Kashmir

[rajkumar]

Admin,

I would like to start a seprate thread to discuss Kashmir with other forum members. I find myself disscusing Kashmir with other forum members in different threads. Please let me know if this is OK.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waqqas

Yes India did take Kashmir to the UN. Wrongly in my view. It was a bilateral matter then and it is a bilateral matter now. We never took the Indus water treaty to a third party so why Kashmir.

On a different point why should Kashmiris be consulted when people in other princely states were not given the option? Why should Kashmir be any different. As far as I recall the Princes were asked to choose India or Pakistan, some choose India some choose Pakistan. I don't recall people who lived in these states ever being given a choice. My own grandfather lived in a princely state and the King choose to take the state into the Indian Union and my grandfather was never consulted.

As it is Kashmir gets special status within the Indian Union. Article 370 of the Indian constitution prevents non Kashmiris from buying land or settling permanently within Kashmir. No other Indian state has this protection.

If India had wished we can or could have made Kashmir a hindu (I personally do not like to use the term hindu but I cannot think of something more appropriate at this time) majority state. My own home state has seen its population grow by 40 million in the last ten years. It would not take much for the GoI to acquire land in Kashmir tell Indian railways to put special trains for Kashmir and settle people from all over India in Kashmir. Do you seriously think that the culture of Kashmir would have been able to absorb this kind of shock? BTW the chinese have done exactly this in Tibet, they have flooded Tibet with Han Chinese and are at a point of destroying the tibetian culture.

India cannot settle people in Kasmir because of Article 370 and we cannot revoke Article 370 since the Indian supreme court will not allow the basic framework of the Indian Constitution to be changed. In if the change is passed by both houses of the Indian parliament. If you want I can dig out the cases which prove this point.

So India is struck with this situation.

The question then becomes were do we go from here. Do we become forward looking countries or do we constantly look in the rear view mirror and fight old wars?

In my view the situation is simple just turn LOC into a international border. Pakistan keeps what it has and we keep what we have and the Chinese keep the bits of Kashmir that they have.

[talhasyed]

When you talk about the wishes of the ruler, you utterly forget about the Nizam of Hyderabad. We know quite well how his views were respected. Muslims ruling over a Hindu majority. Pakistan doesn't do anyhting about it, because the people are Hindu. In Kashmir, you have the opposite situation. A Hindu ruling Muslims (mind you, a resistance guerilla war was already ongoing against him before 1947). You can't have it both ways, you know.

Secondly, when you proclaim the said Article as a good thing, it's like saying 'Hey, I pulled back the knife I put in your back 1 inch, shouldn't you be happy?'.

Remeber, the Kashmir issue has been disputed from the start. It was never settled to begin with. Thus, you cannot say that it is an internal Indian matter.

[rajkumar]

talhasyed

I think we should restrict our discussion to just Kashmir. The issue of Hyderabad raises questions about whether the Indian Union could have tolerated attacks on it by groups based in Hyderabad. Goa is again another issue, GoI asked Portugal to give up its colony and Portugal choose not to so we took military action to recover it. Sikkim is another case but in Sikkims case the people of Sikkim did vote to join the Indian Union.

By all means if you wish to talk about Hyderabad, Goa, Sikkim then we could start another thread.

I have never said that Kashmir is a internal Indian issue. All I said is that it is a Bilateral issue between the two of us. I don't want it both ways. Kashmir is a Bilateral issue and in my opinion it should stay as such.

You may have an issue with Article 370 but the fact that it exists and that it gives the Kashmiris more rights than any other group in the Indian union and GoI cannot remove Article 370.

You have still not answered my question about were we go from here? What is the solution given the fact that neither country for its own internal reasons can afford to give up a inch of ground in Kashmir.

[talhasyed]

The reason I mentioned Hyderabad is that it is inevitable in a discussion of Kashmir. The events that happened in Hyderabad have everything to do (in principle) with what the conflict in Kashmir is all about. However, if you so wish, I will not discuss it in this particular post.

I have never said that Kashmir is a internal Indian issue. All I said is that it is a Bilateral issue between the two of us. I don't want it both ways. Kashmir is a Bilateral issue and in my opinion it should stay as such.

Under ideal conditions, yes, it would be a bilateral issue. The porblem is, India refuses to duscuss Kashmir as anything but an internal issue. The reality of the matter is that Kashmir is in dispute.

If you ask a neutral person in the streets of say, Hawaai, about what should be done in Kashmir, he will certainly say 'Ask the people'. This is all Pakistan wants. India does not see things this way. Thus, the issue has to be bought to countires like the USA which can press forward dialouge about Kashmir in a way that recognizes the problem as non-internal. If other countries are not involved, India would never agree to a referendum.

You have still not answered my question about were we go from here? What is the solution given the fact that neither country for its own internal reasons can afford to give up a inch of ground in Kashmir.

The only thing that can be done, and should be done realistically speaking, is to ask the Kashmiris themsleves. Period.

[rajkumar]

talhasyed

I think we will have to agree to disagree on the involvement of the Kashmiris.

Having said that is there any other way in your opinion of moving this forward.

[talhasyed]

RajKumar,

Can you provide a list of reason as to why Kashmiris should not have a say in the matter?

Unless the crux of the problem is addressed, nothing can be done, and nothing can go forward.

There will be more freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on how you look at it), and more wars b/w India and Pakistan. The only way to solve this is to ask the Kashmiris about their future, and get past problem behind us. Only then will there be peace between India and Pakistan.

[rajkumar]

talhasyed

The reason that Kashmiris should not be asked because when the British granted independence to India, the 565
Princely states covering over two fifths of the sub-
continent with a population of 99 million, technically,
became sovereign states. The "Memorandum on States’ Treaties and Paramountcy" stated that the paramountcy which the Princely states had enjoyed with the British would lapse at independence. The ‘void’ created would have to be filled either by a federal relationship or by ‘particular political arrangements’ with the successor government or governments, whereby the states would accede to one or other dominion.

The Instrument of Accession was to be signed only by the ruling princes and there was no provision in it for referring the question of accession to the new independent states of India and Pakistan. The rulers of Bhawalpur and Khairpur acceded to Pakistan accordingly.

Maharaja Hari Singh of J&K hoped to stay out of both and to continue to wield power as an independent ruler. However on 26 October 1947, the Maharaja acceded to India and installed Abdullah as head of the state’s administration.

If as you say that the Kashmiris should be asked. Can I ask which Kashmiris? Those that are living there today or those that lived in Kashmir in on 26 Oct 1947? How would you then account for the fact that your Kashmir does not (as far as I know but I ccould be wrong) have the equivalent to our Article 370 and as such has been settled by people from other states in Pakistan whereas my Kashmir only has people who were born in Kashmir.

How do you propose to take into account the Kashmiri Pandits who were chased out of Kashmir valley in 1992?

How do you propose to take into account the areas of pre 1947 Kashmir which were sized by China from India in 1962 and those areas which were gifted to China by Pakistan. Should people living in these areas also have a voice/vote?

If as you want the Kashmiris to have a voice then what about the people of Bhawalpur and Khairpur whose rulers choose to accede to Pakistan? Should not these people also be asked now 54 years after the event.

I agree that Kashmir is central to Pakistan & India and the only viable solution is to turn the LoC into a international border.

I still fail to understand what the problem is about turning LoC into a International border. We both get to keep our respective bits of Kashmir.

[abdul]

Call me a pessimist..
But discussing who is right or wrong doesn't really matter..
The truth is that neither nation can afford to lose Kashmir...
Both nations have built their foundation (Pakistan perhaps more than India really) around Kashmir..
It doesn't matter whether India is secular or not... india needs a muslim majority state to prove to the outside world it is indeed secular...
Pakistan needs to prove that muslims cannot live in India..its that simple...
For india things are further complicated by the fact that there is a huge Muslim population in the rest of the country...Giving Kashmir independance would lead to a backlash against them whether or not they support independent or Pakistani Kashmir....
Something India cannot afford...making things even more difficult, unlike Pakistan, India has a politician at its helm...A politician that gives up Kashmir will never win an election again.....
Frankly Kashmir is going to remain a war zone until economics more than anything else, forces one side to concede...

[rajkumar]

abdul

I agree this is why I am pushing for the LoC to be changed to International Border and for both of us to get back to looking at problems which really matter.

[Gul Khan]

Indians claim to be the biggest democracy ( which is a load of horse s.h.i.t, Read India hollow democracy). How about referendum Canada/Quebec style??

[rajkumar]

Gul Khan [/i]

While I would like to debate the merits of Indian democracy I think we should leave that for a different thread.

I started this thread with a view to finding out if the problem of Kashmir has a solution or not. So far the signs are not good.

No one has come up with an answer to my solution of changing LoC to IB. I would like forum members to come up with logical argument as to why this is not a solution.

[H Khan]

rajkumar,

The fact remains it is Bharat's past conduct with different people and independent lands which under no circumstances cannot be ignored.

Bharat's past actions and words are its intentions for the future. Therefore, separating what Bharat has done in the past with Sikh, Hyderabad, Sikkim, Bhuan, Goa, East Pakistan, Kashmir, Junnaghadh, Gujrat, Assam, Maripur, etc are in fact all related i.e Akhund

[SyedA]

Mr Abdul

few questions for you, what exactly your background is, I mean where in pakistan. The email you have used doesn't exist, I had left you alone thinking you might change it later on. Also, I would rather have you use your work email here than some made up. You have till tomorrow before yo uget banned for good.

[SyedA]

Abdul

apparently you registered with: horn_buster@aggienet.com
Your current email is: horn_buster@perfectlyprivate.net

and your isp info shows as:
130.164.147.131 (client-147-131.natinst.com)
66.68.73.209 (cs666873-209.austin.rr.com)


rr.com is an isp so obviously that is your home account and natinst is a corporate domain so that is your work.

care to explain why so much secrecy!!!?

[Sultan]

Raj Kumar u pointed out the fact of not consulting the Kashmiri people. Well i have to disagree.

India being a "democratic state" has to consult the people over any future decision of Kashmir. This is the essence of democracy where the common man has a say in the decisions of the govt. including the Kashmiris!! India being a democratic state has to provide the right for self autonomy through holding a referendum. These are the core roots of democracy an India claiming to be the "biggest democracy" has to conform with the democratic processes and facilitate the requirements of all its citizens including the minoritites - Kashmiris. However none of these processes have been provided by the Indian state to the Kashmiri people and their right to self determination.

U then go on to talk about converting the LOC into an international border..... well this is pretty laughable seeing as how Indian policy makers still are very bitter about the fact that pre 1947 India was divided to create independent states i.e Pakistan. And yet u go on to talk about permanently dividing Kashmir along the LOC by converting the LOC into an international border. If Indian policy makers donot accept the creation and existence of sovereign states carved out of pre 1947 India then what makes u think that the Kashmiris will accept being split into two respectiv territories?? The fact of the matter is that the Kashmiri people want the right to self autonomy. The Kashmiri people have never regarded themselves to be Indian. They have no ethnic or religious roots to tie them to India and transforming the LOC to an international border will not stabilise the region an bring about peace. The Kashmiris want independence hence the 50 yr struggle that we are witnessing in Jammu and Kashmir. Bilateral peace talks will not work. The Kashmiris have to be involved in any future peace talks as this is their future we are negotiating. Furthermore, if India claiming to be a democracy has to start taking responsibility and act like one. India has to provide a referendum in Jammu and Kashmir under the supervision of the UN (e.g. E.Timor) and whatever the outcome India has to accept it and facilitate it.

