The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

In a sensational interview with India's top television personality, Karan Thapar, on Thursday night, Pakistan's former foreign minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri confirmed what many in New Delhi suspected, namely, that through back channel diplomacy, Islamabad and New Delhi had reached a broad understanding on contentious issues such as Sir Creek, Siachen and Kashmir as far back as two years ago.

The Indian prime minister was expected to visit Pakistan to conclude some of the agreements but the Indian side apparently began developing cold feet and it is "sheer bad luck", as Kasuri put it, that the momentum dissipated.

To quote Kasuri, "If the Prime Minister of India had come when we [Pakistan] thought he would, we would have actually signed it, and that would have created the right atmosphere for resolution of other disputes, particularly the issue of J&K [Jammu and Kashmir]. We needed the right atmosphere."

And once again, we see that the GoI just cannot act responsibly or in good faith to resolve the disputes that have bedeviled Indo-Pak realtions since 1947.

Nehru violated that trust in the fifties, and even now the GoI just cannot take that final step to conflict resolution.

 

[metalfalcon]

The point was discussed a bit back..Settle Kashmir and Get the Reward!!!

1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.

2.All three flags flown on public buildings.

3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towrds the sikh refugees to be resettled.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

7.Merge the two police forces.

8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir parliment.

Very Interesting Points, But again Indian won't Like it. Pakistan is Ever ready for Kashmir and Kashmiri People.

 

[RedBaron]

Very interesting points...I would be interested in other precedents in history where such power-sharing has been successful. I suspect there are not many, because they are hard to structure, hard to administer. Just look at how complex the workings of the usual Indian or Pakistani State or provincial gov't is. Now this complexity will increase manifold if joint governance has to be implemented for Kashmir. Very difficult to implement, not practical, no precedence in history.

Another problem is both Pakistan and India have fragile democracies. In Pakistan it's due to Army influence, in India it's due to the nature of recent gov'ts which are coalition gov'ts. It's very hard for GoI to allow drastic concessions with nothing in return, it will be suicide for the party (or parties) involved. They will be labelled as the "party that lost Kashmir".

Far easier is agreeing to the free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border, and increased commerce. Anything beyond that is not practical at this stage...

 

[macintosh]

India, Pakistan were close to signing an accord on Kashmir: Report

Washington, Feb 22: Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf were close to signing an accord to end the decades-old conflict over Kashmir after three years of secret talks but failed to achieve the vital breakthrough, media reports here said.

The peace initiative is described in an article by investigative journalist Steve Coll. Writing in the New Yorker magazine, Coll writes that the two sides had "come to semicolons" in their negotiations when the effort lost steam, the Washington Post said on Sunday.

"The negotiations, which began in 2004, produced the outlines of an accord that would have allowed a gradual demilitarisation of the disputed Himalayan province, a flash point in relations between the rivals since 1947.

"The effort stalled in 2007, and the prospects for a settlement were further undermined by deadly terrorist attacks on Mumbai in November," the Post said, quoting the New Yorker report.

The attempt ultimately failed, not because of substantive differences, according to Coll, but because declining political fortunes left Musharraf without the clout he needed to sell the agreement at home.

Although Musharraf fought for the deal - as did Manmohan Singh - he became so weakened politically that he "couldn't sell himself", let alone a surprise peace deal with Pakistan's longtime rival, Coll notes, quoting senior Pakistani and Indian officials.

Musharraf resigned as president in August 2008.

Coll, a former Washington Post managing editor who won a Pulitzer Prize in 2005 for his book "Ghost Wars", writes that the resolution of the Kashmir dispute was the cornerstone of a broad agreement that would have represented a "paradigm shift" in relations between India and Pakistan: a moving away from decades of hostility to acceptance and peaceful trade.

The Post reports that under the plan, the Kashmir conflict would have been resolved through the creation of an autonomous region in which local residents could move freely and conduct trade on both sides of the territorial boundary.

Over time, the border would become irrelevant, and declining violence would allow a gradual withdrawal of troops that now face one another across the mountain passes.

"It was huge - I think it would have changed the basic nature of the problem," the New Yorker article quoted a senior Indian official as saying. "You would have then had the freedom to remake Indo-Pakistani relations."

According to Coll's account, the secret negotiations consisted of about two dozen meetings in hotel rooms in various overseas locations.

The sessions revolved around developing a document known as a 'non-paper', diplomatic term for a negotiated text that bears no names or signatures and can "serve as a deniable but detailed basis for a deal," the New Yorker article says.

