India-Pakistan relations

[El Profesor]

I feel like this deserves a thread, especially with the tensions in the Indian subcontinent rising again. 

I´d like to understand the situation better since the situation is rarely treated with the depth it deserves in foreign noews outlets and debating with indian and pakistanese members in the forum would give us a better understanding. 

 

 

[El Profesor]

I have some question regarding the border dispute: 

Is this problem still related to the partition of India? If so, how?

Are the tensions in the border used by politicians on both countries to gain internal support?

Is there still a bad blood between the two countries regarding the 1971 war and the indepedence of East Pakistan?

[Azeem]

I think it's a good thing India takes it part of Kashmir, China accede it's Aksai Chin and we take our part. Although there will be some skirmishes for US to intervene and Trump to present in his next year's campaign as how he brought world peace, which makes me think all of this might be planned at deep state level. 

An independent Kashmir was most preferred by international powers but it's all about the waters, control Kashmir and you control the waters of both countries.

 

[Asura]

I will try to explain my best of my knowledge and anyone with more knowledge can correct me if im wrong somewhere as this is a sensitive issue.

When the british left India, all the princely states were brought under one country named India and three states, namely Hyderabad (where I am from), Kashmir and Junagadh didnt accede to either India or Pakistan. Later the nawab of Junagadh wanted to join Pakistan but geographically that was not possible so they remained with India. However Hyderabad and Kashmir wanted to be independent and not be a part of India. Both these regions are ruled by muslim kings at that time. Hyderabad was forced to accede but kashmir was not totally integrated into India. Later the Hindu king of kashmir wanted India's help since there was a threat from pakistan. India accepted to help the kashmir king only if he accepted to accede into the country of India to which they agreed.

Kashmir given some special rights and benefits to be more independent of the country's laws and constitution, this special benefits are given via article 370 and 35A which means that the local state law/govt has to accept with any Indian govt's decisions for the law to be implemented. This means the state has more power than the Indian constitution. In the late 80s and 90s, JKLF, an organisation that wanted kashmir to be independent of India drove away hundreds of thousands of kashmiri pandits (hindus) out of the valley and in the process killed many of them. Most of them still cant return back to their home land as they are scared of their lives. Now that the govt is abolishing 370 and 35A and trying to integrate the region completely into India, the country will have more authority over the region and hope peace will prevail more.

In a way this land is disputed due to different religious beliefs as the majority of the people (muslims) wanted to join Pak and the Hindu king wanted to accede to India back in 1947. Later on the hindus (kashmiri pandits) were driven out of the kashmir valley making it completely muslim dominant. There are many hindu temples and pilgrimage places in this region and for anyone from India to visit those places there needs to be a lot of security due to the tensions. 

 

EDIT: Just Hyd was ruled by muslim nawab, but not kashmir. I had to strike that sentence off. Its a mistake

[IgnisExcubitor]

Just to add few points to @Asuragood post. Bare with me, it will be a long post. 

We annexed Kashmir to India in 1947, but unlike Hyderabad, whose annexure was overseen by our first Home Minister, Sardar Patel, Kashmir's was handled by our first Prime Minister, Nehru. Amongst his several other blunders (like voluntarily giving up a seat at UN's security council to China, etc) he allowed the special provision of 370 to be alloted to the state in 1950. 35A was an addition to that later. 

Basically these two additions gave Kashmir special privileges like separate constitution, separate flag, outsiders(non Kashmiri Indians) not being allowed to buy land, no reservations to local tribals, dalits, etc. They also came with terrible anti-women laws like if a woman married an outsider, then she would lose her rights over her property. 

Now it was always stated that this law was meant to be temporary, but successive governments shirked their responsibility to remove it. Mind you, there were other regions with similar laws that were later erased. This government has shown the guts and gone ahead. What does that mean? In simple terms the state (formerly, as now it has been divided and I will get to that) of Jammu and Kashmir will be governed by the same laws as the rest of the country. How that turns out, no one knows for now. While Jammu and Ladakh have cheered the decision, there could be problems in Kashmir - or specifically four districts in Kashmir which are known to be sensitive. 

