Modi sulking over Pakistan internationalizing Kashmir Dispute

[VCheng]

............
See, without the SA, Pakistan had a Right, to go to UN time and again and demand its problem be solved. Now if the Great Powers - like US and China (which did support Pakistan in the 70's till early 90's) would have supported Pakistan, that Right to go to UN may have yielded results for Pakistan. Time is fickle and the time may come yet again when the Great Powers align in favour of Pakistan.

Now, India has closed that possibility by the SA by making Indias consent a prerequisite to UNs intervention regardless of whether the Great Powers support the move or not.

That is the price Pakistan paid to get back its prisoners of war of its defeated Army, only to have them hang its elected PM a few years later.

 

[VCheng]

As I said..India has put Pakistan in a straitjacket with the SA.
We wont talk to them on Kashmir and neither will we allow them to bring in third party mediation.What is left is Pakistan trying to talk here and there about Kashmir without being able to do anything. This final straw is what we are trying to remove now.

Whether our strategy is right or wrong is another issue, but it has been executed right.

Having said that, I will also say that it will be to India's advantage too to make peace, as it will be to Pakistan.

 

[Kinetic]

Modi is bad at foriegn relations as is proven from the pak-russian alliance in making for Afghanistan with china as a addition.

Modi instead of solving will in turn create more trouble in Indian occupied kashmir because of extreme hatred toward him which will increase more after his party win in IOK through rigging

Thats your biggest doubt, Russia is nothing and will not provide anything that can be athreat to India. We still got their bests.

Come out of Dream, because of Modi diplomacy no one even bothered to utter a word about Kashmir. lol

 

[Sine Nomine]

Thats your biggest doubt, Russia is nothing and will not provide anything that can be athreat to India. We still got their bests.

Come out of Dream, because of Modi diplomacy no one even bothered to utter a word about Kashmir. lol

we already have lot of things which never will let New Delhi to have sound sleep at night.

 

[SpArK]

we already have lot of things which never will let New Delhi to have sound sleep at night.

Like lighting fire crackers and making sounds at midnight, right?

 

[ito]

We know for past 60 years you are dreaming of it but they will never become reality.

now what are we dreaming?

 

[Judge]

That is the price Pakistan paid to get back its prisoners of war of its defeated Army, only to have them hang its elected PM a few years later.

Yes. It can be roundly summed in the exact same words. The price Pakistan paid for bringing back its 90,000 Prisoners of War.
Whether or not it was worth it is a question for Pakistanis to answer - including @AgNoStiC MuSliM .

@AgNoStiC MuSliM - there is one more thing I forgot to add. Pakistan can get out of this straitjacket by getting India to sign another treaty that supersedes the SA. The question is - will Pakistan be able to. It would require an India under extreme duress and fighting to save itself and Pakistan on a new level of Strength.

Having said that, I will also say that it will be to India's advantage too to make peace, as it will be to Pakistan.

I disagree.
On a short term goal - yes, it would be to India's advantage to make peace. Economy, stability, etc, etc. A lot of things in favour of it.

But if you look at a long term goal - then No. Making peace is not to India's advantage. See by having Kashmir - and by extension India - as an unresolved issue for Pakistanis means blinding Pakistanis to all else.
As long as they focus on us, they themselves keep the Islamist currency in circulation regardless of whether it is encouraged by the PA or not.
Pakistanis will be attracted towards notions of jihad and world domination and removal of 'al yahood o hunud' problem. They will find solace in religion as long as they feel 'injustice' has been done to them. That means till this go on they will keep taking decisions (keeping religion their absolute focus) which will be disastrous one after the other.

What they will not do is take a hard look at where they are heading, what religion is doing to them. Pakistan is an outward looking society - unlike India (which is an inward looking society)- and consequently, what happens outside rivets them more. On its own being an outward or inward looking society both have their advantages and disadvantages.

India cannot break Pakistan anymore. It is out of question. Modern states are incapable of that. Onlyl internal machinations and contradictions can do it. I find this course Pakistan is on currently (and has been for the last couple of decades)- an agreeable one.

I am quite sure you will not like my post being a Pakistani, but the logic underlining it is one to be considered if you do it dispassionately.

 

[Jayanta]

Yet Indian members keep telling us of 'what a great triumph in diplomacy' Modi's unprovoked ceasefire violations across the LoC/WB have been, and how Pakistan "internationalizing the Kashmir issue and the LoC violations by India" reflects "Pakistan's pain" - the pain over "internationalization" appears to be one suffered by Modi and Company, as can be seen from the following, in addition to previous statements by the Indian EA spokesperson and various BJP leaders.

Unprovoked...my ***. There are video evidence of infiltrators trying to sneak in and Pakistani Army giving the covering fire. And well unlike Maunimohan Singh....this government isn't going to just watch. Now the Indian Army do not have their hands tied behind. Every infiltration bid will be replied in similar manner...whether you like it or not. So if you want peace stop harboring terrorists and stop assisting them in infiltrating into India....if you do so there will be Peace...if not you will be in piece.

 

[VCheng]

..............
I disagree.
On a short term goal - yes, it would be to India's advantage to make peace. Economy, stability, etc, etc. A lot of things in favour of it.

But if you look at a long term goal - then No. Making peace is not to India's advantage. See by having Kashmir - and by extension India - as an unresolved issue for Pakistanis means blinding Pakistanis to all else.
As long as they focus on us, they themselves keep the Islamist currency in circulation regardless of whether it is encouraged by the PA or not.
Pakistanis will be attracted towards notions of jihad and world domination and removal of 'al yahood o hunud' problem. They will find solace in religion as long as they feel 'injustice' has been done to them. That means till this go on they will keep taking decisions (keeping religion their absolute focus) which will be disastrous one after the other.