The US and British governments were aware of the talks and offered low-key support and advice but otherwise elected to let India and Pakistan settle their disputes unaided, Coll says.

"Ultimately, any peace settlement would have to attract support in both countries' Parliaments; if it were seen as a product of American or British meddling, its prospects would be dim," Coll writes.

The article portrays Musharraf as an enthusiastic supporter of the deal who succeeded in winning converts among Pakistan's sceptical military leadership. Yet, just as the two sides were beginning to consider how to sell the plan domestically, Musharraf was compelled to seek a delay.

In March 2007, as New Delhi and Islamabad were discussing plans for a historic summit, Musharraf became embroiled in a controversy with his country's Supreme Court. He eventually sacked the chief justice, triggering weeks of protests by lawyers and activists.

What was thought to be a temporary setback soon proved to be far more serious. "Rather than recovering, the General slipped into a political death spiral," culminating in his resignation, Coll said.

India-Pakistan ties - and hopes for resuming the peace initiative - began a downward slide after Musharraf left office. In Kashmir, anti-India fighters began an aggressive campaign of public demonstrations and terrorist attacks that seemed designed, Coll writes, to send a message: "Musharraf is gone, but the Kashmir war is alive."

The Post notes that in recent weeks, there have been signs of a modest thaw in India-Pakistan relations.

Indian and Pakistani spy agencies have been cooperating secretly in India's investigation of the November 26 Mumbai terrorist attacks, sharing highly sensitive intelligence, with the CIA serving as arbiter and mediator, the Post said.

Yet, in the emotionally charged aftermath of the attacks, Pakistan's new civilian-led government may not find it easy to return to negotiations on Kashmir, even if it wishes to, Coll said.

"The military is completely on board at top levels -- with a paradigm shift, to see India as an opportunity, to change domestic attitudes," a senior Pakistani official was quoted as saying. But, he reportedly added, "The public mood is out of sync."

 

[dabong1]

Very interesting points...I would be interested in other precedents in history where such power-sharing has been successful. I suspect there are not many, because they are hard to structure, hard to administer. Just look at how complex the workings of the usual Indian or Pakistani State or provincial gov't is. Now this complexity will increase manifold if joint governance has to be implemented for Kashmir. Very difficult to implement, not practical, no precedence in history....

The excuses can go on and on but with transparent negotiations between all the parties all problems can be solved.
Northern ireland being a good example and the devolution of scotland another where ideas could be copied to solve tricky problems.
The old west germany is another example of a country that was run by three nations.

Another problem is both Pakistan and India have fragile democracies. In Pakistan it's due to Army influence, in India it's due to the nature of recent gov'ts which are coalition gov'ts. It's very hard for GoI to allow drastic concessions with nothing in return, it will be suicide for the party (or parties) involved....

A roadmap was laid out by clinton in which the pakistanis would first stop cross border movement and the indians would respond by opening road routes and increase of exhange of people ect and then joint control.
The kashmir "peace plan" has come to a halt wth indians not moving to the next phase in the plan and wanting to concerntrate on non kashmir issues like trade.
Pakistan has stopped the fighters crossing the LoC .....which is a major concession and in return they got a bus which is not good enough.

They will be labelled as the "party that lost Kashmir". ...

Or they could be known as the party "that bought of peace and prosperity"

Far easier is agreeing to the free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border, and increased commerce. Anything beyond that is not practical at this stage...

Your not even moving on the "free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border" with the excuse that they are all terrorist and ISI agents in disguise.
As i said from the start we can pull a hundred and one excuses not to do anything but we will be stuck in stalemate bleeding each other.
Before i came on this forum there was no way i would accept a joint governance plan for kashmir,it had to be part of pakistan and that was it.......but after reading the concerns of indians on the issue and there fears i have come to the conclusion that a joint set up running kashmir is the best option for a stable future.
Try to listen to my concerns as a pakistani and incorprate them into your thinking when we try to discuss coming to sort of settlement on the kashmir issue.

1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.

This will give power to the pak-indo govts to keep a check on kashmir and will increase understanding and cooperation between the two nations.
You might not want a pakistani as the president of "indian" kashmir for a year but do not forget that the "pakistani" kashmiris will have to be under a indian president also for a year.

2.All three flags flown on public buildings.