[Saad Hasan]

"Maharaja Hari Singh of J&K hoped to stay out of both and to continue to wield power as an independent ruler. However on 26 October 1947, the Maharaja acceded to India and installed Abdullah as head of the state’s administration. "

Alister Lamb in his "Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy states that when the Indian troops started landing on the Srinagar airfield they found their compatriots in the form of Patiala regulars... Even the Maharaja in his memoirs says that when the first India troops started making their way it into the State, he had not signed the instrument of succession... Indians insisting that they only intervened in Kashmir based on the justification provided by a rather dubious instrument of accession is nothing but criminal. Fact of the matter is the hundred or so Dakota planes that were assembled on airfields in and around Dehli could not have been improvised overnight. It must have weeks of preparations and with all the blessings of British authorities under the auspicious of
Mountbatten. The bottom line is that India from the onset had every intention of invading and occuping Kashmir and current occupation is nothing but illegal...

My recollection of the events is a bit sketchy, but if you are a bit unclear on this, I could also quote excrepts from Lamb's book to support what I have state and also where he proves, that the crossing of Pathan tribesmen into Kashmir is pre-emptied by the landing of Indian troops into Kashmir, the date Lamb cites is Oct 27, and from your post the date indians land is Oct 22... So there goes another justification for the illegal invasion and occupation..

[Rauf]

IMHO, Rajkumar has a valid point that Kashmir issue needs to be settled, its a wishful thinking that world will get involved in this complex situation when nothing of economics for them is at stake. There is no oil/gas reserve there (period).

Now, I am not an expert on LOC, but if I remember correctly, there have been 3/4 since 1947. Which one should become LOC, and then the nagging Siachin Glacier, who would have control of it, will people on both side will agree to declare it a no men land?

In the past, the tourist use to ask permission from Gov't of Pak to visit this area, thus to international organization, this peace of land was under Pak control. Now a question to Rajkumar, will India vacate this land? If Pak agrees to one of the three LOCs that existed in Kashmir that is acceptable to India.

Does India recognize that LOC has changed since Kergil, there are peaks that now belong to Pak, is that acceptable to India, I don't think so. Then the awful question is that neither of 3/4 LOC will ever be acceptable to one side. Is India willing to make a sacrifice by agreeing into Pak LOC decision? The Gov't in Pak cannot survive if it agreed to Indian dictated LOC, and that is a given fact.

I would my self very much like to get this issue of Kashmir over with, so an NCAA type program could be started between Indian and Pak Colleges/Universities so Pop has something to enjoy, and a lot of money to be made.

Yes, I do agree that South Asia has a potential to become a Military and Economic power house that could dwarf Asia/Europe/America, that is a fear factor that is well recognized, and with vested interest why would anyone from outside want to see this issue solved :), think about it.

Only the business minded people from both countries can exert pressure on the military/Gov't to persuade them to come to an agreement, since no one else would have more interest to get benefit out of this then them.

The next question is even more complicated, Pak will require its own ID, which is not associated as Sidekick of India or 2nd nation of Subcontinent, will India agree to this?

The scenario of Kashmir is much more complicated then recognizing LOC as Permanent border, there are other hordes of issue that need to be solved.

India wants to play the dominant power role in Asia, the question is does the rest of Asian/ME countries needs to be looked after, are they unable to handle their own issues that Indian power role is needed. This idea was rejected by most after Gulf war when USA presented this to Asia/ME countries.

My 2 coppers worth.

[Uzair]

Let Kashmir decide its own future

The west can help bring peace and justice to the troubled province

Roy Hattersley
Monday November 19, 2001
The Guardian

George Bush was right to say that the prosecution of the war against terrorism cannot be contingent on securing a just and lasting peace in the Middle East - though rejoice that Tony Blair added that, moral imperatives aside, there is no real chance of the war being won while the open wound of Palestine is allowed to fester.
But even if, over the next year or so, Israel's frontiers (as set out by United Nations resolutions) are guaranteed and the Palestinian state is established and recognised, the jihad will continue wherever Muslims believe that they are being suppressed and persecuted. History and geography combine to mean that, sooner or later, Kashmir will become the distant country that forces the west to take belated notice of its despair.

The history is simply described. When imperial India was partitioned after independence, Kashmir was left in limbo. There are a number of possible explanations for Lord Mountbatten's indecision. Clement Attlee was rightly pressing him to draw the borders of the new nation as quickly as possible. Kashmir's rivers - Thelum, Indus, Chenab and Tawi - irrigated both of the new nations that were to be created on August 15 1948. It may even be that Lady Mountbatten's close friendship with India's Pandit Nehru prevented predominately Muslim Kashmir from becoming part of the Islamic republic of Pakistan.

The plan and promise were to determine Kashmir's future by a UN-supervised plebiscite. Before that could happen the power vacuum was filled by Pakistan from the west and India from the south - Pakistan with the authority of an international mandate, India to suppress Pathans who were making trouble along the border. The two countries agreed, in the Simla agreement, to work out a permanent and peaceful solution. Nothing happened.

If the promised plebiscite were held, the votes would be split three ways. An insignificant minority would support the idea of an independent Kashmir - even though a separate state is not economically viable. About a quarter would opt for union with India. Almost three times as many would choose to join Pakistan - because, being Muslims they want to be members of the Islamic republic.

That is the reason politically sophisticated Indians - who deny that their government is motivated by the territorial imperative - say that the plebiscite should not be held. They do not want the sub-continent to be divided into a Hindu and a Muslim nation. India is a secular republic. To cede Kashmir to Pakistan would be getting dangerously close to accepting the religious division.

Perhaps. But whatever their reasons, most Kashmiris want to be governed from Islamabad. And 50 years ago they were told that they would be given the chance to choose. The denial of that right has resulted in sporadic revolt in what the Pakistanis call "occupied Pakistan" and brutal suppression of the uprisings by the Indian army. The refugees, unhappily camped in "free" Kashmir, tell stories of atrocities that are too spontaneous to be propaganda.

The attribution of racial characteristics is a dangerous habit. So I limit my comments about the Kashmiri personality to the experiences of people I know. Most are descendants of men who, given a few pounds when their land was flooded to build a dam, used the money to come to England and build new lives of industrious anonymity.

They are not, by nature, revolutionaries. But they tell me - with real apprehension - that militant Arabs and Pakistanis are beginning to infiltrate the communities from which they came. That is where geography becomes important. Look at the map of north India. Where do you think the pro-Taliban mojahedin will go when they are driven out of Afghanistan?

The one good thing to come out of the destruction of the World Trade Centre is the improved chances of justice for the Palestinians. And we must all admire the forbearance of President Pervez Musharraf - who knows how dependent the allies are on his good will - in not telling Bush and Blair that the future of Kashmir has to be added to the list of subjects that the great powers must examine when Osama bin Laden and co are satisfactorily dealt with. What better way to prove that the west is not at war with Islam?

Next week the prime minister of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is in London. I doubt if Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan will be so reticent about the need to provide the justice that helps to keep the peace. In politics, self-interest and morality do not always combine. Self-determination for Kashmir is an opportunity to follow both paths simultaneously. A plebiscite under the aegis of the UN would be consistent with the new world order of which the prime minister spoke at the Labour conference and he could insist, until it was held, on an end to the military brutality. The second demand would be valuable practice for what one day he must say to President Putin about Chechnya.

[Gul Khan]

Originally posted by rajkumar
Gul Khan [/i]

While I would like to debate the merits of Indian democracy I think we should leave that for a different thread.

I started this thread with a view to finding out if the problem of Kashmir has a solution or not. So far the signs are not good.

No one has come up with an answer to my solution of changing LoC to IB. I would like forum members to come up with logical argument as to why this is not a solution.

Yes its important to discuss Indian democracy because if India was a democracy then we would not have this problem today. Thats why I brought Canada/Quebec in the discussion.

Converting LoC into IB is out of the question don't even think about it. So far India has shifted its stand from Integral part of BahRAT to LoC is the border, trust me at this rate we can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

[Waqqas]

rajkumar, I am not surprised at all with regard to your stand on Kashmir. I have realized that even rational and educated bhartis turn into deaf, dumb and blind bigoted fascists when speaking of Kashmir.

You cannot have it both ways. Either the wishes of the ruler of a state have to be respected or you listen to the people of the state. In Hyderabad, Junagadh, Kashmir and many other states Bharat used the "logic" of force and hypocricy. It is indeed shameful that anybody, even bhartis, can deny this and in fact defend their government's evil and unethical policies.

It is not for me to answer why your grandfather was not consulted with regard to the future of his state. I guess you will have to ask this question to your hypocritical government, which violated all laws concerning ethics, morals and decency while dealing with these issues after partition.

Below are a few tidbits frm the net. I don't expect any bhartis to be convinced by them because I have learned by now that there is no use arguing with somebody that denies reality. However, I hope other members of the forum will find these examples useful:



When the British relinquished their claims to paramountcy, the 562 independent princely states were given the option to join either of the two nations. A few princely states readily joined Pakistan, but the rest--except Hyderabad (the largest of the princely states with 132,000 square kilometers and a population of more than 14 million), Jammu and Kashmir (with 3 million inhabitants), and Junagadh (with a population of 545,000)--merged with India. India successfully annexed Hyderabad and Junagadh after "police actions" and promises of privileges to the rulers.

***

The nawab of Junagadh and the nizam of Hyderabad were both Muslims, though most of their subjects were Hindus, and both states were surrounded by India. Junagadh, however, faced
Pakistan on the Arabian Sea, and when its nawab followed Jinnah's lead in opting to join that Muslim nation, India's army moved in and took control of the territory.
Last Update: December 16, 2000


***

When the Indian subcontinent was partitioned in 1947, the Nizam elected to resume independent status rather than join India. On Nov. 29, 1947, he signed a standstill agreement with India to last one year, and Indian troops were withdrawn. Difficulties persisted, however; the Nizam continued his efforts to assert his autonomy; India insisted that Hyderabad join India; and the Nizam appealed to King George VI of Great Britain. On Sept. 13, 1948, Hyderabad was invaded by India, and within four days Hyderabad's accession to India was achieved. After a period of military and provisional civil government, a popular ministry and
legislature were set up in the state in March 1952.
www.onwar.com


********************************************


The Dispute: The Muslim Nawab of Junagadh, announced his decision, contrary to the wishes of his subjects who were predominantly Hindu, to accede to Pakistan. When Pakistan notified India that it had accepted the accession, India protested on the legal grounds that a Muslim ruler could not decide the accession of his state contrary to the expressed will of his Hindu subjects. Instead, India advocated the alternative rule, that the people of the princely states had the inherent right to express their preference for the country they wished to join. The Indian army subsequently entered Junagadh, and a referendum was held. As expected, the people of Junagadh overwhelmingly voted for India. India thereby established the principle that, in the case of a conflict between the people and the ruler of a princely state, the people, not the ruler, had the right to choose accession.

