Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid. PHOTO: FILE
“There is no way in which India will accept any intervention on an issue that is entirely accepted in the Simla Agreement as a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan,” Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid said in an interview with NDTV.
Terming Kashmir an integral part of India, he said, “It is a waste of time for anybody no matter how eminent to be even trying to question this.”
Ahead of his meeting with US President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Nawaz sought US intervention in resolving the Kashmir issue.
“Though India has rejected such (third party) intervention, the world powers should get involved in finding a resolution to the (Kashmir) issue,” he told reporters in London late on Saturday during a stopover on his way to the US. The premier is set to meet the US president on Wednesday.
In his interview, Khurshid also said that any US economic aid to Pakistan must not be used in a manner that is detrimental to India’s security and strategic interests, and hoped Washington would keep that in mind as a ‘good strategic partner’.
Meanwhile, India will assess whether Pakistan is serious about the ceasefire along the LoC after the meeting between the two countries’ directors general military operations (DGMOs), the Times of India reported on Sunday.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 21st, 2013.
COMMENTS (53)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1727523993-0/Copy-of-Untitled-(7)1727523993-0-270x192.webp "iranian supreme leader says hamas hezbollah resistance signifies israel s defeat")
1730979821-0/Copy-of-Untitled-(20)1730979821-0-270x192.webp "muslim us representatives tlaib omar and carson re elected to us congress")
@Afrooz: Every nation state has the right to exist as long as it enjoys the legitimacy of its people. You cannot deny the right of any human being to be in charge of his destiny. Denial of national sovereignty is what leads to massacre and genocide. Being a Muslim majority nation representing an independent Muslim state, Pakistan has every legitimate right to exist. Welcome to the 21st century.
@Jai Hind: The Muslim majority state of Kashmir is a disputed territory recognized by the UN, and the consensus of the nations of the world, pending final resolution by a UN plebiscite vote by the democratic will of the Kashmiri people to determine its future based on UN resolutions. 66 years, and still Kashmiris are denied their democratic right to choose their destiny. Not only that but human rights violations including kidnap, rape, torture, murder, and genocide of Muslims in Kashmir is a state-sponsored activity by India. Take a look at Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India and would continue that way forever. The people in the state participate in the elections and vote their representatives in the state assembly and Indian parliament for decades. Army is out their to protect the citizens of India and to thwart the nefarious designs of so-called non-state actors emanating from its western borders. Army is doing a good job kicking these terrorists and militants sponsored by our envying neighbours.
Overall, who cares what our neighbours think!!!!!!!!
J&K is Great under the governance of Great India.
@Bakhtiyar Ghazi Khan: A country that was born 65 years ago - does not have the "right" to recognize a nation that has existed for 5000 years.
@IndianDude: India has been adamant since independence of rejecting the legitimacy and national sovereignty of Pakistan. Whereas Pakistan has always accepted India's right to exist as a Hindu majority nation, India has constantly interfered in Muslim majority lands to deny Pakistan its legitimate territory by virtue of faith and culture. Look no further than the ethnic nationalist mess of 1971 and the 66 years of brutal occupation of Muslim majority Kashmir.
Throughout that time, Pakistan survived and thrived throughout invasions and interference by India, USSR, and currently the US, Israel, and Karzai's puppet regime.
While you Indians celebrate 1971 as a day of victory, we never forget those Bihari, Assamese, religious Bengali Muslims who were terrorized, raped, and tortured by fantical Bengali nationalist extremists funded by Hindu extremists in India. Pakistani soldiers in Indian prisons were given food mixed with glass and metals to tear their internal organs. Yet because of our sacrifice, we have become a stronger people and come to the realization that our success is in our faith and our brotherhood in Islam. Nothing has been done but it has furthered Pakistan's resolve over the years and hardened Pakistan. in 1999, Kargil war Pakistan showed the world that it can defeat and humiliate a nation 5 times its size against all odds.
Regardless of what you say or not, Pakistan's military might and discipline is at a level currently above India. India is furthermore crippled by its reliance on Muslim nations for energy, leaving an attack on Pakistan as economic suicide. Pakistan can take all the time in the world to build itself, India does not have the luxury. Not even mentioning China's rise. The story is still unwritten. A new chapter is coming, just wait.
@Rex Minor: "You have no fture but a war which you wish an for this you have lots of Loly Pops". Reading ET, it seems that you are on the receiving end of lolly pops everyday from India.
