The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[harish]

Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.

Dear Xeric, how is that so different from what is on the ground today? What are the ramifications of a change of terminology (LOC to IB) of the de facto point of no return in terms of a full blown armed and even nuclear conflict between the two countries? Unless you (your fundamentalists, your weak off-on civilian governments, and most importantly your army and ISI) need a moral high ground and international credibility/sanction in keeping on stoking the flames of unrest in Kashmir and keep the attention of the people of Pakistan diverted from what really ails your country? You and I both know that such factions are present in J&K even today. I have already covered this part in my previous post which I hope you would read. First, both India and Pakistan I feel are agreed that independent Kashmir is not a viable solution. That is half the battle won brother!

Once we are agreed on such a fundamental truth, we then need to accept the equally patent truth of the reality on the ground today, much as it may be unpalatable to both our countries. And that is that we have what we have, and the chance of getting a square kilometer more is next to impossible, without a full blown armed conflict, that would in all probability go nuclear by the side that finds itself going down. The chances for that have come and gone long ago. They were not seized for one reason or the other, and that’s that. Let us move on, and look forward instead of back. There is no sense in going into the by whom of it cause it is not pertinent here. So once we are agreed on the above two where does that leave us? Removing ego and wet dreams out of the picture that would leave us with the only possible solution of converting LOC to IB once and for all and moving forward in our relations peacefully.

Speaking about the disgruntled and less than satisfied factions on our side of the fence, again I have covered it in my previous post. They would first be counseled by neutral arbitrators/elders from the community. Failing which they would need to make a choice between staying in India or moving to Pakistan. Don't you see the beauty of this solution my friend? First India and Pakistan take one step back and many steps forward by deciding what is India and what is Pakistan. Then we both unitedly give the entire population of Jammu and Kashmir the right to vote on which country they would rather live in. The plebiscite we have been fighting over for decades now! In a way acceptable to all, for want of a better more workable alternative. Everything else would follow, and most importantly, in Peace. It would then simply be a matter of negotiation, and give and take, and working out the details.

The donor country (of translocated populations at the time of this plebiscite and Partition II) would agree on a mutually agreeable fair price in terms of financial compensation to pay the translocated people for the land and immovable assets they would be leaving behind, to help them start a new life afresh in the recipient country of their choice. I use the word ‘host country’ interchangeably with your ‘India,’ cause I believe it could be equally possible that there would be certain factions within the part of Kashmir you hold (AK and GB/NA) who would prefer to come join India, and this arrangement would benefit them as well. The currency exchange valuation would be pre-decided mutually between India and Pakistan to ensure equality, in light of the big gulf which has off late developed between the Indian rupee vis a vis its Pakistani counterpart. This part could be arbitrated on by both our Reserve banks, much like the Euro. Please let me know what you think of this solution brothers.

Remember how the first Partition happened? It started with a polarization of two ideologies. Then a separate nation was carved out as a land mass. And then the migration of people one way or the other depending on which ideology they saw their future with. Partition II would be the same. The land masses are decided first. Then the people move. But the movement is peaceful. Protected by the armed forces and governments on either side. Safe transit. Rightful compensation. And ready and speedy rehabilitation so that one need not live as a refugee, but as a proud new citizen of the country of your choice. Lets learn our harsh lessons of 63 years ago brothers, and show the spirits of our ancestors that we did things better this time around. And righted the wrongs of days gone by. They will smile down on us, and their torn spirits would be free at last.

 

[Jade]

Hey thick heads the issue is of not the color coding, but some lamers (like yourselves) trying to prove that NA and Azad Kashmir are inclusive in the phrase Jammu And Kashmir!

But the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown OUT of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my post # 1082, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!

And @ Gounder:
Kid you really need to get your map-reading straight. That map shows that though NA and AK are/were part of J & K (the red colored border) but now they are in Pakistani hands (the green color).

