Kashmir Crisis Master Minded Hindutva Strategy to Stop Anti US Movement in India

[palashb...@gmail.com]

<strong>Kashmir Crisis Master Minded Hindutva Strategy to Stop Anti US
Movement in India


Troubled Galaxy Destroyed Dreams: Chapter 42

Palash Biswas

http://troubledgalaxydetroyeddreams.blogspot.com/

Hindutva Maha Rath was flagged off by the RSS Icon Lal Krishna Adwani
from Indian Parliament on the day when the so called Left enforced the
UPA super slave Government to go for Trust Vote. Indian communists
tried their best to play the Anti Imperialist as well as Anti Fascist
roles in the Reality Nuke Opera. Adwani subverted the debate in the
Heightened Hindutva justifying the Hindu Zionist White Manusmriti
Apartheid Galaxy re alliance! Poor communists had no home work to
resist the Saffron Magic which captured this bleeding divided Sub
continent once again after the destruction of Babri Mosque in Ayodhya!
The crisis over the land grant to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board
threatens to divide Jammu and Kashmir along communal lines.The
Hindutva Fascist forces have fielded God Rama to justify the US
interests!

What a drama follows! Indigenous communities were divided in more than
six hundred castes and three percent Brahmins en cashed the crisis of
British Imperialism to sustain its colonies after the World Wars and
Global Recession! India was divided in nationalities, castes and
communities. Anti imperialist aboriginal indigenous communities were
never the parties in so called National Freedom Struggle which turned
out to be the Freedom for Brahmins only! Dr Ambedkar was the supreme
commander of the indigenous subaltern movement but he could not stop
partition as he failed to resist Gandhi executing Pune Pact. Because
the SC dominated indigenous movement could not deal with nationality
question. Neither it could mobilise the OBC and ST against Brahminical
Power Politics! Provided if the Aboriginal People from North West
Frontier bordering Afghanistan and the modern Swat Valley, along with
the tribals of Chittagong in Bangladesh, the nationalities in North
East and central India, had it been so easy a cakewalk to partition
India transferring power to Brahmins!

Kashmir Crisis is quite reminiscent of the Pre Partition circumstances
in Bengal. The Tebhaga movement was in full bloom led by the
communists. Hindu as well as Muslim peasants were fighting jointly
against the Brahmin zamindars of United Bengal.Elite Brahmin Shyama
Prasad Mukherjee was the leader of Hindu Mahasabha who was responsible
to sabotage Krishak Praja Samiti leader Fazlul haq. Haq constituted
the Haq Shyama Ministery to provided the launching pad for the
Pakistani Nationality as Muslim League took over the Muslim psyche
just because of the failure of Fazlul Haq. Then, Mukherjee and the
elite ruling Brahmins of Bengal, hitherto being the voices of the
British Masters since the War Of Plassy, jumped into the freedom
struggle just after the beginning of First World War. The Ruling Class
psyche has been well expressed in the so called classics of Tara
Shankar Bandopadhyaya, rare human documentation of Hatred against the
indigenous aboriginal communities in India.

Mukherjee declared whether India is divided or not, Bengal would be
divided! Because the Brahmins were not ready to bear anymore the
dominance of the untouchables and the converted lower class Hindus!
This was a supreme strategy to provoke Muslim Nationality which
convinced a secular man like Jinnah. Hindu Mahasabha launched an anti
Muslim campaign to break Hindu Muslim peasants` Unity and defend the
Brahmin Zamindars.The ultimate result was the partition of Bengal.

The Hindutva forces would not dare US interests in this divided
bleeding subcontinent! This psyche never allows any space for Anti
Imperialist Movement anywhere in this subcontinent. The best ploy to
resist any Anti Imperialist movement in India happens to be the magic
realism of Hindutva! Which has struck Kashmir well planned! It seems
that any anti Imperialist movement led by the aboriginal indigenous
majority eighty five percent population of India is almost
Impossible.

The Brahmins never cared much for the integrity of India as the
subaltern history of Partition of India proves well! The Brahmins
never care to sustain Kashmir as an integral part of India this time!

This is the game!


Talks between an all-party delegation and the group leading the
agitation demanding land for the shrine board failed in Jammu on
Saturday. The Shri Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti, a combine of over 30
groups leading the agitation, said the talks were "inconclusive" and
announced it would carry on with its campaign.

NDTV reports:

A new peace formula has been put forth to end the Amarnath deadlock.
Whether the new proposal is accepted or not there's resentment at how
Kashmiri Muslims were kept out of the talks on Saturday.

When it became clear that the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti would not
accept Kashmiri leaders Mahbooba Mufti, Farooq Abdullah and Saifuddin
Soz as part of the all-party delegation, members asked Home Minister
Shivraj Patil to talk alone with the Samiti.

But Patil insisted that others remained. Eventually, only the Kashmiri
Muslim leaders were excluded.

Finally former Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad also excused himself
even though he's a Jammu leader. So it would not appear that just the
Kashmir leaders were out.

Back in the Valley Mirwaiz Omer Farooq, chairman Hurriyat Conference
has been put under house arrest. This after he decided to join the
march to Muzaffarabad on Monday, the call for which has been given by
Fruit Growers Association.

Meanwhile, the PDP has said it will participate in the march.

However, speaking to NDTV the home minister said his committee had
succeeded in creating goodwill and understanding.

He denied that there was an economic blockade and appealed to the
separatists not to try and take trucks via Muzaffarabad in Pakistan in
a symbolic protest.
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060904


The land grant controversy has troubled the state for over five weeks
now, with at least 15 people dying in violent protests and clashes.
The controversy began when the state government allotted 40 hectare of
forestland in north Kashmir to the shrine board in May—a step which
angered Muslims—and then scrapped its decision on July 1, this time
angering Hindus.


An all-party delegation led by Home Minister Shivraj Patil visited
Jammu on Saturday to find a solution but both sides in the controversy
refuse to budge from their positions.


Does the controversy threaten to pit Jammu and Kashmir against each
other? CNN-IBN’s Editor-in-Chief Rajdeep Sardesai asked this on the
Weekend Edition to Virender Raina, national spokesperson for Panun
Kashmir, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, chairperson of All Parties Hurriyat
Conference, and youth activist Aditya Raj Kaul.

Jammu vs Kashmir: Reign of peace
Rashid Ahmad, Hindustan Times
Domail (Baltal), August 10, 2008

From Domail (Baltal), at a place called Baltal, begins the shortcut to
God. The Amarnath caves are just 16 km away from this piece of land
the size of a football field — the Himalayas towering around it and
the Sindh river gently gurgling past. Pilgrims begin the quickest
climb to the shrine from here.

Shortcuts often come with dangers.

In the last six weeks, this piece of land 93 km from Srinagar has
triggered one of the deepest communal divides in independent India in
the Valley, with 10 people killed and more than 500 injured on the
streets of Jammu and Srinagar.

On Saturday, the streets still burned, even as the Amarnath Yatra
Sangharsh Samiti, the organisation demanding that the Baltal land be
returned to a temple trust, climbed down a bit by agreeing to peace
talks with Home Minister Shivraj Patil.

At Baltal’s Ground Zero, however, peace has never had to be talked out
in the 30 years that pilgrims have been pitching tent here.

In an extension of a 160-year-old tradition of Hindu pilgrims being
helped by Muslim workers on the older route to Amarnath from Pahalgam,
around 300 Muslim labourers and seasonal workers escort people to the
cave, carrying the old on their shoulders, providing mules to others,
supplying water and helping with backpacks and other luggage.

