Monday, October 21, 2019
05:09 PM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Compulsory Subjects > Pakistan Affairs

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Thursday, June 04, 2015
Muhammad Hammad Mangi's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: I am in your mind !
Posts: 116
Thanks: 16
Thanked 38 Times in 27 Posts
Muhammad Hammad Mangi is on a distinguished road
Arrow Kashmir Conflict Let's talk with our present knowledge.

Kashmir conflict is a territorial conflict between India and Pakistan which started just after partition of India.[2] India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir, including the Indo-Pakistani Wars of 1947, 1965 and 1999. Furthermore, since 1984 the two countries have also been involved in several skirmishes over control of the Siachen Glacier. India claims the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir and as of 2010, administers approximately 43% of the region, including most of Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier. India's claims are contested by Pakistan, which administers approximately 37% of Kashmir, namely Azad Kashmir and the northern areas of Gilgit Baltistan.[3][4]

The root of conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian Government is tied to a dispute over local autonomy.[5] Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the late 1970s and by 1988 many of the democratic reforms provided by the Indian Government had been reversed. Non-violent channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused a dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India.[5] In 1987, a disputed state election[6] created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups.[7][8][9] In July 1988 a series of demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency.

Although thousands of people have died as a result of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir,[10] the conflict has become less deadly in recent years.[11][12] Protest movements created to voice Kashmir's disputes and grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, have been active in Indian Administered Kashmir since 1989.[11][12] Elections held in 2008 were generally regarded as fair by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and had a high voter turnout in spite of calls by separatist militants for a boycott. The election resulted in the creation of the pro-India Jammu & Kashmir National Conference, which then formed a government in the state.[13][14] According to Voice of America, many analysts have interpreted the high voter turnout in this election as a sign that the people of Kashmir endorsed Indian rule in the state.[15] But in 2010 unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of local youth by security force.[16] Thousands of youths pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence.[17] The Indian government blamed separatists and Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group for stoking the 2010 protests.[18]

However, elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 25 years of history in Kashmir.[19][20][21][22] European Union also welcomed elections, called it "free and fair" and congratulated India for its democratic system.[23][24][25] The European Parliament also takes cognizance of the fact that a large number of Kashmiri voters turned out despite calls for the boycott of elections by certain separatist forces.[23]

Contents [hide]
1 Timeline
1.1 Early history
1.2 Partition and dispute
1.3 Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
1.4 Sino-Indian War
1.5 1965 and 1971 wars
1.6 1989 popular insurgency and militancy
1.7 1999 Conflict in Kargil
1.8 2000s Al-Qaeda involvement
2 Reasons behind the dispute
2.1 Indian view
2.2 Pakistani view
3 Chinese view
3.1 Cross-border troubles
3.2 Water dispute
3.3 Pakistan's relation with militants
4 Human rights abuse
4.1 Indian administered Kashmir
4.2 Pakistan administered Kashmir
4.2.1 Azad Kashmir
4.2.2 Gilgit-Baltistan
5 Map issues
6 Recent developments
6.1 Efforts to end the crisis
6.2 2008 militant attacks
6.3 2008 Kashmir protests
6.4 2008 Kashmir elections
6.5 2009 Kashmir protests
6.6 2010 Kashmir Unrest
6.7 2014 Jammu and Kashmir Elections
6.8 October 2014
7 The US Presidents on Conflict
8 Problems Before Plebiscite
8.1 UN Resolution is not Compulsory
8.2 Instrument of Accession
8.3 Article 370
8.4 "Nehru's Promise"
8.5 Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir
8.6 Private Survey
9 See also
10 References
11 Further reading
12 External links
Timeline[edit]
Main article: Timeline of the Kashmir conflict
Early history[edit]
See also: History of Kashmir
According to folk etymology, the name "Kashmir" means "desiccated land" (from the Sanskrit: Ka = water and shimira = desiccate). The mid-12th century Rajatarangini, a history of Kashmir written by Kalhana, records that the valley of Kashmir was formerly a lake. Hindu mythology relates that the lake was drained by the saptarishi or sage, Kashyapa, son of Marichi, in turn the son of Brahma, who cut a gap in the hills at Baramulla (Varaha-mula). Once Kashmir had been drained, Kashyapa invited Brahmans to settle there. This remains the local tradition, and the physical geography of the territory suggests that it may have some basis in fact. Kashyapa is connected with the draining of the lake in traditional histories, with the chief town or collection of dwellings in the valley called Kashyapa-pura, which has been identified as Kaspapyros in Hecataeus (Apud Stephanus of Byzantium) and the Kaspatyros of Herodotus (3.102, 4.44).[26] Kashmir is also believed to be the country indicated by Ptolemy's Kaspeiria.[27]

