Saturday, August 19, 2006

Kashmir I: Separate State?

My Perspective

The history of Kashmir is fraught with lies, deception, aggression, conflicts, riots, unfulfilled promises and misrule. One can squabble over them for years and still not come up with a solution to end the killings of innocent lives- those of civilians and those of security personnel. No pragmatic solution can ever envision a Kashmir Pandit migrating back to Kashmir Valley. Such a dream will always remain a dream. Can there be a practical plan that allows Hindus in India to repossess the lands they have left in Pakistan during time of Independence? Instead one should start looking for practical solutions for Kashmir Muslims and Kashmiri Pandits.

The uprising is seen only in the Kashmir Valley under Indian Administration while POK (Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir- also called as Azad Kashmir) is relatively calm, and I can dare say it is peaceful. The other regions of this state- Jammu and Ladakh have been relatively peaceful as well. The present demographics of Kashmir (not Jammu and Ladakh) predominantly consist of one faith and their unanimous aspirations for independence are entwined with roots in this particular faith. India cannot hold a piece of land in its territory when its people have no will or desire to be with India, work with India, or work for India. India has been a strong proponent and supporter of many Independence movements of many nations in the post-colonial era. India even went to war against Pakistan to create a new nation called Bangladesh to secure liberty and freedom to a section of people fighting against oppression based on linguistic and regional differences. With such record of upholding the aspirations of people to be free, India cannot look away from the real problem of Kashmir- that it is a freedom struggle of certain section of people who form the majority in that region.

Approximately half a million Indian troops actively take part in suppression of terrorism in Kashmir Valley – where around 4 million people live (in Indian Administered Kashmir Valley). That’s a ratio of 1 soldier for every 8 civilians. That’s like living in Mumbai with 3 million troops holding sophisticated military weapons. British ruled India with far less number of troops. If one were to describe this scenario, and if I were not Indian, I would be appalled at the kind of military strength we are using to rule that piece of land (we are definitely not ruling the people). Agreed, the movement is now carried out mostly by foreign mercenaries, ailing from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, and so many Middle East countries. But they also include indigenous Kashmiri Muslims. Though it started off as a Kashmiri movement, it has certainly been hijacked by foreign mercenaries who fight the cause under the pretext of Jihad- a holy war, against Indian Administration. Though Kashmiri people resent Pakistani involvement they hate Indian Rule so much so that they are ready to tolerate the foreign involvement, and actually support them overtly and covertly.

I believe that India can address the aspirations of Kashmiri Muslims who have been fighting a war against Indian Administration for nearly two decades now by creating a separate state of Kashmir. 

Kashmir Valley Region on either side of LOC:
My proposition is based on the belief that as Indians we don’t want to coerce and force certain section of people by suppressing their aspirations to live as an independent nation. The concept of a nation is an idea. When a certain majority of people of a region believes in an idea of statehood a nation is formed. It may be forged with a constitution, cemented with a government, protected with an army, and run with legislature, judiciary and executive. But at the heart of this nation are the people, their aspirations and their notions of freedom. We may tend to believe that a nation is more than an idea and start killing people trying to promote our belief system over others. Its time we reflect- Are we the oppressors? Are we the same Indians who promoted freedom for so many nations in Asia and Africa ending the colonial rule from this world? Can we be mature enough to realize that boundaries of nations change with time and that we should be willing to accept the harsh realities instead of fighting it with weapons and soldiers? We are a nation because we all believe in it. Every other state in India is part of India because they want to be with India. They are not coerced and forced with huge armies. India is India because we all want to be part of India. If everyone in this country does not want to be in India, I don’t think the idea of India will be valid anymore. We have to realize that people of Kashmir Valley do not share our notions of statehood. We should not be forcing our notions onto them with continued occupation. 

I believe that India should announce the steps leading to independence and full autonomous status to Kashmir. By doing this, we save ourselves lot of trouble (of administering that region with huge armies) and satisfy the aspirations of Kashmiri people. May be we can then tell ourselves that we acted as a mature adult who did not kill the child just because the kid who is now grown up wanted to leave home. Instead, we can tell ourselves that we suppressed our false ego and prestige to deal with situation quite maturely. I laid out some of the possible steps. I am not an administrator, but I tried to give out some of the plausible steps.