Now, beyond laws. State of Jammu and Kashmir is technically made of three parts: Kashmir (predominantly filled with Muslims), Jammu (fair degree of Hindus) and Ladakh (predominantly filled with Buddhists). 

It's important to highlight this, because despite of these three separate regions, Jammu and Kashmir was always ruled by three Muslim families of Kashmir. Ladakh, which is culturally so different, had always demanded a separation. They have got their wish now, as after today's events we now have two union territories (you can call them regions) called 1)Jammu and Kashmir and 2) Ladakh. 

The three main Muslim families are Abdullahs, Muftis (both who ruled politically) and Geelanis (who championed the separatist movement). For several decades these families have got richer by corruption while ruling the state. While they sent their kids to rich colleges abroad and gathered immense wealth, they have used and instigated the locals to create and retain chaos. Hopefully, that will now decline, if not stop. 

To answer the other questions. There will never be a free/independent Kashmir. For a plebiscite to happen UN's rules are laid in detail. First Pakistan needs to withdraw its forces from Pak-occupied Kashmir and then India has to reduce its forces on our side of Kashmir. I can't see that happening. Also Kashmiri pandits  who have been driven out from their homes in the nineties, need to have a say in it cause Kashmir belongs to them just as much. However, an independent Kashmir will be overrun by either India, Pakistan or worse China, because strategically it's a critical location. 

Yes, politicians from both sides are primarily responsible for high tensions, cause it serves them well in elections. But I have to also highlight Pakistan's army and their spy agency ISI's role in creating, training and sponsoring cross-border terrorists. 

As for the bad blood. It existed before 1971. Religious problems between Hindus and Muslims have existed before independence, but partition after the independence really made it worse. Several lives were lost on both sides of the border. Pakistan's terrorism factory further doesn't help matters. 

I hope the new changes opens up this region to more opportunities. I am not worried about Ladakh or Jammu. The only worry is Kashmir. How the local population, which has been taught to distrust the country, and Pakistan's army react to this will matter as well. 

If you want to know more, I would urge you to read Rahul Pandita's book Our Moon has Blood Clots. 

[Asura]

10 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

If you want to know more, I would urge you to read Rahul Pandita's book Our Moon has Blood Clots. 

I read this book and learnt a lot about that region and the pandits' exodus. Never knew about that stuff before I read that book and I started to research on that topic a lot more later on..

 

[The Artful Dodger]

It's difficult to find reasonable and fair analysis of this conflict, increasingly you seem to find a lot of anti-Muslim rhetoric seeps into Western comments on this and they ignore the worrying rise of right-wing Indian nationalism.

It's interesting, and damning, that arguably the two most bitter and potentially world ending conflicts on earth were both created from the remnants of the British Empire.

[nudge+]

22 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

If you want to know more, I would urge you to read Rahul Pandita's book Our Moon has Blood Clots. 

 

11 hours ago, Asura said:

I read this book and learnt a lot about that region and the pandits' exodus. Never knew about that stuff before I read that book and I started to research on that topic a lot more later on..

 

Got the book today; thanks for recommendation.

[IgnisExcubitor]

4 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

It's interesting, and damning, that arguably the two most bitter and potentially world ending conflicts on earth were both created from the remnants of the British Empire.

The British handled partition terribly. They appointed a man, Mountbatten, who was more interested in rushing back to the UK to fulfill his other ambitions rather than complete that delicate task. A job that would have taken at least 2-3 years was done in months. 

Worse he selected a lawyer, Cyril Radcliffe - who had never been to India, didn't know its political, religious, cultural and social makeup - to draw the new borders. And Mountbatten gave him weeks to do a job that would have taken months. And he used old census data. To be somewhat kind to Radcliffe, he was just a pawn. And the fact that he refused to take money (3k pounds at that time) for that job, after learning that millions died and close to 14 million were displaced, forces me to believe that he felt remorseful. Mountbatten on the other hand was a cunt in several other ways (like hiding the map until the last minute, not giving new countries enough time to prepare, etc... I could go on and on) 

But here's the important part. Should we continue to blame the Brits, instead of finding a solution? 

Today I learned that we have lost 41000+ plus lives (civilians and military) since 1947 in that region. Therefore, it's high time we change the ways. Try a different approach. Maintaining the status quo wasn't helping. Militancy in Kashmir was also having a damaging effect on Jammu and Ladakh. 