There is little sense of the street rage and deep religious divide
sweeping Jammu and Srinagar.

“I am here for more than a month, helping yatris,” said Ashiq Hussain
(25), a resident of nearby Kangan. Hussain is an Arts graduate but
could not get a government job. His three younger brothers, two
sisters and widowed mother depend solely on him for livelihood.

“This is the time I earn for my family. We have no other means,” he
said. Ashiq has earned around Rs 12,000 in a month.

The piece of land at the centre of the conflict has pre-fabricated
structures, including latrines, bathrooms and shelter sheds.

The control over the conduct of the yatra, which rested with the Shri
Amarnath Shrine Board (which now looks only after religious matters),
is now with the state tourism department.

On Saturday, about 200 yatris were ready to set out on the trek.
Officials said 250 yatris had already left. Those who could afford
were taking the helicopter service.

Abdul Gani Khan, another resident, said he had been associated with
the annual pilgrimage for 15 years.

“We have never treated yatris like outsiders invading the Valley. They
are like family,” said the 55-year-old.

Akhel Kumar, a 23-year-old Delhi student, agrees. “We have no problem
here. When my friend Abhishek and I decided to leave for the yatra,
friends and relatives advised against it,” he said. “We faced problems
in Jammu. Agitators threw stones on our vehicle at Samba and Kuthua.
We thought the worst might be waiting in the Valley. But we are
surprised to see the hospitality and generosity of the people here.”

On the way from his home state Chattisgarh, driver Anil Kumar’s
Scorpio was stopped at several places in Jammu by protesters who asked
him to go back. “At Samba some people hurled stones at us,” said Kumar
(35). “But it is all calm once I reached the piece of land over which
battles are being fought.”

Om Prakash Karlekar (45), a pilgrim from Maharashtra, termed the
rioting over the yatra as a “political stunt”.

“This is disgusting. We must not be swayed by what is being said and
done,” he said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=3357c363-d249-4420-8137-abda757d3691&ParentID=056d4aa2-5870-4f29-b2ff-1ab4dd19bbd7&MatchID1=4737&TeamID1=8&TeamID2=6&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1194&MatchID2=4728&TeamID3=2&TeamID4=3&MatchType2=1&SeriesID2=1191&PrimaryID=4737&Headline=Jammu+versus+Kashmir%3a+Reign+of+peace



Swapan Dasgupta
Identity crisis
10 Aug 2008, 0148 hrs IST, SWAPAN DASGUPTA

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Columnists/Identity_crisis/articleshow/3346990.cms
There is a facet of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir that is both
puzzling and revealing: why did it take the government so long to
begin talking to the protestors in Jammu?

Consider the facts. On July 31, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh invited
the leader of Opposition L K Advani and Arun Jaitley for a discussion
on internal security. After an anodyne exchange on terrorism, the
prime minister requested the BJP to use its good offices to ensure
that the 'blockade' of the highway to the Kashmir Valley is lifted. He
had information that the separatists would use the disruption to press
for accessing the Muzaffarabad road and demanding transit through
Pakistan. This would create fresh complications and add an
international dimension to the problem.

The prime minister's fears were warranted since this is precisely what
the Hurriyat Conference leaders have begun demanding. Yet, for a full
week, until the all-party meeting on August 6, the government sat back
and watched the agitation in Jammu escalate steadily. At the all-party
meeting too, the government's limited objective was to secure a
unanimous resolution asking for the Jammu agitation to be called off.
It was only after the BJP flatly refused that the government
grudgingly agreed to begin a dialogue with the Sangharsh Samity
spearheading the agitation.

Democracy is by definition quite tiresome. It involves constant
engagement with saints, dreamers, rogues and normal people. In Jammu
and Kashmir, successive governments have kept the door open for
dialogue with even those who have questioned the state's inclusion in
the Indian Union and supped with the ISI. The prime minister even
travelled to Srinagar for a Round Table Conference which included the
Hurriyat Conference - it is a separate matter the separatists didn't
attend. So, why did the government hesitate to talk to those who have
been on the streets for over a month, defying curfew, braving
hardships and marching with the Indian tricolour? If the separatists
are "our people", are the citizens of Jammu non-citizens?

The government's insensitivity arose from a mindset that has
influenced official thinking, shaped the million-dollar conflict-
resolution industry and permeated into the editorial classes. It was
centred on the assumption that the Kashmir Valley was all that
mattered in Jammu and Kashmir; Jammu and Ladakh were the loose ends
that could be conveniently papered over. No one gave a damn when
Ladakh protested against the demographic transformation and the threat
to its identity and Jammu's long-standing complaints of discriminatory
treatment were brushed aside with sneering condescension. All that
mattered was the so-called 'hurt Kashmiri psyche' and Kashmiri
'alienation'. These labels of victimhood also became the cover for the
most heinous political crime of independent India: the ethnic
cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley. Today, this shameful
expulsion has become such a footnote that Hurriyat leaders can
brazenly proclaim their 'secular' credentials on TV talk shows, while
the voices of Pandit protest are rubbished with the disdain reserved
for Praveen Togadia.

The protests in Jammu are only partially about the 40 acres of land
given to the Amarnath Yatra Shrine Board and then taken away after the
PDP and the separatists raised the bogey of a demographic invasion and
an assault on Kashmiri identity. Imagine the outcry if a Haj Terminal
is peremptorily denotified on 'cultural' grounds?

Having had their feelings trampled upon for so long, the people of
Jammu are demanding the right to live with self-respect and dignity in
a state where only separatist blackmail seem to matter. The protests
are an assertion of political empowerment and a plea to the rest of
India to give nationalism a place in Jammu and Kashmir.
Simultaneously, it is a fitting rebuff to the mindset that deems Omar
Abdullah's eloquent insensitivity in the Lok Sabha an iconic assertion
of cosmopolitan modernity.

Express News ServiceInvoking Bapu and Ram, Advani, Rajnath raise Jammu
pitch
Suman K JhaPosted online: Sunday, August 10, 2008 at 0029 hrs
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/346842.html

New Delhi, August 9: Hours before talks between the Amarnath Sangharsh
Samiti and the all-party delegation from New Delhi fell through, BJP’s
Prime Ministerial candidate L K Advani and party president Rajnath
Singh affirmed their resolve to support the agitation for restoration
of the land to the Amarnath shrine board.

“Our demand is supported by every believer — whether Hindus or Muslims
— in the country,” Advani claimed. A 150-member Rashtrawadi Muslim
Manch (an RSS affiliate) went to Jammu and Kashmir in solidarity with
the demand only this week...This is India’s struggle, our party
supports the Sangharsh Samiti charter in its fullest,” he said at a
function here today.

“Like Gandhiji told the people of India ‘Do or Die’ today, you should
also get ready to make sacrifices and struggle,” said Advani at a
Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha function, coinciding with the Quit India
anniversary.

BJP president Rajnath Singh, in keeping with his positioning for the
last few months, played a hardliner to the hilt. “The BJP, born in
1980, is in the prime of youth

today. The Ram Lalla of Advaniji’s rath yatra, too, has entered His
youth. The party is fully behind the Jammu agitation,” said the BJP
president, reiterating the party’s commitment to “introduce POTA when
it came to power”.

Hitting out at the Congress for what he called its “flawed
secularism”, Advani said: “Secularism means respect for all religions;
this doesn’t mean that Hindus be shown disrespect. Congress and some
other parties think they can benefit politically by promoting an anti-
Hindu mindset. This is evident in the recent developments in Kashmir.
A similar anti-Hindu mindset was also evident in the Congress-led UPA
Government’s approach towards the Ram Sethu issue...”

