VANCOUVER, BC, CANADA: This is with reference to Tariq Fatemi’s article of July 13 titled “Peace prospects with India”. What is required for Pakistan is to reduce its force strength at the border with India, remove the threat by non-state actors and also recall non-state actors sent to Kashmir.
Then India can follow by drawing down its troops from Kashmir. Once Kashmir is in such a state, then both countries can consider upgrading their trade links. Also, in the meantime, the two sides can sit down and negotiate, starting with minor issues. If that were to happen with some degree of success, it would be seen as a tangible confidence-building measure. That could, in turn, build up momentum for the resolution of more serious issues, leading eventually to Kashmir.
One thing that Pakistan should not expect is that India will hand over Kashmir on a silver platter. It was ceded to India. The best solution really can be that the Line of Control is declared as the international border between the two countries, and that people on both sides are given permission to move freely across it. Both countries could share in the defence of the region.
Mohan Ram
Published in The Express Tribune, July 14th, 2011.
COMMENTS (43)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Somehow (and I'm also to blame for this), the discussion shifted from the original topic "Make LOC the international border" to treatment of minorities in India. Some unverifiable claims have been made (like the one from Priyanka about a Muslim woman owning 35 houses in Hyderabad) and half the girls in her college being Muslims. Others have said that Indian minorities (Muslims particularly) are treated much better than Hindus or Christians in Pakistan. This too is debatable, but again, should not be discussed here. The main point, Indian refusal to grant Kashmiris the right of self-determination (or even full autonomy-special status-as per article 370B) has been conveniently ignored by Indian readers. One thing is clear: India will not withdraw from J&K unless the Kashmiris convert enmasse to Judaism (in that case, of course, Israel and the Western media will go all out to support the Kashmiris' right to self-determination).
@Shakir Lakhani: In case you are not aware, the vast majority of indian christians and parsees who work overseas are economic migrants. I should know, because I am on of these. There are however,considerably more hindus working overseas as well. So to use that fact to suggest the minorities don't thrive in India is silly, to say the least. Contrast that with Pakistan, where the only group thriving are jihadis and the military. (the difference between the two is probably just semantic). On the issue of violence against minorities in India, I would venture to say a muslim or christian in pakistan has a much higher chance of dying in sectarian or ethnic conflict in pakistan than a muslim in india might. Another little nugget if you will, the largest act of philanthropy in India (to the tune of $2.5 billion (yes, with a 'b'), was was made by a member of this 'oppressed' minority group. On the final point, I will simply state the facts: Indian Army Generals: 1.Lieutenant General S K Hasnain 2.Lieutenant General M K Zaki 3.Major General Mohammed Amin Naik Indian Airforce: 1. Air Chief Marshall Rasheed Lateef. As an aside, in India we have the concept of civilian control over the armed forces. At the time of the kargil crisis, the defence minister under a BJP (??right wing,communal party) was George Fernandes. Under the current (??left of center,secular) congress govt, the defence minister is A.K. Antony.In case you are wondering, they are both christians. Don't tell me this is mere tokenism.
Need I go on???
@ all you Indians: You have missed an important point, the heading of the letter. If India believes all of J&K should belong to it, why are you talking of making LOC the border? Secondly, if India really withdrew from the plebiscite offer because Pakistan didn't withdraw its troops, why doesn't it say so now? If both Pakistan and India withdraw their troops from the areas of J&K under their control, the problem is solved. A plebiscite can be held under UN supervision. But I know that India will find some excuse of the other to prevent Kashmiris from exercising their right of self-determination, because it knows that they will opt for either independence or joining Pakistan.
