro-Pakistan tilt. He released the Sheikh and sent him to Islamabad. Unfortunately Nehru died when the Sheikh was in the midst of talks with Gen Ayub Khan, Pakistans martial law administrator.
Until then Kashmir was a problem between India and Pakistan. They held talks and fought wars but reached nowhere. The Shimla Agreement converted the ceasefire line into the Line of Control. But the two failed to go further because of their domestic compulsions. The Sheikh returned to power and entered into an accord with then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi that restored some autonomy which New Delhi had appropriated in his absence. But the Sheikh did not have a free hand because the bureaucracy and the intelligence agencies, by then strong, did not want him to succeed. They treated me like a chaprasi (peon), the Sheikh often told me.
His son, Farooq Abdullah, much less in stature, tried to retrieve the situation by asking New Delhi to go back to the terms of accession, the centre retaining only three subjects, defence, foreign affairs and communications. Successive governments at New Delhi felt that they could not go back as they feared a backlash. Former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was the only person who foresaw the danger in not reaching a settlement. He set up a back channel which almost found a solution when Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was ousted by Gen Pervez Musharraf.
I was reminded of the promise Nehru made to the Kashmiris that they would be given an opportunity to decide what they wanted to do with their territory. I told them that Nehru had rejected the demand for a plebiscite in his lifetime. His reasoning was that Pakistan by joining Cento and Seato, the two military pacts against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, had changed the context of the undertaking.
In the 80s, the Kashmir problem became an issue. The Kashmiris too claimed a place on the table for talks on Kashmir. Rigged state elections in 1987 drove the youth from ballot to bullet which Pakistan was willing to provide. The following 10 years saw a running battle between the Kashmiris and the security forces. Thousands died on both sides. The result was a further hiatus between the Kashmiris and New Delhi.
Three things happened. One, the anti-India Kashmir leadership constituted a joint body, the All Hurriyat Conference. Two, a secular movement acquired an Islamic edge, particularly because of hardliner Syed Ali Shah Geelani. Three, the pro-Pakistan tilt changed into a resolve for independence, the slogan which Yasin Malik, the first militant in Kashmir, raised. Today that sentiment prevails in the shape of a demand that Kashmiris decide their own destiny.
The demand for independence may be genuine but it is not possible. I wonder even if Pakistan would agree to an independent, sovereign state when the chips are down. I opposed the demand at the conference in Washington on two counts: one, India will not agree to another partition on the basis of religion, and two, borders could be made irrelevant but not changed. I also cautioned that Jammu and Ladakh would not go along with the valley to the point of secession.
Yet it would be useful to find out what was the solution that Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif had reached to make the former say: We were almost there. Former Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri announced at Delhi that they had reached a settlement. What was the solution?
And the most important part is whether Kashmiris would accept it? Both India and Pakistan must persuade them to accept autonomy because independence does not seem to find favour in either New Delhi or Islamabad. It can tell upon Indias integrity. The Kashmiris should realise that independence is not an ideal solution.
By Kuldip Nayar
What is happening in the valley lends credibility to the Kashmiri diaspora that met in Washington a few days ago to ask for an early, peaceful solution to the Kashmir problem.
I was one of the participants at the conference which was convened by the Kashmiri-American Council and Association of Humanitarian lawyers. Emotions apart, the diaspora was concerned over the future of the land of their origin.
All agreed, as is the general belief in India, that a delayed political solution of the Kashmir problem is responsible for the eruption of occasional violence or protests in the state. The participants expressed grave concern over the deteriorating human rights situation in Kashmir and demanded the appointment of a commission to investigate the causes of the current violence in the valley, where 43 people have died since June 11 when the present wave began.
I have no doubt that the mishandling of the situation and violation of human rights have contributed to the spread of defiance and destruction in the valley. But the youth were equally determined to pelt stones on security forces.
In fact, the reason behind such occurrences is the alienation of Kashmiris from India and New Delhis assumption that the people will ultimately come round to accepting the status quo if they were to find the governance just, honest and working for the betterment of the state. The situation has gone beyond that.
There is validity in the argument that the separatists are not allowing the situation to settle down. But the fact remains that people in Kashmir have given Srinagar and New Delhi many chances the recent one being the year-old election in which they participated to the extent of 60 per cent to sort out the problem of autonomy. But the two did not do so.
Where did things go wrong? My experience tells me that the more a political party, or the administration at Srinagar, goes nearer to India the greater is the resentment of people who want to preserve their own identity. A government which is seen challenging New Delhi is liked because it gives them a vicarious satisfaction of being independent.