Using the Junagarh principle, the Indians invaded the State of Hyderabad (Deccan) on13 September 1948 and forced the 62 years old Muslim Ruler and his small ill-equipped Army to surrender.

The legal debate surrounding the question of accession acquired new complexity when the population of Jammu and Kashmir revolted against the Maharaja and asked for accession to Pakistan. The Kashmiri's appeal for help prompted Pathan Tribesmen to come to the aid of their Kashmiri brothers. Fearing the imminent fall of Srinagar, the capital of Kashmir, the Maharajah requested immediate assistance from India to counter the threat. India agreed to help but in return asked for the State’s accession to India. The Maharajah hesitated, but relenting under pressure, requested provisional accession. India accepted the request contrary to its previous position established on the Junagarh case, that the ruler had no legal standing to decide the question of accession in contravention to the people’s desire.

History is witness to the fact that India sent its forces into Kashmir before the Maharaja signed the accession document. An infantry battalion and a mountain battery of artillery from the Patiala Forces had been stationed in Jammu and Srinagar respectively, by the first week of October 1947, whereas the Maharaja signed the so-called Instrument of Accession on 26 October 1947. This fact nullifies the Indian claim that it sent its forces to protect Indian Territory from aggression. More Indian forces reached Srinagar on the morning of 27 October 1947. The Pakistan Army entered Kashmir in May 1948 to stop the Indian thrust aimed at occupying areas liberated by the peoples revolt against the Maharaja.

In accepting the accession of the Maharajah, Lord Mountbatten, the last British Viceroy and the First Governor General of India, referred to the ‘special circumstances’ and added that ‘as soon as law and order have been restored, the question of the State’s accession should be settled by a reference to the people’. Accordingly, Mountbatten maintained ‘that in the case of any state where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the state’. These statements were avidly reinforced by India’s first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru who said, ’We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given, and the Maharaja has supported it, not only to the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but also to the world. We will not and connot back out of it’.

In total perspective, India’s policies toward Junagadh, Hyderabad, Jammu and Kashmir were legally and morally inconsistent. In Junagadh for example, the referendum for accession underscored the principle of restrictive self-determination. In Jammu and Kashmir, the Maharaja’s accession furnished India with a so-called legal basis to defend the State. In Hyderabad, where no official referendum was held and where the ruler did not accede, the forced accession to India brought about by military action, was presumed to have the tacit approval of the predominantly Hindu population. In each case of annexation there was a different rationale, but a similar goal, namely annexation of territory. The use of military force provided the only consistency in India’s policy


************************************

Here is Dr Alistair Lamb's account of what really happened in Kashmir:

http://indianterrorism.mybravenet.com/alistairlamb.htm

The Maharajah never signed any instrument of accession. It was all a fraud. And that is why Bharat has never shown the original copy of the document to the world!

*************************************

Finally, here are some of the pledges made by bharti leaders to the Kashmiris and indeed to the world that the Kashmiris will be allowed to determine the future of Kashmir through a fair plebiscite. We all know how much those promises are worth.....

http://indianterrorism.mybravenet.c...out_Kashmir.htm

[rajkumar]

Sultan,

India is a democratic state you may disagree but that’s fine with me. I need you to prove to me why you think India is not a democracy because from my day-to-day experience that is not the case. My neighbours and I have a vote and we do change our local, state and national governments from time to time. That’s a fair definition of democracy as far as I am concerned.

As far as consulting the people of Kashmir go my question still stands WHY? No state, which joined either India or Pakistan, was ever given this option. So why should it be given to Kashmir. What is so special about Kashmir that its people deserve to be treated differently?

Lets assume that the people of Kashmir are allowed to hold a referendum. Could you please then define who is a Kashmiri?

1. Is it the descendants of the people living in the state in 1947?
2. What about the people who were chased out of the valley in 1992?
3. What about people living in areas of Kashmir, which are occupied by China or were gifted to China by Pakistan?
4. What about the people who have migrated to the Pakistan part of Kashmir since your Kashmir does not enjoy the protection of our Article 370?

Saad Hasan,

I am not going to dispute the dates with you because I have read books, which quote different dates.

But can we deal with the ground realities, as they exist today? If we cannot then there is no solution.

Rauf,

Like you I am not an expert on the LoC. I recognise that LoC has moved and small parcels of land have changed hands over the past 50+ years. This is fine.

In order to move forward why don’t we establish a bilateral commission to fix the positions on the 1st of Jan 2001 and then both governments accept that as the LoC.

I agree with you because I don’t think the world is very interested. After all as far as the US is concerned its just two groups of sand niggers killing each other so no skin of the US nose.

Uzair,

I would discount Roy Hattersley since he is a MP from a consistency that I think has a large number of people from Pakistan.

IMHO can we keep this as a bilateral issue?



Gul Khan

I agree that India would be happy to settle for less than the whole of Kashmir. But I don’t think you should read that as a point of weakness.

Pakistan has tried for the last 50+ years to change the LoC witness Kargil. India has also changed the LoC witness Siachen. We have been slightly more successful but that’s a debatable point.

At this rate we are going to be here in the next millennium. Why don’t we fix the problem now?

Waqqas,

I hear what you say but can we move on? You keep what’s yours we keep what’s ours.


My Observation:

I don’t think people are serious about solving the Kashmir issue if this forum is any indication. As I have previously mentioned neither side can offered for internal political reason to compromise.

So were does this leave us. In my view there will be no “major” wars between Pakistan & India because the Pakistani WMD negates the Indian conventional superiority and the Indian WMD negates the Pakistani WMD. Thus we are left with a low-level insurgency conflict or “Kargil” type incursion.

This is fine for us because our birth rate and general increase in GDP more than replenishes any losses of men & material we may experience in Kashmir.

[fameen]

Raj Kumar,

This thread had the potential to lead to a useful discussion, but I'm afraid you started with the GOI's maximalist position. The LOC has always been on offer... from '48 onwards. It has never been acceptable to Pakistan. If you are serious about discussing this, I think you can at least climb down to what several Indian writers and journalists have been discussing... uniting Kashmir into one, free travel etc... with Indian and Pakistani sphere's of influence. It may or may not involve a referendum, but at least it spares the Kashmiris the armed partition to which they have been subjected by the Indian Army. So given your starting position, I would question your motives. It is also distressing to note your last post, where you appear to conclude, in a predictable BR like analysis that India is bigger than Pakistan and can sustain low level insurgency indefinitely. Maybe so, but in not addressing Kashmir, India is giving up its otherwise achievable objective of getting a seat at the Security Council and pulling its weight in international affairs, commensurate with its size. This is so because so long as you have a hostile Pakistan on your border, we will always serve to diminish you.

I must admit I fail to understand this phobia Indian hindus have about Muslims and their perceived "latent" power. Jinnah started as an ambassador for hindu-muslim unity and found himself forced, over the years, to successfully arguing a communalist cause. His experience was of bitter hindu intransigence as exemplified by Nehru and Patel. This translates itself into heavy handed behavious towards not only Pakistan, but also its other, even smaller, neighbours. Those who are secure in their power, need only whisper... those that are not secure, do the shouting. India can afford not to shout. So please consider the possibility that India is indeed doing substantial damage to its national interest by throwing its weight about with its smaller neighbours. Pakistan is not big enough to defeat India on the battlefield. But is not small enough to be defeated either. If it was, 1971 would have settled the issue.

If there are concessions to be made, they have to originate with India, the larger and more secure power. Based on that, Pakistanis may feel emboldened to reciprocate. But for any of this to happen, India's hindus have to begin to actually believe that they are strong, rather than vociferously stating it again and again, almost as if they are scared it is a mirage.

[rajkumar]

fameen


Thank you a very nice post. Just what I had been waiting for.

If you will allow me then I would like to take this opportunity to think about the issues you have raised and get back to you.

On a general point its always better to start negotiations with the maximalist position.

[Gul Khan]

Raj,

Converting LOC into IB is out of the question you must understand that. Now discuss what you want to discuss.

Its my understanding that only and only kashmiris will have to decide which way they want to go.

[Waqqas]

"You keep what’s yours we keep what’s ours. "

Spoken like a true follower of Chanakiya, rajkumar. So we should not care about the wrongs done to the Kashmiris and others by Bharat, but just accept it? I don't think so. And what is this talk of "yours" and "ours"? Maybe you did not get it so let me spell it out for you: The Kashmiris are a part of this conflict. You cannot ignore them. THEY are to decide through a fair plebiscite whether to join bharat or Pakistan. You cannot ignore them and talk of Kashmir as a commodity or a piece of land that you want to carve up with anybody.

"My Observation:
I don’t think people are serious about solving the Kashmir issue if this forum is any indication. "

Now that is an extremely ignorant and arrogant statement. You are basically saying that since we do not accept Bharat's Might is Right policies, we are not serious about this issue.

"This is fine for us because our birth rate and general increase in GDP more than replenishes any losses of men & material we may experience in Kashmir."

Don't count on keeping it going for too long in Kashmir. Look at what happened to Russia. The same will happen to Bharat within the next few years. BTW your statement also shows how much bhartis care for human life....

You have made it clear to all members of the forum that Bharat and bhartis are not bothered by ethical and moral dimensions of the Kashmir conflict. You bhartis only understand the language of violence and force. This ultimately will lead to the destruction of Bharat.

Also, you did not comment about the instrument of accession or about bharat's claim to J&K. Is it because you basically know your claim is bogus or is it due to arrogance because you hold most of the state by brute force and don't care to discuss it as such?

[Sultan]

India is a democratic state you may disagree but that’s fine with me. I need you to prove to me why you think India is not a democracy because from my day-to-day experience that is not the case. My neighbours and I have a vote and we do change our local, state and national governments from time to time. That’s a fair definition of democracy as far as I am concerned.

NO India is only a democratic state to a select category within Indian society: those people who fit into Hindu fundamentalist and extremist ideology of a completely Hindu nation dominated by the superior classes of India's draconian "class system". The entire draconian "class system" dominates Indian society in every aspect. It is this ideology that the GoI uses as a foundation to define their system of governance by supporting instituionlised racism and religious bigotry in the very state institutions that service the Indian state.

As far a Indias minorities are concerned Indias "democratic" processes fail to facilitate and cater for these minorities. If India truly did take its "democratic" processes seriously and followed true democratic processes in dispensing its authority and rule over the state then why is that so many nimorities are looking for Independence. Below is a list of some of the minority groups which are looking for Independence apart from the Kashmiris: The very fact so many of these minorities are looking for independence suggest that there is something seriosly wrong with Indias democratic processes!

