08-18-2005, 10:57 PM
Kashmir is part of Pakistan or India? I think it is hard question to answer. If you will ask this question to an Indian heâll reply âIndiaâ and if you would ask same question to Pakistani he would reply âPakistanâ.
Let me answer this question with logic,
Little About Kashmir Conflict
India and Pakistan fought three wars between 1947 and 1972, with Kashmir as the main battleground. Ever since, Kashmir has been in pieces, with India and Pakistan occupying most of it, and China a small portion. Both India and Pakistan claim all of it to be rightly theirs.
The conflict traces its roots to 1947, when India and Pakistan were formed from former British colonies in South Asia. Pakistan was formed from the majority Muslim part of British territory, and India from the majority Hindu part.
The state of Jammu-Kashmir, with a majority Muslim population but a Hindu ruler, chose to be part of India in a process that many Muslims--and Pakistan--believed to be illegal. The United Nations has issued resolutions calling for a referendum to decide Kashmir's fate, but India has ignored them. The majority would almost certainly vote for Kashmir to be independent or part of Pakistan.
Almost immediately, India and Pakistan fought their first war over Kashmir. In 1949 and freed 1/3 of Kashmir [called Azad Kashmir], its seems to Indian that Pakistani will take over whole of Kashmir and there is no way to win the war over Kashmir. Then Indian went into UNO and demanded to stop the war then countries signed the Karachi Agreement establishing a ceasefire line--but did not agree to where the final border should be. The ceasefire was supervised by U.N. observers, who have remained in the area from 1949 until the present day.
In 1965, India and Pakistan fought their second war over Kashmir. It only lasted sixteen days, and did not result in any major changes.
In 1971, India and Pakistan fought their third war, this time mainly over Bangladesh, and a new ceasefire line was reached in Kashmir. In July 1972, the two countries signed a new agreement defining a "Line of Control"--a new ceasefire line--in Kashmir. Once again, the countries did not decide a permanent border.
In the 1980s, India rather obviously rigged elections in Kashmir in order to keep its supporters in power. Ongoing corruption, not to mention outright persecution, rape, and other human rights violations, bred increasing discontent among Kashmiri Muslims.
Kashmir Part of India or Pakistan..
Indian can claim Kashmir on the following Grounds
1) It was Hindu ruler in Kashmir when partition took place therefore Kashmir should be part of India
PAKISTANâS OBJECTION
When British occupied Indo-Pak, it was Muslim rule so if India claims Kashmir on the above base then whole Indo-Pak should be under Muslim rule.
Pakistan claim Kashmir on following grounds
1) When partition took place it was decided that Pakistan will be formed from the majority Muslim part of British territory, and India from the majority Hindu part. According to that formula Kashmir is part of Pakistan.
2) Kashmir was one of many princely states in India. Under the Partition Plan in 1947, these states were free to join either India or Pakistan.
3) The Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, made it clear that this decision would be made final only when the people of Kashmir vote in a plebiscite or referendum on the matter. India accepted this position but has never allowed such referendum to take place.
4) The United nations passed three resolutions calling for a plebiscite to be held but India ignored such calls. Many believe that India refuses to hold a plebiscite for fear that the majority of Kashmiris would vote to join Pakistan.
5) The United Nations has issued resolutions calling for a referendum to decide Kashmir's fate, but India has ignored them. The majority would
Indian Objection
Indian objection is not more than blaa blaa blaaâ¦or Kashmir is indiaâs atoot-ang.
I think Pakistan is in better position to claim Kashmir as a part of Pakistan and Indian hold over Kashmir is illegal. Many Indian says they respect International Law (UNO) then why they donât accept the UNO resolutions, do they have any answer? I donât think so, their answer would be no more then blaa blaa blaa.
Let me answer this question with logic,
Little About Kashmir Conflict
India and Pakistan fought three wars between 1947 and 1972, with Kashmir as the main battleground. Ever since, Kashmir has been in pieces, with India and Pakistan occupying most of it, and China a small portion. Both India and Pakistan claim all of it to be rightly theirs.
The conflict traces its roots to 1947, when India and Pakistan were formed from former British colonies in South Asia. Pakistan was formed from the majority Muslim part of British territory, and India from the majority Hindu part.
The state of Jammu-Kashmir, with a majority Muslim population but a Hindu ruler, chose to be part of India in a process that many Muslims--and Pakistan--believed to be illegal. The United Nations has issued resolutions calling for a referendum to decide Kashmir's fate, but India has ignored them. The majority would almost certainly vote for Kashmir to be independent or part of Pakistan.
Almost immediately, India and Pakistan fought their first war over Kashmir. In 1949 and freed 1/3 of Kashmir [called Azad Kashmir], its seems to Indian that Pakistani will take over whole of Kashmir and there is no way to win the war over Kashmir. Then Indian went into UNO and demanded to stop the war then countries signed the Karachi Agreement establishing a ceasefire line--but did not agree to where the final border should be. The ceasefire was supervised by U.N. observers, who have remained in the area from 1949 until the present day.
In 1965, India and Pakistan fought their second war over Kashmir. It only lasted sixteen days, and did not result in any major changes.
In 1971, India and Pakistan fought their third war, this time mainly over Bangladesh, and a new ceasefire line was reached in Kashmir. In July 1972, the two countries signed a new agreement defining a "Line of Control"--a new ceasefire line--in Kashmir. Once again, the countries did not decide a permanent border.
In the 1980s, India rather obviously rigged elections in Kashmir in order to keep its supporters in power. Ongoing corruption, not to mention outright persecution, rape, and other human rights violations, bred increasing discontent among Kashmiri Muslims.
Kashmir Part of India or Pakistan..
Indian can claim Kashmir on the following Grounds
1) It was Hindu ruler in Kashmir when partition took place therefore Kashmir should be part of India
PAKISTANâS OBJECTION
When British occupied Indo-Pak, it was Muslim rule so if India claims Kashmir on the above base then whole Indo-Pak should be under Muslim rule.
Pakistan claim Kashmir on following grounds
1) When partition took place it was decided that Pakistan will be formed from the majority Muslim part of British territory, and India from the majority Hindu part. According to that formula Kashmir is part of Pakistan.
2) Kashmir was one of many princely states in India. Under the Partition Plan in 1947, these states were free to join either India or Pakistan.
3) The Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, made it clear that this decision would be made final only when the people of Kashmir vote in a plebiscite or referendum on the matter. India accepted this position but has never allowed such referendum to take place.
4) The United nations passed three resolutions calling for a plebiscite to be held but India ignored such calls. Many believe that India refuses to hold a plebiscite for fear that the majority of Kashmiris would vote to join Pakistan.
5) The United Nations has issued resolutions calling for a referendum to decide Kashmir's fate, but India has ignored them. The majority would
Indian Objection
Indian objection is not more than blaa blaa blaaâ¦or Kashmir is indiaâs atoot-ang.
I think Pakistan is in better position to claim Kashmir as a part of Pakistan and Indian hold over Kashmir is illegal. Many Indian says they respect International Law (UNO) then why they donât accept the UNO resolutions, do they have any answer? I donât think so, their answer would be no more then blaa blaa blaa.