“It was essentially due to Shyama Prasad Mookerjee’s sacrifice that
the Tricolour found the pride of place in the state (J&K),” Advani
said. “Had he not made the supreme sacrifice, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed
(and others like him) would not have become chief ministers
there...The present crisis has revived the old issue of the state’s
full integration with the rest of the country. Why should there be two
systems (of governance) in one country?” he said.

“How can Kashmir’s identity be threatened by the erection of temporary
structures on just 100 acres of land for provision of basic amenities,
and that too for only two months in a year? And what is Kashmir’s
identity? Isn’t Kashmir an integral part of India?” asked Advani.

J&K talks: No headway, curfew still on in Jammu
Zafar Iqbal
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Jammu)
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060828&ch=8/10/2008%208:47:00%20AM
Please be flexible so we can resolve this crisis," that was the
message of the Home Minister Shivraj Patil to the Amarnath Sangharsh
Samiti which has been leading the protests in Jammu.
The Samiti has also called for a bandh in Jammu till August 14 and
curfew has not been relaxed on Sunday.
A day-long deadlock over the J&K peace talks on Saturday was broken
after Kashmiri leaders Mehbooba Mufti, Farooq Abdullah and Saifuddin
Soz withdrew from the 18 member all-party delegation as per a
condition set by the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti to attend the peace
talks.
The Samiti accused these leaders of starting the whole Amarnath land
row in the first place.
But the first round of talks didn't achieve much.
Leela Karan the Convenor of Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti speaking to NDTV
on whether the J&K talks were inconclusive said that the discussions
would continue as he wanted both sides to rethink their proposals. He
also said that the agitation would continue.
Kashmiri leaders say they don't want to be an obstacle in the peace
process but add that no resolution can be found without the
involvement of the Kashmiris.
"The meeting will definitely take place. But if progress can be made,
if we are out of the meeting, then we will not attend it," said
Mehbooba Mufti, leader, PDP.
The Samiti wants revocation of the Amarnath land deal, a demand the
government finds difficult to meet.
"They should be flexible in their stand and help us resolve the
issue," said Shivraj Patel, the Home Minister.
Forcing the Kashmiri leaders out of the delegation is the first
victory of the Amarnath Yatra Sangharsh Samiti, but how they achieve
their real objective will also be determined by how powerfully they
put their point of view and what the government decides at the end of
the day.
J&K row harks back to S P Mukherjee days: Advani
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (New Delhi)
Comparing the present agitation in Jammu over the Amarnath issue to
the protest launched by Jana Sangh ideologue Shyama Prasad Mukherjee
55 years ago for cancelling the "visa" system for those visiting Jammu
and Kashmir, BJP leader L K Advani on Sunday said "we have turned a
full circle".
"Shyama Prasad Mukherjee had promised the people during that agitation
that he would either get the permit system abolished or sacrifice his
life ... Today (after the Amarnath agitation) we seem to have turned a
full circle," Advani said.
He was speaking at a function to release the special issue of a
children's magazine dedicated to former Prime Minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayee.
Criticising the forces opposed to allotment of land for Amarnath
pilgrims, Advani said, "They say how can you give land to outsiders in
Kashmir... Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and whoever
raises questions about this issue will have to pay for it."
Advani praised Mukherjee for his agitation which led to the abolition
of the permit system for those entering Jammu and Kashmir.
"Mukherjee died two years after forming the Bharatiya Jan Sangh under
mysterious circumstances. This party had to undergo several
tribulations to reach this stage," he said.
Gen Sinha castigates PDP, media
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Chandigarh)
Former J&K Governor Lt Gen (retd) S K Sinha on Sunday took on the PDP
for its so-called anti-national role while blaming the media for
"misleading and misinforming" the public on the sensitive Amarnath
land row.
Alleging that Mufti Mohammed Sayeed was opposed to the length of the
annual pilgrimage to the cave shrine, Sinha said the former Chief
Minister and PDP patron placed prefabricated structures along the
Baltal route and continuously resisted his work as chairman of Shri
Amarnath Shrine Board.
In his 90-minute keynote address at a seminar on "Shri Amarnath Land
Transfer -- Implications of Revocation" organised in Chandigarh by the
Forum on Integrated National Security, Sinha blamed the media, too,
for its irresponsible coverage of the issue.
"I can understand the Valley press being prejudiced and engaging in
yellow journalism but the national media has been misleading public
opinion on this issue which is a matter of great concern," he said.
Sinha said vested interests are trying to portray the decision of land
transfer to SASB as one made by him "whereas the truth is that the
state cabinet in May this year had unanimously approved of land being
given to the Board."
Separatists are whipping up the sentiments of Kashmiri citizens
against the transfer, he said, by projecting it as a step to
facilitate permanent settlement of Hindus and one that could
potentially change the demography of the Valley.
Sinha also blamed the Centre for going into an "overdrive" with its
"appeasement policy and hurried revoking of the order."
Meanwhile, in New Delhi RJD chief Lalu Prasad blamed Sinha for the
ugly turn to the Amarnath land transfer issue.
"Sinha is in the root of all this problem. He should not have been
made the Governor," said Prasad, speaking on the sidelines of the
first national executive meeting of the Youth RJD.
Echoing the LJP chief Ram Vilas Paswan's earlier comments, Prasad said
that the Press Conference by Sinha's personal secretary in which it
was said that the land was transferred triggered off the controversy.
Charging the BJP with communalising the issue, Prasad said that BJP is
anxious for the Prime Ministership and party leader Lal Krishna Advani
is raising the issue with this purpose alone.
"Once again Rama is suiting BJP. They are raising the issue to become
the PM," said Prasad charging BJP with spreading "communal virus."
Arguing that local Muslims always cooperated in the pilgrimage, he
said that there has been no obstruction to it.
Yaseen Malik ends fast on PM's request
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Srinagar)
Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) Mohammad Yaseen
Malik on Sunday ended his six-day-long fast unto death following a
message from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh requesting him to end the
fast.
Malik, who had refused to cooperate with doctors and even declined to
take medicines orally, took a glass of juice from the mother of one of
the youths, Asif Mehraj, who was killed in police action while
protesting against the economic blockade of the Valley at Maisuma on
Monday, in presence of the Divisional Commissioner and Kashmir police
chief.
"I take the word of the Prime Minister seriously. I don't doubt the
credentials of the Prime Minister who is a very good human being. I am
hopeful that his words would be translated into practice," Malik said
after breaking his fast.
Malik, who was admitted in Soura Medical Institute on Thursday after
his condition deteriorated, ended his fast around 4.30 pm when
Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, Masud Samoon and Inspector General
of Police, Kashmir, S M Sahai visited him and read out the Prime
Minister's message.
"We will monitor the situation for a month and take necessary action
if the government promise is not kept," he said
Amarnath row: New J&K peace formula mooted
NDTV Correspondent
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (New Delhi)
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060899&ch=633539982682842500
There is a new peace proposal that could break the Amarnath deadlock.
Sources told NDTV that according to the proposal, all the
controversial decisions that led to the flare up will be cancelled
including the Cabinet decision transferring land to the Amarnath
Shrine Board and also the decision revoking that order.
In their place the old high court order will continue to operate. This
order asks the government to safeguard the Yatris' interests.
The big question, however is, will the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti
accept this formula? The BJP hopes it will, but it seems clear the
Hurriyat won't agree to it.
Meanwhile in Delhi, the leader of the Opposition L K Advani has hit
out at those who, what he says, are challenging the identity of Jammu
and Kashmir.
"The issue is not about Amarnath. It's not about a shrine. They didn't
have a problem when land was allotted to Vaishno Devi temple in Jammu.
But they are opposing the transfer of land in Kashmir. Every Indian
has right to every inch of land in India. Nobody can deny that right.
And if some people try to resist, it is not a small thing. They are
questioning the identity of J&K. They are challenging the
Constitutional fact that J&K is an integral part of India. Therefore,
we will oppose their move with all our might and we will win," said L
K Advani, Leader of the Opposition.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/south_asia/2002/kashmir_flashpoint/default.stm

Page last updated at 16:56 GMT, Thursday, 7 August 2008 17:56 UK
S Asia rivals sign security deals
India and Pakistan sign two security co-operation accords during talks
between their foreign ministers.





