Is Kashmir for India or Pakistan

[vedu]

Is Kashmir for India or Pakistan ?

for last five decates this is hottest metter that kshmir is whoes actually.

is it for Hind or Pak.

Obiously Indian say for India and Paki say for Pakistan.

but how it is realize what actually true.

and why pak is so much interested to Kashmir.

why not other like Rajasthan or Punjab...

[observer]

Let me tell you the history of Kashmir after independence briefly. In 1947 India became free from British rule and another country Pakistan was formed out of it. Apart from the various states these two countries got, there were some princely states which had been ruled by Indian princes under the British and not directly by the British. These princely states were to decide for themselves on who to join, India or Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir was one such state which had a Muslim majority population but was ruled by a Hindu ruler Maharaj Ranjeet Singh. India and Pakistan signed an agreement not to interfere in its internal affairs and let J & K decide for itself who it wants to join.

But in early 1948 Pakistan sent tribal invaders into J & K to occupy it so that it could have J & K for itself. Thereafter J & K asked India for military help to defend itself against invaders from Pakistan. India said it could only help J & K if it joined India because according to the agreement it had signed with Pakistan it couldn't interfere in J & K's internal affair. Thus J & K joined India under the condition that it would have its own constitution and a special status within the Indian Union.

But Nehru didn't order clearance of parts of J & K occupied by Pakistani tribals after that and instead took the issue to the UNSC (UN Security Council). The resolutions of UN asked for both Pakistan and India to remove their presence from J & K so that a plebiscite could be held and people of J & K could decide their fate but neither Pakistan nor India removed themselves from J & K so the matter is unsettled till now.

Also in the last 60 years India has generally treated J & K with suspicion and had even imprisoned its CM Sheikh Abdullah for a long long time in the 1950s. All of this has alienated Kashmiris from India. India should have treated Kashmiris better.

But have no doubts, J & K became a part of India legally, with documents in 1948 parts of which Pakistan is occupying illegally since then.

Also over the years Pakistan has tried wresting Indian held part of J & K through military invasions and armed guerrila warfare (terrorism) in which it has failed till now.

So this is the situation. Pakistan initiated forcible involvement into J & K and the hostilities over J & K between India and Pakistan continue to this day.

If you want my opinion then I am for the people of the whole J & K including Pakistan occupied part, the psrt severed from J & K called Northern areas , Aksai Chin given to China by Pakistan and Indian held part of J & K deciding about their future with Pakistan and India removing themselves from the scene as per the UN resolutions (which Pakistan so much repeats but doesn't mention a bit about its involvement in "Azad Kashmir", Northern Areas which it has separated from J & K and Aksai Chin which it so happily gave away to China).

Also Pakistan says it is interested in J & K because it is Muslim majority and Pakistan believes all Muslims of South Asia should have their own homeland in Pakistan. But India believes people of all faiths can live together in a place called India.

[miqsh]

it could be also that rajasthan or punjab aren't near or worthy enough for them.

[India1989]

If kashmir is given away by India then the very next day either Pakistan or China will occupy it. then it will be too late for India to come and help.

[miqsh]

are there more disadvantages by losing kashmir or advantages?

[pankaj]

I thinks the question raised by Vedu is not a matter of discussion wheather Kashmir is for India or Pakistan because if you remember the history Pakistan,Bangladesh,even Afganistan were parts of Hindustan. Jammu & Kashmir being a muslims dominated state, does'nt mean that its not a part of India.We have 14% muslims population in our country but we can't divide the country on this basis.

[India1989]

are there more disadvantages by losing kashmir or advantages?

It doesn't matter. WE don't have Kashmir for our needs. We have Kashmir cause they are Indians. Even if it was advantage for us by losing kashmir then we wouldn't have given up Kashmir either. Ever week about 50 army person die in Kashmir in violence. If we lose Kashmir we will save about 5000 army lives a year.

We have Kashmir because we have promised the King of Kashmir that under any circumstances we will always help and protect Kashmir. Kashmir has been with us since India formed and it will be very sad for all Indians if we are separated. AFterall we are Indians. So disadvantage or advantage we will be broken if we are separated. They are just a part of India like any other states. It is ridden with violence today doesn't mean that we will want to lose them cause it is disadvantageous for us. If we look at other things it will add to the beauty of India and make India more beautiful and diverse. If peace is restored Kashmir will proper and no one can stop them.