At least this frees Ladakh, a region filled with Buddhist population, from Kashmir's clutches. It will develop under the centre's rule. 

I hope the same for Kashmir. A place where even cinema theatres are banned. A place that has 1% of the country's population but gets 10% of financial help, which in turn has been gobbled up by only three families until now. 

Now it opens up to industries, development and more opportunities. There is no certainty that there won't be problems in the coming days. But at least a different approach is being tried. And if it works, the valley and the region in whole will be peaceful than before.

 

13 hours ago, Asura said:

I read this book and learnt a lot about that region and the pandits' exodus. Never knew about that stuff before I read that book and I started to research on that topic a lot more later on..

 

Yep, same here. I didn't know about the Pandit exodus until I was 25. This should be in the school textbooks. But we know how selective our textbooks are. 

[Pig on the Wing]

8 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

It's difficult to find reasonable and fair analysis of this conflict, increasingly you seem to find a lot of anti-Muslim rhetoric seeps into Western comments on this and they ignore the worrying rise of right-wing Indian nationalism.

It's interesting, and damning, that arguably the two most bitter and potentially world ending conflicts on earth were both created from the remnants of the British Empire.

Such a lefty snowflake. Stop using rationality to besmirch the Union flag, you Corbynite commie

[Azeem]

20 hours ago, Asura said:

I read this book and learnt a lot about that region and the pandits' exodus. Never knew about that stuff before I read that book and I started to research on that topic a lot more later on..

 

I've talked about this to some people, were these pandits mainly suitated in Ladakh ? as i've heard.

Many people went through oppression because of this conflict which i think anyone who can see beyond the cloak of nationalism will be sorry for, but we can't decide the fate of all of Kashmir based on what people went through in some parts no matter how horrible they are, you mentioned earlier that Maharja of Kashmir feared Pakistan, well I've heard that there were mass killings of Muslims by Maharaja's army in 1940s because of which the Tribal Pathans of neighbouring states revolted. Can of worms really.

And like us you guys also have a claim over our side of Kashmir aka Gilgit-Baltistan, which has nothing to do with what happened in other parts of the state, the Dogras did a lot of killing and persecution in Gilgit-Baltistan which resulted an armed revolt and they through an indigenous struggle got free from them. But again since they are a party in the conflict i can't base my whole judgment on all of Kashmir because of what people of Gilgit went through cause there are many other people and many other stories. 

[Azeem]

11 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

It's difficult to find reasonable and fair analysis of this conflict, increasingly you seem to find a lot of anti-Muslim rhetoric seeps into Western comments on this and they ignore the worrying rise of right-wing Indian nationalism.

It's interesting, and damning, that arguably the two most bitter and potentially world ending conflicts on earth were both created from the remnants of the British Empire.

You British just can't exit properly 

[Azeem]

12 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

It's difficult to find reasonable and fair analysis of this conflict, increasingly you seem to find a lot of anti-Muslim rhetoric seeps into Western comments on this and they ignore the worrying rise of right-wing Indian nationalism.

It's interesting, and damning, that arguably the two most bitter and potentially world ending conflicts on earth were both created from the remnants of the British Empire.

That's true though, there are some right wing elements who want a ' Greater India ' type of stuff.

Sanjay Raut in senate " We have taken Jammu and Kashmir, tomorrow we will take Balochistan(province of Pakistan) and Pakistan controlled Kashmir. I have confidence that PM (Modi) will accomplish the dream of Akhand Bharat (Greater India).

I don't know did or how he said that but WTF how can you say something like that in senate or parliament.

[Azeem]

How The Dogras got Kashmir and neighboring areas under their control 

Jammu & Kashmir was joined to India in 1947, after the last dynastic monarch, Hari Singh Dogra, ceded control to the newly-formed Republic. Dogra dynasty's control of J&K began after first Dogra, Gulab Singh, was awarded the monarchy for betraying Sikh Empire to British.

Steinbach, a German mercenary who served in the Sikh military said. In their positions of power, the Dogras directly caused the downfall of the Sikh Empire.

