Pakistan Occupied Kashmir demarcated by bloodshed. The repercussions of the affairs in Kashmir led to a fight between the two nations. The conflict over Kashmir, for Pakistan, could be limited to their Islamic congruence. India's secular dogma could, however, be examined closely. Ergo, this world's only conflicting nuclear neighbors are fighting not only for territory but also for their ideologies. The Kashmir conflict is based on the reign of colonialism: these two nations profess the same dependence. Say no to plagiarism. Get Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get Original EssayThe formation of PoKJ&K has been a bone of contention between India and Pakistan since 1947. At the time of independence, the 565 princely states of the time were given the choice between India and Pakistan. The situation which added fuel to the confusion due to partition was the incongruity of Maharaja Hari Singh when he had no option but to accede Kashmir to India through of an instrument of accession. Since then, this instrument has been controversial and a bone of contention, with some considering it lawful and others a parody. The issue was internationalized by Jawaharlal Nehru by submitting it to the UN. Pt. Nehru, mentioned that "once the soil of the State has been cleared of invaders (from Pakistan) and normal conditions have been restored, its people will be free to decide their future by the democratic method of "a plebiscite or referendum which, in order to ensure impartiality, could take place under international auspices". This referendum is far from being a mere trifle. International law and conventions There is an argument that international law and the UN conventions on the Kashmir issue are irrelevant because the resolution which was passed in the UN due to the post-partition conflict between India-Pakistan is now a dead letter due to the delay The UN's involvement in the Kashmir issue lasted for around 17 years. With the signing of the Simla Agreement in 1972, the UN was left out of the picture as both countries adopted a bilateral approach. facing the entanglement of Kashmir. Although the UN has adopted a multitude of resolutions, these are not directly enforceable and only the parties to the dispute, with their consent, can enforce them. After hearing from Indian and Pakistani representatives, the UN Security Council adopted its first resolution (Resolution 38) on the Kashmir conflict on January 17, 1948, calling on India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on January 20, the Security Council adopted another resolution (Resolution 39), establishing the United Nations Commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the dispute and serve as a mediator between the two countries. Pakistan opposed the idea of a plebiscite, fearing that its outcome would undoubtedly be predisposed by Sheikh Abdullah, close to the Prime Minister at the time, Nehru. Indians opposed this proposed plebiscite as they were adamant on the assertion that J&K had become part of the Indian Union. None of the resolutions passed by the UN proved successful, as sometimes the Soviets vetoed India, other times China favored Pakistan. Consequently, the UN withdrew from thequestion after Russia negotiated the Tashkent agreement. India was too categorical in refusing to pay attention to the UN resolutions, which turned out to be one of the major factors behind the failure of the UN resolutions. Although it was India which brought this matter to the UN in the first place in the hope of proclaiming Pakistan as the attacker in the 1947-48 war, contrary to this, the UN suggested a plebiscite and by Consequently, India has distanced itself from all UN resolutions. Both nations have repeatedly violated the Simla Accord which apparently negated international intervention by providing for bilateral solutions to the Kashmir issue. The first is the Siachin Glacier breach in 1982, during which India sent its forces to the Siachin Glacier region and set up a difficult military post there. Pakistan, in 1984, also sent its troops. From that point on, both nations are sitting, which is a violation. The next war was the famous Kargil War planned by Pakistan. Furthermore, India violated the Simla Accord by instituting a fence along the LoC. Although this is not the spirit of the letter of Article 4(ii)(1) of the Agreement, it undoubtedly violates the Agreement. So, at present, given that there have been numerous violations of the agreement, it is high time that new bilateral negotiations see the light of day where both nations will start taking the resolutions of the UN. Even if the UN resolutions are now a dead letter, they cannot under any circumstances become overtaken by events. The passage of time cannot undo a persistent and unprecedented norm, namely the right to self-determination. This concept of qualifying a resolution as a dead letter in the event of non-implementation would undoubtedly put an end to serious international agreements. Therefore, the UN Charter will suffer the same fate as the