Suppose you have to resolve the issue of Kashmir

ooyebubbly · 04-21-2005, 03:20 AM

HEY SUPPOSE THAT U HAVE TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF KISHMIR
HOW WILL U REPLY
CONDITION IS U HAVNT HAVE TO ANGRY ANY ONE ----NEITHER INDIAN NOR ANY PAKISTANI
SO GO GO AHEAD N SAY
U JUST HAVE TO RESOLVE IT NOT STARTS SPEEKING LONG LECTURES OK ABT HISTORY

----------------------------------------------------------
ONE DAY I WILL HACK N DESTRY THIS GOOD SITE,IN HANDS OF POOR SICK PEOPLE

maani · 04-21-2005, 05:12 AM

I will only say this...about 80% of Kashmiri dont want to be with either Pakistan or India...so just give them the right about their future and see...

Ace

qatil · 04-21-2005, 07:10 PM

the thing witch cannot be done why you are asking.
you Gandi

abdulmajid · 04-22-2005, 05:41 AM

the only solution for which all parties SHOULD feel happy is that all five parts- indian held valley, azad kashmir, jammu, ladhakh and northern areas- are divided into as many parts which all three parties agree, and then these areas are given under the direct supervision of UNO for some time, then UNO hold the plabescite giving three options i.e joining india, pak or independ kashmir.
however india will never acept it, but in ideal situation it SHOULD.
even if kashmir dipute is solved by accepting control line as a permanent border and held kashmir is given sufficient autonomy, pakistan should accept it because it will be in the benefit of all the muslims in the region. the sooner it is solved the bettter it is.

inta habieba omri, malikta omri

Goodman · 04-22-2005, 05:47 AM

The whole valley of kashmir is to be independent and all three countries (India, China and Pakistan) are guarantors of the geographical integrity of the valley.

abdulmajid · 04-22-2005, 06:31 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Goodman
 The whole valley of kashmir is to be independent and all three countries (India, China and Pakistan) are guarantors of the geographical integrity of the valley.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
valley is just a part of the disputed territory-other parts are ladakh, jammu, and pakistani northern areas-. and what if people in valley want to join india or pakistan. who will ensure that pakistan, india and china guarantee the geographical integrity of the valley.

inta habieba omri, malikta omri

Goodman · 04-22-2005, 09:13 PM

the state of kashmir incluing the valley, laddakh, gilgit, baltistan, jammu and pounch.

Wanted to write state in my first post not valley. Thanks for the correction.

Pracs · 04-24-2005, 09:04 AM

With all the history on Kashmir, I think the best option would be

1)Azad Kaskmir and Gilgit (Pakistan)
2)Kashmir Valley (joint india pakistan control under an internaional arrangement)
3)Jammu (India)
4)Ladakh (China).

The only new arrangement would be the one for ''2'', the other three regions are with the three different countries already. I think in this case the valley would revert to Pakistan as well. Ground reality is that an independant country (Kashmir) would not be in the geo political interest of the this region and for any of the three countries for that matter

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

abdulmajid · 04-25-2005, 10:54 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 With all the history on Kashmir, I think the best option would be

1)Azad Kaskmir and Gilgit (Pakistan)
2)Kashmir Valley (joint india pakistan control under an internaional arrangement)
3)Jammu (India)
4)Ladakh (China).

The only new arrangement would be the one for ''2'', the other three regions are with the three different countries already. I think in this case the valley would revert to Pakistan as well. Ground reality is that an independant country (Kashmir) would not be in the geo political interest of the this region and for any of the three countries for that matter

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Dear Pracs!
your post is very interesting, and it has raised a few points in my mind. I hope you will elaborate on that.
1. why ladakh should be given to china and on what basis? if i am not wrong, in ladakh mostly the population is bhudhist and they seems to be happy living under indian federation. certainly more happy than joining china.
2. how independent kashmir will not be in the geo-political interest of this region? was the creation of bangladesh or pakistan in geo-political interest of this region?

akhbarak eih habibbie!!!

Pracs · 04-26-2005, 08:01 AM

Ladakh or Aksi Chin are already part of China, annexed by China (Pakistan has officially acedeed its right to China on that, one of the foundation stones of Pakistani-Cheeni dosti). Present day Indian province/region of Ladakh is the just the froniter state bordering Chinese held Ladakh or Aksi Chin (as now called).

