Pakistan

Two thirds in Indian Kashmir want independence: poll

The poll, conducted for Sunday Hindustan Times, showed that 66 per cent of respondents wanted complete independence.

Afp September 12, 2010

NEW DELHI: About two thirds of residents in India Kashmir want independence for their region, with less than one in ten seeking a merger with Pakistan, a survey showed Sunday.

The poll, conducted for the Sunday Hindustan Times newspaper, showed that 66 per cent of respondents in the Kashmir valley wanted “complete freedom to entire Jammu and Kashmir as a new country.”

Only six per cent in Kashmir wanted a “complete merger of the entire Jammu and Kashmir in Pakistan.”

The desire for independence for the state is not shared in the Jammu and Ladakh parts however, where 76 per cent and 70 per cent wanted a “complete merger” of the state into India.

Respondents were also asked who was to blame for a current wave of unrest in the Kashmir area where young stone-throwers have clashed with security forces for the last three months.

Seventy protesters and bystanders, some children, have been killed, mostly by security forces who have fired on demonstrations.

In Kashmir, 56 per cent blamed India for the unrest, while 44 per cent of those asked in the "rest of India" thought Pakistan was responsible for stirring up trouble.

Majorities in all areas concurred that Indian forces should not use bullets against protesters, with 96 per cent saying it was wrong in Kashmir, and 85 per cent in the rest of India.

Two thirds thought it was wrong in Jammu, while 31 per cent said it was acceptable.

The poll was conducted by Team CVoter and canvassed 2,369 people.

Curfew in Kashmir

On Sunday, Indian security forces enforced a strict curfew in much of Kashmir, after protests erupted on the first day of Eid.

Thousands, including women and children, marched through the city and held demonstrations at its historic business centre.

Protesters hoisted green Islamic and Pakistani flags atop a clock tower and later police blamed them for setting fire to a government building that housed the offices of the force's crime branch and power development department.

Separatists, who led Saturday's protests, blamed "anti-movement elements" for setting fire to the building and called for a probe into the arson.

Police said they had imposed a curfew on Sunday to prevent further violence.

COMMENTS (88)

Deb D | 14 years ago | Reply Hi Folks!! I would like to say, that please ask the government to give some aids instead of rigid curfew.If you will try to pinch a bleeding with a rusted blade it can become septic, which may result in future amputation.We as the people of India should all together send the message to Kasmiris that we are with them and we accept them with love and care. They are angry with the nation no probs!!... we can win there support as a nation not as an individual. If our countrymen take initiatives that whole nation stand up and say Kasmiris are our bro n sis and we can't stay apart from them.I think they will understand.If we together send hand written mails to kasmirians that we are with them. Because our whole nation is like family if some one gets angry its our duty to console them with love. Thanks & Regards, Deb

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Isfand – Bro, in democracy people have right to express their anger and if such anger is out of some genuine hardship, it is the duty of every state to address it. Sometimes, the cause of anger is not what is visible on surface. It is at the first instance, duty of the J&K government and its polity to address it. The loss of lives of normal citizens is inhuman and the cause of it is to be realized by main stream polity. It is our government and we have to pull the strings to bring it on right path. Same is the case with normal citizenry. It is for them also to realize how they can make their representatives accountable. The young lives are not to waste, but to canalized them for their own development and for the development of the society. I hope better sense will prevail on the elected representatives to douse the fire. I have little hope from the saparatists as their agenda is different and guided either by wrong notions or from somewhere else. Inshah Allah, J&K will flourish for happiness of all.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Isfand | 14 years ago | Reply @Mohammed Taufeek Even if in past Pakistan has interfered in Kashmir,this time is really an indigenous protest,even the indian goverment knows tht Pakistan has nothing to do with the riots of these days. You said "well we are happy to be a part of india" comon i really adivce to thnk more carefully when you write,if it is as you say....why these ritos?why the majority of kashmiri wants an independent Kashmir?.......... Best Regards

Mohammed Taufeek | 14 years ago | Reply well we are happy to be a part of india. they are providing us all kind of facilities and security. I know its pakistani propaganda to disturb piece of kashmir valley. I have seen in reports how people in baluchistan and so called azad kashmir are living. No development work have been done by pakistan in those areas. pakistan is exploiting its occupied kashmir. Compare indian and pakistani kashmir. You will definitely note the difference.Indian govt is spending lots over jammu and kashmir.even govt here has not allowed indians of other states to live in kashmir. Well we are happy with india to be a part of it. I request pakistan that please dont interfere with our matters.

jai | 14 years ago | Reply kashmiris already have freedom in India. What they don't have is freedom to kill and persecute non-muslims by forming an Islamic state like Pakistan. Your freedom does not include the freedom to take away the freedom of others. One's rights end where the rights of others begin.

Isfand | 14 years ago | Reply @SKChanda Btw your prevous comment is simply impressive,if Tribune ever organize some kind of "Comment Awards" your comment will definitly win under the category "Most articulated,complex,lenghty comment" : D I even saved it so in future i can read/study it as a article on kashmir,partition : ).

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Isfand – Thanks man. We have got a good buffer between hard liners and India. I am much worried about Kashmiri? What we could not get for Punjab, Sindh, Bengal etc. i.e. the people to people contact, at least we can hope between the two parts of Kashmir. Differences apart, we enjoyed free expression of views for the first time on Pak daily. My thanks to the Tribune. @ Jahanzaib Haqua – Thanks to you especially for bearing our lengthy comments, though it has not become as intense as you see at TOI or HT. All the best to you. My sincere thanks to all my Pakistani brothers for bearing us and listening the other view point. SKChadha

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Isfand, Lol. Definitely, man. In hindsight, partition has shielded India. Cant thank Jinnah enough. :P

Isfand | 14 years ago | Reply @Anoop "buffer against massive instability and violent neighbourhood" hahahaha so there is something for which you have to be gratefull to Pakistan and pakistanis, we are sacrificing ourselves so you can continue to grow annunally at 7-8%(gdp) : D Say Thanks : ) btw i think with a united India, afghanistan would have been much better,gov of India have always critical toward Taliban,Paksitan govt only after 11th september,and even in tht case we all know tht Mussharaf was doing a double game with the Usa Best Regards

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Isfand, I agree with you on most of the points. The way forward on Kashmir I think is everybody's second choice,i.e., make the borders or LOC or whatever you want to call it as soft borders. Allow trade and allow Kashmiris on the both side to visit each other on special permits. Give Kashmir valley as much autonomy as mentioned in the Indian constitution in Article 371. Pakistan must do the same. As Manmohan Singh has said make the borders irrelevant. Thats the only feasible solution. The current Status Quo is suitable for India so the terms of the future agreement has to be along its terms. But, that doesn't mean other's interests should be forgotten altogether. Regarding Akandh Bharat, I dont support it. Who wants to live next to the Taliban? Pakistan acts as a buffer against massive instability and violent neighbourhood. I dont know why people are giving importance to fringe elements.

