Kashmir issue: PM Nawaz accuses India of inflexibility

Published: November 20, 2014
SHARES
Email
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addressing the session of AJ&K Council in Muzaffarabad, Azad Jammu and Kashmir. PHOTO: APP

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addressing the session of AJ&K Council in Muzaffarabad, Azad Jammu and Kashmir. PHOTO: APP

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addressing the session of AJ&K Council in Muzaffarabad, Azad Jammu and Kashmir. PHOTO: APP  Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. PHOTO: REUTERS

MUZAFFARABAD: After Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s speech on Kashmir in UN ruffled feathers in India, the premier blamed the neighbour for having an inflexible approach towards the longstanding issue, Express News reported on Thursday. 

Speaking at a meeting of Azad and Jammu Kashmir Council in Muzaffarabad, the prime minister said that he will consult Hurriyat leaders prior to entering negotiations with India.

Calling for a peaceful resolution of the dispute, PM Nawaz reiterated that all issues should be resolved through negotiations and without the use of force.

“During recent ceasefire violations along the Line of Control, many have been hurt and have suffered; we do not need to use power.” PM Nawaz stressed.

Vowing to continue efforts for the Kashmir cause, the prime minister urged the international community to help Pakistan in its attempts to enter talks with India.

“Pakistan has always kept Kashmir issue at the forefront in all world peace forums,” Nawaz added.

Shunning Indian accusations related to Pakistan harbouring militants in the country, the premier said it was a lie that Pakistan was providing sanctuaries to anti-India elements,

“India has a propoganda against us that we are harbouring terrorists in order to cover up their wrong doings in Kashmir,” he said, adding that Pakistan itself was a victim of terrorism and was doing everything to eliminate it.

Poll

Do you think PM Nawaz should talk to Hurriyat leaders prior to entering dialogue with India?

     View Results


Polls are non-scientific, reflect only the online audience and can be manipulated.
Loading ... Loading ...

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (34)

  • wiserneighbour
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:08PM

    Keep consulting.They will solve the issue.India won’t start any dialogue in near future

    Recommend

  • muhammad nawaz
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:11PM

    at this time nawaz sharitf last mistake in breakdown his government last time saved shariff family saudia arabia but now people of pakistani not give chance

    Recommend

  • Abdullah
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:39PM

    PM in action. Mr. PM we need this kind of attitude from you, not the one which you had for past 16 + months.

    Recommend

  • Tony Singh
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:43PM

    “Speaking at a meeting of Azad and Jammu Kashmir Council in Muzaffarabad, the prime minister said that he will consult Hurriyat leaders prior to entering negotiations with India.”

    If that is the attitude Mr. Sherif, then call Hurriyat to Pakistan for consultation. So long as they are on Indian soil, you can either talk to them or to the Indian government. PeriodRecommend

  • vinsin
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:54PM

    I do agree that India has created Kashmir issue. But I disagree that Pakistan is not harboring terrorist. Dawood Ibrahim, Masood Azhar, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar and people who were involved in mumbai 2008 attacks are still in Pakistan.

    There is no issue of inflexibility, UN resolutions are very clear on this, it is the Pakistan who has committed that it would move it’s army and then plebiscite to happen within a decade. UN resolution is same as what Jinnah committed to Mountbatten. As long as Pakistan army is there UN cannot do and will not do anything.

    Recommend

  • Sneha
    Nov 20, 2014 - 1:54PM

    So basically what he wants is flexibility as in “do a mumbai” – the mastermind and his group who are banned for their act by most of the world roam free as heroes giving press interview in his country but we should not mind it and be flexible.
    Do Kargil, border voilation – infiltration, behead soldiers, kill civilians but we should not retaliate and still be flexible.
    Talk to separatist in our “own” land india not theirs for “tea” and then violate Shimla agreement – “condition only pak and india can talk no third person.”
    And who are these people, when there is elected representatives in jk voted by the people? Will China talk if you talk to tibetian xinjiang separatist before both country bilaterals, or india meets Baloch separatist before pakistan meet in your own country?
    I am glad modi is focusing economy and world trade and solving country’s problems and not on countries with no such ambitions but conflicts. We had enough of their guns and roses strategy.

