Kashmir..........How many of you do see chances of a solution? - Page 2

Victory · Jun 23rd, 2009, 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arleitter

Let's discuss it on a serious note.`Legends' who have been around here for years,saying they will get Kashmir from India militarily ,pls refrain from posting such `utopian' stuffs here.

Do you people see any chance in resolving the so called `Kashmir Issue'?

Ps:-Obama administration has made it clear that they will not mediate India-pak talks on Kashmir.This is a set back to both hardliners and softliners.

I do not see a solution for kashmir in my lifetime, unless India acts. Pakistan or kashmiris can do nothing in this regard.

We have two options

1) allow self determination for the kashmiris
2) Hold on to kashmir

The third one of a peaceful settlement with kashmir getting greater autonomy within Indian republic is also possible, but I do not think that the hardliners and their "supporters" will allow that to happen.

Victory · Jun 23rd, 2009, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by janab-e-ali

^
*yawn*

My country's history as a distinct, sovereign political entity dates back to over 1,500 before your "India" even came to exist. A brutal, illegal occupation of our land hasn't changed its basic cultural/historical/territorial integrity.

There was one change -- "Religion"

janab-e-ali · Jun 23rd, 2009, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victory

I do not see a solution for kashmir in my lifetime, unless India acts. Pakistan or kashmiris can do nothing in this regard.

We have two options

1) allow self determination for the kashmiris
2) Hold on to kashmir

Brute force can only accomplish so much. Ultimately it's impossible to suppress the will of an entire people...every European colonial power learned this in Africa/Asia over the past few decades, and I'm confident India will ultimately have to confront the same reality in Kashmir. It probably won't be soon (remember, it took Pakistan/India 190 years to throw off the yoke of colonialism)...but its inevitable.

The process could be expedited if India's coveted permanent seat in the UNSC was tied to the long awaited plebiscite...not super likely I know, but a possibility, especially if the US decides it needs a stable base in the region.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victory

There was one change -- "Religion"

Your point being?

Victory · Jun 23rd, 2009, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by janab-e-ali

Brute force can only accomplish so much. Ultimately it's impossible to suppress the will of an entire people...every European colonial power learned this in Africa/Asia over the past few decades, and I'm confident India will ultimately have to confront the same reality in Kashmir. It probably won't be soon (remember, it took Pakistan/India 190 years to throw off the yoke of colonialism)...but its inevitable.

The process could be expedited if India's coveted permanent seat in the UNSC was tied to the long awaited plebiscite...not super likely I know, but a possibility, especially if the US decides it needs a stable base in the region.

I do not think the public opinion in India will allow for a separation of kashmir state. However, after few decades, who knows?

Quote:

Your point being?

If it takes 190 years or even hundred years, demographics can change and the public opinion in kashmir might change. My point was that Kashmir of today is not what it was 1500 years or even 500 years ago. The change of the religion has brought a major change in the lifestyle and thinking of the people.

janab-e-ali · Jun 23rd, 2009, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victory

I do not think the public opinion in India will allow for a separation of kashmir state. However, after few decades, who knows?

You might be interested to know that back in 2007, a survey conducted across major urban centers in India and Pakistan showed that only 35% of Indian respondents and 11% of Pakistani respondents would consider an independent Kashmir "unacceptable" if it was the result of a free & fair plebiscite.

Indian and Pakistani Publics Show Flexibility on Kashmir - World Public Opinion

Granted, this is probably biased towards the opinions of more educated, cosmopolitan people, but its certainly promising.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victory

If it takes 190 years or even hundred years, demographics can change and the public opinion in kashmir might change. My point was that Kashmir of today is not what it was 1500 years or even 500 years ago. The change of the religion has brought a major change in the lifestyle and thinking of the people.

Kashmir's "demographics" haven't changed per se. We are the descendants of they very same people who inhabited Kashmir 1500 years ago. The fact that our ancestors opted to convert to Islam about 700 years ago doesn't change our basic identity as Kashmiris. Kashmir existed as a sovereign state both during its pre-Islamic history, and afterward as well.

As for public opinion changing...well, I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. I'm sure the French thought that the Algerian independence movement was a passing fad too...

The sooner India realizes that maintaining a full-on military occupation in Kashmir (because that's what it takes to keep Kashmir in India) is a waste of her resources, the sooner we can all move on and India can actually start focusing on improving the miserable situation in places like UP and Bihar (where the people actually WANT to be a part of India).

CM · Jun 23rd, 2009, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xephyr

My dear friend CM.. you are now singing overtures of peaceful solution...Had not Pakistan encouraged terrorism in Kashmir valley...bet you...solution would have been found by now...Violence makes things much more tighter..Nobody wins in that game...Unfortunately, some (from either sides) have chosen wrong path...
One of cousins works in Kashmir..who says there is always exaggeration of wrong things by the local politicians....Do not listen to them too much...

Read other threads CM...how Balochis are being treated there???..You can listen to the biased voice...

Baloch issue start a new thread. Your comments are not relevant.

40 years India had not fulfilled a single UN resolution. They had taken no steps to self-determination.

India is a democracy, give the Kashmiri people that very basic democratic right. Let them choose their destiny.

Largest democracy my ass.

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 06:24 AM

What self-determination?Why there is any need of a plebiscite?Pls explain.............

