What's new

Upholding the Kashmir cause!

Pakistanis are wasting tgeir energy and hard earned sources for wrong cause.The legitamacy of so called freedom fighting was finished when they tortured tge minoriities like Pundits,Sikhs and Shias.Without their support there is no freedom.struggle only terrorism.Even Kashmiris dontcare about it.For them the useless exercise of Pakistan is just another opportunity formore incentives from GoI.Thats all.Look at the last election .People voted in huge amount with record poll.Why do the Pakistan waste their sources for such an opportunistic people.You guys dont have enough time to see the plight of poor Balochis.
I agree with @Norwegian .Even my state was a also a 3 princely states before independence.But now we are Indians

If Kashmiris don't really care and they would rather vote in elections, maybe its a good opportunity for India then to hold the plebiscite? something they had promised to the Kashmiri people after all.

@Norwegian

Kashmir is an emotional issue for both Pakistanis and Indians. A compromise on both side is required. Holding on to the rigid official positions will not bring us any closer to the solution, it will in fact do the opposite.

My solutions: Let us convert LOC to IB and let Kashmiries get maximum autonomy to govern their affairs.

Except that its not for Pakistanis or Indians to decide. That should be left to Kashmiris.
 
.
This fellow who wrote this article needs to do a bit of homework. He's as clueless as a monkey on a barge pole. Just to educate this feather brain and others of his ilk.....

Pakistan stresses on the UN Resolutions for a plebiscite in Kashmir. But according to Part II of the UN Resolution 47 (1948) adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting held on 21 April, 1948 (document no. s/726, dated the 21st April, 1948) that before a plebiscite is held:

"The Government of Pakistan should undertake to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State".

However, Pakistan never did abide by the caveat contained in Part II of the Resolution till date. It has failed to withdraw all its forces and nationals from the entire Kashmir region as required in Part II, para 1 of the UN Resolution as a first step for a plebiscite.

If so, how can Pakistan keep demanding for a plebiscite when it is yet to comply with the UN Resolutions and blaming India for non compliance instead?

Secondly,

Resolution 47 was passed by United Nations Security Council under chapter VI of the UN Charter. Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

So, the question is, why did Pakistan agree to pass the Resolution under chapter VI of the UN Charter and not insist on including it under Chapter VII which would have made a plebiscite mandatory and enforceable?

Pakistanis keep harping on the issue insisting that India is violating the UN Resolutions. They obviously have never read the Resolutions or choose not to.

This ignorant clown who wrote the article has made a real fool of himself. He's shot himself in the foot, and how!

Ah, the usual little smart Indian response.

It was India who lodged the complaint in UN, not Pakistan and yes, they did it under Chapter 4. The resolution was passed on April 21, 1948, the UNCIP arrived in July 1948 but before the UN guys could get to their work, the control of J&K was given to the 'Prime Minister' Sheikh Abdullah.

As the resolution states, the implementation of ceasefire was to be overseen by UNCIP. India rejected its initial proposals because UNCIP didn't blame Pakistan enough for the 'invasion'. Pakistan rejected them because it didn't believe the preparation for and holding of plebiscite would be free with Sheikh Abdullah as PM.

There were further proposals in December 1948 for have a ceasefire in place to which both the countries agreed, thats where the LoC comes from.

After the ceasefire line aka LoC was established in January 1949, the UNCIP proposed to keep whole of J&K under a Plebiscite administrator. India rejected.

December 1948, UN proposed a complete demilitarisation of Kashmir so a plebiscite can be held. India rejected.

UNCIP was replaced by individual representatives who couldn't get the two sides agree on anything. The most prominent proposal being holding a number of small plebiscites by regions. India rejected.

The mandate for UNCIP ended and it was replaced by Military Observer Group who stay to this day.

After the 1965 war, Soviet Union vetoed most of the resolutions on Kashmir including the ones presented during the 1971 war. In Shimla agreement, the 'ceasefire line' was renamed to 'Line of Control' which India proclaimed as a de facto border. India stopped reporting to the UN Military Observers as well because from her point of view, the matter was all resolved.

