The Kashmir issue...through different view points

[Snak3eye5]

After reading a lot of posts on the kashmir issue around here. I have a few thoughts If you look at it objectively some of the solutions mentioned isnt as simple as India just giving away Kashmir to Pakistan or Pakistan nuking India to get Kashmir by force. Lets look at it from different eyes and educated view points and you will find the solution is quite complicated and I fear say there is no middle ground or a solution..

The Logical Indian

May say, won't terrorism progress to other parts of the country. Himachal pradesh, Leh, Jammu, etc. If we give Kashmir away, won't Pakistan demand himmachal, Leh, Jammu, maybe even Kerala. Sril lanka will then demand Tamil Nadu or China suddenly demanding some other territory etc.

The Deluded Indian
Why are we messing around with Kashmir so much and spending so much time and energy there for Kashmirirs that really don’t want to stay with India and want to join Pakistan.

Viewpoints from a Kashmir point of View.

I want to be independant and don't want to join Pakistan or India regardless of weather India is more stable or Pakistan has more people who idenify with me being muslim.

I want to join Pakistan and be with my muslim brothers and sisters.. or

Why should i join Pakistan and how will my kids study in iit or iim's, How can India just give us away to a country that has military coups every 4-5 years and are mentioned in the same breath as north korea and Iran.

The Patriotic Pakistani

May say I need to help my muslim brothers from being tortured and save them from the naughty Indians so i want my government to fight for Kashmir independance forever.

The deluded Pakistani

I will save Kashmiris just because the hindus are torturing them and are mis treating them just because of their religion. Lets just go to war and nuke India already, we have the weapons..

The Practical Pakistani

Do I really care about Kashmir, when half the people around me don’t have access to good schools, good education, jobs ? All i see is shady people approach me with radical views

The Pakistan Government

By going after Kashmir is the only way I can get public support to keep building/creating my military arsenal and continue getting aid from China, US. By letting the public know that rather than working on re-building the economy and infrastructure or increase spending on education we need to keep buying weapons and keep the public attention towards the poor kashmiris who are being abused/tortured by the evil Indians.

This way I can also keep all the other ethnic tribes in check through their mutual hatred with India since there is nothing else to focus their attention on.

The Indian Government

May say If we give Kashmir now which is a part of our Indian identity then what good am I ? Some will even say that If India gives Kashmir to Pakistan it will prove that India is weak and hence the government is weak. Other states will start talks on wanting to separate itself from India. Should I let China and Bangladesh bully me also when they start asking for parts of India ?

From a patriotic indian

May say Kashmir is an integral part of India and India should not leave it . India has spent so much money and lives on Kashmir that it would be foolishness to leave it now .

The practical Indian

May say, lets just give Kashmir away and stop the blood shed of our soldiers and maybe even build a huge wall so we can just keep Pakistan and China at bay. We need to continue focusing on our rising middle class, Bollywood and spending on education

I fear that in reality there is no solution or middle ground. Feel free to add more educated view opinions..

 

[Subaltern]

Can't help but laugh at the 'patriotic Pakistani' point. Yes, Patriotic Pakistanis are so motivated by the 'sufferings of their Islamic brethren', that they will say 'Kashmiris are opressed in India', when fact is, India spends more money subsidizing Kashmir than any other state and we gave them article 370 to protect their demographic identity, while Pakistan didn't, all the while, ignoring or being silent on the fact that their overlord China has banned muslim names like Mohammed amongst the Uyghurs.


btw, you forgot to include the most decisive voice in non-violent discourse on Kashmir : the legalist Indian. History shows, its not the words of the 'practical Indian/patriotic Indian' that has stopped the world from calling Kashmir independent or Pakistan's, its the words of the legalist Indians, who've proved very effectively and easily that Republic of India has unquestionable sovereign rights over J&K, while Pakistan has no sovereign rights.

At the same time, legalist Indians have pointed out that we are not against Kashmiri self determination, Kashmiri self-determination is blocked by Pakistan's non-compliance of the UNSC decision.

Why do you guys think even China endorsed the view that Pakistan should leave J&K, withdraw all its citizens and India should post troops all over J&K (to a minimum requirement to preserve law and order) and THEN do referendum ?

Because China is sensetive to sovereign rights question. If China questions the clear passage of sovereign rights from Maharaja of J&K to Republic of India, by the same token, India, USA, Japan, Korea, EU, etc will question passage of Tibet's sovereign rights from the Dalai Llama to the Qing dynasty, the legal parent of PRC today.