WTF! i never new i would be studying map reading from kids who cant even prove their claim i.e. NA is part of J & K by any mean!!

So both of you, the sooner you grow up the better it would be, one of you has already met his fate.

The map I posted is from western media. Its pure BS that western media has been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown out of J & K. I repeat J&K comprise of Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Aksai Chin, Shaksam, Valley, NA and P-O-K; and India has claims on all the areas mentioned.

Anyway you need to improve your map reading skills. Look at the map you posted and read it otherwise

 

[Xeric]

^^Have you read the recent survey conducted by the Chatham house and their conclusion particularly with regard to the plebescite.

If you haven't then its no use discussing further. Please go through the report carefully. Note that it doesn't include the NA areas which could have been more negative towards Pakistan keeping in mind the local sentiment.
Chatham House - Publications - Reports and Papers - Kashmir: Paths to Peace

While you are at it, you can check out another poll done by an Irish professor at
www.peacepolls.org

and check out the EU resolution of the Kashmir issue. You can google the report but the relevant part is this article here
EU Report Says Plebiscite Not In Kashmiris' Interest

One of the main reason being the plebiscite does not have independence as an option (which was removed on GoP insistence btw).

These are no different that those you have posted earlier and my concerns still stand as were posted by me in the following post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/664098-post681.html

By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.

Publicizing BS like 'Pakistan Failed To Fulfil Its Obligations' (which indeed doesnt mention any credible proof to support its claim except the regular rhetorics of 'Pakistan needs to limit its cross LoC infiltration') tells us that the reports are just resonating the india tones.

The following excerpt from one of the reports, without providing any credible source says it all:
Echoing India's position, the Nicholson report observes that Pakistan needs to take more effective steps to curb cross-Line of Control infiltration of militants. Moreover, the report supports the Indian position that demilitarisation in J&K is not favourable unless there is genuine reduction in violence levels.

Why dont for once and all anyone can come with a proof that Pakistan is supply the freedom fighters with weapons, ammo, money, training etc? You people harp about Pakistani statements like 'if Pakistan has a proof for indian involvement in Balochistan why dont it shows us all', but when they same formula is applicable to you, you start posting the self created news of 'foiled' infiltration attempts and even worse, post articles from the 'ancient times' where some support was available from organizations like LeT.

Until there's a hard proof, the india and western allegations over Pakistani involvement are void, which in turn put the credibility of such reports and poll in question - the ones who cant see the truth on ground how can they dig out the truth from people's heart?!

 

[Xeric]

The map I posted is from western media. Its pure BS that western media has been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown out of J & K. I repeat J&K comprise of Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Aksai Chin, Shaksam, Valley, NA and P-O-K; and India has claims on all the areas mentioned.

Anyway you need to improve your map reading skills. Look at the map you posted and read it otherwise

Post reported!

Fed up of your stupidity, ignorance and absurd claims that too without proof.

 

[harish]

Even with an intelligent guy like Xeric, and a soldier to boot, who doubtless has seen his share of death and suffering amongst his own men, as ours must have too, I see this common self-defeating tendency to look behind and debate till our teeth fall out (from old age or violent trauma) about who did what and who should have done what and who said to do what. Nit pick on terminology, and technicalities, and historical chronologies, and definitions, and the like, when the solution is there, its obvious, and its the only one available. Arre bhai, this thread is about solutions, but I guess no one is interested. I wish your sindhis and our gujaratis would have been in charge of negotiations. You would have seen a solution and money rolling in both sides within a year. Businessmen and corporates have a way of cutting through bullshit and egos and precedents when there is profit to be had.

 

[Jade]

Post reported!

Fed up of your stupidity, ignorance and absurd claims that too without proof.