    Recommend

  • Kushal
    Nov 20, 2014 - 2:05PM

    What inflexibility? We were flexible in 1947. We ended up creating a blunder. This time not a single inch of land will be spared.

    Recommend

  • Prognosticator
    Nov 20, 2014 - 2:31PM

    Listen to your own adviser Mr.Sartaj Aziz’s comments on BBC and you will know what India is talking about. Enough of the double-talk.
    The Kashmir problem is really simple. Vacate PoK and the problem is solved.

    Recommend

  • Frank
    Nov 20, 2014 - 2:38PM

    What a volte-face by Nawaz Sharif! Thank you, Imran Khan!

    Recommend

  • AVMPolpot
    Nov 20, 2014 - 2:53PM

    ” the prime minister said that he will consult Hurriyat leaders prior to entering negotiations with India”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Bravo….or Bravado?

    Recommend

  • vinsin
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:10PM

    Pakistan got exactly the land as demanded by Jinnah, 25% for 25% Indian Muslims, that included Kashmiri Muslims also. Pakistan was inflexible in Bangladesh, is inflexible in case of Baluchistan. Is Pakistan ready to take all Indian Muslims or atleast those who would prefer to move? If tomorrow Indian Muslims demand for another Muslims state which they will do in future what would be Pakistan position? Separatists are not part of UN resolution.

    Recommend

  • In the name of love (what more)
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:11PM

    kashmiris are talking of only 2 solutions. One is to stay with India and the other is independence. There are hardly any takers of going with pakistan. Therefore, it is now only a matter between India and Kashmiris. Pakistan has no role to play whatsoever. Infact, such statements by the Pakistani PM do not help ties between the 2 countries.

    Recommend

  • Siraj Ahmed
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:16PM

    Nawaz knows that times have changed! India under Modi will never accept this condition.
    So after failing to get a meeting with Modi at the forthcoming SAARC meeting and utter failure of international community to even respond to Pakistan’s desperate plea for third party to get involved in Kashmir issue, our PM is now pandering to the Pakistani domestic audience.

    Recommend

  • Cynic Waheed
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:22PM

    @ET – Do Pakistani’s also leave any comments? Or is this space exclusively for Indians? Please try to give balanced views from both sides instead of giving this space to our very very friendly, wise, and always correct Indian firends!

    Thanks.

    Recommend

  • AVMPolpot
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:25PM

    Pakistan wants a just and fair solution of Kashmir Issue
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    namely the handing over of Jammu and Kashmir and a couple of other Indian states to Pakistan.Is it too much to ask?:)

    Recommend

  • AVMPolpot
    Nov 20, 2014 - 3:27PM

    Pakistan seems to be in pre Kargill 2 Mode
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Just listen to the PM, Sartaz Aziz and COAS.

    Recommend

  • a_writer
    Nov 20, 2014 - 4:32PM

    The recent statements from Mr.Aziz, Mr.Sharif and Pakistani Govt. explain the recent LOC firings.
    Recent events such as Mr.Sharif’s speech at the UN about Kashmir, India’s cancelled the Foreign office meeting have not garnered much world attention. The only way to get the world to notice Kashmir is to stir up trouble at the border. I think this is the motivation for Pakistani military to start firing at the border ( it is no longer an ‘LOC’, for all practical purposes it is the official border) and the new Indian govt. appears to be more than willing to respond vigorously.

    Recommend

  • Menon
    Nov 20, 2014 - 4:43PM

    There are no issues with Kashmir as far as India is concerned. Jammu and Kashmir is state in the Republic and that is it.

    Recommend

  • Nov 20, 2014 - 8:18PM

    Statement of NS is for domestic consumption.