Sheikh Abdullah, a popular Kashmiri leader, understood this. He did not question Kashmirs accession to India but placated the Kashmiris by criticising New Delhi for eroding the states autonomy. For example, he would say that the Kashmiris would prefer to stay hungry if the atta from India was meant to trample upon their right to stay independent. It may have been a fiction but it worked.
Even Jawaharlal Nehru, the Sheikhs friend and supporter in political battles against the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, did not understand his rhetoric and detained him without trial in southern India for some 12 years. Still Nehru realised rather late that tampering with autonomy had taken the shape of separation and a strong pro-Pakistan tilt. He released the Sheikh and sent him to Islamabad. Unfortunately Nehru died when the Sheikh was in the midst of talks with Gen Ayub Khan, Pakistans martial law administrator.
Until then Kashmir was a problem between India and Pakistan. They held talks and fought wars but reached nowhere. The Shimla Agreement converted the ceasefire line into the Line of Control. But the two failed to go further because of their domestic compulsions. The Sheikh returned to power and entered into an accord with then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi that restored some autonomy which New Delhi had appropriated in his absence. But the Sheikh did not have a free hand because the bureaucracy and the intelligence agencies, by then strong, did not want him to succeed. They treated me like a chaprasi (peon), the Sheikh often told me.
His son, Farooq Abdullah, much less in stature, tried to retrieve the situation by asking New Delhi to go back to the terms of accession, the centre retaining only three subjects, defence, foreign affairs and communications. Successive governments at New Delhi felt that they could not go back as they feared a backlash. Former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was the only person who foresaw the danger in not reaching a settlement. He set up a back channel which almost found a solution when Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was ousted by Gen Pervez Musharraf.
I was reminded of the promise Nehru made to the Kashmiris that they would be given an opportunity to decide what they wanted to do with their territory. I told them that Nehru had rejected the demand for a plebiscite in his lifetime. His reasoning was that Pakistan by joining Cento and Seato, the two military pacts against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, had changed the context of the undertaking.
In the 80s, the Kashmir problem became an issue. The Kashmiris too claimed a place on the table for talks on Kashmir. Rigged state elections in 1987 drove the youth from ballot to bullet which Pakistan was willing to provide. The following 10 years saw a running battle between the Kashmiris and the security forces. Thousands died on both sides. The result was a further hiatus between the Kashmiris and New Delhi.
Three things happened. One, the anti-India Kashmir leadership constituted a joint body, the All Hurriyat Conference. Two, a secular movement acquired an Islamic edge, particularly because of hardliner Syed Ali Shah Geelani. Three, the pro-Pakistan tilt changed into a resolve for independence, the slogan which Yasin Malik, the first militant in Kashmir, raised. Today that sentiment prevails in the shape of a demand that Kashmiris decide their own destiny.
The demand for independence may be genuine but it is not possible. I wonder even if Pakistan would agree to an independent, sovereign state when the chips are down. I opposed the demand at the conference in Washington on two counts: one, India will not agree to another partition on the basis of religion, and two, borders could be made irrelevant but not changed. I also cautioned that Jammu and Ladakh would not go along with the valley to the point of secession.
Yet it would be useful to find out what was the solution that Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif had reached to make the former say: We were almost there. Former Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri announced at Delhi that they had reached a settlement. What was the solution?
And the most important part is whether Kashmiris would accept it? Both India and Pakistan must persuade them to accept autonomy because independence does not seem to find favour in either New Delhi or Islamabad. It can tell upon Indias integrity. The Kashmiris should realise that independence is not an ideal solution.
SRINAGAR, India At least 60 people have been killed and hundreds injured after heavy rain triggered flash floods in Leh, the main town in India Kashmir's high-altitude Ladakh region, officials said Friday.
The floods tore though the town and surrounding villages without warning during the night when most residents were asleep, damaging homes and government buildings.
"So far we have some 60 dead," Kashmir Tourism Minister Nawang Rigzin Jora told AFP from Leh.
Jora said the death toll was likely to rise "significantly" with dozens still missing in Leh and rescue workers unable to reach some of the affected districts nearby.
At least 200 people were reported injured.
"The devastation is unprecedented," Jora said, adding that the military had been called in to help with the relief efforts.
The Indian army has a large presence in Ladakh which shares a sensitive border with neighbouring China.
The mountainous, Buddhist-dominated region, sitting in the southeastern part of Muslim-majority Kashmir, is popular with foreign adventure tourists interested in Himalayan trekking and river-running.
