The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[hero]

Stop your whining, trolls. Before we even begin to speak about Balochistan, we should first speak about Assam, Khalistan, Telangana, Tamil Eelam etc. But I'm sure you don't want to do that, so let's cut the crap and concentrate on the "disputed territory" of Kashmir. Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.

If you can't talk sense, then it is best to shut up and let grown men like EjazR do the talking, at least that guy knows what we're talking about. Every time someone like you opens his mouth, all you do is hurt India's case (even your countrymen are probably ashamed at your ignorance).

Sorry sir, for not following your order. It was best to shut their mouths first.

Pakistan should stop supporting and training terrorist. If you say dispute then it is dispute between kashmiri people and india. We are going to short it ourself. It is nothing to do with pakistan.

 

[Trichy]

Stop your whining, trolls. Before we even begin to speak about Balochistan, we should first speak about Assam, Khalistan, Telangana, Tamil Eelam etc. But I'm sure you don't want to do that, so let's cut the crap and concentrate on the "disputed territory" of Kashmir. Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.

If you can't talk sense, then it is best to shut up and let grown men like EjazR do the talking, at least that guy knows what we're talking about. Every time someone like you opens his mouth, all you do is hurt India's case (even your countrymen are probably ashamed at your ignorance).

Sorry sir, for not following your order. It was best to shut their mouths first.

i) Tamil Eleam is not a problem of India!
ii) Telangana wants separate state not a freedom from the India!
iii) Khalistan is a vanished issue (Indian PM is from there only)
iv) Assam ULFA already Crack-down but ya they are small groups only problem now

 

[toxic_pus]

Regarding this 'Kashmir is a disputed territory', some members, particularly those who swear by UN resolutions, should be better advised to note, that the 'dispute' is between India and Pakistan, and not between India and people of Kashmir, whereby the 'dispute' is to be solved with recourse to Kashmiri's opinion. The oh-so-divine UN resolutions are clear that there are only two parties to this 'dispute' and Kashmiris are not one of them. So this canard, 'Kashmiris right to self-determination' arises out of the 'disputed status' of Kashmir, is what it is - a canard.

 

[Valiant_Soul]

When did I say I support this? Why is it that anybody who speaks for the rights of Kashmiris is declared a terrorist by Indians?

Okay, so you wish to bury your head in the sand over 15 years of cross-border terrorism. I do not know how many times this has been discussed to death that Pakistani establishment at one level or another is the force behind cross-border terrorism in India. Isn't this your covert warfare because this is all you can do?

There are various types of warfare, you should turn to History books before asking me that question. As for respect, your Armed Forces respects us plenty, because they know what we're capable of. That's all the respect we need.

I know all kinds of warfare, but none that is targeted towards unarmed innocent people. Yes we know what you are capable of - that has been quite explicit from the four wars. Our armed forces so love to talk about the time it will take for them to complete their task once they get on to it. That shows their respect for your strength.

In other words, the Kashmiris can go to hell, the land belongs to India. Once again, you show no regard for the people of Kashmir with this statement. All you want to do is occupy a piece of land without its people. That is why they want independence in the first place; it's their land a lot more than it is yours (or even mine for that matter).

Astonishing the way you can twist the whole meaning of what has been said. I said they are free to choose their allegiance, they are free to call India their home or they can choose to be part of some other nation as people in any Indian region has the right. Yes, the land is paramount because the national integrity is paramount. That however is not contradictory to the upliftment of the people of Kashmir.

It's a waiting game for Kashmiris, nobody can sustain an occupation forever. This is why every Kashmiri says "when we attain freedom" and not "if we attain freedom" in the documentary Jashn-e-Azadi

.

This is not an occupation by any stretch of imagination. But let us wait and see where this takes you and us.

You're absolutely right. Which is why you should be lecturing your soldiers who recently shot killed two teenage boys for simply protesting (without weapons).

Any credible source/link for the same?

You should also be lecturing your government who took their land and gave it to a Hindu organization to attract more Hindus into the region. BSF soldiers are, at the very least, as unpopular in the Valley than militants, if not more. Killing innocents and denying basic rights has a lot to do with that.

Propaganda talk! As I said, if India wants to change the population demographic it has all the right to have people from everywhere else settle in Kashmir. Also read what EjazR has mentioned, you have your answer in his post. And do not forget the displaced Kashmiri pandits.

 

[PAFAce]

Okay, so you wish to bury your head in the sand over 15 years of cross-border terrorism. I do not know how many times this has been discussed to death that Pakistani establishment at one level or another is the force behind cross-border terrorism in India. Isn't this your covert warfare because this is all you can do?

We can do plenty, and that is the only reason why your Generals don't have their evening tea at the Lahore gym-khana. I think that's all I need to say about your superiority complex. As for civilian deaths, you'd do well to research the number of civilians killed by militants over the last year versus those killed by your soldiers, or for that matter, read up on the casualties since 1990 and you'll come crashing off your high horse.

