Kashmir isn’t the ONLY one. . . !

The British India.
Being divided in two.
States being asked which country they’ll like to be a part of.
The state of Hyderabad Deccan.
The people want India, the Nizam wants Pakistan.
Jammu and Kashmir.
The people want Pakistan, the ruler wants India.
Hyderabad goes to India due to the favor of the people.
Kashmir. . .

Yes, this is where the confusion starts. If Deccan could be a part of India on the wish of the residents, why wasn’t Kashmir a part of Pakistan in a like manner? Or, if the ruler of Kashmir could be granted his wish, why not the Nizam of Hyderabad Deccan? After all these decades, the Kashmir issue is still alive and burning, and no solution is to be heard of. Evidently, it will most probably never come to an end, because some people will never want peace. Some peoplewant to keep this issue alive.
However, the Kashmir issue isn’t my only concern here. Enough has been said about Kashmir and nothing done, and it will be of no use to talk about it rightaway. I will have my share on Kashmir, but that is to follow later. My other concern here is that Kashmir isn’t the only one. The only one whom India claims to be it’s part. The whole world might see Pakistan as the “bad guy,” but, yo, here comes the climax:

1 Disputes with recognized sovereign states

  • 1.1 People’s Republic of China
  • 1.2 Pakistan
  • 1.3 Bangladesh
  • 1.4 Nepal
  • 1.5 Myanmar
  • 1.6 Sri Lanka
    • 1.6.1 Kachchatheevu
    • And these are the disputes with the “recognized sovereign states”  as is said. God knows better how many there actually are. It’s not only with Pakistan, but SIX recognized sovereign states with whom India has disputes on territorial basis. Out of her eight neighbors, India has conflicts with SIX. My mom used to tell me that one person may lie, but the whole world can’t.
    • India hasn’t kept the issue and conflict of Kashmir alive only. It is not just Kashmir which is the one. And this is my prime concern. For I believe the world (rather, most of America, Israel and the like countries) believe Pakistan to be the bad guys. Which means that not only Pakistan is the liar, but China, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and Mayanmar are also lying. It’s not just the LoC India has her men on, it’s also in the Line Of Actual Control, between China and India. India says Pakistan does not want to end the dispute. I’d like to remind them, that Pakistan actually gave up it’s claim on the Trans Karakorum Tract for a border agreement with China in 1963. Hence, Pakistan gave up it’s claim for the sake of peace. As soon as Pakistan gave up her claim, India claimed it again and is still claiming – and China contests it. And yet we are accused of not wanting peace and of not endeavoring the Kashmir dispute. This is all, however are accusations of India. If they be so truthful, wouldn’t it mean that China, Nepal, Mayanmar, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh all are hate-infested. It would appear that all of India’s neighbors are unjust. All of them want to have unnecessary disputes with India. All of them want to “take over” India, (though I can’t imagine why China would!) andall India’s neighbors are the wrong-doers. It might appear, that all India’s neighbors are trying to be evil, are trying not to have peace with the innocent ones. Not only did Pakistan fought an unprovoked war with India in 1965 on the basis of territorial disputes, but China did so too three years before on the same issue. Although. Although Pakistan has had her share in having conflicts with China over territorial basis, but they have been resolved. Resolved long ago.
    • China did not accept the boundaries of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, north of the Aksai Chin and the Karakoram that were proposed by the British.
    • China settled its border disputes with Pakistan in the Trans Karakoram Tract in 1963 with the provision that the settlement was subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute.

    China and Pakistan solved the matter. I wonder why. If Pakistan is so bent on capturing territories the wrong way, I wonder why Pakistan solved the dispute with China, and India, the righteous and innocent one, hasn’t yet. And since 1963, Pakistan has had friendlier relations with China than with any other country or state.  Indians say that they do not approve of the Two-Nation Theory. Yet a big question mark is there if India had any Two-Nation theories with her other five neighbors, too. India says so, too, that Kashmir is an integral part of the nation. Why then, some very troubling incidents take place there every day? Could an integral part of any sovereign nation be humiliated the way Kashmir is?

