Pak willing to give up claim on Kashmir: Musharraf

[Srirangan]

Sweetheart,

If you care even an ounce for the truth, won't you realize that it has been your side yearning for gaining more of Kashmire?

'65 and then a Kargil in '99 - failing both times, but trying to get a piece of Kashmire.

We aren't losing sleep, we have even publicly come forward to relinquish the claim on the 'Northern' Areas. You'd realize this, if only the truth meant anything.

 

[blain2]

Assuming everything you claimed was true, even then, if there were to be a freedom struggle in any other region of the Subcontinent, should free movement then be the solution.

Because regional autonomy is already a reality in India, in fact the Central Govt. has to time and again depend on regional players to hold sway.

All I am saying is that the logic is flawed. Remember the entire region is disputed, that includes the entire Azad Kashmir ie. the 'Azad' Kashmir and what you call Northern Areas of Gilgit and Baltistan.

So allow me to do the break down, disputed regions:
#1 Jammu
#2 Kashmir
#3 Ladakh
#4 Aksai Chin
#5 'Azad' Kashmir
#6 Gilgit
#7 Baltistan
#8 Balwaristan

#1 #2 & #3 are held by India
#4 is held by China
#6 #7 & #8 are under Pakistani control

All 8 sub regions are disputed by one or more players. What Musharraf proposes is:

1. Autonomy
#1 #2 & #3 already enjoy autonomy and have popular elected Govt.'s.

You are joking right?

2. Demilitarization
Terrorism has to end for the Indian Security Forces to leave. Once terrorism ends, the Forces will have to automatically vacate. However, in the absence of which, a withdrawal would be unforeseeable.

How do you gauge that terrorism has ended? The flow of people is already the lowest ever.....India just like Pakistan will continue to see some form of terrorism for some time...what India has to do is to realize that there are other players here as well....there is only so much that Pakistan can do. What you state above is the same old..

Now, Musharraf is promising a similar 'demilitarization' in 'Azad' Kashmir. However he doesn't make any commitments about the Northern Areas. Why?

Because unlike Indian Kashmir, there is no real issue of self determination in these areas (its similar to Jammu, which Pakistan has offered India to keep to itself because of the Hindu majority).

Also, will (and can) Musharraf guarantee Chinese demilitarization of Aksai Chin?

Why would Musharraf do that? That is for China and India to figure out now...why should sorting out of problems b/w Pakistan and India be contingent upon Aksai Chin?

3. Joint Control Mechanism
Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiri's, Musharraf proposes, to jointly rule in Kashmir. Now observe the flawed reasoning of your self imposed President:
Musharraf denies Kashmiri independence. Simply means there is no Kashmiri citizen, as it is not a country. You are an Indian or Pakistani citizen of Kashmiri origin.

He is OUR president...regardless of being self imposed or elected. Kashmiri independence is not a possibility realistically...this is something that even the diehards in Kashmir realize. There are certain things that Kashmiris would have to rely upon Pakistan and India to do for them like defence, foreign affairs etc. And btw, since you are picking so many bones about Musharraf denying Kashmiris this and that, how about your brutal repression of the Kashmiri demands for the same over the past 50 plus years? So maybe your alternate to his proposal is to go on with this occupation of Kashmiris for ever?

However, your Khan (Pashtun origin?) Prime Minister of 'Azad' Kashmir would need to prove his Kashmiri origins if Musharraf's 4 Point Plan is to be appointed.

That would not be too difficult.

4. Free Travel
Musharraf suggests there be no free travel between people. Why? Why not get passports & visas to travel? Or does he want the mess on the NWFP/Afghan border to be replicated here. A stupid idea!

Because this does allow Kashmiris and India and Pakistan some control over who comes in and goes out...give him credit for trying to avoid the mess that we have on Afghan-Pak border (thanks to Afghani concerns about the Durrand line).

There you go, all 4 points scrutinized.