"United Liberation Front of Asom· Assam Watch· Bengal Liberation Army (which demands the secession of West Bengal)· Bodoland Liberation Force (which demands an independent Bodoland created from Assam)· Dalitstan Organization (which demands independence for predominately Dalit Scheduled Tribes areas)· Gujrat Swaraj Sangh (which demands an independent Gujrat)· Council of Khalistan (which demands an independent Sikh Khalistan)· Maratha Rashtra Parishad ( which demands the restoration of Shivaji’s 18th Century Empire)· Revolutionary Party of Manipur (which demands an independent Manipur)· Hezb-e-Muglistan, Pan-Islamic Mughlestan and Jihad-e-Mughelstan (which wants to restore the Muglestan Khilafat which would involve the union of Pakistan and India as well as Bangladesh, Nepal and Afghanistan), Oriya Mahasabha (which demands an independent Orissa)· Indian National Front for Smaller States (demanding the creation of Bodoland from Assam, Gorkhaland from West Bengal, Purbanachal from eastern Uttar Pradesh, Panchal from western Uttar Pradesh, Bundelkhand from southern Uttar Pradesh, Telengana from Andhra Pradesh, Vidarbha from Maharashtra, Saurashtra from Gujarat, Malowa from Madhya Pradesh and Kodagu from Karnataka) All this in addition to the already committed formation of Uttaranchal (northern UP), Jharkhand (southern Bihar) and Chhattisgarh (eastern MP). "


As far as consulting the people of Kashmir go my question still stands WHY? No state, which joined either India or Pakistan, was ever given this option. So why should it be given to Kashmir. What is so special about Kashmir that its people deserve to be treated differently?

U keep on reiterating this statement. Whch suggests to me that the peace process oer Kashmir is not take seriously by the Indians as it is these exact statements which provide the stumbling blocks, the barriers to achieving peace. U cannot equate the history of other states to that of Kashmir! Why? because these states are not Kashmir and Kashmir is not these states that u talk of! The sitation in Kashmir has changed drammatically since 1947. It has been nearly 54 yrs since 1947 and the conditions in Kashmir have changeddrammatically due to internal and external developments. Thus, if one were to concentrate on the history of Kashmir and the history of other states ( who have absolutely nothing to do with Kashmir!) as a central issue to reslving the Kashmir issue then u wll fail miserably and u will create new disputes in the process. The Kashmir issue is aleady a complex nd sensitive one and yet u talk of equating issues that occured in other states in 1947 to the one in Kashmir. Where is the sense in that!! To progress on negotiations over peace in Kashmir one has to take Kashmir for what it is today into cotext and remain within these boundaries. Because if u statrt putting up barriers to the issue with statements like the one above that u made then u will only reinforce the foundation of the conflict for the next 50 yrs. So I advise u Indians to stop trying to create barriers for the peace talks and start to take responsibility and tackle the Kashmir issue for what it is today! If it is this type of mentality that the majority of Indians use to tackle the Kashmir issue then it suggests not only to me but the entire world that India has no intention of negotiating peace and the Indians really have something to hide in Kashmir. An issue that the GoI refutely denies.

Lets assume that the people of Kashmir are allowed to hold a referendum. Could you please then define who is a Kashmiri?

Then u go onto talk about why India should consult thr Kashimris on any peace talks. This is a ludicrous statement and just supports my theory that peace talks and the will to settle the Kashmir issue are not being taken seriously! The reason why Kashmiris should be involved in the peace talks is simple. The Kashmiris are the inhabitants of Kashmir and they are the rightful owners of Kashmir. They are the ones who have the right to self determination not the Indians. These people are in the middle of the conflict. Every thing that happens in Kashmir affects these people. Any future peace talks will be to determine these people future and yet u r talkng about sidelining them and denying them the right to determine their own future! Every man has a right to detemine his future and the very denial of these rights reveals Indias oppressive nature to its minorities and its failure to protect the rights and liberties of the minorities under its facist control.

Furthemore, if u want to know who a Kashmiri is then go to Kashmir! Its blatantly obvious to the rest of us who the Kashmiris are except u. A Kashmiri is a Kashmiri despite his/her geographic location. A Kashmiri is one who was born on the very territory they rightfully claim as theirs. A kashmiri is one whose ancestors are Kashmiri. It is these people who claim the right to Kashmir and the right to self determination!

[Singh]

The idea of accepting LOC as an international border has been emphatically rejected by everyone here, yet the claims of a peaceful resolution. India will NEVER EVER willingly give up its portion of Kashmir, referendum or not. Anything less is not acceptable to Pakistan. So what exactly is the proposal for a peaceful solution?

[Saad Hasan]

Let the Kashmiris decide, we will accept whatever may come, sadly the same cant't be said about you...

[fameen]

Originally posted by Saad Hasan
Let the Kashmiris decide, we will accept whatever may come, sadly the same cant't be said about you...

Saad, well stated. If what Singh says is indeed true, then Mr. Vajpayee has made a strategic blunder in internationalising the Kashmir issue. The international community can't be expected to condemn Pakistan for supporting "cross-border terrorism" and support India for screwing Kashmiris. You can't have your cake and eat it too, my friend. Fortunately for Pakistan, intellectual rigour has never been a strong suit of Indian politicians or, as Singh's post above would suggest, some Indians.

[M Ahmed]

Salamzz,
The Indian allegation of so-called "cross border terrorism" is flawed.There is no BORDER between Pakistan administered(Azad) Kashmir and Indian administered(Occupied Kashmir).Where is the border?There is only a LINE OF CONTROL which is essentially the Ceasefire line which came to be known as the LOC after Simla.The UN and the entire international community recognise the disputed status of J&K.So any talk of cross border terrorism is ridiculous.The LOC cannot be considered as a border.The Indians themselves have termed some areas of the LOC as the AGPL (Actual Ground Position Line) near Siachin.Hence any talk of cross border terrorism is hogwash.
Regards.

[raj]

Salamzz,
The Indian allegation of so-called "cross border terrorism" is flawed.There is no BORDER between Pakistan administered(Azad) Kashmir and Indian administered(Occupied Kashmir).Where is the border?There is only a LINE OF CONTROL which is essentially the Ceasefire line which came to be known as the LOC after Simla.The UN and the entire international community recognise the disputed status of J&K.So any talk of cross border terrorism is ridiculous.The LOC cannot be considered as a border.The Indians themselves have termed some areas of the LOC as the AGPL (Actual Ground Position Line) near Siachin.Hence any talk of cross border terrorism is hogwash.
Regards.


mansoor ahmed,
So is it In-Border terrorism? The fact of the matter is, terrorists(aka mujahideen) have succeeded in ethnic cleaning of Kashmiri Pundits from Kashmir valley. They are fighting Indian govt in kashmir. Many of these groups have their headquarters in Karachi, Lahore(Muridke) and Muzaffarabad. They use terror as a policy against "infidel " . Some of these groups were recently declared as terrorist outfits by US. These groups openly collect funds for the so called jihad in Kashmir.

Waqqas,
Don't count on keeping it going for too long in Kashmir. Look at what happened to Russia. The same will happen to Bharat within the next few years.

We will see if your predictions come true.

BTW your statement also shows how much bhartis care for human life....

It shows the determination to fight against the terrorists and the suicidal mujahideen and their backers. It also rejects and shows that we will fight back the policy of thousand cuts. It shows that Indians will not be cowed by terror. (I assume you support mujahideen fighting Indians)And coming from people who back fidayeen(?) mujahideen, it doesn't even have a halo of truth to the statement.

You have made it clear to all members of the forum that Bharat and bhartis are not bothered by ethical and moral dimensions of the Kashmir conflict.

There is no moral or ethical dilemma in confronting terrorists.

You bhartis only understand the language of violence and force.

Supposing if what you say is true, are you suggesting that those who oppose India use that policy?

[quote]This ultimately will lead to the destruction of Bharat. [/qoute]

We will see if your predictions come true.

[quote]Also, you did not comment about the instrument of accession or about bharat's claim to J&K. Is it because you basically know your claim is bogus or is it due to arrogance because you hold most of the state by brute force and don't care to discuss it as such?[/qoute]

Bharat's claim to Kashmir is based on instrument of accession. On which legal document is Pakistan's claim based on?

[Gul Khan]

Originally posted by Singh
The idea of accepting LOC as an international border has been emphatically rejected by everyone here, yet the claims of a peaceful resolution. India will NEVER EVER willingly give up its portion of Kashmir, referendum or not. Anything less is not acceptable to Pakistan. So what exactly is the proposal for a peaceful solution?

We know India will not accept a referendum after all India knows the out come and on top of that India is a democracy. Further we also know Kashmir dispute will not be resolved peacefully..

I think the above in a nut shell gives you the the complete picture.

[M Ahmed]

Salamzz,

There are more than 70,000 graves of Kashmiris in Indian Occupied J&K.If there is cross border terrorism,then how come the graves of the terrorists are situated on Kashmiri soil?Is it that people from Mureedke,Karachi and Muzaffarabad have been holding the funerals of these 70,000 people?If they are not indiginous Kashmiris, then how come there are public processions and protest demonstrations in almost every town in J&K?I don't think that people from Pakistan are attending these rallies and funeral-cum protest demonstrations.
International Law accords the application of the Geneva Conventions and International Laws regulating conflicts to all situations of an insurgency.The Kashmiri people struggle for freedom clearly fulfills the 3 conditions necessary for the application of insurgency status which automatically entitles them to be treated according to International Humanitarian Law.The conditions are
1.That the majority of the people of an area should be up in arms against the government rule,
2.That they should clearly define their objectives,
3.That they should be under a clearly indentifable political and military command.
The Indian Army is the biggest perpetrator of state-terrorism against helpless people whose crime is that they are muslims,demanding freedom from Indian occupation.Yet the Indian Govt and Army have been persistently violating human rights against International Humanitarian Law when the Kashmiri people should be treated as insurgents.NOT AS TERRORISTS.

If India has the rea instrument of succession,why does it not produce it for the world to see?I am sure that RAW will come up with a forgery without much trouble.

As regards the US branding certain mujahideen outfits as terrorists,it is no surprise from them.The US itself calls all those groups who serves its interests as freedom fighters e.g Afghan Mujahideen, and when their interest is served,they automatically turn into terrorists.Since these mujahideen groups played no role for the US,they were conveniently branded as terrorists.There is no clear definition of terrorism yet.So freedom struggle and terrorism cannot be viewed as the same.The Harkat-ul-Mujahideen was approached by the CIA through a source and asked to start activities against China in Sinkiang,but Harkat refused to do so,hence they were branded as terrorists as threatened by the CIA for not doing so.

If there is no popular uprising against Indian Occupation in Kashmir,then what are 700,000 troops doing there? trying to suppress who and what?This is the largest concentration of an army deployed to suppress freedom struggle any where in the world.

If India is so sure about the support that it claims to have in J&K,then one way to find out would be for both India and Pak to demilitarize AJK and Indian held Kashmir and hold a referendum under any neutral body and ask the people what they want.It will confirm who is right and who is wrong.

Hindu pundits are not ethnically cleansed in J&K by the Mujahideen.Such acts are the artwork of the RAW and the IA.When President Clinton visited India, such acts were timed and designed to grab his attention and lay the blame on Pak.

Indian love for human life is restricted only to Hindus.For a Muslim,death in the path of struggling against foreign oppression is martyrdom and the promise of great rewards and an eternal life in Paradise.We all have to die one day.so why not for a just cause?One more thing.India might be 10 times bigger in terms of size,resources and population than Pakistan,BUT the nuclear factor has balanced out the disparity and we can and we will drag you into destruction if our existence is at stake.The root of the whole problem is that Indians have not accepted the partition of mother Indian and the creation of Pakistan.SANITY IS OF THE ESSENCE,NOT INTRANSIGENCE IN THE FACE OF REALITY.