    According to a report of Human rights watch,
    “Indian security forces have assaulted civilians during search operations, tortured and summarily executed detainees in custody and murdered civilians in reprisal attacks. Rape most often occurs during crackdowns, cordon-and-search operations during which men are held for identification in parks or schoolyards while security forces search their homes. In these situations, the security forces frequently engage in collective punishment against the civilian population, most frequently by beating or otherwise assaulting residents, and burning their homes. Rape is used as a means of targeting women whom the security forces accuse of being militant sympathizers; in raping them, the security forces are attempting to punish and humiliate the entire community.”

    Pakistan, on the other hand, says the Kashmir is her jugular vein. The incidents that occur in the Pakistan-administered Kashmir are reported to be works of Al-Qaeda. It should be noted, however, that the Al-Qaeda is involved in extremist activities all over Pakistan. Those who say Al-Qaeda is a part of the Pakistani Army, should go read History again. As some has said, these stories are “cooked up” by the Indian side in order to portray the Pakistani Army in a bad position in front of the world.

    The United Nations Commission on Human Rights reports that there are roughly 1.5 million refugees from Indian-administered Kashmir, bulk of whom arrived in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and in Pakistan after the situation on the Indian side worsened in 1989 insurgency.

    Now, if the Kashmiris are so in favor of India, it is a big question mark as to why they migrated to Pakistan. And all those who’d blame the activists operating in Kashmir for the incidents, this survey would answer them:

    Médecins Sans Frontières conducted a research survey in 2005. The survey states that 11.6% of the interviewees who took part in the study responded that they had been victims of sexual abuse since 1989.[162][163] Some surveys have found that in the Kashmir region itself (where the bulk of separatist and Indian military activity is concentrated), popular perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups. Amnesty International has called on India to “unequivocally condemn enforced disappearances” and to ensure that impartial investigation is conducted on mass graves in its Kashmir region. The Indian state police confirms as many as 331 deaths while in custody and 111 enforced disappearances since 1989.[164][165][166][167]Amnesty International criticised the Indian Military regarding an incident on 22 April 1996, when several armed forces personnel forcibly entered the house of a 32-year-old woman in the village of Wawoosa in the Rangreth district of Jammu and Kashmir. They reportedly molested her 12-year-old daughter and raped her other three daughters, aged 14, 16, and 18. When another woman attempted to prevent the soldiers from attacking her two daughters, she was beaten. Soldiers reportedly told her 17-year-old daughter to remove her clothes so that they could check whether she was hiding a gun. They molested her before leaving the house.[167]