I know all kinds of warfare, but none that is targeted towards unarmed innocent people. Yes we know what you are capable of - that has been quite explicit from the four wars. Our armed forces so love to talk about the time it will take for them to complete their task once they get on to it. That shows their respect for your strength.

"Once they get to it" is laughable, because once they get to it, we'll get to them. They've been "getting to it" since 1947, but all the poor blokes have managed to do is sit around talking about how they will do it. "Dus qadam aur Pakistan khatam" is quite a wet-dream for many. "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese, and we know how well that's been going. But I don't want to get into a boasting match, I have sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of both our Armed Forces to sleep peacefully right beside the Wagah Border. Any keen student of the Armed Forces on either side will let you know that if they are sitting around talking about "the time it will take for them to complete their task", they are wasting your hard earned money. What your soldiers should be doing is working to overturn their image as the laughing-stock of professional Armed Forces.

Astonishing the way you can twist the whole meaning of what has been said. Yes, the land is paramount because the national integrity is paramount. That however is not contradictory to the upliftment of the people of Kashmir.

You claim that land as if it belongs to you. It's a shame that you have absolutely no respect for the indigenous population nor their hardships at the hands of your armed forces, all you see is your ego.

This is not an occupation by any stretch of imagination. But let us wait and see where this takes you and us.

It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.

Any credible source/link for the same?

If you can't be bothered to research even the most basic facts about the current affairs regarding Kashmir, then I feel extremely disappointed at the fact that I've spent many minutes debating with you. It's like you don't even want to learn about Kashmir's issues, you'd just rather spew the same garbage that you've been force fed by your governments for over six decades.

The protests started after a 14-year-old boy died after he was struck in the head by a police tear gas shell as an anti-Indian protest ended last Sunday. The police officer who fired the shell was suspended and police called it "a callous and irresponsible action."

Then on Friday, witnesses said paramilitary soldiers charged at a group of people gathered on a playground and began firing as they fled, killing a 17 year old. Hemant Lohia, a top police officer, confirmed that the boy died from a bullet wound but said details about his death were still under investigation.
Source: washingtonpost.com

Now that you've made it perfectly clear that you are not interested in conducting even basic research on the subject, I don't see much point in continuing our discussion. You can live in your self-made paradise, while I whole-heartedly support the people being put through your hell.

Propaganda talk! As I said, if India wants to change the population demographic it has all the right to have people from everywhere else settle in Kashmir. Also read what EjazR has mentioned, you have your answer in his post. And do not forget the displaced Kashmiri pandits.

India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, EjazR didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their objectives. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).

If you say dispute then it is dispute between kashmiri people and india.

the 'dispute' is between India and Pakistan, and not between India and people of Kashmir, whereby the 'dispute' is to be solved with recourse to Kashmiri's opinion.

Please make up your minds, you guys are so damn confused. In any case, there are three parties involved in this issue, and all three will have to compromise. If, for some reason, India does not want Kashmir to join as a party,then Pakistan should (and does) represent the will of the majority of Kashmiris. It's really very simple. Stop indulging in petty arguments and lets get to solving the issue.

i) Tamil Eleam is not a problem of India!
ii) Telangana wants separate state not a freedom from the India!
iii) Khalistan is a vanished issue (Indian PM is from there only)
iv) Assam ULFA already Crack-down but ya they are small groups only problem now

Ghalat fehmi.

The largest Tamil and Sikh communities outside of South Asia are found in Canada. Separatist Tamils here claim Northern Sri Lanka and the Southern portion of the state of Tamil Nadu as sovereign territory, hence Tamil Eelam definitely applied to India as well (though it isn't a major concern).

During the massacre of Sikhs involved in the Khalistan movement, there was mass refugee-immigration from India to Canada, and hence many seriously anti-Indian sentiments can be found amongst a small portion of Sikhs in Canada (particularly in British Columbia). Human Rights Watch and other Sikh organizations certainly wants India to probe the massacre, but the Indian government is reluctant to do so (understandably).

Telangana is definitely a struggle for a separate state, but to say that there is no nationalist movement is foolish. This situation, however, is still very much manageable (though Mr. Chidambaram has done everything in his power to screw it up).

Lastly, Assam is very much alive, despite the crackdown and the Bangladeshi government selling out. The biggest concern for you is the fact that the leader of ULFA has asked for a plebiscite to be conducted in Assam, which is a clear Red Flag for any observer about public opinion in the region. If I were you, I'd try to get control of that situation using diplomacy and tactics, not a heavy hand. It has every potential to turn into another Kashmir (though I don't expect the Bangladeshis to ever support that movement as Pakistanis support Kashmir).