However, an earlier and well known recorded reference can be found in the writings of Hsien Tsang, a 6th Century Chinese Buddhist who referred to a state called 'Kash-mi-lo' that had existed in the 1st century.[citation needed]

The Pashtun Durrani Empire ruled Kashmir in the 18th century until its 1819 conquest by the Sikh ruler Ranjit Singh. Following the First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–1846), Kashmir was ceded under the Treaty of Lahore to the East India Company, who sold it shortly afterwards through the Treaty of Amritsar to Gulab Singh, Raja of Jammu, who thereafter received the title Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir. From then until the 1947 Partition of India, Kashmir was ruled by the Hindu Maharajas of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, although the majority of the population were Muslim, except in the Jammu and Ladakh region. However, India which has a population five times larger than Pakistan has almost the same population of Muslims.[28]

Partition and dispute[edit]
British rule in India ended in 1947 with the creation of a new state: the Dominion of Pakistan alongside the Union of India, the successor state to British India, while British suzerainty over the 562 Indian princely states ended. According to the Indian Independence Act 1947, "the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian States lapses, and with it, all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian States".[29] States were thereafter left to choose whether to join India or Pakistan or to remain independent. Jammu and Kashmir, the largest of the princely states, had a predominantly Muslim population ruled by the Hindu Maharaja Hari Singh. Following partition, Pakistan had expected the annexation of Kashmir to its territory.

Hari Singh, the maharaja of Kashmir, initially believed that by delaying his decision he could maintain the independence of Kashmir, but, caught up in a train of events that included a revolution among his Muslim subjects along the western borders of the state and the intervention of Pashtun tribesmen, he signed an instrument of accession on 25 October 1947[30] to the Indian union. This was the signal for intervention both by Pakistan, which considered the state to be a natural extension of Pakistan, and by India, which intended to confirm the act of accession.[31]

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947[edit]
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
After rumours that the Maharaja supported the annexation of Kashmir by India, militant Muslims from western Kashmir[31] and Pakistani tribesmen made rapid advances into the Baramulla sector. Maharaja of Kashmir Hari Singh asked the government of India to intervene. However, India and Pakistan had signed a non-intervention agreement. Although tribal fighters from Pakistan had entered Jammu and Kashmir, there was no solid legal evidence to unequivocally prove that Pakistan was officially involved.[citation needed] It would have been illegal for India to unilaterally intervene in an open, official capacity unless Jammu and Kashmir officially joined the Union of India, at which point it would be possible to send in its forces and occupy the remaining parts.

By the time Pakistani tribesmen reached the outskirts of Srinagar, the Maharaja desperately needed military assistance. Before the tribesmen's arrived, India argued that the Maharaja must complete negotiations to cede Jammu and Kashmir to India in exchange for military aid. The subsequent cession agreement was signed by the Maharaja and Lord Mountbatten of Burma.[1] In Jammu and Kashmir, National Conference volunteers worked with the Indian Army to drive out the Pakistanis.[32]


The Instrument of Accession of Kashmir to India was accepted by Viceroy Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma.
The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders.[32] Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.'[33] However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.[34]

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[35] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite.[35] India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected.[36] As a result Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw.[37] Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations of General Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.[38] The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter[39] and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.[40]

Sino-Indian War[edit]
Main article: Sino-Indian War
In 1962, troops from the People's Republic of China and India clashed in territory claimed by both. China won a swift victory in the war, resulting in Chinese annexation of the region they call Aksai Chin and which has continued since then. Another smaller area, the Trans-Karakoram, was demarcated as the Line of Control (LOC) between China and Pakistan, although some of the territory on the Chinese side is claimed by India to be part of Kashmir. The line that separates India from China in this region is known as the "Line of Actual Control".[41]