    •  “. . . perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups.”
    • Several international agencies and the UN have reported human rights violations in Indian-administered Kashmir. In a recent press release the OHCHR spokesmen stated “The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is concerned about the recent violent protests in Indian-administered Kashmir that have reportedly led to civilian casualties as well as restrictions to the right to freedom of assembly and expression.”[48] A 1996 Human Rights Watch report accuses the Indian military and Indian-government backed paramilitaries of “committ[ing] serious and widespread human rights violations in Kashmir.”[168] One such alleged massacre occurred on 6 January 1993 in the town of SoporeTIME Magazine described the incident as such: “In retaliation for the killing of one soldier, paramilitary forces rampaged through Sopore’s market, setting buildings ablaze and shooting bystanders. The Indian government pronounced the event ‘unfortunate’ and claimed that an ammunition dump had been hit by gunfire, setting off fires that killed most of the victims.”[169] There have been claims of disappearances by the police or the army in Kashmir by several human rights organizations.[170][171] Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978:[172][173] Human rights organizations have asked Indian government to repeal[174] the Public Safety Act, since “a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order.”[165]
    • Many human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch (HRW) have condemned human rights abuses in Kashmir by Indians such as “extra-judicial executions”, “disappearances”, and torture.[166] The “Armed Forces Special Powers Act” grants the military, wide powers of arrest, the right to shoot to kill, and to occupy or destroy property in counterinsurgency operations. Indian officials claim that troops need such powers because the army is only deployed when national security is at serious risk from armed combatants. Such circumstances, they say, call for extraordinary measures. Human rights organizations have also asked Indian government to repeal[174] the Public Safety Act, since “a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order.”[165] A 2008 report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees determined that Indian Administered Kashmir was only ‘partly free’.[164] A recent report by Amnesty International stated that up to 20,000 people have been detained under a law called AFSPA in Indian-administered Kashmir.
    • Massive demonstrations occurred after plans by the Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir state government to transfer 100 acres (0.40 km2) of land to a trust which runs the Hindu Amarnath shrine in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley.[213] This land was to be used to build a shelter to house Hindu pilgrims temporarily during their annual pilgrimage to the Amarnath temple.
      Indian security forces and the Indian army responded quickly to keep order. More than 40 unarmed protesters were killed[214][215] and at least 300 were detained.[216] The largest protests saw more than a half million people waving Pakistani flags and crying for freedom at a rally on 18 August, according to Time magazine.[217] Pro-independence Kashmir leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq warned that the peaceful uprising could lead to an upsurge in violence if India’s heavy-handed crackdown on protests was not restrained.[218] The United Nations expressed concern on India’s response to peaceful protests and urged investigations be launched against Indian security personnel who had taken part in the crackdown.[48]
    • How would any nation’s armed forces do that to their integral part, is unimaginable. Now let us have some of Pakistan’s jugular vein. I wont hide the facts that yes, women are treated less well than men are in Azad Kashmir, but they are treated just women are treated in the whole of Pakistan. Never has this world seen Kashmiris protesting anti-Pakistan or writing “Go, Pakistan, go back,” on their roads and walls.
    • The United Nations Commission on Human Rights reports that the status of women in Pakistani-administered Kashmir is similar to that of women in Pakistan. Women are not granted equal rights under the law, and their educational opportunities and choice of marriage partner remain “circumscribed” in Pakistan-administered kashmir. Domestic violence, forced marriage, and other forms of abuse continue to be issues of concern. In May 2007, the United Nations and other aid agencies temporarily suspended their work after suspected Islamists mounted an arson attack on the home of two aid workers; the organizations had received warnings against hiring women. However, honor killings and rape occur less frequently than in other areas of Pakistan.
    • A word of Gilgit and Baldistan, that were previously part of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir:
    • In 2009, the Pakistan government implemented an autonomy package for Gilgit-Baltistan which entails rights similar to those of Pakistan’s other provinces. Gilgit-Baltistan thus gains province-like status without actually being conferred such a status constitutionally. The direct rule by Islamabad is replaced by an elected legislative assembly and its chief minister.]
    • Indian acquaintances tell me time and again, that Pakistan doesn’t want any resolution on the Kashmir issue, and that Pakistan has never endeavoredto end the dispute.

      On 5 December 2006, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf told an Indian TV channel that Pakistan would give up its claim on Kashmir if India accepted some of his peace proposals, including a phased withdrawal of troops, self-governance for locals, no changes in the borders of Kashmir, and a joint supervision mechanism involving India, Pakistan, and Kashmir.[208] Musharraf stated that he was ready to give up the United Nations’ resolutions regarding Kashmir.[209]

    Clearly, India is the one which doesn’t want to end the dispute. Whether they want to keep the dispute alive for valor or for some other reasons, is out of my intellect, but the reader will note that Kashmir is not the only dispute India has managed to keep alive all these years. Though I don’t like President Zardari, still, this is another report which enlightens the fact that Pakistan does want peace.

    President Asif Ali Zardari hoped that Holbrooke would help mediate to resolve the Kashmir issue.[240]Subsequently Kashmir was removed from the mandate of Holbrooke.[241] “Eliminating … Kashmir from his job description … is seen as a significant diplomatic concession to India that reflects increasingly warm ties between the country and the United States,” The Washington Post noted in a report.[242] Brajesh Mishra, India’s former national security adviser, was quoted in the same report as saying that “No matter what government is in place, India is not going to relinquish control of Jammu and Kashmir”. “That is written in stone and cannot be changed.”[243] According to The Financial Times, India has warned Obama that he risks “barking up the wrong tree” if he seeks to broker a settlement between Pakistan and India over Kashmir.[244]

    I presume I have said enough.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s