@Khan ".. 1965 (probably you were not even born at that time so read) it was India who cried for ceasefire NOT Pakistan. … China ask Pakistan to take step, It was Pakistan who decided let go otherwise,.....blah...blah.. Pakistan forces would have been sitting in your capital. 1971 war was not a war but a conspiracy, you should thanks to USA n USSR. Long story short READ2 than comment..."
Here is simple question to all you pakistani who think same as khan(most of them ):
Q: Who was india's best buddy at that time? A: Russia-USSR Q: Who were pakisatanis best buddies? A: USA, China. Q: In a war between two nation where is the ceasefire held? who is the mediator? A: The nation that won/ has upper hand usually decides the negotiation parameters and mediator (e.g. '71 war..pakis were dragged to shimala india and there was no mediator..because we had won.)
Assuming that pakistan won '65 war:
Q: Where was the cease-fire held. A: Tashkent - USSR/Russia, india's bestestest buddy at that time! Not in beijing or wahington!!! Q: Who was the mediator? A: USSR/Russia, india's bestestest buddy at that time! Not china or USA pakis bestestest buddies!!
Just like you celebrate 'defense' day as a day your army saved lahor (LOL! who proudly celebrates saving their own behinds from thrashing), the pakistan should celebrate the '71 defeat as 'west pakistan independence day' LOL!
@saad: Saad - does it matter if Pakistan won or lost 1965 war. Jammu and Kashmir continues to be an integral part of India. Last time I checked, an Indian was in the Governor's house, the Legislature was elected based on Indian constitution and our soldiers were patrolling the streets of Srinagar. What counts is not who won the battles but who won the war. It does not matter what strategy or tactics were employed to win the war, The fact remains we clearly won the war for Kashmir still remains Indian territory beyond the control . If you had won the war, Pakistani soldiers would be patrolling the streets of Srinagar. As of now this is not happening which proves my point., Wake up and smell the coffee.
ET, please allow me to respond. Lately you have been deleting my posts.
@G. Din: You, and your Indian friends, can start to show that Pakistan doesn't bother you by not writing obsessively on a Pakistani website. The fact that you are here, proves otherwise.
It is always Indians who claim Pakistanis and Indians are one. You will never meet a single Pakistani who would even entertain that idea. Furthermore, the idea that Pakistanis are rabid religious fanatics and Indians are being peaceful secularists is ridiculous. 3,000 dead burnt raped Indian Muslim women in Gujurat, among many other incidents, proves you wrong. Pakistan does not have communal mob riots targeting minorities, regardless of what you may think.
You may be able to convince gullible people that India is peaceful, but the fact that you invaded Pakistan 3 times and continue to deny our national sovereignty proves you otherwise. Pakistanis are Muslim, and we are proud of our religion, and being religious is nothing to be ashamed of. Islam has stood the test of time far better than any other religion, and we have no need to go secular or irreligious because we still find guidance in our faith
@Surya: @Last Word: A fool's brain digests philosophy into folly, science into superstition and art into pedantry,,,,,,,,
The road to knowledge is learning and not to commit suicide. You have no fture but a war which you wish an for this you have lots of Loly Pops.
Rex Minor ...
@Mashael: I have just one problem with your otherwise laudable sentiments. Don't ever band India and Pakistan together. West's hyphenation ("Indo-Pak") didn't work nor is this pathetic attempt by well-meaning Pakistanis in general and some Indian Muslims to club those two countries together to succeed. Pakistanis said that we are two distinct nations and therefore we must separate. Although it didn't seem so at the moment, but it was the most fortuitous thing to happen to India. Therefore most of us Indians heartily agree not in the sense that Pakistanis meant but truly, in every way we are two distinct peoples. Indians tend to be secular in outlook; Pakistanis are basically religiously motivated fanatics of different degrees. We look forward in Time; your sights are forever on Nizam-e-Mustafa of 7th century AD. We are a scientifically-motivated nation, you will never be one. We are now a space-faring nation; you will never be one. We try to get along with everyone in the world; you antagonize everybody in the world. We are readily assimilated in every non-Indian society; you on the other hand tend to be exclusivists and exclusionary, creating and gravitating to your own ghettos. And so on and on. There is not only no common ground between us, there is not even a meeting ground. So, get rid of this "bhaichara" business; you just are not suited temperamentally to be a "bhai" of anybody. If anyone like Shias, Ahmadis, Qadhianis and Masihs etc. come with their smiles and arms open and try to hug you, you declare them non-Muslims prior to killing them. We have over millenia welcomed Jews, Parsis, Christians etc. amongst us; you decimated Hindus and Sikhs already living in Pakistan to extinction. Our destinies started diverging the moment we parted ways and are now diverging at a very rapid rate. So, never the twain shall meet, praise the Lord for that. That does not mean that you cannot chart your own destiny according to your own genius. It may not be to our or anyone else's liking but why should you care. Go ahead. Show to the world what wondrous things you are capable of. And, if some of that appeals to us, we shall adopt/adapt it for our own use. Now, wouldn't that be the day?