[rajkumar]

Sultan

NO India is only a democratic state to a select category within Indian society: those people who fit into Hindu fundamentalist and extremist ideology of a completely Hindu nation dominated by the superior classes of India's draconian "class system". The entire draconian "class system" dominates Indian society in every aspect.

Lets deal with shall we. I have a person who works for me in India looking after my house as he has done for the past twenty years. Yet he comes from a lower class then me and at every single election, local, state or national he goes back to his village and votes.

I have a dhobi who has worked for our family for three generations yet he votes. So by your definition he is a hindu fundamentalist but the problem is that he is a muslim.

There are numerous constituencies in India which have a 100% muslim voter lists yet they vote for who ever they feel like. Are they also hindu fundamentalist? I don't think so.

It is this ideology that the GoI uses as a foundation to define their system of governance by supporting instituionlised racism and religious bigotry in the very state institutions that service the Indian state.

Have you looked at the recruitment policy of the Indian State? The indian state recruits on a basis of a persons position in society. So the Indian UPSC system reserves over 50% of its seats for indians who come from backward sections of society. Does this sound like racism? I would say the Indian state is being racist but aganist my class, not that it bothers me.

As far a Indias minorities are concerned Indias "democratic" processes fail to facilitate and cater for these minorities. If India truly did take its "democratic" processes seriously and followed true democratic processes in dispensing its authority and rule over the state then why is that so many nimorities are looking for Independence. Below is a list of some of the minority groups which are looking for Independence apart from the Kashmiris: The very fact so many of these minorities are looking for independence suggest that there is something seriosly wrong with Indias democratic processes!

Democracy means rule by the majority even if its the majority of a single person. Democracy does not mean the rule of the minority. If people feel strongly about a issue then it is upto them to convert there issue into a issue of the majority. Until that happens they will remain minority issues.

"United Liberation Front of Asom· Assam Watch· Bengal Liberation Army (which demands the secession of West Bengal)· Bodoland Liberation Force (which demands an independent Bodoland created from Assam)· Dalitstan Organization (which demands independence for predominately Dalit Scheduled Tribes areas)· Gujrat Swaraj Sangh (which demands an independent Gujrat)· Council of Khalistan (which demands an independent Sikh Khalistan)· Maratha Rashtra Parishad ( which demands the restoration of Shivaji’s 18th Century Empire)· Revolutionary Party of Manipur (which demands an independent Manipur)· Hezb-e-Muglistan, Pan-Islamic Mughlestan and Jihad-e-Mughelstan (which wants to restore the Muglestan Khilafat which would involve the union of Pakistan and India as well as Bangladesh, Nepal and Afghanistan), Oriya Mahasabha (which demands an independent Orissa)· Indian National Front for Smaller States (demanding the creation of Bodoland from Assam, Gorkhaland from West Bengal, Purbanachal from eastern Uttar Pradesh, Panchal from western Uttar Pradesh, Bundelkhand from southern Uttar Pradesh, Telengana from Andhra Pradesh, Vidarbha from Maharashtra, Saurashtra from Gujarat, Malowa from Madhya Pradesh and Kodagu from Karnataka) All this in addition to the already committed formation of Uttaranchal (northern UP), Jharkhand (southern Bihar) and Chhattisgarh (eastern MP). "

There are lots of groups who want to leave the Indian union. But why is it that the people who make up these areas vote in Indian elections? Why is it that some of these groups resort to violence in order to say to people living in there area that they cannot vote in elections? If they are so confident of there support then why don't they register themselves with the Election commission and fight a election. If they are so convinced of there cause why not submit themseleves to the peoples court. Because none of these groups have the courage of there convictions. They are all composed of the "goondas" whoes aim in life is the extract money from people they say they represent and when people have a secret vote they always reject them.

[majithia]

Rajkumar,

I like your long diatribe, but you arguments don't cut very nicely here. You logic and your memory are both selective and that is why all this discussion does not and would not take us any where.

I have seen Bangladesh in the making and in early seventies this term "TERRORISM" was not coined or was not as popular at least in the West.

Did not your government get involeved in any terrorism across "recognised" international borders in East Pakistan?

I am sure your answer would be another long post with your usual twisted logic giving all the bullshit (which we have to shovel for a long time) about freedom movement in East Pakistan and if you want me to buy that, then by the same token and logic we have every right to give moral and military support to Kashmiris people that was divided and there is resolution in the UN collecting dust that clearly says about a plebisite in Kashmir across LOC, which is not an international border even today.

And please don't give us your long godamn democracy lecture and what your Dhobi does in election times.

And I have seen your domocracy working and minorities pathatic condition especially Muslims,I know better.:p :p :p :p

Majithia

[Waqqas]

raj, a bit less of the bharti propaganda BS, please. The Kashmiri Pandits were told to leave the valley by Governor Jagmohan, the butcher Bharat had given the job of crushing the Kashmiri independence movement. He thought it would be best to let the Hindu population exit so there would be no witnesses to the massacres the Indian army carried out of Kashmiri Muslims.

Believe me, this is not just my prediction. I pray to Allah we will all live to see Bharat break into countless pieces.

"It shows the determination to fight against the terrorists and the suicidal mujahideen and their backers."

Indeed....80 000 Kashmiri corpses, countless burnt businesses, houses and mosques, thousands of raped Muslim women and yet more thousands of tortured or simply "disappeared" Kashmiris bear witness to the bravery, determination and humane nature of the Bharti army...

"There is no moral or ethical dilemma in confronting terrorists."

The Kashmiris are not the terrorists. Your rapist army and coward government is, though.

"Supposing if what you say is true, are you suggesting that those who oppose India use that policy? "

Why would I deny it? You occupied Kashmir by force and are using extremely brutal methods to oppress the Kashmiris. Why is it wrong for them to oppose this occupation, by force or otherwise? And why should it be wrong for anybody to support the just Kashmiri freedom struggle?

"Bharat's claim to Kashmir is based on instrument of accession. On which legal document is Pakistan's claim based on?"

Are you really so mentally challenged that you didn't understand what I wrote previously or are you just behaving the way a bharti is supposed to behave? There IS no instrument of accession. It is a lie and your government knows it. Ask them to show the world this document. As for Pakistan's claim, it is based on the rules laid down for the partition of British India. We (Pakistanis and Kashmiris) will get what is rightfully ours. If bharat has to be broken into a thousand pieces to achieve that, so be it. Your own brutal, blood-thirsty leaders and their insane policies will ultimately be responsible for this destruction of bharat.

[abdul]

First of all to make things clear , i am a muslim whose parents are from India but i have lived in the US all my life...
Sultan ...>>>NO India is only a democratic state to a select category within Indian society: those people who fit into Hindu fundamentalist and extremist ideology of a completely Hindu nation dominated by the superior classes of India's draconian "class system
>>>
This statement is absolutely ridiculous..this may be what you want to believe but is absolute crap...
Your stupidity is only matched by your sheer ignorance...
Wake up man....
First of all did you know that there are castes among muslims too ???And catholics too....
Why ? simple ..marriages across religions..a concept i'm sure that is unheard of in Pakistan..hard to believe isn't it ? And yes in case your wondering , my wife is catholic....And don't talk about the ways minorities are treated in India, we all know how the Mohajirs are doing in Pakistan....Deal with your own problems first..

And it is really laughable how Pakistanis preach to the whole world about democracy...

Frankly living in the US, I've realized that both Indian and Pakistani leaders have made fools of themselves...
My american colleagues simply can't understand why India cannot get rid of its "terrorists" themselves... and need to bneg the US for help....
And Musharraf really made a fool of himself by talking of "respecting the peoples aspirations" in Kashmir and Afghanistan...yes..in exactly the same way that he did in Pakistan by overthrowing ( an admittedly corrupt ) but democratically elected government...so stop preaching ...Contrary to what you think people outside Pakistan are not all stupid....And people who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others...(or undress with lights on...)
Bodoland and Ulfa I have heard of....What the hell is the ")· Maratha Rashtra Parishad " ?And the
Dalitstan Organization ?? Are you making these up ? ?? And just for your information there are a number of political rganizations in India. Just because we have numerous organizations that doesn't mean that they are all separatist ... That's what a democracy is all about ...but then i hardly expect you to understand....

[H Khan]

Listen you jackass abdul aka bharati nazi,

You call one of our members stupid?????????

You are banned kid!



Sultan ...>>>NO India is only a democratic state to a select category within Indian society: those people who fit into Hindu fundamentalist and extremist ideology of a completely Hindu nation dominated by the superior classes of India's draconian "class system
>>>
This statement is absolutely ridiculous..this may be what you want to believe but is absolute crap...
Your stupidity is only matched by your sheer ignorance...

[majithia]

Abdul,

You are an asshole of nth degree, a stinking Bharati who come here to convince his secularity and Abdul's Bharat that is all secular, who has lived most his life kissing his American friends and collegue's ass to prove that he is more American than Americans and more Hindu than Hindus themseves. What a shameless jerk you are :D :D

Why don't you tell your American Masters that your Hindu Masters don't have the balls to take care of this terrorism in Kashmir and elsewhere in India and they need American help:D :D

No body gives a flying **** about your opinion here.

And you must be sleeping by an "open crack" lately to convince us that you are an Abdul:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Take a hike you fake Abdul and fake American. And shove your opinion where sun does not shine :D :D

Take Care You Ignorant RSS/Nazi Stinker

Love and Lotus flowers up your ass

Majithia

[SyedA]

first time saw H Khan in anger.... made my day and majithia bhai's anger is just awesome, have seen it quite few times... :)


Abdul is gone, someone should have told him that abdul is used in conjunction with another muslim name, never by itself... most likely a hindu

P.S. and no one calls our members names..... not even an indian muslim!!!

[Sultan]

This statement is absolutely ridiculous..this may be what you want to believe but is absolute crap...

Abdul,
well done! ur personal attacks directed towards me just reconfirms my thoughts of u having the intellect of an ape!!! The sheer fact that u have to resort to calling me stupid just proves that u cannot even offer constructive criticism!!!!


U talk as if i am ignorant. Well thats laughable considering the fact that u equate the teachings of Islam and Christianity to the vulgar, racist ideology that forms the Hindu caste system that is endorsed by Indian society!! If u were a muslim like u claim to be then u will have known that equality amongst all human beings is held with upmost importance in Islamic society. But of course r not a Muslim r u. Its blatantly obvious to the rest of us that u r another Hindu mascerading as a Muslim!! Pls dont insult our intelligence. U would have been baned earlier but we just wanted u to continue to make a fool of urself in front of the hundreds of people that visit this site daily!!

Futhermore..... whats the deal with people like urself mascerading as Muslims. Whats the matter have u got an identity crisis?? Or an inferiority complex?? Why cant u present urself with ur true identity??? Given the wording of ur posts id say that its a bit of both. Maybe u should go see a shrink. U never know they could actually help u and if not they can do a great service to mankind and lock u up in a mental hospital!!!!!

Furthermore........ Whats the deal with u mascerading here

[majithia]

Syed,

I have zero or less than zero tolerence for these ignorant and arrogant "impersonator" Bhartis who come here as just Abdul with no last name. They think they smart ass:D :D

Thanks for taking care this jerk, he reminds me of Bengali servant whose name was Abdul :D :D

Majithia

[Sultan]

Lets deal with shall we. I have a person who works for me in India looking after my house as he has done for the past twenty years. Yet he comes from a lower class then me and at every single election, local, state or national he goes back to his village and votes.