1965 and 1971 wars[edit]
Main articles: Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 and Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
In 1965 and 1971, heavy fighting again broke out between India and Pakistan. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 resulted in the defeat of Pakistan and the Pakistani military's surrender in East Pakistan, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. The Simla Agreement, signed in 1972 between India and Pakistan, allowed both countries to settle all issues by peaceful means through mutual discussion within the framework of the UN Charter.

1989 popular insurgency and militancy[edit]
Main article: Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
“ 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. ”
— British journalist James Buchan[42]
In 1989, a widespread popular and armed insurgency[43][44] started in Kashmir. After the 1987 state legislative assembly election, some of the results were disputed. This resulted in the formation of militant wings and marked the beginning of the Mujahadeen insurgency, which continues to this day.[45] India contends that the insurgency was largely started by Afghan mujahadeen who entered the Kashmir valley following the end of the Soviet-Afghan War.[46] Yasin Malik, a leader of one faction of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, was one of the Kashmiris to organise militancy in Kashmir, along with Ashfaq Majid Wani and Farooq Ahmad Dar (alias Bitta Karatay). Since 1995, Malik has renounced the use of violence and calls for strictly peaceful methods to resolve the dispute. Malik developed differences with one of the senior leaders, Farooq Siddiqui (alias Farooq Papa), for shunning demands for an independent Kashmir and trying to cut a deal with the Indian Prime Minister. This resulted in a spilt in which Bitta Karatay, Salim Nanhaji, and other senior comrades joined Farooq Papa.[47][48] Pakistan claims these insurgents are Jammu and Kashmir citizens, and are rising up against the Indian army as part of an independence movement. Amnesty International has accused security forces in Indian-controlled Kashmir of exploiting the Public Safety Act that enables them to "hold prisoners without trial". The group argues that the law, which allows security forces to detain individuals for up to two years without presenting charges violates prisoners' human rights.[49][50] In 2011, the state humans right commission said it had evidence that 2,156 bodies had been buried in 40 graves over the last 20 years.[50] The authorities deny such accusations. The security forces say the unidentified dead are militants who may have originally come from outside India. They also say that many of the missing people have crossed into Pakistan-administered Kashmir to engage in militancy.[50] However, according to the state human rights commission, among the identified bodies 574 were those of "disappeared locals", and according to Amnesty International's annual human rights report (2012) it was sufficient for "belying the security forces' claim that they were militants".[51]

India claims these insurgents are Islamic terrorist groups from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Afghanistan, fighting to make Jammu and Kashmir a part of Pakistan.[50][52] They claim Pakistan supplies munitions to the terrorists and trains them in Pakistan. India states that the terrorists have killed many citizens in Kashmir and committed human rights violations whilst denying that their own armed forces are responsible for human rights abuses. On a visit to Pakistan in 2006, current Chief Minister of Kashmir Omar Abdullah remarked that foreign militants were engaged in reckless killings and mayhem in the name of religion.[53] The Indian government has said militancy is now on the decline.[when?][12]

The Pakistani government calls these insurgents "Kashmiri freedom fighters", and claims that it provides them only moral and diplomatic support, although India[54] believes they are Pakistan-supported terrorists from Pakistan Administered Kashmir. In October 2008, President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan called the Kashmir separatists "terrorists" in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.[55] These comments sparked outrage amongst many Kashmiris, some of whom defied a curfew imposed by the Indian army to burn him in effigy.[56]

In 2008, pro-separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq told the Washington Post that there has been a "purely indigenous, purely Kashmiri"[11] peaceful protest movement alongside the insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir since 1989. The movement was created for the same reason as the insurgency and began after the disputed election of 1987. According to the United Nations, the Kashmiris have grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, which has committed human rights violations, .[11][12][57]

1999 Conflict in Kargil[edit]

Location of conflict.
Main article: Kargil War
In mid-1999, insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir infiltrated Jammu and Kashmir. During the winter season, Indian forces regularly move down to lower altitudes, as severe climatic conditions makes it almost impossible for them to guard the high peaks near the Line of Control. The insurgents took advantage of this and occupied vacant mountain peaks in the Kargil range overlooking the highway in Indian Kashmir that connects Srinagar and Leh. By blocking the highway, they could cut off the only link between the Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a large-scale conflict between the Indian and Pakistani armies.