A nice fudging of the issue with the indian flag flying high in muzzafrabad alongside the pak and kashmir flag and vice versa the pakistani flag flying high in srinagar alongside the indo-kashmir flag.
At least when the army men on either side of the border said that there nations flag will be flying high on the other side they will be proved correct but not in they way the thought.


3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir

All the above are to do with letting indians know that issue of "secular" india and the fear that every other state in india will want to independent if the kashmiris get there way is put to rest.
The kashmiris hold indian passports,take part in indian state elections ect should be enough for the indians to keep thinking off them as "indian kashmiris".


5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towards the sikh refugees to be resettled.

We could use this issue to show the goodwill between the two nations and give a boost to the final settlement.


7.Merge the two police forces.

A way for the indians to keep a track on whats going on pak kashmir and vice versa......it will build trust as each can make sure that kashmir is not being used to undermine either nation.

8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.

Very easy to do.



We can either get on with it and move away from a fixed mindset and solve problems or carry on the way we have.
The pakistan govt i can assure you will sooner or later let the kashmiris re activate the training camps in AJK and start crossing the LoC if there is no movement on kashmir.....its not a threat but history telling us what will happen.

 

[RedBaron]

Northern ireland being a good example and the devolution of scotland another where ideas could be copied to solve tricky problems.
The old west germany is another example of a country that was run by three nations.

- Kashmir is a tri-partite issue: Kashmir, Pakistan, India. N. Ireland and Scotland were both bilateral.
- The divisions are much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines.
- German joint governance by Allied forces was limited, and was a result of WWII. Berlin remained a divided city and Germany remained a divided country till unification.
- I don't believe international borders changed in Scotland, N. Ireland.
I'm not saying a solution is impossible. Just that it will take longer, and it will need stable governments on both sides to work together.

A roadmap was laid out by clinton in which the pakistanis would first stop cross border movement and the indians would respond by opening road routes and increase of exhange of people ect and then joint control.
The kashmir "peace plan" has come to a halt wth indians not moving to the next phase in the plan and wanting to concerntrate on non kashmir issues like trade.

Was something signed, or was it a non-paper? Must have been before Kargil/coup/parliament attacks. Has there been even 5 years of peaceful stability without a crisis recently?

Pakistan has stopped the fighters crossing the LoC .....which is a major concession and in return they got a bus which is not good enough.

Pakistan has no control over the fighters now as the Mumbai attacks prove. These guys openly trained, planned and executed the attack under GoP noses.
The bus...well you have to start somewhere, one cant throw open the borders from day 1.

Your not even moving on the "free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border" with the excuse that they are all terrorist and ISI agents in disguise.

Is this the official GoI position?

The pakistan govt i can assure you will sooner or later let the kashmiris re activate the training camps in AJK and start crossing the LoC if there is no movement on kashmir.....its not a threat but history telling us what will happen.

However you word it, this is a threat...and threats don't work. Its obvious training camps still exist in some shape or form, else Mumbai would not have happened. GoP has been running these camps for the last 20 years, if it wishes to continue the same route, GoI will just have to respond in a manner it sees fit.

As i said from the start we can pull a hundred and one excuses not to do anything but we will be stuck in stalemate bleeding each other.
Before i came on this forum there was no way i would accept a joint governance plan for kashmir,it had to be part of pakistan and that was it.......but after reading the concerns of indians on the issue and there fears i have come to the conclusion that a joint set up running kashmir is the best option for a stable future.
Try to listen to my concerns as a pakistani and incorprate them into your thinking when we try to discuss coming to sort of settlement on the kashmir issue.

The opinions I've expressed are just mine, I can't and won't claim to represent Indian majority. I'm not against peace in Kashmir. Back in 2005, I would have carefully listened if GoI tried to "sell" me the roadmap that Kasuri discussed. I may even have voted for it.

Now, barely two months ago, I watched my beloved city held hostage by these mad-men who came from Pakistan. They planned, trained and jump-started their plan from LeT/JuD/LeJ (or whatever they call it today) camps in Pakistan. The cafes and hotels they attacked and killed people in cold blood were the very places I frequented as recently as last fall. So suddenly, this issue is now personal. Till the perpetrators of this attack (Lakhvi and Co.) are executed, and jail-time won't cut it, I'm asking my gov't to stand firm and not compromise. If GoI (Cong or the next one) talks peace before these guys are executed, I'm all for impeaching them. But again, that's just my personal view.

 

[dabong1]

- Kashmir is a tri-partite issue: Kashmir, Pakistan, India. N. Ireland and Scotland were both bilateral...