After Ranjeet Singh, the kingdom fell into complete disarray as it was overwhelmed by political intrigues, cloak and dagger schemes, murders, coups d’état, and civil war. At the center of it all were the Dogras.

In 1845, while the Empire was led by a boy king, the British declared war on the Sikhs. With no one else to turn to during the war. According to Shah Mohammad, a Punjabi poet living in Amritsar during the war, Dogras had the majority of the Sikhs “removed from the army, thus weakening the Sikh military beyond retrieval.” Within two years, British forces overwhelmed the Sikhs and occupied Lahore.

Mohammad suggests that Dogras“were serving none but himself.” They welcomed the British with open arms. Under the March 1846 treaty large portions of the Empire’s territory were ceded to the British, most of the Sikh army was disbanded, and their arms were seized. 

In short, the Sikh Empire became a vassal state of the British East India Company. While negotiating the Treaty of Lahore, the Dogra minister did not neglect to consider his own future. Dogras suddenly perplexed the Governor-General by asking what they were to get for all they had done to bring about a speedy peace and to render the army an easy prey.

Under Governer General's auspices, “Kashmir and the hill states... were cut off from the Punjab Proper and transferred to Gulab Singh Dogra as a separate sovereign.”

Having thus betrayed the Sikh Empire in exchange for lining his own pockets, the Hill Raja fled north. Mohammad reports, “After getting Kashmir in the bargain, Gulab Singh repaired forthwith to Jammu and then Gilgit.” So Gulab Singh Dogra became the first Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir.

[IgnisExcubitor]

4 hours ago, Stick With Azeem said:

I've talked about this to some people, were these pandits mainly suitated in Ladakh ? as i've heard.

Many people went through oppression because of this conflict which i think anyone who can see beyond the cloak of nationalism will be sorry for, but we can't decide the fate of all of Kashmir based on what people went through in some parts no matter how horrible they are, you mentioned earlier that Maharja of Kashmir feared Pakistan, well I've heard that there were mass killings of Muslims by Maharaja's army in 1940s because of which the Tribal Pathans of neighbouring states revolted. Can of worms really.

And like us you guys also have a claim over our side of Kashmir aka Gilgit-Baltistan, which has nothing to do with what happened in other parts of the state, the Dogras did a lot of killing and persecution in Gilgit-Baltistan which resulted an armed revolt and they through an indigenous struggle got free from them. But again since they are a party in the conflict i can't base my whole judgment on all of Kashmir because of what people of Gilgit went through cause there are many other people and many other stories. 

Pandits that were present in Kashmir were killed or displaced, not Ladakh. In fact after the exodus, some settled in Jammu. 

Secondly, Maharaja initially wanted an independent province, something which everyone was okay with, except the Muslim conference (ally of Jinnah's All India Muslim league) which understandably wanted to join Pakistan. Initially there were group of Pashtuns that attacked from the west, causing the Maharaj to change his tunes and wanting to join India, post which our armies got involved. You rightly point out to the can of worms where Hindus and Sikhs were massacred in and after Poonch rebellion and Muslims being killed in Jammu massacre. It is indeed messed up, and all sides are to be blamed. 

 

4 hours ago, Stick With Azeem said:

That's true though, there are some right wing elements who want a ' Greater India ' type of stuff.

Sanjay Raut in senate " We have taken Jammu and Kashmir, tomorrow we will take Balochistan(province of Pakistan) and Pakistan controlled Kashmir. I have confidence that PM (Modi) will accomplish the dream of Akhand Bharat (Greater India).

I don't know did or how he said that but WTF how can you say something like that in senate or parliament.

Nobody takes Sanjay Raut seriously. He has a habit of spouting shit even against the ruling party (His party is an ally in the government). He probably meant Baltistan, instead of Baloch. I am absolutely sure he doesn't even know the difference. The man is a grade A turd. 

There are idiots everywhere. I watched your news channels Samma and Geo out of curiosity last night and I saw similar voices on your side. Voices in your Parliament spreading fear of Kashmiris being killed when in reality things are completely different. I would be more worried about your general Bajwa's quotes "Pakistan Army firmly stands by the Kashmiris in their just struggle to the very end. We are prepared and shall go to any extent to fulfil our obligations...," Gen Bajwa told the army commanders. 