OTHER TOP STORIES


Pakistan 'controls terror flow'

Families' mercy needed for 'spy'

Tears of joy as prisoners return

India 'will cut' Kashmir troops

Row over Kashmiri Pakistan visit

Kashmir leaders to visit Pakistan

Second Kashmir buses arrive safe


Kashmir voices
Personal perspectives from Indian-administered Kashmir
Kashmir options
Maps showing the options and pitfalls of possible solutions
Kashmir
Key questions about the conflict answered



DESPATCHES


Why Kashmir's bus matters

How will the new bus service affect the peace process?


Witnessing a piece of history

Where are Pakistan militants?

Mixed views over bus service

History of a troubled road

Hopes of divided families
BACKGROUND


Roots of the crisis

Victoria Schofield, author of Kashmir in Conflict, explains how the
dispute began.


Who are the Kashmir militants?

South Asia's high nuclear stakes

Kashmir's forgotten plebiscite

Contentious Line of Control



PROFILES


Lashkar-e-Toiba

Pakistan-based group fighting against Indian control.


Profile: President Pervez Musharraf

Manmohan Singh

Country profile: India

Country profile: Pakistan



Military balance
How the armed forces of India and Pakistan compare
Timeline
A guide to the troubled relations between India and Pakistan

NEWS FOR YOUR REGION
BBCUrdu.com

BBCHindi.com


Kashmir conflict
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Kashmir dispute)
Jump to: navigation, search


The disputed areas of the region of Kashmir. India claims the entire
erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir based on an instrument
of accession signed in 1947. Pakistan claims all areas of the
erstwhile state except for those claimed by China. China claims the
Shaksam Valley and Aksai Chin.


Page 1, The Treaty of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir) to the Union of
India signed on 26 October 1947, and accepted the following day which
shows Maharaja Hari Singh's accession of the state of Jammu and
Kashmir to India


Page 2, Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir), with signatures
of Maharaja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir, and Viscount Mountbatten
of Burma, Governor-General of India.
The Kashmir conflict refers to the territorial dispute between India
and Pakistan (and between India and the People's Republic of China)
over Kashmir, the northwesternmost region of the Indian subcontinent.

India claims the entire erstwhile Dogra princely state of Jammu and
Kashmir and presently administers approximately half the region
including most of Jammu, Kashmir Valley, Ladakh and the Siachen
Glacier. India's claim is contested by Pakistan which controls a third
of Kashmir, mainly Azad Kashmir and the northern areas of Gilgit and
Baltistan. The Kashmiri region under Chinese control is known as Aksai
Chin. In addition, China also controls the Trans-Karakoram Tract, also
known as the Shaksam Valley, that was ceded to it by Pakistan in 1963.

The official stated stance of India is that Kashmir is an "integral
part" of India, while the official stated stance of Pakistan is that
Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status can only be
determined by the Kashmiri people.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir: in 1947, 1965,
and 1999. India and China have clashed once, in 1962 over Aksai Chin
as well as the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. India
and Pakistan have also been involved in several skirmishes over
Siachen Glacier. Since the 1990s, the Indian state of Indian
administered Jammu and Kashmir has been hit by confrontation between
Kashmiri separatists, including militants whom India alleges are
supported by Pakistan, and the Indian Armed Forces, which has resulted
in thousands of deaths[1].

Contents
[hide]
1 Partition, dispute and war
2 Timeline
2.1 Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
2.2 Sino-Indian War
2.3 1965 and 1971 wars
3 Rise of militancy
3.1 Cross-border troubles
3.2 Human rights abuse
4 Reasons behind the dispute
5 Indian view
6 Pakistani view
7 Water dispute
8 Map issues
9 Recent developments
9.1 Conflict in Kargil
9.2 Efforts to end the crisis
10 Recent events
11 See also
12 Further reading
13 References
14 External links



[edit] Partition, dispute and war


A map of the Kashmir region showing the boundaries of the erstwhile
princely state of Jammu and Kashmir in red.


The Instrument of Accession of Kashmir to India was accepted by
Viceroy Lord Mountbatten
In 1935, British rulers compelled the Dogra King of Jammu and Kashmir
to lease parts of his kingdom, which were to make up the new Province
of the North-West Frontier, for 60 years. This move was designed to
strengthen the northern boundaries, especially from Russia.

In 1947, the British dominion of India came to an end with the
creation of two new nations, India and Pakistan. Each of the 562
Indian princely states joined one of the two new nations: the Union of
India or the Dominion of Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir had a
predominantly Muslim population but a Hindu ruler, and was the largest
of these autonomous states and bordered both modern countries. Its
ruler was the Dogra King (or Maharaja) Hari Singh. Hari Singh
preferred to remain independent and sought to avoid the stress placed
on him by either India and Pakistan by playing each against the other.

In October 1947, Pakistani tribals from Dir entered Kashmir with the
hope to liberate it from Dogra rule. The state forces were not able to
withstand the invasion and the Maharaja signed The Instrument of
Accession that was accepted by the Indian National Congress on October
27, 1947.


[edit] Timeline
The following is a timeline of the Kashmir conflict.

Spring, 1947: Protests against the Maharaja's taxation policies turn
into a rebellion against Dogra rule in the district of Poonch. The
revolt spreads to Mirpur and Muzaffarabad districts.[2][3]
August-October, 1947: Communal riots break out in the Jammu region of
the state; an estimated 200,000 Muslims are killed and much of the
remaining population flees to Pakistan.[2]
August 15, 1947: Independence and partition of British India into
India and Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir does not decide which dominion
to join.[4]
October 3, 1947: Pro-Pakistan chieftains from the districts of Poonch,
Mirpur, and Muzaffarabad declare independence from Dogra rule, and
announce the formation of a provisional "Azad" (free) Jammu and
Kashmir government at Rawalpindi, Pakistan.[3]
October 17, 1947: Patiala state forces enter Jammu & Kashmir to aid
the Maharaja in his campaign against the separatists.[5]
October 22, 1947: Pashtuns from Pakistan's North West Frontier
Province, backed by Pakistani army, invade Kashmir. Maharaja of
Kashmir asks India for help.[6]
1947/1948: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 commences. Indian troops enter
Srinagar.
1965: Pakistan launches Operation Gibralter which leads to Indo-
Pakistani War of 1965.
December 6, 1971: Indo-Pakistani War of 1971; Secession of East
Bangla
1972: Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan agree to
respect the cease-fire as Line of Control.
April 13, 1984: The Indian Army takes Siachen Glacier region of
Kashmir.
May, 1987: As a result of an agreement between Rajiv Gandhi and Farooq
Abdullah, elections for the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly are
blatantly fixed in favor of the National Conference, resulting in
widespread unrest in the state.[7][8][9]
1989: Armed militancy begins in Kashmir.
February 5, 1990: First Solidarity day is observed throughout Pakistan
and Azad Kashmir for the alleged massacres by Indian armed forces.
[10]
May 1999: Intrusion of Pakistan-backed militants into Indian-Kashmir.
Kargil War commences.
March 20, 2000: Murder of 35 Sikhs by the Islamic Fundamentalist
militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba called the Chittisinghpura massacre.
July 14-16, 2001: General Pervez Musharraf and Atal Behari Vajpayee
meet for peace talks.
October 2001: Jammu and Kashmir state assembly in Srinagar attacked.
December 2001: Attack on Indian parliament in New Delhi by Kashmiri
militants resulting in 2001-2002 India-Pakistan standoff.
May 2, 2003: India and Pakistan restore diplomatic ties.
July 11, 2003: Delhi-Lahore bus service resumes
November 2003: Indo-Pakistan cease-fire is declared.[11]
September 24, 2004: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President
Musharraf meet in New York during UN General Assembly.
July, 2006 : Second round of Indo-Pakistani peace talks.