Probable Conditions:

  • Independent Kashmir CANNOT join India or Pakistan for a period of 15 years.
  • Kashmir has to form its own constituent assembly through fair elections within the first 12 months after Independence.
  • India will protect the borders of Kashmir for the first 3 years.
  • Kashmir has to raise its own army and border force within the first 3 years.
  • Kashmir and India have to pay compensation to the migrated Kashmir Pandits through a period of next 25 years.
Good to have but not necessary conditions:

  • Kashmir will allow Indian visitors without Visa just like Nepal (or Bhutan).
  • Kashmiri nationals to visit, study and work in India just like Nepalese.
  • POK/Azad Kashmir is also let go by Pakistan to join this new nation.


  1. I agree with your pragmatic solution. But to acheive this we will need a change of mindset amongst Kashmiris and the political leaders of India.

    The most practical final solution for the Kashmir issue will be:
    1. Grant greater autonomy to Kashmir valley - similar to Hong Kong's status within China.
    2. Convert LoC into permanent international border - upholding the letter and spirit of Shimla agreement 1972.

    However, economic development, social justice and democratic approval must precede the final solution.

    Economic Development: SEZ to boost manufacturing industry, FTZ to increase exporta from the State and completion of rail, power and other infrastructure projects.

    Social Justice: Unconditional release of all political prisoners; Troop reduction; Rehabilitation of Pandits in a separate district carved out from parts of Anantnag and Doda.

    Democratic approval of final solution:
    A referendum (district-wise) can be held to abolish the special status given under Article 370.
    Districts that vote "Yes" will join the Indian Union. Districts that vote "No" will form a Special Autonomous Region.

  2. Very informative series of posts!! good job, I tend to agree with your thinking!!

  3. So, mass killing and ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits and slaughtering of innocent civilians is a freedom movement for you! Wah wah! You might also apply the same logic for Tamil rebels in Sri Lanka who recruit children who arent yet into their teens to use them as human shields in battles.

    You might also think that the movements in the northeast are also freedom movements. They dont want to live with India, so give them separate nationhood!

    You might propose the same solution for a separate country of Tamil Nadu since many Tamils believe their culture is superior, is distinct and therefore, deserve independant nationhood!

    You might also propose the same solution for a separate country of Punjab because there are many Punjabis who feel "How long should we feed India?"!

    A day will soon come when each and every state in India wants to become a separate nation because every state has a distinct culture/religion/penises/testicles in India. And Sujai Karampuri will smile and scream "Yes yes! Go ahead!"

    And when that happens, India will break into a thousand pieces. Mahatma Gandhi will become the greatest fool the world has produced. Sujai Karampuri will not be perturbed at all.

    Sujai, please go read up some history. You'll notice a pattern in foreign invasions in India - all of them took place when India wasnt one unified country. They all happened whenever India was more broken than united, when individual states were having petty squables between them. Today, India stands drained of all its wealth - material, spiritual and moral - because of these invasions. This is the reason why I dont want any further break up of India. The creation of Pakistan already butchered the country into two. Now, I dont want the same forces to butcher it further.

    And if at all Kashmir is given freedom, why the HELL should India compensate for Kashmiri Pandits?! Kashmiri Pandits were driven out by Kashmiri Muslims. If Kashmir becomes an independant nation (God forbid), compensation is their job, not India's!

    To me, Kashmir is nonnegotiable. Kashmir BELONGS to India. Balls to plebiscite! You yourself mentioned that plebiscite is not a reliable solution citing the demographics. Doesnt that make sense to you? We dont hold plebiscites for the people of Andhra Pradesh or Uttar Pradesh for selfdetermination and we wont hold plebiscites for Kashmir. Period! Screw your high horse!

    If at all there'll be an independant Kashmir, it'll come over 2 million dead bodies, those of the Indian armed forces including mine!

    These socalled freedom fighters of Kashmir are people who are willing to slaughter innocent civilains, blow themselves up and you call it a goddamn freedom movement. Freedom movement my foot! Call it ethnic cleansing, terrorism or simply coldblooded "beastism"!