It doesn’t behoove of think tank to use words such as “thick heads”, “Kids”, “lamers” while arguing. Arguments have to civilized

 

[Xeric]

Even with an intelligent guy like Xeric, and a soldier to boot, who doubtless has seen his share of death and suffering amongst his own men, as ours must have too, I see this common self-defeating tendency to look behind and debate till our teeth fall out (from old age or violent trauma) about who did what and who should have done what and who said to do what. Nit pick on terminology, and technicalities, and historical chronologies, and definitions, and the like, when the solution is there, its obvious, and its the only one available. Aree bhai, this thread is about solutions, but I guess no one is interested.

i appreciate you kind words , but unfortunately, though i was and had been talking solutions previously but then your atoot ang syndrome brought that to a grinding halt. Either agree that Kashmir is not india or else i cant talk solutions with someone having a stubborn stance over Kashmir, how can one?

 

[EjazR]

These are no different that those you have posted earlier and my concerns still stand as were posted by me in the following post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/664098-post681.html

By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.

Publicizing BS like 'Pakistan Failed To Fulfil Its Obligations' (which indeed doesnt mention any credible proof to support its claim except the regular rhetorics of 'Pakistan needs to limit its cross LoC infiltration') tells us that the reports are just resonating the india tones.

The following excerpt from one of the reports, without providing any credible source says it all:
Echoing India's position, the Nicholson report observes that Pakistan needs to take more effective steps to curb cross-Line of Control infiltration of militants. Moreover, the report supports the Indian position that demilitarisation in J&K is not favourable unless there is genuine reduction in violence levels.

Why dont for once and all anyone can come with a proof that Pakistan is supply the freedom fighters with weapons, ammo, money, training etc? You people harp about Pakistani statements like 'if Pakistan has a proof for indian involvement in Balochistan why dont it shows us all', but when they same formula is applicable to you, you start posting the self created news of 'foiled' infiltration attempts and even worse, post articles from the 'ancient times' where some support was available from organizations like LeT.

Until there's a hard proof, the india and western allegations over Pakistani involvement are void, which in turn put the credibility of such reports and poll in question - the ones who cant see the truth on ground how can they dig out the truth from people's heart?!

Regarding your "concerns" I think you are mixing up the Chatham house poll which was completely different from the peacepoll.org one.
And have you GONE THROUGH the pdf file? Becuase if you did , it has break down of Jammu muslims and Ladakh muslims as well. And the results will be surprising.

The polling questions itself do not highlight WoT or mumbai attacks. They are pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people.

If the Kashmir issue is so important to you. It would be well worth to go though both the surveys- the chatham house and the peacepolls.org one.


And regarding the issue that Pakistan does not send any infiltrators across the borders--I agree that it went down during Musharraf era, but it has gone up since.
Arif Jamal mentioned that the same Kashmiri based militant groups said that right now has never been so good since 1999 (in terms of clandestine support from the establishment). He is a Pakistani based journalist.

 

[Chinna Gounder]

Hey thick heads the issue is of not the color coding, but some lamers (like yourselves) trying to prove that NA and Azad Kashmir are inclusive in the phrase Jammu And Kashmir!

But the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown OUT of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my post # 1082, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!

And @ Gounder:
Kid you really need to get your map-reading straight. That map shows that though NA and AK are/were part of J & K (the red colored border) but now they are in Pakistani hands (the green color).

WTF! i never new i would be studying map reading from kids who cant even prove their claim i.e. NA is part of J & K by any mean!!

So both of you, the sooner you grow up the better it would be, one of you has already met his fate.

Thick heads,lamers,kid.....think tank huh..?

Who said NA and P-O-K are parts of Jammu and Kashmir.(or Indian Administered Kashmir).?
Dont twist the words to suit ur needs.

Wat i said in my previous post is that NA and P=O=K are parts of the former princely state of Kashmir which was given by the accession document by Raja Harisingh to India.
And as such along with J&K on the Indian side ,P-O-K and NA are also disputed areas administered by Pakistan.

Now dont try to prove that NA is not a part of the historic princely state of Kashmir....I know better.

