Pakistan has sought UN's mediation in Kashmir dispute, India has opposed it: UN Secretary-General

[waqar goraya]

United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Thursday said that the body was following the Kashmir situation "very closely".

"Obviously this [Kashmir] is a situation that we continue to follow and follow very closely,” Guterres' said in a statement released by his spokesperson Stephane Dujarric, a few days after at least 17 people were killed by the Indian army in held Kashmir in a fresh wave of violence.

“The secretary-general has expressed and will continue to express his concern at the situation [in Kashmir]," Dujarric said. “I think we spoke about it earlier in the week, reminding all parties of the need to protect civilians."

Talking to the media during a routine briefing, Dujarric assured that the "good offices of the UN are available" for both countries to reach a peaceful solution to the dispute. He added that while Pakistan has continuously sought UN's good offices to resolve the decades-old dispute, India has opposed the body's mediation.

The statement pointed out that concerned parties must be willing to solve the issue in order to avail UN assistance.

Dujarric also clarified that the option was not exclusively for India and Pakistan, but for every nation involved in a dispute.

Three Indian soldiers and 13 suspected militants died on Sunday in several clashes south of Srinagar, the main city of the region. Besides, four civilians were also killed and dozens injured when police opened fire on thousands of demonstrators who poured onto the streets, throwing stones and chanting slogans against the Indian rule.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1399957/p...hmir-dispute-india-has-opposed-it-un-secy-gen

 

[PakLFC]

Ultimately only a final war will settle Kashmir. It has gone past what the obsolete UN says or thinks.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

For India the status quo is the solution - why go to the UN and risk that changing? India's economy is big enough to maintain the status quo and the international community (the UN, the EU, the Yanks, even China and the GCC nations) simply don't care (well other than making a few token statements on the issue) hence why nothing will ever change.

 

[WildSwing]

For India the status quo is the solution - why go to the UN and risk that changing? India's economy is big enough to maintain the status quo and the international community (the UN, the EU, the Yanks, even China and the GCC nations) simply don't care (well other than making a few token statements on the issue) hence why nothing will ever change.

Exactly, India is happy with the status quo, India doesn't need to do anything or go anywhere for Kashmir, the ball is in pakistan's court, they have to make all the moves, India can afford to keep the army in kashmir as long as it is required

 

[Taaya]

Yes, India - maintain the status quo. As long as you can admit that you are no less horrific than other regimes which commit genocide and atrocities in order to 'protect national interests'. Creating terror in people's everyday lives because it serves national interests - that nails the definition of terrorism. Look it up before creating your own definition.

 

[waqar goraya]

For India the status quo is the solution - why go to the UN and risk that changing? India's economy is big enough to maintain the status quo and the international community (the UN, the EU, the Yanks, even China and the GCC nations) simply don't care (well other than making a few token statements on the issue) hence why nothing will ever change.

Obviously, status-quo is the best option for India. It knows he can do nothing with other half of Pakistani Kashmir.
This status quo has its price though, may be not that much currently but Pak-India abysmal relations, loss of lives in LOC firings, threat of a nuclear war and human rights violations on mass scale in Kashmir all are the results of this status-quo.
India is bigger and stronger than Pakistan in economic aspect. But It is more to do with Pakistan's weakness than India's strength. Indian economy was pretty weak couple of decades earlier but Kashmir unrest was not so extreme then.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Obviously, status-quo is the best option for India. It knows he can do nothing with other half of Pakistani Kashmir.
This status quo has its price though, may be not that much currently but Pak-India abysmal relations, loss of lives in LOC firings, threat of a nuclear war and human rights violations on mass scale in Kashmir all are the results of this status-quo.
India is bigger and stronger than Pakistan in economic aspect. But It is more to do with Pakistan's weakness than India's strength. Indian economy was pretty weak couple of decades earlier but Kashmir unrest was not so extreme then.

In the late 80s and through most of the 90s the policy of Pakistan and the Kashmiri separatists almost worked. India was a mess economically and close to bankruptcy and couldn’t have sustained the level of troops and resources that were needed in J&K and at the border.

But then the fruits of the Rao and Manmohan Singh government kicked in and the economy turned around. And of course 9/11 then happened which changed things a lot (supporting the Kashmiri militants as they did before was no longer possible for Pakistan) and well the rest is history.