@Shakir Lakhani:
You have now brought the Indus water into the debate.The Pakistani water commissioners have admitted that India is not stealing the water.Arbitration by the neutral swiss engineer found no fault.India was only asked to lower the dam height by a foot.India is also blamed for releasing excess water .Every dam has a safe storage capacity.Once it exceeds its safe capacity,the water would have to be released to prevent a major catastrophe.As an engineer you should know that.There is an article on the BBC where a Pakistani graduate farmer accused India of controlling the rain clouds to flood Pakistan last year.Speaks volumes of the standard of Pakistan's colleges. Your fellow Pakistani Dr Saleem who agrees with your views ,seems to have graduated from this type of college.India is ruthless according to him.Tell me Dr Saleem how many times has India attacked Pakistan.In all the wars,bar 1971 its Pakistan who has attacked India.A ruthless enemy would not be standing by idly while your country exported terrorism.As for your statement that Muslims would be ruling India after the departure of the British.Thats a joke.Smaller doses of the joker Zaid Hamid would help in dispelling this notion.If Muslims would be ruling India why did Jinnah feel that partition was the only solution for Muslims .This rubbishes your claim that Muslims would rule India.
@ rajan: it's true that the ahmedis are discriminated against not only in Pakistan but in other Muslim countries as well (I will not go into the reasons why this is so, because a non-Muslim would not understand). But remember, Pakistan has never claimed to be a secular country (as India does). Indians (specially the Hindus living in North and West India), despite their so-called "secular" constitution, are extremists, as proved by the frequent killings of Muslims, Christians and Sikhs. If minorities are "thriving" in India, you wouldn't find so many Indian Parsees and Christians living in foreign countries. One Jewish or Parsi general doesn't mean much, btw we have yet to hear of a Muslim general or admiral or air marshal in the Indian armed forces, despite Muslims being more than 15% of the Indian population. Do you know the reason for this?
Shakir The UN had appointed a US admiral to oversee the plebisicite,once the conditions were met.The first condition was that Pakistan troops withdrew from Kashmir.This condition was not met or else the Admiral would have started the procedure of conducting the plebiscite.If Pakistan had fulfilled the first part of the UN resolution they could then point the finger at India.What was stopping Pakistan from fulfilling this condition when Nehru was PM.Pakistan also has troops on POK border,just like India.India may have more troops to control the infilteration
@Shakir Lakhani: Regardless of where you might have been born, your knowledge of India is clouded by an in born hatred of India, something so very quintessentially pakistani....... Your notion that muslims have undergone genocide in india is patently false...yes there have been horrible massacres..nellie, bhagalpur, gugarat but genocide.....my foot. As my previous post explains, the only population group that has declined in percentage in India since independence has been the hindus. This is a fact. Every minority in India has thrived from the parsees and,jews to christians and sikhs.Just a little nugget for you, when Gen 'tiger' Niazi surrendered in Dakha (1971), he he did so to two indian generals, one a Jew and the other a Sikh (both commanded by a parsee). That was in 1971.....India now is even better. Can you say the same of pakistan?? What kind of a country is it where an Ahmedi cannot call his place of worship a mosque, without fearing for his life. As for partition, that was without doubt the best thing to happen to India.We managed to excise ourselves of a malignancy....that unfortunately is spreading to other parts of the world as a terrorist menace. Just ask the Bangladeshis about how they feel of 1971 and whether they would like to re do the bifurcation. Finally as for Kashmir, get a life. India will not allow for a partition, UN resolution or not.
@Shakir Lakhani:
You betrayed yourself by just one mistake. "the number of Indian Muslims is less than half of what it should be, owing mainly to forcible conversions but also due to genocide", If you would have known anything, I mean anything even an iota (Hope being an engineer you would know what iota is), then you would have known that no one can be converted to hinduism. Like jews you are born hindu, no one can convert a muslim to hindu. You have seen hindus being forcibly converted to Islam in Pakistan and thought that it will be nice to put the same allegation on hindus. But your lack of knowledge gave you up. You were amazed on the lack of knowledge of Indians about Pakistan, but they don't claim to the contrary. Whereas you claim to be an engineer, know everything about kashmir, water problem, India's disputes with Bangladesh, Tamils, maoists, even Maldivs and also the exact financial status of more than 70% Indians (according to you more than 800 million Indians live on less than 1/2 $ a day) but you don't know a simple fact that whatever happens to Muslims in India, they will not be converted to the majority religion.