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Agnostic Muslim Agnostic Sahib – Thanks to Tribune, Lagta Hai Aap Kuch Jyada Hi Agitate Ho Rahe Hain. That is why from Kashmir you reached to Hydrabad and Junagarh. But first let me deal with your blah blah blah on Hidutva, Kashmir, Siachin and plebiscite. (a) You bring the word ‘Hindutva’ to associate it with expansionist and colonialist vision. Is it true? What will be your views if I also associate ‘Islam’ with same terminology? Agnostic Sahib don’t try to denigrate any religion by associating it with your own thought process. Try to dig the words ‘Sindhu or Hindu’ in vocabulary and my reply to you on this point will be clear to you. You and I are having blood of this genome only in our veins. May be little percentage different in your veins …. I am nobody to comment about that. Yes, colonialist vision of Pakistan was quite apparent in East Pakistan. Sir, this colonialist vision only led for creation of Bangladesh. This vision is also apparent when you call PHK as ‘Azad Kashmir’ and then broke it by separating Balawaristan. I know Hon’ble Zia’s curriculum will not allow you to digest facts which world recognize. (b) How much ‘AZAD’ is ‘Azad Kashmir’ (PHK)? - Your government says that ‘Azad Kashmir’ is not part of Pakistan and they are AZAD? A big joke for the entire world. I confront you with the following facts: i. The deprived people of Gilgit Baltistan areas do not have the right to appeal in the Supreme Court or the High Court of AK or Pakistan. Not even a criminal or civil case can be lodged with the High Court or the Supreme Court because Gilgit and Baltistan do not fall within the jurisdiction of the High Court or the supreme Court of AK or Pakistan. ii. Despite accession to India, Pakistan engineered attack on Kashmir by tribal and their regular armed forces. Remember, people in Gilgit and Baltistan liberated their areas without Pak assistance, but Pak ruled it trough a resident for 26 years under F.C.R. as the British used to do. The people of Gilgit Baltistan area can not send their elected representatives to any Assembly. Is this 'Azaadi'. iii. These Azad areas do not have their own currency, postage stamp, UN membership etc. etc. (the list is long). iv. High ranking officers like Chief Secretary, Finance Secretary, I.G.P etc for AK come from Islamabad. Is it Azad Kashmir? v. During ZA Bhutto’s tenure, Azad Kashmir Rifles militia was disbanded by Pakistan government and amalgamated with Pak army. Is it Azadi vi. No elections in AK can be fought without taking oath of allegiance to Kashmir's accession to Pakistan. In preceding elections nationalist formed national alliance to fight elections. Their all nomination applications were rejected for not filling accession to Pakistan oath document. Are these people free or enslaved? vii. No Minister, Prime Minister or President in AK can assume office unless he takes the oath of Kashmir's accession to Pakistan. Is that President, PM and the ministers 'azaad' to call their land Azad Kashmir? viii. Nobody in AK can be appointed on any government job unless he/she expresses loyalty to the concept of Kashmir's accession to Pakistan. This is only what the enslaved people have to do, not the free people. ix. AK does not get royalty of Mangla Dam or its share of foreign exange earnings nor the share towards tax realizations and sales tax. A region and people providing energy resource to others without asking for its cost and allowing its own people to remain deprived. Looking another Side NWFP get royalty of Terbela Dam. x. For the last 50 years, people in AK have been held hostage to "so-called freedom of Kashmir". People finding no avenues of subsistence in their land, emigrate to Middle East, Europe and other lands to labour untiringly and keep themselves living. During past 8 years of turmoil in the valley very few people have immigrated to foreign countries, but in AK innumerable numbers have emigrated in search of livelihood.Thousands of AK youth do menial jobs in Rawlpindi, Islamabad, Lahore etc. Sir, I have described only few facts, the list is long ….. better not to talk of all factors? That is why I say, there is no use after 63 years of your croaking for plebisite in Kashmir? I repeat again and remind you to please read UNHCR’s 2008 report clearly determined that Pakistan administered Kashmir was 'Not Free'. It also criticized the Pakistani Government saying the appropriation of land in the Northern Areas by non-Kashmiri migrants from elsewhere in Pakistan, with the tacit encouragement of the federal government and army, has led to dwindling economic opportunities for the local population and an increase in sectarian tension between the majority Shia Muslims and a growing number of Sunnis. The same report determined that the Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir was 'Partly Free'. http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,USCIRF,,PAK,,48556999c,0.html (c) Now I come to Bangladesh – The treachery with ‘Awami League’ by Mr. ZA Bhutto and Gen. Yahya Khan is probably known to you and I will not go into that. Yes, if you want to know as to who broke Pakistan, please read Hamid Mir’s analysis in Dawn’s Editorial at link: http://www.thenews.com.pk/editorial_detail.asp?id=169180 . I think this will be sufficient for you. (d) Now I come to Siachin – 1985 Siachen Line of Control, ended at the foot of the glacier. Rest of it was unmarked. It was no man’s land. Pakistan started mountain expeditions on the glacier and made it a sneaking area, claiming it part of Pak controlled territory. India made diplomatic protest. Pak claimed the glacier was its! India moves in to assert its control. Pak loses again and Siachen was firmly under Indian control. Sir, no lesson learned and it is Pakistan which placed it in Indian lap. (e) Balawaristan Region – The reason now given by you that it is separatist’s propaganda is funny. As on such facts only you reject India’s claim on Kashmir. Though, India hold valid accession documents for entire J&K suzerainty. Hold regular elections. The people of J&K elect their own government; also send their representatives to the Parliament of India. The number of Members of Parliament that too from different political spectrum from J&K held ministerial posts in Central Government of India. Agnostics Sahib even the Nehru family also represent Kashmiri. Trace the origin following leaders e.g. Jawahar Lal Nehru, Indra Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Abdullah’s, Saifuddin Soj and Mufti Mohammad Sayeed the list is long. They all are Kashmiri. What a great loyalty to the people of AJK and Balawaristan …… really appreciable??? (f) Your quoting History of Partition about Hydrabad and Junagarh – During partition there were 562 princely states in the sub-continent which were not part of British India. The British Crown abandoned them and given them a choice to accede to either India or Pakistan or remain outside them. It is a fact that these states were given choice but due to "geographic compulsions" of such States, Mountbatten took the position that only states that shared a delineated common border with area designed as Pakistan should only accede to Pakistan otherwise it would lead in chaos and both Pakistan and India would look like polka dots. In this creation of area Congress and Muslim League were also of the similar view and were part of division. The British Crown territories to be acceded to Pakistan were also decided with discussions and approval of Muslim League. The division of India-Pakistan was in fact division of warring political parties i.e. INC & ML for their own political future. ‘Aap aur Hum to Mohra Hain’. Please show me any historical document in which Kashmir at any time was part of Pakistan? Nobody at that time predicted huge and uncontrollable mass migration. The main reason of present hostility is migration, looting and personal scars inflicted by both communities on each other. Mountbatten did not have power to impose his abovementioned point of view on the states. Political parties looking into the bloodshed, as it usually happens, distanced themselves from this tacit understanding and placed entire blame on Mountbatten. Hydrabad – Nizam of Hyderabad wished to remain independent or to accede to Pakistan. However, this triggered largest armed rebellion of agriculturists at that time. As Hyderabad was landlocked area within Indian part, Congress put economic blockade. The Congress led government at centre also used military force (Operation Polo) against the landlocked princely state of Hyderabad which was successful and on 17.09.1948 the Nizam signed an Instrument of Accession to the Union of India. Agnostic Sahib, at that time what was important was approval of Accession from Princely States for legality of the territory between warring political parties. India being secular, Congress tried its best to woe Muslim population so that they stick to India and India should have larger territory. On the other hand Muslim League after partition was interested in having all Muslim leaders on its side and who so ever opposed it, had become religious traitor for ML and example is Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad. For Indians he is hero and I don’t know how you rank him. The Muslim leaders loyal to Congress were having their interests in India and did not want to migrate to Pakistan. These leaders also played major role in the whole process to unite the territory of India. Junagarh State – Junagarh State included Mangrol and Babariawad Jagirs. Nawab of Junagarh expressed its desire to join Pakistan though it was not having common border with Pakistan. The Nawab successfully argued about the sea link to attach it with Pakistan. Mangrol and Babariawad Jagirs of Junagarh were Hindu dominated and they declared independence and nawab of Junagarh with its mighty force re-occupied these territories. Junagarh was surrounded by Hindu dominated area and they enforced its blocked. The clashes happened and Nawab of Junagarh fled to Pakistan. His Dewan SN Bhutto invited India to intervene to avoid the bloodshed and preserve law and order pending settlement. Imran Sahib, this Dewan was nobody else but father of Late Julfikar Ali Bhutto, ExPM of Pakistan and founder of PPP. Pakistan Government objected the right of Dewan to call GOI as he was not ruler of Junagarh. Meanwhile, GOI held plebiscite which went in favour of India and the State is merged in India. I am not sure whether Nawab of Junagarh, though he expressed desire to be part of Pakistan, had ever signed the documents of accession to Pakistan. Please enlighten me. History for us is to learn the past and not to create animosity? This we have already seen a lot in past. Over 75% of Indo-Pak population is borne after partition and history of partition is a fact. We have no alternative but to live with this legacy. Agnostic Sahib, ‘Yeh Batware Ki Lakeer Jo Ham Aaj Dedk Rahe Hain, Yeh Hamare Ancestors Ne Hi Khinchi Hai … !!! Khuda, God Ya Ishwar Ne Nahin’. We cannot change History or remove this Lakeer. We have to live with it, whatever twist we give to past and whatever animosity we express. Isn’t it?

Jahanzaib Haque | 14 years ago @All Please reduce the lengths of individual comments or we will be forced to delete them as per our comment policy. Best regards (Web Editor)

Isfand | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic muslim @Anoop @SKChadha @Kashmiri Regarding the indian administrated kashmir,i think is nearly useless now to point out the other country mistakes but instead should simply try solve the issue,we can have mainly have three scenarios 1)An indipendent kahsmir,comlpetly unrealistic simply because India will never let this happen,the pain of another "partition" will be two much,and will set a dangerous example for the union of India. Tht's the reason because even after 70 000 deaths in the valley since 1989,India policies havnt changed a lttle bit. 2)Kashmir as part of Pakistan,another unrealistic scenario simply because the majority of kashmiris dont want it and the India dont want it. 3)The current status doesnt soddisfy complety not one of all three "Parties" In my humble opinion the only long term definite solution is to re-unite Kashmir (pk part and indian part),de-militarize the zone and give it a SPECIAL STATUS so we both countries can share it,it will be part of India and it will part of Pakistan.It will have more autonomy thn the other states so this regions can soddisfied also the kashmiris I know this solution is not really wht Pakistan, India or Kashmiris want but i think this the only solution which can decently soddisfy everyone, the best compromise. Once united we can all ask back the Chinese occupied kashmire. Once we have solved this issue nothig will stop Pakistan and India from becoming each other best friends,we have the same culture,history,languages and ancestors so really kashmir is the only which is holding us back from creating some kind indo-pak federation based on the europe union model,free trade,free circulation of ppl and goods,etc And maybe one day some kind of United states of India with a reunited punjab and bengal. Regarding to Balochistan we should do a similar poll in which we ask them if they want more autonomy(in accordance to JInnah vision for Pakistan in which the regions would have majority of the power and not the federal state,as agreed by the balochi leaders of tht time 1947, unfortunatly today the pk political structure is the contrary) or they want indipendence.I 100% sure tht the vast majority still want to be part of Pakistan,but they simply want the kind of political structure Jinnah promised them.Obvously we simply cant give them independency from Pakistan(to much pain). Wht we must do is simply to create a Pakistan in accordance to Jinnah vision secular and federal with most of the powers in the hand of the regions,Its a shame tht Balochistan even its the region with more resourses thn any other region its still the poores one. Regarding to Akhand Bharat" Even if India have been governed in different periods,by one or more empires (for example two or more in the north,one the south plus all the princely states) the region from pakistani punjab,sindh to east bengal have always been refered as India,some times this definition icluded the north west frontiers regions,balochistan and other times no. (like Italy always considered one nation divided in different smaller states untill reunifincation in the 19th century) But really nobody cant deny as part of the concept and history of India the pakistani punjab and sindh,so all the Indus(from which indus civilization) river region and bangladesh. Pakistan is simply an artifical state made for the muslims of north west India and originally also for the east bengalis. I want to thank tribune moderators as "Kashmiri" did for standing by freedom speech unlike Toi moderators who really seem hard core members of bjp. I want also to thank the indian fellows who read and commented this article,indeed dialogue and exchange of opinion is wht we (pakistani ,indians) need most.

Tauseef | 14 years ago | Reply This comment is in regards to the "alerts" that readers like me receive on their handsets. I expect that these comments are moderated before thay are allowed to be published on the site. Lately, I have been receiving comments that are, shall I say, derogatory towards other people's opinions and hit at their nationalities. I expect the moderators of the website to spare the reader, the pain of any personal or harsh comments, by either editing the comments or blocking them altogether. Regards, Tauseef.

kashmiri says | 14 years ago | Reply @Parvez Mahmud you should have tried to write your bit in support of the people of Kashmir.it will never be published. Incredible India my foot.Express tribune is great even people like Anoop and S.K Chand have found their voice here.Well done EXpress tribune .keep up the good work.