Yes but unfortunately all with the usual counter-arguments.

 

[Srirangan]

How do you gauge that terrorism has ended? The flow of people is already the lowest ever.....India just like Pakistan will continue to see some form of terrorism for some time...what India has to do is to realize that there are other players here as well....there is only so much that Pakistan can do.

The movement across the LoC is infiltration, not terrorism. Terror will be gauged by the sustained peace in the Valley or the lack of.

What you state above is the same old..

Yes, and so it shall remain. There will be troops as long as there is violence perpetrated by terrorists or what some of you call 'mujahideen'.

Why would Musharraf do that?

Musharraf can't do that. Let us not worry about the why's. Musharraf is not China's boss.

That is for China and India to figure out now...why should sorting out of problems b/w Pakistan and India be contingent upon Aksai Chin?

Why? Isn't Pakistan a party to the Kashmir dispute? I'm sorry but Aksai Chin is part of this very mess to which you guys are a party. Will India, Pakistan demilitarize while China bulks up the piece of Kashmir it holds? Be realistic!

He is OUR president...regardless of being self imposed or elected. Kashmiri independence is not a possibility realistically...this is something that even the diehards in Kashmir realize.

True.

There are certain things that Kashmiris would have to rely upon Pakistan and India to do for them like defence, foreign affairs etc.

Why Pakistan when India would suffice? But then the Congress Govt. is probably nice enough to entertain the Status Quo. For the right wingers, status quo is a concession. And vice versa, I am sure there are hard-liners in Pakistan too.

Hence, status quo being the only solution. After all talk and time waster proposals being thrown up, status quo is the only possible solution.

And btw, since you are picking so many bones about Musharraf denying Kashmiris this and that, how about your brutal repression of the Kashmiri demands for the same over the past 50 plus years? So maybe your alternate to his proposal is to go on with this occupation of Kashmiris for ever?

A load of propaganda. I don't even need to respond, the latest Freedom Index provides all the answers.

Because this does allow Kashmiris and India and Pakistan some control over who comes in and goes out...give him credit for trying to avoid the mess that we have on Afghan-Pak border (thanks to Afghani concerns about the Durrand line).

1. Is there presently a lack of control?
2. And how will free movement of people ensure more control? In fact it would aid the opposite. Unless everyone suddenly has the IQ of a potato.

Yes but unfortunately all with the usual counter-arguments.

Which clearly lack merit.

 

[blain2]

Musharraf can't do that. Let us not worry about the why's. Musharraf is not China's boss.

Ok whatever you say. Read my point to undestand the gist. Playing with words does not take away from the fact that India's dealings with China have nothing to do with Pakistan and India, unless ofcourse if you are looking for more reasons to avoid making a deal. I never insinuated that Musharraf has any leverage over China...I just stated that is not his concern.

For the rest of stuff, all I have to say that I have gone down the road many a times and our discussion won't be very fruitful so I won't bother.

A load of propaganda. I don't even need to respond, the latest Freedom Index provides all the answers.

Yeah last I heard, the people in IoK were enjoying life as never before.

 

[Srirangan]

Ok whatever you say. Read my point to undestand the gist. Playing with words does not take away from the fact that India's dealings with China have nothing to do with Pakistan and India

O.K. Before you go on, let us clarify:
- India's dealings with China have something to do with Pakistan
- Pakistan's dealings with China have everything to do with India, and,
- China's dealings with Pakistan have mostly to do with India

These are realities New Delhi has to confront.

 

[vnomad]

Yeah last I heard, the people in IoK were enjoying life as never before.

You'd be right there(even though you didn't mean it that way). The Kashmiri economy has seen the best year in decades. The tourism industry has seen an excellent year(the militants are lobbying grenades right and left trying to stop it) and the horticulture industry(the mainstay of the Kashmiri economy) has seen a record produce. This is in addition of the generous(massive) aid from the centre. The poverty in J&K is fourth lowest in India and that's saying something.

