The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!

[Bang Galore]

Every one in Pakistan must realize that we tried many times but failed to take Kashmir thru military means. India is not going to gift Kashmir to us. Only other solution which could be acceptable to the Kashmiris (Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris, not to India or Pakistan) would be to make the border between Azad Kashmir and IOK immaterial for the Kashmiris; something like US/Canada.

This solution, though only one feasible, implies that Pakistan is in effect giving up on Kashmir and accepting India’s occupation.

Had this come about, bigoted politicians would have had a field day in Pakistan as well as in India. It is good that Musharraf’s plan remained unfulfilled else he would have been hounded out of Pakistan for selling out on Kashmir.

Sir, without going into who Kashmir belongs to, something on which we will never see eye to eye, let me just say that a loosely porous LOC between J&K and Azad Kashmir with free ingress and egress of "Kashmiris" is never going to work, nor is it going to be acceptable to India for obvious security reasons.

Today with a hard LOC and high troop density, we hear of encounters with terrorists crossing over from Pakistan (under convenient covering fire by the regular PA) every second day. What is it going to be like with a free for all namesake line on a map as per your suggestion?

Secondly, and most importantly, who are these "Kashmiris" going to be? Who is going to decide that? On what basis? And who is going to police them to ensure that they are really who they claim to be? Again in the current climate of suspicion and the residual bad blood of the past 6 decades, this is neither a viable nor an acceptable solution.

Once we do that, we will slowly have half of impoverished Pakistan suddenly becoming "Kashmiri" to come over to the more prosperous side, with or without malintention. Who does the Governement of India provide for? And how does the Governemnt of India ensure that the "Kashmiris" from your side who are coming over, are actually returning, and not permanently staying back at the cost of the displacement of our local Kashmiris?

And more importantly from a security point of view, how does the Governemnt of India ensure that Pakistanis coming over as Kashmiris stay put within the Indian state boundaries of Kashmir, and not start drifting across to Jammu and then to Punjab and Himachal and Uttaranchal and so on and so forth? Are we going to then have a second army patrolled LOC to maintain J&K as a holding area within our own country?

I am sorry sir, but you are talking about trying to make oil and water mix.

You have the lethal virus of the Taliban in your country talking about joining your Army to wage Jihad against India. You have various other malignant tumors like the LET and JUD and others of their ilk. Should India instead of shoring up its borders to protect its population from such disease, open the gates and let them in?

Partition far from being neatly surgical, was the violent ripping apart of the body of our motherland. 60+ years have allowed the wounds to heal, and scar over. Except Kashmir, which like a diabetic sore keeps on and on and on oozing blood and pustulence. It is time to cauterize that one opening once and for all, and separate the child from the umblical cord joining it to its mother.

Its time for Pakistan to move on. On its own.

Cheers, Doc

I'm in the extremely odd position of agreeing with both the above seemingly contradictory posts. niaz's post clearly marks out the only possible resolution of the Kashmir dispute while vsdoc's post points out the practical problems with such a resolution. Which is why it's important to give any such resolution time. As long as Pakistan has armed militants roaming about with hatred against India in their hearts, there can be no open borders. The problem is that since the time of Musharraf; the security situation in Pakistan has worsened. While we can technically reach a solution calling for loose borders, it's highly unlikely that the borders will actually become such for a long time.

 

[theboss]

Well kashmiris attack Indian security apparatus every day in IOK however such does not happen in AJK. Speaks a lot about wishes of Kashmiri people.
It is important for Pakistan to secure Kashmir into its sphere of influence. Any power sharing aggrement with India over Kashmir means compromising our waters, agriculture and food security hence automatically scumming Pakistan into failure and disintegration.

Either Kashmir should be independent with considerable Pakistani influence or become a semi-govern area of Pakistan much like FATA. Pakistan annexing Kashmir is a far fetch dream and will bring the same Kashmiri reaction and attitude toward Indian security forces.

 

[theboss]

Tell that to your cricket stars, starlets, poets, singers, writers, and journalists who inspite of not living in slums, having above average per capita household incomes, and managing to have a loo with running water at home, still find India an irresistible destination to come to professionally.

Also tell that to the parents of the Pakistani kids who come over by the planeload month after month to get congenital cardiac abnormalities operated on by Indian doctors.

Its absolutely ok to be proudly nationalistic AM, but sometimes you need to bow to facts, unpalatable as they might be. Cloaked or not.

