Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan by the UN-monitored LoC, but is claimed in full by both countries. PHOTO: EPA/FILE
In an interaction with reporters in Hyderabad, external affairs ministry spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin said the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir was no longer an international issue.
“[The Kashmir dispute] is not an international issue anymore … it is an issue between India and Pakistan,” said Akbaruddin. “No one on any international forum is focused on this issue … nobody is raising the matter elsewhere … this is success in itself,” he added.
While Pakistan has repeatedly called for a plebiscite in Kashmir in accordance with the United Nations resolutions, India has always maintained that the dispute is a bilateral issue between the two nations.
India and Pakistan have fought three wars since their independence from Britain in 1947 - two of them over Kashmir.
Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan by the UN-monitored LoC, but is claimed in full by both countries. It lies at the heart of more than 60 years of hostility between India and Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 26th, 2013.
COMMENTS (64)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1730884134-0/BeFunky-collage-(26)1730884134-0-270x192.webp "trump plans sweeping tariffs on mexico canada china sparking trade war fears")
INDIA HAS WRIGHT TO DREAM SO LET THEM DREAM@Strategic Asset:
Muslim majority districts awarded to Pakistan & the rest (Hindu/Sikh majority being implied) remaining with India was applicable only for British territory. That principle did not apply to the areas controlled by the Princes who had the freedom to go independent or join India or Pakistan as per their (not necessarily per people's) choice. In such places the Maharajah or Nawab or Nizam as the case may be mattered. Radcliff was not authorised to divide Princely India. It was not a simple matter as Secular v/s Islamic or even little more complicated plebiscite. It was a matter of Brtish Act of Parliament & agreements between Crown & Princes. The work of Sardar Patel & VP Menon, racing before time, in negotiating with more than 500 Principalities to stay put with India wouldn't have been praiseworthy if it was easy. As against that a poorly handled deal with Khan of Kalat by Pakistan leading to rebellion by Khan's brother is at the root of Balochistan problem. http://tribune.com.pk/story/188798/recalling-baloch-history/
@Professor: Kashmir is not an internal problem of India....Pakistan has been a party to it starting from the UN resolutions to Simla Agreement etc...There can be a debate as to whether you see it as an international issue or a bilateral one.... but in no way this can be termed as an issue internal to india
Go over Kashmir issue in international world and see how many countries support you. @Kamil:
I am also kashmiri more than you and Kashmir also a part of lndia . Bharat Malta ki jai @Basharat hussain:
So its your ancestors property @gp65:
India needs to revoke section 272 and integrate Kashmir ( Jammu and Leh are non muslim )and for those people who think India held kashmiris are miserable should really call their friends there and see how life in Kashmir is ? Granted there are human rights vilolations committed however Indain Gove pours in millions of rupees for education, health etc. There is no taliban that dictates if girls can go to school etc....it is a civilized place.
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks: Oh yeah ? Is that why the world is absolutely quite on Kashmir ? Only Pakistans dream that the isue is international and would ever get Kashmir.
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks: There are many Balochs that would dispute your statement.
UN resolution of 13 August 1948 decreed that STATUS QUO should be maintained.......pakistan violated it by selling a big chunk of area to CHINA.....get that area back pakistan and we shall fulfill the rest part of the resolution if we want............
Kashmir problem is nothing but an upshot of the ill fated two nation theory on which partition took place.TNT was bogus, theoretically,principally & practically. TNT died in 1947 when millions of Muslims stayed back in India, it died again in 1971. As an Indian i am glad that TNT was conceived & Pakistan was formed, but that does not necessarily means that i consider TNT to be altruistic in any sense. Until the everyone realizes the fact that many things went wrong with the way a line was drawn on the map of the subcontinent during 1947, one can not reach an consensus..
@FYI: In the case of Junagadh a Plebiscite was conducted in February 1948, in which approximately 99% of the people chose accession with India. . You are missing a very important point. Pakistan was made exclusively for people of a particular faith in the subcontinent as their homeland. Even before Israel, Pakistan was the first country to be set up in the name of religion. India never claimed to be a homeland solely for Hindus. India was for all Indians regardless of faith. The partition was NOT as claimed by many in Pakistan as India for Hindus and Pakistan for Muslims. . In Junagadh, the people were majority Hindu and the act of them assimilating into Pakistan would have gone against the very basis for the creation of Pakistan regardless of what the Nawab thought.
Who cares? Its all politics; nothing will ever change aka Pakistan will never get Kashmir.
@Gratgy: Baluchistan is not a disputed territory but Kashmir is, and while we are at it, let us ask the people of ASSAM whether they would like to have some say for their freedom too.
@vish: Has Balochistan issue ever been discussed in UN? I don't remember so. Nor do I ever remember Nagaland issue ever been mentioned in UN. Right?
