Jump to content

Should J&K be split into 3 states?


Trichromatic

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Tibarn said:

Population transfer of J&K Muslims to Pakistan is the only solution. 

 

Take Pakistani Hindus and Sikhs in exchange and resettle them in Kashmir Valley. 

Population transfer only happen if there are mass riots , killing looting , raping , only then people flee o/w they never do that.Even in 1947 most muslims who voted for Pakistan in 1946 elections preferred to stay in India 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. 

Bad idea. One of the strongest points India has re: Kashmir as opposed to Pakistan, is that we've honoured the instrument of accession by not altering Kashmir. Pakistan has, by creating Azad Kashmir, Northern territories, giving a chunk of it to China as pimp-protection money, etc. If we partition kashmir, we lose that legal edge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

Population transfer only happen if there are mass riots , killing looting , raping , only then people flee o/w they never do that.Even in 1947 most muslims who voted for Pakistan in 1946 elections preferred to stay in India 

There is no peaceful, nonviolent solution to Kashmir, in my opinion.  Any ideas otherwise are wishful thinking. Considering that the population transfer only involves J&K, the number of security personnel in the valley should be increased during the process to minimize any chaos. This is different than the partition of India, where the British just set an arbitrary deadline to leave and left India in chaos and with a shortage of manpower to even control riots, looting etc. 

 

The Kashmir issue is entirely a bilateral issue since the Shimla Agreement, no matter how much certain people want to make it an international issue. That's the one good thing Indira did. That leaves only 3 possible outcomes/solutions to me:

 

1) Status quo: The Kashmir issue will continue bleed both countries, especially Pakistan, but we also waste lives and resources throwing money at a problem that certain sections of the country aren't even willing to acknowledge is a religious issue.  

 

2) A decisive war where the remaining territory of Kashmir comes to us. This is not going to happen for a long time. The padosis are crazy enough to launch a nuke when pushed into a corner, we are not. 

 

3) Exchange the population. The padosis's only claim over Kashmir is that it was a Muslim majority kingdom when partition happened. If they want the population so much, they can have them. I would happily take all the Hindus and Sikhs in exchange. I don't see a reason why the padosis would refuse to take the population.

 

If the padosis truly want peace in the region, then they will accept taking the population. They keep repeating that Kashmir is the unfinished agenda of partition. If they refuse, we can easily call out their bluff that they don't want to settle the issue as peacefully as possible, and would rather attempt to and fail to gain territory, than solve the issue. It would at minimum expose the padosis as having imperialist delusions.

 

Their civilian population thinks of Kashmir as a religious issue from my experience. Their military leadership knows they are actually more interested in the water resource access through Kashmir. We can at least put them in a difficult political spot by asking them to peacefully take the population and resettle them there. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Singh bling said:

Population transfer only happen if there are mass riots , killing looting , raping , only then people flee o/w they never do that.Even in 1947 most muslims who voted for Pakistan in 1946 elections preferred to stay in India 

Cannot have population transfer without pretty much getting kicked out of the UN and becoming a global pariah like North Korea. India is a signatory to human rights charter and its pretty straightforward that you cannot disenfranchise a born citizen of a country. So one can encourage Kashmiri muslims to go to Pakistan. One cannot force them to, since they are born Indian citizens.

 

So population exchange is not going to happen. Demographic flood is a more achievable scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tendu_10 said:

 

why the hell do we want those areas. Majority Muslim and will create an even worse security tension.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

 

Those areas are legally a part of India. That would also give Ind access to border with Afganistan 

 

One of the reasons, Kashmir issue has become so grave is because many in Ind don't care about the area. This has allowed Pak to focus only on J&K. Ind has to make it clear that Kashmir issue is about Pak vacating those areas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those areas are legally a part of India. That would also give Ind access to border with Afganistan 

 

One of the reasons, Kashmir issue has become so grave is because many in Ind don't care about the area. This has allowed Pak to focus only on J&K. Ind has to make it clear that Kashmir issue is about Pak vacating those areas

 

im sick of Kashmir headache. Theyve already gotten rid of the Pandits its just full of Muslim radicals.

 

If we got POK and GB which is full of even more Muslims then it will require even more security more troops on the ground more waste of money. And most in POK and GB arent separatists from Pak. this strategic move isnt worth all the bloodshed.

 

We should keep J&K but divide it up into administrative divisions.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tendu_10 said:

 

im sick of Kashmir headache. Theyve already gotten rid of the Pandits its just full of Muslim radicals.

 

If we got POK and GB which is full of even more Muslims then it will require even more security more troops on the ground more waste of money. And most in POK and GB arent separatists from Pak. this strategic move isnt worth all the bloodshed.

 

We should keep J&K but divide it up into administrative divisions.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

 

That is what the enemy wants. Ind to lose interest

 

That area is occpied by Pakistanis. Natives are subjucated. Per UN resolution, all Pakistanis have to vacate the area 

 

Pandits want to resettle. Ind cannot give up on them and needs to be tough on militants, traitors and Pak

 

 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of 3, I would argue for 2. Ladakh is too sparcely populated to be a state of its own and I'm afraid if it becomes a UT, it would get completely ignored. 

 

Make Jammu and Ladakh as one separate state. Development of these two regions cannot be held hostage at the cost of the problems of the valley. Make Kashmir a separate state and abolish article 370. Give some financial incentive to people from outside states buying property there. Let the stone pelters keep pelting stones. Counter them with force. Real force. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tendu_10 said:

 

why the hell do we want those areas. Majority Muslim and will create an even worse security tension.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

 

Sparsely populated. Population, after 70 years of jihadi army, also very docile. (talking about G-B here. )

 

Regardless, Its a crime against mother nature that a green flag has been allowed to be flown for so long in such a beautiful piece of real estate. 

Edited by surajmal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...