Fears of the Kargil War turning into a nuclear war provoked the then-United States President Bill Clinton to pressure Pakistan to retreat. The Pakistan Army withdrew their remaining troops from the area, ending the conflict. India reclaimed control of the peaks, which they now patrol and monitor all year long.

2000s Al-Qaeda involvement[edit]
Main article: Al-Qaeda
See also: Allegations of support system in Pakistan for Osama bin Laden
In a 'Letter to American People' written by Osama bin Laden in 2002, he stated that one of the reasons he was fighting America was because of its support for India on the Kashmir issue.[58][59] While on a trip to Delhi in 2002, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that Al-Qaeda was active in Kashmir, though he did not have any hard evidence.[60][61] An investigation by a Christian Science Monitor reporter in 2002 claimed to have unearthed evidence that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates were prospering in Pakistan-administered Kashmir with tacit approval of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI).[62] In 2002, a team comprising Special Air Service and Delta Force personnel was sent into Indian-administered Kashmir to hunt for Osama bin Laden after reports that he was being sheltered by the Kashmiri militant group Harkat-ul-Mujahideen.[63] US officials believed that Al-Qaeda was helping organise a campaign of terror in Kashmir to provoke conflict between India and Pakistan. Their strategy was to force Pakistan to move its troops to the border with India, thereby relieving pressure on Al-Qaeda elements hiding in northwestern Pakistan. US intelligence analysts say Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives in Pakistan-administered Kashmir are helping terrorists trained in Afghanistan to infiltrate Indian-administered Kashmir.[64] Fazlur Rehman Khalil, the leader of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, signed al-Qaeda's 1998 declaration of holy war, which called on Muslims to attack all Americans and their allies.[65] In 2006 Al-Qaeda claim they have established a wing in Kashmir, which worried the Indian government.[66] Indian Army Lieutenant General H.S. Panag, GOC-in-C Northern Command, told reporters that the army has ruled out the presence of Al-Qaeda in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. He said that there no evidence to verify media reports of an Al-Qaeda presence in the state. He ruled out Al-Qaeda ties with the militant groups in Kashmir including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. However, he stated that they had information about Al Qaeda's strong ties with Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed operations in Pakistan.[67] While on a visit to Pakistan in January 2010, US Defense secretary Robert Gates stated that Al-Qaeda was seeking to destabilise the region and planning to provoke a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.[68]

In June 2011, a US Drone strike killed Ilyas Kashmiri, chief of Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, a Kashmiri militant group associated with Al-Qaeda.[69][70] Kashmiri was described by Bruce Riedel as a 'prominent' Al-Qaeda member,[71] while others described him as the head of military operations for Al-Qaeda.[72] Waziristan had by then become the new battlefield for Kashmiri militants fighting NATO in support of Al-Qaeda.[73] Ilyas Kashmiri was charged by the US in a plot against Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper at the center of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.[74] In April 2012, Farman Ali Shinwari a former member of Kashmiri separatist groups Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, was appointed chief of al-Qaeda in Pakistan.[75]

Reasons behind the dispute[edit]
The Kashmir Conflict arose from the Partition of British India in 1947 into modern India and Pakistan. Both countries subsequently made claims to Kashmir, based on the history and religious affiliations of the Kashmiri people. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, which lies strategically in the north-west of the subcontinent bordering Afghanistan and China, was formerly ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh under the paramountcy of British India. In geographical and legal terms, the Maharaja could have joined either of the two new countries. Although urged by the Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, to determine the future of his state before the transfer of power took place, Singh demurred. In October 1947, incursions by Pakistan took place leading to a war, as a result of which the state of Jammu and Kashmir remains divided between India and Pakistan.