  4. Mr. Sujai please get your facts right before posting such worthless and ridiculous articles. Your remark that people of POK enjoy more freedom than J&K made me laugh. Judging by your columns, it looks like your are a hardcore communist who does not hesitate to sell his honour in exchange for a few dollars. It the people like you masquerading as liberals who are more dangerous to unity of India and world peace than mass murderers like Bin Laden. Your comments on Kashmir are totally ignorant and devoid of the facts and looks more like a propaganda of the Pakistan government machinery rather than from a person claiming to have "Liberal, Secular" upbringing.

  5. Kartik:
    I said:
    "The uprising is seen only in the Kashmir Valley under Indian Administration while POK (Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir- also called as Azad Kashmir) is relatively calm, and I can dare say it is peaceful. "


  6. One of the points raised by you as the solution to kashmir is granting independence.What I understood is"Since the majority of Kashmiris r asking for independence why should we hold them.Further,U believe that if the majority of a state r asking for independence ,they should be given it.

    My question is in the form of an example

    Let us go back to 1980's.Khalishtan movement was on the lips of majority of sikhs in Punjab.A cry for a seperate homeland.Going by your logic we should have granted them freedom since the majority asked for it.But by the 1990's ,the movement lost momentum.It died. U may argue that Punajb police under the leadrship of KPS Gill did employ harsh tactics which can possibly be taken as Human right abuse.But u cannot deny the fact that had the people not wanted the khalishtan movemnt to die even force by Punjab police wud not have been able to supress the rebellion.The leadres came back to main stream and today normalcy is a rule rather than exception in Punjab.

    It shows that majority may be feeling discriminated but they may cool down as it happened in Punjab.Had we given them the option of plebiste in 1982-83,they wud have voted for independence but today they r not asking for independence either through guns or even peaceful protests.

    So wat is the appropriate time for holding a plebiste..bcos it is possible that eventually people may come to mainstream sooner or later.

  7. Abhishek:
    Hope the Kashimir Muslims join 'mainstream'. May be, it will take time. But not every episode is similar to Punjab. They have to be treated differently.

    In my opinion (I could be wrong), Kashmir is very different from Punjab. May be, we have to use force to bring them into 'mainstream'. What are we doing right now? Isn't use of 400,000 troops to rule 4 million people a force?

    May be, twenty years from now, Kashmir will want to join India, or may be, there won't be anyone left in that land to join us.

    India is quite happy with the status quo. Few people die daily, and it is quite OK with most of us. We believe we can continue doing it, pass it to the next political party or next generation to deal with the problem.

    I am not very comfortable with our stand on this issue.

  8. I apologise.It seems I have not been able to explain my point.
    Let me try to explain in a different manner.

    Imagine that this is the year 1984 insted of 2006.The Sikhs r demanding indepndence.The Govt is acting just like the Indian army is alleged in Kashmir.The Indian army destroys the holiest shrine of sikhs(the golden temple)
    which is as holy as macca or medina for muslims on the orders of govt.More than 2000 sikhs r massacared on the streets of delhi in just 2 days.Many young sikhs have cut off their hair to avoid being detected as sikhs to aviod getting killed off in encounters just like kashmir.
    Bloodshed,Fake Encounters,Rampant human right abuse as well as religious right abuse are going on for the past 3 years just as it happens in kashmir .In such a scenario...wat wud u suggest?As the people r demanding u suggest plebiste to determine their fate?

    Pls donot think about the 1990's.Just 1983.Bcos if u think about 1990 u will know that the movement has died.So chances r that the thinking process may get biased.

  9. Sorry for one more blog.But it is just to point an error.

    1.It is true that there are more than 4,00,000 Indian troops in Kashmir.But most of them are posted on Line of Control to patrol the borders.They were there even before 1989 when insurgency broke out.They donot patrol the streets of srinagar,poonch,Rajouri etc.They duties r limited to patrolling border.
    The only regiment which is assigned with the task of counter insurgency operations is Rashtriya Rifles.It is a 40,000 strong force.It is supported by STG(State Task Group) and Kashmir police.
    If u watch television carefully u will find that kashmiris wud be protesting against STG and Rashtriya Rifles only.Bcos other regiments or units of Army donot operate inside cities or towns!!!
    So it is 40,000 troops not 4,00,000!!