CM · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:11 AM

Because the President of India said the plebicite shall be held. Because UNSC resolution which India agreed to said they would.

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:22 AM

President of India????????? Why should the then president of India place a comment on it?

Or if you are trying to say about what prime Minister Jawharlal Nehre had agreed then it's ok...

but before that pls go through the resolution of March 30,1951

Kashmir, UN Security Council Resolution 91

Hope it will give you an idea of why there is no need to conduct a plebiscite in Kashmir...

CM · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:35 AM

Yes President Nehru had agreed to it. Secondly that resolution at no where states a plebicite should not be held.

Slickstar · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:46 AM

Absolute joke of a thread. In fact, the notion that many claim that Kashmir is ours is ludicrous. "we" do not own anything. If freedom is to prevail, the people of Kashmir should be let alone to decide for themselves.

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:48 AM

^^Nehre was Prime Minister.Anyway...........

yes it does not say that a plebiscite should not be held but

It also says...............

preparatory to the holding of a plebiscite,demilitraisation of the state has to happen.Where is the conduicive situation for that in the light of terrorism and insurgency in Kashmir?

Why does POK have Pak Soldiers?It is not demilitarized yet........

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 07:54 AM

Next is the description of U.N commission for India and Pakistan Resolution,Jan 5 1949..

You will understand,why there is no need of a plebiscite in Kashmir ,given the contect of the resoltion and given the present atmosphere in the state.

http://kashmir.ahrchk.net/mainfile.php/after1947/12/

Slickstar · Jun 23rd, 2009, 08:02 AM

UN this UN that. Give me a break. There is a very simple way to resolve this issue. Put it to a vote. SIMPLE. If the people of Kashmir truly want to be part of either the Pakistani or Indian union the ballot will indicate so. If they do not want to be part of any external body then it is their absolute natural right to govern themselves. Any military intervention beyond this point is should be considered an invasion.

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 08:06 AM

We go by UN only.That's the neutral unbiased agency.Moreover we want to ensure that our Kashmiri people are getting the best available service in the world.We do not ant to give our Kashmiri brothers and sisters anything less than a PROFESSIONAL SERVICE.

Slickstar · Jun 23rd, 2009, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arleitter

We go by UN only.That's the neutral unbiased agency.Moreover we want to ensure that our Kashmiri people are getting the best available service in the world.

BBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH

please you might sell that off to the fools here but try harder. The UN? The UN as an organization does not represent the Kashmiri people. In fact, what does the UN have to do with Kashmir? This is fallacy of epic proportions. And not only that, who are you as an individual and who is India to decide what is better for the Kashmiri people. This line of thought borders the slave masters of the southern states who also claimed slavery was bringing the black man to civilization.

Again, the best people to represent the people of Kashmir is not the UN nor the bureaucrats of Indian congress, but the people of Kashmir itslef.

Stop being so naive and against freedom. let the power of the ballot decide the fate of the Kashmiri people. not the......lol UN...

CM · Jun 23rd, 2009, 08:34 AM

The requirement for demilitarization was that Indian troops would leave Kashmir as well. They did not. India must remove her troops as well.

aam bandha · Jun 23rd, 2009, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CM

The requirement for demilitarization was that Indian troops would leave Kashmir as well. They did not. India must remove her troops as well.

Well you seem to put a lot of stress on the UN resolution ..... so this one is for you ...

Here is UN telling India and Pakistan to settle Kashmir issue ...... no asking the Kashmiri's ... what do you have to say to this ...

ODS HOME PAGE

"Urges India and Pakistan to resume the dialogue between them on all outstanding issues, particularly on all matters pertaining to peace and security, in order to remove the tensions between them, and encourages them to find mutually acceptable solutions that address the root csuses of those tensions including Kashmir."

Arleitter · Jun 23rd, 2009, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slickstar

BBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH

please you might sell that off to the fools here but try harder. The UN? The UN as an organization does not represent the Kashmiri people. In fact, what does the UN have to do with Kashmir? This is fallacy of epic proportions. And not only that, who are you as an individual and who is India to decide what is better for the Kashmiri people. This line of thought borders the slave masters of the southern states who also claimed slavery was bringing the black man to civilization.

Again, the best people to represent the people of Kashmir is not the UN nor the bureaucrats of Indian congress, but the people of Kashmir itslef.

Stop being so naive and against freedom. let the power of the ballot decide the fate of the Kashmiri people. not the......lol UN...

How come?kashmir is an integral part of India so Kashmiris.Its not you as an individual or your country to decide what is apt for Kashmiris.We will go by U.N resolution only and not by somebody across the border.If you are not ready to accept and acknowledge the U.N resolutions ,why did you bother to be a part of it and can always say this openly to the International community.

If you are so adamant about `kashmiri's freedom' you are free to ask your government to give Kashmiris living in POK,freedom.

Punjabee in USA · Jun 23rd, 2009, 09:54 AM

Who knows what the future of Kashmir will be in a few hundred years....

But in all likelihood, Kashmir is going to stay a part of India during our lifetime. We can debate all we want on this forum, but its not going to change anything.

Kashmiris can either realize this, and start integrating into the Indian mainstream OR keep fighting India and in the process screw up their lives, livelihood, the future of the next generation and the economy of Kashmir. And not to mention that they could be killed anytime in the ongoing armed conflict.