The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[karan.1970]

Karan, no doubt Kashmir is something over which Pakistan and India have become enemies more than anything else.
I am not ignoring the fact that 90% of all our issues are tied to Kashmir.

Let me assure you that humans are sentimental beings, sometimes it is not enough that you have economic growth etc.
If economics are the only motivation then our forefathers would not have gained support when they rallied together to become independent of the British Empire.
Same is the case with many of the Kashmiris who just do not want to be a part of India and over time many have become frustrated over the state of affairs.
It does not mean that India is evil and Pakistan is good, just as it does not hold the other way around as well.

The fact that Pakistan is also a stakeholder means that Kashmir is something to which all three are tied and will all be frustrated one way or another...till we think out of the box which seems the only option.

However, if small adjustments are made and entire Kashmir is declared as a zone in which Kashmiris can roam easily...i think the enmity will subside...

The reason why i say it is simple...all of you no matter how much you hate each other's country just picture that Kashmir was no longer an issue...do you see any other major reason why we need to be hostile all the time?
Will it not bring about a huge change for the positive?
If you see all of this then it makes sense to resolve it and not let our past enmity, hate and mistrust stand in the way.

I think all parties have learnt their lessons by now, it has been 6 decades and this issue has held ransom the prosperity and fate of billions in the region...clearly it has significance, enough to resolve it.

Thank you sir.. A voice of sanity is always a welcome change in the constant barrage of claims and counter claims..

 

[Xeric]

An article from a Pakistani Newspaper and a conspiracy theory of an acknowledged India baiter.. hmm.. ..

So the Pakistani press dont stand a chance, right?

And atleast Lamb is better than your Vermas who sits in think tanks, is biased to the extent of conspiracy and cant say anything less raising the Akhund Bharat slogan.

i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?

 

[hindustan]

i dont know why not pakistan understand from what pepoples of kashmir want

they show you what they want in last election

why dont you guys let them live with peace

pakistan is creating problem in kashmir

 

[toxic_pus]

i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?

Not the least. Where there is conspiracy, there is money to be made.

Anyway...

Documents (c) and (d) were published by the Government of India on 28 October 1947. The far more important document (a), the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed. To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signed by the Maharajah ever did sign an Instrument of Accession. There are, indeed, grounds for suspecting that he did no such thing. The Instrument of Accession referred to in document (c); a letter which as we have seen was probably drafted by Indian officials prior to being shown to the Maharajah, may never have existed, and can hardly have existed when the letter was being prepared.

You mean this Instrument of Accession, Mr Lamb?

Any agreements favourable to India signed after such intervention cannot escape the charge of having been produced under duress. It was, one presumes, to escape just such a charge that the false date 26 October 1947 was assigned to these two documents.

To prove duress one has to prove that the original decision to accede was taken at a date or time later than 27th October, 1947, when IA was already there in Kashmir. The signing date doesn’t prove that the decision was taken there and then. The fact remains that the oral agreement was reached before 26th October, 1947. Mehr Chand was in Delhi to negotiate accession long before 26th October, 1947. He had the carte blanche to decide on behalf of the Maharaja [refer Looking Back by Mehr Chand]. The signing date was merely ceremonious.

But then again, you already know that.

 

[toxic_pus]

It is not a fact and certainly was not raised as an issue with any solid evidence, it was seen as a possibility because it was a great opportunity for Pakistan to give India a Bangladesh of its own.

Even Gen Kuldip Singh (officer in charge of operation bluestar)as i recall in his interviews also hinted at a possibility (not proven fact) of Pakistani help and highlighted a fear of Pakistan stepping in and recognizing Khalistan just as India did in Bangladesh ( i vividly recall him mentioning Bangladesh and equating the two in case Pakistan Army stepped in, which it did not).
Now the possibility (which was not availed by Pakistan) has become a fact 2 decades down the line?

Sikhs have been one of the most fierce warriors of subcontinent...they needed training from Pakistan to fight?
All that funding of Sikh community all over the world towards the cause should not be ignored.
It was a pretty popular cause on its own, why taint it with Pakistani influence and support?

Anyways, it is now buried in the past but stop painting it in any other tone than what it was primarily...a rebellion of the Sikhs in Indian Punjab with many members of Sikh community all over the world funding and helping their people, now that is a fact which cannot be denied.

Once again it is not that Pakistan and India are evil, however there have been many things in their history which are not desirable and nobody wants to own up to them despite making mistakes

Let us get back to topic at hand now, otherwise mods will have to ban me.

K.P.S. Gill is the one you should be reading or hearing. Not Gen. Kuldip Singh. The former was the one responsible for fighting the Punjab insurgency throughout the 80s and successfully quelling it.

No one however denies the fact that it was a rebellion of the Sikhs. Its just that, Pakistan tried to pull a Bangladesh on us but failed miserably. That is also a fact.

 

[Xeric]

Not the least. Where there is conspiracy, there is money to be made.

Anyway...


You mean this Instrument of Accession, Mr Lamb?

To prove duress one has to prove that the original decision to accede was taken at a date or time later than 27th October, 1947, when IA was already there in Kashmir. The signing date doesn’t prove that the decision was taken there and then. The fact remains that the oral agreement was reached before 26th October, 1947. Mehr Chand was in Delhi to negotiate accession long before 26th October, 1947. He had the carte blanche to decide on behalf of the Maharaja [refer Looking Back by Mehr Chand]. The signing date was merely ceremonious.

But then again, you already know that.

i knew you would come up with this illegible piece. The one that was never produced at the time when it was required but when it was 'created'.

