To be independent, or not to be independent?

[sanaa]

Sanaa, you don't get my point.

Pakistan demands a plebiscite. It is obviuosly willing to do everything possible for the this event to occur.

is it willing to first withdraw from the invaded area? and who is pakistan to demand anything? it is the one at fault here . this wouldnt have happened if pakistan had not invaded kashmir . it needs to withdraw from kashmir and leave the kashmiris in peace

India on the other hand, currntly does not accept the PAkistani proposal. WHY???

who is pakistan to dictate what should happen . first it should withdraw from the area it invaded and then talk

Kashmiris should be allowed to decide their own future!

actually so should pakistanis but you dont see that happening

 

[sanaa]

Here's a secondary source:

"The catalyst was the 1987 election in Kashmir which was shamelessly and blatantly rigged."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/voices_from_kashmir/html/kashmiri_separatist.stm

what are u linking to ? that quote is from a seperatist , in fact there is not even an article . it is just an interview of a seperatist

what is interesting is on the same site , another interview of the kashmiri historian says this



Since then I have embarked on writing a history of Kashmir. I have written about 100 pages. For my research, I have been travelling across the state. Wherever I go now in my travels, I feel that something is missing. I remember neighbourhoods which were inhabited by my Kashmiri Hindu brothers.



They used to invite us to major Hindu festivals, such as Shivratri. And we, in turn, used to invite them to celebrate Eid.

But now they are gone. Soon after the outbreak of violence in 1989, many Kashmiri Hindus left Srinagar and the Kashmir Valley, driven out of their homes in fear.

I feel that I have lost something. It is my strong belief that without the Kashmiri Hindus one cannot talk about Kashmiri identity, or Kashmir.

This is because it is their land. We, the Kashmiri Muslims, are converts [to Islam]. And it is the Kashmiri Hindus who have understood us best just as we understand them. Kashmiri Hindus form about 5 to 6% of the total population of Kashmir and the Muslims form about 95%. But what sustains my belief that Kashmir is incomplete without its Hindus is the fact that we have lived together for six centuries amicably, without shedding blood.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/voices_from_kashmir/html/historian.stm

and look at what this kashmiri muslim has to say
"We back India and want to continue being a part of it."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/voices_from_kashmir/html/hotel_manager.stm

 

[sanaa]

on the same bbc news link

sajjad hussain , a kashmiri muslim has to say this
"The people of this part of Kashmir have always stood by India.
I don't blame Delhi for all that's wrong with us. But I blame them for banking on Kashmiri politicians who only enrich themselves and care for no-one else's welfare.

We don't like Pakistan. We live in constant fear of being shelled by the Pakistani army. They destroy our homes and our lives.

India is a democratic country and we have faith in its democracy and its commitment to a multi-faith society. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/voices_from_kashmir/html/student.stm

 

[sanaa]

Salam (Peace),

This is from an Indian article:

"While most elections in Kashmir have been rigged, what was distinctive about the 1987 election was that fraud was combined with violence. Polling agents of the Muslim United Front (MUF) were thrown out of booths and beaten up. Several of those who subsequently joined the militant ranks were eyewitnesses to the electoral fraud perpetrated by the Indian state. "


http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/DA25Df01.html

it is not an indian article , it is from asia times . anyway i dont see any evidence for "most elections being rigged" . assuming the 1987 election was actually rigged well india has rectified its fault and these problems do come up in democracies . things are better now .
but what is interesting is the article also says

Pakistan, which has for long championed self-determination for the people in Indian Kashmir and criticized India's record on human rights in the Valley, has itself denied basic civil and political rights to the parts of Kashmir under its control.

Azad Kashmir was granted the right to vote only in 1970, 22 years after Pakistan "liberated" the area. The Northern Areas were allowed to vote only in October 1994, 47 years after they came under Pakistani rule.

Thousands of militants armed and trained in camps run by the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan's paramount security agency, are sent across the LoC to "liberate" Indian Kashmir. But the Azad Kashmir wing of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) is subject to repression as it favors freedom from Pakistan and India.

 

[bless_sins]

Salam (Peace),

There are Kashmiris that want to be part of India and those that don't. The problem is the numbers. To solve that problem we need a plebiscite.

SHould PAkistan withdraw? How does Pakistan know that India won't rig the plebiscite just like it rigged the elections.

The Plebiscite should be held in Kashmir by a neutral third party (like U.N.). India refuses to accept thrid party invovlement.

AS for the Kashmiri HIndus, there is nothing the Muslims can do. There are currently 400,000 Indian soldiers in Kashmir, making it the world's most densely occupied terrirtory. If that many soldiers can't do anything than neither can Pakistan (whose entire army is 500,000), or the Kashmiri people.

Besides, there are lot of allegations of arresting politcal activists (which numbers in the thousands), who suddenly "disapper" from police custody.

Kashmiri women have also protested rape by India soldiers.

The terrorism started when India rigged 1987 elections. Many (but not all)Kashmiris clearly want independence.

The terrorism is supported by Kashmiris themselves. If it was by foreigneers, then 400,000 Indian troops would be able to stop it.

 

[bless_sins]

it is not an indian article , it is from asia times . anyway i dont see any evidence for "most elections being rigged" . assuming the 1987 election was actually rigged well india has rectified its fault and these problems do come up in democracies . things are better now .
but what is interesting is the article also says

The article is very pro-indian, not surprising as it was written in Bangalore.