Raj Kumar,
Pointing out a few case examples of minorities managing to vote still does not justify the fact that thousands of minorities in India are still under represented and treated as second class citizens. Ur going to have to better than that to convince me that democracy in India is not a sham!

QUOTE]Have you looked at the recruitment policy of the Indian State? The indian state recruits on a basis of a persons position in society. So the Indian UPSC system reserves over 50% of its seats for indians who come from backward sections of society. Does this sound like racism? I would say the Indian state is being racist but aganist my class, not that it bothers me. [/QUOTE]



On paper it may seem so, however I doubt that it is actually implemeted.
However, the mere fact that 1 million "low caste" Hindus recently converted to Buddhism reinforces my statement that the GoI still does not cater for and facilitate the need of the minorities through ur so called democratic processes. If the "democratic processes" in India did really work and the GoI were serious about defending democracy then i doubt we would have seen a phenomenal amount of Indians converting to Buddhism to get away from the draconian system of selective targetting the minorities and denying them the right for equal representation in Indian society and in the govt. i.e Indias endorsement and practice of the caste system

Democracy means rule by the majority even if its the majority of a single person. Democracy does not mean the rule of the minority. If people feel strongly about a issue then it is upto them to convert there issue into a issue of the majority. Until that happens they will remain minority issues.

Yes democracy does mean rule by majority but it also means equal representation in society. Something that the caste system, which is widely advocated in India, goes against everything democracy stands for. However the question to be asked is does India truly practise democracy?? I doubt it. The mere fact that there are numerous numbers of groups and organisation springing up in various states in India, looking for liberation and the right to self determination proves that there is something seriously wrong with the "democratic processes" in India. The mere fact that these groups seek liberation from India proves that minorities issues are sidelined by GoI because they donot conform to the govts vision of a completely dominated Hindu India. If the democratic processes in India did cater for and facilitate the issues and needs of the minorities then I seriously doubt there would be groups in India seeking liberation from the Indian union. I seriously doubt that these groups would utilise violent methods if democracy in india worked. The mere fact that the GoI fails to recognise the minorities and offer equal representation forces these groups to achieve their objectives through violent measures. If the govt. allows these people the right to utilise the democratic processes to project their views then there would be no need to resort to violent measures!! However, the govts failure to recognise the minorities and their rights raises the question does democracy really exist in India??

[Amad Rana]

Why ? simple ..marriages across religions..a concept i'm sure that is unheard of in Pakistan..hard to believe isn't it ? yes indeed we in Pakistan don't believe in kind of prostitution's you blackees of sub-continent practice in AMERIKA ,just to get freakin jobs by offering your mothers,sisters ,wife even daughters to white man ,that is berry berry bad in our society but again you freakin bustards are Indians and that is equal to savages . And yes in case your wondering , my wife is catholic, sure she may be catholic but from banglore or dalitland of shiv the untouchable ,who became Christian,just to get H1B-visa ,after giving karma classes to head missionary in his home ,I don't think any white woman can stand a smelly and stinky Indian close to her and next time before you log on pakdef ,please take a shower and brush your ugly typical indian teeth beacuse even my God damn moniter is smelling bad now o.k shive the untouchable :D:D:Dcheerz

[Sultan]

H Khan, Majithia and Syed cheers for ur support and Syed good job on banning Abdul or whatever his name his.........

[SyedA]

Sultan...

I had banned him agian cause he was using a free email address. Apparently he works at texas instruments and I can find out who he is based on his host name and IP address. Anyway, I allowed him again after he emailed me. H Khan and I had a suspicion about him but, I wanted to play him out see what he does. he couldn't resist and took the bait.

He is gone and banned for good... i would rather have an indian with his real identity talk like that than a so called Indian muslim who is giving muslims in india a bad name also.

P.S. and no one calls pakdef's one and only sultan stupid :)

[Sultan]

P.S. and no one calls pakdef's one and only sultan stupid

Stop ur embarrasing me....:D :D

I cant believe that a reputable multi national like Texas Instrument actually gave that guy a job! What were they thinking. Unless he has a brain dead job like working on the prodn line packing calculators in a box.

[M Ahmed]

Mr.Rajkumar! you have said ,
There are lots of groups who want to leave the Indian union. But why is it that the people who make up these areas vote in Indian elections? Why is it that some of these groups resort to violence in order to say to people living in there area that they cannot vote in elections? If they are so confident of there support then why don't they register themselves with the Election commission and fight a election. If they are so convinced of there cause why not submit themseleves to the peoples court. Because none of these groups have the courage of there convictions. They are all composed of the "goondas" whoes aim in life is the extract money from people they say they represent and when people have a secret vote they always reject them.

Now let us apply your words on Jammu and Kashmir.If the Indian Government holds free,fair,impartial,neutral and just elections in J&K without tampering with the original muslim population there and with voters lists and single member,one vote, constituencies ,in the presence of international observers,you will see for yourself that atleast the Kashmiris will surely vote against India.Why don't you try this to correct ur information on the status of things in J&K?Holding a plebicite under UN u will propbably never agree to,hence this concession of holding elections urself,BUT they must be free,fair,impartial and just without any direct,indirect,overt,covert interference by the Indian Govt and verified by neutral impartial international observers.
Yes Indian democracy is very much genuine,but it applies only to the majority.As u say,the majority has the say,but what about the rights of the minorities?India is the only democracy where churches and nuns and burnt,mosques desecrated and destroyed under the nose of the Govt and Sikh and Muslim holy worship places violated.Babri Mosque and the desecration of the Golden Temple are two candid examples of Indian sham democracy.

[yasser]

Sultan bhai Hooooo! :D


There are too many monkeys lurking on this forum, time for Pak Army style "Operation clean up"!

[raj]

Waqqas ,
A Couple of things,

1)First you demand India to show Instrument of accession.
2) In the next breadth you say RAW can forge the document.

What that tells me is that you have already made up your mind and nothing can change your views. So my discussion on that subject would be futile.

Originally posted by Waqqas

Believe me, this is not just my prediction. I pray to Allah we will all live to see Bharat break into countless pieces.


Waqqas,
You pray to Allah, some people in India pray to their gods(including Allah) with opposite prayers. Infact they would claim that part of their prayer has already been answered.



Indeed....80 000 Kashmiri corpses, countless burnt businesses, houses and mosques, thousands of raped Muslim women and yet more thousands of tortured or simply "disappeared" Kashmiris bear witness to the bravery, determination and humane nature of the Bharti army...

Some one claims 70,000 killed. You claim 80,000 Kashmiris are killed. Who is right? If its 80,000 it means an average of 18 deaths every day for 12 years.

Do these 80000 include any hindus and sikhs? Are they just civilians or AK-47 wielding "mujahideens"? Does it include Indian soldiers? Does it include Jammu and Kashmir police forces? Does it include one group of mujahideen killing other group of mujahideen? Does it include pakistanis/afghans etc ?If so how many in each case?

Some other person claims that 700,000 indian forces are present in Kashmir.

From Bharat-Rakshak.com

Total Indian army strength--- 980,000 active troops

Total Pakistan army strength 550,000 active troops.

Premise: Assuming 700,000 indian troops in Kashmir fighting insurgency/terrorism,then there are only 280,000 troops to defend against the several thousand kms of border with china, burma, and the rest of the border with Pakistan in Punjab, Rajasthan and gujarat.
And also india is fighting insurgency/terrorism in Assam, mijoram, nagaland etc. Say lets assume India deployed only 150,000 on the Chinese border. An another 30,000 thousand in the entire north-east for fighting insurgency/terrorism. So that leaves just 100,000 active troops to defend the Rajastan, Punjab and Gujarat border.
These 100,000 will be facing Pakistan army of atleast 200,000 -400,000, in these places. And if that were the case Pakistan army would be right now marching from three side into New Delhi.

Result: And that would mean a rout of indian forces by Pakistan in Punjab, Rajasthan, gujarat,and Chinese forces in the entire north-east from Arunachal to the Tibet border on the north.

So for that simple I don't buy claims that India has deployed 700,000 troops in Kashmir. That I think is pure and simple propaganda BS like so many of other claims.


The Kashmiris are not the terrorists. Your rapist army and coward government is, though.

Off course, not all Kashmiris are terrorists. Those trained "mujahideen"/"guest mujahideen"(See whats happening in Afghanistan to these special breed of people) killing people and terrorising innocents are defintely terrorists. Off course you have right to believe whatever you like.


Why would I deny it? You occupied Kashmir by force and are using extremely brutal methods to oppress the Kashmiris. Why is it wrong for them to oppose this occupation, by force or otherwise? And why should it be wrong for anybody to support the just Kashmiri freedom struggle?

Are you really so mentally challenged that you didn't understand what I wrote previously or are you just behaving the way a bharti is supposed to behave? There IS no instrument of accession. It is a lie and your government knows it. Ask them to show the world this document. As for Pakistan's claim, it is based on the rules laid down for the partition of British India. We (Pakistanis and Kashmiris) will get what is rightfully ours. If bharat has to be broken into a thousand pieces to achieve that, so be it. Your own brutal, blood-thirsty leaders and their insane policies will ultimately be responsible for this destruction of bharat.



Look who is talking?, India even according to you took the fig leaf of instrument of accession. Was it not the friendly "mujahideen" who captured part of Kashmir now with Pakistan? Pakistan plain and simple captured Kashmir by force using the fig leaf of Pathan Mujahideen, similar to Kargil circa 1999. Maha Raja of Kashmir was not with you, nor was there a referendum held in Kashmir for its accession to Pakistan. How can Pakistan claim legality of its occupation of Kashmir, except for the brute force it used to capture it?

Care to explain Pakistan's claim? And why not Bangladesh should have a similar case?


Instead of calling for destruction of other countries, it would be better for everyone to hold on to their dear countries and hope that it won't be bifurcated like in 1971.

The leaders of both India and Pakistan are not much to speak of, but your eloquent portrayal of them fits more of Pakistani military dictators circa 1971 than Indian politocos.

[H Khan]

raj,

You think I can go and post a reply like yours on BR without getting banned?

Yes, they are hindus, Sikh and bharati armed forcespersonal counted in 70,000 dead. But this absurd argument that war for self determination fought by local and indeginous freedom fighter can be sustained for 12 years by external forces is as good as asking when did the sun rise from the west!


check this link out and tell if this Bharati soldier can find a freedom fighter amongst these people?

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20011124/wl/imdf24112001074911a.html

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20011105/wl/imdf05112001071455a.html


Yes, these Kashmires were tought how to throw stones by the Hamas?

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20011026/wl/mdf74846.html



How come so many people are praying on this dead Kashmir? I think if he has send from across from the LOC no one would dare to reconize his body??!!


http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20011124/wl/imdf24112001084011a.html


Get real, raj, and admit that Bharat has the most separetist movements in its land because of brutality by the hindu majority

[Amad Rana]

NOTE: GRAPHIC PICTURES ,NOT RECOMMENDED FOR UNDERAGE CHILDREN indian army killings in kashmir.http://www.atpak.f2s.com/aik.net/kill.html

[Waqqas]

"What that tells me is that you have already made up your mind and nothing can change your views. So my discussion on that subject would be futile. "

The same can be said about you. You are showing incredible arrogance, lecturing us on Kashmir, while denying that Kashmiris should be allowed to vote for the future status of their state and that your army is committing crimes against humanity there.