Northern reland was the same with the british,irish and northern irish people involved in a dispute which needed three peoples to come to some sort of agreement.

- - The divisions are much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines....

If you check you will find that the irish have been fighting the war against the british govt for hundreds of years and there "division was much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines"......why do you think millions of irish went to the US,the poatoe famine,the first slaves sent to work the plantations where irish ect.

- - German joint governance by Allied forces was limited, and was a result of WWII. Berlin remained a divided city and Germany remained a divided country till unification.

But they where able to have joint governance being the point.

- - I don't believe international borders changed in Scotland, N. Ireland..

If the right soultion can be found we dont have to change the border in kashmir.......make the border as irrelevant as internal EU borders.

- I'm not saying a solution is impossible. Just that it will take longer, and it will need stable governments on both sides to work together..

- Was something signed, or was it a non-paper? Must have been before Kargil/coup/parliament attacks. Has there been even 5years of peaceful stability without a crisis recently?..

Pakistan never signed anything with india saying it would stop cross border movement........as a pakistani i do find it starnge that everytime india has to move on the core issue something happens in india...terrorist attack ect

- Pakistan has no control over the fighters now as the Mumbai attacks prove. These guys openly trained, planned and executed the attack under GoP noses...

Theres thousands of trained fighter that can called up and sent into kashmir in a matter of weeks if the Pak govt wanted.
When ever the indian army does something bad its also "a few rotton apples"....well use the same logic on the fighters........the majority follow orders but you will get a few that will do terrorist attacks the same way col prohbit does not represent the whole indian army.

- The bus...well you have to start somewhere, one cant throw open the borders from day 1. ...

Maybe if pakistan had kept up the military pressure in kashmir with the fighters crossing in there hundreds and sent bus instead you would have taken that as bigger symbol of pakistan wanting peace?

- However you word it, this is a threat...and threats don't work. Its obvious training camps still exist in some shape or form, else Mumbai would not have happened. GoP has been running these camps for the last 20 years, if it wishes to continue the same route, GoI will just have to respond in a manner it sees fit....

And we carry on the we have.

- The opinions I've expressed are just mine, I can't and won't claim to represent Indian majority. I'm not against peace in Kashmir. Back in 2005, I would have carefully listened if GoI tried to "sell" me the roadmap that Kasuri discussed. I may even have voted for it.....

- Now, barely two months ago, I watched my beloved city held hostage by these mad-men who came from Pakistan. They planned, trained and jump-started their plan from LeT/JuD/LeJ (or whatever they call it today) camps in Pakistan. The cafes and hotels they attacked and killed people in cold blood were the very places I frequented as recently as last fall. So suddenly, this issue is now personal. Till the perpetrators of this attack (Lakhvi and Co.) are executed, and jail-time won't cut it, I'm asking my gov't to stand firm and not compromise. If GoI (Cong or the next one) talks peace before these guys are executed, I'm all for impeaching them. But again, that's just my personal view.

I agree that these terrorist must be bought to justice and hanged but if no resoultion on kashmir is found these groups will always exist.
With kashmir solved will there be any need for LeT/JuD/LeJ to exist?

Just one more point.....its sad what happened in mumbai but the kashmirs have been living under the same conditions fear and bombings for decades.

 

[RedBaron]

If the right soultion can be found we dont have to change the border in kashmir.......make the border as irrelevant as internal EU borders.

I heard this statement before, maybe from PM Singh...I love the idea because I've seen how beautifully it works during my frequent EU travels.

Maybe some day Pakistani tourists can shop in Srinagar and I can plan a hike to K2 base camp, always loved K2. Everyone gains...

Provided all the i's are dotted and t's crossed to prevent any future back-tracking on the IB issue, and AFTER Mumbai perpetrators are toast, I may very well vote for such a plan.

 

[ejaz007]

India granted a ‘lifeline’ after IHK polls: Omar

* IHK CM says quick progress in Kashmir almost impossible in present scenario
* New Delhi mistaken that Kashmir issue has dried down
* Favours reviving ‘non-paper’ Indo-Pak deal

NEW DELHI: India has been granted a “lifeline” after most Kashmiris voted in the landmark elections but the government must avoid complacency and intransigence if it is to bring peace to the region, Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) newly elected Chief Minister Omar Abdullah told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday.

