kashmir : the definitive solution

[asq]

Track the posts...who brought God into the discussion?

Kashmir is not about democratic rights...it is more do with religion. Yes India is the world's largest democracy, but can you show any definition where democracy means giving rights to secessionists? Would US agree to part with Hawaii or would Pakistan agree to part with Sindh or Baluchistan? If the answer is no, then don't expect India to part with any of its states

U.N has not passed any resolutions about Hawaii or about Baluchistan. To hold plebiscite so lay off with your strange concoctions, and hold free and fair plebecite as urged by U.N. Spin master.

 

[ZYXW]

@jamahir

I read the entire thing and there are several valid points. I am a Kashmiri and while I do have a personal preference, I will give you a non partisan viewpoint that I think will be beneficial for the entire subcontinent.

As tempting as the idea of an independent kashmir sounds in theory, I am very skeptical about it in practice. India and Pakistan have too much "bad-blood" between them to ever allow Kashmir to be a truly independent state. They will both try to have a stronger presence or influence in the region and it will turn merely into a cold war. However, India and Pakistan are not "bad" for doing that because a security dilemma is something that is in the nature of states, especially nuclear armed neighbors. Kashmir can never be truly "left-alone" because it has become a vital point throughout history. Even if it is, yes maybe - despite all odds- kashmir can find a way to survive on its own, however, will it ever be powerful enough to maintain it's independence if Pakistan or India tries to influence it - and that breach of contract between the two nuclear powers will lead to more direct conflict in the future. As long as Pakistan and India do not sort out their differences, they will forever be paranoid when it comes to kashmir.

I am no expert but I think the best solution is to leave the border as it is. I understand kashmiris complain about their home being divided, but kashmiris have to understand the dynamics of history: the changing of borders is inevitable with time and as long as both sides treat them well, holding on to claims of land and being emotional will only leave them behind as the world progresses.

I am Kashmiri, but before being Pakistani, Kashmiri or even Indian, we're global citizens; as long as there is no infringement of human rights, it is important not to get emotional where politics is concerned. India needs to treat kashimiris well and so does pakistan - that would suffice. Judging by the responses on this thread you can probably also tell that we have a long way to go before India and Pakistan can put aside their differences, so an independent kashmir is out of the question right now.

 

[jamahir]

I am a Kashmiri

umm... there must be seven or eight kashmiris on pdf including one from india ( sarthak ganguly ).

I will give you a non partisan viewpoint that I think will be beneficial for the entire subcontinent.

As tempting as the idea of an independent kashmir sounds in theory, I am very skeptical about it in practice.

"independent kashmir", as proposed by muammar gaddafi ( the originator ), is not to be a nation made permanent for even the next twenty years...

(a). it is meant to be a demonstration to rest of south asia of the wisdom of having decentralized direct-democracy guided by socialism - real democracy.

(b). it is meant for enabling drastic demilitarization in india and pakistan... and think of how much of western armaments will remain unsold and uncontributing to silly war posturing... think of how much resources can be relieved in south asia to remove its poverty and extreme injustice.

(c). it is meant to remove a major headache for the world community.

and that breach of contract between the two nuclear powers will lead to more direct conflict in the future.

(a). gaddafi recommended for baathist socialists ( iraqi, perhaps ) to guide such a kashmir in administration because they are experienced in running a scientific ( politically ) and independent society... doing so prevents any kashmir-administration-internal problem from creating a india-pakistan conflict.

(b). drastic demilitarization, as direct result of such a solution, will also prevent india and pakistan from being technically capable to lauch a non-nuclear war against each other.

(c). the solution encourages south asia to see the wisdom in going socialist, at least letting the world be relieved of this issue... any breach of contract by india or pakistan will and should involved military action by more responsible nations in the world.

holding on to claims of land and being emotional will only leave them behind as the world progresses.

that is my point too... rather than retain tradition attachment to the land, kashmir becoming a socialist region will provide for their material/spiritual needs and allow their energies to get them in sync with progress of the rest of the world.

