First International law or UN do not recognize "freedom" fighters.
The UN has no internationally agreed definition of terrorism and the reason is that some organizations (OIC, Arab League etc.) define terrorism to exclude "armed struggle for liberation" and "self-determination". The member countries (of these organisations) won't accept any definition of terrorism which may declare Palestinian Freedom Fighters as Terrorists. This Dead Lock continues to this day and the UN has not adopted
the convention on international terrorism.
So, as long as the UN does not "define" terrorism, the
Kashmiri Freedom Fighters cannot be declared
Terrorists ..... Their insurgency cannot be declared
legitimate either (In case the UN chooses to define terrorism to exclude "armed struggle for liberation" and "self-determination") .....
As far as International Law is concerned, the Statute of the International Court of Justice does recognize
the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations as a valid source of International Law. This category may also include the work of organizations and private institutions. Opinions expressed by experts carry significant weight in International Law.
And here is what some experts on International Law have to say regarding the
Kashmiri Freedom Fighters:
(The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is an international human rights non-governmental organization based in Geneva. The Commission itself is a standing group of 60 eminent jurists(including senior judges, attorneys and academics) dedicated to ensuring respect for international human rights standards through the law. Commissioners are known for their experience, knowledge and fundamental commitment to human rights.)
ICJ sent a fact finding mission to Kashmir in 1995. The final report published not only challenged the accession of Kashmir to India, it went on to say "If as the ICJ mission has concluded , the people of Kashmir have a right for self determination,
it follows that their insurgency is legitimate " ... (p.84-98)
http://www.icj.org/category/publications/reports/page/33/
Second, right of self determination can only be granted when there is an absence of self governance for a considerable period of time.
Third right of self determination can be warranted in case of colonial rule. By international law, Indians as a race do not count as a colonial ruler on Kashmir.
Fourth, secession in disguise of self determination based on sect or religion is a threat to global peace under UN charter
The Premises are false, Your argument fails.
Without going into details of
Right of Self Determination and its recognition under the UN and International Law, I will just point out that In case of Kashmir, the right to self-determination has been given to the people of Kashmir by the United Nations Security Council itself. The U.N Security Council passed 23 resolutions in this regard. The relevant UNSC Resolutions, as clarified by the UN Representatives on several occasions, are still valid.