resolutions on Kashmir. This right to self-determination is, by definition, an unlimited right. This is not only Pakistan's fault, but also India's fault in part. There is a rudimentary principle which denies the possibility of an agreement between the parties if it affects the rights of a third party. If this happened, this international agreement would be seen as nothing more than contempt. India and Pakistan are making a mockery of democratic norms with the Kashmir issue. The Plight of Civilians and the Plight of Refugees There is no situation like China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine in the India-Pakistan rivalry over Kashmir. The only reason is that at the time of partition, there was a provision for the transfer of civilians. An option was given to the people. But the fate of civilians in the daily armed conflict between India and Pakistan deserves reflection. Also, the civilians of J&K neither want to go to Pakistan nor stay in India. Thus, the question of the transfer of refugees does not have much importance as in the case of China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine. The time in 1947 when people were forced to abandon their homes in what is now Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). ) on the attack of Pakistani forces in Jammu and Kashmir, made the blood run cold. Those who drifted from areas like Muzaffarabad, Poonch, Kotli, Bhimber and Mirpur are still not settled and granted refugee status. Our Indian government is sticking to the stand that they are not qualified to be called refugees and claim their benefits as they have left PoK, which is undoubtedly part of India. Thus, recently, the compensation to be paid to the residents of Mirpur, whose properties were flooded due to the construction of the Mangla dam, was refused by the governmentIndian. Currently, the people of PoK staying in Jammu and Kashmir without political status number around 1,20,000 and also they are deprived of any assurance from the Indian governments regarding their position in the Kashmir conflict. The two nations constantly argue over territorial issues. Amidst all this, the nix authorities paid attention to the opinion and condition of Indian Muslims as well as PoK civilians. If countries feel that without understanding the plight of civilians they would be able to find a solution to this long-standing conflict, then they are falling short. Over time, the state government of J&K has been , by and for Kashmiris. As the PoK refugees are not Kashmiris, they were not allowed to settle in the valley because the state government never wanted them to. To their relief, the central government settled a few refugees in the Jammu region, with others forced to settle in states like Punjab, Rajasthan and UP. The Nix authorities have shown tenacity in settling these refugees. The current programs implemented for this cause are only confusing aid measures, small free grants accompanied by rehabilitation. These refugees have not yet been compensated for their properties in PoK territory and, to twist the knife, they are being told that providing compensation at this level will put India's position at the UN at stake. By raising this question, the controversy that comes to the porch is that PoK will be taken back and people will be fired. By thinking with a practical approach, by no stretch of the imagination, our authorities have the required capacity to recover PoK. In all this mess, refugees are being disenfranchised and duped. Role of Pakistan in ensuring the needs and security of civilians in PoK. After the October 2005 earthquake, the harsh reality of PoK came crashing down. The state was then impecunious. The region is witnessing Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and the rise of jihadist influence in the region is also alarming. There is no political party working for the development of the province, paving the way for terrorists. People are now suffering from unemployment problems and do not have access to other basic amenities. The attacks on Kashmiri Pandits in Nadimarg in 2003 were carried out by these groups. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in 2002: “We must call on Pakistan to stop terrorist activities carried out on its territory in India, in Kashmir. » Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary, told the British Parliament in 2002: "A number of terrorist organizations have been at the forefront of violent activity in the region. Successive governments of Pakistan have encouraged and financed terrorists to make incursions across the Line of Control. and engage in terrorism. » Kashmiris are destabilized by the growing number of foreign mercenaries in Kashmir and the growing dominance of Islamabad. Pakistan has ignored the resentment of the people of this region against the growing Chinese presence in the region. China even undertook many development projects in PoK and the trans-Karakoram territory in 1963. There is even suspicion that the Sunni-majority state of Pakistan, alongside China, could exterminate the Shia minority of Gilgit Baltistan in order to to silence any opposition to their policies. in the future[3]. Indiscriminate violence has marked the region since 1989 and more than 34,000 civilians were killed between 1989 and 2001. Kashmir is a beautiful place, with even more beautiful people. Seven decades and generations have passed through it. It is perhaps..