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim, You are missing the point. For a plebiscite to be held the people in the government need people's approval. We will never give them. The only 'plebiscite' can be held is under the Indian constitution in the form of election. Besides, for a plebiscite to be help Pakistan must vacate POK and China must vacate the territory given by Pakistan. You have yourself said that is NOT going to happen. The status quo will NEVER change in Pakistan's favour. India holds just too many cards. Whatever written in the constitution cannot be true unless its grounded in reality. It cannot realistically claim Texas as part of India but it certainly has the authority to guide the government if a plebiscite could be held or not. Well, the constitution is not going to change in this aspect anytime soon, my brother. For that Parliament needs 2/3rd majority and that power is given from the people of India. India is not a dictatorship under Zia to radically change the constitution which will have devastating effects and set up a dangerous precedent. Just for a nuclear liability bill there is so much debate and speculation. You can entirely erase the option of radically amending the constitution. The status quo didn't change when India was at its weakest, its not going to when its on its way to becoming a super power. It can only change in India's favour or wont change at all. When the army comes back to power to oust the 'corrupt' civilian government in few years time then it'll continue the work Musharraf had done and will create 'soft borders'. Thats what we want. If you and other Paksitanis think plebiscite is near by then Pakistan can start by taking out its military from POK and asking China to vacate the Territory it had given. When the plebicite is near then all India has to do is pump in the Muslim populations from the rest of India along with Kashmiri pandits.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @SKChadha: "Agnostic Sahib – You are too much influenced by ‘Hindutva’ ideology and consider it as India’s national agenda." It is not a matter of me being influenced, when people such as you and Anoop keep regurgitating the 'scars of partition' and 'part of India since time immemorial'. It is your viewpoint of South Asia that remains expansionist, based on the myth of 'Akhand Bharat since time immemorial'. Stop using that canard to justify your arguments and I won't have to call you out on what your argument actually implies - an expansionist and colonialist vision. Have you seen this ideology from Indian side in creation of Bangladesh? Have you seen this ideology during SIMLA AGREEMENT when for peace India returned over 90000 POWs to Pakistan for just maintaining status quo at LOC? Please enlighten us how and why Kargil has happened? India did not annex Bangladesh because it would have inherited the insurgency that Pakistan fought - it was a plain and simple pragmatic decision. Though Kissinger's memoirs do illustrate what Indira Gandhi was planning - she apparently thought of both NWFP and Baluchistan as not being Pakistani territory, and as the recent book on RAW illustrates, had plans of invading West Pakistan and dividing it, and backed off only because of US and Soviet pressure. And my simple answer to why Kargil happened is to question you why Siachen happened, right after Simla too. What were you going to do with 90,000 POW's? Was there any advantage to holding them? Following international rules of war in returning POW's after hostilities cease is not something to brag about. Either you are too naive or just keeping your eyes shut to the atrocities being committed in PHK & Balawaristan region (i.e. Gilgit-Baltistan region). Just make a Google search for Balawaristan Bringing up a separatist website that disseminates propaganda to justify your POV does illustrate the paucity of your argument. As for the 'lack of freedoms', that would be pretty much par for the course anywhere in Pakistan given the many military coups, and the restrictions on the press till Musharraf came into power. But the biggest factor that sets Pakistan apart from India on the issue of the disputed territories is that Pakistan is willing to let them choose which nation they wish to be a part of through a plebiscite, India is not. If things in G-B and Azad Kashmir are really as bad as you claim, then these people will not vote in favor of Pakistan - it is as simple as that. Pakistan is not afraid to let these people decide, but India certainly is. The naivete (or deliberate obfuscation) is therefore on your side Chadha sahib, not mine. The respective positions of the two nations themselves indicate which side is more confident of the loyalties of the people of the disputed territory. I repeat, it is India which is time and again facing hostilities from our brothers across the border. The root cause of our division was nothing but religious bigotry. Even today the root cause of such hostilities against India is the same religious bigotry. Grow up man … learn to live with differences. At least agree that we disagree on certain matters …. !!! Nonsense and more distortions. It was not Pakistan that invaded, occupied and annexed Junagadh and Hyderabad illegally, the former a month after it had acceded to Pakistan and before the tribes entered Kashmir. It was not Pakistan that unilaterally violated a commitment to allow the Kashmirs to exercise self-determination to resolve the territorial dispute. And it was not Pakistan that invaded Siached in blatant violation of the Simla Declaration, or supported insurgents and terrorists in East Pakistan to break it apart. Time and time again, from India's creation in 1947, India has acted as an aggressor against Pakistan, seeking to expand its territory at the expense of Pakistan - Kashmir, Junagahd, Hyderabad, Siachen - all of these bear testimony to India's expansionist Akhand Bharat mindset. And sir, let go of your hatred of Pakistan and accept our existence. Once more you betray your true poisoned mindset by calling Pakistan's creation 'the result of religious bigotry'. Being Muslim or Hindu is part of an individual's identity matrix. For Pakistanis in 1947 it became a dominant part of the identity matrix as far as political discourse about their future after the British was concerned. To call this 'religious bigotry' is the equivalent to calling Gandhi and Nehru racists for advocating independence from the British on the basis of 'Indians vs British'. Why did they not instead push for equal rights as part of the British Empire or United Kingdom and remain 'British'? Your resentment of Pakistan's independence and refusal to accept is at the heart of the matter sir. So, to you, 'grow up', and learn to accept reality that there never was an Indian nation-State before 1947, and millions of people on the lands that became Pakistan refused to be part of the nation-State of India that was created, and that you must respect their choice. Learn to respect the choice that the people of Pakistan made Mr. Chadha, learn to respect it. Otherwise there will never be peace.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @SKChadha As I said, 'lets not make fools of each other'. What you referred to is not part of any of the UNSC resolutions passed, and therefore does not represent any sort of commitment by the UNSC to India nor does it represent any sort of obligation on Pakistan given that it was not part of any UNSC resolution. The excerpt from that actual UNSC resolution that I posted supports my last comment to you on this issue. Pakistan was under no obligation to unilaterally withdraw without a UNCIP proposal on demilitarization that India agreed to. The various UN Commissions and rapporteurs offered many pragmatic demilitarization plans that India rejected - surely you are not going to suggest that they were all bought off by Pakistan to offer proposals favorable to Pakistan alone! The assurances were rightfully unacceptable to Pakistan, and the UNCIP proposals did not come close to them, precisely because that would skew the situation in the disputed territory completely in India's favor. Given India's treacherous behavior in invading and occupying Junagadh and Hyderabad, there was good reason to not formalize any of the 'assurances' as a resolution. And again, how many of the UNCIP proposals on demilitarization did India accept? The intransigence was entirely India's - she wanted Pakistan to completely vacate the territory and deploy her forces there, with absolutely no enforcement mechanism available to the UN to ensure that a plebiscite was carried out. The UNSC did not accept that crock of BS from India, and neither did Pakistan.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @Anoop: You have done nothing but repeat the canard of 'its in my constitution'. You just can't look beyond your expansionist and colonialist desire. You can make Mickey Mouse be a living object in your constitution, that does make it reality. The territory of J&K is disputed pending plebiscite, and its accession was conditional pending plebiscite. To incorporate it into India after a violation of those commitments is illegal. As I pointed out, just because your legislators decide to incorporate Texas (or some part of Pakistan using the 'Akhand Bharat from time immemorial canard that SKChadha and many Indians like to regurgitate), that does not make it reality or legal. Let me point out one basic flaw in your 'its in the constitution argument' - you argue that just because its in the constitution it cannot be changed, but your constitution also recognizes ALL of J&K, including the territories under Pakistani and Chinese control, as Indian. Do you honestly believe that either Pakistan or China is going to give up that territory? So what value does your constitution have now on this issue? Your logic would imply that India will remain a perpetually hostile State to Pakistan and China, waiting to invade and occupy territory under our control the moment it sees an opportunity. That is what your 'its in the constitution' canard inevitably leads to. As for communal outrage - that is India's problem. If you cannot control your Hindu extremists, then that is your headache to deal with as much as dealing with Islamic extremists is our headache. And, as pointed out earlier, there have been solutions proposed that go beyond 'winner takes all' in proposing regional plebiscites, or district wise plebiscites or a demarcation along the Chenab river, called the Chenab formula. India still ends up the winner in terms of territory it has acquired since Pakistan would no longer claim the territory of Jungadh that India illegally occupied and annexed after it had acceded to Pakistan, or the territory of the former State of Hyderabad, which India also illegally invaded, occupied and annexed.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @Umar Farooq Seriously though, who would ever want to become part of Pakistan voluntarily? We'll find out if the Kashmiris are ever allowed to exercise their right to self-determination, and one has to wonder why India is still running scared of allowing the Kashmiris to exercise that right promised to them if Indians believe what you stated above ...

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Agnostic Muslim As regards to UN Resolution dated 13.08.1947 – (a) The first draft of the assurances was attached to the resolution and it was placed before Pakistan, which of course, did not accept it. These assurances are available in UN Archives. However, I give it for your information as under: “Resolution on Assurances adopted by U.N. Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) 1948 This resolution was in the form of an assurance provided to India before the main U.N. Resolution of August 13, 1948, was to be implemented. The Resolution on Assurance said:- Responsibility for the security of J&K rests with Government of India. The sovereignty of the J&K Government over the entire territory of the State shall not be brought under question. There shall be no recognition of the so-called Azad (Free) Kashmir Government. The territory occupied by Pakistan shall not be consolidated to the disadvantage of the State of J&K. The administration of the evacuated areas in the North shall revert to the Government of J&K and its defence to the Government of India, who will, if necessary, maintain garrison for preventing the incursion oftribesmen and for guarding main trade routes. Pakistan shall be excluded from all affairs of J&K in particular in the plebiscite, of one should be held. If a plebiscite is found to be impossible for technical or practical reasons, the Commission will consider other methods of determining fair and equitable conditions for ensuring a free expression of people’s will. Plebescite proposal shall not be binding upon India if Pakistan does not implement Part I and II of the resolution of 13th August, 1948. (The resolution had called upon Pakistan to withdraw troops from occupied Kashmir). Note: The UNCIP could not make Pakistan accept these assurances with the result that the very basis of U.N. resolution of 13th August, 1948 collapsed. Source: United Nations” (b) As these assurances were left for discussions and with each discussion papers, and Pak’s adamancy, the issue went on becoming complicated and diluted. The proposal to UN was from India and hence ultimately it was recorded that “India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any form …..”. Please read carefully and understand the language? Agnostic Sahib – This UN recording is sufficient for India, so as nobody in future crock or interfere in this affair at International Forum. Please enlighten me further?

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Agnostic Muslim Agnostic Sahib – You are too much influenced by ‘Hindutva’ ideology and consider it as India’s national agenda. Have you seen this ideology from Indian side in creation of Bangladesh? Have you seen this ideology during SIMLA AGREEMENT when for peace India returned over 90000 POWs to Pakistan for just maintaining status quo at LOC? Please enlighten us how and why Kargil has happened? Isn’t it shameful to refuse dead bodies of valiant soldiers killed in such aggression to fool the world? I am sorry that every problem is in life just by adjustments, especially the governance of the nations. I am not aware of the facts of such adjustments in Pakistan …!!! India asserts that entire J&K including Gilgit-Baltistan is a part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir which is an integral part of India. Either you are too naive or just keeping your eyes shut to the atrocities being committed in PHK & Balawaristan region (i.e. Gilgit-Baltistan region). Just make a Google search for Balawaristan or visit: http://www.balawaristan.net/. Further, quoting UN is also of no use. Please read UNHCR’s 2008 report clearly determined that Pakistan administered Kashmir was 'Not Free'. It also criticized the Pakistani Government saying the appropriation of land in the Northern Areas by non-Kashmiri migrants from elsewhere in Pakistan, with the tacit encouragement of the federal government and army, has led to dwindling economic opportunities for the local population and an increase in sectarian tension between the majority Shia Muslims and a growing number of Sunnis. The same report determined that the Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir was 'Partly Free'. http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,USCIRF,,PAK,,48556999c,0.html I repeat, it is India which is time and again facing hostilities from our brothers across the border. The root cause of our division was nothing but religious bigotry. Even today the root cause of such hostilities against India is the same religious bigotry. Grow up man … learn to live with differences. At least agree that we disagree on certain matters …. !!!

Umar Farooq | 14 years ago | Reply Seriously though, who would ever want to become part of Pakistan voluntarily?