The writer is not clueless and neither are you I guess, your response to this article is just a reflection of what India has been doing for the 70 years regarding Kashmir, LIE.
 
. .
Except that its not for Pakistanis or Indians to decide. That should be left to Kashmiris.

Would you say same for Tibet, that it is not a matter of China?

Islam may be cross national brotherhood and all other cross national things, but things doesn't work in that way in other parts of the world.
 
.
837930-ShamshadAhmadNew-1423846589-740-640x480.JPG

The writer is a former foreign secretary

Every year on February 5, we observe the Kashmir Solidarity Day with great zeal and fervour, showing Pakistan’s full support and unity with the people of Indian-occupied Kashmir and their ongoing freedom struggle while also paying homage to Kashmiri martyrs who lost their lives fighting for Kashmir’s freedom. For decades, however, we have been observing this annual occasion as a ritual only with a countrywide public holiday and sporadic protest rallies and gatherings with no practical expression of solidarity for the legitimate freedom struggle of the Kashmiri people. As a nation, we just walk through the ritual, enjoying the holiday mostly sitting at home without even realising what it is all about.

The day is usually marked by public processions, special prayers in mosques for the liberation of Kashmir and protests against the Indian oppression in Kashmir. In practice, however, other than the familiar spectacle of a human chain with people standing in rows clasping each other’s hands on all major crossings into AJK from Pakistan, one doesn’t see any other public demonstration of solidarity in our major cities to reassure Kashmiris that they are not alone in their struggle. This year, for a change, one witnessed special fervour and passion on Kashmir Day at all levels in the country showing support and solidarity for the Kashmir cause.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif specially went to Muzaffarabad to address the joint session of the AJK Legislative Assembly and the Kashmir Council and reiterated that Pakistan would continue its moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiris in their legitimate struggle for the right of self-determination and that no decision against their will would be accepted. “There is no solution to the Kashmir issue except a plebiscite. I make it clear to the entire world that durable peace in South Asia is linked to the resolution of the Kashmir dispute,” he declared. This was a timely message to his Indian counterpart who misread Nawaz Sharif’s gesture of goodwill last year when he attended Narendra Modi’s oath-taking ceremony in Delhi.

What should be clear to Modi is that by putting up an arrogant face, you cannot change realities. Besides representing the key unfinished agenda of the June 3, 1947 Partition Plan, Kashmir is an internationally recognised dispute, which has been on the UN agenda for over six decades. In accordance with UN Security Council resolutions, the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan was to be decided through a free and fair plebiscite under UN auspices. All those resolutions remain unimplemented, denying the Kashmiri people of their inalienable right of self-determination.

On their independence, India and Pakistan inherited many problems, but the Kashmir dispute was the mother of all. The Kashmir clash in 1948, the 1965 war, the Siachen dispute, the Kargil crisis, a volatile Line of Control with frequent violent eruptions, recurring skirmishes at the Working Boundary, frequent war-like military deployments and resultant tensions, water disputes, and mutual suspicions and accusations are all directly related to Kashmir. Even today, the two countries remain locked in a confrontational mode. While all other issues are amenable to easy solutions, the Kashmir dispute invokes intense feelings among the peoples of India, Pakistan and Kashmir.

It is not a ‘real estate’ issue or a question of ‘re-demarcation’ of geographical boundaries. It is a question involving the fundamental right of self-determination of the Kashmiri people, pledged to them by the international community through solemn UN Security Council resolutions. The setting aside of UN resolutions is one thing, the discarding of the principle they embodied is quite another. The underlying cardinal principle of self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter and reaffirmed in the Millennium Declaration cannot be ignored. The Kashmir settlement has to be in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people, impartially ascertained under no coercion or intimidation.