For a geographical idea of the area, refer to the following link

http//www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/kashmir_disputed_2003.jpg

Kashmir is in one of the most sensitive areas in Asia,.. With China, India and Pakistan bordering it, it could easliy turn into a hot bed of politico-relegious-military issue. Keep in Mind China's explosive Muslin Population in the Southern Provinces. Pakistan as a true Chinese friend has kept a lid on any Muslim political aspirations (and there have been a couple there). Do you think an Independant Kashmiri Govt. could not unbuckle under pressure from Iran or Saudi or for that matter from other Extreme Pakistani groups.

Bangladesh was and is 2000 kilometers plus away from Pakistan, an independant Bangladesh has had no bearings on us (its practically in a different region). That was one of the prime reasons it broke of us. I am worried about a Kashmiri state heavily under influenced by India and close to us effecting us in ways.

You know how edgy we get when we have a pro India Govt. Afghanistan ! (some thing during the Royal govts. there ! back in the 60's). Pro India is anti Pakistan.

Ofcourse, these are all ''assumptions'' and all of these have been doing there rounds in the press in the form of Journalistic editorials and opinions.

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

abdulmajid · 04-27-2005, 08:43 PM

on march 2, 1963 the border agreement between pakistan and china was signed in beijing. according to the agreement pakistan recieved an area of about 750 square miles which was previously under the control of china. this agreement is of a provisionary nature and it will be discussed again on accession of kashmir to pakistan. this is the pakistani version of the story.
how pakistan could have ceded aksai chin which was not under its control. also ladakh is a vast region and china had captured most of it in 1962, then returned all but some strategically important areas which now form aksai chin. as far as indian claims are concerned we all are aware of their exaggeration skills. hari singh must not have thought of controlling these far flung areas even when he was in the arms of his favorite woman and offcourse completely drunk. it's obvious when new settlement of kashmir will be reached aksai chin will be discussed again. china's interest in aksai chin is because of the road link that joins tibet and xinjiang autonomous region otherwise i think this area is totally useless. and certainly it will not be too difficult to solve it.
i didn't get what u mean from the following sentense. <blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">originally posted by pracs
Keep in Mind China's explosive Muslin Population in the Southern Provinces. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
if u want to say they are kind of extremists or they believe in use of arms, the u are totally wrong. there is nothing in the recent history to support such opinion. yes in early 90's afghan tajiks tried to be smart but there was no real support for them from the locals. yes there is believed to be a few chinese muslims in taliban ranks, so what muslim extremists have joined them from all over the world even from US born white people. 10 or 12 people does not represent the whole community which according to official statistics is 18 million. muslims in china are only demanding the right to pracitice their beliefs and chinese government has changed it's policies dramatically in recent years.the age of mao is over and new china is modern. further we should keep in mind in china muslims were never targetted, yes there were restrictions but these were for people of all religions, not muslim specific. even in those times muslim areas had much more autonomy. still today muslim areas form the part of xinjiang and uygur autonomous region. muslims in china are backward, but it's causes are others. and with the new developments chinese government is spending much more on these areas.
ok, if for the time being we imagine that kashmir is independent and theri is a taliban like government ( which is impossible) and they are willing to support a seperatist movement in china. then the question, can they practically do it. the answer is a NO. they can't. simply because the geographic realities are very different from afghanistan or china. in case of afghanistan the insurgents can go and come back from afghanistan into pakistani tribal areas by travelling just one night. but in case of china and kashmir we will have to see if it's even possible to cross himalyan ranges through unknown tracks. if one say it's possible then the question how much it will take , the answer must be like one month.
these are just my predictions but these are obvious ones because all of us know about the heights of these mountains and vast glaciers where u can't move without using special equipment. the two regions are not as close as they look on map.
launching an insurgency from afghanistan or from kyrgyzstan into china is 100 times easy. and afterall america has strong bases in both these countreis. so why worry from an independent kashmir.
i wanted to write a bit more but already this post is very long. will discuss in future.

akhbarak eih habibbie??

Pracs · 04-28-2005, 07:04 AM

Before I go on with my point of view,, enjoyed your piece there,.. I would love to read a complete version of this, do take out the time to put it on a post.

Yes you are right that the Chinese Muslims have had liberties which their cousins in the ex USSR did not, or for that matter which other fellow Chinese (Buddhists in the south) did not have,, ofcourse that was more of due to poltical reasons. Muslims have had the right to pray and live their lives in China. But as with communist China, there have been instances and these Muslim provinces still happen to be the Chinese back waters.