 

[yuba]

We can do plenty, and that is the only reason why your soldiers don't have their afternoon tea in the Lahore gym-khana. I think that's all I need to say about your superiority complex. As for civilian deaths, you'd do well to research the number of civilians killed by militants over the last year versus your soldiers, or for that matter, read up on the casualties since 1990 and you'll come crashing off your high horse.


"Once they get to it" is laughable, because once they get to it, we'll get to them. They've been "getting to it" since 1947, but all the poor blokes have managed is sitting around and chatting about how they will do it. "Dus qadam aur Pakistna Khatam" is quite a wer-dream for many. "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese. We know how well that's been going. Bit I don't want to get into a boasting match, I have sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of both our Armed Forces to sleep peacefully right beside the Wagah Border.


You claim that land as if it belongs to you. It's a shame that you have absolutely no respect for the indigenous population nor their hardships at the hands of your armed forces, all you see is your ego.


It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.


If you can't be bothered to research even the most basic facts about the current affairs regarding Kashmir, then I feel extremely disappointed at the fact that I've spent many minutes debating with you. It's like you don't even want to learn about Kashmir's issues, you'd just rather spew the same garbage that you've been force fed by your governments for over six decades.

The protests started after a 14-year-old boy died after he was struck in the head by a police tear gas shell as an anti-Indian protest ended last Sunday. The police officer who fired the shell was suspended and police called it "a callous and irresponsible action."

Then on Friday, witnesses said paramilitary soldiers charged at a group of people gathered on a playground and began firing as they fled, killing a 17 year old. Hemant Lohia, a top police officer, confirmed that the boy died from a bullet wound but said details about his death were still under investigation.
Source: washingtonpost.com

Now that you've made it perfectly clear that you are not interested in conducting even basic research on the subject, I don't see much point in continuing our discussion. You can live in your self-made paradise, while I whole-heartedly support the people being put through your hell.

India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, EjazR didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their objectives. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).

if pakistan military so powerfull why you not take kashmir what you should do is read the neutral accounts of indo pac wars instead of digesting you militarys propaganda i cant belive you live in this bubble you created for yourselves i from india but i still do not say we won 62 war but you still think you won in 47 65 and kargil

 

[yuba]

by the way during operation gibralter was it not local kashmiris that told the indians about the infiltrations

 

[toxic_pus]

"We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese...

A citation would be appreciated. Btw, Ms. Gandhi became PM in 1966, a good 4 years after Indo-China war.

It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.

Please elaborate, why it is 'occupation'.

India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, EjazR didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how".

How is GoI trying to 'willfully' altering the demographics when nobody from the rest of India can even buy land and settle permanently in Kashmir.

EDIT: Ejaz has clearly explained 'why'.

It was specifically handed over to provide for Hindu pilgrims...

You would have read it, only if you were not busy burying your head in the sand.

 

[PAFAce]

if pakistan military so powerfull why you not take kashmir what you should do is read the neutral accounts of indo pac wars instead of digesting you militarys propaganda i cant belive you live in this bubble you created for yourselves i from india but i still do not say we won 62 war but you still think you won in 47 65 and kargil

I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"

A citation would be appreciated. Btw, Ms. Gandhi became PM in 1966, a good 4 years after Indo-China war.

That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event.

Please elaborate, why it is 'occupation'.

1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).

I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.

You would have read it, only if you were not busy burying your head in the sand.

It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, EjazR simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write that on the brochure.

 

[yuba]

I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"


That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event.


1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).

I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.


It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, EjazR simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write that on the brochure.

i am all for debate but untill you realise that no matter what india will not give up ourside of the loc,so the best solution would be to make it a soft border encourage trade and try to live peacefully as neighbors

 

[yuba]

I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"


That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event.


1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).

I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.


It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, EjazR simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write that on the brochure.

sending terrorists across the loc to kill innocents shoot people in hotels is that what you mean by civilised debate

 

[toxic_pus]

Please make up your minds, you guys are so damn confused. In any case, there are three parties involved in this issue, and all three will have to compromise. If, for some reason, India does not want Kashmir to join as a party,then Pakistan should (and does) represent the will of the majority of Kashmiris. It's really very simple. Stop indulging in petty arguments and lets get to solving the issue.

The people who matter in New Delhi are far from confused. But your confusion is spilling out of your guts. First you did a 'monkey see, monkey do' with the word 'disputed' without realising its connotation in the context of UN resolutions. When cut down to size, you have resorted to the usual 'Pakistan should represent the will of the majority of Kashmirs'. This sense of entitlement is amazing.

How did you gather that Pakistan is somehow entitled to represent Kashmiris? Did it occur to you that a party to a dispute can't 'represent' a facilitator.

Ghalat fehmi.

Yeah right.

