Pakistan refuses to sign three multilateral pacts at SAARC summit: officials

[surya kiran]

The entire territory of J&K is considered disputed by the international community, and under that status either both India and Pakistan are occupying territory, or neither is.

Also, the UNSC resolutions call for engagement between India and Pakistan to determine the how and when of demilitirization prior to a plebiscite being held, negotiations that India is currently refusing to engage in, so it is India that is violating the UNSC resolutions, not Pakistan.

Simla agreement over rules those. Sorry. Why do you think nobody takes Pak seriously at the UN, not even China? Its because of the Simla Accord.

 

[Star Wars]

The power shortage can be overcome via energy imports from Pakistan's Western neighbors and investment in setting up more dams and power plants, so what else?

What ??....western Neighbor...Pakistan importing power from Afghanistan ?? We all know how the Iran deal tunre dout

 

[Norwegian]

Then why is it refusing to implement the UNSC resolutions on holding a plebiscite? This resolutions ask for negotiations between India and Pakistan on demilitarization. India is running away - that much is pretty clear to all except the most obtuse.

UNSC resolution also call for Pakistan to remove its forces from Azad Kashmir. If Pakistan is not implementing its part, why condemn India?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

UNSC resolution also call for Pakistan to remove its forces from Azad Kashmir. If Pakistan is not implementing its part, why condemn India?

Are you even reading the posts? I clearly pointed out to you that the UNSC resolutions (these were resolutions passed after the initial ones that only mentioned a Pakistani withdrawal) call for negotiations between India and Pakistan on the "how" of demilitarization. That means India and Pakistan have to agree on demilitarization, and that is something India refuses to engage with Pakistan on.

 

[SrNair]

Its the puny establishment of Pakistan that is pushing him. This guy has no balls to stand up against them, yet alone his sole competitor Imran Khan.

Bro your govt and PM should atleast follow the examples of your all weather friend China.Entire world know the bitter rivalry between China and Japan.But look at their trade relation 330+billion$ even India China trade is now closing to 100 billion $mark.
PM Modi already made it clear.He will seek outside opportunity and they are already started it.Already sign a relation pact with Nepal.Pakistan and her people have so much to lose because of this hard stance.

 

[Norwegian]

Are you even reading the posts? I clearly pointed out to you that the UNSC resolutions (these were resolutions passed after the initial ones that only mentioned a Pakistani withdrawal) call for negotiations between India and Pakistan on the "how" of demilitarization. That means India and Pakistan have to agree on demilitarization, and that is something India refuses to engage with Pakistan on.

If both Pakistan and India demilitarize, who will hold the elections? UN?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What ??....western Neighbor...Pakistan importing power from Afghanistan ?? We all know how the Iran deal tunre dout

TAPI and with the potential development of hydropower on the Afghan side, there is likely to be additional surplus electricity available for Pakistan.

Also, Pakistan is already importing small amounts of electricity from Iran for the border areas, and can increase those purchases if sanctions are lifted, or pay for it via barter, as India does. The list of options of energy import from Pakistan's western neighbors is pretty comprehensive.

 

[Norwegian]

Bro your govt and PM should atleast follow the examples of your all weather friend China.Entire world know the bitter rivalry between China and Japan.But look at their trade relation 330+billion$ even India China trade is now closing to 100 billion $mark.
PM Modi already made it clear.He will seek outside opportunity and they are already started it.Already sign a relation pact with Nepal.Pakistan and her people have so much to lose because of this hard stance.

I know Pakistan has all to lose on this. That's why I am educating some Pakistanis here how bad it is to vote in a rigged PM!

 

[SrNair]

Clearly nawaz took a hard stance here.

He dont have any choice.At one side their sensitive relation with China and on other side internal political compulsions

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Simla agreement over rules those. Sorry. Why do you think nobody takes Pak seriously at the UN, not even China? Its because of the Simla Accord.

No it doesn't - Simla clearly reiterates the commitment of both States to the UN Charter, the very Charter under which the UNSC Resolutions were passed, resolutions that both India and Pakistan committed to at that time.

In addition, Simla does not contain any language invalidating existing commitments between India and Pakistan (like the UNSC Resolutions or the Indus Water Treaty), and this is demonstrated by the fact that India does not claim that the Simla Agreement invalidated the IWT (which was also a third party mediated agreement entered into prior to the Simla Agreement).

 

[Norwegian]

He dont have any choice.At one side their sensitive relation with China and on other side internal political compulsions

Internal politics, lol! He will come back and announce he couldn't sign the deal because of dharna

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If both Pakistan and India demilitarize, who will hold the elections? UN?

Yes.

 

[Norwegian]

Yes.

 

[surya kiran]

No it doesn't - Simla clearly reiterates the commitment of both States to the UN Charter, the very Charter under which the UNSC Resolutions were passed, resolutions that both India and Pakistan committed to at that time.

In addition, Simla does not contain any language invalidating existing commitments between India and Pakistan (like the UNSC Resolutions or the Indus Water Treaty), and this is demonstrated by the fact that India does not claim that the Simla Agreement invalidated the IWT (which was also a third party mediated agreement entered into prior to the Simla Agreement).

It says principle of the Charter. Does not state UNSC resolutions. Instead it says, "(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them"

You also signed "That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, they will refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each other."

Your government signed this. Unless you want to say that your government signs any document without reading, which btw I will agree to.

 

[he-man]