The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[vsdoc]

you really want to go down the racial eugenics route and talk about indians, where did you get your MD from :ROFL:

please lets not talk about the merits of being "a pure blooded indian", nobody else does for good reason, so i would bit my tongue to save yourself some embarrassment.

This is a good thread and deserves not to go down the racial route. However, you are most welcome to take the issue up with me by PM ..... mods, whats the policy on banning vis-a-vis PM content please?

and therein lies the issue with you, stop being a charlatan, you are trying to be something you are not, you come into these threads looking for a bit of a reaction, i mean why else would you bring up your whacko notions of "racial hygiene" and pakistani's, obsessed much? ofcourse you are!!

PM please if you want to discuss what I am ..... and want to hear from me about yourself.

rallies, yep true, plenty of them, most of them protesting against your lot.

Its the Constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT of every Indian to protest in a peaceful manner. Its called Democracy. And our soldiers posted there protect that Democratic way of life precious to all Indians ..... so that those from across the border do not sneak in by night to disturb that in any way.

so kashmir is more developed than the most developed parts of pakistan....well this is news to me

You have 18 movie theaters in Pakistan man ..... as claimed by a Pakistani director. I think Srinagar would have as many.

Lets not go there unfortunate cousin.

Cheers, Doc

 

[absarahmedkhan]

JLN was quite an idiot (my personal opinion) , half the problems India faces today are because of him and his idiotic politices (as well intended as they may be).

Under influence of the Western block , he made an irrational decision of Internationalizing a domestic or at best Bi-lateral issue , JLN has long gone and his promises and policies went with him.

As for the statement "don't play the game for fear of losing it" , one has to look at what is at stake for India.

One can type endlessly on the forum and keep crying UN , rights , plebiside , let kashmiri's decide etc. but it just keeps things stuck because this option is just not acceptable to India and she is under no compulsion whatsoever to fulfill it.

As for Kashmir belongs to Kasmiri's logic , why dosen't the same rule apply to say Tibet , where Tibet belongs to Tibetans or Chechneya belongs to the chechans.

I'm not talking about Tibetans or Chechen. Whatever they wants is purely their internal matter, and neither it concerns India or Pakistan 'directly'.

Besides, unlike Kashmir, Junagadh was ruled by a Muslim Nawab. He ruled over almost 80% of Hindus. The Nawab of Junagadh was a pro-Pakistani. He decided to joined Pakistan at the time of Partition -- disregarding the sentiments of Hindus. He was guided by one of his Chief Minister Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto -- father of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto -- who also suggested the then Nawab to join Pakistan. However, if we go through the case of Kashmir, it was totally opposite. A Hindu Maha Raja ruling over a Muslim majority state of Kashmir ignoring the sentiments of majority of Kashmirs -- decided to join India whereas Nawab of Junagadh ignoring the sentiments of majority of Hindus decided to join Pakistan. Junagadh was invaded by India then. New Delhi announced plebiscite there -- which of course was a formality. Junagadh was then acceded in India.

What it was decided at the time of demarcation was a fair rule -- Muslim majority states would join Pakistan. Wasn't it fair? In both cases, India seized Junagadh so as Kashmir.

Please, do understand the history. I'm not concerned if JLN, for you, was idiot or not. He was one of your leader who's lauded by many.

 

[jarnee]

Frankly, India would never agree to such a Solution. That would result in loosing massive amounts of land for her. But at the end of the day, "Someone" has to sacrifice their interests for the sake of stability and peace in the region.

1.Till the time India is a democracy nothing can be compromised , as it would mean dead end for that political party.

2. India has 16 Crore muslim population, what will be the basis of this partition of india? Islam? Whole Idea of India will be lost if Kashmir is lost on religious grounds...

3. India cannot stay secular ..which is core to its existense ..so ..to me last opprtunity and i guess some Pakisnai general rightly said in 1965 ..Now or Never.

 

[jarnee]

Leave aside 7 lac Army in teh valley ..India can fight endless war ...to what ever cost ..bec ..no cost can be higher then your existence.

 

[Barrett]

Its the Constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT of every Indian to protest in a peaceful manner. Its called Democracy. And our soldiers posted there protect that Democratic way of life precious to all Indians ..... so that those from across the border do not sneak in by night to disturb that in any way.



You have 18 movie theaters in Pakistan man ..... as claimed by a Pakistani director. I think Srinagar would have as many.

Lets not go there unfortunate cousin.

Cheers, Doc

600,000 to protect the democratic right ? hahahah

And i guess for the indians the number of cinemas is a symobol of development please get out of your bollywood world ....For you govinda dancing around tress might be the democratic way of expression.

Cousins ?

 

[ice_man]

i think scenario 4 is the best give KASHMIR to KASHMIRI's and deploy the UN PEACE FORCE to protect its borders from pakistan & india!!!!!

 

[Nihat]

I'm not talking about Tibetans or Chechen. Whatever they wants is purely their internal matter, and neither it concerns India or Pakistan 'directly'.