The largest Tamil and Sikh communities outside of South Asia are found in Canada. Separatist Tamils here claim Northern Sri Lanka and the Southern portion of the state of Tamil Nadu as sovereign territory, hence Tamil Eelam definitely applied to India as well (though it isn't a major concern).

During the massacre of Sikhs involved in the Khalistan movement, there was mass refugee-immigration from India to Canada, and hence many seriously anti-Indian sentiments can be found amongst a small portion of Sikhs in Canada (particularly in British Columbia). Human Rights Watch and other Sikh organizations certainly wants India to probe the massacre, but the Indian government is reluctant to do so (understandably).

The expats mean diddly squat as long as there is nothing on the ground and the situation on ground is cool as cucumber. If expats' opinion is all you have got to measure a movement, then remember there is a significant number of Baloch expats who are against Pakistan.

Next time try harder.

Telangana is definitely a struggle for a separate state, but to say that there is no nationalist movement is foolish. This situation, however, is still very much manageable (though Mr. Chidambaram has done everything in his power to screw it up).

You have no clue to what you are talking about. Isn't it?

Lastly, Assam is very much alive, despite the crackdown and the Bangladeshi government selling out. The biggest concern for you is the fact that the leader of ULFA has asked for a plebiscite to be conducted in Assam, which is a clear Red Flag for any observer about public opinion in the region. If I were you, I'd try to get control of that situation using diplomacy and tactics, not a heavy hand. It has every potential to turn into another Kashmir (though I don't expect the Bangladeshis to ever support that movement as Pakistanis support Kashmir).

Pathetic. But then again, you must be right. After all a Pakistani knows more about India that Indians themselves.

 

[ejaz007]

BJP warns govt against any deal on Kashmir
* Advani questions if ‘powerful nudge from US’ behind willingness to talk to Pakistan
By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday questioned if a “powerful nudge from Washington” was behind New Delhi’s offer for talks with Islamabad, and warned against any deal on Kashmir that breaches a Lok Sabha resolution. The resolution – unanimously passed on February 22, 1994 – says Jammu and Kashmir “has been, is and shall ... [remain] an integral part of India”.

In a two-page statement issue in New Delhi, Advani highlights US President Barack Obama’s statement in 2008 on “working with Pakistan and India to try to resolve the Kashmir crisis in a serious way”. He then says the government’s sudden willingness to hold talks with Pakistan had prompted political analysts to ask if this was a consequence of Obama’s statement being put into action. Separately, the BJP welcomed a high court order quashing a five percent quota for Muslims in jobs.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[yuba]

The people who matter in New Delhi are far from confused. But your confusion is spilling out of your guts. First you did a 'monkey see, monkey do' with the word 'disputed' without realising its connotation in the context of UN resolutions. When cut down to size, you have resorted to the usual 'Pakistan should represent the will of the majority of Kashmirs'. This sense of entitlement is amazing.

How did you gather that Pakistan is somehow entitled to represent Kashmiris? Did it occur to you that a party to a dispute can't 'represent' a facilitator.


Yeah right.


The expats mean diddly squat as long as there is nothing on the ground and the situation on ground is cool as cucumber. If expats' opinion is all you have got to measure a movement, then remember there is a significant number of Baloch expats who are against Pakistan.

Next time try harder.


You have no clue to what you are talking about. Isn't it?


Pathetic. But then again, you must be right. After all a Pakistani knows more about India that Indians themselves.

i am a sikh but i am also an indian most people who want a khalistan live outsidethe country you go to punjab and see how much most sikhs love india there may have been some problems in the past and i think some people should be punished for their role in delhi riots but we sikhs allways have and allways will be ready to protect our motherland india

 

[toxic_pus]

That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event.

Yes we all know what 'after' means. Question is why are you giving me English lessons when you should be giving a citation.

1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).

I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.

Horsepucky. IA is in Kashmir on the basis of Instrument of Accession which granted India the constitutional right to be in Kashmir. That was bolstered by UN writ, which required India to maintain presence. To prove that presence of IA in Kashmir is merely 'occupational' you have to prove that IA doesn't have a writ to be there.

1. Irrelevant, because India's presence is constitutional and is vetted by UN.

2. Bogus, no terrorism, no 'half a million Indian troops'. There wasn't any 'half a million troops' before the insurgency broke out in '87.

3. It is not unique to Kashmir. Police break up rallies in other parts of India as well, if such a rally is considered to be disruptive of civil life.

4. Indian democracy gives them the right to say about their future.

5. BS, unless you prove it.

It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, EjazR simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write that on the brochure.

It would take a lot more than that to ruffle my my feathers. Don't you loose sleep on that. But can you explain how can GoI 'encourage' Hindu worshipers to settle down in Kashmir, when they can't even buy land to settle down.

Btw, Kashmir houses a number of sites which are considered to be holy by the Hindus.