[edit] Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
The irregular Pakistani tribals made rapid advances into Kashmir
(Baramulla sector) after the rumours that the Maharaja was going to
decide for the union with India. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir asked
the Government of India to intervene. However, the Government of India
pointed out that India and Pakistan had signed an agreement of non-
intervention (maintenance of the status quo) in Jammu and Kashmir; and
although tribal fighters from Pakistan had entered Jammu and Kashmir,
there was, until then, no iron-clad legal evidence to unequivocally
prove that the Government of Pakistan was officially involved. It
would have been illegal for India to unilaterally intervene (in an
open, official capacity) unless Jammu and Kashmir officially joined
the Union of India, at which point it would be possible to send in its
forces and occupy the remaining parts.

The Maharaja desperately needed the Indian military's help when the
Pathan tribal invaders reached the outskirts of Srinagar. Before their
arrival into Srinagar, India argues that Maharaja Hari Singh completed
negotiations for acceding Jammu and Kashmir to India in exchange for
receiving military aid. The agreement which ceded Jammu and Kashmir to
India was signed by the Maharaja and Lord Mountbatten.[2]

The resulting war over Kashmir, the First Kashmir War, lasted until
1948, when India moved the issue to the UN Security Council. The UN
previously had passed resolutions setting up for the monitoring of the
conflict in Kashmir. The committee it set up was called the United
Nations Committee for India and Pakistan. Following the set up of the
UNCIP the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on April 21, 1948.
The resolution imposed that an immediate cease-fire take place and
said that Pakistan should withdraw all presence and had no say in
Jammu and Kashmir politics. It stated that India should retain a
minimum military presence and stated "that the final disposition of
the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the
will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free
and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United
Nations". The cease fire took place December 31, 1948.

At that time, the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the
plebiscite but Pakistan did not withdraw it's troops from Kashmir thus
violating the condition for holding the plebiscite. Over the next
several years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions,
revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous
withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region, per
the recommendations of General Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN
arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the
demilitarization of the region - every one of which was accepted by
Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.[12]


[edit] Sino-Indian War
Main article: Sino-Indian War
In 1962, troops from the People's Republic of China and India clashed
in territory claimed by both. China won a swift victory in the war,
resulting in the Chinese administration of the region called Aksai
Chin, which continues to date. In addition to these lands, another
smaller area, the Trans-Karakoram, was demarcated as the line of
control between China and Pakistan, although parts on the Chinese side
are claimed by India to be parts of Kashmir. The line that separates
India from China in this region is known as the Line of Actual
Control. [3]


[edit] 1965 and 1971 wars
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1965
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
In 1965 and 1971, heavy fighting again broke out between India and
Pakistan. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 resulted in the defeat of
Pakistan and Pakistan Military's surrender in East Pakistan
(Bangladesh). The Simla Agreement was signed in 1972 between India and
Pakistan. By this treaty, both countries agreed to settle all issues
by peaceful means and mutual discussions in the framework of the UN
Charter.


[edit] Rise of militancy
Main article: Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
In 1989, a widespread armed insurgency started in Kashmir, which
continues to this day. India contends that this was largely started by
the large number of Afghan mujahideen who entered the Kashmir valley
following the end of the Soviet-Afghan War, though Pakistan and
Kashmiri nationalists argue that Afghan mujahideen did not leave
Afghanistan in large numbers until 1992, three years after the
insurgency began.[13] Yasin Malik, a leader of one faction of the
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front,along with Ashfaq Majid Wani and Bitta
Karate, was one of the Kashmiris to organize militancy in Kashmir.
However since 1995, Malik has renounced the use of violence and calls
for strictly peaceful methods to resolve the dispute.He developed
differences with one of the senior leader farooq papa for shunning the
demand for independent Kashmir and trying to cut a deal with Indian
Prime Minister resulting in spilt in which Bitta Karete Salim nanaji
and other senior comrades joined Farooq papa.(see Praveen Swami; PMO
in secret talks with secessionists.[4] [5] [14]

Pakistan claims these insurgents are Jammu and Kashmir citizens, and
they are rising up against the Indian Army in an independence
movement. It also says the Indian Army is committing serious human
rights violations to the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. It denies that
it is giving armed help to the insurgents. India claims these
insurgents are Islamic terrorist groups from Pakistan-administered
Kashmir and Afghanistan, fighting to make Jammu and Kashmir part of
Pakistan. It believes Pakistan is giving armed help to the terrorists,
and training them in Pakistan. It also says the terrorists have been
killing many citizens in Kashmir, and committing human rights
violations, while denying that its own armed forces are responsible
for the human rights abuses.

The Pakistani government calls these insurgents, "Kashmiri freedom
fighters", and claims that it gives only moral and diplomatic support
to these insurgents, though India [15] believes they are Pakistan-
supported terrorists from Pakistan Administered Kashmir.


[edit] Cross-border troubles
The border and the Line of Control separating Indian and Pakistani
Kashmir passes through some exceptionally difficult terrain. The
world's highest battleground, the Siachen Glacier is a part of this
difficult-to-man boundary. Even with 200,000 military personnel, [6]
India maintains that it is infeasible to place enough men to guard all
sections of the border throughout the various seasons of the year.
Pakistan has indirectly acquiesced its role in failing to prevent
"cross border terrorism" when it agreed to curb such activities [7]
after intense pressure from the Bush administration in mid 2002.[8]

The Government of Pakistan has repeatedly claimed that by constructing
a fence along the line of control, India is violating the Shimla
Accord. However, India claims the construction of the fence has helped
decrease armed infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir.

In 2002 Pakistani President and Army Chief General Pervez Musharraf
promised to check infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir.