"Do these 80000 include any hindus and sikhs?"

Yes, among others it includes those 35 Sikhs killed by the Indian army during Clinton's visit, and it also includes those dozens of Hindus killed by bharti security forces during last year's amarnath yatra.

"Off course, not all Kashmiris are terrorists. Those trained "mujahideen"/"guest mujahideen"(See whats happening in Afghanistan to these special breed of people) killing people and terrorising innocents are defintely terrorists. "

That is the pathetic lie you are hoping to sell. The Kashmiris however, would like to disagree with you. Take a look at the article I am attaching at the end of my post. It will show who those "mujahideen" actually are.

"Was it not the friendly "mujahideen" who captured part of Kashmir now with Pakistan? "

Of course, but only after bharti forces started occupying Kashmir. The Pathans went there to help out their Kashmiri brethren. I can understand you don't like it, though.

"Care to explain Pakistan's claim?"

I have done it over and over again. It is not my problem that you are selectively dyslexic when it comes to the reality of Kashmir. In Hyderabad, Junagadh and Manavadar bharat occupied the area using the excuse that the majority of the population was Hindu, though the ruler was Muslim. However, in Kashmir bharat reversed this logic and occupied the area because the ruler was Hindu, though most of the population was, and still is, Muslim. That is what I call Chanikyan hypocricy.

"it would be better for everyone to hold on to their dear countries and hope that it won't be bifurcated like in 1971. "

Your sarcasm and gloating is noted. I assure you that this time it will be bharat that breaks up. Not into two pieces, but into such a jigsaw puzzle that counting and remembering the names of the countries emerging from the former USSR will seem like an easy task.


*********

India’s secret army in Kashmir
Mubarik Shah
Updated on 11/19/2001 9:32:14 AM


Send this Article to your friend
Printer-Friendly Version!!!
Post your Comments


The Indians do not talk of them.

The world largely doesn’t know of them.

The Kashmiris dread and hate them.

The Indian military lovingly calls them ‘Friendlies’.

The Kashmiris scornfully brand them variously as ‘The Third Force’ or ‘Sarkari militants’ or ‘renegades’.

Respected watchdog Human Rights Watch (HRW) has, however, christened them as India’s Secret Army in Kashmir and profiled their wickedness and evil deeds in an exclusive 48-page startling report.

They are former Kashmiri freedom fighters, coerced or seduced away from the resistance movement by the Indian military to be its hired guns and death squads to eliminate activists fighting its occupation of Kashmir.

For a company, they have scores of proclaimed rogue criminals and hardened jailbirds, released from captivity at the Indian military’s instance, and recruited to this secret army.

India commenced raising this underground force of state terrorists soon after it launched its ongoing massive, brutal military action in 1992 to quell the popular uprising in occupied Kashmir.

The international community was yet to be enamoured of India as an emerging market and an investor’s place.

It reacted adversely to the Indian military campaign.

New Delhi started coming under world heat to rein in the military and respect human rights of the Kashmiris.

In a bid to ward off this mounting pressure while continuing with its brutal methods against the Kashmiris, the Indian military launched into organising these death squads around 1993, “subcontracting” to them, as the HRW report put it, some of its abusive tactics.

The report noted while they were set on the suspected freedom fighters, whose elimination at their hands under the military’s protective shield would routinely be attributed to “inter-group rivalries”, their main victims were civilians, particularly difficult journalists, human rights activists, medical workers and families of suspected freedom fighters.

They were assigned “special operations in which the costs in terms of human lives and the Army’s reputation were likely to be too great”, observed Indian journalist Pankaj Mishra in a report in daily Hindu that got him in trouble with his fellow journalists for its outspokenness.

They were tasked to threaten and kill families of the freedom fighters living in the Valley as well as the “journalists and human rights activists who were seen as too eager to report the excesses committed by the army”, he wrote.

“In return, the army and the administration looked the other way when these renegades kidnapped and killed for money”.

Besides, said Mishra, between 1994 and 1996, they helped the army track down and kill hundreds of hardcore freedom fighters.

Though not wearing the uniform and operating outside the army’s command structure, their links with the Indian military became quite known outside the barracks by early 1995.

Not only had it become a public knowledge that they had been trained and armed and were being bankrolled by the Indian army but they were often seen patrolling with the army squads and living in military compounds.

They thus caught the eye of foreign human rights watchdogs that started urging their governments to compel India to disband and disarm this secret army in Kashmir and prosecute its members responsible for murders, violent assaults and other human rights abuses.

The human rights community started building up pressure on the US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and India’s other trading partners to suspend all military sales and all cooperation with New Delhi until it disbanded the underground terrorist force.

In the face of this escalating demand, the army decided in 1996 to dismantle the militia and induct its elements in the Indian paramilitary forces deployed in Kashmir.

Though themselves exceptionally notorious for brutality and gross human rights abuses, even these paramilitaries were unwilling to take them on their rolls.

They viewed them too thuggish for their “discipline”.

On army’s insistence, only the Border Security Force (BSF) took a few.

For the rest, the army turned to the state police.

But Farooq Abdullah, who by then had been catapulted to the chief minister’s saddle in a rigged poll, was averse to take them in, not so much for their roguishness as for the threat he perceived from them to his own personal security.

Finally, he had to give in to the arms-twisting of the domineering Indian army in the state.

These hired guns and death squads now make up the dreaded Special Operations Group of the state police, creating waves all over the Valley with their wickedness, brutality and thuggery.

Quite interestingly, elements of them now also form the core of Farooq Abdullah’s own personal security apparatus.

Some were still left out.

They were too wild to be acceptable even to the state police.

They are now freelancing, mostly for the army for “special operations”.

According to Pankaj Mishra, there are “still 1,500 of them on the government’s payroll”.

They are “the most dreaded people in the Valley”, even “more than the Army and police officials in remote areas, or the jumpy soldiers in their bunkers”, he says.

“A senior Government official spoke to me of them as Frankenstein’s monsters; they were, he said, the most visible and hated symbol of Indian rule over the Valley, and it was not going to be easy to tame them”, Mishra reported further.

The Kashmiris see the hand of these state terrorists in car blasts, grenade explosions in markets and public places, killing of civilians in their homes, murderous assaults on political figures, and politically-motivated massacres of the Sikhs and Hindus in the Valley.

Hurriyat leader Abdul Ghani Lone blames them for the failed attempt on his life at his home on the November 1 night.

In a press statement on Tuesday, Hurriyat chief Abdul Ghani Bhat came out strongly against the stepped-up reign of terror unleashed by these state terrorists, in and out of uniform, on the innocent Kashmiri civilians since September 11.

“Organised groups of people, organised at the state level, indulge in rape, arson, killing in custody and perhaps all such acts which are inhuman and barbaric”, he said.

“This is state terrorism.

And this state terrorism is unacceptable to us.

If the people who talk in terms of nonviolence and democracy, culture and civilisation, if they are serious, let them bring culprits to book and disband such elements as are involved in the acts of terrorism”.

“If the state does not stop terrorism at their level, we may be forced to call upon the people to come out and die with honour and dignity”, he warned.

“Enough is enough”, he said.

It may be enough with Bhat.

But it can’t be with the Indians.

For keeping the world charmed into its unbroken silence over the Kashmiris’ brutalisation by their military with their lullaby of ‘cross-border terrorism’, they need acts of terrorism in the Valley.

If their secret army of hired guns ad death squads is delivering them well on that score, why would they disband it? Poor Bhat! He is asking for the moon.

[Sultan]

Off course, not all Kashmiris are terrorists. Those trained "mujahideen"/"guest mujahideen"(See whats happening in Afghanistan to these special breed of people) killing people and terrorising innocents are defintely terrorists. Off course you have right to believe whatever you like.

Raj,

Ones man terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. U have been provided evidence by H Khan and Rana which exposes Indias brutality towards the Kashmiris. Those mujahideen that u are denouncing as terrorists are the very people who are protecting the innocent Kashmiris from the naked, brutal aggression they face in the hands of the Indian military!! One can relate to a number of international as well as domestic sources that shows us who the terrorists are here!!

Furthermore, u attempting to fabricate the fact that there is a foreign element amongst the KASHMIRI FREEDOM FIGHTERS is easily exposed as another attempt of Indian propaganda BS. Ur attempts to equate the situation in Afghanistan to the one in Kashmir is proposturous. It just proves to everyone that people like u are willing to use another crises as an escape goat for the utter failure of the GoI to bring about the integration of the Kashmiri people into the Indian union, through utilising terror tactics in a bid to break the movement of independence that burns so bright in each and every Kashmiris heart. Raj without evidence from an internationally reputable and unbiased source all ur claims of a foreign element working to undermine the Indian state by supporting the Kashmiri Freedom fighters is passed off as propaganda on ur part.

And u stating that people do posses the right to think whatever they like is correct however it is ironic seeing as how it is coming from u Raj. Arent u the same person who supports the Indian govt. and their actions in Kashmir. The very same Govt. who denies the right for an independent referendum to be held in Jammu and Kashmir to determine the future of the Kashmiri people. The very same govt. who denies the kashmiris self determination, autonomy and liberty from the Indian state. Afterall these concepts of autonomy and liberty from the Indian state are quite popular amongst the Kashmiri people, it does seem to be what the majority of Kashmiris in Jammu are thinking, for if it was not then we wouldnt be witnessing a freedom movement currently!! Thus U stating that people have the right to think whatever they like on the one hand but then advocating an oppressive govt. that has endorsed terror tactics and denial of civil liberties, (such as the freedom to think) in order to break a popular concept of liberation of Jammu from India is pretty hypocritical on ur part.

[M Ahmed]

Mr.Rajkumar,

As regards the issue of the instrument of accession,then I have this to add to what I said before.Any instrument of accession is no substitute for the will of the people of Kashmir.The Partition of the Sub-Continent was based on the principle of two-nation theory where by all muslim majority areas were supposed to acceed to Pak and all hindu majority to India.This shows the supremecy of the will of the people of different ethnic communities.Just as you indians say that the decision of the Nizam and the rulers of Junagarh to join Pak was illogical bc according to you,their population was majority hindu,similarly this formula should have been applied to Kashmir without distinction or discrimination.The opinions of the members here ,illustrated material depicting atrocities of the India Army in J&K should be enough to convince any rational,sane person.If you insist that india posseses the original instrument of accession,then why don't you take the matter to the International Court of Justice ICJ in the Hague?If you are so sure and so convinced about the validity of your claims,then why don't you take the matter in front of the international community?You continue to insist that kashmir is no dispute,that it is an integral part of India,that it is a bilateral issue,that it is an internal matter of India.You do this precisely bc you know that your position in any third or any international or multilateral forum will not be tenable.This explains your fear of taking the matter to any international forum.If you insist that you have the instrument of accession,then the UN resolutions stand valid notwithstanding your possession of any accession document.India took the matter to the UN when she thought she could fool the world.When this did not happen,then you refuse to acknowledge or accord any importance to the UN resolutions.

