Modi's Article 370 remark: Is it time to end special status for J&K?

[WAR-rior]

I don't mind chidambaram as PM- congress has never said pappu will be PM, only that he will be 'face of congress' against Modi

Chidambaram? Seriously. That guy sucked as Fin Minister. Fuget bout PM. There is no point choosing tried and tested and miserably failed ones. Simple point to get.

 

[MohitV]

I think J&K should be separated into three separate states namely Kashmir Valley, Ladakh and Jammu.

yeah seriously as ladakh totaly diffrnt from kashmir....culture is diffrnt , geography is diff, etc etc.....ladakh will surely prosper if it is separated from kashmir.....as due to everything that is going on in kashmir....ladakh is not getting the attention it needs..

it shld not be scrapped for now or else it will cause alot of chaos

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Chidambaram? Seriously. That guy sucked as Fin Minister. Fuget bout PM. There is no point choosing tried and tested and miserably failed ones. Simple point to get.

Dude, he was a damn good FM, his Harvard Business School MBA trained head understood most of the problems. Don't blame him if BJP stalled parliament and never let any business to go through.

 

[Indischer]

Abolishing Article 370 is going to be a difficult task .

An interesting comment from BJP spokesperson yesterday in a news channel "Sardar Patel joined 500+ states with Indian Union without a problem . We allowed Nehru to handle a single one and he made a mess out of it" .

That statement obfuscates the reality a bit. Sardar Patel was entrusted with uniting ALL of India's kindoms. It was Sardar Patel's failure to ensure that states like Kashmir and Hyderabad resisted accession to India. How/why do the failures alone get transferred onto Nehru's shoulders suddenly?

Kashmir and Hyderabad sought independence from both India & Pakistan. Since Pakistan could not influence militarily in Hyderabad, India could wrest it in 1949. In any impartial assessment, Kashmir stands divided not because of Nehru's failure, but because of Patel's.

Interestingly, it may be argued that since Nehru saw Kashmir as his ancestral homeland that he was determined not to lose it to Pakistan. As the man went by rationale & logic, it should have been apparent to him that in a state where 90% of the citizens were Muslim and which shared borders with Pakistan, it could not be retained by India except by force.
Remember, Junagadh, which had a muslim ruler, hindu majority populace and shared maritime borders with pakistan, was forcibly included by India on the premise that a Hindu majority state cannot go to Pakistan (perhaps another reason why Nehru ensured a strong secular outlook to India, because otherwise, India's claim on Kashmir sounds hollow indeed).

 

[Yeti]

Kashmir will benefit if Indians could buy land and property in the state it would fuel a big property boom thus creating jobs for the locals. We should learn from China where Hans can live in any part of the mainland from Tibet to Xinjiang.

Also why we call Kashmir a integral part of India when they have 'special status' and not the same law applied elsewhere?

 

[he-man]

I will say this for the last time

we need 2/3 majority in parliament and 1/2 in the j&k assembly

this is impossible for the forseable future.anyone thinking otherwise is not informed enough

 

[WAR-rior]

Dude, he was a damn good FM, his Harvard Business School MBA trained head understood most of the problems. Don't blame him if BJP stalled parliament and never let any business to go through.

Thats your misunderstanding when you compare theoritical brains of some havard satisfying local problems of india which needs ground realities experience and innovative solutions. WHat has Chidambaram done till now in terms of novel solutions for our local problems? Implementing solutions from a developed country may not always fit for a developing country. Thats a truth accepted universally.

Bottomlone is, its naive to choose someone just coz hes havard or oxford return. Even pappu is Oxford or Cambridge degree holder. Does it justify his words uttured during campaign? No.

 

[adwityagrata]

That statement obfuscates the reality a bit. Sardar Patel was entrusted with uniting ALL of India's kindoms. It was Sardar Patel's failure to ensure that states like Kashmir and Hyderabad resisted accession to India. How/why do the failures alone get transferred onto Nehru's shoulders suddenly?

Kashmir and Hyderabad sought independence from both India & Pakistan. Since Pakistan could not influence militarily in Hyderabad, India could wrest it in 1949. In any impartial assessment, Kashmir stands divided not because of Nehru's failure, but because of Patel's.

Interestingly, it may be argued that since Nehru saw Kashmir as his ancestral homeland that he was determined not to lose it to Pakistan. As the man went by rationale & logic, it should have been apparent to him that in a state where 90% of the citizens were Muslim and which shared borders with Pakistan, it could not be retained by India except by force.
Remember, Junagadh, which had a muslim ruler, hindu majority populace and shared maritime borders with pakistan, was forcibly included by India on the premise that a Hindu majority state cannot go to Pakistan (perhaps another reason why Nehru ensured a strong secular outlook to India, because otherwise, India's claim on Kashmir sounds hollow indeed).

When the British was forced to grant Independence to India and Pakistan, they also granted independence to all the other princely stats. It was left to India and Pakistan to try and grab as much sates they could into their union. Those land grabbing was not bound by the same rules that decided on partition.

It was Sardar Patel's exemplary skill which forced all the 550 small princes and zamindars to surrender to Independent India.