[edit] Human rights abuse
Claims of human rights abuses have been made concerning on both the
Indian Armed Forces and the armed militants operating in Jammu and
Kashmir. [9]. A 2005 study conducted by Médecins Sans Frontières found
that Kashmiri women are among the worst sufferers of sexual violence
in the world, with 11.6% of respondents reporting that they had been
victims of sexual abuse.[16] Some surveys have found that in the
Kashmir region itself (where the bulk of separatist and Indian
military activity is concentrated), popular perception holds that the
Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than
the separatist groups. According to the MORI survey of 2002, in
Kashmir only 2% of respondents believed that the militant groups were
guilty of widespread human rights abuses, while 64% believed that
Indian troops were guilty of the same. This trend was reversed however
in other parts of the state.[17]


[edit] Reasons behind the dispute
Ever since the Partition of India in 1947, both India and Pakistan
have staked their claim to Kashmir. These claims are centred on
historical incidents and on religious affiliations of the Kashmiri
people. The whole Kashmir issue has caused longstanding enmity between
post-Colonial India and newly created Muslim Pakistan. It arose as a
direct consequence of the partition and independence of the Indian
subcontinent in August 1947. The state of Jammu and Kashmir, which
lies strategically in the Northwest of the subcontinent, bordering
China and the former Soviet Union, was a princely state ruled by
Maharaja Hari Singh. In geographical terms, the Maharaja could have
joined either of the two new Dominions. Although urged by the Viceroy,
Lord Mountbatten, to determine the future of his state before the
transfer of power took place, Hari Singh demurred.

Kashmir remains bitterly divided on the ground; two-thirds of it
(known as the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir) compromising Jammu,
the Valley of Kashmir and the sparsely populated Buddhist area of
Ladakh are controlled by India; one-third is administered by Pakistan.
This area includes a narrow strip of land (Azad Kashmir and the
Northern Areas) compromising the Gilgit Agency, and Baltistan and the
former kingdoms of Hunza and Nagar. Attempts to resolve the 'core
issue' through political discussion were unsuccessful. In September
1965 war broke out again between Islamabad and Delhi. The United
Nations called for a yet another cease-fire and peace was restored
once again following the Tashkent Declaration in 1966, by which both
nations returned to their original positions along the demarcated
line. After the 1971 war and the creation of independent Bangladesh
under the terms of the 1972 Simla Agreement, Prime Minister Indira
Gandhi of India and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan agreed that
neither side would seek to alter the cease-fire line in Kashmir, which
was renamed as the Line of Control, "unilaterally, irrespective of
mutual differences and legal interpretations".

Numerous violations of the Line of Control including the infamous
incursions by insurgents and Pakistani armed forces at Kargil which
led to the Kargil war as well as sporadic clashes on the Siachen
Glacier where both countries maintain forces at altitudes rising to
20,000 ft, add to concern for the stability of the hostile region.


[edit] Indian view
The Indian claim to Kashmir centers on the agreement between the Dogra
Maharaja Hari Singh, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Lord
Mountbatten according to which the erstwhile Kingdom of Jammu and
Kashmir became an integral part of the Union of India through the
Instrument of Accession. It also focuses on India's claim of secular
society, an ideology that is not meant to factor religion into
governance of major policy and thus considers it irrelevant in a
boundary dispute. Another argument by India is that, in India,
minorities are very well integrated, with some members of the minority
communities holding positions of power and influence in India. Even
though more than 80% of India's population practices Hinduism, a
former President of India, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, is a Muslim while Sonia
Gandhi, the parliamentary leader of the ruling Congress Party, is a
Roman Catholic. The current prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh,
is a Sikh and leader of opposition, Lal Krishna Advani, is a Hindu.

In short, India holds that,

For the UN Resolution mandating a plebiscite to be valid, Pakistan
should first vacate its part of Kashmir.
The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified
the Maharaja's instrument of Accession to India and had adopted a
constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of the
state with the Indian Union. India claims that this body was a
representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri
people at the time.
India does not accept the Two Nation Theory that forms the basis of
Pakistan.
India asserts that Kashmir being a religiously diverse region with a
large number of Hindus and Buddhists, the region under a non secular
Islamic Nation Pakistan is against the secular credentials of Kashmir.
India points at the religious cleansing of the minorities in Pakistan
after the independence.
The state of Jammu and Kashmir was made autonomous by the Article 370
of the Constitution of India, though this autonomy has since been
reduced
India also points to an opinion poll held in Jammu and Kashmir that
most of the Muslims living in the Kashmir valley do not want Kashmir
to be a part of Pakistan.[18]
India alleges that most of the terrorists operating in Kashmir are
themselves from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and that Pakistan has
been involved in state sponsored terrorism.[19]
India states that despite Pakistan being named as an "Islamic
Republic", India accuses Pakistan of being responsible for one of the
worst genocide of Muslims when it allegedly killed millions of its own
countrymen in East Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities.
India also points to articles and US reports[20] which suggest that
the terrorists are funded mostly by Pakistan as well as through
criminal means like from the illegal sale of arms and narcotics as
well as through circulating counterfeit currency in India.

[edit] Pakistani view
Pakistan's claims to the disputed region are based on the rejection of
Indian claims to Kashmir, namely the Instrument of Accession. Pakistan
insists that the Maharaja was not a popular leader, and was regarded
as a tyrant by most Kashmiris. Pakistan also accuses India of
hypocrisy, as it refused to recognize the accession of Junagadh to
Pakistan and Hyderabad's independence, on the grounds that those two
states had Hindu majorities (in fact, India occupied and forcibly
integrated those two territories). Furthermore, as he had fled Kashmir
due to Pakistani invasion, Pakistan asserts that the Maharaja held no
authority in determining Kashmir's future. Additionally, Pakistan
argues that even if the Maharaja had any authority in determining the
plight of Kashmir, he signed the Instrument of Accession under duress,
thus invalidating the legitimacy of his actions.

Pakistan also claims that Indian forces were in Kashmir before the
Instrument of Accession was signed with India, thus, Indian troops
were in Kashmir in violation of the Standstill Agreement, which was
designed to maintain the status quo in Kashmir (although India was not
signatory to the Agreement, signed between Pakistan and the Hindu
ruler of Jammu and Kashmir). [21][22].

From 1990 to 1999 some organizations report that Indian Armed Forces,
its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent militias have been
responsible for the deaths 4,501 of Kashmiri civilians. Also from 1990
to 1999, there have are records of 4,242 women between the ages of
7-70 that have been raped.[23][24]. Similar allegations were also made
by some human rights organizations.[25]

In short, Pakistan holds that

The popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrates that the Kashmiri people
no longer wish to remain within India. Pakistan suggests that this
means that either Kashmir wants to be with Pakistan or independent.
Indian counterinsurgency tactics merit international monitoring of the
Kashmir conflict, and the Indian Army has carried out human rights
violations - including torture, rape and extrajudicial killings -
against the Kashmiri people.
According to the two-nation theory by which Pakistan was formed,
Kashmir should have been with Pakistan, because it has a Muslim
majority. The "K" in Pakistan stands for Kashmir.
India has shown disregard to the resolutions of the UN (by not holding
a plebiscite).
The Kashmiri people have now been forced by the circumstances to rise
against the alleged repression of the Indian army and uphold their
right of self-determination through militancy. Pakistan claims to give
the Kashmiri insurgents moral, ethical and military support (see 1999
Kargil Conflict).

[edit] Water dispute
Another reason behind the dispute over Kashmir is water. Kashmir is
the origin point for many rivers and tributaries of the Indus River
basin. They include Jhelum and Chenab which primarily flow into
Pakistan while other branches - the Ravi, Beas and the Sutlej irrigate
northern India. Pakistan has been apprehensive that in a dire need
India under whose portion of Kashmir lies the origins and passage of
the said rivers, would use its strategic advantage and withhold the
flow and thus choke the agrarian economy of Pakistan. The Boundary
Award of 1947 meant that the headworks of the chief irrigation systems
of Pakistan were left located in Indian Territory. The Indus Waters
Treaty signed in 1960 resolved most of these disputes over the sharing
of water, calling for mutual cooperation in this regard. This treaty
faced issues raised by Pakistan over the illegal construction of dams
on the Indian side which limit water to the Pakistani side.