http://www.dawn.com/news/1050932/us-policy-on-kashmir-unchanged
@Rex Minor: Don't worry about India's poor. We have gone far ahead of you. Worry about ur compatriots who are getting blown apart each day..
@Mashael: I pray that some one listens to you. For me you are voice of wisdom and I agree. Regards and love from India
@saad: @Khan: Ask the moderators to let through my rejoinder to your comments. You might find it interesting and educational.
@ Saad There can be two explanations for your meaningless comments 1) You are an Indian in disguise, provoking sentiments for fun 2) You are someone who has closed his eyes and dont want to see real picture
I go with first
@Rex Minor: Will you ever grow up son and become Rex Major one day ?
@Khan: please read in detail about 1965 conflict in Kashmir, Not in the narration of Pak Army OR Indian Army. Read what International press says Then you will know who left what.
@Khan: Does it matter whether India cried, pleased etc etc. Jammu & Kashmir is still with us after 40 years and you are left holding a rump part of which you sold to the Chinese. Wake up and smell the coffee. There is absolutely no way we will give you Kashmir and none of your Muslim/Chinese friends are going to help you either.
@Mashael: Action not emotions are needed to upgrade the conditions in both counties, who are condemned to live and die together. There have been several Indian civilisations before and they all disapeared without leaving a trace to learn about the causes of their demise.
Education is the key for human progress and no reforms have been carried out in both countries sinced the end of colonisations. who was the woman who serverd the poors of India and said that at times she even had doubts that the just God exists after watchng the conditions of the Indians sick and poor?
Rex Minor
Irrespective of who won the 1965 war, it is time that India and Pakistan move on. We cannot live according to history otherwise all the Jews would be against Germany. We must bring forward our educated individuals who sit down to actually find a solution. There will be no solution till military is involved. The problem with Pakistan is that the military has the upper hand. Pakistan is paying the price for General Zia's Islamic doctorisation of the whole generation. Look at the rest of the world- small countries like Korea and Japan have achieved so much and we are still not able to meet the basic requirements of our people. War is worthless- there is no winner. After all , all we need is 2 yards to be buried. Taking Kashmir is fine but given the present state of Pakistan can we assure our Kashmiri brothers that they will be safe, prosperous and happy in Pakistan. We have to first improve our state of affairs- kashmiris are brothers and we should care about their emotions but what about millions of Pakistanis already living in Pakistan. Have we thought about them. Lets take a pledge that we will first make Pakistan a glorious nation- not by war but by progress, civil rights, economic growth, freedom of speech, education, science and above all love for humanity.
At first Pakistan tried to snatch it by force. Then it tried proxy war. Now it is begging the world for support on Kashmir. Your standards are falling quite rapidly.
Wikipedia doesnt make blind claims dear pakistanis..It also gives a direct reference link enclosed in bracket [ ] after each claim which you can click & see the proof..Entire neutral sources of the world claim pak lost 65 war & still they are crying they won...outsiders must be laughing..now you can also see globalsecurity.com regarding 65 war truth..or Time magazine link in wikipedia itself..& regarding the english newspaper the austrailian newspaper made news about chawinda battle which pak has a upper hand & not about 65 war as a whole..also pak lost other battles like burki,phillora,ichogil bund,asal uttar & 65 war as a whole!
Just leave my indian bros..its not worth debating these pakis people regarding 65 war..world knows india won..let them cry!
@Hedgefunder:
Thank you.!!!