I am Kashmiri, but before being Pakistani, Kashmiri or even Indian, we're global citizens;

or as i call it - "citizen of humanity" - my natural inclination.

as long as there is no infringement of human rights, it is important not to get emotional where politics is concerned.

but politics is essentially affairs of human society so how can one not be emotional when knowing that there are clean solutions to problems but some people prefer being immature and fight on for unjustifiable reason??

India needs to treat kashimiris well and so does pakistan - that would suffice.

have you read fatima bhutto's "the shadow of the crescent moon"?? just curious.

Judging by the responses on this thread you can probably also tell that we have a long way to go before India and Pakistan can put aside their differences

pdf has too much nationalism, which creates unnecessary hatreds and sadnesses ( this for me ).

 

[jamahir]

@Wani Ainan

please go through this thread from the start.

by the way, have you seen the films "harud" and "haider"??

 

[The_Showstopper]

It is with Kashmir only and India has nothing to do with it.

You can say that all your life but the reality is not gonna change. Anyways stop flogging dead threads....

 

[livingdead]

who wrote it was it you @jamahir ?

 

[jamahir]

who wrote it was it you @jamahir ?

gaddafi, and it is from 2002.

 

[livingdead]

gaddafi, and it is from 2002.

I doubt it was written by gaddafi. Must be one of his officials.
In any case this is not a new solution, unless I did not understand the solution. The author is asking for azadi which is what has been demand of people of valley since the beginning.

 

[ranjeet]

I doubt it was written by gaddafi. Must be one of his officials.
In any case this is not a new solution, unless I did not understand the solution. The author is asking for azadi which is what has been demand of people of valley since the beginning.

Socialism is always a solution.

 

[nForce]

Socialism is always a solution.

It is both the end of beginning and beginning of the end at the same time.
One thing for sure, Pakistan as a neighbour and enemy is fine. I would definitely not want to have North Korea in their place.

 

[jamahir]

I doubt it was written by gaddafi. Must be one of his officials.

the base idea would have been his though even the green book had contributors... voluntary removing himself from official leadership gave him a lot of time for writing, making speeches and supporting movements and revolutionaries.

he also wrote essays and stories...

i have posted an essay of his ( death to the incapable - until revolution ).

In any case this is not a new solution, unless I did not understand the solution. The author is asking for azadi which is what has been demand of people of valley since the beginning.

not the azadi that geelani type of people want... azadi of a progressive kind, one guided by international progressives rather being left alone to take kashmir back into administrative chaos and india/pakistan back to war posturing.

besides that, the solution embeds the idea of power of nations being replaced by power of groupings/blocs, which really is a hidden way of projecting the libyan "third universal theory" ( jamahiriya theory ).

Socialism is always a solution.

always.

 

[Styx]

Socialism is always a solution.

 

[ranjeet]

always.

So is alcohol.

You won the internet today.

 

[livingdead]

the base idea would have been his though even the green book had contributors... voluntary removing himself from official leadership gave him a lot of time for writing, making speeches and supporting movements and revolutionaries.

he also wrote essays and stories...

View attachment 245050

i have posted an essay of his (
death to the incapable - until revolution ).



not the azadi that geelani type of people want... azadi of a progressive kind, one guided by international progressives rather being left alone to take kashmir back into administrative chaos and india/pakistan back to war posturing.

besides that, the solution embeds the idea of power of nations being replaced by power of groupings/blocs, which really is a hidden way of projecting the libyan "third universal theory" ( jamahiriya theory ).



always.

Come on these were ghost written by others, obviously. Have you heard him speak?
Not much different from autobiographies of katie price.
Azadi is azadi, from Indian point of view, its secession from union. How does it matter what form of govt they will pursue after getting azadi?
Its one of the much debated options(other options being whole kashmir going to pakistan, whole kashmir going to India, IB made permanent border), but not a new option.

 

[jamahir]

So is alcohol.

dawa and daaru are two different things.