Is Pakistan disintegrating?

[tor_khan]

^ Part of your response to Point 2 points to many of the fears that the smaller states in the region have of India and these fears allows Pakistan to justify itself, I guess.

All of which says that the Kashmiris, for now remain forcibly under Pakistan or India. For the majority of Kashmiris of course unless either through a stroke of luck or if they are able to muster up some formidable opposition, they will remain, in all probability, part of India.

That said for any Kashmiri to place hope in Pakistan coming to their aid is wishful because being the more unstable state it might well crumble before India.

Nuclear missiles speak volumes.

[drona]

Levanaye Zalmaye, tor_khan

Considering the geopolitical realities of the region and competing strategic interests of India, Pakistan, US and China ; what is the ideal solution for the Kashmir conundrum ?

I hope you are aware that:

1. the Indian security forces were only posted in Kashmir Valley after Pakistani proxies started committing acts of terrorism against those Kashmiris who didn't want to "liberate" the Valley. Till 1988 there were no security forces .

2. The biggest weapon that has been used to combat insurgency in Kashmir Valley is AK-47 and Insas rifles. Should India have taken the leaf out of Pakistan, used helicopter gunships and heavy artillery on Kashmiri towns that they have so generously used in FATA and Baluchistan ? The Kashmiri separatist leaders are also not mysteriously killed like usually happens in Pakistan.

3. the Human Development Indicators of the Valley are much better than most other states of India. J&K gets the highest grants per capita from the Fed. Govt..

4. the people from J&K have more political rights than people from other states. I can own land in almost any part of India except J&K. But the Kashmiris can buy and get a job in every part of India. Also J&K govt. has made a law that any Kashmiri girl who marries a boy outside the state will lose her inheritance. So there is no chance of Kashmiri identity getting "diluted" because it's accession to the Indian Union.

Regards,
Drona

[khyaal]

The only reason for tied destinies is because nations agree to split up like that when the large federation is no longer sustainable.

When Yugoslavia split up, the Serbian state was not all Serbian, or Serbian land. Part of it was Albanian, for example.

What was the question anyway.

Unlike Czechoslovakia the division of Yugoslavia didn't happen in a peaceful manner as we all know, and Pakistan is expected to meet the same fate very soon. The problem with Pakistan is it is not running like a federation. The Punjab dominated center has colonized the rest of the nations. All this is evident from the chaotic history of Pakistan since its creation by the British. Bengal's secession and thus the division of Pakistan, Pashtuns insurgencies in the 70's against their forcible merger in Paki federation and Baloch's fifth episode of rebellion against the occupation of Qalat States Union in 1948 are such fault lines which could bring this false federation to end any instant. They have kept this pseudo federation intact only through Punjab's military might till this time. But I think its demise is getting nearer.

[khyaal]

Kashmir belongs to neither India nor Pakistan - Kashmiris.

Even Omar Abdullah last week said that he believes his country never merged with India. Coming form someone like him, it means a lot.

Therefore, to assert that Kashmir is India's own land (or Pakistan's for that matter) is an insult to the memory of tens of thousands of Kashmiris who have died as a result of Pakistani and Indian state-sponsored terrorism. Despite the propaganda on PTV, Pakistan wants Kashmir only for its waterways and its strategic-position on the world map. It's the same with India. The real owners of Kashmir, its inhabitants, have time and again showed that they want nothing to do with either of the two foreigners trying to take over their country.

Kashmir is the tragedy of our age. No one cares about it. Pakistan ships Gilgitis and Pashtuns there to freeze to death on the heights of Kargil and I don't need to mention what the Indian 'security' forces do there.

Zalimya! the dispute over Kashmir is just a pretext from Punjab/Pakistan to have a reason for keeping a huge army, which it in fact uses to keep internal suppression. You might argue about the water issue but that too is only relevant if Pakistan acts like a federation. What is ironic about Pakistan's stand on Kashmir is its nexus with China which also occupies Part of Kashmir. It only proves Pakistan is seeking reasons for its existence and nothing else, and that reason it could get only through exaggeration and magnification of external threats. India got the opportunity to keep its forces in Bangladesh during 1971 war which it didn't. So admitting Pakistan's security concerns are nothing more than getting duped by its 'wolf coming' drama.

[Proud Indian]

Brother has raised some very good points.