As one of the oldest unresolved international conflicts, Kashmir is today a sombre reminder to the world that it cannot continue to ignore the legitimate aspirations of the Kashmiri people. They want nothing but freedom from Indian occupation. The indigenous Kashmiri struggle goes on undeterred with thousands of Kashmiris already laying down their lives. No amount of atrocities and humiliations can stop them from pursuing their legitimate cause. The Kashmiri people continue to experience untold hardships, including human rights violations. This is the crux of the Kashmir situation. India will do itself good by seeing the writing on the wall.

India’s efforts to obfuscate the Kashmir dispute as an issue of terrorism will not succeed. Popular movements cannot be suppressed. Brutal military force brings no relief to anyone. Stark lessons are there to be learnt from history. Even the world’s sole superpower today owes its existence to a long war of independence. Modi cannot deny the history of his own country. It was the 1857 War of Independence that laid the road to India’s liberation as an independent state. India is forcibly hanging on to Kashmir when the Kashmiris don’t want to have anything to do with India. They want their right of self-determination.

Today, the voice of the Kashmiris is that of a wronged and forcibly subjugated people challenging India’s and the world’s conscience. For India, it is time to revert to the path of justice and fair play, and to heed to sanity and legality. On our part too, it is time to come out of our ostrich-like mode of total apathy and indifference to the Kashmir cause. Pro forma gestures of ritualistic solidarity are no service to the people of Kashmir. While India never showed the slightest change in its position, our rulers in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks gave wrong signals through their self-serving gestures of unilateral flexibility.

What they don’t understand is that beyond UN resolutions, there is no compact formula or tailor-made solution available for addressing the Kashmir issue. A free and fair plebiscite under UN auspices remains the only solution to which both India and Pakistan had committed themselves in terms of those resolutions. Our commitment to the Kashmir cause is rooted in this legal and moral reality and cannot be given up by our rulers merely as gestures of goodwill or as a confidence-building measure in pursuit of a peace that will never come by giving up on our principled position. Until then, we must continue to extend full political, diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmir cause and keep upholding the Kashmiris’ right of self-determination in every international forum.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 14th, 2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
Upholding the Kashmir cause – The Express Tribune

Kashmiris have a right of self-determination, no doubt. But so do Bengalis, Balochis, Punjabis, Pashtuns, Seraikis, Sindhis, Biharis, Marathas, Tamils, Gujaratis, Rajasthanis and other native ethnicities of the Subcontinent that formed former Princely States of India:


prepartind.jpg


If every Indian ethnicity or groups of people along with their native princely states were granted right of self-determination, the people of Subcontinent would have eventually gone back to the same era of infighting that left us vulnerable against foreign invaders and interests since time millennium. Therefore this hypocrisy on Kashmir must now end after 68 years of mindless struggle for Kashmiri right of self-determination!

@Akheilos @dexter @Slav Defence @sur @XenoEnsi-14 @TankMan @DESERT FIGHTER @p100 @BDforever @hunter_hunted @Mav3rick @rockstar08 @asad71 @Major Sam @pursuit of happiness @Faizan Memon @Spy Master @ozzy22 @Manticore @war khan @ShowGun @Afridistan @Razia Sultana @madmusti @farhan_9909 @ghazaliy2k @KingMamba @Khalid Newazi @Etilla @SpArK @Srinivas @desert warrior @DRAY @pumkinduke @wolfpack @pursuit of happiness @danish_vij @rubyjackass @Star Wars @Ammyy @bloo @Marxist @karan.1970 @Not Sure @Arav_Rana @Avik274 @SamantK @Major Shaitan Singh @Omega007 @farhan_9909 @haviZsultan @Sidak @ranjeet @Yogijaat @ravi Nair @WAR-rior @halupridol @he-man @Indrani @Mike_Brando @SarthakGanguly @sreekumar @OrionHunter @lightoftruth @Water Car Engineer @indiatester @Ind4Ever @13 komaun @anant_s @itachiii @SwAggeR @Brahmos_2 @jaiind @Blue_Eyes @bhangi bava @SAMEET @naveen mishra @Bagha @utraash @Chanakya's_Chant @Krate M @gslv mk3 @r1_vns @blood @noksss @kurup @PARIKRAMA @thesolar65 @Rohit Patel @wolfschanzze @levina @vostok @rahi2357

Like how you handed over parts of Kashmir to the Chinese,Aur damn hai na toh ukhaad loh joh ukhaad na hai
 
. .
Ah, the usual little smart Indian response.