Administered by Area Population % Muslim % Hindu % Buddhist % Other
India Kashmir valley ~4 million 95% 4% – –
Jammu ~3 million 30% 66% – 4%
Ladakh ~0.25 million 46% – 50% 3%
Pakistan Gilgit-Baltistan ~1 million 99% – – –
Azad Kashmir ~2.6 million 100% – – –
China Aksai Chin – – – – –
Statistics from the BBC report "In Depth" *There are roughly 1.5 million refugees from Indian-administered Kashmir in Pakistan administered Kashmir and Pakistan UNHCR
A minimum of 506,000 people in the Indian Administered Kashmir valley are internally displaced due to militancy in Kashmir about half of who are Hindu pandits CIA
Muslims form the majority in the Poonch, Rajouri, Kishtwar, and Doda districts of the Jammu region. Shia Muslims make up the majority in the Kargil district in the Ladakh region.
India does not accept the two-nation theory and considers that Kashmir, despite being a Muslim-majority state, is in many ways an "integral part" of secular India.[76] It is also worth noting that India has a Muslim population close to 177 Million very close to Pakistan which has a Muslim population of 178 Million.[28] In fact, as per 2001 Census Muslim population in the State of Uttar Pradesh (in India) alone was around 30 million more than Jammu & Kashmir which is at around 6 million.[77]
Two-thirds of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, comprising Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, and the sparsely populated Buddhist area of Ladakh are controlled by India while one-third is administered by Pakistan. The latter includes a narrow strip of land called Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas, comprising the Gilgit Agency, Baltistan, and the former kingdoms of Hunza and Nagar. Attempts to resolve the dispute through political discussions have been unsuccessful. In September 1965, war again broke out between Pakistan and India. The United Nations called for another cease-fire, and peace was restored following the Tashkent Declaration in 1966, by which both nations returned to their original positions along the demarcated line. After the 1971 war and the creation of independent Bangladesh under the terms of the 1972 Simla Agreement between Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan, it was agreed that neither country would seek to alter the cease-fire line in Kashmir, which was renamed as the Line of Control, "unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations".

Numerous violations of the Line of Control have occurred, including incursions by insurgents and Pakistani armed forces at Kargil leading to the Kargil war. There have also been sporadic clashes on the Siachen Glacier, where the Line of Control is not demarcated and both countries maintain forces at altitudes rising to 20,000 ft (6,100 m), with the Indian forces serving at higher altitudes.

Indian view[edit]

Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947 under which he acceded the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India.
India has officially stated that it believes that Kashmir to be an integral part of India, though the then Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, stated after the 2010 Kashmir Unrest that his government was willing to grant autonomy to the region within the purview of Indian constitution if there was consensus[by whom?] on this issue.[78] The Indian viewpoint is succinctly summarised by Ministry of External affairs, Government of India[79][80] —

India holds that the Instrument of Accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India, signed by Maharaja Hari Singh (erstwhile ruler of the State) on 25 October 1947[81][82] and executed on 27 October 1947[82] between the ruler of Kashmir and the Governor General of India was a legal act and completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act (1935), Indian Independence Act (1947) as well as under international law and as such was total and irrevocable.[80]
The Constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Maharaja's Instrument of Accession to India and adopted a constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of India. India claims that the constituent assembly was a representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri people at the time.[83][84]
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 tacitly accepts India's stand regarding all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan and urges the need to resolve the dispute through mutual dialogue without the need for a plebiscite.[85]
United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 cannot be implemented since Pakistan failed to withdraw its forces from Kashmir, which was the first step in implementing the resolution.[37] India is also of the view that Resolution 47 is obsolete, since the geography and demographics of the region have permanently altered since it adoption.[86] The resolution was passed by United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such is non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.[39][40]
India does not accept the two-nation theory that forms the basis of Pakistan's claims and considers that Kashmir, despite being a Muslim-majority state, is in many ways an "integral part" of secular India.[76]
The state of Jammu and Kashmir was provided with significant autonomy under Article 370 of the Constitution of India.[87]
All differences between India and Pakistan, including Kashmir, need to be settled through bilateral negotiations as agreed to by the two countries under the Simla Agreement signed on 2 July 1972.[88]
Additional Indian viewpoints regarding the broader debate over the Kashmir conflict include –