    2.Secondly,Your statement that in 20 yrs time their may not be any kashmir left is more of poetic justice rather than actual.It is always advisable to avoid poetic addition to enhance the power of the sentence specially in a debate/arguement which is about looking for solutions.

  10. Abhishek:
    You said:
    Imagine that this is the year 1984 insted of 2006.The Sikhs r demanding indepndence.

    Yes, we did go through troubled phase with Punjab in 1980s. I believe Punjab and Kashmir are different in many respects. They are similar only in one respect- they both wanted to create their nations outside India.

    I do not agree that we should give independence to every group or region which starts fighting for independence. When I propose more autonomy or independence for Kashmir Muslim, I take into account the historical reasons. In history of modern India, Punjab and Kashmir have a different place.

    When Punjab became a part of modern India, there was no question or debate on whether it would join Pakistan or India. It was decided that eastern part would go to India and western part would go to Pakistan. No leader or no section of the people decided to stay independent. No provisions were made in constitution to guarantee such independence or autonomy. No promises were made to decide the fate of Punjab at a later date. The government of India did not diminish the powers of Punjab leaders after independence. The government of India did not put in jail the leaders of Punjab. The government of India did not install one puppet government after another in Punjab. The sikhs and hindus in that state enjoyed equal opportunity unlike in Kashmir where Hindus which comprised less than 10% were holding nearly 90% of the posts in governments, banks, universities, etc. The demographics are also not the same. Punjab is well respresented in Hindu and Sikh community unlike Kashmir Valley where 90% is Muslim.

    I understand that India made some mistakes with Punjab in early 1980s, like trying to meddle with Akal Takht by installing its puppet, which backfired. Govt. of India made a series of mistakes, limited in time, and paid the price. Govt. of India realized that it made mistakes, but it was a bit late. Punjab was on fire seeking revenge- was seeking separation. Even when it was seeking this separation, not every one in punjab was ready for separation. Most Hindu community was not for Khalistan. Not every Sikh was for Khalistan, though they were angry with India.

    It took some time, some force, to bring situation back to normalcy. The situation in Kashmir, however is different.

    If this was 1984 in Punjab, I would ask Govt. of India to apologize, make amends, and curb the terrorist activity to restore normalcy.

  11. Abhishek:
    I contend your argument that only 40,000 troops are posted in the valley. There was a news report in which PM Manmohan Singh agreed to decrease the number of troops by 10% (or odd) from the Kashmir Valley to appease Kashmiri Muslim. In that report, it was mentioned that he was decreasing the troops to 400,000 in Kashmir Valley. The total count including the borders is around 600,000-700,000 which Pakistanis often quote.

  12. Abhishek:
    Kashmir will always be there. Sorry that I said that Kashmir won't be there. There are many nations and country that still exists inspite of being ravaged and reduced to pulp- like Cambodia after Khmer Rouge, Kosovo after Serbia, Tibet after Chinese invasion, West Bank under Israeli invasion, etc.

    But is that something we, as Indians, desire?

  13. 1.When India became indpendent there was no demand for independence in Punjab.
    2. No provisions were made in constitution to guarantee such independence or autonomy. promise of plebiste
    4.No Pupet govt installed.

    I want to know just bcos Punjab never demnded independence at the time of independence,it doesnot have the right to demand it now?Do the people demand indepndence based on what was promised or does it depend upon groud realities of current situation?

    In fact the well known kashmiri sepetarist Maqbool Bhat had once said
    ...."If the struggle for freedom was to be stopped by the court
    rulings there would have been hardly any free nation on earth
    today. If the evolution of civilization, democracy and freedom
    was to be prevented by the existing judicial or administrative
    system no revolution would have taken place from the beginning
    of history...."

    Just bcos punjab demanded independence after 33 yrs after independence of India makes its case less stronger than kashmir?And yes..Pupet govt was installed in punjab in the name of presidential rule.Even kashmir was under presedential rule for long time.