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim, Its like talking to a wall. I know Pakistan's constitution has been raped and bigoted principles have been inserted. But, Indian constitution is for real. There is a real meaning. Constitution does not give anyone authority to change the Territory of India. Parliament has to have 2/3rd majority to change it, which will NEVER happen. Who is going to jeopardize their political future by embarking on such a radical change in the Constitution which would set a dangerous precedent? Its like its written in stone. There can never be a plebiscite in Kashmir. If they go ahead and even attempt to change the constitution then they will lose my vote and many many voters like me. J&K consists of Ladakh and Jammu and they will never want to entertain separatist thought. Plus, India can always push in Indian muslims into Kashmir and change the demography easily without provoking any anger. In 1965 Pakistan wanted Kashmir so bad it attacked us. In tit-for-tat response we did the same in 1971 but succeeded in breaking the country. If you still want to follow that suicidal path, be my guest. India is a future Super-Power. We are already a pseudo-member of NSG. We will get into UNSC also. We are a big elephant nobody can take on or master. People of Kashmir have their issues, I agree. But, the Indian constitution also provides enough autonomy and institution,like the judiciary to solve those issues. If they say they(Some fringe elements) want to join Pakistan just because they are Muslims, then guess what, there are 10 folds more Muslims in rest of India. What about them? Let the Seperatists fight the elections, which they never will, then we can truly see how has the popular support. Use your brain. Will or can India give up Kashmir. Consider the factors: Constitutional impediments, Communal outrage, Origin of Major rivers and most important of them all Setting up of a dangerous precedent in Indian history. If a small power like Israel cant be bullied into giving up land to the Palestinians then how on earth will a Regional power like India will do it, considering all the factors I mentioned in the above paragraph? Its impossible. India has all the cards and the country which claims the land is in war with itself and is on the failed state path and already considered a failed state by many in the world. If India did not give up Kashmir when it was weakest(Post 1990), it will never in its future. Many in Pakistan realize this. Especially few in the military like Musharaff. That is the reason he agreed to all the Indian conditions in the back channel talks. The present or future governments will follow the same agreement and plan. So, dont waste your time. Concentrate on re-building Pakistan after the floods.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @ SKChadha: Please do not distort Noon's comments and make them out to be more than they should be. An adjustment of the LoC and division of the territory of J&K on a regional or even district wise basis depending upon the wishes of the people is still possible. What is not acceptable is the status quo with the LoC beign converted to the IB, and millions in Kashmir being annexed into India against their will. In fact, what your 'quotations that will leave no space' point out is that Pakistan has always been flexible on the issue and willing to move beyond a single plebiscite with 'winner takes all'. It has been open to the argument that the people of Jammu and Laddakh might not want to become a part of Pakistan, and therefore adjustments can be made. It is India that has not budged from its stance of LoC == IB. Agnostic Sahib – Kashmir was always a part of India from time immemorial. Please look towards entire India for friendship, as Indians do, and please not crock Kashmir? Please let us know what are your views of the part of Kashmir under Pakistan’s occupation, though Pakistan calls it as ‘Azad Kashmir’? Please enlighten me if above facts are wrong? May God bless you. Yet another canard that is also illustrative of the expansionist mindset of India - what 'time immemorial' are you talking about? There was no unified Indian nation-State until 1947. Before that it was a colony put together by the British, amalgamated from various Kingdoms and Princely States. Before the British it was just that - a motley of Kingdoms whose borders fluctuated depending upon wars and the strength of their rulers. Let us not start inserting mythological arguments of 'Akhand Bharat' into the debate. If Maurya had a vast Kingdom rising from the East of the sub-continent, then Ghauri and others had vast empires rising from the West and Central Asia. Furthermore, today you raise the canard of 'Kashmir was part of India since time immemorial', to justify Indian occupation and annexation of J&K, but by the same logic you could raise the canard of 'Pakistan (or some part of Pakistan) was part of India since time immemorial' and use that to justify occupation and annexation of parts of Pakistan! Indians need to let go of this expansionist and hostile ideology based on the mythology of Akhand Bharat. India is a nation-State today because in 1947 the peoples comprising today's Indian State joined together in a compact of nationhood. It is not a nation because of some half-baked theory of 'Akhand Bharat from time immemorial'. Indians need to keep this Hindutva ideology out of discourse as much as Pakistanis need to moderate the role of religion in the State and discourse as well.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @SKChadha: Please enlighten us that other than this resolution, to which resolution both India and Pakistan have agreed? We should not make fool of each other. It is not India but Pakistan which skirts the Resolution in its letter and spirit. The dispute about Kashmir is only as regards to the territory you call as ‘Ajad Kashmir’ and we call it as ‘PHK’. As Pakistan calls it ‘Azad’ hence, in its own terminology, its presence in any kind in PHK territory before plebiscite make it an aggressor to this territory. Yes, let us indeed not 'make fools of each other' and leave out the parts of the resolutions that indicate how the demilitarization of J&K was to come about and these conditions on the withdrawal of forces implemented. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND PAKISTAN ON 13 AUGUST 1948. (DOCUMENT NO. S/1100, PARA 75, DATED THE 9TH NOVEMBER, 1948) "Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission." Repeat - 'the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission' - you certainly realize how many commissions and reperteurs were appointed by the UN to formulate a plan agreeable to both India and Pakistan don't you? Please enlighten me as to which proposals on demilitarization and conducting a plebiscite, proposed by the UN commissions, India accepted and how many she rejected? Indeed, India's intransigent attitude towards the pragmatic proposals advocated by various UN commissions is best summed up by the words of this UNCIP representative: "in the end I became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any form or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of such character, as would in my opinion, permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled." UNCIP chief representative The UNSC resolutions never called on Pakistan to just pack up its bags and leave its part of J&K as soon as the resolutions were passed. The UN appointed commissions were precisely for the task of coming up with demilitarization solutions that would not result in one party or the other taking advantage of the others withdrawal and influencing the plebiscite. India chose to reject almost all of the proposals. The fault for non-implementation of the UNSC resolutions clearly lies with India.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply @SKChadha: "It is never claimed that India is a perfect idealistic nation for you to adopt. Please be happy with whatever better democratic setup you have. India has its own problems and so is Pakistan. I am not here to detail your weaknesses. On the other hand your reminding it will also serve no purpose." Then you should have directed that comment at your compatriot Anoop, since my comment that you are responding to was directed at his own 'list of sorry affairs' in Pakistan. Have some intellectual honesty to realize the context in which the comments were made and to whom, and direct your ire at your compatriots, who never miss out on an opportunity to bash Pakistan and its state, first. "The basic difference lies in ideology of our two nations. India is secular and Pakistan is a Muslim country. " I am not really interested in discussing the ideology of my nation with you, nor is it relevant to this discussion. I do not care what kind of country India is, or wants to be. All I care about is the resolution of the dispute of Kashmir in accordance with the commitments and promises made by the Indian State to the international community and the Kashmiri people. Pakistan's ideology is the concern of Pakistanis, and my internet moniker should be pretty revealing in terms of what side of the debate I fall on on that issue. I will comment on the 'scars of partition' comment that you and many other Indians continue to make. The scars are of your own making. There never was a unified Indian nation State. British India, the colony, was built up out of the conquests of various Kingdoms and States that existed in the sub-continent. What occurred in 1947 was in fact the first instance of attempting to create a single nation-State out of South Asia, and a significant section of the people said no! Those millions in the territories comprising Pakistan chose to be part of a separate nation-State. There was no 'wrenching apart of an Indian State'. The people of today's India entered into a compact of nationhood that they thought would serve them well, and the people of today's Pakistan entered into a compact of nationhood that they thought would serve them well. These 'scars', beyond the actual scars of communal violence that was the fault of a hasty partition, are essentially evidence of an expansionist Indian mindset that sees India as complete only as 'Akhand Bharat', encompassing all of its neighbors. It is evidence of a hostile mindset in India. It is time for Indians to stop pretending about 'scars of partition', and accept that there never was this mythological 'Akhand Bharat' and never will be, and the hundreds of millions in Pakistan want nothing to do with it.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Anoop: Your argument of the 'constitution of India overriding everything' is absurd. If tomorrow India passes an amendment in its constitution declaring Texas to be an Indian State, that does not mean Texas is suddenly an Indian State. The UNSC resolutions have made J&K disputed territory and that is how it is regarded internationally. If Indian politicians have made a mockery of their international commitments and promises to the people of Kashmir, then it is their responsibility to fix it. Once cannot justify crimes on the basis of someone arguing that the crimes are 'codified as part of their value system, and therefore must continue'. If the Indian constitution is the problem, then it is the responsibility of Indians to do the right thing and change it, and not argue in favor of the continuation of a crime, the occupation of Kashmir, on the basis of committing a flawed act of unilaterally incorporating the territory into India. BTW, the promise of plebiscite made to the Kashmiris and the international community was not just a promise made by politicians, it was a promise made by the State of India through acceptance of the UNSC resolutions, and it was a promise made by the State of India by virtue of its Governor General conditioning the accession of J&K to a plebiscite.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Neeraj: The UNSC resolutions were accepted by India, Pakistan and the international community as a means of resolving the dispute. Not only that, India invaded and occupied the State of Junagadh that had acceded to Pakistan and then claimed that its annexation into the Indian Union was justified because of the unilateral plebiscite India held in occupied Junagadh. So India herself set the precedent for what was the 'fair' means of resolving the status of disputed territories. As for NATO's presence in Afghanistan, the opinion of the people does not count, it is what the State of Pakistan, as a UN member State, does in support of any UN resolutions passed WRT Afghanistan, and on that count the fact that the State of Pakistan provides logistical support for NATO operations, provides direct military support to the extent is possible given our security and resource constraints etc. clearly indicates where the State of Pakistan stands WRT the UN position on Afghanistan. Your next argument about the sanctions on JuD leader Hafiz Saeed - please look up the UN sanctions on HS and what they require Pakistan to do. They do not require Pakistan to arrest HS or punish him, they merely require Pakistan to restrict his inter-State movement (between nations) along with banning the JuD itself (all of which Pakistan is in compliance with). It is not Pakistan's fault that the UNSC did not choose to carry out a proper trial of the JuD and HS in the ICC or ICJ, and then prescribe a punishment that the GoP could implement. As for your pipe dream of India passing a resolution declaring Baluchistan 'disputed' - you don't just pass resolutions in the UN like that. The UNSC passed resolutions on J&K because of all the turmoil at partition and the fact that India and Pakistan were at war over its accession. Not to mention that India herself argued that the Kashmiris would choose their future nation through plebiscite. None of those dynamics exist vis a vis Baluchistan. It is not contested seriously by any other nation, and its annexation as part of Pakistan has long been accepted. But again, good like with your pipe dreams.

Parvez Mahmud | 14 years ago | Reply I checked TOI and looked at comments and most of them propose killing and throwing out all Kashmiris.This is what Largest secular democracy feels at heart.