 

We shouldn't really care about idiots, cause they don't drive the policies. We will see more rhetoric and idiocy from several sides in the coming days. More importantly, we shouldn't believe in rumours, something that are being spread for the past few days. When this is the reality. 

 

 

[Azeem]

Interesting to see how China pan out of it, they have like 20-25 % of Kashmir under their control. 

[The Artful Dodger]

21 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

The British handled partition terribly. They appointed a man, Mountbatten, who was more interested in rushing back to the UK to fulfill his other ambitions rather than complete that delicate task. A job that would have taken at least 2-3 years was done in months. 

Worse he selected a lawyer, Cyril Radcliffe - who had never been to India, didn't know its political, religious, cultural and social makeup - to draw the new borders. And Mountbatten gave him weeks to do a job that would have taken months. And he used old census data. To be somewhat kind to Radcliffe, he was just a pawn. And the fact that he refused to take money (3k pounds at that time) for that job, after learning that millions died and close to 14 million were displaced, forces me to believe that he felt remorseful. Mountbatten on the other hand was a cunt in several other ways (like hiding the map until the last minute, not giving new countries enough time to prepare, etc... I could go on and on) 

But here's the important part. Should we continue to blame the Brits, instead of finding a solution? 

Today I learned that we have lost 41000+ plus lives (civilians and military) since 1947 in that region. Therefore, it's high time we change the ways. Try a different approach. Maintaining the status quo wasn't helping. Militancy in Kashmir was also having a damaging effect on Jammu and Ladakh. 

At least this frees Ladakh, a region filled with Buddhist population, from Kashmir's clutches. It will develop under the centre's rule. 

I hope the same for Kashmir. A place where even cinema theatres are banned. A place that has 1% of the country's population but gets 10% of financial help, which in turn has been gobbled up by only three families until now. 

Now it opens up to industries, development and more opportunities. There is no certainty that there won't be problems in the coming days. But at least a different approach is being tried. And if it works, the valley and the region in whole will be peaceful than before.

 

Yep, same here. I didn't know about the Pandit exodus until I was 25. This should be in the school textbooks. But we know how selective our textbooks are. 

You are correct. We cannot just blame something which happened not too far off a century ago. Murder and indiscriminate violence is murder and indiscriminate violence which can't be condoned by any grievance, however righteous it may be. 

I just find it fascinating how the British empire disintegrated in such an incompetent way, given how much we hear about how it brought x, y and z to various places. Sectarian hatred usually isn't mentioned, funnily enough. 

[Asura]

On 06/08/2019 at 15:13, IgnisExcubitor said:

Yep, same here. I didn't know about the Pandit exodus until I was 25. This should be in the school textbooks. But we know how selective our textbooks are. 

our text books were busy talking about loudu number one chaacha my ass nehru, that fucking pervert

19 hours ago, Stick With Azeem said:

I've talked about this to some people, were these pandits mainly suitated in Ladakh ? as i've heard.

Many people went through oppression because of this conflict which i think anyone who can see beyond the cloak of nationalism will be sorry for, but we can't decide the fate of all of Kashmir based on what people went through in some parts no matter how horrible they are, you mentioned earlier that Maharja of Kashmir feared Pakistan, well I've heard that there were mass killings of Muslims by Maharaja's army in 1940s because of which the Tribal Pathans of neighbouring states revolted. Can of worms really.

And like us you guys also have a claim over our side of Kashmir aka Gilgit-Baltistan, which has nothing to do with what happened in other parts of the state, the Dogras did a lot of killing and persecution in Gilgit-Baltistan which resulted an armed revolt and they through an indigenous struggle got free from them. But again since they are a party in the conflict i can't base my whole judgment on all of Kashmir because of what people of Gilgit went through cause there are many other people and many other stories. 

From what I know the pandits were majorly located in kashmir.

I dont have anything else to add on the rest of the stuff other than what Ignis said above. He seems to have a better information/knowledge on the subject than me. 

