Skip to main contentdfsdf

anouk jurgens's List: Pakistan India Conflict

  • May 14, 09

    www.school.eb.com/...article-214223

    • but they became apparent after the British withdrawal from South Asia in 1947. By the terms agreed to by India and Pakistan for the partition of the Indian subcontinent, the rulers of princely states were given the right to opt for either Pakistan or India or—with certain reservations—to remain independent. Hari Singh, the maharaja of Kashmir, initially believed that by delaying his decision he could maintain the independence of Kashmir, but, caught up in a train of events that included a revolution among his Muslim subjects along the western borders of the state and the intervention of Pashtun tribesmen, he signed an Instrument of Accession to the Indian union in October 1947. This was the signal for intervention both by Pakistan, which considered the state to be a natural extension of Pakistan, and by India, which intended to confirm the act of accession. Localized warfare continued during 1948 and ended, through the intercession of the United Nations, in a cease-fire that took effect in January 1949. In July of that year, India and Pakistan defined a cease-fire line—the line of control—that divided the administration of the territory. Regarded at the time as a temporary expedient, the partition along that line still exists.
    •    
       

       Although there was a clear Muslim majority in Kashmir before the 1947 partition, and its economic, cultural, and geographic contiguity with the Muslim-majority area of the Punjab could be convincingly demonstrated, the political developments during and after the partition resulted in a division of the region. Pakistan was left with territory that, although basically Muslim in character, was thinly populated, relatively inaccessible, and economically underdeveloped. The largest Muslim group, situated in the Vale of Kashmir and estimated to number more than half the population of the entire region, lay in Indian-administered territory, with its former outlets via the Jhelum valley route blocked.

    1 more annotation...

  • May 14, 09

    The Indian claim to Kashmir centers on the agreement between the Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Lord Mountbatten according to which the erstwhile Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir became an integral part of the Union of India through the Instrument of Accession. It also focuses on India's claim of secular society, an ideology that is not meant to factor religion into governance of major policy and thus considers it irrelevant in a boundary dispute. Another argument by India is that, in India, minorities are very well integrated, with some members of the minority communities holding positions of power and influence in India. Even though more than 80% of India's population practices Hinduism, a former President of India, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, is a Muslim while Sonia Gandhi, the parliamentary leader of the ruling Congress Party, is a Roman Catholic. The current prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, is a Sikh and leader of opposition, Lal Krishna Advani, is a Hindu. Indian viewpoint is succinctly summarized by Ministry of External affairs, Government of India.[40][41]

    * India holds that the Instrument of Accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India, signed by the Maharaja Hari Singh (erstwhile ruler of the State) on 26 October, 1947, was completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act (1935), Indian Independence Act (1947) and international law and was total and irrevocable.[41]
    * The Constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Maharaja's Instrument of Accession to India and had adopted a constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of the state with the Indian Union. India claims that this body was a representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri people at the time.
    * India believes that all differences between India and Pakistan including Kashmir need to be settled through bilateral negotiations as agreed to by the two countries when they signed the Simla Agreement on July 2, 1972.[42]
    * Indi

    en.wikipedia.org/...Kashmir_dispute

      • India holds that the Instrument of Accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India, signed by the Maharaja Hari Singh (erstwhile ruler of the State) on 26 October, 1947, was completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act (1935), Indian Independence Act (1947) and international law and was total and irrevocable.[41]
        •  
      • The Constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Maharaja's Instrument of Accession to India and had adopted a constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of the state with the Indian Union. India claims that this body was a representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri people at the time.
        •  
      • India believes that all differences between India and Pakistan including Kashmir need to be settled through bilateral negotiations as agreed to by the two countries when they signed the Simla Agreement on July 2, 1972.[42]
        •  
      • India does not accept the Two Nation Theory that forms the basis of Pakistan.
        •  
      • United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 was never able to be implemented as Pakistan failed to withdraw its forces from Kashmir which was the first step in implementing the resolution.[43] Now the resolution is obsolete since the geography and demographics have been permanently altered.[44] The resolution was passed by United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter.[45] Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.[46]
      • India is a secular state and the many ethnic minorities in Kashmir would be treated as second class citizens in Islamic republic of Pakistan.
        •  
      • Indian Government has repeatedly asked Pakistan not to allow its territory to be used for terrorist attacks against India.[47]
        •  
      • India has asked United Nations that It should not be leave unchallenged or unaddressed claims of moral, political and diplomatic support for terrorism, which were clearly in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 which is a Chapter VII resolution that makes it mandatory for member states to not provide active or passive support to terrorist organizations.[48][49] Specifically it has pointed out that Pakistan Governments support to Terrorist organizations Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba is in direct violation of this resolution.[50]
        •  
      • Indian Government has repeatedly called on United States to declare Pakistan a Terrorist state.[51][52][53][54]
        •  
      • United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 [55] tacitly accepts India's stand that all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan need to be resolved by mutual dialogue ( and does not call for a plebiscite)
        •  
      • The state of Jammu and Kashmir was made autonomous by Article 370 of the Constitution of India.[56]
        •  
      • India points to the recent state elections held in phases in November–December 2008. High turnouts were seen in spite of calls for boycott by Kashmiri Muslim separatists.[57]. The Pro Indian Party National Conference emerged as the winner.[58]
        •  
      • In a diverse country like India, disaffection and discontent are not uncommon. Indian democracy has the necessary resilience to accommodate genuine grievances within the framework of our sovereignty, unity and integrity. Government of India has expressed its willingness to accommodate the legitimate political demands of the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir.[40]

    1 more annotation...

1 - 2 of 2
20 items/page
List Comments (0)