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Agnostic Muslim – To cut short let me deal with atrocities you have referred in India and the plebiscite issue in Kashmir. (a) “And what is India’s sorry tale of atrocities and despair?” It is never claimed that India is a perfect idealistic nation for you to adopt. Please be happy with whatever better democratic setup you have. India has its own problems and so is Pakistan. I am not here to detail your weaknesses. On the other hand your reminding it will also serve no purpose. The basic difference lies in ideology of our two nations. India is secular and Pakistan is a Muslim country. Our good wishes for Pakistan, whatever small they are, are directed towards its entire citizenry, whereas voices emanating from Pakistan are directed mainly towards India’s Muslim population only. Hence, such voices from Pakistan are attributed as false motive of our neighboring nation. The feeling would not have pinched so much if India would have also been a religion based State. Religion or faith here is personal to anyone? We cajole, entice, criticize and persuade each other on religious beliefs and enjoy or feel annoyed but do not have feeling of hatred for each other. The voices of Pakistan may be with good intentions, but when they are directed to a particular community or protectionist for a particular religion alone is making more harm only to that community or religion in India. The animosity between the two nations come on forefront and only agitates masses here as also further alienates society. Moreover, such intention creates more mistrust towards motives of our neighboring country. It is fact that religious intolerance still exists in India, but believe me the efforts of our masses are to dose it and not to give air to it. The atrocities are highlighted in mainline media for correction and not for advertising hatred by skewing it in favors of a particular religion. Zia’s blogs are safety valve to vent out such feelings and cool down the fire. We all admire him for his contribution to our society. If you read comments carefully, you will observe that he is lauded for his efforts, even in criticisms. The disliking expressed against Islam or Muslims is only due to the scars of Partition and the terror inflicted from across the border in the name of religion. You can further observe this cross border effect in Mr. Madani’s, encounter with Gen. Musharaff. He is an elite Muslim leader and our Rajya Sabha Member at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1CXrHxC8MY. (b) Now I come to the Kashmir, plebiscite, UN resolution and blah blah blah …. About which resolution of Kashmir you are talking? Is it the following resolution? “1. UN Resolution (Document No. S/1100, Para 75, dated 9th November, 1948) PART I (Cease-fire Order) para B states: “The High Commands of Indian and Pakistan forces agreed to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (For the purpose of these proposals “forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides).” Here reference to “organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities” clearly denotes the tribesmen from Pakistan’s side in PHK. Please also refer Part II (Truce Agreement) para A (2) & (3): “(2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting. (3) Pending a final solution the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission”. Please enlighten us that other than this resolution, to which resolution both India and Pakistan have agreed? We should not make fool of each other. It is not India but Pakistan which skirts the Resolution in its letter and spirit. The dispute about Kashmir is only as regards to the territory you call as ‘Ajad Kashmir’ and we call it as ‘PHK’. As Pakistan calls it ‘Azad’ hence, in its own terminology, its presence in any kind in PHK territory before plebiscite make it an aggressor to this territory. I t is not India which negated UN Resolutions, it is Pakistan which negated it since inception. Please read Mr. Noorani’s article in Dawn at http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/consensus-on-kashmir-550 . It is the dilemma of Pakistan as to the vacation of territory occupied by it as pre-condition for any plebiscite and that too is basically in PHK. It is Pakistan, which was periodically raising and dropping the plebiscite issue in negotiations. Please read following from aforesaid article of Mr Noorani: “What is the status of the Kashmir dispute today? Since 1990 even the US ceased to talk of the UN resolutions. In February 1958 Prime Minister Feroz Khan Noon (of Pakistan) met the US envoy to the UN, Henry Cabot Lodge, in Karachi. Ambassador James M. Langley recorded: “Noon made no mention of a plebiscite and it seemed to me that he was clearly thinking of a compromise which would provide for a territorial division between India and Pakistan.” Noon was no traitor. A few months earlier on April 29, 1957, the UN mediator on Kashmir Gunnar Myrdal had, in his report, pronounced those resolutions as virtually obsolete: “The situation with which they were to cope has tended to change.” That was 50 years ago. On March 23, 1962 Ayub Khan was prepared to drop plebiscite if India offered an alternative. The Z.A. Bhutto–Swaran Singh talks (1962-3) centered on a partition line in Kashmir; not on plebiscite.” Now please don’t blame Mr. Noorani. It is not only he who had narrated the facts. If the quotations start no space will be left for anything else. It is in this context India negates Pakistan’s any claim to PHK and demands its territory back. It is in this context every nation says that UN Resolutions on plebiscite are redundant and Pakistan is mum as it suits them. It is the precise reason for which every Indian say that somewhere in our dealings with Pakistan; India is compromising its sovereignty over the land known as PHK. The Nehru is not blamed for the resolution. He is blamed in India for inapt handling of the matter thereafter in the name of peace. Agnostic Sahib – Kashmir was always a part of India from time immemorial. Please look towards entire India for friendship, as Indians do, and please not crock Kashmir? Please let us know what are your views of the part of Kashmir under Pakistan’s occupation, though Pakistan calls it as ‘Azad Kashmir’? Please enlighten me if above facts are wrong? May God bless you.

kashmiri says | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim thank you,thank you not only to you but to Express tribune also who have not discriminated the publishing of comments on the bases of name and what you want to express.Unlike Indian news papers like times of India it is a dream to voice your concerns/opinions through them unless you are 100%pro Indian and pro government.I have been writing my bit in comments column in Times of India almost every time the news about Kashmir is mentioned,but never will it be published.Any thing against Muslims or Kashmir is well written. Thank you express tribune for you unbiased approach even Indians have been given opportunity to express their opinions this shows Pakistan is morally much developed then India. Now click on the below link and see for your self what Times of India is publishing then try to write your bit in support of Muslims it will never be published. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Dont-push-us-too-far-on-Kashmir-its-ours-Pak-told-US/articleshow/6552306.cms

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim, UNSC doesn't have more authority in India than its people or its Supreme Court. Besides, we are not a pushover country like Pakistan to accept whatever they tell us. Nehru made the promise I agree but the constitution is much more important that any promise made by the elected representatives. Indian politicians have a habit of not keeping their promises, so dont be surprised. Besides, according to the Simla Agreement India and Pakistan will solve their disagreements bilaterally. I am not one of those who dream of a larger India. Besides, who would want to live next to the Taliban? If India was territorial it could easily have taken over Bangladesh. But, we didnt and that shows we are a status quo power. You dont realize the implication of what you are saying. Just because a group of Muslims attacked a train in Godhra hundreds died in the riots that followed. Hindu-Muslim relations have been destroyed by the partition. If what you want happens then God-forbid. Millions would die, probably more than the tiny population of Kashmir. Pakistan, I thought was made for Muslims, I had thought, but they completely ignore the plight of Muslims left behind in the partition. No surprises here as we have seen the gory scenes of 1971 when Muslims attacked Muslims, raped them, tortured them and killed them in former East Pakistan. Pakistan cannot even manage the territory it already has, it has given up large chunk of it to the Taliban(Waziristan) and made districts were recognized as Taliban controlled with whom Pakistan made deals. J&K consists of Hindu Majority Jammu, Buddhist Majority Ladakh and Muslim majority Kashmir. Kashmir is their as much as the people who live there. Lets not forget the Kashmiri pandits who were driven out of the valley by Pakistan supported militants(Who ironically have turned on their masters. I call this Karma). There cannot be a plebiscite in Kashmir, but if there was one jammu and Ladakh would rule over Kashmir and it would be a waste of time for everyone. But, it would set a dangerous precedent which India cannot afford. You dont realize how easy is it for us to quash the rebellion. All we have to do is remove the restrictions of people outside Kashmir settling there, like the Chinese did to Uighurs. But, that would be unfair. There is one way though, the Hurriat can fight the elections and prove they have the people's support. Why do you think they dont fight elections? They can tell the people to consider it like form of plebiscite! They know they wont win. You know that. Use your brain. Pakistan has ruined itself because it wanted Kashmir. Your military has ruined your country. Its on the verge of bankruptcy. It already has lost one wing due to bigoted policies. Pakistan can hold plebiscite in Baluchistan and show us undemocratic Indians what democracy is all about. Until that happens it'd be hypocrisy to ask us to hold plebiscite.

Neeraj, India | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim, So, in your view, UNSC resolutions are nothing but the gospel of truth. It must be revered, feared and adored as Greeks did to the the book, with the same title. OK, lets see what you guys are doing with some of the other gospels of truths i.e UNSC resolutions. Why go far, let us take NATO's presence in Afghanistan. Why a vast majority of Pakistanis never spare a day, sorry, even an hour, criticizing presence of US troops in that country? After all they are there, armed with UNSC resolution, the gospel of truth! There is another gospel of truth for Pakistan as well, it says that you must immediately put an end to the activities of Jamaitul Dawa and it's leader Hafiz Said. But, the man is roaming freely never missing a single opportunity to gulp kilograms of halwa at a single go! As you must be well aware of fact that, the day is not far when India will be sitting in the Security Council as it's permanent member. What if evil Indians succeed in, by hook or crook, getting a ' gospel of truth ' passed in the council, recommending independence of Baluchistan! With your tons of 'intellectual honesty', would you be ready to part with Baluchistan?

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply SK Chadha sahib, I have read the history of Baluchistan, and the fact remains that the accession of the territories comprising the present province of Baluchistan faced no major quarrel or demands for plebsicite, nor was any promised. The minor rebellions by one or two Sardar's here and there don't change that fact. They were far smaller in scope than what India had to deal with in Punjab, and that is in fact the relevant comparison - Baluchistan is better compared with Indian Punjab, given that at partition itself the peoples of neither territory had any issues with annexing to Pakistan and India respectively. Pakistan settled is border with Iran, and regardless of what the Afghans may wish, their rulers demarcated their borders with today's Pakistan when they signed the Durand and forgo their rights over territories East of the Durand Line. And no, before you regurgitate a canard, the Durand had no expiration date and the treaty has not been challenged in any international forum so it stands valid. J&K is a completely different kettle of fish. There remains no agreement B/W India and Pakistan over the border, and the Kashmiris were very clearly promised plebiscite to determine their future status, and this was further committed to by India's leadership in the UN and in India's acceptance of the UNSC resolutions. Further, India's actions in invading and occupying Junagadh (after it had acceded to Pakistan) and justifying that annexation through plebiscite indicates the precedent and importance India herself placed on plebiscite as a means of determining accession of Princely States that were disputed. So the comparison of J&K with Baluchistan just does not cut it. It is time for ordinary Indians to do the right thing, the moral thing, the ethical thing and the legal thing, and petition their government and protest for an end to Indian occupation and the implementation of the plebiscite promised the Kashmiris and the international community. Whether the plebiscite occurs over the entire State as one entity or in the various regions can be decided in negotiations, but the Kashmiris must be allowed to determine which nation they wish to be a part of. True nations are not built upon forced occupation and violated promises - they are built upon the people willingly acceding to a State. The Kashmiris need that promise to willingly accede, or not, implemented.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Anoop: Allowing the Kashmiris to exercise the right of self-determination is not 're-partitioning India' that is just emotional rhetoric thrown about by Indians to justify their occupation. The accession of Kashmir was in fact made conditional to a plebiscite when Mountbatten accepted the instrument of accession, and the Indian leadership committed to it domestically, and in international fora, most notably the UN, and accepted the UNSC resolutions passed on the issue. It is therefore nothing like someone just calling for the partition of India, it is a demand for the fulfillment of commitments made by India to the Kashmiris and the international community. A crime (the forced occupation of Kashmir) cannot be overlooked just because Indians want the world to forget about it. As for partition, only in the delusional minds of Akhand Bharat Indians is it a 'nightmare'. You Indians would do well to finally accept Pakistan's existence and stop whining and crying over our independence. End your moral bankruptcy and fulfill the commitments made to settle the issue of Kashmir through plebiscite. As for the Muslims in India, they can do whatever they want, they are not living in J&K after all, and they chose their home to be India - the Kashmiris were denied their promised right to make that decision. So end your expansionist and hostile policies and allow the Kashmiris to decide through a plebiscite their destiny. True Nations are not built upon forcible occupations of people and their lands, they are built by the willing accession of those people to the idea of a nation. The argument advocated by Indians, of illegally annexing Kashmir despite the wishes of its people, is the Nazi and Colonialist vision of a nation, not that of a true democracy. And Pakistan will be fine, that is for us to worry about. Indians should focus on shifting away from the Nazi State that they have become where occupation and subjugation is justified through some mythological vision of 'Akhand Bharat'. End this philosophy and drive of Indian expansionism and hostility at the expense of peoples and their lands that do not wish to be part of India.