However, I've promised some close Pakistani friends of mine to be a good boy this time around. So if you feel I was trolling or that the language was dangerously close to the inappropriate line, please let me know and I will gladly edit my post buddy.

Cheers, Doc

The adversiry between India and Pakistan will not help anybody but India should curb its own expansionist and dominant ambitions. India wishes to "pawn" south asia and an average indian in mired in mysterious "superiority" complex which has resulted in riots against them in sevral countries.

 

[blueoval79]

The adversiry between India and Pakistan will not help anybody but India should curb its own expansionist and dominant ambitions. India wishes to "pawn" south asia and an average indian in mired in mysterious "superiority" complex which has resulted in riots against them in sevral countries.

for a moment i thought its going to make sense...but then...as always...

 

[karan.1970]

Well kashmiris attack Indian security apparatus every day in IOK however such does not happen in AJK. Speaks a lot about wishes of Kashmiri people.

The only flaw (IMHO) in this is that its not Kashmiris but Pakistani terrorists who do most of the attacking.

It is important for Pakistan to secure Kashmir into its sphere of influence. Any power sharing aggrement with India over Kashmir means compromising our waters, agriculture and food security hence automatically scumming Pakistan into failure and disintegration.

Either Kashmir should be independent with considerable Pakistani influence or become a semi-govern area of Pakistan much like FATA. Pakistan annexing Kashmir is a far fetch dream and will bring the same Kashmiri reaction and attitude toward Indian security forces.

Pipedreams at best. Trying to exhert influence over Afghanistan is costing you guys so dearly at this time (remember Zia.. thats where it started). You should first get things in NWFP, SWAT etc under control before having territorial ambitions in Kashmir..

 

[theboss]

Lets stop flaming and trolling shall we, however much you might try to cloak it in your posts.

Indian per capita socio-economic indicators are largely close to those of Pakistan, and until the disparity in those indicators increases significantly, there is nothing that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished living in slums and lacking basic sanitation facilities, offers to the impoverished Pakistani.

Once in an Indian economic summit, the speaker talked about benefits of Indo-Pak peace that Pakistani professional wouldnt need to travel so far to GCC countries for work when they can find oppurtunities next door in neighbouring India??

This was an absolute WTF statement.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Tell that to your cricket stars, starlets, poets, singers, writers, and journalists who inspite of not living in slums, having above average per capita household incomes, and managing to have a loo with running water at home, still find India an irresistible destination to come to professionally.

Absolutely, on a professional and legal basis.

Your argument is different, implying we are going to see the sort of exodus of the Pakistani impoverished to India that one sees from South Asia to the West, and that just is not going to happen given India's own impoverished and slum dwelling millions.

Who wants to travels thousands of miles to get out of a slum only to get into a larger one?

Also tell that to the parents of the Pakistani kids who come over by the planeload month after month to get congenital cardiac abnormalities operated on by Indian doctors.

Again an absolutely legal and paid journey to seek professional services, and not at all the 'half of impoverished Pakistan suddenly becoming "Kashmiri" to come over to the more prosperous side, with or without malintention' image that you painted without regard to your own hundreds of millions of impoverished dwelling in slums and lacking employment, opportunity and even basic sanitation.

Its absolutely ok to be proudly nationalistic AM, but sometimes you need to bow to facts, unpalatable as they might be. Cloaked or not.

That is advice you need to take Doc sahib, not me, given that it was not me making pretentious posts and making the argument of 'Pakistan's impoverished moving to India'. My argument in fact is much more balanced, pointing out that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished, and largely equivalent (to Pakistan) per-capita socio economic indicators, cannot logically be an attraction for 'Pakistan's impoverished'.

However, I've promised some close Pakistani friends of mine to be a good boy this time around. So if you feel I was trolling or that the language was dangerously close to the inappropriate line, please let me know and I will gladly edit my post buddy.

For the reasons I mentioned above, I do think that it was trolling.

You might have made the point in a more refined manner than some, but it essentially boils down to the age old canard along the lines of 'Pakistan is full of poor people and undeveloped, while India is a superpower with no/few poor people and far ahead of Pakistan'.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Once in an Indian economic summit, the speaker talked about benefits of Indo-Pak peace that Pakistani professional wouldnt need to travel so far to GCC countries for work when they can find oppurtunities next door in neighbouring India??

This was an absolute WTF statement.

In an environment of normalized India-Pakistan relations, the opportunity for Pakistani professionals to work in India will be similar to Indian professionals working in Pakistan. If the talent is available and there are no diplomatic hurdles, there is no reason why Indian and Pakistani companies would not shop around for the best HR talent anywhere they find it.