Shame on you for your falsehood.
First of all, something about myself. I was born in India and have close relatives in Mumbai and Gujarat, so you can't say that I know nothing about India (in fact, many Indians have told me that I know more about India than they do). Secondly, the number of Indian Muslims is less than half of what it should be, owing mainly to forcible conversions but also due to genocide. Thirdly, Azad Kashmir is not populated by people from other parts of Pakistan, in fact many Kashmiris have migrated to other Pakistani cities. Not many Indians know that there are many Hindus in Pakistan (my family doctor, for instance is a Sindhi Hindu). Relatives of L. K. Advani and Juhi Chawla still live in Karachi. I'm astonished sometimes how little knowledge of Pakistan do Indians have. Finally, I wonder whether Indians have ever realized how much they have lost (in economic terms) by treating Pakistan as an enemy from day one. If India had not annexed J&K (or Hyderabad and Junagadh), there would have been peace between the two countries, and India would have been the major trading partner of Pakistan, besides of course saving the enormous amount spent on maintaining 700,000 troops in Indian-occupied J&K.
@Dr Priyanka: I fully agree with your comments that Indian Muslims are not treated as second class citizens but on the contrary, they have made a lot of progress since Independance and contributing a great deal in the development of this country. I am proud to be secular and have Muslim friends and we also participate in each other's religious festivals and other functions.
@ET : Thank you for not posting my comments. But I would respectfully expect a mail explaining where in my comments did I make any attack on an individual, group of individual or country ? If exposing the contradiction to mr Lakhani's comment above is a crime then please feel free to delete this comment too. @Lakhani : Hopefully this message goes through. You claiming to be engineer does not make you expert in water flow manipulation and in no way still establishes your conspiracy theory and claims. What irritates an intelectual being is someone like you just makes claim and not establish anything. Very much same as Pakistan always claims India's hand in Balochistan uprising but never ever able to provide any evidence to it. Unlike what India did for Pakistani's involvement in mumbai attack. Is it too difficult to understand the rational and need behind establishing what you claim ? Can you provide any substantial evidence on what ever you said above whether it is for Kashmir or river issues ? I would recommend you do some reading and provide us materials so we get opportunity to correct our version ( if we are wrong ) about everything from Kashmir to water issues. And please dont refer to articles published and preached by madrasas. Your engineering skills can be well used to do an unbiased academic research on every topic you touch based from independent and neutral sources. Peace!
URDU: Dekho duniyawaloon! Yeh Lakeer key fakeer ... Chillatey hain galiyon mein, 'Taqbeer! Taqbeer!' Wuah! Wuah! Shabash! Hamare kal key beer, Kya aisey sanwarengey aap, bigdee taqdeer? . ENGLISH: Let the world witness these belligerents. They shrill aloud, their demands, sans reasons. Bravo! These stubborn sons of morrow. Odd is their solution to heal the wounds of history.
@Shakir Lakhani: Your statement 'Muslims in India are second class citizens' is something which is inappropriate and you are committing a factual error when you say that. I hope you understand what you are saying. Because you donot live in India you donot know the truth. Go to Hyderabad India and see for yourself. Then you shall realise your mistake. Half the girls in medical school with me in Hyderabad were muslims. And my boss was a Khan and she owned 35 houses in Hyderabad. There are many examples. I think there is some gap in communication between your country and the rest of the world. I would suggest that you try and do some homework before you make such comments. Kudos to all Indians who inspite of so many religions live in harmony and lead very exciting lives. There are still problems, for example poverty needs to be eradicated, hopefully we can sort out that problem too.