1. Partition can never be 'complete'. It's unnatural and therefore, it will never have any sort of an 'end'.

2. I think Kashmiri separatism is not an offshoot of the two-nation theory. In fact, many states did not want to be part of India or Pakistan in 1947. Things just happened too suddenly. Take Balochistan and Malakand, for example. They didn't join like Sind and Punjab. The Tamils had to swallow a lot of nationalist pride to become a part of a never-done-before Indian state. Or look at Assamese separatist assertions. The state of Hyderabad had to annexed by force. Kashmir is one of those cases instead of being from those influenced by nonsensical Muslim separatism. I feel for Bengalis - having to see their ancient homeland divided over people's favorite deities. Perhaps the difference here is that the Kashmiris haven't given up yet.

3. That would be ideal but that's not how it is in the real world. As a neo-realist specializing in game theory and the mathematization of public opinion, you, of all people, should know that the institutional forces gelling these states together are powerful beyond one man and his idealistic thoughts.

You say partition is unnatural but then you say Kashmir is not India's land.

The original inhabitants of Kashmir are Kashmiri Pandits. Kashmir is originally Hindu land that is part of India for thousands of years. Do you ever hear Kashmiri Pandits complaining about being with India? No, you just hear the Muslims complaining who were not even part of Kashmir. Kashmiri Muslims are descendants of Arabs who raped them and forced them to convert to Islam, their land is the Middle East not Kashmir.

Kashmir (including Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) belongs to India. End of story.

[drona]

Proud Indian,

The religion of Kashmiris and how they were converted - whether by force of sword or by the love of Sufis- is irrelevant. J&K is a part of India, because the shenanigans of an impatient Jinnah forced the J&K monarch to sign the letter of accession with India.

Otherwise it might have stayed independent or merged eventually with Pakistan.

~Drona

[Michin Khel]

@Proud indian
The present khyber Pakhtunkhwa was once populated by hindus. Mahmod ghaznavi killed or expelled its hindu inhabitants so that the region become depopulated and afghan tribes came one by one into the region.

I think india should also claim khyber pakhtunkhwa.

[roadrunner]

@Proud indian
The present khyber Pakhtunkhwa was once populated by hindus. Mahmod ghaznavi killed or expelled its hindu inhabitants so that the region become depopulated and afghan tribes came one by one into the region.

I think india should also claim khyber pakhtunkhwa.

Nonsense.

NWFP (easier to write) was never populated by Hindus.

[roadrunner]

Yeah, how dare India terrorize it's own land while Pakistani government very bravely had terrorized every other neighboring country already? And maybe some of your people should have taken a nap with rats instead as well, maybe you wouldn't have had Hira Mandi today.

What's the deal with rats by you Dravidics all the time?

Rats is not a Pakistani thing. I have no idea why you're so obsessed by it.

There is nothing wrong with being Pakistani, I have no idea why you believe there is.

the facts are these.

The UN passed a binding resolution that a plebiscite is to be held and the people of Kashmir will decide who they want to join, India or Pakistan.

India prevented the plebiscite from occurring, and forcibly made the Kashmiris part of their Constitution.

There is no fighting on the Pakistani side of Kashmir.

The fighting is all on the Indian side of Kashmir because that is where the resentment is.

[Michin Khel]

Nonsense.

NWFP (easier to write) was never populated by Hindus.

Read some history books.
Also from yousafzais to gandapurs all tribes in KP claim that they have migrated from present day afghanistan.

[roadrunner]

Read some history books.
Also from yousafzais to gandapurs all tribes in KP claim that they have migrated from present day afghanistan.

So what?

Migrating to Afghanistan from Pakistani NWFP doesn't mean they were Hindu.

Have you ever thought that history books use shorthand terminology for Hindu rather than specifics that most people would not understand.

Hinduism was never established in the NWFP. This is a fact.

You are welcome to try and disprove this. You won't be able to.

[Michin Khel]

And why i would waste my time with a person who doesnt know the basic knowledge of pashtun history?

Between are you a pashtun?

[roadrunner]

And why i would waste my time with a person who doesnt know the basic knowledge of pashtun history?

Between are you a pashtun?

So you cannot prove it.

You simply read certain textbooks and vomit what you read.

This means you are a parrot, not a historian.

[Michin Khel]

So you cannot prove it.

You simply read certain textbooks and vomit what you read.

This means you are a parrot, not a historian.

OK go to khyber.org, click section of tribes and read detail of each tribe there. after that discuss it with me.

[roadrunner]

OK go to khyber.org, click section of tribes and read detail of each tribe there. after that discuss it with me.

Obviously you can't prove it.

I know everything there is to know about Pashtun tribes.

One of those things is they were not Hindu.

I know what they were that you are mistaking for Hindu. Do you?