It was India who lodged the complaint in UN, not Pakistan and yes, they did it under Chapter 4. The resolution was passed on April 21, 1948, the UNCIP arrived in July 1948 but before the UN guys could get to their work, the control of J&K was given to the 'Prime Minister' Sheikh Abdullah.

As the resolution states, the implementation of ceasefire was to be overseen by UNCIP. India rejected its initial proposals because UNCIP didn't blame Pakistan enough for the 'invasion'. Pakistan rejected them because it didn't believe the preparation for and holding of plebiscite would be free with Sheikh Abdullah as PM.

There were further proposals in December 1948 for have a ceasefire in place to which both the countries agreed, thats where the LoC comes from.

After the ceasefire line aka LoC was established in January 1949, the UNCIP proposed to keep whole of J&K under a Plebiscite administrator. India rejected.

December 1948, UN proposed a complete demilitarisation of Kashmir so a plebiscite can be held. India rejected.

UNCIP was replaced by individual representatives who couldn't get the two sides agree on anything. The most prominent proposal being holding a number of small plebiscites by regions. India rejected.

The mandate for UNCIP ended and it was replaced by Military Observer Group who stay to this day.

After the 1965 war, Soviet Union vetoed most of the resolutions on Kashmir including the ones presented during the 1971 war. In Shimla agreement, the 'ceasefire line' was renamed to 'Line of Control' which India proclaimed as a de facto border. India stopped reporting to the UN Military Observers as well because from her point of view, the matter was all resolved.

The writer is not clueless and neither are you I guess, your response to this article is just a reflection of what India has been doing for the 70 years regarding Kashmir, LIE.
:rofl::omghaha:

I like the way Pakistanis twist the issue to suit their silly arguments which amount to squat! Clutching at straws as usual! What more does one expect?

Stop obfuscating the issue. Get real. Wake up and smell the coffee. You are way out of sync with reality as all of Pakistan is! The Kashmir issue is now dead as a dodo. The sooner you guys realise this, the better. India has moved on while you guys are still stuck in a time warp.
 
.
The learned diplomat-bureaucrat must know that he cannot expect a buffalo to dance if he played the flute to it.Pakistan/Pakistanis must make a niyat/solemn vow to clear Indian occupation by arming/aiding the Mujahids adequately.
 
. .
If Kashmiris don't really care and they would rather vote in elections, maybe its a good opportunity for India then to hold the plebiscite? something they had promised to the Kashmiri people after all.



Except that its not for Pakistanis or Indians to decide. That should be left to Kashmiris.
There are technical problems for plebiscite even if all parties agree to it
1. Changed demography of pakistan part of j&k
2.aksai chin
3. Kashmiri pandith problem due to terror factories across the border
Never mind all those war for kashmir(undermining plebiscite option)
Now tell me which country took plebiscite out of the equation ?
 
. .
:rofl::omghaha:

I like the way Pakistanis twist the issue to suit their silly arguments which amount to squat! Clutching at straws as usual! What more does one expect?

Stop obfuscating the issue. Get real. Wake up and smell the coffee. You are way out of sync with reality as all of Pakistan is! The Kashmir issue is now dead as a dodo. The sooner you guys realise this, the better. India has moved on while you guys are still stuck in a time warp.

You were boasting about Pakistan's failure to meet the requirement of UN resolutions so I responded. I didn't make any arguments of my own.

As for moving on, yes thats the same argument Israel gives for the occupied territories. The problem for you is that while India might be Israel, Pakistan is not Palestine.
 
.
Pakistan can "uphold" the Kashmir cause as much as it likes in the UN and to anyone who will listen but the trouble is, with Pakistan they employ a two prong strategy and one of them is this internationalising of the Kashmir dispute on the global stage but the other is, well we all know what games they play and the destruction their proxy war has caused.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom