No resolution for Kashmir due to UN’s indolence and world’s apathy: Syed Ali Geelani

[Corona]

lol look at this imbecile back tracking like the little indian he is.

Look at this retard, changing the subject when he has no defense to my accusations....

It is costing India more, that' common sense. Pakistan haven' stationed troops in IOK. It is your troops fighting the liberation movements in IOK and dozens of groups fighting for Kashmir liberation. Plus the weather is killing indian occupier terrorists too.

Yes india can maintain and Pakistan will keep playing it' game as it is doing since 47, it is your govt who cries foul when something happens. As I said Pakistan is fine with proceeding with current scenerio as long as Muslim population keep rising.

India can afford what it's paying. Kashmiri terrorists can't.
And if your plan for the liberation of Kashmir is to wait till the Muslim population grows, you're gonna be waiting for ever. There were Muslims during all the wars we had with Pakistan, did anything happen?
How do you figure Muslims will have anything to do with it in the future when the current Muslims in the Middle East and North Africa don't give a sh*t about Kashmir?

 

[American Pakistani]

Please read up on Aksai Chin and the Shaksgam Valley for more information.

Shaksgam Valley or Trans Karakoram tract was in Chinese control long before Pakistan's independence. Pakistan had no physical control over that land and those lands were above the British created boundary during their rule.

In Pakistan's agreement of 1963 Pakistan only backed off from claims on the lands above British created boundary of Kashmir whereas Chinese withdrew from 750 sq territory that they were controlling. To summarize, Pakistan gained some land and just backed off from the claims of something that it had never controlled.

W.F. Van Eekelan, a Dutch diplomat who served in New Delhi and London and delved into the archives in both places to write an excellent study, Indian Foreign Policy and the Border Dispute with China, concurs with the view that while Pakistan waived claims on old antiquated maps, China withdrew from 750 square miles.

diplomat Abdul Sattar, who served as foreign minister records “Pakistan remembers with gratitude an extraordinary gesture by Premier Zhou Enlai after the alignment was agreed, the Pakistan government belatedly realised that some grazing lands along the Mustagh River in the Shimshal Pass on the other side of the watershed were historically used by inhabitants of Hunza. It then appealed for an exception to the watershed principle to save hardship to the poor people. Zhou generously agreed to the amendment of the boundary so that an area of 750 square miles remained on the Pakistan side.” It was done at midnight.

https://www.dawn.com/news/513164

What about Aksai Chin? China snatched it from India nothing to do with Pakistan.

 

[VCheng]

Shaksgam Valley or Trans Karakoram tract was in Chinese control long before Pakistan's independence. Pakistan had no physical control over that land and those lands were above the British created boundary during their rule.

In Pakistan's agreement of 1963 Pakistan only backed off from claims on the lands above British created boundary of Kashmir whereas Chinese withdrew from 750 sq territory that they were controlling. To summarize, Pakistan gained some land and just backed off from the claims of something that it had never controlled.





https://www.dawn.com/news/513164

What about Aksai Chin? China snatched it from India nothing to do with Pakistan.

No matter how one views the above, the point remains that UN Resolutions applied to all of Kashmir as it existed in 1947, something that does not exist anymore.

 

[American Pakistani]

India can afford what it's paying. Kashmiri terrorists can't.
And if your plan for the liberation of Kashmir is to wait till the Muslim population grows, you're gonna be waiting for ever. There were Muslims during all the wars we had with Pakistan, did anything happen?
How do you figure Muslims will have anything to do with it in the future when the current Muslims in the Middle East and North Africa don't give a sh*t about Kashmir?

It is actually opposite, Kashmiri civilians are sons of that soil and they will keep fighting for independence, their birthright also accepted by UN and the world as dispute. But indian occupier terrorists are outsiders who will keep paying for egoistic and elites of few indians.

If entire india is ruled by Muslims then Pakistan have no issues because those Muslims won' massacre Kashmiris. So as long as Muslim population keep rising Pakistan is fine.

No matter how one views the above, the point remains that UN Resolutions applied to all of Kashmir as it existed in 1947, something that does not exist anymore.

Agreed, but your claims that Pakistan gifted some territory in a plate is falsified nonsense lines picked by you from indians.

 

[VCheng]

Agreed, but your claims that Pakistan gifted some territory in a plate is falsified nonsense lines picked by you from indians.

Where did I say "gifted"? My point remains correct and Pakistan's cession of claims to large parts of Kashmir in favor of China only complicates the picture in fulfilling requirements as stipulated in the original UN Resolutions.

 

[Corona]

It is actually opposite, Kashmiri civilians are sons of that soil and they will keep fighting for independence, their birthright also accepted by UN and the world as dispute. But indian occupier terrorists are outsiders who will keep paying for egoistic and elites of few indians.

If entire india is ruled by Muslims then Pakistan have no issues because those Muslims won' massacre Kashmiris. So as long as Muslim population keep rising Pakistan is fine.



.

Keep looking everything from a religious point of view if it helps you but reality is different. Muslims in India join the army. Heck, Muslims in Kashmir join the police and other government jobs. Our fight is not with Muslims, Hindus or Christians. It's with the enemies of our country.
Maybe it's because Pakistan was created to satisfy a religious imbalance, but in India, religion comes after country.

Where did I say "gifted"? My point remains correct and Pakistan's cession of claims to large parts of Kashmir in favor of China only complicate the picture in fulfilling requirements as stipulated in the original UN Resolutions.

Need a new plan that all parties agree to if the issue is to be settled peacefully. I have zero hope in the old referendum plan.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Incorrect. It called for a plebiscite in ALL of Kashmir, including parts ceded by Pakistan to China, and those under Indian and Pakistani control.

No matter how one views the above, the point remains that UN Resolutions applied to all of Kashmir as it existed in 1947, something that does not exist anymore.

1) Pakistan didn't cede any territory to China .... (b/w how can you hold a plebiscite in an uninhabited area ??)

2) International law permits a State in de facto and effective possession of an area to conclude agreements of a limited local character to maintain peace and tranquility

The Sino Pak border agreement of 1963 is Provisional , The article 6 clearly states :

“The two parties have agreed that after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the boundary, as described in Article Two of the present agreement, .."

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/what...-know-the-sino-pak-boundary-agreement.310842/

 

[American Pakistani]

Where did I say "gifted"? My point remains correct and Pakistan's cession of claims to large parts of Kashmir in favor of China only complicate the picture in fulfilling requirements as stipulated in the original UN Resolutions.

You claimed that it was ceded to China. Pakistan have not ceded or gifted or sacrificed any territory to anyone. That territory was already under Chinese control when British were ruling. If anything Pakistan gained the territory not ceded anything.

 

[VCheng]

The Sino Pak border agreement of 1963 is Provisional , The article 6 clearly states :

“The two parties have agreed that after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the boundary, as described in Article Two of the present agreement, .."

That is a good point. Determining the areas to which the UN Resolution applied won't be a straightforward matter as many would believe, that is all I will say here.

 

[American Pakistani]

Keep looking everything from a religious point of view if it helps you but reality is different. Muslims in India join the army. Heck, Muslims in Kashmir join the police and other government jobs. Our fight is not with Muslims, Hindus or Christians. It's with the enemies of our country.
Maybe it's because Pakistan was created to satisfy a religious imbalance, but in India, religion comes after country.


Need a new plan that all parties agree to if the issue is to be settled peacefully. I have zero hope in the old referendum plan.

You are massacring Muslims just due to beef and you say you are not against them, you massacred muslims in 2002 and made the murderer your PM and you say you are not against them, you bombed muslims in samjhouta express you say you are not against them, you destroyed Bari masjid you say you are not against them. Dude don' bring offtopic and stay on topic. I only said that as long as Muslim population keep rising in India and IOK, Pakistan is fine for now. Once muslims are majority they will make sure you bhartis don' commit genocide on Muslims in IOK.

 

[M. Sarmad]

That is a good point. Determining the areas to which the UN Resolution applied won't be a straightforward matter as many would believe, that is all I will say here.

The Boundary Agreement does not affect the status of the territory of Jammu and Kashmir. It does not affect the imperatives of demilitarization of the State. It does not derogate one jot or title from the right of self-determination of the people. It is, therefore, in entire conformity with the position adopted by the Government of Pakistan and the UN Resolutions

India did protest and a protest letter was sent to the UN Security Council after the signing of this agreement alleging that “the Government of Pakistan has unilaterally altered, not only in its own favour but also in favour of another aggressor, China, the basis of the Security Council Resolution of 17 January 1948 and the UN Commission’s resolution of 13 August 1949.” ... But the UN didn't accept Indian claim and no resolution (in this regard) was passed by the UN Security Council.

If you aren't scared of the outcome, so why don't you complete the preconditions for the UN referendum to take place? Why such total disregard for the world body?

Pakistan is under no obligation to withdraw its troops from Kashmir unilaterally. The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement to govern the withdrawal of not only Pakistan forces but also the bulk of the Indian armed forces from the state, the withdrawals to be carried out in a synchronized manner. ... And let me remind you it's India (not Pakistan) that has rejected all demilitarization plans proposed by the Commission and that's why both sides failed to conclude a truce agreement (thus halting the process). There's a reason for which the UN appointed official mediator blamed India and not Pakistan for halting the process !!

 

[Corona]

You are massacring Muslims just due to beef and you say you are not against them, you massacred muslims in 2002 and made the murderer your PM and you say you are not against them, you bombed muslims in samjhouta express you say you are not against them, you destroyed Bari masjid you say you are not against them. Dude don' bring offtopic and stay on topic. I only said that as long as Muslim population keep rising in India and IOK, Pakistan is fine for now. Once muslims are majority they will make sure you bhartis don' commit genocide on Muslims in IOK.

We've had a few Muslims killed in the beef lynchings, not a massacre.
And yes Muslims died in communal riots, the Masjid was destroyed, and all of it done by religious hardliners, NOT the government. A mob did all those things. The government had no part in any of those. We've punished and are still punishing those who are responsible. And the PM was cleared by the court before he took his post.

I'm not going off topic, I'm merely countering what you said about religion playing any role in the resolution of Kashmir. Religion has ZERO play in the Kashmir issue, and it will have ZERO effect on any solution we come up for Kashmir.

 

[American Pakistani]

I'm not going off topic, I'm merely countering what you said about religion playing any role in the resolution of Kashmir. Religion has ZERO play in the Kashmir issue, and it will have ZERO effect on any solution we come up for Kashmir.

I'm gonna report any more offtopic post. So don' try to divert the topic, I know you guys love to derail every thread.

For you it maybe zero play, for Pakistan it is a future long term strategy. Muslims are already around 15% on total indian population, till 2050, they might reach 25% and from there it will be not so long when they reach 50%. Once they have majority they will be the rulers and will make sure indian occupier terrorists does not massacre Kashmiris.

 

[Corona]

I'm gonna report any more offtopic post. So don' try to divert the topic, I know you guys love to derail every thread.

For you it maybe zero play, for Pakistan it is a future long term strategy. Muslims are already around 15% on total indian population, till 2050, they might reach 25% and from there it will be not so long when they reach 50%. Once they have majority they will be the rulers and will make sure indian occupier terrorists does not massacre Kashmiris.

Even if Muslims reach a majority population, Kashmir strategy on the Indian end will remain unaltered. The Muslims in India are still Indians first. I'll reiterate, depending on religious commonalities to solve an issue will not work out, has not worked out in the past and will not work out in the future.
You can reduce yourself to thinking that religion will solve it, but truth is, people bond over a shared culture more effectively than religion.

And if your primary concern is the death of Kashmiri people, the solution to that is clear too. Stop joining terrorist factions and fighting the army. Instead, join politics, join schools, join debates anything to better yourselves.

 

[VCheng]

The Boundary Agreement does not affect the status of the territory of Jammu and Kashmir. It does not affect the imperatives of demilitarization of the State. It does not derogate one jot or title from the right of self-determination of the people. It is, therefore, in entire conformity with the position adopted by the Government of Pakistan and the UN Resolutions

India did protest and a protest letter was sent to the UN Security Council after the signing of this agreement alleging that “the Government of Pakistan has unilaterally altered, not only in its own favour but also in favour of another aggressor, China, the basis of the Security Council Resolution of 17 January 1948 and the UN Commission’s resolution of 13 August 1949.” ... But the UN didn't accept Indian claim and no resolution (in this regard) was passed by the UN Security Council.

If and when UN pays attention to this matter, it would be interesting to see how they decide, if at all.