In a diverse country like India, disaffection and discontent are not uncommon. Indian democracy has the necessary resilience to accommodate genuine grievances within the framework of India's sovereignty, unity, and integrity. The Government of India has expressed its willingness to accommodate the legitimate political demands of the people of the state of Kashmir.[79]
Insurgency and terrorism in Kashmir is deliberately fuelled by Pakistan to create instability in the region.[89] The Government of India has repeatedly accused Pakistan of waging a proxy war in Kashmir by providing weapons and financial assistance to terrorist groups in the region.[90][91][92][93]
Pakistan is trying to raise anti-India sentiment among the people of Kashmir by spreading false propaganda against India.[94] According to the state government of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistani radio and television channels deliberately spread "hate and venom" against India to alter Kashmiri opinion.[95]
India has asked the United Nations not to leave unchallenged or unaddressed the claims of moral, political, and diplomatic support for terrorism, which were clearly in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373. This is a Chapter VII resolution that makes it mandatory for member states to not provide active or passive support to terrorist organisations.[96][97] Specifically, it has pointed out that the Pakistani government continues to support various terrorist organisations, such as Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba, in direct violation of this resolution.[98]
India points out reports by human rights organisations condemning Pakistan for the lack of civic liberties in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.[94][99] According to India, most regions of Pakistani Kashmir, especially Northern Areas, continue to suffer from lack of political recognition, economic development, and basic fundamental rights.[100]
Karan Singh, the son of the last ruler of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, has said that the Instrument of Accession signed by his father was the same as signed by other states. He opined that Kashmir was therefore a part of India, and that its special status granted by Article 370 of the Indian Constitution stemmed from the fact that it had its own constitution.[101]
In 2008, the death toll from the last 20 years was estimated by Indian authorities to be over 47,000.[102]

Pakistani view[edit]

Map of Kashmir as drawn by the Government of Pakistan
Pakistan maintains that Kashmir is the "jugular vein of Pakistan"[103] and a currently disputed territory whose final status must be determined by the people of Kashmir. Pakistan's claims to the disputed region are based on the rejection of Indian claims to Kashmir, namely the Instrument of Accession. Pakistan insists that the Maharaja was not a popular leader, and was regarded as a tyrant by most Kashmiris. Pakistan maintains that the Maharaja used brute force to suppress the population.[104]

Pakistan claims that Indian forces were in Kashmir before the Instrument of Accession was signed with India, and that therefore Indian troops were in Kashmir in violation of the Standstill Agreement, which was designed to maintain the status quo in Kashmir (although India was not signatory to the Agreement, which was signed between Pakistan and the Hindu ruler of Jammu and Kashmir).[105][106]

From 1990 to 1999, some organisations reported that the Indian Armed Forces, its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent militias were responsible for the deaths of 4,501 Kashmiri civilians. During the same period, there were records of 4,242 women between the ages of 7–70 being raped.[107][108] Similar allegations were also made by some human rights organisations.[109]

In short, Pakistan holds that –

The popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrates that the Kashmiri people no longer wish to remain within India. Pakistan suggests that this means that Kashmir either wants to be with Pakistan or independent.[110]
According to the two-nation theory, one of the theories that is cited for the partition that created India and Pakistan, Kashmir should have been with Pakistan, because it has a Muslim majority.
India has shown disregard for the resolutions of the UN Security Council and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan by failing to hold a plebiscite to determine the future allegiance of the state.[111]
Pakistan was of the view that the Maharaja of Kashmir had no right to call in the Indian Army, because it held that the Maharaja of Kashmir was not a hereditary ruler and was merely a British appointee, after the British defeated Ranjit Singh who ruled the area before the British conquest.[112]
Pakistan has noted the widespread use of extrajudicial killings in Indian-administered Kashmir carried out by Indian security forces while claiming they were caught up in encounters with militants. These encounters are commonplace in Indian-administered Kashmir. The encounters go largely uninvestigated by the authorities, and the perpetrators are spared criminal prosecution.[113][114]
Human rights organisations have strongly condemned Indian troops for widespread rape and murder of innocent civilians while accusing these civilians of being militants.[115][116][117]