And FYKI, yes, official correspondence and decisions are based on documented dates. i wonder how it would be if india 'decides' to raise/lower fuel prices but enforce them prior to the notification issued by the concerned ministry?

How about you celebrating your independence on some August? Or may be how about Pakistanis celebrating their independence on 23 March 1940 when it was DECIDED that an independent homeland would made for the indian Muslims?

i wonder how your office records correspond to each other?!!

You have hence proved, that the IA went inside an INDEPENDENT State against the will of the ruler and committed crimes against humanity to which it is still party to!

 

[toxic_pus]

i knew you would come up with this illegible piece. The one that was never produced at the time when it was required but when it was 'created'.

To prove that this is an 'illegal piece' you have to prove that the signatures that this document bears are fraudulent. Till that time, it is just as legal as it can get.

You are however free to call it 'illegal'. You will only make Jinnah look bad.

And FYKI, yes, official correspondence and decisions are based on documented dates. i wonder how it would be if india 'decides' to raise/lower fuel prices but enforce them prior to the notification issued by the concerned ministry?

How about you celebrating your independence on some August? Or may be how about Pakistanis celebrating their independence on 23 March 1940 when it was DECIDED that an independent homeland would made for the indian Muslims?

i wonder how your office records correspond to each other?!!

Still doesn't prove what Lamb was bleating about. That is, the Instrument was 'signed under duress'. All the examples that you have cited actually bolster what I have said. The decision to raise/lower fuel price, or decision to grant independence to India and Pakistan are/were taken prior to the date of notification. Similarly the date on the Instrument doesn't mean that the decision was taken on that date (or time). Hence, the question of 'accession under duress' doesn't arise.

However that you have equated Notifications to agreements, probably tells a thing or two about your piss poor understanding of agreements, or what makes an agreement valid.

You have hence proved, that the IA went inside an INDEPENDENT State against the will of the ruler and committed crimes against humanity to which it is still party to!

Far from it. Oral agreement is still valid.

 

[Xeric]

To prove that this is an 'illegal piece' you have prove that the signatures that this document bears are fraudulent. Till that time, it is just as legal as it can get.

Si it's legal just because some one like you says so, right?

You are however free to call it 'illegal'. You will only make Jinnah look bad.

The damn thing was not even provided to Pakistan when you jumped inside Srinagar. Keep the BS to yourself!

Still doesn't prove what Lamb was bleating about. That is, the Instrument was 'signed under duress'.

It proves many other things that you have very conveniently ignored

All the incidents that you have cited actually bolsters what I have said. The decision to raise/lower fuel price, or decision to grant independence to India and Pakistan are/were taken prior to the date of notification. Similarly the date on the Instrument doesn't mean that the decision was taken on that date (or time). Hence, the question of 'acceding under duress' doesn't arise.

This gives me so much insight to your understanding of how things get enacted and incidered!!

Far from it. Oral agreement is still valid.

So things in india get done orally, right?

BTW, why did you waste so much paper and ink on your constitution?

Jungle raj would have been a better option for your likes!

 

[Xeric]

i am still waiting an explanation to the following:

the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed.

May be the indian thought that things would also get done orally outside india

 

[toxic_pus]

Si it's legal just because some one like you says so, right?

No. Because you couldn't prove that the signatures are fraud.

The damn thing was not even provided to Pakistan when you jumped inside Srinagar. Keep the BS to yourself!

Wonder why Jinnah, the fine constitutional lawyer that he was, didn't proceed too far with this.

Could it be that he figured that not much of a legal case can be made out of it.

It proves many other things that you have very conveniently ignored

I answered the key issue.

This gives me so much insight to your understanding of how things get enacted and incidered!!

OK. If that makes you happy

So things in india get done orally, right?

Thats how it done all over the world. But that's real world we are talking about. Not the fantasy world you live in.

BTW, why did you waste so much paper and ink on your constitution?

Jungle raj would have been a better option for your likes!

Now you have equated agreements with constitution. In other words you don't know what a constitution is or what it stands for. Jinnah is surely turning in his grave.

 

[Xeric]

Ok, now the usual chankian tactics.

Rant on, boy!

 

[toxic_pus]

i am still waiting an explanation to the following:

the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed.

May be the indian thought that things would also get done orally outside india

The whole point of the para above is to prove that there is/was no Instrument of Accession. I believe those images prove that there is and always was an Instrument of Accession, unless of course you can prove 'fraud'.

This kind of argument is called fallacy (I am forgetting the latin name of the fallacy). These arguments go like - the other party hasn't seen it, therefore it doesn't exist.

Other than that the para is meaningless.

 

[toxic_pus]

Ok, now the usual chankian tactics.

Thank you for equating me to the great man.

 

[Xeric]

You have failed to address the points raised by Mr Lamb. Instead you have restored to rhetoric and nit picking. i have learned that you master in red herring and that's only what you can do best.

i am still waiting if you can pick up the concerns raised by the writer and can negate them with proof and logic, or else you can shut up and let others give it a try.


N.B. Do you suffer from anal retention, BTW?


P.S. i was more concerned about the baleful and noxious behavior of your 'hero', even if one consider him as such

 

[karan.1970]

So the Pakistani press dont stand a chance, right?

On this topic it doesnt.. because there are similar articles in Indian press that talks exactly the opposite POV. . So its a he said she said.. No value

And atleast Lamb is better than your Vermas who sits in think tanks, is biased to the extent of conspiracy and cant say anything less raising the Akhund Bharat slogan.

He could be. But most folks dont pay attention to either..

i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?

No! wrong..