What they will not do is take a hard look at where they are heading, what religion is doing to them. Pakistan is an outward looking society - unlike India (which is an inward looking society)- and consequently, what happens outside rivets them more. On its own being an outward or inward looking society both have their advantages and disadvantages.

India cannot break Pakistan anymore. It is out of question. Modern states are incapable of that. Onlyl internal machinations and contradictions can do it. I find this course Pakistan is on currently (and has been for the last couple of decades)- an agreeable one.

I am quite sure you will not like my post being a Pakistani, but the logic underlining it is one to be considered if you do it dispassionately.

I can understand your logic without agreeing with it, Sir.

 

[Sneaker]

That is wonderful news! So perhaps now the Indian media and government can stop whining about "Pakistan's internationalization of the Kashmir dispute"?

We are more like mocking. All whining we have delegated to pak.

 

[karan.1970]

That is a question for Modi and his government - if, as it appears from the comments of Indians and their sympathizers on this thread, the Indian government does not care about Pakistani attempts to internationalize the Kashmir dispute, then why is his EA spokesperson and various BJP leaders routinely issuing statements against Pakistan "internationalizing the Kashmir Dispute"?

Why is the Indian media carrying report after report of "Modi demanding/tough talking/chest puffing that Pakistan stop internationalizing the Kashmir Dispute"?

There is a disconnect between the views expressed on this thread by Indians/Indian sympathizers and the statements of Modi/BJP and the Indian government.

Actually there is none.. Imagine an illiterate drunk who comes and pees on the road outside my office. His doing that does not hurt me or my office building at all, apart from a little embarrassment for the visitors to see him degrading the neighborhood for those few minutes. But still the office guard would shout at him for the stupid and shameless act. Would you call that a disconnect ? I dont think Pakistan's attempts to internationalize Kashmir issue are any different in impact from this example. No harm, but still get shouted on. And life goes on

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As long as Simla Agreement is in force, the bilateral nature of all disputes, including Kashmir, will be binding on both countries, and recognized as such by the international community, as we have already seen multiple times. Any third party mediation will require consent of both India and Pakistan.

Third party mediation is in place already via the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir, as acknowledged by the Simla Agreement's reiteration of the commitment of both India and Pakistan to the UN Charter, and by the fact that there is no language in Simla that supersedes any commitments entered into by India and Pakistan prior to the Simla Agreement, such as the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir and the Indus Water Treaty.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The statement of 'both' is pretty irrelevant as there is only one party here - Pakistan which wants outside mediation or intervention. India being the larger and dominant of the two parties is loathe.
Getting Pakistan to sign the Shimla essentially institutionalizes Pakistans weakness and India's strength as it removes any third party entering the game and changing the strengths.

It does absolutely nothing of the sort - the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir stayed in place with Simla as did the Indus Water Treaty, as explained in my previous posts.

No Sir. It is not retroactive because it does not need to be. Any UN intervention now(ie post Shima) needed to be raised by Pakistan again in the UN - which Pakistan cannot do because of the Shimla Agreement. Let us for a second again assume that Pakistan does so despite the SA, the UN can not still legally intervene as India shows them the SA and asks them to sit down again.
Consequently without India's consent Pakistan cannot ask UN to mediate any longer.

The UNSC resolutions on Kashmir have no expiration date - Pakistan does not need a "new UNSC Resolution passed" for the existing resolutions to remain valid, and hypothetically speaking, even if a new UNSC Resolution was passed on an India-Pakistan dispute (without India's consent), India's commitment to the UN Charter (as also explicitly recognized in the Simla Agreement) would require her to honor it, whether she agreed to UN mediation or not.

The Charter of UN specifies on orderly conduct between nations with rights and privileges. It has naught to do with the specific Indo-Pak issue. We do infact conduct our relations on the principles of the Charter of UN as does almost every country in the world.

The UN Charter also defines the processes of Chapter VI UNSC Resolutions, and therefore any country that signs on to the UN Charter also signs on to a commitment to the UNSC Resolutions under the various Chapters.

Quite a lot.
See, without the SA, Pakistan had a Right, to go to UN time and again and demand its problem be solved. Now if the Great Powers - like US and China (which did support Pakistan in the 70's till early 90's) would have supported Pakistan, that Right to go to UN may have yielded results for Pakistan. Time is fickle and the time may come yet again when the Great Powers align in favour of Pakistan.

Now, India has closed that possibility by the SA by making Indias consent a prerequisite to UNs intervention regardless of whether the Great Powers support the move or not.

Pakistan can "go to the UN and demand that the Kashmir Dispute be resolved in accordance with the existing UNSC Resolutions" even now, and that is in fact exactly what Pakistan has been doing. The Simla Agreement does not stop Pakistan from referencing the existing UNSC Resolutions and demanding their implementation. The US and China did support Pakistan, and yet there was little movement in resolving the Kashmir dispute, so I fail to see what exactly Pakistan would have done differently had "Indira agreed to hand over J&K to Pakistan and the following Indian government reneged on that commitment".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You are mixing "Munna, Aukat me raho" sentiment with "Munna mai to dar gaya".

True - Modi's 'sulking' is basically a result of being told "Munna, aukat me raho .." by Pakistan, after he cancelled the bilateral dialog over frivolous reasons and then engaged in unprovoked ceasefire violations.

 

[Nitin Goyal]

True - Modi's 'sulking' is basically a result of being told "Munna, aukat me raho .." by Pakistan, after he cancelled the bilateral dialog over frivolous reasons and then engaged in unprovoked ceasefire violations.

lol.. delusion at it best.