Reality is Patel was able to tackle all these problems including Kashmir too in-spite of the constantly instigated by Jinnah in Pakistan. Mountbatten wanted the Kashmir Problem to be referred to U.N. Nehru always sided whatever Mountbatten said and Patel was dead against making a move of taking Kashmir to UN.

Patel had even met Maharajah of Kashmir and had obtained his signature that the matter may not be referred to UN.

Despite all this Nehru referred this Kashmir issue to UN in totally opposition to Sardar Patel, who had insisted that it is purely an internal matter and there was no need to refer this to UN.

Patel is on record saying "If only Nehru had listened to my advice,not a single Pakistani would have been allowed to stay inside Kashmir even for a single day."

Indian claim on Kashmir comes from the same instrument of accession that the ruler of kashmir signed with the Govt. of India. The same as that for any other state that joined India. Their religious leaning was and continues to be irrelevant.

Lastly Maulana Abul Kalam Azad confessed in his autobiography that was published posthumously in 1959, “It was a mistake on my part that I did not support Sardar Patel. We differed on many issues but I am convinced that if he had succeeded me as Congress President he would have seen that the Cabinet Mission Plan was successfully implemented. He would have never committed the mistake of Jawaharlal which gave Mr. Jinnah an opportunity of sabotaging the Plan. I can never forgive myself when I think that if I had not committed these mistakes, perhaps the history of the last ten years would have been different.”

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Thats your misunderstanding when you compare theoritical brains of some havard satisfying local problems of india which needs ground realities experience and innovative solutions. WHat has Chidambaram done till now in terms of novel solutions for our local problems? Implementing solutions from a developed country may not always fit for a developing country. Thats a truth accepted universally.

Bottomlone is, its naive to choose someone just coz hes havard or oxford return. Even pappu is Oxford or Cambridge degree holder. Does it justify his words uttured during campaign? No.

Dude, he was one of the architects (along with MMS who was then the finance minister) of dismantling of the old economic order and the initiation of reform in 1991. He was one of the key stewards. And let me remind you that until 1998 the BJP rejected every single thing that these guys did (but had no problems basking in the credit when the momentum picked up after these guys did the work). I think you're being needlessly dismissive about this guy.

 

[WAR-rior]

Dude, he was one of the architects (along with MMS who was then the finance minister) of dismantling of the old economic order and the initiation of reform in 1991. He was one of the key stewards. And let me remind you that until 1998 the BJP rejected every single thing that these guys did (but had no problems basking in the credit when the momentum picked up after these guys did the work). I think you're being needlessly dismissive about this guy.

Well I am not. I am not rejecting for what he did when it was required but with times change the solutions. Today India cant apply Western learned models to current requirements. What Modi did in Gujarat is innovative in nature and is commended by Whole western world. They are not doing it merely on marketing activities by Modi. They have seen it on ground. Some reason right. Not taking away things done by MMS and PC but today times are different and they have failed to bring novel changes and solution as direly required by our country.

Its time we try new solutions and mentality atleast for next 5 yrs. Who knows whole India can become Gujarat with Modi's innovation and proactiveness.

 

[Indischer]

When the British was forced to grant Independence to India and Pakistan, they also granted independence to all the other princely stats. It was left to India and Pakistan to try and grab as much sates they could into their union. Those land grabbing was not bound by the same rules that decided on partition.

It was Sardar Patel's exemplary skill which forced all the 550 small princes and zamindars to surrender to Independent India.

Reality is Patel was able to tackle all these problems including Kashmir too in-spite of the constantly instigated by Jinnah in Pakistan. Mountbatten wanted the Kashmir Problem to be referred to U.N. Nehru always sided whatever Mountbatten said and Patel was dead against making a move of taking Kashmir to UN.

Patel had even met Maharajah of Kashmir and had obtained his signature that the matter may not be referred to UN.

Despite all this Nehru referred this Kashmir issue to UN in totally opposition to Sardar Patel, who had insisted that it is purely an internal matter and there was no need to refer this to UN.

Patel is on record saying "If only Nehru had listened to my advice,not a single Pakistani would have been allowed to stay inside Kashmir even for a single day."

Indian claim on Kashmir comes from the same instrument of accession that the ruler of kashmir signed with the Govt. of India. The same as that for any other state that joined India. Their religious leaning was and continues to be irrelevant.

Lastly Maulana Abul Kalam Azad confessed in his autobiography that was published posthumously in 1959, “It was a mistake on my part that I did not support Sardar Patel. We differed on many issues but I am convinced that if he had succeeded me as Congress President he would have seen that the Cabinet Mission Plan was successfully implemented. He would have never committed the mistake of Jawaharlal which gave Mr. Jinnah an opportunity of sabotaging the Plan. I can never forgive myself when I think that if I had not committed these mistakes, perhaps the history of the last ten years would have been different.”

Independence was never an option for any of the 550 odd states. They only had the freedom to choose between India and Pakistan. It was the argument of some rulers that since their forefathers had surrendered to the British Crown alone, they ought to be independent once the Crown-rule ended. But Lord Mountbatten had made it clear that this was not a possibility.