Keep crying, I'm lovin' it... Kashmir..Kashmir..Kashmir.. India keep pressing the jugular vein of Pakistan... hahaha
first stop burning your schools and killing girl students...........kashmir is just rock and hills
@G.din really who taught your this history let me guess it must be some hindu extremist because hindu extremist tell its indian people that india won all wars fought with pakistan. Really indian army was on the gates of lahore really thats why your General fail to drink tea at Gymkhana thats ohhh so because of ceasefire india stop its dream of capturing lahore right hmm i see no wonder you're PM lal bahadur died in Tashkent hmmm. hahaha whom you fooling if according you india was at the gate of lahore then no UN or US or even russia can make india stop capturing lahore why didn't your army capture lahore or sialkot huh tell me? why pakistan was able to bomb your amritsar cities and your air force most of its planes destroyed and pakistan had superiority in air all throughout the war? Well true india was successful in kashmir then why did they attack sialkot and lahore sector why? Mr G.din FYI remember operation blue star well it was pakistani Government who gave you name of all the separatists leader and their location if pakistan didn't gave you the list of separatists leader then Mr G.din right now amritsar would have been capital of khalistan.Lastly finally you do admit muslims ruled india for more the millennium.
@G. Din: sir pl allow Mr. Kahn to live in dreams. if you try to make him to realise that, his heart will never accept as facts are opposite to his dreams.
Anyone think the USA wants to mediate Kashmir? If so I have a bridge I can sell you.
Pakistan should teach a lesson to india the one it had teached earlier. only than sanity will prevail and Banyas will start talking like parrot like their grandmaster did in 1948.
@ TO all INDIANS well its time for some history lessons guys. 1965 war was won by pakistan and this is reported in neutral english newspaper in which it clearly states Pakistan has victory. Operation gibralter which was started by pakistan army had met failures because india was successful in beating back pakistan offensive but they knew if it continue india will be in deep trouble decided to launch offensive in lahore and sialkot sectors and some 2 more sectors so pakistan can more forces from kashmir to these sectors. Indian army Generals decide lets take lahore and sialkot and then move further into pakistan and wanted to capture Rawalpindi. But there plans met massive failure even your own General admitted that a night before attack we all decided that we will drink tea in lahore Gymkhana but once the attack started indian army started to disperse in all direction,some of them captured and most of them killed indian army met failure in all sectors and pakistan army went further into indian and capture most of small cities and village. Pakistan air force had superiority from start of the war and even bomb amritsar city. True india army also had some pakistan villages but pakistan had most of the territory UN intervened and ceasefire was put into action. it was clearly victory for pakistan army because pakistan army had beaten back indian offensive who was triple in number still pakistan defended its border. India never capture lahore wonder why there is no authentic evidence of india capturing any of pakistan city. After the war your PM decided to increase your army budget and get your army a decent weapons. Australian newspaper in their morning headlines stated pakistan win the war now indians don't tell me australian newspaper was funded by ISI and its editor was zaid hamid hahah.
@Pakistani: Are you really Pakistani?
@Khan: "...your pathetic out burst compelled me to enlighten you. " Which part of my "outburst" did you find "pathetic"? Before answering, consult a good non-Pakistani published English dictionary to know what words like "outburst" and "pathetic" mean. "1965 (probably you were not even born at that time so read) " I had two children by that year. "... it was India who cried for ceasefire NOT Pakistan. " Why would India cry for ceasefire if it was at the gates of your premium city, Lahore, and threatening to enter it? Use some commonsense. "Jammu was gone." Now, that would be news to Jammuites. " Let me further add here in 1962 when China was kicking Indian … China ask Pakistan to take step, It was Pakistan who decided let go otherwise, Pakistan forces would have been sitting in your capital." China did kick Indian ... in 1962 for which we remain thanklessly grateful but assuming that China did ask you "to take step" why didn't you take advantage of that situation? Was it because Indian Armed forces had already routed your army twice before that and Pakistani army was still licking their chops? Get out of your delusions of Islamic marshal prowess. Glory days of Islam have been over for nearly a millennium now.