 

[Xeric]

Regarding your "concerns" I think you are mixing up the Chatham house poll which was completely different from the peacepoll.org one.
And have you GONE THROUGH the pdf file? Becuase if you did , it has break down of Jammu muslims and Ladakh muslims as well. And the results will be surprising.

Yes i did and i am not mixing up anything.

But then it doesnt change the basic question of 'By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.' Why, you'll know when you read further.

The polling questions itself do not highlight WoT or mumbai attacks. They are pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people.

That's what i said. Omitting or adding a particular factor can alter the entire shap of the poll. There are certain things that cant be relagated, not even temporarily. Issues like Pakistan's fight against terrorism, terrorist attacks inside india, shaking economy, natural disasters etc etc might and would have a direct bearing over the question being asked.

Moreover, the particular group that is targeted for question would also matter. The ages, the gender, the educational level, employed or unemployed, standard of life etc etc all affects the poll. With a precise tweak in these constants results can be made to conform a particular answer.

Why would a hefty-earner who indeed is a Muslim but enjoys a guud life because of the indian imports like to say that he wants to join Pakistan? And on the other hand someone whose innocent son was killed by indian soldiers or the daughter was ravished would say that he would even think of joining inidia?

Similarly the youth would have a different opinion and the old-timers would have their own. How ever these indicators are mixed and made legitimate but still a certain factor would turn out to be the deciding one and that's what would matter (as in this case the GWoT and all the related shyt), and guess what, these pollers are guud at that (like by saying that 'these were pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people').

Having said that, i dont challenge the credibility of the organization conducting the polls as those on ground asking the questions must be doing a very guud job, but then the selection, profiling and segregation of individuals to be questioned and deciding the external factors to be included or excluded is what i am concerned about.

i know you can post here the details of people who were questioned and justify your point regarding the transparency, but then omitting/adding a certain age group, issue, factor, incident etc could turn the tides.

And regarding the issue that Pakistan does not send any infiltrators across the borders--I agree that it went down during Musharraf era, but it has gone up since.
Arif Jamal mentioned that the same Kashmiri based militant groups said that right now has never been so good since 1999 (in terms of clandestine support from the establishment). He is a Pakistani based journalist.

That's what i am saying, by shouting thief thief you impress no one, get hold of the thief with the booty right there and then we can talk over this.

 

[Nihat]

i am glad that some of you can talk sense at times.

i agree with your post less the last line. Converting the LoC into IB is totally unacceptable to Pakistan as handing over complete Kashmir to Pakistan is unacceptable to india.

Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.

Well, you have a good point there but declaring a de facto border would be a good start simply because it would isolate the problem.

I always wished India would make Jammu a deperate state, Laddakh a Union Territory and Kashmir a seperate autonomous region.

Since Jammu and Laddakh have never shown even a semblense of Insurgency, I don't see any reason why it should be part of the dispute.

the problem area is a very small region called "Kashmir". As an autonomous region it is well capable of developing a self-sustaining economy (based on tourism) and the shreds of militancy will completly dissapear eventually when there will be no support or reason for it.

 

[Xeric]

Some fruitful thought....

Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition

Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition

Gilgit-Baltistan or the Northern Areas is the northernmost region of Pakistan. The entire area including Gilgit and Baltistan was known as the Gilgit Agency till October, 1947. This is a strategically very important region of the world, which is sandwiched between the high peaks of Hindukush and Karakorum on the north and those of western Himalaya on the south. It borders to the north with Afghanistan and China, to the south with India and Azad Kashmir and to the west with North-West Frontier, Pakistan.

Unlike the area that Pakistan calls "Azad Kashmir," the Northern Areas are incorporated into Pakistan. A small part of Northern Areas was ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963 with the proviso that the settlement was subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute. India does not recognize the Northern Areas as belonging to Pakistan and calls the region encompassing Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (***)"

The region was under local rulers for many centuries. The rulers of Hunza were called Mirs, and those of Gilgit were called Raas. Some parts of the region were invaded by Maharajas of Kashmir and they forcefully governed the area for many years, which led to the common belief that it is a part of Kashmir. But the people of Gilgit-Baltistan regard themselves as being distinct from Kashmiris and many want to become the fifth province of Pakistan. And they oppose being included in Kashmir. Their opinion is that invasion of Mahrajas doesn't mean that this is a part of Kashmir, just like British invasion over the India in 19th century does not mean that India is a part of Britain. The region's lack of representation in the parliament of Pakistan has placed it outside the mainstream politics of the country, which has become a major cause of frustration to the inhabitants of Gilgit-Baltistan.

The Northern Areas comprise the two districts of Baltistan and the three districts of Gilgit (where the capital is located). Hunza, an independent principality for 950 years which only came under Pakistani rule in 1974, is also located in this region. The Northern Areas collectively comprise a territory of 27,991 mi² (72,496 km²).

Brushaski, an isolated language, is spoken in Hunza, Nagir, Yasin, some parts of Gilgit, and some villages of Punyal. Although Brushaski is most popular and polite language in the Area, it still is not used by a large portion of population. Shina with different accents or in different dialacts is the Language of over 40% of total population, spoken mainly in Gilgit, throughout Diamer, and most of the areas of Ghizr. Balti with a similar accent, is spoken by the entire population of Baltistan except some villages. There are also some other languages spoken in the area -- Wakhi is spoken in upper Hunza and some villages in Ghizr, and Khwar is spoken by some Khwar families in Ghizr. None of these languages are related to each other. Urdu is the Lingua franca of the Area. Urdu is understood by almost all men, and literate women.

According to Habib R. Sulemani the Northern Areas of Pakistan is commonly known as "Gilgit-Baltistan" and this term clearly indicates the districts of Gilgit, Ghizer, Diyamer, Skardu and Ganchay, while the term 'Northern Areas' confuses parts of the NWFP with Gilgit-Baltistan. Gilgit-Baltistan is geographically and politically more suitable than any other term.

 

[harish]

Can we get back to solutions please? Or are we going to go further and further back into history? Like when Chandragupta Maurya ruled everything all the way up to Afghanistan. So lets stop this on this thread at least. I took the pain of typing out a long post on 'Solutions'. Look forward to your response to that.

 

[Xeric]

Can we get back to solutions please? Or are we going to go further and further back into history? Like when Chandragupta Maurya ruled everything all the way up to Afghanistan. So lets stop this on this thread at least. I took the pain of typing out a long post on 'Solutions'. Look forward to your response to that.

Stay put, i am right here.
BTW, did you change your position or not..?

And the piece that i posted is very much linked with the topic as we have among us a few who are not quite clear of universal truths and live in a fool's paradise. They need to be shown a mirror before they claim something more stupid.

 

[Xeric]

Dear Xeric, how is that so different from what is on the ground today? What are the ramifications of a change of terminology (LOC to IB) of the de facto point of no return in terms of a full blown armed and even nuclear conflict between the two countries? Unless you (your fundamentalists, your weak off-on civilian governments, and most importantly your army and ISI) need a moral high ground and international credibility/sanction in keeping on stoking the flames of unrest in Kashmir and keep the attention of the people of Pakistan diverted from what really ails your country? You and I both know that such factions are present in J&K even today. I have already covered this part in my previous post which I hope you would read. First, both India and Pakistan I feel are agreed that independent Kashmir is not a viable solution. That is half the battle won brother!

i agree, an independent would be a road towards another disaster. It was be just another place for both countries to play a new match similar in contents but smaller in scale to the one being played in Afghanistan.

But i didnt get the point of bringing in the our govt, the Army and then the bad-a$$ ISI..??