You have a point there about the practicality of land routes from Kashmir through China, but there'd still be possibilities. What I fail to understand, is where does this Independent Kashmir ideology come from ? Did any one say something about having independent countries all over South Asia after the Brits left.? I mean what is it all about, I understand that Bangladesh was a mistake, an unfortunate chapter in the History of post Colonial south Asia. And why does it have to be muslim countries spliting up ?? What's wrong with Pakistan ? Haven't we done enough for the cause of Kashmiris,, we have put our lives on stake to rescue Kashmir and did out best. What reasons do Kashmiris have of even thinking about an ''Indepedent option''?

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

Shahid_fss · 04-28-2005, 07:59 AM

Kashmir should be with pakistan but some people are there who want an independent Kashmir. Why?
If you conduct a servey you will find out that more then 70% of Kashmiris and Pakistanis think that Pakistan played a Kashmir game to avail financial aid and Pak govt didn't wanted to loose this money so they made this issue unresoled forever. This thought made those people decide to be independent rather then be a part of Pakistan.
Some political parties in AK are also using this issue for there own benefits. Moreover when (if) Pakistan is thinking about a U turn, it will also encourage this thought.
I think we all should understand that union of Kashmir and Pak is more beneficial for muslims than its deivision or independence.
In reality, Kashmir had never been a part of Pakistan. It was also not in the direct control of british. Kashmiris have already lost so much (lives, peace, wealth) due to there decision to be a part of Pakistan now its Pakistan's tern not to play games with Kashmiris. Kashmir is more importent than indian friendship.

========================
```*``` I love stars;
*`*`*`* Shining;
`*`*`*` and Smiling;
*`````* Always.
------------------------
[email protected]
http//www.shahid-fss.tk
========================

Pracs · 04-29-2005, 05:54 AM

You may be partly correct, but it is one of those conspiracy theories. I for one do not believe in an Indepedent Kashmir. Well, just not Kashmir, there were over a hundred princely states not under direct British Control, including Hyderabad, Junagadh, Gawalior, Bhawalpur, Kalat, Swat, Patiala, and hordes of others,.. None of these are an independant country ofcourse !

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

abdulmajid · 04-29-2005, 09:09 PM

the sole purpose of the creation of pakistan was to protect muslims living in india. a piece of land is not sacred at all, but human lives certainly are. kashmir is different from a cricket match. there is something serious going on in that land; killings, rapes, tortures, chopping some parts of the body off. but pakistanis are still watching sweet dreams, on one nice morning indian prime minister will appear on TV and tell the audience, "well we have realised it now, kashmiris want to join pakistan. so pakistanis! whole kashmir is yours from now on. jiay hind!!."
the best chance for kashmir's accession to pakistan is through a phased process, may be in the beginning autonomy plus free and fare elections then independece and if kashmiris really want to join pakistan then nothing in the world can stop them after independece. it's too obvious that no government in india can afford to give pakistan any big gain on kashmir. imgaine if congress give only a part of kashmir to pakistan through a plabescite. then what will happen?. congress and sonia ghandhi can only dream of indian premiership for next 50 years. imagine a nation which can not tolerate a cricket match loss to pakistan, will they tolerate the accession of kashmir to pakistan. in india people are very poor, so indian government will have no shortage of men willing to die in the name of bharat mata. nehru's family or upper class brahmans of BJP will not risk their political ambitions just for the sake of a few thousand indian men.
president musharraf knows all this, he tried to win kashmir through kargil adventure but he realised the real things very soon, pakistanis are not willing to go on a war for kashmir. kashmir is whether independent or part of pakistan after getting rid of india is immaterial. the material thing is that no more kashmiris are killed and they start living peacefully.
many people in pakistan are criticising musharraf ( i also don't like many of his policies) but hey have no plans of their own, they are asking pakistan government to do nothing just sit back and relax. not sit back and relax completely, give a statememnt after one week that pakistani government supports the freedom struggle. come on!! wake up!, after 5 years people will be so tired of daily rapes and killings that they will be even willing to convert to hinduism. haven't this happened in undalusia ( now spain).
if at the moment india gives kashmir, even the autonomy and indian forces are withdrawn from kashmir and pakistan accepts the line of control as permanent border, then this will be a huge step. i am sure in that scenario forces in the valley who are willing to join pakistan will become more and more stronger and certainly they will rule in case of free and fare elections. and a muslim dominated area with its own government will be of much more help for the muslims living in india. and especially when pakistan will be on their back.

akhbarak eih habibbie??