    But ironically,the party which was accused of all this bloodshed,human right abuse,genocide of sikhs in delhi n punjab is in power today and that too in Punjab!!!!

    So i m really not able to see why kashmir is different .....and why the same cannot happen in Kashmir.

    Times changed..people changed...they elected the same party which was once accused of human right abuses against them.Strange isnot it?

  14. I beleieve given that most of the circumstances r same the opinion sud be same.If u believe that when majority of people ask for sud be granted.The same logic sud be applied to other states of same situation.

    Punjab n Kashmir r similar as-
    1.Both demanded independence from union of India.

    2.Force was used in both cases to supress the rebillion.

    3.Religion was attacked as well.

    4.Rampant human right abuses took place.

    5.Presidential rule was applied bcos the masses rebelled n demanded independence n state administration collapsed.

    They r different

    1.One asked independence in 1947..and was promised one.The other asked it in 1983 n was not promised...

    I feel that the number of similarities r more than dissimilarties.

  15. Abhishek:
    I am not getting the point. Are you asking for independence to Kashmir? or are you asking for independence to Punjab?

    Are you saying that since Punjab asked for independence and now is quiet, it should be the same with Kashmir?

    I am not able understand why you are making this case.

    According to me Kashmir and Punjab are different and hence require different solutions. Sometimes our idea of the right solution may not work, we need to work with another solution.

    Any region may or can ask for independence. It depends on how, we as a nation will deal with it, which will be different in different instances. Our constitution does not clearly lay out the procedures for seceding from the Union of India, where as US does (though that was not considered the case during Civil War). At one side is our need to protect the concept of India and what it means to all of us residing in it, and at the other side is the aspirations of certain people who want to secede. We need to balance between these two. I am a strong proponent for giving more weightage to the people asking for freedoms.

    I believe that sanctity of India as we see it today is not permanent. Some people may ask for separate nation because they are upset or angry with certain policies of India, and if India corrects itself, they may opt to remain with India. But there might be other set of people who believe that there is no way they can reconcile their differences. In such cases, one of the better options is to part ways.

    Though you quote some similarites between Punjab and Kashmir, I do not agree with all of them. Those similarities are only confined to religious nature and intent to separate. I don't agree with majority agreeing to secession, and I don't agree to the scale of operations, in time, length and breadth. I believe that Sikhs were angry with some wrongs, and when the anger subsided, they remained with India. With Kashmir, I don't see it as mere anger, but a difference in opinion at a fundamental level on what should be the basis for the nation- religious principles or secular principles.

    It was nice talking to you, Abhishek.

  16. It seems that Punjab is making u a little uncomfortable.The reason I took up Punajb is bcos I wanted to understand the ideal time when a plebiste should be held?Shall it be hold when people r rebelling or when the rebellion has died?

    Anywayz a lot of north east states also claim that they are different historically and culturally.And actually they r right!!

    U may again call it just ANGER but try telling this excuse to them(punjab ,naga,ULFA,Kuki rebels) they call it just anger??

    Te independence may not be a solution bcos if in future some state decides to part its way..what explanation will we give.They will quote the kashmir issue.Will they agree that Kashmir was a different issue n needs to be treated differently??

    Your solution also talks about compensating the hindu pandits.But how?Money pls elaborate.Can Kashmir pay a reasonable amount to displaced 1,00,000 kashmiri pundits??

  17. In my opinion a possible solution can be as the following

    1.Pakistan shouldnot claim Jammu and Ladakh because Jammu has a hindu majority while Ladakh has a buddhist majority.Not only that the insurgent movement is mostly limited to Kashmir Valley.I havenot heard much about Jammuians and Ladakhis protesting the Indian rule either through peaceful protests or guns.When the people have themselves not shown any inclination , what is the point of Pakistan or Kashmiris asking for Jammu and Ladakh ?

    2.In return, India shall not ask for Northern Areas(NA) to be included in Kashmir

    3.A Kashmir Union shall be formed which will have Pakistan Kashmir and Indian Kashmir.It will be under joint control of India and Pakistan for defence and External affairs.An army of both Indian n Pakistani regements can be raised for this.Rest of the activities can be maintained independently by Kashmiris. However technically POK remains a part of Pakistan while IAK remains a part of India.