 

[Subaltern]

As for solution, there is a solution to Kashmir. Repeal of article 370. Then demographic flood of Indians into Kashmir. Fast-forward 30-40 years and when situation in Indian Kashmir resembles that in Xinjiang today- where >50% people are not ethnic Kashmiri, we will see no more shenanigans in Kashmir. Then, if 'ethnic Kashmiris' get out of hand (of which, only the muslim dominated valley is the problem. We don't hear stone pelting in Jammu or Ladakh or any such thing), we will have the majority of 'rest of kashmir' drowning out their voices.

That way, nobody dies, there is no war over Kashmiri fate and Kashmir is pacified. The only price to be paid, is Kashmiri culture gets diluted/absorbed into the mainstream Bihari/Punjabi culture. Given how culture changes anyways with time, this is an acceptable price for most rational people.

 

[Snak3eye5]

I should have also posted to add some humour in some of the view points since this is a time pass tread without the history lessons posted by the poster above...But witht hat being said do you ahve a link that China endorsed Pakistan should leave J and K ? China is Pakistan's ally and can't see them doing that..

 

[Subaltern]

I should have also posted to add some humour in some of the view points since this is a time pass tread without the history lessons posted by the poster above...But witht hat being said do you ahve a link that China endorsed Pakistan should leave J and K ? China is Pakistan's ally and can't see them doing that..

1948, UNSC resolution 47. China is a signatory to that and step#1 of the resolution is for Pakistan to leave PoK and withdraw all (non-Kashmiri) Pakistani citizens from the territory.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I should have also posted to add some humour in some of the view points since this is a time pass tread without the history lessons posted by the poster above...But witht hat being said do you ahve a link that China endorsed Pakistan should leave J and K ? China is Pakistan's ally and can't see them doing that..

Thanks for pointing that out for those that missed the humour. I found the deluded Pakistani to be very funny as compared to the deluded Indian whose viewpoint seemed quite rational in comparison.

 

[big_gamer007]

Excellent post sums up all the viewpoints.. Just to add another viewpoint amongst some Indians is that Kashmir the land is ours and if anyone wants to leave India they can pack their bags and go to Pakistan but we would not give away the land..

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Excellent post sums up all the viewpoints.. Just to add another viewpoint amongst some Indians is that Kashmir the land is ours and if anyone wants to leave India they can pack their bags and go to Pakistan but we would not give away the land..

Why not? You gave away the rest of Pakistan, and Bangladesh as well for that matter.

 

[uberkoen]

Can't help but laugh at the 'patriotic Pakistani' point. Yes, Patriotic Pakistanis are so motivated by the 'sufferings of their Islamic brethren', that they will say 'Kashmiris are opressed in India', when fact is, India spends more money subsidizing Kashmir than any other state and we gave them article 370 to protect their demographic identity, while Pakistan didn't, all the while, ignoring or being silent on the fact that their overlord China has banned muslim names like Mohammed amongst the Uyghurs.


btw, you forgot to include the most decisive voice in non-violent discourse on Kashmir : the legalist Indian. History shows, its not the words of the 'practical Indian/patriotic Indian' that has stopped the world from calling Kashmir independent or Pakistan's, its the words of the legalist Indians, who've proved very effectively and easily that Republic of India has unquestionable sovereign rights over J&K, while Pakistan has no sovereign rights.

At the same time, legalist Indians have pointed out that we are not against Kashmiri self determination, Kashmiri self-determination is blocked by Pakistan's non-compliance of the UNSC decision.

Why do you guys think even China endorsed the view that Pakistan should leave J&K, withdraw all its citizens and India should post troops all over J&K (to a minimum requirement to preserve law and order) and THEN do referendum ?

Because China is sensetive to sovereign rights question. If China questions the clear passage of sovereign rights from Maharaja of J&K to Republic of India, by the same token, India, USA, Japan, Korea, EU, etc will question passage of Tibet's sovereign rights from the Dalai Llama to the Qing dynasty, the legal parent of PRC today.

'Legalist Indians' need to stop reiterating this point of view and read up on the latest developments regarding the UN resolutions on Kashmir to understand who is actually blocking the Kashmiri self-determinition.

In order to point you in the right direction, I suggest you read up about the McNaughton proposals and UN Resolution 80 which was passed two years after resolution 47 which is the one you are referring to in your post here.