 

[blain2]

You'd be right there(even though you didn't mean it that way). The Kashmiri economy has seen the best year in decades. The tourism industry has seen an excellent year(the militants are lobbying grenades right and left trying to stop it) and the horticulture industry(the mainstay of the Kashmiri economy) has seen a record produce. This is in addition of the generous(massive) aid from the centre. The poverty in J&K is fourth lowest in India and that's saying something.

Ok vnomad, I agree that things are ok if you say so...but you know its not even the economic state of Kashmir that is the issue of contention here (since economic upliftment has not been the primary issue for the Muslims of Kashmir). They want nothing to do with India. That is the crux of the issue.
Economic upliftmen only goes so far when there are other underlying differences.

The other point is that there is not one issue on which you and I would agree just because your countrymen have to toe the official govt line even when new ideas are being floated.....I mean just the fact that Pakistan makes an offer which is away from its decades old stated position is something that should be considered in optimism since its a lot more than what comes out of India, but many of your countrymen would simply disagree with it because its the inbuilt programming that gets in the way of problem resolution. So I guess India will carry on with the ostrich approach of denying that there is a problem in Kashmir and life will go on as is (chances are that it will become worse in the future). Faced with the rigid stance, Pakistan too will continue its support of Kashmir via covert and overt means.

The overall outlook is rather bleak for the region if we go by the rigid opinions being held by people on even silly forums like this. If we can't agree upon a common approach to this problem then expecting our politicians to come to terms is unreal (if not a joke).

 

[blain2]

O.K. Before you go on, let us clarify:
- India's dealings with China have something to do with Pakistan
- Pakistan's dealings with China have everything to do with India, and,
- China's dealings with Pakistan have mostly to do with India

These are realities New Delhi has to confront.

I don't agree with the first one. What India has to deal with Pakistan on is what they are at odds about. This primarily includes the Kashmir region as seen by India under the control of Pakistan and the other way around. Throwing China into the mix is muddying up the issue and nothing else....besides at official levels too, GoI has kept the AC issue out of its dealings with Pakistan on the Kashmir problem.

I mean lets get real here...there are a lot of factors outside of what Pakistan and India have to work out....first do one, then others will be facilitated due to the goodwill generated from the first one.

China does not have to make peace with India just because Pakistan does....but on the other hand, if India makes peace with Pakistan then it means that India has one less threat to worry about (I am being simplistic here, however this could be a reality). China and India do not have as bloody a history as India and Pakistan....if a deal can be made by Pakistan and India, I simply do not see why China and India can't come to terms (unless you guys become a US pawn in threatening China, which would have long term ramifications on the India-China peace process).

 

[Srirangan]

Let me be blunt about this, an Indian "peace" arrangement with Pakistan should not in any way compromise the security situation vis-a-vis China. Demilitarization may, hence it is a concern.

We haven't dragged China into this, but they are a part of the Asian security arrangement. Nothing happens in isolation.

 

[blain2]

Let me be blunt about this, an Indian "peace" arrangement with Pakistan should not in any way compromise the security situation vis-a-vis China. Demilitarization may, hence it is a concern.

We haven't dragged China into this, but they are a part of the Asian security arrangement. Nothing happens in isolation.

Your bluntness notwithstanding, the Kashmir issue has existed before the India-China territorial problems popped up and it is a "bi-lateral" issue b/w Pakistan and India with no room for a third party as all Indian pronouncements until now have indicated....Indian demilitarization in the Indian Kashmir and Pakistani demilitarization in AK do not change the security dynamics of the region in any drastic way between India and China....unless you are expecting Chinese field armies sweeping down from AC which is no longer a valid threat (it would be if you want to maintain the decades old suspicions and carry on with it).

In any case, the ball is not in India's court alone either....there is a lot of stuff going on around India...so if not now, at one point in the future some compromise would have to be made on the Kashmir issue.