    4.LOC(Line of Control) to be opened and people allowed to mingle freely.However Non Kashmiris shall not be allowed to buy property in Kashmir.

    5.There shall not be any visa restriction for kashmiris of either side.

    6.Kashmir shall be independent in matters of Trade,Communications,Infrastructure,Cultural development,Agriculture etc etc.Water resource is a little tricky in view of Indus water treaty between India and Pakistan.What can be done is Pakistan can supply water to POK as it is doing now while India can continue on its side of Kashmir

    The only tricky part will be control over External affairs because there is a possibility of clashes on this.Pakistan being an Islamic state will support Iran,Iraq,Afganistan while India being supporter and an ally of USA in its nuclear deal may not support Iran,Afganisthan.So this can get messed a bit.If the External affiras is given to Kashmiirs then India will be loser because being a muslim majority ,Kashmiirs will be Pro muslim and Anti American.

    I may not agree with me as many may like full independence...but think about it.Take the case of Japan.Japan's defence control lies with USA after World War-2.Has it affected Japan's growth or prosperity??Take the case of North Ireland.Technically it is a part of Britian,but it represent itself as a seperate nation in sports,it has its own flag,own policies except defence and external affairs and even economy!!!
    When these two examples are there ,why not Kashmir???

  18. Technically,IAK remains with India n PAK remains with Pakistan.Both nations can keep their pride.Kashmiris get wat they want.I donot think that shoud bother much about defence as it also reduces any defence expenditure by Kashmir which they can use for development.

    However,let us wait for a few more years.The sepetarist movement is not as strong as it was in 1990.The human right abuses have come down as well(compared to 1990-95).The people may go the Punajb way..and join mainstream.Similar syptoms r showing up as it happened in Punjab.Kashmir may go the Punjab way.So just a few more years.

    Meanwhile an Independent commission should be set up under NGO'S,UN to monitor human right abuses by Army.A serious check on Army abuses can do end the hostility towards army n India n pave way for the mainstream politics.


  19. Abhishek, you ask:
    The reason I took up Punajb is bcos I wanted to understand the ideal time when a plebiste should be held?Shall it be hold when people r rebelling or when the rebellion has died?

    I don't have an answer to your question.

    There are two worthy causes worth upholding. One side is the freedom, which every human is entitled to and is free to decide what that freedom is. The other side is the concept of nation, which gives us security, provides amenities, gives us justice, and which in turn safeguards our freedom.

    Both of them are worth defending and worth dying for.

    When in face of an enemy who comes to occupy our lands to rule us, to impose his tyranny on us, we will defend that enemy using everything at our disposal, including our lives. That is fighting for our freedom and also for defending our nation which gives us that freedom.

    How do we characterize the fight which involves occupying other people's lands, imposing our tyranny, depriving them of their freedoms? all in the name of upholding the concept of our own country? That's hegemony, that's imperialism, that's colonialism.

    We will have different peoples asking for freedom. That does not mean we give it away as soon as they ask it. Why? Because, we also have to defend against dissolution of our nation which provides us that freedom. But when does our freedom become more important than their freedom? When do we start curbing their every voice to protect our freedom and impose on them our idea of freedom?

    I don't have answers to that. I think we deal with each issue case-by-case.

  20. Abhishek, you ask:
    Your solution also talks about compensating the hindu pandits.But how?Money pls elaborate.Can Kashmir pay a reasonable amount to displaced 1,00,000 kashmiri pundits??

    Land is good, the way Tibetans have their homes within the confines of India. However, some Pundits feel that it is not practically feasible since their condition is not similar to that of Tibetans. Majority of them are educated and have taken up professions in different parts of India. They would rather live in those towns and metros than a separate land given to them. However, it might act as token to ensure the concept of Kashmiri Pundits lives on.

    They should be compensated with money as well (by India, and if possible by Kashmir). Actually, many of them are given jobs in different sectors of India. However, BJP opposed such compensation because they believed such compensation would allow this problem to die out. I am definitely for compensation for the loss of the property, agony, displacement, etc.