[edit] Map issues
As with other disputed territories, each government issues maps
depicting their claims in Kashmir as part of their territory,
regardless of actual control. It is illegal in India to exclude all or
part of Kashmir in a map. It is also illegal in Pakistan not to
include the state of Jammu and Kashmir as disputed territory, as
permitted by the U.N. Non-participants often use the Line of Control
and the Line of Actual Control as the depicted boundaries, as is done
in the CIA World Factbook, and the region is often marked out in
hashmarks, although the Indian government strictly opposes such
practices. When Microsoft released a map in Windows 95 and MapPoint
2002, a controversy was raised because it did not show all of Kashmir
as part of India as per Indian claim. However, all the neutral and
Pakistani companies claim to follow UN's map and over 90% of all maps
containing the territory of Kashmir show it as disputed territory.[10]

Sources from:

UN: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the
map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United
Nations. Dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control of
Jammu and Kashmir agreed upon by the Republic of India and the
Government of Pakistan since 1972. Both the parties have not yet
agreed upon the final status of the region and nothing significant has
been implemented since the peace process began in 2004.

Islamabad: The Government of Pakistan maintains un-provisionally and
unconditionally stating that the formal "Accession of Jammu and
Kashmir" to Pakistan or even to the Republic of India remains to be
decided by UN plebiscite.It accepts UN's map of the territory.
[citation needed]

New Delhi: The Government of India states that "the external
artificial boundaries of India, especially concerning the Kashmir
region under its jurisdiction created by a foreign body are neither
correct nor authenticated".[citation needed]


[edit] Recent developments
India continues to assert their sovereignty or rights over the entire
region of Kashmir, while Pakistan maintains that it is a disputed
territory. Pakistan argues that the status quo cannot be considered as
a solution. Pakistan insists on a UN sponsored plebiscite .
Unofficially, the Pakistani leadership has indicated that they would
be willing to accept alternatives such as a demilitarized Kashmir, if
sovereignty of Azad Kashmir was to be extended over the Kashmir
valley, or the ‘Chenab’ formula, by which India would retain parts of
Kashmir on its side of the Chenab river, and Pakistan the other side -
effectively re-partioning Kashmir on communal lines. The problem
however is that the Population of Pakistan Administered portion of
Kashmir is both ethnically and linguistically and culturally different
from that in Kashmir Valley India. The Azad Kashmir population being
on the most part ethnic Punjabis. Therefore a Partition on the Chenab
formula is opposed by most Kashmiri politicians from all spectrums,
though some, such as Sajjad Lone, have in recent months suggested that
non-Muslim part of Jammu and Kashmir be separated from Kashmir and
handed to India. Some political analysts say that the Pakistan
terrorist state policy shift and mellowing down of its aggressive
stance may have to do with its total failure in the Kargil War and the
subsequent 9/11 attacks that put pressure on Pakistan to alter its
terrorist position.[26] Further many neutral parties to the dispute
have noted that UN resolution on Kashmir is no longer relevant.[27]
Even the European Union has viewed that the plebiscite is not in
Kashmiris' interest.[28] The report also notes, that the UN-laid down
conditions for such a plebiscite have not been, and can no longer be,
met by Pakistan.[29] Even the Hurriyat Conference observed in 2003,
that "Plebiscite no longer an option"[30] Besides the popular factions
that support either parties, there is a third faction which supports
independence and withdrawal of both India and Pakistan. These have
been the respective stands of the parties for long, and there have
been no significant change over the years. As a result, all efforts to
solve the conflict have been futile so far.

The Freedom in the World 2006 report categorized the Indian-
administered Kashmir as "partly free", and Pakistan-administered
Kashmir as well as the country of Pakistan "not free". [11] India
claims that contrary to popular belief, a large proportion of the
Jammu and Kashmir populace wish to remain with India. In a 2002 survey
by MORI in the Indian administered areas around 61% of the respondents
said they felt they would be better off politically and economically
as an Indian citizen, with only 6% preferring Pakistan instead. [31]
However, it is important to note that the same MORI survey found that
within the Kashmir Valley, only 9% of respondents said they felt they
would be better off as Indian citizens, with 13% preferring Pakistan,
and the remaining 78% showing no enthusiasm for either nation.[32][33]
According to a 2007 poll conducted by the Centre for the Study of
Developing Societies in New Delhi, 87% of respondents in the Kashmir
Valley prefer independence over union with India or Pakistan.[34]


[edit] Conflict in Kargil
Main article: Kargil War


Location of conflict.
In mid-1999 insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir
infiltrated into Jammu and Kashmir. During the winter season, Indian
forces regularly move down to lower altitudes as severe climatic
conditions makes it almost impossible for them to guard the high peaks
near the Line of Control. The insurgents took advantage of this and
occupied vacant mountain peaks of the Kargil range overlooking the
highway in Indian Kashmir, connecting Srinagar and Leh. By blocking
the highway, they wanted to cut-off the only link between the Kashmir
Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a high-scale conflict between the
Indian Army and the Pakistan Army.

At the same time, fears of the Kargil War turning into a nuclear war,
provoked the then-US President Bill Clinton to pressure Pakistan to
retreat. Faced with mounting losses of personnel and posts, Pakistan
Army withdrew the remaining troops from the area ending the conflict.
India reclaimed control of the peaks which they now patrol and monitor
all year long.


[edit] Efforts to end the crisis
The 9/11 attacks on the US resulted in the US government wanting to
restrain militancy in the world, including Pakistan. Due to Indian
persuasion on US Congress Members, the US urged Islamabad to cease
infiltrations, which continue to this day, by Islamist militants into
Indian-administered Kashmir. In December 2001, a terrorist attack on
the Indian Parliament linked to Pakistan resulted in war threats,
massive deployment and international fears of nuclear war in the
subcontinent.

After intensive diplomatic efforts by other countries, India and
Pakistan began to withdraw troops from the international border June
10, 2002, and negotiations began again.[citation needed] Effective
November 26, 2003, India and Pakistan have agreed to maintain a
ceasefire along the undisputed International Border, the disputed Line
of Control, and the Siachen glacier. This is the first such "total
ceasefire" declared by both nuclear powers in nearly 15 years. In
February 2004, Pakistan further increased pressure on Pakistanis
fighting in Indian-administered Kashmir to adhere to the ceasefire.
The nuclear-armed neighbours also launched several other mutual
confidence building measures. Restarting the bus service between the
Indian- and Pakistani- administered Kashmir has helped defuse the
tensions between the countries. Both India and Pakistan have also
decided to cooperate on economic fronts.

On Dec. 5, 2006, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf told an Indian
TV channel that Pakistan would give up its claim on Kashmir if India
accepted some of his peace proposals, including a phased withdrawal of
troops, self-governance for locals, no changes in the borders of
Kashmir, and a joint supervision mechanism involving India, Pakistan
and Kashmir, the BBC reported[12]. Musharraf also stated that he was
ready to give up the United Nation resolutions regarding Kashmir [13].


[edit] Recent events
The 2005 Kashmir earthquake, which killed over 80,000 people, led to
India and Pakistan finalizing negotiations for the opening of a road
for disaster relief through Kashmir.

