Azad Kashmir claim on Gilgit Baltistan

[Joe Shearer]

This is set in stone. Its sad that there is little research on this but what can we do. Stories are dying. Perhaps one day accounts will be written.

I can only diffidently point out that it is a singular lack of record, confined to those areas least congenial to presentation as anything other than an attempt to win by force of arms what was not available through the constitutional arrangements that had been made.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You cannot ignore revolutionary constitutionalism Joe. That is a complicated branch of international law but it perhaps maybe the most oldest form of it and its history has multiple precedents.

Drink deep or drink not of the Pierian Spring.

Think, for a moment, if this doctrine spread insidiously to regions outside its stout advocate of the moment.

These aspects, as you well know, in your role as perhaps the most well-informed among members of the branches of international law, nestle uneasily with the sets of rules that have been drawn up to determine the legitimacy of an administration that has broken from the past. There is, in fact, overlap.

Think of what can happen in the tinderbox that is Pakistan if an unfriendly neighbour (Tajikistan? Uzbekistan? Iran?) were to foster and nourish aspirants to revolutionary constitutionalism in an aggressive manner, systematically, rather than in the inchoate* Hindu festival kind of manner in which some contemporary efforts have been alleged to have been made.

* This term may be parsed in its legal sense without offence to the intent of the passage.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Look the way I see it both countries put their hand in the cookie jar and and since the said countries were found by lawyers, they stretched the law as much as they can to gain legal and moral ground for their actions.

If we look at the previous record of what transpired, especially during the Round Table Conferences, the matter by no means is as binomial as might appear with the context of August 1947 alone. It is a reality, unfortunately for one set of arguments, that the process of gaining independence dates back to the 1880s, not the 1940s.

 

[Joe Shearer]

On a lighter note when was the last time you guys had a discussion with a mod on extreme opposing views and he didnr start deleting posts and issuing bans.

To be honest, I have had rather more pungent exchanges than this courteous and well-mannered one on PDF itself, in its original avatar. There were no repercussions.

 

[Saithan]

Article 370: What happened with Kashmir and why it matters

India is re-defining its relationship with Kashmir after seven decades. Here's what you need to know.

www.bbc.com

How accurate would you guys say the article from BBC is ?

From what I understand, abolishing article 370 in the absense of a constitution in K/J means India is going to take over control/administration even the work with the constitution ?

But it says in the article that India abolished K/J constitution.... They can do that and even completely disregard the local peoples opposition ?

Breaking that entire area into smaller regions may in the end make it easier to divide it. Even accept the parts that want to join Pakistan and leave India.

Flag of Jammu and Kashmir - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

But I do not think India will allow any such actions, which only leaves armed uprising. At the end of the day, I do not see anything changing. Even if BJP move is violating everything about rule of law, it is still the strongest that decides the fate of the weak.

This thread is about Azad Kashmir and it's claim on G-B, and while everything is conjoined, I think India abolishing Article 370 has opened up for solutions. Maybe not as how India envision it.

I see Pakistans move to promote G-B to province as a counter move to what India did. Personally I think Pakistan should have done that long ago and galvanized the development of the region.

So a question comes to mind. Does K/J have to join Pakistan as a whole ? Now that India has scrapped K/J constitution and it's sovereignty, Why not hold referendum in the places under Pakistan and officially have them join Pakistan ? (I have to add this bit too: "if that is what they want").

I expect the outcome is they will join Pakistan, but a referendum would put massive pressure on India administrated Kashmir. IMO.

A quick question to @Joe Shearer during the Indian move into K/J Nehru or the commanders stopped at Kargil. In the documentary the argument for stopping there was that the local language changed from one to another. I get the impression that the commander thought taking anything beyond Kargil would mean the people would be against India. Is that a valid reason for stopping there ?

 

[Saithan]

 

[Saithan]

Hazara region has Turkish origin population ?

This is 2nd part I need to see 1. and 3.part too

 

[Joe Shearer]

How accurate would you guys say the article from BBC is ?

Misleading, in one or two sections, to the point of causing astonishment. In other sections, a realistic portrayal of the situation as it is, and not, to the chagrin of the people in power in Delhi, as it is wished to be.

Please read further for a detailed response to your message, and, inter alia, a commentary on the magazine.

 

[Kaptaan]

Hazara region has Turkish origin population ?

This is 2nd part I need to see 1. and 3.part too

I am from Hazara region [not to be mistaken for Hazara people who are found primarily in Quetta, Balochistan] is very mixed. If you look at a map you will see it realy is a collision zone between west, north and east. There are layers on layers of population and without doubt there will be Turkish layer.

Historical;ly this was the Gandharan region and stretched from present day Islamabad to Kabul. Within 100 mile radius almost every racial group can be seen. Ginger haired, blue eyes, blond hair, dark hair, dark skin with even Mongol mixture and eyes is discernible.

This is Shaheen Shah Afridi [although he is from FATA region] standing at nearly 6ft 6inch tall or 1.98 m and plays for Pakistan cricket team.

Further south in Balochistan we have nearly million Shia Hazara people.

The origins of the Hazara have not been fully reconstructed. In historical context, Turkic and Mongol—is probable because their physical attributes,[27] facial bone structures and parts of their culture and language resemble those of Mongols and Central Asian Turks. Genetic analysis of the Hazara indicate partial Mongol ancestry.[2

And @Joe Shearer I don't think anybody should be offended at you presenting your thoughts. If we disagree then we disagree. This is what civilized discourse is all about.

 

[Cliftonite]

There is no real way to know this (if you imply what I think you are), given huge muslim population retained within India (including muslim majority areas in UP/Bihar and other places too). It also brings up interesting questions in areas where INC (and not muslim league) won elections in British dominion elections pre-partition in certain areas of current Pakistan.

A clarification for example came (from kashmiri locals themselves) in the 2nd "impatient" move in 1965 when operation gibraltar was attempted....and roundly exposed by the locals early (and thus causing Pakistan to escalate it into an official war when Indian security forces captured pretty much all the Pak army infiltrators thanks to early detection and the Kashmiri masses not starting an uprising as they planned).
a number of rational Pakistanis in PDF still talk about this to dissuade the war hawk types there about how "easy" and "forgone" certain assumptions about Valley Kashmiris (and those outside it) are in their exact persuasion on the issue at hand.

A further clarification came from the Indian Kashmiri leader (at the time) himself after he saw what Pakistan "muslim nationhood" argument lead to w.r.t its Eastern Wing (and quite quickly, brutally but also decisively in the end as to the argument's sustenance itself)...and what agreements he then made with the Indian disposition on the matter, taking stock of his people's wishes too in addition to his political ambitions.

Things started to then alter drastically in the late 80s due to a whole course of events (that is a long subject to get into and you will hear the most toxic opinions on it of all stripe, so its hard for neutral or outsider to really grasp the bulk of the reality below all that noise), but Indian Kashmir was relatively quite peaceful before it.

The way I see it- Pakistan has got Kashmir all wrong. Much ado about nothing.


For many on PDF, getting Kashmir seems to be Pakistan's raison d'etre.

Kashmiris want independence. I don't get why Pakistan needs to spend so much resources on a small valley that doesn't even want to join us.

P.S Happy Diwali to you and @Joe Shearer

 

[Nilgiri]

P.S Happy Diwali to you and @Joe Shearer

Thank you buddy.