feryal | 14 years ago | Reply India has insurgency raging in 200 of 600 districts - but the US and its allies do not wish to project the reality as India is their bulwark against China in this region. Kashmir is the tip of the iceberg. Survey by Hindustan Times hardly would have credibiltiy. The message is - if we have to give up kashmir so does Pakistan (hence the emphasis on independence as a whole unit with AJK).

maitre | 14 years ago | Reply 'Hindustan Times' survey in Kashmir is true but in India is an exageration (allegation): friends do not take the Indian agencies voting as true as they reflect typically Indian truma of Pakistan. The Kashmiris are struggling for their independance and want to free themselves from the clutches of India. Look at Manmohan Singh who, on one hand, talks about his restlessness due to insurgency in Kashmir, and, on the other hand, uses the Indian forces to kill the kashmiris. He endorses the innocent kashmiris killings in Kashmir. This is a clear Indian double standard. The Kashmiris and Palestinians should be given the right of self-determination and independance; agreed by UNO resolutions.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply "Somebody should do somilar study in Balochistan…I am sure they won’nt comment on this study after that…" Perhaps, but unlike J&K, Balochistan is not disputed territory and does not have UNSC resolutions calling for a plebiscite to determine the future status of the territory, which India committed to several times, and which India's leaders promised the Kashmiris several times. Apparently many Indians just do not have the intellectual honesty to address the dispute and their nation's moral bankruptcy in violating its commitment in the UN to a plebiscite, and instead resort to canards and strawmen like these.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Daubic: And what is India's sorry tale of atrocities and despair? Thousands of Muslims killed in the Gujarat riots by Hindu extremists with the full involvement of a Hindu Chief Minister of Gujarat. Thousands of people killed by extremists in the Babri Mosque riots, after the razing of the babri mosqu by Hindu extremists Hundreds of people killed and Churches burned in Hindu-Christian riots Tens of thousands killed, tortured and maimed when the Sikhs wanted their own homeland Tens of thousands killed in the ongoing Naxal uprising against the State Women stripped naked and paraded in front of entire villages Foreign female tourists raped on an almost daily basis Mob lynchings (yes, they happen in India as well) An even higher poverty rate than Pakistan, with more poor people in the poorest Indian States than in all of Africa And of course, over 60,000 Kashmiris killed in an attempt to subjugate them and continue Indian occupation Indians have no room to be casting stones on these counts. A commitment was made by India in the UNSC and to the people of Kashmir and the international community, a commitment of plebiscite, and that commitment should be fulfilled. BTW, as for a poll in Pakistan on remaining in Pakistan, the most recent PEW survey indicated that 89% of Pakistanis view themselves as Pakistani before their ethnicity, and another 4% view their identity to be equally Pakistani and their ethnicity - the total of those who see their Pakistaniat so strongly is 93%. I'd say that most Pakistanis are perfectly happy living as Pakistanis in Pakistan. Take your Indian distortions, propaganda and canards somewhere else.

Yousaf | 14 years ago | Reply seems like this truth is indigestible....ask them clearly if they want to join Pakistan, otherwise leave them on their fate and concentrate on exisiting territory - where everything is messed up.

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Agnostic Muslim – “The territories comprising the current province of Baluchistan were integrated into Pakistan largely with little issue” To my knowledge, the Baloch ethnicity is also presently divided into a) Sistan Province of Iran; b) Pakistani Baluchistan to which alone you are referring as Baluchistan; and c) Helmand province of Afghanistan. The division is similar to division of Kashmiri, Punjabi, Rajasthani, Sindhi, Bengali etc. etc. What is so special about Kashmir alone? Agnostic Sahib, read the history of Durand Line and the ethnic clashes with Iran. The original homeland of Baloch is north-west Zagros Mountains, Syria, Anatolia and Iran. The area was not part of British Territory but was suzerainty. Please also read the history of Baluchistan's accession to Pakistan and the social uprisings and full arms conflicts. First in 1948 led by Prince Abdul Karm Khan; Second in 1958 by Nawab Nowroz Khan; Third in 1963-69 by Sher Mohammad Bijarani Marri; Fourth in 1973-77 by Nawab Khair Baksh Marri and Fifth which is going on since 2004 to till date in which Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti gave his Shahadat. Please also read the facts of Turbat Killings and the uprising of Khan of Kalat Mir Suleiman Dawood.

User | 14 years ago | Reply Somebody should do somilar study in Balochistan...I am sure they won'nt comment on this study after that...

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Agnostic Muslim, No matter what you and I say, the fact remains that no major power will voluntarily give up a piece of land. Especially a democracy. Add the Constitutional difficulties, Religious uproar and the fact that the rivers that run through or originate from that area you can scratch that option completely. Indian judiciary will not allow a Plebiscite to be held as its against the Indian constitution which does not give any state the right to declare Independence. The Parliament will not allow it because it'll result in the end of their political career and their respective parties will cease to exist. Most importantly, what about the 150 Million Muslims living in India? If you are going to divide India again on Communal lines what would happen to them? Partition was a bad dream and now as a result Pakistan is the nightmare. What ever counter arguments you come up with, its JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. If you have not learned that in the 63 years of Pakistan then I dont know what to say. My advice for Pakistanis is that just concentrate on re-building your almost-bankrupt economy and adoption of Democracy in its pure version. After the US withdraws China is certainly not going to give aid in the massive amounts that Pakistan needs, as we saw with the recent floods where China gave a paltry amount of $10 Million. Even the arch rival India gave more than double the amount. Fight for Kashmiris right to live peacefully as envisioned under the Indian constitution. Its OK if they get genuine autonomy as mentioned in Article 371. There is no other option left. Talking about Kashmir when their own backyard in on fire and Balochistan is having a similar movement like Kashmir, is just not wise. One thing I can say with confidence. If Indian government of UPA cant control the uprising and leads to a plebiscite then they will certainly lose my vote FOREVER, in all the future election. I assume that many people here share my views and similarly not vote for UPA and congress ever.

Daubic | 14 years ago | Reply Conduct a similar poll in Pakistan and ask its citizens, how they feel to be part of pakistan. I am sure just 95% would poll against staying with pakistan, which has the following features. 1. Target Killing 2. Mob Lynching 3. Robbery by the Rulers 4. Floods and Feminine 5. Begging for survival to the western countries 6. Suicide Bombings 7. Shia - Sunni Muslim Bashes 8. Minorities Harassment 9. Suppressing Baluchistan People rights Please conduct the survey in Baluchistan and see if you get atleast 1/10th majority in favor of pakistan. I don't know why Pakistan is so interested in the affairs of Kashmir. If religion is the key, which drives them, then what about the Shia Muslims that were killed. Were they not Muslims, what about Pathans, Baluchis?

Tony Singh | 14 years ago | Reply Why just Kashmir, a poll should be conducted on the partition of subcontinent itself. Just because we were thrown away from our homeland 63 years ago does not mean we have lost our right to determine whether we wanted the partition in first place!

kashmiri | 14 years ago | Reply @Cronous Hi I think you haven’t heard Kashmiries shouting Pakistan zindabad and waving green flags (Pakistani national flag) in front of Indian security forces. That should give you some idea. Click below and know what kashmiries want. http://wn.com/kashmiriscarryingpakistaniflagstellingindiatoleavekashmir

RealityCheck | 14 years ago | Reply As Neeraj pointed out - "Already, our right leaning friends never miss an opportunity to tell us that once muslims are in a majority at any part or region of non-muslim world they tend to demand independence and resort to violence." I used to defend the secularist stand of India to our right leaning friends at every opportunity. Their argument used to be precisely this. And the emerging picture is that they were right. The another point of right leaning guys was that they call us infidels and think inferior. I always thought that this is a stretched imagination of fanatics, but again I found that they are right when I started following Pakistani newspapers. You will find at least one or two Muslim houses in most Indian villages. They are all respected there and well integrated. The act of Kashmiri muslims is really going to be highly detrimental to secular fabric of India.

Hamza Baloch | 14 years ago | Reply Nice to see this news in "Pakistan" tag, in express tribune:)

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Anoop: "Last Assembly elections a Hurriat leader fought elections and to everybody’s surprise lost it to NC. He didnt even come 2nd. He came behind PDP and Congress." And in NWFP KAGK, an anti-Pakistan politician, overwhelmingly won election a year before partition. He campaigned against Pakistan and called for a boycott of the referendum. Yet an overwhelming majority of the voters of the NWFP chose Pakistan in the referendum, with total turnout slightly larger than that which elected KAGK, indicating both a failure of his boycott and his anti-Pakistan message. Yet KAGK remained a popular politician, and in many circles in the NWFP still is. The point being that people can vote differently when it comes to local issues vs national issues vs international issues. At a local level KAGK's popularity was unquestionable, but at a national level his message was rejected by the people of the NWFP. The same can be argued to be the case in J&K. And quite frankly, it never ceases to amaze me how Indians tout the results and turnouts in elections and polls such as this one, yet continue to support the Indian states position of continuing occupation and denying the Kashmiris a plebiscite. If Indians really believe that election results and turnouts indicate a desire to remain with India and a rejection of Pakistan, then why not let the Kashmiris decide in a plebiscite as committed to in the UNSC, and as India herself gave the people of Junagadh (that had acceded to Pakistan)? End this dispute instead of hiding behind canards and half-truths.

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply Cronous: "Hmm, so does that mean that Pakistan will be letting Balochistan go anytime soon? After all it is pretty clear that Pakistan keeping Balochistan against its will. Or can I guess “azadi” is forgotten on your Western borders?" The territories comprising the current province of Balochistan were integrated into Pakistan largely with little issue, through accessions by their rulers and jirgas, and there was no commitment made, nor asked, for a plebiscite. The annexation of those territories was not contested by an other nation, nor has the UNSC passed any resolutions declaring the territory disputed. Therefore the comparison made with Kashmir is flawed and a canard meant to deflect attention away from the fact that the Indian State continues to occupy, repress and deny Kashmiris their right to self-determination. A better comparison with J&K would in fact be of the State of Junagadh, whose ruler acceded to Pakistan - India invaded, occupied and annexed the State in violation of the accession to Pakistan, and justified the annexation through a plebiscite it held unilaterally, with no input from the legal owner of the territory (Pakistan) or the UN. Apparently India has a two sets of laws - one for Hindus (who were given a plebiscite in Junagadh after India's illegal invasion and occupation of the State) and another for Muslims (who are denied self-determination despite India's leaders promising it to them multiple times and committing to it in the UN).