In the week of March 10, 2008, 17 people were wounded when a blast hit
the region's only highway overpass located near the Civil Secretariat
-- Indian-controlled Kashmir's seat of government -- and the region's
high court. A gun battle between security forces and militants
fighting against Indian rule left five people dead and two others
injured March 23, 2008. The battle began when security forces raided a
house on the outskirts of the capital city of Srinagar. The Indian
Army has been carrying out search-and-cordon operations against
militants in Indian-administered Kashmir since the current armed
violence broke out here in 1989. While the authorities here say 43,000
persons have been killed in the violence, various rights groups and
non-governmental organizations have put the figure at twice that
number. [14]


[edit] See also
List of topics on the land and the people of Jammu and Kashmir
History of Jammu and Kashmir
Timeline of the Kashmir conflict
Kashmiriyat - a socio-cultural ethos of religious harmony and Kashmiri
consciousness.
Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir) to the Country / Dominion
of India
Indo-Pakistani Wars
Trans-Karakoram Tract
Aksai Chin
Kargil War or the Indo-Pakistani War of 1999
LOC Kargil, a 2003 Bollywood war film based on "Kargil War"
Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
Indian Kashmir barrier

[edit] Further reading
Drew, Federic. 1877. “The Northern Barrier of India: a popular account
of the Jammoo and Kashmir Territories with Illustrations.&;#8221; 1st
edition: Edward Stanford, London. Reprint: Light & Life Publishers,
Jammu. 1971.
Dr. Ijaz Hussain, 1998, Kashmir Dispute: An International Law
Perspective, National Institute of Pakistan Studies
Alastair Lamb, Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1846-1990 (Hertingfordbury,
Herts: Roxford Books, 1991)
Kashmir Study Group, 1947-1997, the Kashmir dispute at fifty :
charting paths to peace (New York, 1997)
Jaspreet Singh, Seventeen Tomatoes -- an unprecedented look inside the
world of an army camp in Kashmir (Vehicule Press; Montreal, Canada,
2004)
Navnita Behera, State, identity and violence : Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh (New Delhi: Manohar, 2000)
Sumit Ganguly, The Crisis in Kashmir (Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson
Center Press; Cambridge : Cambridge U.P., 1997)
Sumantra Bose, The challenge in Kashmir : democracy, self-
determination and a just peace (New Delhi: Sage, 1997)
Robert Johnson, 'A Region in Turmoil' (London and New York, Reaktion,
2005)
Hans Köchler, The Kashmir Problem between Law and Realpolitik.
Reflections on a Negotiated Settlement. Keynote speech delivered at
the "Global Discourse on Kashmir 2008." European Parliament, Brussels,
1 April 2008.
Prem Shankar Jha, Kashmir, 1947: rival versions of history (New
Delhi : Oxford University Press, 1996)
Manoj Joshi, The Lost Rebellion (New Delhi: Penguin India, 1999)
Alexander Evans, Why Peace Won't Come to Kashmir, Current History (Vol
100, No 645) April 2001 p170-175.
Younghusband, Francis and Molyneux, E. 1917. Kashmir. A. & C. Black,
London.
Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in Conflict I.B. Tauris, London.
Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in the Crossfire, I.B. Tauris, London.
Muhammad Ayub, An Army; Its Role & Rule (A History of the Pakistan
Army from Independence to Kargil 1947-1999). Rosedog
Books,Pittsburgh,pennsylvnia USA.2005.ISBN 0-8059-9594-3

[edit] References
The references used in this article may be clearer with a different
or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking.

^ A Good Voice Silenced: Kashmir's Loss Is Also Mine
^ a b Schofield, Victoria. 2003. Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan
and the Unending War. I.B.Tauris. Pages 41-43
^ a b Bose, Sumantra. 2005. Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to
Peace. Harvard University Press. Pages 32-33.
^ BBC NEWS | India Pakistan | Timeline
^ Wirsing, Robert. 1994. India, Pakistan, and the Kashmir Dispute: On
Regional Conflict and Its Resolution. Macmillian. Pages 50-51.
^ Stein, Burton. 1998. A History of India. Oxford University Press.
432 pages. ISBN 0195654463. Page 368.
^ Akbar, MJ. Exerting Moral Force. "Time Magazine," September 30,
2002.
^ Ganguly, Sumit. Explaining the Kashmir Insurgency: Political
Mobilization and Institutional Decay. "International Security," vol.
21, no. 2.
^ Behind the Kashmir Conflict. "Human Rights Watch," 1999.
^ http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080206/j&k.htm#7 Kashmir
Solidarity Day in Pak now a subdued ritual
^ India and Pakistan cease-fire holds in Kashmir
^ India Grabs It. Time Magazine, February 4, 1957.
^ Timeline of the conflict - BBC
^ "Interview: "I have never been on Pakistan's 'favoured guests'
list"", Newsline (2005-01-01). Retrieved on 2006-07-27.
^ FBI has images of terror camp in Pak
^ Wailing Woes
^ Kashmiris Reject War In Favour Of Democratic Means
^ Exerting Moral Force - TIME
^ US panel raps Pakistan cross-border terrorism
^ [1] US Embassy
^ BBC NEWS | South Asia | Kashmir: The origins of the dispute
^ Ministry of Foreign Affairs
^ Cry and Anguish for Freedom in Kashmir (by Anver Suliman) - Media
Monitors Network
^ Conflict Rape Victims: Abandoned And Forgotten By Syed Junaid
Hashmi
^ Human Rights Watch World Report 2001: India: Human Rights
Developments
^ Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy after the Bush Visit to South Asia
Strategic Insights Volume V, Issue 4 (April 2006) by Peter R. Lavoy
^ Kickstart Kashmir - Times of India.
^ EU: Plebiscite not in Kashmiris’ interest - November 30, 2006, Pak
Observer
^ REPORT on Kashmir: present situation and future prospects Committee
on Foreign Affairs Rapporteur: Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne
^ [http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/bline/2003/07/01/stories/
2003070102280400.htm Jul 01, 2003, The Hindu
^ Ipsos MORI - Kashmiris Reject War In Favour Of Democratic Means
^ Truth Behind the MORI Poll on Kashmir
^ Full Text of the MORI Survey on Kashmir
^ 87 pct in Kashmir Valley Want Independence
Jammu Kashmir / Azad kashmir

[edit] External links
The Future of Kashmir, ACDIS Swords and Ploughshares 16:1 (winter
2007-8), Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International
Security (ACDIS) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front
Bookmarks and Coverage on Kashmir Conflict
Kashmir Watch: In-depth coverage on Kashmir conflict
Legal Documents related to Kashmir including treaties
Centre for Contemporary Conflict on Kargil War
BBC articles on Kashmir
Kashmir Conflict
Recent Kashmir developments
The Political Economy of the Kashmir Conflict U.S. Institute of Peace
Report, June 2004
The Jammu and Kashmir issue
A peep into Kashmir History
The Kashmir dispute-cause or symptom?
LoC-Line of Control situation in Kashmir
Jammu & Kashmir-The Basic Facts
Introduction of the Kashmir dispute
An outline of the history of Kashmir
Images of Muzaffarabad (Capital City of Pakistani controlled Kashmir)
Images of Pakistan controlled Kashmir
News Coverage of Kashmir
Jammu & Kashmir on The Indian Analyst News, Analysis, and Opinion
Accession Document.
Conflict in Kashmir: Selected Internet Resources by the Library,
University of California, Berkeley, USA; University of California at
Berkeley Library Bibliographies and Web-Bibliographies list
Timeline since April 2003
A peep into Kashmir History and timeline
Conflict in Kashmir: Selected Internet Resources by the Library,
University of California, Berkeley, USA; University of California at
Berkeley Library Bibliographies and Web-Bibliographies list
Kashmir resolution of the European Parliament, 24 May 2007
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front </strong>