@Mozart: " Oh and what happened to Junagardh? As I remember Junagardh acceded to Pakistan. " * Myth - The principles applied to secure the accession of the erstwhile kingdom of Junagadh to India on the basis of a Hindu majority were not followed in the case of Kashmir which has a Muslim majority. * Reality - In the case of Junagadh a Plebiscite was conducted in February 1948, in which approximately 99% of the people chose accession with India. So, by conducting a plebiscite, India ‘technically’ fulfilled its international obligations thus avoiding any criticism of its earlier strong arm tactics and portrayed to the world that it was ready to hold a Plebiscite in Kashmir once the stipulated conditions set by the UN had been fulfilled i.e. complete removal of Pakistan Army, Tribals and Jihadis from the disputed territory. Because Pakistan has refused to do so till date, Pakistan has given India a legally tenable and diplomatically advantageous position by shifting the onus for non implementation of UN resolutions on Pakistan.
* Myth - India is legally bound to implement the UN resolution for determining the ‘right to self determination’ through Plebiscite. * Reality - The UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII. That is why J&K is an Integral part of India Legally, Constitutionally and Democratically.
You want Kashmir based on the two nations theory? Then take Kashmir along with all the Muslims living in India and thousands of Pakistani Muslims living in Bangladeshi camps. After that let not a single Muslim live in India! Let me remind you, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. First, learn to fix your own house, which is crumbling from sectarian infighting.
Akberudin didnot treatment like jafry had in Gujrath then he will know what kashmir reality is
@ModiFied: dude you're fed too much radish at breakfast
@Basharat hussain: If you want freedom, go to azad kashmir. Like many people did during partition. Or be happy that you are allowed to speak and roam freely. So better be quiet.
@BruteForce: those were elections not referendum where people are asked their choice of choosing their country like happened in Sudan
@Kamil:
So Elections during which there were 80% participation do not count as people's will in your book?
If India has been successful in Kashmir, why does it need to oppress it with an occupation force of ovver 600,000 soldiers. Indian proclivity for myths appears to be infinite.
@Gp65: did u tell this to modi in 2002?
@Asok: If South Sudan and East Timor could be global issues so is KAshmir. A state is refusing the people of a region their right of deciding their fate
@faraz: explain other states
@Fiz: Same applies to Baluchistan dear.
@Gratgy: Well, I guess there are other states in India as well where the same could be done. Why wouldn't India set an example as an elder?
We should appreciate that the subject was concluded at Shimla in 1972.
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks:
"Why not ask the Kashmiri people if this problem is international or not and if they would like to get the UN to solve their problem once for all."
Good thoughts. By the same token, would you also use your logic to ask the Baloch if their problem is international or not and if they would like to get the UN to solve their problem once and for all?
Some victory.
It is not even an issue between India and Pakistan. It is an issue between Indian Govt. and few Kashmiris who want to extract something from Govt. by keeping this issue alive.
With these blunt words India has dared Pakistan to do whatever it wants to do. India has finally awakened from being a sleeping giant. Congrutlations India.
When entire nation is fed on lies, result is always Pakistan. If anything is a casualty in Pakistan, its the truth. After watching today's interview of Mr Hafiz Saeed conducted by Express News TV, I am fully convinced that Peace slogan of NS is nothing buy part of an orchestra in which different actors are playing an assigned role. How come a person like Mr Hafiz Saeed in interviewed on issues of national and international importance if he is not part of any government body? How come no one in Pakistani government does not come with clarifications on his statements? Hafiz Saeed says that India has 37 consulates in Afghanistan and whole Pakistan believes this white lie. How come Pakistani government does not come with the true figure ? I have no doubts now that Mr Saeed is part of Pakistani strategy and plays a role assigned to him. Even Mr Nawaz Sharrif's peace overtures are part of the same song when Pak army is creating troubles at LOC.
what about balochistan, no more forcefully occupy our balochistan.we want freedom.
@FYI:
Oh and what happened to Junagardh? As I remember Junagardh acceded to Pakistan.
Every time Pakistan raises the Kashmir issue in an international forum it violates the Simla agreement which Pakistan/Mr Bhutto signed.
Is that a breaking news? That has been India's stance for quite a long time.
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks Why not ask the Kashmiri people if this problem is international or not and if they would like to get the UN to solve their problem once for all.
Pakistan can set a fine example by asking the people of Balochistan whether they want UN Mediation or not
@kamal: Whether or not Pakistan has internal problems is not the issue. India too has internal problems. The root cause is the denial of the rightful aspirations of the Kashmiri people to determine their own destiny according to their wishes as was mandated at the time of partition. The fact that India refuses to hold a plebiscite is a tacit admission that they understand where the loyalty of Kashmiris lie. From a geographical, cultural, religious and ethnic point of view, Kashmiris including my mother's family will always align ourselves with Pakistan. You may think that the world does not care about the rights of occupied people in Kashmir or Palestine or anywhere else to govern themselves according to their own wishes but I think the world community would love to see a peaceful resolution of all these conflicts according to the wishes of the people who live there.