@Shakir Lakhani: Sir, if you are indeed an engineer as you aver, you should know: 1. Water cannot be blocked by weirs. Weirs are essentially constructed to facilitate navigation. 2. Sure, dams can be built but even they cannot block water from flowing downstream after they have been filled. So, the water may reduce during the filling period but that cannot be for ever. Indus treaty allows India to build such run-of-the river projects for electricity production. 3. Water can be diverted after building a dam which India has done in one case but total quantum of water flowing to Pakistan has remained unchanged. India can do that under the IWT , for your information. 4. There was practically no activity because of obvious reasons of paucity of resources before Indus water treaty was signed, much less "frequently". 5. Sir, confine yourself to India-Pakistan affairs. You do not speak for Bangla Desh which was made amply clear by the people of Bangla Desh when they kicked you out. It is for those two countries to sort out any problems between them. Do NOT -repeat NOT-poke your nose where it doesn't belong. 6. All cases Pakistan has taken to arbitration after purposely frustrating India's efforts to settle them mutually have been decided by World Bank neutral arbitrators in India's favour proving that there is no other purpose in Pakistan's wailing and groaning and complaining and cribbing but perverse mischief due to its pathological anti-India mindset. 7. Continue this kind of behaviour, and you will eventually succeed in strengthening those in India (mostly in the state of J&K) who want India to unilaterally abrogate the treaty ( I suppose you do know that either state can do that!). After that Pakistan has absolutely no recourse but to wage another war to force its point of view on India and, if you have taken the results of Indo-Pakistan wars to your heart, that should be absolutely not the way you should be going.
Plebicite, Plebecite and that is the answer for the people of Kashmir. UN needs to review its policies in a more just and fair manner and be more sensitive towards the poor muslims of Indian occupied Kashmir and honor the UN resolution. Keeping in view the fast and quick UN action taken in East Timur and South Sudan - UN should do it for the Kashmiris too, and thereby promoting peace and defying suppression, oppression and illegal Indian occupation.
Whether India realises it or not, the only solution to Kashmir is by respecting the United Nations resolution that calls on India to hold free and fair elections there so that people can choose their destiny. As for Pakistani Kashmir, Indians conveniently forget that most of Pakistani soldiers who die fighting there against India are locals, whereas the Indians have to bring in soldiers from far flung areas of India to fight there.
@Shakir Lakhani: The muslim population of India has NEVER declined in any of the many census surveys since independence. On the contrary, it has increased.Can u say the same of hindus in pakistan now?? India is indeed a secular republic, unlike pakistan which despite all its trappings of 'democracy' is nothing but a military theocracy, with 2 constitutional classes of pakistanis: the muslim and the lesser, non-muslim. India has its castes, but before the law all are equal. Had india 50 years ago, done away with article 370, there would be NO insurgency of the type you see now in J&K. Because J&K would be full of malayalees,tamils,bengalis,gugaratis,marathas,biharis,oriyas and so on.....kind of what POK is right now filled with punjabis,pathans,sindhis and so on. You see, if that had happened, there would no need to station"700,000' troops in Kashmir.
LoC as an international border is unacceptable to the Kashmiris. Acknowledging that giving the right to Kashmiris to exercise their inalienable right is 'giving up' Kashmir is a start. Shows how much Kashmiris want to stay with india, indians are atleast learning something.
@ G. Din: Sir, I'm an engineer, I know river water flowing into Pakistan through weirs can be blocked and diverted elsewhere, dams can be built upstream (as India has done on the River Chenab) so that water reduces to a trickle before the river enters Pakistan. Since India was doing this frequently, Pakistan had to raise the issue in international fora and finally in 1960, the Indus Waters Treaty was signed in Karachi by Pandit Nehru and President Ayub Khan. And India has done the same thing in the east, making Farakkha Barrange on the Brahmaputra before it flows into Bangladesh.
Any Pakistani leader who agrees to make the ceasefire line an International Border is going to get himself into an awful lot of trouble. There can be no other solution but for India to hold the UN referendum it promised. How can we have normal relations with a country that just invaded, occupied and annexed a neighbouring country?