Essay / Pakistan Occupied Kashmir demarcated by bloodshed. The repercussions of the affairs in Kashmir led to a fight between the two nations. The conflict over Kashmir, for Pakistan, could be limited to their Islamic congruence. India's secular dogma could, however, be examined closely. Ergo, this world's only conflicting nuclear neighbors are fighting not only for territory but also for their ideologies. The Kashmir conflict is based on the reign of colonialism: these two nations profess the same dependence. Say no to plagiarism. Get Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get Original EssayThe formation of PoKJ&K has been a bone of contention between India and Pakistan since 1947. At the time of independence, the 565 princely states of the time were given the choice between India and Pakistan. The situation which added fuel to the confusion due to partition was the incongruity of Maharaja Hari Singh when he had no option but to accede Kashmir to India through of an instrument of accession. Since then, this instrument has been controversial and a bone of contention, with some considering it lawful and others a parody. The issue was internationalized by Jawaharlal Nehru by submitting it to the UN. Pt. Nehru, mentioned that "once the soil of the State has been cleared of invaders (from Pakistan) and normal conditions have been restored, its people will be free to decide their future by the democratic method of "a plebiscite or referendum which, in order to ensure impartiality, could take place under international auspices". This referendum is far from being a mere trifle. International law and conventions There is an argument that international law and the UN conventions on the Kashmir issue are irrelevant because the resolution which was passed in the UN due to the post-partition conflict between India-Pakistan is now a dead letter due to the delay The UN's involvement in the Kashmir issue lasted for around 17 years. With the signing of the Simla Agreement in 1972, the UN was left out of the picture as both countries adopted a bilateral approach. facing the entanglement of Kashmir. Although the UN has adopted a multitude of resolutions, these are not directly enforceable and only the parties to the dispute, with their consent, can enforce them. After hearing from Indian and Pakistani representatives, the UN Security Council adopted its first resolution (Resolution 38) on the Kashmir conflict on January 17, 1948, calling on India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on January 20, the Security Council adopted another resolution (Resolution 39), establishing the United Nations Commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the dispute and serve as a mediator between the two countries. Pakistan opposed the idea of a plebiscite, fearing that its outcome would undoubtedly be predisposed by Sheikh Abdullah, close to the Prime Minister at the time, Nehru. Indians opposed this proposed plebiscite as they were adamant on the assertion that J&K had become part of the Indian Union. None of the resolutions passed by the UN proved successful, as sometimes the Soviets vetoed India, other times China favored Pakistan. Consequently, the UN withdrew from thequestion after Russia negotiated the Tashkent agreement. India was too categorical in refusing to pay attention to the UN resolutions, which turned out to be one of the major factors behind the failure of the UN resolutions. Although it was India which brought this matter to the UN in the first place in the hope of proclaiming Pakistan as the attacker in the 1947-48 war, contrary to this, the UN suggested a plebiscite and by Consequently, India has distanced itself from all UN resolutions. Both nations have repeatedly violated the Simla Accord which apparently negated international intervention by providing for bilateral solutions to the Kashmir issue. The first is the Siachin Glacier breach in 1982, during which India sent its forces to the Siachin Glacier region and set up a difficult military post there. Pakistan, in 1984, also sent its troops. From that point on, both nations are sitting, which is a violation. The next war was the famous Kargil War planned by Pakistan. Furthermore, India violated the Simla Accord by instituting a fence along the LoC. Although this is not the spirit of the letter of Article 4(ii)(1) of the Agreement, it undoubtedly violates the Agreement. So, at present, given that there have been numerous violations of the agreement, it is high time that new bilateral negotiations see the light of day where both nations will start taking the resolutions of the UN. Even if the UN resolutions are now a dead