Quote:
Originally Posted by Farhad Aslam
Just a couple of clarifications:
My meaning of 2 parts was on the bases of legal and political status of parts of Kashmir i.e Indian Occupied Kashmir, AJK and GB(controlled by Pak).
|
1. Then there was another political region Ladakh as well, mean 2+2 . Anyways..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farhad Aslam
Reports of amnesty International are credible and I don not put a question mark on these, this is a fact which we know and accept but I want to remove the intentional, systematic and mysterious dust from the other side of picture as well. I simply ask about social, political and economic condition of AJK and GB. In AJK you can not contest Election for local assembly if you do not accept the term of accession to Pakistan , KH Khursheed's elected government was overturned by Ayoub Khan as he called for recognition of AJK government as a ‘revolutionary provisional successor government’ of deposed Dogra ruler of Jammu and Kashmir with a freehand to take the freedom movement to its logical end. Afterwards, he had to face imprisonment in infamous Palandari and Dalai jails as well.
|
2. British journalist James Buchan "In the years since 1990, the Kashmiri Muslims and the Indian government have conspired to abolish the complexities of Kashmiri civilization. The world it inhabited has vanished: the state government and the political class, the rule of law, almost all the Hindu inhabitants of the valley, alcohol, cinemas, cricket matches, picnics by moonlight in the saffron fields, schools, universities, an independent press, tourists and banks. In this reduction of civilian reality, the sights of Kashmir are redefined: not the lakes and Mogul gardens, or the storied triumphs of Kashmiri agriculture, handicrafts and cookery, but two entities that confront each other without intermediary: the mosque and the army camp. ”
This may be the one reason of development by India on Indian side of Kashmir. The second reason is of course a state /province status by India for Kashmir and lot of development funds etc.
3. Dear parliamentary democracy was started in AJ&K in 1970s, and an Interim Constitution of 1974 was promulgated for Legislative Assembly in Kashmir, whose preamble states ''................. WHEREAS the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir is yet to be determined in accordance with the freely expressed will of the people of the State through the democratic method of free and fair plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations as envisaged in the UNCIP Resolutions adopted from time to time; AND WHEREAS a part of the territories of the State of Jammu and Kashmir already liberated by the people are known for the time being as Azad Jammu and Kashmir;
AND WHEREAS it is necessary to provide for the better Government and
administration of Azad Jammu and Kashmir until such time as the status of Jammu and Kashmir is determined as aforesaid and for that purpose to repeal and re-enact the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, with certain modifications;
AND WHEREAS in the discharge of its responsibilities under the UNCIP
Resolutions, the Government of Pakistan has approved of the proposed repeal and reenactment of the said Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, and authorized the president of Azad Jammu and Kashmir to introduce the present Bill in the Legislative Assembly of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for consideration and passage..'
4. Brother, unlike India, Pakistan has not grabbed the Kashmir and has left it to be decided by the wishes of its people. Though under control of Pakistan - as also necessitated under UN Resolutions - AJK is a self-governing state and is not constitutionally part of Pakistan. It has parliamentary democracy having its own chosen legislature, P.M, President, its own High Court, anthem, flag, judiciary and its AJK Council controls its financial matters including taxes and budgets, so the political Government of AJ&K is responsible for all development works as well.... Nevertheless, there are development issues in provinces of Pakistan and they are quite drastic because of lack of interest by the political leadership, who are more interested in filling their own pockets instead of thinking for the masses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farhad Aslam
Afterwards, he had to face imprisonment in infamous Palandari and Dalai jails as well. Situation in GB is not different, for 60 years they were treated like Bermuda Triangle.
I have the opportunity to be in all three parts of Kashmir and I can bet on the difference of development.
|
5. Dear, do not be too hypothetical to term any thing like Bermuda
... GB has not been made a part of proper Pakistan through constitution and there are serious issues at various levels... And it has not been made a part due to the cause of Kashmir, Pakistan wants to give it autonomy/decisions to be taken by the will of its people
. Hope you be able to see official statements at various bureaucratic levels at various Ministries including stance at Ministry of Foreign Affairs..
.............And as stated above, development problems are everywhere in Pakistan, one can find issues even at the capital of the country, that is more linked to the will of administrators...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farhad Aslam
History can not be written only on the bases of assumptions and comparisons but lets move forward.... My basic question is whosoever started the issue whatsoever have been the relations and legalities in the past, why has Kashmir issue now become just an old book in the shelf? You may not see a war between India and Pakistan as they have attained some degree of Deterrence. They have other fish to fry. They might have lost the interest in Kashmir as they have learned to sustain without their jugular vein. But why do we forget there is a nation that needs identity, be it Indian, Pakistan or Kashmiri they want to get rid of this stained tag of Disputed territory. They need recognition no matter if it is just a province or a sovereign state. Kashmiris ask a question who are they? If neither of the India or Pakistan is able to satisfy them with answer it should be left to them.
|
6. These are not mere assumptions dear, have a look at the BBC one article linked in its South Asia section and linked to historical issues of Kashmir issue;
"Exactly when Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession has been hotly debated for over 50 years. Official Indian accounts state that in the early hours of the morning of 26 October, Hari Singh fled from Srinagar, arriving in Jammu later in the day, where he was met by V P Menon, representative of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and signed the Instrument of Accession.
On the morning of 27 October, Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar.
Recent research, from British sources, has indicated that Hari Singh did not reach Jammu until the evening of 26 October and that, due to poor flying conditions, V P Menon was unable to get to Jammu until the morning of 27 October , by which time Indian troops were already arriving in Srinagar.
In order to support the thesis that the Maharaja acceded before Indian troops landed, Indian sources have now suggested that Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession before he left Srinagar but that it was not made public until later.
This was because Hari Singh had not yet agreed to include the Kashmiri leader, Sheikh Abdullah, in his future government. To date no authentic original document has been made available.
Pakistan immediately contested the accession, suggesting that it was fraudulent, that the Maharaja acted under duress and that he had no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan was still in force.
Pakistanis also argued that because Hari Singh fled from the valley of Kashmir , he was not in control of his state and therefore not in a position to take a decision on behalf of his people.""
7. Further, as stated earlier, during partition plan of Punjab, havoc was wrecked during distribution of Distt Gurdaspur and its only one Tehsil Shakargarh (51 % Muslim) was given to Pakistan while other two Muslim majority Tehsils Batalla and Gurdaspur (51 & 53 % Muslim majority) were given to India just to make a link of Kashmir to India, they had already in mind to grab the Kashmir at the middle of 1947. The events which followed in other states are clear to proof that it was India which severed the Kashmir... ....
8. I can understand your feelings as of a scion of displaced Kashmiri family................. Kashmiris are Kashmiris dear, they have their own identity and culture, which cannot be crushed by anybody and hope for good that Pakistan is not going to do any thing against them. .. As regards conversion of political status of Kashmir from being a disputed territory to a part of any country or having independence, the matter is with the United Nations, which cannot make any firm decision due to global power involvements...