India has been carrying out a campaign of state-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir since 1947. Internationally, Kashmir is a disputed territory under claim by Pakistan. Its so funny when Indians try to rebuke their frustration by parroting the Balochistan card. Balochistan, as per legal instruments, is part of Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir, per legal instruments, is a disputed terroritory controlled by India. See the difference?!!
Whoever brings up the Balochistan issue should also have the guts to face and accept independent Khalistan, Tamil Eelam, Maoist north-east India, Greater Bangladesh (including all of Indian Bengal) and the island dispute rightfully claimed by Maldives. Make all these independent, then we can talk about Balochistan.
@Abdul, LOC is the solution ..thats it .. you can take yourself into the sea then!
@R S JOHAR:
Take it out of the sea then! The plebiscite is the solution thats it.
@Shakir Lakhani: "...India has consistently blocked river water flows into Pakistan right from 1947 to present times...." Please do NOT repeat these stupid assertions unless you, at the same time, explain how India did it and what did India do with all the waters when India "blocked" entire rivers! Have some brains,man!
@ Tony Singh: "we the children of the people displaced during partition also want referendum on partition itself". You can't reverse partition. Even my family had to flee from Hindu mobs to safety in Pakistan. Partition was necessary, since Muslims knew they could never survive in a united India. Over the years I've come in contact with Indians and I'm struck by the fact that most Muslims in India are still second-class citizens (I'm not talking about the few who have made it to the top, like Shahrukh Khan or Azim Premjee). On ships owned by Indians, I have never met a Muslim officer. Even in Karachi (a pre-dominantly Muslim city), there were only three Muslims in the Karachi Port Trust before partition (a peon, a clerk and a watchman-no officers). Of course there were Hindus, Christians, Parsis and Sikhs in all Pakistani firms before partition, but very few Muslims. This is what partition and the creation of Pakistan achieved: empowerment of the sub-continent's Muslims.
@Abdul Rehman Gilani: If you want plebiscite in Kashmir, then we the children of the people displaced during partition also want referendum on partition itself. Why only Kashmiris should have special treatment? Any comments??
Kashmir had a Hindu ruler and Muslim residents, so Kashmir went to India. On the other hand, Hyderabad and Junagadh had Muslim rulers but Hindu residents, so (again) India invaded and annexed the two states. True face of Indian "secularism"!
@Abdul Rehman Gilani: The plebisite like OBL has been burried in the deep seas since long and time has to solve this sixty years old chronic problem more realistically or maintain staus quo.
@ Nick Haynes: India is interested in retaining Kashmir because all Pakistan's rivers originate from there. India has consistently blocked river water flows into Pakistan right from 1947 to present times. "The UK has clearly recognized the accession of the erstwhile Maharajah as valid". Doesn't matter, because the U.N. still recognizes J&K as disputed territory. Moreover, recent findings have proved that the Maharaja signed the instrument of accession after Indian forces invaded J&K. "India is not a Hindu republic, it is secular". Ask the husbands of Muslim women who had their wombs ripped and foetuses fed to the dogs by Narendra Modi's mobs. "25% of Pakistanis in 1951 were non-muslim". That was when East Pakistan (with about 20% non-Muslims) was a part of Pakistan. Moroever, even three years after partition, the Muslim population of India was more than the Muslim population of East & West Pakistan, according to Sardar Vallabhai Patel. So, today, India's Muslim population should be 330 million at least instead of 150 million. Where are the missing 180 million Muslims? Slaughtered in the many communal riots since 1947 or converted to Hinduism?
Fact is the only solution is not making LOC the border, but the plebiscite! Intransigent behavior should be adopted.
@Nick Haynes:
Fact is that its history that Hari Singh backdated that agreement with india, and even if it is accepted in spirit, Hyderabad(Deccan) rightly belongs to Pakistan as well as Munavadh and Junagadh!
If what your saying is true, why doesnt india act as a big brother and have the plebiscite? Why are they afraid of the results!