 

[vnomad]

They want nothing to do with India. That is the crux of the issue.
Economic upliftmen only goes so far when there are other underlying differences.

How come there was no militancy before 1989 then? The militancy in my opinion was because of the economic conditions in Kashmir back then. India had an economic crisis raging before reforms in 1991.

I mean just the fact that Pakistan makes an offer which is away from its decades old stated position is something that should be considered in optimism since its a lot more than what comes out of India, but many of your countrymen would simply disagree with it because its the inbuilt programming that gets in the way of problem resolution.

You'd be wrong then. I welcome his proposal as a step in the right direction. His proposals should be studied further by joint Indo-Pak working committees.

So I guess India will carry on with the ostrich approach of denying that there is a problem in Kashmir and life will go on as is (chances are that it will become worse in the future). Faced with the rigid stance, Pakistan too will continue its support of Kashmir via covert and overt means.

That's where we disagree. India doesn't deny that there is a problem in Kashmir. The dispute is about the solution to the problem. Training of militants in Pakistan can lead to another war but I sincerely believe that improving economic conditions and integrating Kashmiris into the national mainstream can counter militancy.

The overall outlook is rather bleak for the region if we go by the rigid opinions being held by people on even silly forums like this. If we can't agree upon a common approach to this problem then expecting our politicians to come to terms is unreal (if not a joke).

Don't blame Indians exclusively for it.

 

[Srirangan]

Your bluntness notwithstanding, the Kashmir issue has existed before the India-China territorial problems popped up

Bullocks. British India had signed an agreement with the Ming/Qin (I get confused with Chinese names) rulers of China, that was disputed by Tibet and later the Communist Regime.

^^ Most of this pre-dates Pakistan.

and it is a "bi-lateral" issue b/w Pakistan and India with no room for a third party as all Indian pronouncements until now have indicated....

Absolutely. Which is why something bilateral should not allow India's position vis-a-vis China to be compromised. If it gets compromised, then it no longer remains bilateral, does it?

Indian demilitarization in the Indian Kashmir and Pakistani demilitarization in AK do not change the security dynamics of the region in any drastic way between India and China....

Let South Block in New Delhi decide that. Your reasoning for the same leave much to be desired.

In any case, the ball is not in India's court alone either....there is a lot of stuff going on around India...so if not now, at one point in the future some compromise would have to be made on the Kashmir issue.

Actually, the worst is over. India survived late 80's and the first half of the 90's and has come out only stronger.

Any such challenges will only see the same happen all over again. India rising up, and overcoming her problems to come out stronger. Why? Freedom, democracy yada yada yada

 

[Awesome]

I guess another cruel joke is going to be played by Indian and Pakistan governments. the ultimate sufferes would be the peace loving people of the two countries.
Kashif

This would be true in the past when Pak wanted Kashmir for itself. Not it is ready to let Kashmiris form their own nation.

 

[Awesome]

Mushraff is saying something which is totally different,he says india and pak shud adminster it together and there wont be any independence.

Which basically means under the pretext of a sacrifice he gets access to majority of the Kashmir valley,which even after 50 years of covert war paksitan coudnt win from india.

And Indians get access to the Pakistani side.

But when we work on the details the administration would have to be so minimal and autonomy to Kashmiris would have to be so high that in essence it would just be independence.

Or screw that and let's just do independence. Pakistan only states its against Independence because India is against Independence. For now we maintain our totalitarian point of view just as India does.

We'd only budge when India budges.

 

[Awesome]

We have seen the BB shouting in muzzafarabad " azaadi azaadi" and thats when she was in power.Why has Pksistan time and again said they are only providing "moral support" to freedom fighters.

What difference does that make? We are enemies we'd use covert ways of making life hell for the Indians...

Azadi... from India. Not form Pak. That's the totalitarian point of view and so does India hold the same. If India was to drop its stance we'd drop ours too.