 

[karan.1970]

You might have made the point in a more refined manner than some, but it essentially boils down to the age old canard along the lines of 'Pakistan is full of poor people and undeveloped, while India is a superpower with no/few poor people and far ahead of Pakistan'.

I think to put it in a different way, because of the present economic and trade conditions, India (though not too different from Pakistan in average income etc) offers more opportunities for growth and enrichment. that will create a leveling effect if the borders are porous. It may not be an exodus per se, but definitely a sizable movement which will not be good for India but still will be uncontrollable.

 

[vsdoc]

AM mere bhai, change kar diya mera insensitive canard statement. Tu aaj administrator bana hai aur tu mera bhai bhi hai, isiliye.

Lekin thoda mujhe likhne de yaar. Yeh mera style hai. Koi malice nahin hai. Usko jyada control karega to Doc Doc nahin rahega .... AM ban jayega.

Cheers, Doc

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

India (though not too different from Pakistan in average income etc) offers more opportunities for growth and enrichment. that will create a leveling effect if the borders are porous.

You are not going to see a leveling effect so long as those 'opportunities' elude hundreds of millions in India itself.

Ten to twenty years down the line, with Indian growth largely sustaining and Pakistani growth stagnating at current levels, yes, it'll be a better argument.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM mere bhai, change kar diya mera insensitive canard statement. Tu aaj administrator bana hai aur tu mera bhai bhi hai, isiliye.

Lekin thoda mujhe likhne de yaar. Yeh mera style hai. Koi malice nahin hai. Usko jyada control karega to Doc Doc nahin rahega .... AM ban jayega.

Cheers, Doc

Believe me Doc sahib, we are making allowances for your 'writing style'. Don't think we were not aware of it and how it was the motivation for the, ahem, massive lobbying effort on your behalf by the Indian posters on defence.pk.

We knew what was in store when we unbanned you, though there was some hope that with time, err, some 'moderating effects' might have settled in ..

 

[vsdoc]

Believe me Doc sahib, we are making allowances for your 'writing style'. Don't think we were not aware of it and how it was the motivation for the, ahem, massive lobbying effort on your behalf by the Indian posters on defence.pk.

We knew what was in store when we unbanned you, though there was some hope that with time, err, some 'moderating effects' might have settled in ..

You are saying "was some hope" yaar as in beyond redemption hopeless past tense mere bhai.

Yaar thoda to fark aya hai. Only yesterday I had a full mostly civil conversation with Developereo without him suggesting it was time for my medication again.

Chalo, lets not spoil this great thread. I appreciate your allowances, and will try my best not to take liberties beyond those allowed.

Cheers, Doc

 

[karan.1970]

You are not going to see a leveling effect so long as those 'opportunities' elude hundreds of millions in India itself.

Ten to twenty years down the line, with Indian growth largely sustaining and Pakistani growth stagnating at current levels, yes, it'll be a better argument.

Sure they elude millions in India but its all about relativity. The opportunities may be less considering the size of India, but on average, are more than what exists in Pakistan today in terms of head room for growth. The contrast is more stark in the Jammu and Kashmir area vis a vis G&B and Azad Kashmir.

Anyway, the idea is not to compare the economic conditions in India vs Pakistan but to highlight that a porous border, while looking good on paper, may not be a practical solution while such concerns remain or a control mechanism is identified.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sure they elude millions in India but its all about relativity. The opportunities may be less considering the size of India, but on average, are more than what exists in Pakistan today in terms of head room for growth. The contrast is more stark in the Jammu and Kashmir area vis a vis G&B and Azad Kashmir.

Head room for growth? Both Pakistan and India are developing countries with a large middle class and its only been about three years since Pakistan's growth dipped, but private enterprise continues to thrive and economic opportunities remain, albeit dampened by terrorism and the power crises. That is why I said that this argument of 'Pakistan's impoverished moving to India' will become a legitimate one if the current situation continues for another decade or so.

On the contrast between G&B+AK vs J&K, I am not sure I agree, and perceptions of 'greener pastures' in IAK are certainly not there given the continued reports of militant and State violence and mass protests.

Anyway, the idea is not to compare the economic conditions in India vs Pakistan but to highlight that a porous border, while looking good on paper, may not be a practical solution while such concerns remain or a control mechanism is identified.

The comparison was only to point out the fallacy of a comment made by Doc sahib - the argument of 'concerns about security', in terms of militant movement across a porous border, is a much more feasible one.