    Recommend

  • not true
    Nov 20, 2014 - 8:47PM

    @vinsin:
    “There is no issue of inflexibility, UN resolutions are very clear on this, it is the Pakistan who has committed that it would move it’s army and then plebiscite to happen within a decade.”
    Not true, Pakistan never made any such commitment although the UN resolutions called for it. But in 1950, both India and Pakistan agreed to the Dixon formula wherein both agreed to hold plebiscite in areas under their control and divide Kashmir as per the result of the plebiscite. India reneged and therefore the Kashmir issue lingers on and is a veritable threat to peace.

    Recommend

  • Jawad U Rahman
    Nov 20, 2014 - 9:07PM

    @Menon:
    What about people that live in it. Does it matter what they want?

    Recommend

  • Candid1
    Nov 20, 2014 - 9:12PM

    To all the indian trolls: Thank you for proving the PM’s point. Also, stop tryuing to re-write the UN Resolutions on Kashmir. Pakistan’s obligation was to remove the tribals from Kashmir, which it did, and India’s obligation was to remove its military from Kashmir, which it did not. So take your lies somewhere else, you have no buyers in Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • Last Word
    Nov 20, 2014 - 9:48PM

    This stand taken by Pakistan would also backfire like many others in past two months. Pakistan needs to understand that it is no position to defy India as UN and USA support India which is quite evident from snubs received by Pakistan from both.

    Recommend

  • asad
    Nov 20, 2014 - 9:56PM

    loved to the fact that most indians are angry over the issue of Pakistani PM meeting Kashmiri freedom fighters .

    Recommend

  • ObserverUSA
    Nov 20, 2014 - 10:12PM

    @vinsin:
    The issue of removing Pak forces from Azad Kashmir was resolved through the Dixon Plan.
    “…Dixon received from Nehru a tentative proposal: “In Jammu the ceasefire line would become the boundary, Azad Kashmir going to Pakistan, the remainder to India. Since the latter included territory north of the Chenab River, India would also agree not to reduce `sensibly, substantially or materially’ its flow. The Northern Areas would be conceded but Buddhist Ladakh in the east would remain with India. As to the Valley, which Nehru defined generously, he agreed that prima facie it was in doubt and that a plebiscite must be taken… This would, inter alia, minimise refugee movement while simplifying demilitarisation and administrative arrangements. The Valley, overwhelmingly Muslim but also Sheikh Abdullah’s power base, would be subject to a vote. The major difference that arose was about the territory that India claimed automatically. Because of strong pro-Pakistan areas to the east of the ceasefire line in Jammu, Dixon felt it both unwise and mistaken to follow this closely and warned that he would argue against it.”
    See: http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1921/stories/20021025002508200.htm

    Recommend

  • Gunga Din
    Nov 20, 2014 - 10:48PM

    @Candid1,

    Refer to UNCIP Resolution S/1100 Para 75 of August 13, 1948, adopted unanimously by UNSC on November 9, 1948.

    The Resolution ( Truce Section reads as follows ):

    (1) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir
    constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of
    Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its
    troops from that State.

    (2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour 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.

    India was however allowed to retain as many troops as it needed to maintain peace and order.

    (2) Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the
    Commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law andorder. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.

    Pakistan never pulled back its troops from POK ( including Gilgit Baltistan, Skardu, and Muzaffarabad ). It tried to negotiate with the UN on how many troops it too could retain. That was a non-starter, allowing an invader to remain in the victim’s house. Therefore, the plebiscite never happened then. And, now, after Pakistan’s invasion ( Gilbraltar, Grand slam) in 1965, Pakistan’s surrender and breakup in 1971 and the Shimla Accord of 1972 committing Pakistan to a bilateral solution, the UN Resolutions are now time-barred and meaningless. Every UN Secy General from Boutros Boutros Al Ghali to Kofi Annan to Ban Ki Moon has said so. Yet, Pakistanis still somehow clutch at straws.