The Chenab formula was a compromise proposed in the 1960s, in which the Kashmir valley and other Muslim-dominated areas north of the Chenab river would go to Pakistan, and Jammu and other Hindu-dominated regions would go to India.[118]
Former Pakistani president General Pervez Musharraf on 16 October 2014 said that Pakistan needs to incite those fighting in Kashmir,[119][120]“We have source (in Kashmir) besides the (Pakistan) army…People in Kashmir are fighting against (India). We just need to incite them,” Musharraf told a TV channel.[119][120]

A survey carried out across both Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir by London-based thinktank Chatham House, its author claims 'is the first ever of its kind', shows that only 2% of the respondents on the Indian side favour joining Pakistan.[121]

Chinese view[edit]
See also: Origins of the Sino-Indian border dispute
China states that Aksai Chin is an integral part of China and does not recognise the inclusion of Aksai Chin as part of the Kashmir region.[citation needed]

China did not accept the boundaries of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, north of Aksai Chin and the Karakoram as proposed by the British.[31]
China settled its border disputes with Pakistan under the 1963 Trans Karakoram Tract with the provision that the settlement was subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute.[122]
Cross-border troubles[edit]
See also: Line of Control and Siachen Conflict
The border and the Line of Control separating Indian and Pakistani Kashmir passes through some exceptionally difficult terrain. The world's highest battleground, the Siachen Glacier, is a part of this difficult-to-man boundary. Even with 200,000 military personnel,[123] India maintains that it is infeasible to place enough men to guard all sections of the border throughout the various seasons of the year. Pakistan has indirectly acquiesced its role in failing to prevent "cross-border terrorism" when it agreed to curb such activities[124] after intense pressure from the Bush administration in mid-2002.

The Government of Pakistan has repeatedly claimed that by constructing a fence along the line of control, India is violating the Shimla Accord. India claims the construction of the fence has helped decrease armed infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir.

In 2002, Pakistani President and Army Chief General Pervez Musharraf promised to check infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir.[citation needed]

Water dispute[edit]
Another reason for the dispute over Kashmir is water. Kashmir is the source of many rivers and tributaries in the Indus River basin. This basin is divided between Pakistan, which has about 60 percent of the catchment area, India with about 20 percent, Afghanistan with 5 percent and around 15 percent in China (Tibet autonomous region). The river tributaries are the Jhelum and Chenab rivers, which primarily flow into Pakistan, while other branches—the Ravi, Beas, and the Sutlej—irrigate northern India.

The Indus is a river system that sustains communities in India and Pakistan. Both have extensively dammed the Indus River for irrigation of their crops and hydro-electricity systems. In arbitrating the conflict in 1947, Sir Cyril Radcliffe, decided to demarcate the territories as he was unable to give to one or the other the control over the river as it was a main economic resource for both areas. The Line of Control (LoC) was recognised as an international border establishing that India would have control over the upper riparian and Pakistan over the lower riparian of the Indus and its tributaries. Despite appearing to be separate issues, the Kashmir dispute and the dispute over the water control are in reality related and the fight over the water remains one of the main problems in establishing good relations between the two countries.

In 1948, Eugene Black, then president of the World Bank, offered his services to solve the tension over water control. In the early days of independence, the fact that India was able to shut off the Central Bari Doab Canals at the time of the sowing season, causing significant damage to Pakistan's crops. Nevertheless, military and political clashes over Kashmir in the early years of independence appear to have been more about ideology and sovereignty rather than over the sharing of water resources. However, the minister of Pakistan has stated the opposite.[125]

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed by both countries in September 1960, giving exclusive rights over the three western rivers of the Indus river system (Jhelum, Chenab and Indus) to Pakistan, and over the three eastern rivers (Sutlej, Ravi and Beas) to India, as long as this does not reduce or delay the supply to Pakistan. India therefore maintains that they are not willing to break the established regulations and they see no more problems with this issue.