Terming this opportunity enormous, Abdullah said that a quick progress in the disputed Kashmir region would be almost impossible considering the prevailing economic crunch, a general election and the diplomatic aftermath of the November’s Mumbai attacks. “There is a bad timing and we should not underestimate the extent of the challenges we face,” he added.

The fact that the two-decade-old insurgency has waned should not be taken as an excuse to sit back, said Abdullah. He said New Delhi made a mistake of convincing itself that the Kashmir issue had dried down with a decrease in violence despite increase in terrorists. “New Delhi has really been handed a lifeline through this election and they need to capitalise on that,” said Abdullah.

Abdullah, 38, emerged as chief minister in the disputed region in January after his National Conference Party and India’s ruling Congress Party defied a separatist boycott to win the election and forge a coalition government. Many Kashmiris hoped that his victory could help end the conflict that had provoked two of the three Indo-Pak wars.

‘Non-paper’ Indo-Pak deal: Abdullah felt there were signs of political will in New Delhi and hoped that secret talks between India and Pakistan that nearly led to a deal on Kashmir in 2007 could be revived. The deal, which was called a “non-paper” —a diplomatic understanding that both sides need not sign, fell through and both sides have blamed each other for it. “This non-paper was being circulated. It was autonomy, devolution and self-government. It basically meant that the central unit would have a little less control. We’d like to see this non-paper revived,” he said..

Abdullah said it was almost impossible in his new job description not to offend either Kashmir or the rest of India, and his comments reflect his efforts to tread a fine line between the two. He criticised the killing of two Muslim youngsters on the weekend, which sparked street protests, in an incident blamed on the army, calling it a “huge setback”. He also blamed the Indian government for delays in granting visa to separatists leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq’s Kashmiri-origin American wife.

Abdullah said the new state government was trying to get arrest orders issued last year against separatists rescinded. Any further move would come after general elections due by May, when he might talk to separatist parties for the first time since last year’s protests, he said.

“To be honest with you I haven’t sent out any (feelers) and I don’t think we will be sending out any until once we’ve got this parliament election out of the way,” Abdullah added. reuters

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[maqbool]

This has been taken from a BBC article that ran a couple of years ago.
Link is here:
BBC NEWS

Seems like Option 5 in which both India and Pakistan give up Kashmir, keep some (Gilgit, Baltistan for Pakistan, Jammu and Ladakh for India) and the pure Kashmiris get what they want (they better like it after all we've been through ;-))

Problem solved !

 

[asq]

if you are a good human you make peace.
if you are rotten you make excuses not peace
If you believe in justice, opportunities you cease
if disappointed you try to rid those with fixation decease
God only bless those souls who work diligently for peace.

 

[Thebignag]

Plebiscite - Is the key word. Pakistan has been rooting for Plebiscite since the UN resolution. In the last 60 years, India has been running scared of plebiscite, as JK is Muslim majority. As things stands today, the above scenario, may just turn on it’s head and India may actually root for plebiscite and Pakistan running scare.

Contrasts can’t be starker, as things stands today. India, the largest secular democracy with the second largest Muslim population in the world and amongst the fasted growing economy offers better quality of life than any of India’s immediate neighbors. The younger generation, more modern and worldly wise, would prefer to live in a society, where they can exercise choice. Choose their government, choose their education, choose their professions and choose their religion and practice the same. Choose a way of life they want to live and need not live in fear of their life because they CHOOSE.

The power of “To Choose” is taken for granted in India. Many a time, we do not realize this power we exercise every day of our lives, in India. Indian Kashmiris, too exercise this power everyday of their lives.

They are also aware that Indian security forces do not carry out “Bomb Blasts” in busy markets or go on random shooting at public places. Kashmiris are also aware that violence is not one sided. If one side is Indian Army, there should be ‘the other’ side. They are also aware, that the other angle of violence, are carried out by “as Pakistan says” non-state actors, based, supported and protected by Pakistan. As Pakistani state policy. In spite of this long insurgency, Indian Kashmir is more developed than Pakisthani Kashmir.

As things stands today in Pakistan, don’t be surprise, if Kashrimis, exercise the power, they have got used to, in India, “to choose”. And choose a country with a bigger Muslim population, a country that guarantees practise of religion of choice and they way one chooses to practise, a country with sound education system, a country with government chosen by them, a country with functional judiciary system, a country with higher economic activity and growth, a country with vibrant free media, a country with stable democracy - India.