@Khan:
Only that Pakistan did not pull back its forces, but was driven out by the victorious Indian army. If you guys could have taken Kashmir by now, you would have. Face the facts. :)
@Khan: Since you appear to be well read, hopefully you are aware of the result of the 1965 war a assessed by Neutral observers. The following is excerpted from Wikipedia:
There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below — According to the Library of Congress Country Studies conducted by the Federal Research Division of the United States[73] – The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government. TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[74] The article further elaborates, Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N. Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[75] – The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat. In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[76] Gertjan Dijkink writes – The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts. An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India,[77] summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin. In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[7] – India won the war. It gained 1,840 km2 (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2 (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2 (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2 (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2 (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan. Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[78] Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated. BBC reported that the war served game changer in Pakistani politics,[79] The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party. "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[8] – India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km2) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km2) of its own. An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[80] – A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed. English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[81] – The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate. Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[82] – Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory. Newsweek magazine, however, praised the Pakistani military's ability to hold off the much larger Indian Army.[83] By just the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own. I guess that most of what you've read came from your history books, and the plain fact is these books have been lying to you.
poor pak keeps on trying only to fail.....:D
@Tom: Not only Lahore but half of Punjab & Sindh too ! Khan seems to think that he was the only one around in 1965, so he can lecture the rest, but sadly he too is the product of flawed education ! He is rather choosy with his historical facts too.
@Khan: Then India would have kept Lahore,!!!
@G.Din your pathetic out burst compelled me to enlighten you. 1965 (probably you were not even born at that time so read) it was India who cried for ceasefire NOT Pakistan. India was chocked in Kashmir n within hours (not days or months) Jammu was gone. Let me further add here in 1962 when China was kicking Indian ... China ask Pakistan to take step, It was Pakistan who decided let go otherwise, Pakistan forces would have been sitting in your capital. 1971 war was not a war but a conspiracy, you should thanks to USA n USSR. Long story short READ2 than comment.
What Pakistan doesn't understand is that India unlike its neighbour is least obsessed with Kashmir and is focusing on more important issues namely economy, education, health-care, infrastructure etc and Kashmir figures last in its priority list.
@Khan: " In 1965 Pakistan should have never pulled back it’s forces from Kashmir." If you had not that, today Indian army would have been camping on the eastern bank of Ichhogil Canal. @Zen.one: "...it is a disputed territory as per Simla agreement" Where does Simla agreement mention Kashmir as a "disputed territory"? Simla aqreement talks about negotiations on Kashmir. India expects to negotiate your eviction from the part under occupation by Pakistan.
“It is a waste of time for anybody no matter how eminent to be even trying to question this.” This is the one sentence if pakis understand they will gain jannat automatically..
Its always like this first pakistan cries for american support against india after that cries before UN to support against america for not respecting pakistans sovereignty.
@Khan: In 1965 Pakistan should have never pulled back it’s forces from Kashmir.
Ever considered the design of the new map ? Were you to prepare to lose Lahore and perhaps much more in the south for bit of Kashmir ? Think before you write, and stop living in pipe dreams, that is the actual problem with this Nation and its people, who are educated on flawed and their version of history. Pakistan has never really had any viable policies to deal with India, except Jihadis, Non State Actors etc and not much really has been achieved with those policies over past six decades except it has also managed to lose half of its turf, namely East Pakistan. Common sense suggests that smart thing for Pakistan is focus on its internal security issues and reclaim NW from those assets you created, than start dealing with the economic & social mess that is there then perhaps worry about other issues, as otherwise there may not be a Nation in its present form for too long.
If its disputed, try to come ad take it.
Why don't pakistanis prefer to develop their own country rather than expand it while already sitting on a bomb.
Kashmir is an integral part of India...says Khurshid, at the same time he acknowledges it is a disputed territory as per Simla agreement. Quite a paradox and very ironic.
hahahah Mr khurshid no one in the world consider kashmir to be integral part of india not even UN thats why it is called disputed territory. In the world map its is disputed territory not integral part of india. So its better to stop saying kashmir is integral part of india.
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" (Nepoleon) that's what Mr. Bhutto "Shamla Agreement" was/is and Mr. Nehru Agreement to follow "Will" of Kashmiries in UN 1947 (another example). Mr. Mr. Khursid is within the parameter of the Nepoleon quote when he repeated "Kashmir is integral part of India". Per say Mr. Kasuri (ex-foreign minister) kashmir solution infact was no solution either, it was just another Serab in desert. In 1965 Pakistan should have never pulled back it's forces from Kashmir.
why pakistan not asks US to intervene on hafiz saeed???
Prime Minister Nawaz sought US intervention in resolving the Kashmir issue. Hmmm, who is a 'Dehati Aurat' now?