Agnostic Muslim | 14 years ago | Reply "Who’d like to be a part of beleaguered country?" We won't know until we let the Kashmiris, as promised them by the Indian State itself, an committed to in the UN, decide through a plebiscite. The 'devastated, beleaguered country' is not the one occupying Kashmiris and denying them their promised right to self-determination.

Parvez Mahmud | 14 years ago | Reply Kashmir has every right to decide their future. How long you are going to impose your democracy on them and killing them.

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply The poll facts which are not reflected in the news are as under: 76 % of Jammu want complete merger with India 70 % of Ladhakh want complete merger with India 06 % of Kashmir valley want complete merger with Pakistan 66% of Kashmir valley want independent state ” The poll, conducted for the Sunday Hindustan Times newspaper, showed that 66 per cent of respondents in the Kashmir valley wanted “complete freedom to entire Jammu and Kashmir as a new country and not for valley only.” Only six per cent in Kashmir wanted a “complete merger of the entire Jammu and Kashmir in Pakistan.” The desire for independence for the state is not shared in the Jammu and Ladakh parts however, where 76 per cent and 70 per cent wanted a “complete merger” of the state into India. ……………”

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Usman – Usman Bhai, This year over a million tourist would have visited the beautiful land of Kashmir which have boosted the economy of J&K. The need of the hour is that people of J&K should come forward in hospitality industry. Develop rail, road links, have more educational institutions, increase job prospects for residents and improve health care. These all are State subjects and out of central plan expenditure, the State of J&K is one of the largest beneficiaries percentagewise of these funds. If so called hurriat pasand bigots have any respect for Kashmiri, please come forward, rule your State, make or amend your own law within the framework of Const. of India and make this land again a Paradise on earth. J&K still has better leverage under Const. of India as compared to other States. Please don’t try to doom even that. My dear friend, India has survived as democracy due to our religious tolerance and providing rights and liberties to fellow citizens to vent out their feelings in a democratic way. As long as long, enjoyment of such rights and liberties by one does not disturb social order or affect the life and liberty of fellow citizens. The entire world recognizes this beauty of Indian Constitution and our unity in diversity. No one can fool citizenry of this country or J&K anymore. The silent democratic majority in J&K is also well aware and enjoys these endless and confusing details. The voice of Kashmiri is not represented by stone pelting hooligans on streets, by people who indulge in bandhs disturbing social life, by people those hiding behind the religion and preaching others secular values and also by leaders who shout Hurriyat at the pitch of their voice and never represented their credentials in any elections. Before talking about UN resolutions it is better if one read them and understand them. Sooner we realize that plebiscite issue is redundant it is better as neither India nor Pak is harping on such lost issues or talk of UN Resolutions? Read the lines in between the survey reports, plebiscite for whom, in Valley or in Jammu or in Laddakh or in PHK? Why not to have plebiscite in each Mohalla or Gali or in Village of J&K separately and make it a polka dot free state? Once accession is signed and India acted upon in protection of territory, the question of going back in history is shut. If not, than shall we prepared to apply same yardstick to Baluchistan, so called ‘Azad Kashmir’ or Gilgit Baltistan area? To my opinion, J&K is part of India by valid accession and there is no room of any third party to interfere or comment on it. India should not talk with any third party even for PHK as it is ‘Azad’ and having its own elected PM. This is the precise reason for which our talk if any with Pakistan about Kashmir is to leave the occupied territory, remove its entire infrastructure, whether of terror or otherwise. Till this goal is achieved, India is prepared to talk to Pakistan only about vacation of PHK or for betterment of Kashmiri. Enjoy man … !!! Kashmir Ke Alawa Aur Bhi Gam Hain Zamane Main” … !!!

User | 14 years ago | Reply Really, two third Kashmiris want independence. Vow..........., the greatest and happies news I ever heard in my journalistic life. But again my question is whether they would annex with Pakistan after getting independence from the Indian yolk or do they have economical infrastructure to emerge as an Independent nation that fits to UN standard. I know it's a quite pinching question that will cause twist in stomach of certain people. I don't care. You must have tolerance to digest truth SIR. Mussarat Hussain Washington DC

Neeraj, India | 14 years ago | Reply @Harris Choudhry, I am pretty impressed with your fair and down to earth comment. Let me give you our side of the thinking, I mean what middle class people of India do really think about Kashmir. I will be blunt, there is little sympathy for those stone throwing youngsters, though, everyone feels sad about the killings. It is not that Indian civil society is not compassionate enough or don't feel for the human suffering, but what angers us is the utter stupidity of those separatist crowds and their leaders. They are just not aware of the consequences of their much sought after independence. They have no idea of how lucky they are while staying within India. Government of India is pouring billion of rupees into the kashmir to keep the populace happy. Every essential commodity is heavily subsidized in the state. Otherwise, current months long strikes wouldn't have been possible. The other thing that baffles us is, what is the problem with staying with India? They can enjoy democracy under the supervision of strong and honest institutions. Kashmiri youths have the access to world class educational institutions and also rapidly growing job opportunities in this vast country. Kashmiri traders can use their entrepreneurial skills to prosper and grow in one of the biggest emerging economies. Do the Kashmirs want to secede just because they follow a different faith from the majority of the country? Or in their state they are a religious majority? If so, what about the 130 million of their coreligionists living in various parts of India as minorities? Already, our right leaning friends never miss an opportunity to tell us that once muslims are in a majority at any part or region of non-muslim world they tend to demand independence and resort to violence. These stone pelting kashmiris are just legitimizing the argument. Kashmir badly lacks the means and resources to stay afloat as a sovereign country. Once independent they would be completely ruined economically and ruthless geopolitics would destroy them. Even Bhutan and Nepal need Indian umbrella to survive. Sometimes while watching rioting mobs on tv, frustration makes us shout out, ' give them what they want and let them suffer the consequences'.But, that is not possible for both political and geopolitical reasons. We just cannot let Indian muslims suffer by conceding the foolish demand of Kashmiris. Neither we can allow China a free hand in Himalayas or in the Indian Ocean.

Farhan | 14 years ago | Reply Kashmir should be liberated from its all three nuclear neighbours. But, the question is: "Would kashmiris live hapily without the economical and political reliance of its neighbours?" I dont see any feasible solution in near future. But, i do think that both India and Pakistan should stop interfering in Kashmir immediately.

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply Usman, It would have been far simpler if Kashmir wasn't a land-locked area. Unfortunately it is. Look at Afghanistan and how much influence Pakistan has there.

Muhammad Sadaf Ur Rehman | 14 years ago | Reply I do not think that this poll conducted by Hindustan Times is based on ground realities because it is conveying controversial and interest based facts,moreover in third world countries like India and Pakistan public opinion does not matter a lot because here the governmental powers working's are not independent in itself and our policies based on national issues are decided by whites.One thing is now cleared that this exploitation of Kashmirs could not prevailed for long period .

Neeraj, India | 14 years ago | Reply @Dadi, You call Indian democracy a PR scam of the century and bemoan at the corruption of our law makers. Well, let's forget about India, the largest democracy and see how the world's most powerful democracy, the US, has functioned during it's more than two centuries of history. After gaining independence and making Thomas Jefferson's immortal words 'all men are created equal' as a guiding principle of new nation, America continued with slavery for decades. Even as early as 1950-60s racial segregation was legal. Only in the 21st century a half black man could become president of the US. As for corruption, you must be familiar with subprime mortgage crisis and subsequent meltdown of several banks and financial institutions. That was the biggest fraud of human history and many powerful congressmen and women were part of it. None of them could be brought to justice just because they were smart enough to keep their deals perfectly legal. If these flawed democracies generate revulsion in you, then, certainly, you deserve Mollha Omar as your prime minister!

Usman | 14 years ago | Reply Hi @anoop etc , what i think , we should let them decide, the problem with kasmiries is that we (pakistani & indians) often tend to become the master of their fate, while this is their will and thier life, they should have full freedom to decide where and how they wana live. So let just act according to UN resolution with one amendment (that independant country,India ,Pakistan) and lets see what they say. I dont think whatever they think nobody should object upon them, what you guys reckon

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @Dadi, Dude, I dont care what you think of India. I live here, enjoyed the benefits of being an Indian. I went from being lower middle-class to being upper-middle class. I voted one central government to power which was doing well and kicked out a under-performing state government. My talent is sought after in various countries but I chose to live in India. My Culture is considered cool all over the world and they love our music, our movies and our arts. Even you guys cant get enough of everything Indian(Movies, songs, TV,etc). If you think India is not a democracy you can be happy that Pakistan is not at all close to emulating India. Also, democracy does not have magical powers to shoo away all the bad things in India. Its a framework where one is allowed to grow. Democracy only means power to vote and free and fair elections. I've not voted any one corrupt and never will but I cannot control my other citizens to do the same. Anyway, good-luck to you and hope Pakistan will not become a India-type democracy, as per your wishes.

Harish Advani | 14 years ago | Reply The head line is very selective.If the poll is read in it's entirety, it clearly indicates that 2/3rd of the people in the Kashmir VALLEY(only) want independence.However over 70%in Jammu and Ladakh want to be fully integrated into the Indian polity.The Kashmir valley on it's own will not be economically viable, and most probably end up as a forward base for Jihadi groups and Al Qaeda.Full statehood will on the other hand bring in investment and jobs,tourism etc from other parts of India and overseas.

Tilsim | 14 years ago | Reply It appears from the poll that the majority of people in the Kashmir valley see independence, rather than joining Pakistan as the way forward. I am not surprised. With the multi-decade chaos in Pakistan and the support of Jihadis, why would they think differently? A lot of us Pakistanis either want to or have left Pakistan. The sentiments of Jammu and Ladakh people are not a surprise to anyone who understands the ethnic makeup of the population. This Hindustan Times poll is important. We need to recognise the sentiment of Kashmiris as much as the Indians in order to find a peaceful solution.

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply @hassanain, The separatists do NOT enjoy the popular support in Kashmir. If so then they can fight the elections and prove to the world and Indians that the People of Kashmir wants Independence. Last Assembly elections a Hurriat leader fought elections and to everybody's surprise lost it to NC. He didnt even come 2nd. He came behind PDP and Congress. http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-39670020090516 And, please dont say the elections were rigged. Even Sajjad Lone didnt say that after losing. Also, when you talk of Kashmir you also have to factor in the Kashmiri pandits who were driven out of Kashmir by Pakistan backed Militants in the 1990's. The balance then heavily tilts in India's favour. Plus Shias of Kashmir shudder to think what would happen if they join Pakistan and want to be in India.

faraz | 14 years ago | Reply Obviously Kashmiris dont want to be part of Pakistan; here people still belive in those PTV documentaries on kashmir.

