The Kashmir issue is an impasse. Neither will Pakistan relent its stake, nor will India relinquish its position any further and unfortunately the Kashmiris aren't going to get their freedom from either of these nuclear superpowers, at least not without a lot of pain (they have been subject to too much, already). The blood-shed and injustice is simply not fair, and it can't go on forever.
Despite autonomy granted by Pakistan to mountainous region of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, they have allowed settlement of Pakistanis from other parts of the country diluting the native population. Though revenue and governance is legally kept aloof from Islamabad, the overarching influence of the occupiers cannot be understated. Pakistani administered Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, for all intents and purposes, is a fully integrated territory. The Pakistani constitution doesn't allot right to independence and pro-independence political parties aren't allowed to contest elections. 'Azad Kashmir', as Pakistani administered Kashmir is commonly known, is a misnomer.
India, in comparison, had afforded more political and legal leeway to the Jammu and Kashmir apparatus. They curbed down on it heavily after the insurgency of millitants in 1990s by slapping the territory with a god awful special powers military act viz. AFSPA. Since things aren't going to change in the short term, it completely makes sense for the Indian interests to begin to integrate Jammu and Kashmir along with adjoining buddhist regions of Leh and Ladakh into the constitution. The protests from Kashmiris are valid, justified, and correct; but I can't see India backing down from this. They need to stabilise the region than leave it in a perennial limbo flanked by oppressive and terrible military control on one side and the insurgent, violent struggle on the other.
It is sad that erstwhile Indian PM, Morarji Desai and the then Pakistani President, Zia ul Haq couldn't put this issue to bed in 1980s when they had the chance. It will take leaders of incredible will, power, audacity, and sway on both sides of the border to bring this issue to bed for once and for all: Allegories will be written, songs will be sung, statues will be built, and peace will return to this beautiful land. Someday. The Kashmiris deserve it.
Thank you for giving such a fair overview. I feel there's a lot of chest beating in both countries because of whatever they see in the other. However, I do feel that Kashmir needs peace and as you said, I hope it comes there someday
Absolutely correct. The Kashmiris deserve peace and quiet, the closest both sides came to an agreement was ca. 2003 between Vajpayee and Musharraf. Unfortunately the stakes are too high for India to give up this strategic place.
I think whatever strategic value Kashmir had to India is greatly outweighed by its emotional value - much like Pakistan.
For India, Kashmir has been an enormous drain on its resources, both financially & in lives lost. To accept that muslim Kashmiris are somehow distinct from other Indians is to revive the Two Nation Theory that tore the subcontinent apart, and flies in the face of the lived experience of the multitude of diverse peoples who coexist in relative peace in India.
The supposed secret deal that Vajpayee & Musharraf had agreed to was to finalize the Line of Control as the International Border, permanently bifircating Kashmir between the two. I doubt it would have found much support in either country, if the plans had been public.
This is an utterly stupid comment because it ignored Pakistan is a Muslim country and India is a Hindu majority one. Trying to ignore religion as a factor makes absolutely no sense. You're trying to equate natural movement of Muslims into Azad Kashmir to systematic Hindu population replacement in IOK.
Comments
The Kashmir issue is an impasse. Neither will Pakistan relent its stake, nor will India relinquish its position any further and unfortunately the Kashmiris aren't going to get their freedom from either of these nuclear superpowers, at least not without a lot of pain (they have been subject to too much, already). The blood-shed and injustice is simply not fair, and it can't go on forever.
Despite autonomy granted by Pakistan to mountainous region of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, they have allowed settlement of Pakistanis from other parts of the country diluting the native population. Though revenue and governance is legally kept aloof from Islamabad, the overarching influence of the occupiers cannot be understated. Pakistani administered Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, for all intents and purposes, is a fully integrated territory. The Pakistani constitution doesn't allot right to independence and pro-independence political parties aren't allowed to contest elections. 'Azad Kashmir', as Pakistani administered Kashmir is commonly known, is a misnomer.
India, in comparison, had afforded more political and legal leeway to the Jammu and Kashmir apparatus. They curbed down on it heavily after the insurgency of millitants in 1990s by slapping the territory with a god awful special powers military act viz. AFSPA. Since things aren't going to change in the short term, it completely makes sense for the Indian interests to begin to integrate Jammu and Kashmir along with adjoining buddhist regions of Leh and Ladakh into the constitution. The protests from Kashmiris are valid, justified, and correct; but I can't see India backing down from this. They need to stabilise the region than leave it in a perennial limbo flanked by oppressive and terrible military control on one side and the insurgent, violent struggle on the other.
It is sad that erstwhile Indian PM, Morarji Desai and the then Pakistani President, Zia ul Haq couldn't put this issue to bed in 1980s when they had the chance. It will take leaders of incredible will, power, audacity, and sway on both sides of the border to bring this issue to bed for once and for all: Allegories will be written, songs will be sung, statues will be built, and peace will return to this beautiful land. Someday. The Kashmiris deserve it.
Refs:
https://rediff.com/news/2001/jul/11spec.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_(Special_Powers)_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azad_Kashmir
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_mediation_of_the_Kashmir_di...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jammu_and_Kashmir_(princely_st...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jammu_and_Kashmir
Thank you for giving such a fair overview. I feel there's a lot of chest beating in both countries because of whatever they see in the other. However, I do feel that Kashmir needs peace and as you said, I hope it comes there someday
Absolutely correct. The Kashmiris deserve peace and quiet, the closest both sides came to an agreement was ca. 2003 between Vajpayee and Musharraf. Unfortunately the stakes are too high for India to give up this strategic place.
I think whatever strategic value Kashmir had to India is greatly outweighed by its emotional value - much like Pakistan.
For India, Kashmir has been an enormous drain on its resources, both financially & in lives lost. To accept that muslim Kashmiris are somehow distinct from other Indians is to revive the Two Nation Theory that tore the subcontinent apart, and flies in the face of the lived experience of the multitude of diverse peoples who coexist in relative peace in India.
The supposed secret deal that Vajpayee & Musharraf had agreed to was to finalize the Line of Control as the International Border, permanently bifircating Kashmir between the two. I doubt it would have found much support in either country, if the plans had been public.
This is an utterly stupid comment because it ignored Pakistan is a Muslim country and India is a Hindu majority one. Trying to ignore religion as a factor makes absolutely no sense. You're trying to equate natural movement of Muslims into Azad Kashmir to systematic Hindu population replacement in IOK.