Also, would request that once you are up to date on this topic please educate your fellow Indians.

 

[uberkoen]

Excellent post sums up all the viewpoints.. Just to add another viewpoint amongst some Indians is that Kashmir the land is ours and if anyone wants to leave India they can pack their bags and go to Pakistan but we would not give away the land..

Brilliant. Love this point of view. Although, just a question, how is Kashmir 'the land' yours? Surely, the land belongs to the people and families who have lived there for generations or am I mistaken?

 

[big_gamer007]

Why not? You gave away the rest of Pakistan, and Bangladesh as well for that matter.

You need to ask that question to someone who holds that viewpoint.. But if I have to guess why they think that ways I would say over the course of few decades the way the media and government portray Pakistan to be the enemy losing the land to them would hurt people's ego.. Secondly in last 4-5 years with all the reports of stone pelting and attacks on army by Kashmiri youth (remember the general media shows biased reports in favour of army) has led many Indians to believe Kashmiris are not one of us.. So they don't care if they leave or stay but can't let the land go to Pakistan (ego issues)..

The above is average persons thinking who has this viewpoint.. For a more literate one probably the land holds strategical advantages

 

[Subaltern]

'Legalist Indians' need to stop reiterating this point of view and read up on the latest developments regarding the UN resolutions on Kashmir to understand who is actually blocking the Kashmiri self-determinition.

In order to point you in the right direction, I suggest you read up about the McNaughton proposals and UN Resolution 80 which was passed two years after resolution 47 which is the one you are referring to in your post here.

Also, would request that once you are up to date on this topic please educate your fellow Indians.

UN resolution 80 does not contradict or abrogate UNSC resolution 47. It is also not a position endorsed by Republic of India anyways, neither was it a case of seeking arbitration bilaterally, as UNSC 47 represents.

 

[big_gamer007]

Brilliant. Love this point of view. Although, just a question, how is Kashmir 'the land' yours? Surely, the land belongs to the people and families who have lived there for generations or am I mistaken?

Read my post above it tries to answer the reasoning.. When there is 70 years of mistrust,lies and deceit involved between two countries you can't expect everyone to think reasonably.. The unfortunate price of animosity and greed amongst the te country has to be paid by average Kashmiris..

 

[Subaltern]

Brilliant. Love this point of view. Although, just a question, how is Kashmir 'the land' yours? Surely, the land belongs to the people and families who have lived there for generations or am I mistaken?

People's land is what they privately own. If you don't own a piece of the land, you own no land. All non-private land is owned and operated by the sovereign of said land. The sovereign has overriding land authority, hence sovereign can evict private owners from their land (most common example : government takes your land coz they wanna build a road).

Sovereign of J&K in 1947 was the Maharaja. Then it became Republic of India.
Thus, until there is a referendum, all lands of Kashmir belong to its current legal sovereign, aka Republic of India.
It is not 'my' land. It is 'Republic of India's land'.

 

[uberkoen]

UN resolution 80 does not contradict or abrogate UNSC resolution 47. It is also not a position endorsed by Republic of India anyways, neither was it a case of seeking arbitration bilaterally, as UNSC 47 represents.

UN Resolution 47 wasn't completely endorsed by India either and yes, it was a case of seeking arbitration bilaterally. and no Resolution 80 does not contradict or abrogate resolution 47 it is somewhat of an extension of resolution 47 in terms of appointing a plebiscite administrator and providing a detailed plan for demilitarization of the region. Basically, resolution 80 was the next step towards the plebiscite in Kashmir as per the U.N and it is India that is now blocking the Kashmiri Self-Determination by not following Resolution 80

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You need to ask that question to someone who holds that viewpoint.. But if I have to guess why they think that ways I would say over the course of few decades the way the media and government portray Pakistan to be the enemy losing the land to them would hurt people's ego.. Secondly in last 4-5 years with all the reports of stone pelting and attacks on army by Kashmiri youth (remember the general media shows biased reports in favour of army) has led many Indians to believe Kashmiris are not one of us.. So they don't care if they leave or stay but can't let the land go to Pakistan (ego issues)..

The above is average persons thinking who has this viewpoint.. For a more literate one probably the land holds strategical advantages

So basically there was no problem for India to give away land to Pakistan and Bangladesh in the 1940s but now there is which makes a mockery of that stance that India will never give away the land. Been there, done that.

 

[Subaltern]

UN Resolution 47 wasn't completely endorsed by India either and yes, it was a case of seeking arbitration bilaterally. and no Resolution 80 does not contradict or abrogate resolution 47 it is somewhat of an extension of resolution 47 in terms of appointing a plebiscite administrator and providing a detailed plan for demilitarization of the region. Basically, resolution 80 was the next step towards the plebiscite in Kashmir as per the U.N and it is India that is now blocking the Kashmiri Self-Determination by not following Resolution 80

*sigh*
I'd say you need an education in legalism more than anything else.
UNSC resolution 47 was an arbitration decision. It was sought by the plaintiff (Rep. of India) against the accused (Pakistan) and produced a verdict that had Pakistan and Rep. of India as respondents. Both sides admit their respondent status.
Thus, an arbitration is valid when there are bilateral respondents, irrelevant of acceptance or not by the respondents.
In simple terms, it means if you and I both go to the court, we are bound by the decision, even if we choose not to act on it.

Article 80 is not an arbitrary decision, it does not have respondents, as Rep. of India abstained from Article 80.


Also, since article 80 is not in contravention of article 47, article 80 is simply an addendum to it, as it neither abrogates or contravenes article 47 and article 47 has not been fulfilled.

In simpler terms, it means article 80 applies only if article 47 is followed through, that too, only if India chooses to accept it, as it is not a plaintiff or respondent to the article.

 

[Subaltern]

So basically there was no problem for India to give away land to Pakistan and Bangladesh in the 1940s but now there is which makes a mockery of that stance that India will never give away the land. Been there, done that.

India that gave away land to Bangladesh and Pakistan and India that holds Kashmir are two separate entities.
British India, who had sovereign rights over Pakistan and Bangladesh, chose to give it away. Republic of India, a successor of British India, is simply bound by the decisions of its parent sovereign polity, not responsible for its decision-making.

 

[big_gamer007]

So basically there was no problem for India to give away land to Pakistan and Bangladesh in the 1940s but now there is which makes a mockery of that stance that India will never give away the land. Been there, done that.

Ugh you need to understand few things, before 1947 India was fighting for its own independence the majority of the public was united to get independence the Britishers were ruling at that time.. Then the leaders of that time decided to make another Country on basis of religion in acceptance of Britishers.. Since Indians got independence from Britishers their main fight was won.. The partition was so bloody for god knows what reasons that rather than having USA/Canada relations we would always have the India/Pakistan relations..

You cannot compare 1947 (pre independence India) with today's India.. You think any political party if it gives Kashmir to Pakistan would ever come back in power? It would be a career suicide for them.. Similarly any political party or army chief in Pakistan if they give their Kashmir to India would be committing suicide..

 

[Zak_Fan]

'Legalist Indians' need to stop reiterating this point of view and read up on the latest developments regarding the UN resolutions on Kashmir to understand who is actually blocking the Kashmiri self-determinition.

In order to point you in the right direction, I suggest you read up about the McNaughton proposals and UN Resolution 80 which was passed two years after resolution 47 which is the one you are referring to in your post here.

Also, would request that once you are up to date on this topic please educate your fellow Indians.

A good time to go ahead with referendum was right after Nehru accepted the UN recommendation. But for decades, Pakistan resorted to wars, proxies and militants. Worse, it even sold a part of Kashmir to China, hoping to pressurize India with Chinese presence. Now that military gulf has widened to a point where Pakistan can't keep up, Pakistan sees it's hopes in UN again (which should always have been the case).

Now, from an Indian perspective, referendum isn't an option after 70 years of a forced war on us. Status quo shall remain, and there is little Pakistan can do about it.

 

[Subaltern]

Pakistan has no hope in the UN, either. This is because they unilaterally sold Kashmiri land to the Chinese (Shaksgam valley). Hence, Pakistan has proven itself to've unilaterally compromised the territorial integrity of J&K and thus, in violation of UNSC resolution 47.

You can't claim to dispute territory with nation A, then turn around and give part of the territory to nation B without nation A's approval and still claim to conduct yourself in good faith.

This is why Nawaz Sharif's 'we will send delegations around the world to raise awareness on J&K' has gotten nothing beyond 'yes, poor Kashmiris, violence should stop. There should be no terrorism and India should punish the army people who break laws'. Big fat zero in terms of getting Pakistani recognition about J&K. Because Pakistan has conducted itself in pretty much the most duplicitous and unreliable way regarding J&K according to the law.