We already have india to justify our armed forces' huge existence and dont require another issue for the sake. Instead, this argument of yours made me wonder, is this reason that india has fingered every other neighbor of its (to divert the attention from the real problems of india - hint hint the figure 220)? See the list of territorial disputes here (Gosh! you people can take up a case and get into the guinness world record - the country having the maximum land disputes)

List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once we are agreed on such a fundamental truth, we then need to accept the equally patent truth of the reality on the ground today, much as it may be unpalatable to both our countries. And that is that we have what we have, and the chance of getting a square kilometer more is next to impossible, without a full blown armed conflict, that would in all probability go nuclear by the side that finds itself going down. The chances for that have come and gone long ago. They were not seized for one reason or the other, and that’s that. Let us move on, and look forward instead of back. There is no sense in going into the by whom of it cause it is not pertinent here. So once we are agreed on the above two where does that leave us? Removing ego and wet dreams out of the picture that would leave us with the only possible solution of converting LOC to IB once and for all and moving forward in our relations peacefully.

How?

Avian kham kha...??

You know what, you are guud at sugar-coating you pill and shuffing it down our throat But then you didnt put in your best this time, as the reason that you cite for the conversion of LoC into IB is a full scale war entailing use of nukes (HIC), but you forgot that going by the wishes of Kashmiri people is of utmost importance before we get this issue solved, without them, we would just buy cheap peace that would soon burst. Moreover, as i pointed out a very logical point that why the LoC cant be converted in IB (the factions and areas thingy), i dont see you pointing out any logical reason to why cant the plebiscite option be executed. Please refrain from bring in the rhetorics of 'plebiscite no more a viable option' just because india had lingered the issue for so long that one tends to forget the actual basis of its resolution.

Kashmiris has the right to chose and we must let them choose, how would it feel if someone pushes a partition pill down your throat against your will?

You in your posts sounds like this over Kashmir:

Speaking about the disgruntled and less than satisfied factions on our side of the fence, again I have covered it in my previous post. They would first be counseled by neutral arbitrators/elders from the community. Failing which they would need to make a choice between staying in India or moving to Pakistan. Don't you see the beauty of this solution my friend? First India and Pakistan take one step back and many steps forward by deciding what is India and what is Pakistan. Then we both unitedly give the entire population of Jammu and Kashmir the right to vote on which country they would rather live in. The plebiscite we have been fighting over for decades now! In a way acceptable to all, for want of a better more workable alternative. Everything else would follow, and most importantly, in Peace. It would then simply be a matter of negotiation, and give and take, and working out the details.

The donor country (of translocated populations at the time of this plebiscite and Partition II) would agree on a mutually agreeable fair price in terms of financial compensation to pay the translocated people for the land and immovable assets they would be leaving behind, to help them start a new life afresh in the recipient country of their choice. I use the word ‘host country’ interchangeably with your ‘India,’ cause I believe it could be equally possible that there would be certain factions within the part of Kashmir you hold (AK and GB/NA) who would prefer to come join India, and this arrangement would benefit them as well. The currency exchange valuation would be pre-decided mutually between India and Pakistan to ensure equality, in light of the big gulf which has off late developed between the Indian rupee vis a vis its Pakistani counterpart. This part could be arbitrated on by both our Reserve banks, much like the Euro. Please let me know what you think of this solution brothers.

Remember how the first Partition happened? It started with a polarization of two ideologies. Then a separate nation was carved out as a land mass. And then the migration of people one way or the other depending on which ideology they saw their future with. Partition II would be the same. The land masses are decided first. Then the people move. But the movement is peaceful. Protected by the armed forces and governments on either side. Safe transit. Rightful compensation. And ready and speedy rehabilitation so that one need not live as a refugee, but as a proud new citizen of the country of your choice. Lets learn our harsh lessons of 63 years ago brothers, and show the spirits of our ancestors that we did things better this time around. And righted the wrongs of days gone by. They will smile down on us, and their torn spirits would be free at last.

The rest is provisionary to your LoC into IB suggestion so it wont matter a reply.