Ashutosh | 14 years ago | Reply The separatist sentiments only prevails in the Kashmir valley. Other parts of Kashmir (out side the valley), Jammu and Ladhak region strictly wants to go ahead with India. This survey only confirms this fact. The right democratic process is that the separatist also should stand for elections and prove that they have a genuine leader/ representative and not a bunch of nuisance creators. Otherwise, the elected leaders and people who casted their votes, daring the bullets from the terrorists, may feel cheated and this will set a wrong precedence. India is more diversified than the continent Europe. If we keep agreeing to plebiscite at the drop of the hat, we could never be what we are. As a democracy, the territorial integrity of the country is not negotiable. Any talks or negotiation should be within the constitution of India.

Eeman | 14 years ago | Reply Who'd like to be a part of beleaguered country?

Sonam Shyam | 14 years ago | Reply This survey conducted by Hindustan Times regarding the Kashmir situation comes hardly as a surprise to most right thinking Indians. There are problems in Kashmir valley and our government has, for long, adopted an ostrich like approach to deal with it. I am deliberately using the words “Kashmir Valley” since this so called independence movement is only raging in that particular area. The area of Ladakh, mainly consisting of Buddhists and a large number of Shia Muslims and the area of Jammu, mainly consisting of Hindus, have nothing to do with this azaadi business. So the voice of Kashmir valley in no way can be accepted as the voice of whole of Jammu and Kashmir. Our government in India has been in the denial mode on Kashmir valley problem for last 63 years and has always shied away from facing the truth. The two things which our government keeps on denying is, (1)That There is a religious angle to the Kashmir valley problem and (2) That Pakistan is a party to the Kashmir dispute. Now there are valid reasons for denying these facts. Firstly, if the government were to accept that the Muslim majority Kashmir valley, ethnically cleansed of almost all Hindus, wants independence, then it will bring down the secular edifice of the Indian nation. Muslims all over India have thrived under the Indian constitution so what’s the problem with the Kashmiri Muslims? The government is unable to understand that secularism in Kashmir valley had a mournful demise the moment the Kashmiri Muslims sat quietly when the Pakistan backed Islamic hardliners were butchering and hounding the Hindus out of the valley, to establish the Nizam-e-Mustafa. Sizable population of Kashmir valley has become Islamic hardliners who won’t allow Hindus to come back to the valley. “Kashmiriyat”, consisting of Sufi traditions, ended with the exodus of Hindus and Pakistan has been a party in this blood bath. Secondly, if the government were to accept that Pakistan is a party to the Kashmir dispute, then Congress government would be reminded that it was India, which took the Kashmir problem to the United Nations and made Pakistan a party to the dispute. The legendary Jawahar Lal Nehru, shot himself in the foot and scored the biggest self-goal in independent Indian history. But still the problem remains and Kashmir valley is burning and quite expectedly, Pakistan is fishing in troubled waters. The condition of Kashmiris in so called Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan is also pathetic not withstanding the denials from Pakistan. Already, a large part of erstwhile Northern Areas were seceded by Pakistan to China and now there are reports of Pakistan giving de-facto control of Gilgit-Baltistan to China. Besides this, the Kashmiri area of Aksai Chin is already under Chinese control since 1962. So people of Kashmir are torn between three nuclear armed states. On the practical side, the only feasible solution is for the three parties, however legitimate or illegitimate their claims may be, is to retain the areas under their control and allow Kashmiri public to move around, within the entire Kashmir, freely. I want to tell my Pakistani friends that Kashmir, just because it is a Muslim majority area, cannot become a part of Pakistan. You should remember what West Pakistan did to the Bengali Muslims in erstwhile East Pakistan. I should not reminding you of the genocide committed on Bengalis in 1970-71. Religion couldn’t keep Pakistan together. Even today, within Pakistan, mohajirs, pathans, pashtuns, balochs, Punjabis etc are killing each other. No need to mention the regular bombing of Shias and Ahmedis besides the pathetic condition of Hindus and Christians. Pakistan, land of pure Islam, has the dubious distinction of witnessing the horrible spectacle of Muslims bombing fellow Muslims praying in Mosques, all in the name of Islam. Friends, religion alone cannot make a nation state. Just ask this question, honestly to your self; Why people who read the same holy Koran and believe in the same Allah, are killing each other in an Islamic state? People of Pakistan have to learn to look at the world from outside the religious prism and de-link religion from day to day life. Pakistan was formed on religious basis and after 63 years of your existence, religion has not brought peace in Pakistan.

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Ali Kamran – Sir, the same policy what you are suggesting is being pursued by Pakistan since last 63 years by calling the Pak Held Kashmir as ‘Azad Kashmir’. However, there is no taker of it world over. Please suggest something new?

SKChadha | 14 years ago | Reply @ Hassanain – Why not the same yardstick, which you are suggesting, we first apply to Baluchistan as also to Pak Held Kashmir, Gilgit and Baltistan areas? Please enlighten with your views.

Haris Chaudhry | 14 years ago | Reply Ummm.. why on earth would Kashmir want to be part of Pakistan..? What is it that we have now that we can offer to our Kashmiri brethren..? We are broke and living on IMF, US and World Bank's handouts. Our economy is crippled, our people are being targeted by merciless taliban suicide brigade, our hotels and key institutions look like urban bunkers in view of this threat, we are one of the least transparent nations on earth, we are corrupt to the core and have failed to form powerful institutions, our GDP is not even 1/10th of India, our cricket team is the butt of jokes globally, our passports are the worst forms of travel docs that anyone can carry outside of Pakistan and we are looked at as being the most suspicious creatures globally, we harbour terrorists and send them to Afghanistan and Kashmir, our clergy spits venom against each other and at each other's throats, our literacy rate is hopeless and inflation is sky rocketing, we spend more each year than we earn and going under debt burden every day (borrowing millions of dollars every day).... so tell me why should we believe any differently.... India on the other hand is an emerging super power. Its economy is booming. It is being courted now even by Saudis (yes, our only hope of salvation globally), it has been a democratic nation since its inception, it has 10 times powerful institutions than us, it is developing mega cities and massively undertaking infrastructure projects, its citiznes are remotely hassled globally and it has the reputation of an emerging super power globally. It is secular and by-large good in protecting its minorities unlike us. It is hosting Commonwealth Games this year and Formula 1 next year... We cant even host an under 18 event under our present law and order situation. Its leaders dont roam around the world with a begging bowl and its politicians dont take dictation from its defence forces. Wake up Pakistan. We will be left with nothing if we carried on thinking that the world owes us a living. Kashmiris or for that part, anyone will be foolish to want to become part of a nation like ours... Think about it ... Why on earth will Kashmiris be part of Pakistan when we cant even protect our own fellow muslims, let alone minorities and cannot provide for our own people..?? Regards Haris

Dadi | 14 years ago | Reply @Anoop with all the going on in India why would Kashmiris want to join India. India's marketing of itself as a democracy is the biggest PR scam of the 20th/21st centuries. There's not much to this democracy beyond regular elections. 100+ members of Indian parliament have been convicted of serious crimes. Injustice is widespread so much so that 1/3 of India is under a serious Maoist revolt.... Reality of Indian democracy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuUiWDUBAZw

Isfand | 14 years ago | Reply @Syed Nadir El-Edroos Is tht true abt Azad Kashmir?Also they want independence from Pakistan? And wht abt the Northen Areas,do they consider themself as Pakistani?

Mohammad tauseef | 14 years ago | Reply People who doubt the authenticity of the poll or the credibility of Hindustan Times should visit Hindustantimes.com for a general feel of the newspaper. I think its a pretty independent newspaper and doesn't mess things up.

Cronous | 14 years ago | Reply @Ali "I seriously doubt the credibility of a poll held by the “Hindustan Times”." A poll conducted a couple of months by Chatham House at the behest of Muammar Gaddafi's son showed similar results. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10207909 From the article: "The headline figures of 44% (in Pakistani-administered Kashmir) and 43% (in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir) opting for independence, for example, conceals wide regional disparities. While in the predominantly Muslim Kashmir Valley in Indian-administered Kashmir, the proportion in favour of independence [total separation from India and Pakistan] ranged from 74%-95%. But in the four districts of the predominantly Hindu Jammu part of Indian-administered Kashmir, there was virtually no support for independence at all."

Cronous | 14 years ago | Reply @hassanain "So the world’s largest democracy will keep occupying the Kashmir valley against the will of it’s people just to justify it’s secular label?" Hmm, so does that mean that Pakistan will be letting Balochistan go anytime soon? After all it is pretty clear that Pakistan keeping Balochistan against its will. Or can I guess "azadi" is forgotten on your Western borders?

hassanain | 14 years ago | Reply @Anoop So the world's largest democracy will keep occupying the Kashmir valley against the will of it's people just to justify it's secular label? Divide up Kashmir and be done with it. Let it be independent.

Think therefore | 14 years ago | Reply India and Pakistan should unite like the EU

Anoop | 14 years ago | Reply Its in expected lines to see Jammu and Ladakh to vote for integration with India. In Kashmir the cities is where the separatist sentiment is popular. Well, Kashmir is a land-locked area and hence, it is has to be under one of the other country's influence and must be dependent on it. With all the trouble that Pakistan is in can Kashmir realistically hope their future will be bright in that mess? All this I am saying considering if a plebiscite is ever held, which is NEVER going to happen. India shall not be divided on Religious lines a second time.

Ali kamran | 14 years ago | Reply Kashmir valley have the most beautiful natural seens and minerals stocks, similarly India can control the pakistan water inflow from Occupied Kashmir, so its not in the Indian keen interest to get its troops out of Kashmir. But beside this i think that this kind of media reports can compel india to do so, and for this pakistani media should play its important role, more over in my understanding i think that we should change the basic Kashmir policy keeping in view of the current situation, as we are not strong enough to get the Kashmir by force, so a demand for free Kashmir would be less painful pill for indian to swollow. And by the way Kashmiri Muslims in free country of their own will not harm Pakistan's interests in the Area

Atif | 14 years ago | Reply chalo Azad hy ker do ager Pakistan ko nahy dena kashmir !!! world's largest democracy my foot

Syed Nadir El-Edroos | 14 years ago | Reply People in azad kashmir dont consider themselves part of Pakistan, why would you expect people in Indian administered kashmir to think any different?

ashiqmagami | 14 years ago | Reply i too find some keapholes in survey conducted by hindustantimes

Shazif | 14 years ago | Reply wat a non-sense!

Syed A. Mateen | 14 years ago | Reply If US want, Kashmir issue can be solved in 24 hours, but the problem is that US want Pakistan and India to keep the doors of dialogue open and keep on talking while walking to the opposite direction. Similarly, US do not want that peace should prevail in the Middle East Region. US is fully aware of the Palestine and Israel issue, but does not want to mediate between Palestine and Israel. There also US want both Palestine and Israel to continue the dialogue with each other. Had US solved the issue of Palestine and Israel long time back, the 9/11 terrorist’s attacks would have not been conducted by the Palestinian sympathizers. I do not understand US policy of “keeping the doors open for dialogue”. Had it been a real US internal policy to continue the dialogue then why US did not continue dialogue with Saddam Hussein in Iraq and with Taliban in Afghanistan? Why US first invaded Afghanistan after 9/11 and then Iraq to have full control on oil rich country?

Ali | 14 years ago | Reply I seriously doubt the credibility of a poll held by the "Hindustan Times".

Replying to X