When both the nations will destroy a bit of each other through war or even nuclear out-burst , then everyone will say its an international issue.
SIMLA AGREEMENT ==============================
(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.As it a common knowledge that India & Pakistan have failed to settle their core dispute over Kashmir despite lapse of more than thirty years since the Shimla agreement was signed and India, the first obligation of settling the dispute bilaterally vanishes. Since this obligation cannot be stretched upto eternity, we move to the next option of settling the dispute through “ other peaceful means” .This naturally envisages a role for third party mediation
Shimla Agreement
Kashmir is not an integral part of India.
duh? is ET trying to traffic here? The prelude weakly supports the heading.
* Myth - India is evading the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution on Plebiscite in Kashmir while Pakistan has done its best to ensure that the UN resolutions on Kashmir are implemented. * Reality - UN resolution of 13 August 1948 decreed that a plebiscite would be held in Jammu & Kashmir only after the Commission’s resolutions were implemented. This is possible only by the withdrawal of all Pakistani forces / Tribals from those areas of Kashmir which it had occupied in 1948. By refusing to do so till date, Pakistan has given India a legally tenable and diplomatically advantageous position by shifting the onus for non implementation of UN resolutions on Pakistan. (Note : The UN resolution on Kashmir was passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the UN Charter which is non-binding and has no mandatory enforceability.)
Hindustan also claims to be a superpower and regional policeman, despite accounting for most of the world's impoverished and malnourished population. In other words, who cares what New Delhi comes up with?
Hasan
Is this news? As far as I know, that has always been India's position.
Why the surprise? Under the Simla Accord of 1972 signed by ZAB and Indira Gandhi it was agreed that the issue will be resolved through bilateral discussions. That automatically takes it out of the "international" basket. None of the so-called big powers are willing to mediate between India and Pakistan unless both parties request such mediation. It serves little purpose to add fuel to the fire by making an issue out of this. As it is the people of both countries are already caught up in many problems that call for immediate redress.
We ourselves, self destructive to the core, have brought this on us. No country other than China and a handful of Muslim countries support us on Kashmir. We really worked very hard over the last 25 years to lower our self esteem, destroy from within and loot the country to the core. 50% of the country has never seen any benefits since independence. Lofty goals in the beginning soon became subservient to exploitation and plunder by the elites - the feudals, the bureaucrats, the so called politicians, the Generals, the industrialists. So yes, Indian-held Kashmir has been dead issue since the last 25 years. We should instead worry about implosion.
As per Simla Agreement, Kashmir is a bilateral issue, not an international issue. PERIOD.
India and Pakistan are different nations, therefore the issue is international.
But other than that, to be frank, I don't understand why Pakistan wants this to be a global issue, and get say the US or UN involved. Does anyone seriously believe that in present circumstances, or in the foreseeable future, the US or UN will side with Pakistan against India? And even if in the unlikely event that they did so, that India would actually feel the need to succumb to such pressure?
If it is a matter between India and Pakistan, there is actually a chance that it will get settled. Let us hope so.
India knows it doesn't have an iota of a case in Kadhmir - that's why it is scarred stiff of international mediation.
In all accords. , including Shimla, it has been worded that resolution will be as per UN resolutions. So India should allow UN to hold plebiscite to ascertain the wishes of the people of Kashmir.
There is no justification in the 21st century for sequestering rights of people!
why is this news? Since when is India credible? India can believe whatever it wants, why must ET report this miniscule piece of propaganda?
Any conflict should be resolved only through legal battle, any other means would totally mess up the situation like in case of Kashmir. The war and terrorist have created lot of stakeholders for Kashmir and has become an issue of personal reputation. Any solution would upset at least one stateholder, who would then inturn go to any extent to stall the peace process.
India can never let Kashmir go out of it's clutches for then it trigger sessesion of other states. Pak cannot do the samething, otherwise the mujaheedin would be angry. The only solution is status quo and provincial autonomy.
As if such statements make Kashmir issue less important. India should not behave like an ostrich by closing its eyes on the miserable conditions of Kashmiri people.
Oh Yeah, If I recall correctly, Pakistan and India were at the brink of nuclear war few years ago and the world community was holding their breath and wanted to intervene to settle the Kashmir problem. Kashmir problem is an international problem and it will become even more if these two nations keep on threatening each other. Why not ask the Kashmiri people if this problem is international or not and if they would like to get the UN to solve their problem once for all. I also remember when Israelis has been saying for decades that there was no problem of Palestinians and and now they are talking about Palestinian State of their own. Mr.Akbaruddin could say any thing he wants because it is " feels good" feelings but the reality on the ground is something else and the nations in the United Nations has different view on this issue than Indians do.
Too bad it's a war. Reminds me of "India Shining" and "8% growth rate".
Akbaruddin said the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir was no longer an international issue and the atrocities perptrated on kashmiris by the Indian Army is nobody's issue. Right? Not even human rights!