Everyone is forgetting the following facts:
Only the Kashmir valley (which has 9% of the area of Indian Kashmir) has a muslim majority. The rest of the state does not. The entire population of India-controlled Jammu & Kashmir is less than 1% of India's population, and is therefore demographically insignificant for India. The UK has clearly recognized the accession of the erstwhile Maharajah as valid. In fact, Mountbatten himself ordered Indian Army to fight the Pakistani guerilla invasion of Kashmir. India does not believe in two-nation theory so it does not matter to India whether Kashmiris are muslims or jews. India believes they are Indians just like any other citizen of India, and India is not a Hindu republic, it is secular. Pakistan's record of protecting minorities has been shameful, 25% of Pakistanis in 1951 were non-muslim (22% Hindu and 3% others). What has happened to them? Under what promise can the minorities in Kashmir feel assured to be a part of Pakistan?Lets face the fact that neither India nor Pakistan will part with even one sq inch of land held by each of them respectively and there is no military solution to this intricate problem. Therefore, converting LOC into IB is the most feasable solution as suggested by the writer.
@Shakir Lakhani
answer to ur all questions.
1>That so-called freedom strugle wouldn't have been successful without you.
2>India has many muslim dominated parts, and many of them would say for freedom.Then that doesn't mean that India will give all independence.what an absurd logic ? If it so,then tell ur so-called ever green friend china to give indepence to muslim dominated Xinxiang, I sure after independence they will join with u and you will be even greater than India. Do u have guts ?
Now my question to you
1>why do you want us to free kashmir when you know that even kashmiris are not interested in pak to join? If any kind of violence arises in Kashmir,that will be resolved by police and army and that has been done till now.But don't remain in hope that Eask pakistan like case will arise. After all billion plus people are behind this. Now there is no power in this world ,to say against India.
2>when are u going to free G-B ? Now they are protesting according to G-B association in USA.
3>When are you taking back the portion offered by u to china ? when.....
@shakir, There is a freedom struggle in balochistan and soon muhajirs can ask sindhudesh as per Mirza outburst .You can start giving freedom to balochistan and then talk about tibet ,chechenya,kashmir,syria and where ever people asks indenpendance from dictators or governments.
To all those who wants to see a plebiscite in J&K
Please read the UN resolution 47
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/047/72/IMG/NR004772.pdf?OpenElement
The very first statement (A.1.a) asks Pakistan to withdraw all tribesmen and Pakistan nationals from J&K ! This was to facilitate a plebiscite. Do it and India will conduct a free and fair plebiscite !!
@ James: India has rejected the plebiscite option time and again. Secondly, there is no freedom struggle in Azad Kashmir, so Pakistan doesn't need to keep 700,000 troops there, as India is doing in Indian-occupied J&K. Thirdly, if the people of Indian-occupied J&K want independence, why not set them free? Is it because they're Muslims (not Christians, like the people of East Timor or South Sudan)?
Shakir, The referendum/plebiscite should include the the whole of Kashmir,including POK and the part handed over to China.If Kashmir is disputed,then how did Pakistan hand over part of Kashmir to China without taking the wishes of the Kashmir people into account.The UN resolution states that Pakistan army should first vacate Kashmir before any referendum takes place.Can you see that happening in the future.The demography of the population has also changed .In POK Punjabi's have settled in Kashmir.On the Indian side Pandit's have been driven out.For your information ,no Indian is allowed to purchase land in Kashmir.This law was made to maintain the status quo.The conditions for a UN sponsored plebiscite can therefore never be met.Pakistan is also not in favour of an independent Kashmir.A recent poll in Kashmir showed that the majority of Kashmiri's prefferred independence.The only solution is to accept the line of control as the border and in time allow free movement of people.
Kashmir was never ceded to India, Mohan Ram can ask the Kashmiris for confirmation.
@Shakir Lakhani: We are after the part of Kashmir you control currently and also Gilgit Baltistan.