Pakistan's relation with militants[edit]
India has furnished documentary evidence to the United Nations that Pakistan supports Kashmiri militants, leading to a ban on some terrorist organisations, which Pakistan has yet to enforce.[citation needed] Former President of Pakistan and the ex-chief of the Pakistan military Pervez Musharraf, stated in an interview in London, that the Pakistani government indeed helped to form underground militant groups and "turned a blind eye" towards their existence.[126]

According to former Indian Prime-minister Manmohan Singh, one of the main reasons behind the conflict was Pakistan's "terror-induced coercion". He further stated at a Joint Press Conference with United States President Barack Obama in New Delhi that India is not afraid of resolving all the issues with Pakistan including that of Kashmir "but it is our request that you cannot simultaneously be talking and at the same time the terror machine is as active as ever before. Once Pakistan moves away from this terror-induced coercion, we will be very happy to engage productively with Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues."[127]

In 2009, the President of Pakistan Asif Zardari asserted at a conference in Islamabad that Pakistan had indeed created Islamic militant groups as a strategic tool for use in its geostrategic agenda and "to attack Indian forces in Jammu and Kashmir".[128] Former President of Pakistan and the ex-chief of the Pakistan military Pervez Musharraf also stated in an interview that Pakistani government helped to form underground militant groups to fight against Indian troops in Jammu and Kashmir and "turned a blind eye" towards their existence because it wanted to force India to enter negotiations.[126] The British Government have formally accepted that there is a clear connection between Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and three major militant outfits operating in Jammu and Kashmir, Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen.[129][130] The militants are provided with "weapons, training, advice and planning assistance" in Punjab and Kashmir by the ISI which is "coordinating the shipment of arms from the Pakistani side of Kashmir to the Indian side, where Muslim insurgents are waging a protracted war".[131][132]

Throughout the 1990s, the ISI maintained its relationship with extremist networks and militants that it had established during the Afghan war to utilise in its campaign against Indian forces in Kashmir.[133] Joint Intelligence/North (JIN) has been accused of conducting operations in Jammu and Kashmir and also Afghanistan.[134] The Joint Signal Intelligence Bureau (JSIB) provide communications support to groups in Kashmir.[134] According to Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, both former members of the National Security Council, the ISI acted as a "kind of terrorist conveyor belt" radicalising young men in the Madrassas of Pakistan and delivering them to training camps affiliated with or run by Al-Qaeda and from there moving them into Jammu and Kashmir to launch attacks.[135]

Reportedly, about Rs. 24 million are paid out per month by the ISI to fund its activities in Jammu and Kashmir.[136] Pro-Pakistani groups were reportedly favoured over other militant groups.[136] Creation of six militant groups in Kashmir, which included Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), was aided by the ISI.[137][138] According to American Intelligence officials, ISI is still providing protection and help to LeT.[138] The Pakistan Army and ISI also LeT volunteers to surreptitiously penetrate from Pakistan Administrated Kashmir to Jammu and Kashmir.
__________________
Sometimes the reason of the reason in your mind is the reason of your reasoning problem,,,
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Muhammad Hammad Mangi For This Useful Post:
anabiya mughal (Monday, June 29, 2015), Farie (4 Weeks Ago), QamarAdeel (Friday, June 05, 2015)
  #2  
Old Wednesday, October 24, 2018
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 3
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mehak Aziz is on a distinguished road
Default help

is it ok to copy it for 2018 notes?:
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Saturday, June 29, 2019
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
xidra xid is on a distinguished road
Default hehehe

o bahi kr lo copy history to ni badlati na
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Monday, September 02, 2019
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
pkfalcon is on a distinguished road
Default

Credible, but needs to be updated version particularly w.r.t. the IK governmental impels. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jammu And Kashmir Dispute Gul-e-Lala International Relations 1 Monday, September 02, 2019 04:02 PM
Asma Jilani ---- Vs---- Govt. of the Punjab sajidnuml Constitutional Law 5 Saturday, November 11, 2017 05:00 PM
Current Affairs Sureshlasi Current Affairs 54 Monday, March 20, 2017 05:43 PM
Jihad In The Modern Era: Heavenly Happiness Islamiat Notes 0 Friday, June 22, 2007 01:58 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.