Besides, unlike Kashmir, Junagadh was ruled by a Muslim Nawab. He ruled over almost 80% of Hindus. The Nawab of Junagadh was a pro-Pakistani. He decided to joined Pakistan at the time of Partition -- disregarding the sentiments of Hindus. He was guided by one of his Chief Minister Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto -- father of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto -- who also suggested the then Nawab to join Pakistan. However, if we go through the case of Kashmir, it was totally opposite. A Hindu Maha Raja ruling over a Muslim majority state of Kashmir ignoring the sentiments of majority of Kashmirs -- decided to join India whereas Nawab of Junagadh ignoring the sentiments of majority of Hindus decided to join Pakistan. Junagadh was invaded by India then. New Delhi announced plebiscite there -- which of course was a formality. Junagadh was then acceded in India.

What it was decided at the time of demarcation was a fair rule -- Muslim majority states would join Pakistan. Wasn't it fair? In both cases, India seized Junagadh so as Kashmir.

Please, do understand the history. I'm not concerned if JLN, for you, was idiot or not. He was one of your leader who's lauded by many.

Fair enough , if you wish to eliminate any reference to Tibet or Chechnya then wy bother looking at Junagardh case also. Lets just take Kashmir as unique and not compare it to anything.

Even the solution that Musharraf and Vajpayee were looking at involved strengthening the LOC as a cross over point and opening multiple points for trade and people transit.

I think Pak realizes that India is not parting with any of the territory that it holds today, nor will it entertain any future possibility of the same.

"Soft borders" was a workable solution but then Pak's internal politics changed things and subsequently the terror attacks in India. This is probably the only workable solution and when the 2 nations sit for talks again, this would be the most likely outcome.

 

[Storm Force]

Mushraffs vision for Kashmir was purely a relaxed LOC border. Where the kashmiris on the 2 sides could meet and trade with relaxed border control and no long bureacratic controls or security.

Even mushraff knew that India will never cede territory for easing of tensions.

I also agree that the huge rise of terror threat from Afghan/pakistan border and the mumbai attack has ended this option for another decade.

Pakistan would have to be a completely moderate civillian country with very strong business and political links to both india and the USA in general.
For easy free access between borders with no tension in place.

SORT OF LIKE THE FREE EASY BORDERS IN EUROPE. We europeans can go and live trade buy in any euro country we wish.

ITS PARADISE. no restrictions or fear of war etc.

 

[xuberant]

With Pakistan giving autonomy to its northern areas as Gilgit Baltistan and India agreeing to reduce the number of troops in Kashmir, it seems that back door diplomacy is making progress and more decisions will be uncovered soon.

The best solution which I feel is more fair is an independent Kashmir valley solution scenario 6. I don’t think this region will find it hard to survive on its own because tourism industry will make it prosper. This region can be made as a non-militarized zone between the two countries; a separate independent region which won’t have its own army. It would have its own independent government, judiciary, currency and can have foreign relations with rest of the world. It would have borders with both India and Pakistan and visa would be required for citizens of both countries to enter. Alongside with this solution, India should withdraw its forces from Siachen. Also, a water treaty between all three parties would be made that would restrict all of them to make dams on other parties rivers.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Scenario 7

The Chenab formula

This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do YOU see the future of Kashmir?

Isn't the answer obvious?

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

i think scenario 4 is the best give KASHMIR to KASHMIRI's and deploy the UN PEACE FORCE to protect its borders from pakistan & india!!!!!

This will also work.

 

[eastwatch]

South Asian Media Net

India to accept LoC as border: Mishra
Monday, November 09,2009

LAHORE: Indians are ready to accept the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir as a permanent international border, Brajesh Mishra, India’s first national security adviser, said on Sunday. In an interview with Zee News channel, Mishra said China, after the Kargil war in 1999, had clearly told Pakistan that the LoC should be respected, adding that China had maintained that the LoC issue should be resolved through bilateral dialogue.

“The attitude of China has changed towards India and Beijing has taken a hostile stance against New Delhi due to the Indo-US civil nuclear pact,” he said. “In 1962, we fought a war with China, then with Pakistan, and I am afraid that we might get a bigger jolt than 1962 in the next five years,” he added.

Mishra said that both Islamabad and Beijing were simultaneously striking a “hostile posture” and were trying to surround India. He said that China was trying to subdue India in South Asia, adding the Chinese had always tried to engage India in “different problems with its neighbours” so that New Delhi could never play an active role in South Asia.

“I think we should equip our (Indian) forces as soon as possible, as we are not doing enough in this regard at the moment. We have two enemies, China and Pakistan, and if they work together we would have a bigger problem,” he said.

“It is not that we should enhance our security apparatus to attack someone rather it is to defend ourselves,” Mishra added. daily times monitor

 

[pagans]

Let's be honest ,there is no solution to Kashmir issue. Either INDIA or Pakistan has to become too weak for the issue to die out. There is simply no other way. I bet on it.

 

[neyaab]

Scenario 7 is the best solution

 

[Hari]

Since Kashmir is an Emotional issue for both Countries, Only Possible solution is to Make LoC an International Border with some adjustments here and there