[Azeem]

WTF these keyboard warriors, he and his family probably don't even live here, 

But he raised an interesting point about what i said earlier, that international powers wanted an independent Kashmir cause it's the only way for China to reach the warm waters of Arabian Sea the heart of it's one road one belt initiative. Make Kashmir independent and have a vessel state right next to China's future ambitions.

But since they realized it's not possible now they are silently backing the right wing elements in India to start a war to destabilize the region and China's investment goes down the drain or is halted for a long time.

But they think that the war will be ' controlled ', they probably haven't read The Guns of August” showing how you stumble into wars.

Dark times are ahead

[Azeem]

In 1949, British civil servant William Barton, writing in Foreign Affairs magazine, warned that a "militant group" called the RSS, "whose object is to absorb Pakistan, has of late been asserting itself."

He noted the "atrocities committed" during the "wholesale expulsion of Moslems from the Jammu province." Barton added, "One wonders whether the Indian Government has considered the military implications of the retention of Kashmir in India. With half or more of the population hostile… it would have to maintain an army of occupation."

https://original.antiwar.com/pieter-j-friedrich/2019/08/07/jammu-and-kashmir-loses-special-status/

[IgnisExcubitor]

Again, as I said above, nobody should take keyboard warriors or their opinions seriously. I am seeing the same (and in some cases worse) kind of vitriol from the other side. 

@topic

This gif image simplifies the geography of that region. 

Another report (there is a thread following this tweet) from the ground by Rahul Pandita. Talks about people from Kashmir (not Jammu and Ladakh) 

 

Most of the nations have called this an internal matter of India (with the token reminder of peace), apart from Turkey. Surprisingly, UAE have backed us, which speaks for the good diplomacy job this government has done in the past few years. 

China is more bothered about Ladakh. I doubt they care about Kashmir. Their priorities are Ladakh and the region around Arunachal Pradesh(different Indian state). Plus, I doubt they will take a really hard stand considering the amount of market there is for Chinese goods here. 

I am curious about UK, especially Labour leaders. UK has several candidates of Pakistani heritage and a sizeable Pakistani-British population, whom they will need to pander to, but the official government's line will be 'internal matter.' 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

14 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

Again, as I said above, nobody should take keyboard warriors or their opinions seriously. I am seeing the same (and in some cases worse) kind of vitriol from the other side. 

I'm not sure that's wise. Particularly when these views end up getting picked up and adopted by actual politicians, who may be seen as a joke currently... but if these views become commonplace then they're no longer taken as a joke and taken as serious policy. We've seen it elsewhere, and we've seen a rise in right-wing nationalism in India with Modi - I think people are right to be concerned when the rhetoric starts heating up like that.

[Dr. Gonzo]

On 07/08/2019 at 10:56, The Artful Dodger said:

You are correct. We cannot just blame something which happened not too far off a century ago. Murder and indiscriminate violence is murder and indiscriminate violence which can't be condoned by any grievance, however righteous it may be. 

I just find it fascinating how the British empire disintegrated in such an incompetent way, given how much we hear about how it brought x, y and z to various places. Sectarian hatred usually isn't mentioned, funnily enough. 

Hey fella, ever heard of this place called the "Middle East?" The UK's culpability for so many fucked up situations in the modern world is pretty fucking high.

[Azeem]

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I'm not sure that's wise. Particularly when these views end up getting picked up and adopted by actual politicians, who may be seen as a joke currently... but if these views become commonplace then they're no longer taken as a joke and taken as serious policy. We've seen it elsewhere, and we've seen a rise in right-wing nationalism in India with Modi - I think people are right to be concerned when the rhetoric starts heating up like that.

The problem with being a right wing politician is that you become a hostage of your own words and your own base.

I've heard people saying from March 2018 that there will be escalations between Pakistan-India in Feb-March 2019, Indian jets will come drop a few bombs here and there and claim we have killed X people, Modi will sell this in his election campaign and That's EXACTLY what it happend.

So i can expect anything to happen when right wing rhetoric sells. 

[The Artful Dodger]

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Hey fella, ever heard of this place called the "Middle East?" The UK's culpability for so many fucked up situations in the modern world is pretty fucking high.

Yes, that's why I mentioned the 'two' conflicts that threaten the whole world. The Irish conflict also deserves a special mention, although it lacks worldwide potential.