Some 3,500 metres (11,500 feet) above sea level, Leh is surrounded by high-altitude desert and heavy rainfall is uncommon.
The town was effectively cut off, with the flood waters washing away sections of the main highways to the popular backpacker destination of Manali and the Kashmiri summer capital, Srinagar.
"So far, we have no reports of any tourists among the dead, but some are stranded on the Leh-Manali road. The army has sent rescue teams there," Jora said.
A police spokesman said Leh airport had also been damaged, stopping all incoming and outgoing flights.
AFP: Flash floods kill 60 in Indian Kashmir: officials
The floods tore though the town and surrounding villages without warning during the night when most residents were asleep, damaging homes and government buildings.
"So far we have some 60 dead," Kashmir Tourism Minister Nawang Rigzin Jora told AFP from Leh.
Jora said the death toll was likely to rise "significantly" with dozens still missing in Leh and rescue workers unable to reach some of the affected districts nearby.
At least 200 people were reported injured.
"The devastation is unprecedented," Jora said, adding that the military had been called in to help with the relief efforts.
The Indian army has a large presence in Ladakh which shares a sensitive border with neighbouring China.
The mountainous, Buddhist-dominated region, sitting in the southeastern part of Muslim-majority Kashmir, is popular with foreign adventure tourists interested in Himalayan trekking and river-running.
Some 3,500 metres (11,500 feet) above sea level, Leh is surrounded by high-altitude desert and heavy rainfall is uncommon.
The town was effectively cut off, with the flood waters washing away sections of the main highways to the popular backpacker destination of Manali and the Kashmiri summer capital, Srinagar.
"So far, we have no reports of any tourists among the dead, but some are stranded on the Leh-Manali road. The army has sent rescue teams there," Jora said.
A police spokesman said Leh airport had also been damaged, stopping all incoming and outgoing flights.
AFP: Flash floods kill 60 in Indian Kashmir: officials
Dash
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2009
- Messages
- 6,652
- Reaction score
- -14
- Country
- Location
First of all ...Its NOT a law. Its a proposed action plan.
But who created the plan, when it was created?, what does it signifies now need to be discussed before you claim it to be a law....
Tell me your thoughts about it..
The Associated Press: Flash floods kill dozens in Indian Kashmir
SRINAGAR, India A sudden overnight downpour and flash floods killed at least 59 people and injured 200 in the remote and mountainous Ladakh region of Indian-controlled Kashmir, police and army officials said Friday.
Police and paramilitary soldiers had pulled 59 bodies from flood-hit areas around Leh, the main town in Ladakh, state police chief Kuldeep Khoda said. Rescue efforts were being hampered by gushing water and debris, he said.
Operations had been stopped at Leh airport after it was badly damaged by the flood waters, with parts of the runway washed away. Indian air force troopers were clearing the debris from the airstrip, Khoda said.
"At least 200 people are in the army hospital with injuries. And many more people are trapped under houses and buildings that have collapsed," he said.
The flooding also damaged telephone towers and highways leading to the region, army spokesman Lt. Col. J.S. Brar said in Srinagar, the main city in Kashmir. Leh is about 280 miles (450 kilometers) east of Srinagar.
The affected area is a high-altitude desert about 11,500 feet (3,500 meters) above sea level, and it normally experiences very low precipitation.
Prof. Shakeel Romshoo, a geologist at Kashmir University in Srinagar, said new rivulets had cut deep channels in the mountain gorges of the region and flood waters had inundated low-lying areas.
"It's a challenging topography with steep and unstable slopes. Water flow and velocity being very high, the flash floods have caused huge damage," he said.
"Mud and water is everywhere," said Kashmiri businessman Kausar Makhdoomi, who was on holiday in Leh, the region's main town.
Makhdoomi said the rainfall started before midnight and that water later started coursing down the area's mountains in streams and rivulets. The flooding had damaged several homes and other buildings by Friday morning, he said.
"There was utter confusion and people started to panic," he said.
Police, paramilitary troops and the army have launched a massive rescue operation in Leh, Khoda said.
Flood waters were pouring into the River Indus flowing into neighboring Pakistan, which has also been hit by destructive floods.
SRINAGAR, India A sudden overnight downpour and flash floods killed at least 59 people and injured 200 in the remote and mountainous Ladakh region of Indian-controlled Kashmir, police and army officials said Friday.
Police and paramilitary soldiers had pulled 59 bodies from flood-hit areas around Leh, the main town in Ladakh, state police chief Kuldeep Khoda said. Rescue efforts were being hampered by gushing water and debris, he said.