Your assertion about Indian army troop strength in Occupied Kashmir is again fallacious.The total Indian Armed Forces number over 1.3 million men.Your paramilitary forces and reserves are in sufficient numbers for counter insurgency operations.The forces inside J&K include paramilitary forces from the BSF,Rashtriya Rifles, Central Reserve Police Force and many other security outfits.Had all these forces not been engaged in Kashmir,then it was very likely that India would have embarked on some misadventure against Pakistan when our second strike capability was not so potent as it is now.

1000 of history the the Sub-continent attest to the fact that Hindus are a short sighted,biased,conceited,paranoid,deceitful,malici ous and fanatically anti muslim nation.The treatment meted out to Sikhs,Christians and the lower classes are testimony to this.Peaceful coexistence in the presence of other nations is not possible in Hindu political philosophy.This explains that Indians have not and probably will never reconcile with the existence of Pakistan.It is in all respects a clash of civilizations which will continue for another millennium if India does not give up the dream of Akhand Bharat.

We will avenge the murder of every innocent Kashmiri,the tears and the scars of every muslim face,the honour and respect of every woman/girl who has been molested and dishonoured.We will fight against Indian hegemony till the time when every vestige of the fascist Indian hegemony is destroyed.
Fighting and dying in the path of freedom against oppression is the highest duty of every muslim,and we shall make use of every available resource to bring the struggle against the perpetrators of Indian state terrorism till its logical and successful conclusion.

Peaceis inherent in Islam.peaceful co existence is the spirit of Islam.but when we are faced with people like the Indians who do not accept the very existence of any other nation or ethic group on parity basis,then we have to resort to measures of self defence.Change your attitudes Mr.Raj.If you begin to realise the ground realities,we will reciprocate.Peace is only possible through a mutual realisation of each others position.Whatever we do is in self-defence.You initiated the nuclear programme in the 1950s ostensibly against China,when the whole world knows you can never compete with China.The real target was Pakistan.Since then Pakistan has acted with restraint and in self defence.If only India would behave as a responsible neighbour,things would improve.You have intervened in the Maldives,Sri Lanka,against Nepal and the only impediment in Indian's path to regional bully is Pakistan.Pakistan is here to stay.It won't go away no matter how much Indian would wish it to.The wise thing to do is to learn to live with Pakistan.This will be in the interest of India as well as every one else in the region.Otherwise we are treading on a path of a holocaust of cataclysmic proportions,a disaster beyond history,and the responsibilty of such a situation would rest solely on India.

[raj]

Originally posted by H Khan
raj,
Yes, they are hindus, Sikh and bharati armed forcespersonal counted in 70,000 dead. But this absurd argument that war for self determination fought by local and indeginous freedom fighter can be sustained for 12 years by external forces is as good as asking when did the sun rise from the west!

H Khan,
I believe I never said that it is sustained only by Pakistani/Afgani "mujahideen". What I am saying is that there is fair amount of Pakistani/Afghani "mujahideen" present in the ranks.

Get real, raj, and admit that Bharat has the most separetist movements in its land because of brutality by the hindu majority
Democracy gives certain amount of freedom, which can used for nefarious purposes. And India is diverse culturally and ethnically, so I would expect separatist movements. I do not share your claim of hindu brutality.


The same can be said about you. You are showing incredible arrogance, lecturing us on Kashmir, while denying that Kashmiris should be allowed to vote for the future status of their state and that your army is committing crimes against humanity there.

Sorry, I don't mean to be arrogant or lecturing to anyone. I would be the last person to deny Kashmiris right to elect their govt.

I do not buy the argument that Indian army is commiting crimes against humanity. If self defence against terrorism is called crimes against humanity, then I would support self defence.


That is the pathetic lie you are hoping to sell. The Kashmiris however, would like to disagree with you. Take a look at the article I am attaching at the end of my post. It will show who those "mujahideen" actually are.

Well, let me just say that is my opinion.

Of course, but only after bharti forces started occupying Kashmir. The Pathans went there to help out their Kashmiri brethren. I can understand you don't like it, though.

I disagree.

Your sarcasm and gloating is noted. I assure you that this time it will be bharat that breaks up. Not into two pieces, but into such a jigsaw puzzle that counting and remembering the names of the countries emerging from the former USSR will seem like an easy task.
Waqqas,
There was no sarcasm or gloating intended. Regarding break-up: Hopefully I will be alive and see your prediction come true and appreciate your foresight.

Rana ,
I went to the website you posted. The first thing I noticed is that it says 100,000 people killed. IMHO, highly exaggerated.

Ones man terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. U have been provided evidence by H Khan and Rana which exposes Indias brutality towards the Kashmiris.

Sultan ,
The debate on the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is nearly over. There is a new consensus that you cannot really redraw the maps of nations anymore, irrespective of past rights and wrongs

http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/25/op.htm#1

Furthermore, u attempting to fabricate the fact that there is a foreign element amongst the KASHMIRI FREEDOM FIGHTERS is easily exposed as another attempt of Indian propaganda BS.
All I can say is that is my opinion. If you do not concur with my opinions thats okay.

Raj without evidence from an internationally reputable and unbiased source all ur claims of a foreign element working to undermine the Indian state by supporting the Kashmiri Freedom fighters is passed off as propaganda on ur part.
Please let me know which international organisations you would consider as unbaised?

Thus U stating that people have the right to think whatever they like on the one hand but then advocating an oppressive govt. that has endorsed terror tactics and denial of civil liberties, (such as the freedom to think) in order to break a popular concept of liberation of Jammu from India is pretty hypocritical on ur part.
Every right comes with a certain duty. Indian constitution doesn't guarantee any rights for secession. IIRC, it has punishments for it though. Freedom doesn't guarantee freedom for mayhem or terror. It has certain limits.
Every society/country has its own set of limits on the freedom that a person can enjoy freely. If he exceeds that limit he will be punished according to the laws of the land. Say, for example killing a person is not a right by any means. Why person, even a lion, deer (atleast in India) is not a right. It is a crime.
"Liberation" of Jammu & Kashmir is not a constitutional right. Infact it is a crime according to Indian laws. So anyone who pursues it is a criminal. I do not see any hypocracy.

[H Khan]

raj,

Very diplomatic answers! ;)

[Sultan]

Please let me know which international organisations you would consider as unbaised?

UN, Amnesty International.

[raj]

Originally posted by H Khan
raj,

Very diplomatic answers! ;)

Khan ,
I am a slow typist and take long time to compile even a short summary. Diplomatic answers are easy to give and take shorter time , even then I spent nealy 2 and half hours on the above reply.

[raj]

Originally posted by Sultan


UN, Amnesty International.

Sultan,
Just went to one of the amnesty International sites.

http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/ASA200462001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES\INDIA

Background:
The population of Jammu and Kashmir has been subjected to a high level of violence for over a decade. Since 1989 approximately 34,000 people, including thousands of civilians, have reportedly died in the context of the conflict between militants seeking either independence or accession to Pakistan, and Indian security forces and police. Since the beginning of 2001 alone, around 2,500 conflict-related deaths have been reported in the state, over 850 of which were civilians.

So this unbiased group is saying 34,000 people killed and not 70,000 or 80,000 or even 100,000(website link given by Rana) as said by some of the members.

[raj]

Originally posted by Sultan


UN, Amnesty International.

Sultan,
Here we go. Hope you agree with me now.

http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C4453/0/D5614760BD456CFD8025690000693185?Open&Highlight=2,kashmir


Kashmir has long been a disputed territory [As a matter of policy Amnesty International takes no position on territorial disputes.] between India and Pakistan which have gone to war over Kashmir twice. Armed opposition groups in Jammu and Kashmir, some of which favour accession of the area to Pakistan while others advocate independence, intensified their activities in the Valley of Kashmir in late 1989. India has consistently claimed that Pakistan provides military support and training to secessionist groups operating in Kashmir while Pakistan has equally consistently denied such claims. There is, however, considerable evidence that Pakistan has indeed provided men and military support to groups seeking accession of Kashmir to Pakistan

[fameen]

Raj, so do we keep fighting or do you see a possible settlement. The status quo doesn't work for us. Can you do better?

[Sultan]

So this unbiased group is saying 34,000 people killed and not 70,000 or 80,000 or even 100,000(website link given by Rana) as said by some of the members

Raj, the figure of 34000 is from 1989. The Kashmir conflict has been going on since 1947!!! not 1989.

[raj]

Furthermore, u attempting to fabricate the fact that there is a foreign element amongst the KASHMIRI FREEDOM FIGHTERS is easily exposed as another attempt of Indian propaganda BS.
Sultan ,
So, I assume you now agree that my statements are not Indian propaganda BS and there is "foreign element" involved.





Originally posted by Sultan


Raj, the figure of 34000 is from 1989. The Kashmir conflict has been going on since 1947!!! not 1989.

Sultan, Okay, I don't have figures from 1947. If you have could you please post source of your information.


From Rana's link.
Since 1989, an estimated 100,000 Kashmiris have been killed by the Indian forces stationed in Kashmir


http://www.mcb.org.uk/news140400.html
"The British Muslim community is appalled at the continuing killing, rape, arson and destruction in Kashmir by 700,000 Indian forces, who have killed over 70,000 Kashmiri in the last 11 years.


http://www.krrc.org/articles/auk_apeal2.html
During last 12 years alone, over 80,000 Kashmiris have been killed, thousands of women raped and property worth tens of billions destroyed mainly by the armed forces of India deployed in Kashmir numbering about 700,000.

[raj]

Originally posted by fameen
Raj, so do we keep fighting or do you see a possible settlement. The status quo doesn't work for us. Can you do better?
Fameen,
A very loaded question, I don't have any ready made answers with me. Will think about it and post my views later (maybe next week end).

[H Khan]

raj,

Another diplomatic answer ;)

[Sultan]

So, I assume you now agree that my statements are not Indian propaganda BS and there is "foreign element" involved.

No not all, I still maintain my stance on Pakistan only providing political and moral support to the Kashmiri freedom fighters.

Below is a link from "Human Rights Watch" (an international, unbiased organisation) providing evidence of GoI continued human rights violatons of minorities not only in Kashmir but throughout India:

The government used TADA as a tool to fight trade unions and to detain Muslims, Sikhs, Dalits, and political opponents. Over 76,000 people were arrested while TADA was in force from 1987 to 1995. The conviction rate for these arrests was less than one percent. If enacted, the POTO threatens to be put to similar misuse. On its face, POTO violates a multitude of due process rights guaranteed both by the Indian Constitution and international human rights treaties—most prominently, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). India ratified the ICCPR in 1979. Moreover, contrary to government rhetoric suggesting that POTO contains safeguards to prevent the abuses enabled by TADA, POTO will likewise facilitate illegal detentions.

Hindu Nationalism and Religious Intolerance In Gujarat, Delhi, and Orissa, district administrations continue to conduct surveys to assess the activities and whereabouts of minority community members and leaders. The BJP and its allies continue to implement their agenda for the "Hinduization" of education with the mandating of Hindu prayers in state-sponsored schools and the revision of history books to include what amounts to hate propaganda against Islamic and Christian communities. Throughout the country, over 300,000 training camps, known as shakhas, are dedicated to recruiting young boys and men and providing them with