    Recommend

  • ObserverUSA
    Nov 20, 2014 - 11:04PM

    @Gunga Din:
    “…the UN Resolutions are now time-barred and meaningless.” But Kashmir remains a festering sore and a grave threat to peace in South Asia. Realistically, in the interest of peace, both India and Pakistan must sincerely strive to resolve.

    Recommend

  • ObserverUSA
    Nov 20, 2014 - 11:35PM

    @Gunga Din:
    “…the UN Resolutions are now time-barred and meaningless.” Nevertheless, the Kashmir issue cannot be wished and it continues not only to mar relations between the two neighbors but continues to threaten peace in South Asia. And, it would be in the best interests of both Pakistan and India to resolve it amicably.

    Recommend

  • inderjit sahota
    Nov 20, 2014 - 11:36PM

    There is no point in talks, after many years of talking nothing achieved. Best to leave talks alone.

    concentrate on internal affairs. improve the welfare of the people.

    Recommend

  • Gp65
    Nov 21, 2014 - 12:24AM

    @asad:
    No one is angry. There is a clear marker laid by India that if Pakistan talks to Hurriyat ghen Indian government will not talk to it. India has said nothing about what Pakistan does or does not do eith Kashmiris in Muzaffarabad.

    The person who is frustrated is Nawaz at this clear groundrule. He decided to prooke India into cancelling the secretary level talks and then use that as an excuse to internationalize the issue. Unfortunately, he has had no success. Even OIC simply asked Pakistan to resolve the issue bilaterally with India.

    Recommend

  • Shanawar Hashmi
    Nov 21, 2014 - 1:57AM

    I fail to understand as to why both Pakistan and India don’t agree on letting the people of Kashmir decide what they want. Simply withdraw all military and allow UN designated officials to supervise the referendum. This is the only solution for those who are willing to shun their egos in the name of humanity.

    Recommend

  • Sid
    Nov 21, 2014 - 1:09PM

    @Shanawar Hashmi:
    For the same reason why Pakistan will not allow Balochis to decide their faith.

    Recommend

  • unfair
    Nov 21, 2014 - 9:06PM

    @Sid:
    It is unequal and unfair to equate Baluchistan with Kashmir. Kashmir is an internationally recognized dispute between Pakistan and India and is and unfinished business of Partition. Further, whereas Kashmir has seen wars between Pakistan and India, Baluchistan has witnessed an insurgency for much lesser period of time. Above all it is an internal matter of Pakistan, whereas Kashmir is not and internal affair of India, though India claims it to be so.

    Recommend

  • observer
    Nov 22, 2014 - 6:28AM

    ET Moderators, please allow this retort to @unfair who has made statements that are not correct
    ————————————————————————.

    @unfair:

    “It is unequal and unfair to equate Baluchistan with Kashmir.”

    Yes, they are indeed “unequal”. Pakistan’s annexation of Balochistan by force and subsequent oppression of the Baloch and stealing their resources is a whole lot worse than Kashmir situation. The Baloch never agreed to be annexed to Pakistan; there was no fair and broad referendum. Jinnah sent it the army and forcefully annexed Balochistan against the will of the people. More than 200,000 Baloch have been killed since 1948, with their only fault being their demand for right to self-determination.

    Kashmir has been Hindu land for over 5000 years. Kashmir acceded to India in a legal process and the Kashmir assembly passed a resolution of the same in 1954. India still honors Article 370 that prohibits non-Kashmiris from buying property in Kashmir and becoming residents, thus maintaining the pre-partition demography.

    Compare this with Pakistan occupied Kashmir. in 1970’s Pakistan erased the “State Subject Rule” in effect in AJK/GB/Northern areas that prohibited non Kashmiris settling down in these areas. For the truth about this read:

    http://skardu.blogspot.com/2014/07/gilgit-baltistan-state-subject-rule.html

    http://www.sharnoffsglobalviews.com/the-institute-for-gilgit-baltistan-studies/

    https://www.facebook.com/GilgitBaltistanUnitedMovement

    Recommend

More in Pakistan