Operations had been stopped at Leh airport after it was badly damaged by the flood waters, with parts of the runway washed away. Indian air force troopers were clearing the debris from the airstrip, Khoda said.
"At least 200 people are in the army hospital with injuries. And many more people are trapped under houses and buildings that have collapsed," he said.
The flooding also damaged telephone towers and highways leading to the region, army spokesman Lt. Col. J.S. Brar said in Srinagar, the main city in Kashmir. Leh is about 280 miles (450 kilometers) east of Srinagar.
The affected area is a high-altitude desert about 11,500 feet (3,500 meters) above sea level, and it normally experiences very low precipitation.
Prof. Shakeel Romshoo, a geologist at Kashmir University in Srinagar, said new rivulets had cut deep channels in the mountain gorges of the region and flood waters had inundated low-lying areas.
"It's a challenging topography with steep and unstable slopes. Water flow and velocity being very high, the flash floods have caused huge damage," he said.
"Mud and water is everywhere," said Kashmiri businessman Kausar Makhdoomi, who was on holiday in Leh, the region's main town.
Makhdoomi said the rainfall started before midnight and that water later started coursing down the area's mountains in streams and rivulets. The flooding had damaged several homes and other buildings by Friday morning, he said.
"There was utter confusion and people started to panic," he said.
Police, paramilitary troops and the army have launched a massive rescue operation in Leh, Khoda said.
Flood waters were pouring into the River Indus flowing into neighboring Pakistan, which has also been hit by destructive floods.
bc040400065
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Violence in Indian Kashmir
A cyclical problem
The bloody protests in Indian Kashmir get much bloodier
Aug 5th 2010 | srinagar
BEARING the stiffening corpse of Anees Ganai, a 17-year-old boy, thousands of Kashmiri men marched on Srinagars gaudy, 15th-century main mosque on August 3rd. Anees! Your blood will start a revolution! they chanted, adding the refrain of Kashmiris, Azadi!, Freedom![/B] During two months of violent protests in Indian-controlled Kashmir the mosque had been barred to stop crowds gathering. The killing of around 45 people in that timeincluding 29 in the past weekmost shot by police, suggests that the policy failed. As the mob surged, the police drew back.
Even by its turbulent standards, the Indian-held portion of Kashmir is in chaos. Each day, defying curfews, crowds in Srinagar and several outlying districts gather to pelt stones at police. A paramilitary bunker near the line dividing Indian from Pakistani Kashmir was ransacked this week, and a police station torched. The local economy is choked, as so often in two decades of insurgency and protests. The road to Srinagar is closed and supplies of blood, medicine and baby milk are short.
This is becoming seasonal. Since 2008, when a row over land given to Hindu pilgrims sparked the biggest anti-India demonstrations in two decades, Kashmir has seen annual summer unrest. Last years was provoked by the killing of a woman and a girlgang-raped and murdered by the police, said locals, accidentally drowned, said the government. This years was sparked by the death of another youth, Tufail Ahmed Mattoo, brained by a tear-gas canister on his way from class.
The protests may peter out. Indias central government has sent an extra 30,000 troops to reinforce its armies in Kashmir. This week the states chief minister, Omar Abdullah, visited Delhi to beg for more. And with Kashmirs apple harvest fast approaching, its farmers, who produce 60% of Indias apples, will need to get their crop to market. But if Kashmiris choose to put down their stones, it may not be for long.
What could break the cycle? The government sees the answer in better local services and more jobs. But it would, having long denied the great extent to which Kashmiris want rid of India. While the insurgency raged, backed by Pakistan, the government could blame its neighbour. But as fighting eased and protests rose, blaming Pakistan got much harder. Kashmiri separatist aspirations are the heart of the problem, as Mr Abdullah hinted in Delhi, by calling for a political solution to it.
Short of separation, which would be impossible even if a third of Kashmir were not in Pakistan, it is hard to know what could satisfy Kashmiris. A few obvious things would help. India could stop its soldiers shooting protesters. It could repeal the draconian powers its forces enjoy and move garrisons from town centres. These measures have been discussed, yet nothing is done: because of opposition from security forces, the usual official Indian sloth and a (more forgivable) reluctance to trust that the proxy war with Pakistan is over.
The wretched state of Kashmir serves as a pretext for Pakistani hostility to India. This makes war more likely and incites Islamist militants. Hence Barack Obamas proposal, on the presidential campaign trail, to appoint a special envoy to Kashmir. And hence David Miliband, Britains then foreign minister, suggesting a connection last year between terrorism in India and its occupation of Kashmir. India responded by expressing strong displeasure to both.