The reason why Nehru referred the Kashmir issue to UN was that by December 1948, both armies were fairly well entrenched along today's LOC, and India was unprepared for a Winter-war. There's no way the Indian Army of 1948 had enough mountain divisions to conquer regions like Gilgit Baltistan & Shaksgam valley through the Himalayan winter.

 

[Chronos]

Independence was never an option for any of the 550 odd states. They only had the freedom to choose between India and Pakistan. It was the argument of some rulers that since their forefathers had surrendered to the British Crown alone, they ought to be independent once the Crown-rule ended. But Lord Mountbatten had made it clear that this was not a possibility.

The reason why Nehru referred the Kashmir issue to UN was that by December 1948, both armies were fairly well entrenched along today's LOC, and India was unprepared for a Winter-war. There's no way the Indian Army of 1948 had enough mountain divisions to conquer regions like Gilgit Baltistan & Shaksgam valley through the Himalayan winter.

Blind Nehru hate does get in the way of sound analysis.

 

[utraash]

I know such kind of restrictions exist in some NE states but is it also true about Uttarkhand as Omar Abdullah claimed?
I am unable to verify...
Do clarify. anyone?

wat did he say about Uttrakhand.....?

 

[adwityagrata]

Independence was never an option for any of the 550 odd states. They only had the freedom to choose between India and Pakistan. It was the argument of some rulers that since their forefathers had surrendered to the British Crown alone, they ought to be independent once the Crown-rule ended. But Lord Mountbatten had made it clear that this was not a possibility.

The reason why Nehru referred the Kashmir issue to UN was that by December 1948, both armies were fairly well entrenched along today's LOC, and India was unprepared for a Winter-war. There's no way the Indian Army of 1948 had enough mountain divisions to conquer regions like Gilgit Baltistan & Shaksgam valley through the Himalayan winter.

British had granted Independence to ALL 565 princely state in India. Mountebatten in his personal capacity agreed to assist in merging them with India and pakistan, but there was no British support for this.

Many states choose to be independent till convinced by India by various means. They did not have the option to stay Independent because Sardar Patel took away that option as a policy to encourage them to merge with India.

In 1948 both Armies were incapable of any strong action. A ceasefire was inevitable and in fact was already established. There was no need to go to the UN. It gave no additional benefit to India, on the contrary it involved the international community in what should have been a purely bilateral matter and give the western world an leverage in India. This was foreseen by Sardar Patel and he had warned Nehru against it, Nehru went ahead in-spite of Patels opposition.

Blind Nehru hate does get in the way of sound analysis.

and self proclaimed fools should desist from commenting on topics they know little about.

wat did he say about Uttrakhand.....?

I am not aware of what he said, but India does have a similar problem in other regions.

1) Article 371A- Let alone buying property or settling in Nagaland, Indians can't even enter this state without an inner line of permit.
2) Article 371B- In certain districts of Assam like Karbi Anglong, Indians can't buy land.
3) Article 371C- No Indian can buy property or settle in Manipur.
4) Article 371F- No Indian can buy property or settle in Sikkim.
5) Article 371G- No Indian can buy property or settle in Mizoram.
6) Article 371H- No Indian can buy property or settle down in Arunachal Pradesh, Indians can't even enter this state without an inner line of permit.
7) People in Sikkim don't pay income tax unlike other Indians.
8) People of India can't buy land in many parts of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
9) Indians needing a permit to visit many islands in Andamans and Lakshwadeep

In fact, due to this Anti-Hindu policy, Andaman is filled with illegal Bangladeshi emigrants who have taken over the entire island.

However Kashmir is a larger problem area due to the direct interference of Pakistan and involvement of UN due to Nehru's stupidity and needs to be addressed first.

 

[Indischer]

1) Article 371A- Let alone buying property or settling in Nagaland, Indians can't even enter this state without an inner line of permit.
2) Article 371B- In certain districts of Assam like Karbi Anglong, Indians can't buy land.
3) Article 371C- No Indian can buy property or settle in Manipur.
4) Article 371F- No Indian can buy property or settle in Sikkim.
5) Article 371G- No Indian can buy property or settle in Mizoram.
6) Article 371H- No Indian can buy property or settle down in Arunachal Pradesh, Indians can't even enter this state without an inner line of permit.
7) People in Sikkim don't pay income tax unlike other Indians.
8) People of India can't buy land in many parts of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
9) Indians needing a permit to visit many islands in Andamans and Lakshwadeep

In fact, due to this Anti-Hindu policy, Andaman is filled with illegal Bangladeshi emigrants who have taken over the entire island.

However Kashmir is a larger problem area due to the direct interference of Pakistan and involvement of UN due to Nehru's stupidity and needs to be addressed first.

These Constitutional Articles deny the right to buy land only to outsiders in these states. The people of these States are Indians too!

The Andaman Islands have been populated by Bengalis since colonial times and were formerly under the jurisprudence of Calcutta High Court. The Islands have some of the strictest entry and travel restrictions within India. Where did you pick up this notion that they're illegal Bangladeshis??