Personally I am all for Plebiscite in Kashmir on both side of LOC

 

[asq]

Plebiscite - Is the key word. Pakistan has been rooting for Plebiscite since the UN resolution. In the last 60 years, India has been running scared of plebiscite, as JK is Muslim majority. As things stands today, the above scenario, may just turn on it’s head and India may actually root for plebiscite and Pakistan running scare.

Contrasts can’t be starker, as things stands today. India, the largest secular democracy with the second largest Muslim population in the world and amongst the fasted growing economy offers better quality of life than any of India’s immediate neighbors. The younger generation, more modern and worldly wise, would prefer to live in a society, where they can exercise choice. Choose their government, choose their education, choose their professions and choose their religion and practice the same. Choose a way of life they want to live and need not live in fear of their life because they CHOOSE.

The power of “To Choose” is taken for granted in India. Many a time, we do not realize this power we exercise every day of our lives, in India. Indian Kashmiris, too exercise this power everyday of their lives.

They are also aware that Indian security forces do not carry out “Bomb Blasts” in busy markets or go on random shooting at public places. Kashmiris are also aware that violence is not one sided. If one side is Indian Army, there should be ‘the other’ side. They are also aware, that the other angle of violence, are carried out by “as Pakistan says” non-state actors, based, supported and protected by Pakistan. As Pakistani state policy. In spite of this long insurgency, Indian Kashmir is more developed than Pakisthani Kashmir.

As things stands today in Pakistan, don’t be surprise, if Kashrimis, exercise the power, they have got used to, in India, “to choose”. And choose a country with a bigger Muslim population, a country that guarantees practise of religion of choice and they way one chooses to practise, a country with sound education system, a country with government chosen by them, a country with functional judiciary system, a country with higher economic activity and growth, a country with vibrant free media, a country with stable democracy - India.

Personally I am all for Plebiscite in Kashmir on both side of LOC

Without an Indian hindu there I have talked to many Muslims from India, they say it when no Hindus is there that they live in hell as Muslims in India, also don't tell me about quantity of Muslims, tell me about quality of life they have, many young Muslims are killed for speaking Urdu and are kept from jobs by discrimination, but than India is a racist country. What can one expect, it has its one dolits who are treated worse than animals as animals have respect but not people in India.

 

[shrivatsa]

Without an Indian hindu there I have talked to many Muslims from India, they say it when no Hindus is there that they live in hell as Muslims in India, also don't tell me about quantity of Muslims, tell me about quality of life they have, many young Muslims are killed for speaking Urdu and are kept from jobs by discrimination, but than India is a racist country. What can one expect, it has its one dolits who are treated worse than animals as animals have respect but not people in India.

how true,did u explain to them that how pakistan is heaven for muslims,where shias and sunnis are leaving so peacfully without fear of evil hindus except on some ocasions where bomb may explode killing few but thats acceptable because you are killed by your own muslim brothern not by hindus and calling urdu speaking people muhajir is not racist,and how sharia (talibani) law is spreding making pakistan truly islamic nation.and there is no dicrimination between muhajirs,phaktuns,sindhis and all.

 

[asq]

how true,did u explain to them that how pakistan is heaven for muslims,where shias and sunnis are leaving so peacfully without fear of evil hindus except on some ocasions where bomb may explode killing few but thats acceptable because you are killed by your own muslim brothern not by hindus and calling urdu speaking people muhajir is not racist,and how sharia (talibani) law is spreding making Pakistan truly Islamic nation.and there is no dicrimination between muhajirs,phaktuns,sindhis and all.

Nothing is compared with destruction of Babri mosque and and thousand more destroyed mosque, nothing is as serious as killing in Gujarat, nothings is as serious as no jobs for Muslims, specially in Army, u tell me there are 20% Muslims in India what percentage is in the Army, not even 2%.

So do not go comparing Muslims in Pakistan with Muslims in India, Let me tell u the truth is that we the middle of the road Muslims condemn the attack in Pakistan on any group of people, do you.

Have u ever or any of u ever condemn killing of innocent in kashmiris, but you jump on Pakistan for these problems we have, India is to be blamed for all this as it being party continues killings of kashmiris creates monsters in Pakistan who's friends and family has been killed and raped ( by the way they raped 70 years old woman) by Indian Army and they in turn get raving mad and attack India, why don't you stop all that killing and come to term about atrocities in kashmir and do the justice for kashmiris.

http://kashmir-truth-be-told.blogspot.com/2009/02/13-days-to-justice.html