  21. Abhishek, you ask:
    1.Pakistan shouldnot claim Jammu and Ladakh

    I am in no position to comment on that. In all my discussions, I do not involve Pakistan because I believe it is an Indian problem that has to be solved by India alone.

    You ask:
    2.In return, India shall not ask for Northern Areas(NA) to be included in Kashmir

    I cannot comment on that either.

    3.A Kashmir Union shall be formed which will have Pakistan Kashmir and Indian Kashmir.It will be under joint control of India and Pakistan for defence and External affairs.

    May be, this will work. I am not sure though. Again, you assume that Pakistan has to be involved. What if Pakistan doesn't agree, what if they do resort to dirty tricks? Will be abandon this plan? and come back to status quo? Involving Pakistan in the affairs of Kashmir has been the main problem why we have never solved this issue. I do not recommend it nor do I believe this is a good idea. It will only allow India to once again renege on its stand and committments by blaming Pakistan.

    I agree with the rest of your solutions.

    I am quite OK with autonomy (without full independence) however I do not believe that will solve the problem completely. It will only get us involved further and once again, and the cycle will be repeated. The next government will completely stultify that autonomy.

    You say:
    Take the case of Japan.Japan's defence control lies with USA after World War-2.

    Bhutan is a good example if Kashmir agrees to it. Please understand that both Bhutan and Japan and independent nations. Northern Ireland is not a good example. Talk to many Irish people and they will tell you how they feel.

    Anything works, if Kashmir agrees to it.

  22. Irish people may not like britishers much...but at least their r no riots,killings by either side,fierce demand for independence which makes Britain panic.Going by your logic many South Indians donot like North Indians..many Assamese donot like bengalis..many kannadigas donot like tamilians.Are u loolking for a dreamland where not body dislkes others or u looking for a guns keeping silence?

    Pakistan needs to be involved.If India puts up this offer...Pakistan will be on backfoot.If it denies this as solution then kashmiris will blame Pakistan as India has shown flexibility Kashmiris may take up guns against Pakistan.
    So Guns will keep silence in India as long as Pakistan doesnot agree.

    If they resort to dirty tricks once then agreed, then not only kashmiris but India n international pressure wud be on it.As i understand that most kashmiris will like to go for independence rather than a merge with India or Pakistan.So naturaly kashmiris may take up arms against pakistan for violating the agreement.

  23. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  24. @Atlantian


    I can understand why sujai didn't reply to you.


  25. @abhishek

    are you an indian-foreign-service officer. Great thinking. I like people who come up with solutions and have healthy discussions with each other respecting each others opinion.

    kudos abhishek&sujai.

  26. An independent Kashmir is unworkable in current frame of reference.

    1. Islamic religiosity is at its peak (Just as christian religiosity was at its peak some 400+ Years back). Because of this, no Islamic nation has respected and protected its minority. Kashmir won't be any different. We can't push lakhs of hindu's to their fate, as happened in Pakistan? Where the the 20% hindus of Pakistan vanish?

    2. A weak, infirm Kashmir may either be taken over by Pakistan or by China with the help of Pakistan, becoming a strategic headache for India.

    3. Kashmir may become another breeding ground for terrorists like Afghanistan has become.

    I agree with the fundamental logic that Kashmir problem needs a solution that needs maximum devolution of power from Indian state and self governance from Kashmiris.

    But, the solution may lie elsewhere. Hong Kong is self governed but is a territory of China.

    We need to think in terms of One country, two systems - just as Chinese have done.

  27. just now was searching for Indian Hindu Goddesses pictures on google and found the images and your page.. 1. can I use your pictures (are they copyrighted??) for my purposes.. 2. Very impressed and lucky to find your blog.. what all I waned to write - you have summarised very well on Kashmir at least.. will take ages to decipher your A***le (your view on opinions).. ciao.. nice to see that people like you exist in my nation (and your nation).. ciao.. keep up the good work.. i am new to blogging - i have a blog


  28. Dear Sujai. I have been following your blog for 2-3 years. Your articles are nice and thought provoking about Kashmir. I agree with your stance. Can you write more on Kashmir now? Given the problem therein currently. I will be highly obliged.
    Also can you suggest me some good books about Kashmir dispute?


Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.