That may, subconsciously perhaps, have encouraged David Cameron, Britains prime minister, to suggest that some in Pakistan export terrorism, and sometimes help Afghanistans Taliban. He was right. Yet this has riled Pakistan no end. Urging Mr Cameron to show more balance, Pakistans prime minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani, naturally referred him to the ongoing misery in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
Violence in Indian Kashmir: A cyclical problem | The Economist
A cyclical problem
The bloody protests in Indian Kashmir get much bloodier
Aug 5th 2010 | srinagar
BEARING the stiffening corpse of Anees Ganai, a 17-year-old boy, thousands of Kashmiri men marched on Srinagars gaudy, 15th-century main mosque on August 3rd. Anees! Your blood will start a revolution! they chanted, adding the refrain of Kashmiris, Azadi!, Freedom![/B] During two months of violent protests in Indian-controlled Kashmir the mosque had been barred to stop crowds gathering. The killing of around 45 people in that timeincluding 29 in the past weekmost shot by police, suggests that the policy failed. As the mob surged, the police drew back.
Even by its turbulent standards, the Indian-held portion of Kashmir is in chaos. Each day, defying curfews, crowds in Srinagar and several outlying districts gather to pelt stones at police. A paramilitary bunker near the line dividing Indian from Pakistani Kashmir was ransacked this week, and a police station torched. The local economy is choked, as so often in two decades of insurgency and protests. The road to Srinagar is closed and supplies of blood, medicine and baby milk are short.
This is becoming seasonal. Since 2008, when a row over land given to Hindu pilgrims sparked the biggest anti-India demonstrations in two decades, Kashmir has seen annual summer unrest. Last years was provoked by the killing of a woman and a girlgang-raped and murdered by the police, said locals, accidentally drowned, said the government. This years was sparked by the death of another youth, Tufail Ahmed Mattoo, brained by a tear-gas canister on his way from class.
The protests may peter out. Indias central government has sent an extra 30,000 troops to reinforce its armies in Kashmir. This week the states chief minister, Omar Abdullah, visited Delhi to beg for more. And with Kashmirs apple harvest fast approaching, its farmers, who produce 60% of Indias apples, will need to get their crop to market. But if Kashmiris choose to put down their stones, it may not be for long.
What could break the cycle? The government sees the answer in better local services and more jobs. But it would, having long denied the great extent to which Kashmiris want rid of India. While the insurgency raged, backed by Pakistan, the government could blame its neighbour. But as fighting eased and protests rose, blaming Pakistan got much harder. Kashmiri separatist aspirations are the heart of the problem, as Mr Abdullah hinted in Delhi, by calling for a political solution to it.
Short of separation, which would be impossible even if a third of Kashmir were not in Pakistan, it is hard to know what could satisfy Kashmiris. A few obvious things would help. India could stop its soldiers shooting protesters. It could repeal the draconian powers its forces enjoy and move garrisons from town centres. These measures have been discussed, yet nothing is done: because of opposition from security forces, the usual official Indian sloth and a (more forgivable) reluctance to trust that the proxy war with Pakistan is over.
The wretched state of Kashmir serves as a pretext for Pakistani hostility to India. This makes war more likely and incites Islamist militants. Hence Barack Obamas proposal, on the presidential campaign trail, to appoint a special envoy to Kashmir. And hence David Miliband, Britains then foreign minister, suggesting a connection last year between terrorism in India and its occupation of Kashmir. India responded by expressing strong displeasure to both.
That may, subconsciously perhaps, have encouraged David Cameron, Britains prime minister, to suggest that some in Pakistan export terrorism, and sometimes help Afghanistans Taliban. He was right. Yet this has riled Pakistan no end. Urging Mr Cameron to show more balance, Pakistans prime minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani, naturally referred him to the ongoing misery in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
Violence in Indian Kashmir: A cyclical problem | The Economist
Break the Silence
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,187
- Reaction score
- 0
^^To whom are you reffering?
sentence which you quoted, no where claimed of destroying india!
so, why not save your advice for your self and those who claim to nuke Pakistan?
Killing Kashmiris is fun activity for you inidans.
Look how much is she smilling while taking aim at Kashmiri children!!!!
Well, Indian President have such guts to handle a gun also...but wat abt your prez...okey dont want to get into troll war..I have started this thread to discuss among people, what they think about these kind of steps taken by young mps.. not for trolling by you or others...
This thread is not about killing of kashmiris...better to stick with topic.
I also request my Indian friends to just ignore such kind of bs.
Similar threads