letter, they cannot under any circumstances become overtaken by events. The passage of time cannot undo a persistent and unprecedented norm, namely the right to self-determination. This concept of qualifying a resolution as a dead letter in the event of non-implementation would undoubtedly put an end to serious international agreements. Therefore, the UN Charter will suffer the same fate as the resolutions on Kashmir. This right to self-determination is, by definition, an unlimited right. This is not only Pakistan's fault, but also India's fault in part. There is a rudimentary principle which denies the possibility of an agreement between the parties if it affects the rights of a third party. If this happened, this international agreement would be seen as nothing more than contempt. India and Pakistan are making a mockery of democratic norms with the Kashmir issue. The Plight of Civilians and the Plight of Refugees There is no situation like China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine in the India-Pakistan rivalry over Kashmir. The only reason is that at the time of partition, there was a provision for the transfer of civilians. An option was given to the people. But the fate of civilians in the daily armed conflict between India and Pakistan deserves reflection. Also, the civilians of J&K neither want to go to Pakistan nor stay in India. Thus, the question of the transfer of refugees does not have much importance as in the case of China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine. The time in 1947 when people were forced to abandon their homes in what is now Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). ) on the attack of Pakistani forces in Jammu and Kashmir, made the blood run cold. Those who drifted from areas like Muzaffarabad, Poonch, Kotli, Bhimber and Mirpur are still not settled and granted refugee status. Our Indian government is sticking to the stand that they are not qualified to be called refugees and claim their benefits as they have left PoK, which is undoubtedly part of India. Thus, recently, the compensation to be paid to the residents of Mirpur, whose properties were flooded due to the construction of the Mangla dam, was refused by the governmentIndian. Currently, the people of PoK staying in Jammu and Kashmir without political status number around 1,20,000 and also they are deprived of any assurance from the Indian governments regarding their position in the Kashmir conflict. The two nations constantly argue over territorial issues. Amidst all this, the nix authorities paid attention to the opinion and condition of Indian Muslims as well as PoK civilians. If countries feel that without understanding the plight of civilians they would be able to find a solution to this long-standing conflict, then they are falling short. Over time, the state government of J&K has been , by and for Kashmiris. As the PoK refugees are not Kashmiris, they were not allowed to settle in the valley because the state government never wanted them to. To their relief, the central government settled a few refugees in the Jammu region, with others forced to settle in states like Punjab, Rajasthan and UP. The Nix authorities have shown tenacity in settling these refugees. The current programs implemented for this cause are only confusing aid measures, small free grants accompanied by rehabilitation. These refugees have not yet been compensated for their properties in PoK territory and, to twist the knife, they are being told that providing compensation at this level will put India's position at the UN at stake. By raising this question, the controversy that comes to the porch is that PoK will be taken back and people will be fired. By thinking with a practical approach, by no stretch of the imagination, our authorities have the required capacity to recover PoK. In all this mess, refugees are being disenfranchised and duped. Role of Pakistan in ensuring the needs and security of civilians in PoK. After the October 2005 earthquake, the harsh reality of PoK came crashing down. The state was then impecunious. The region is witnessing Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and the rise of jihadist influence in the region is also alarming. There is no political party working for the development of the province, paving the way for terrorists. People are now suffering from unemployment problems and do not have access to other basic amenities. The attacks on Kashmiri Pandits in Nadimarg in 2003 were carried out by these groups. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in 2002: “We must call on Pakistan to stop terrorist activities carried out on its territory in India, in Kashmir. » Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary, told the British Parliament in 2002: "A number of terrorist organizations have been at the forefront of violent activity in the region. Successive governments of Pakistan have encouraged and financed terrorists to make incursions across the Line of Control. and engage in terrorism. » Kashmiris are destabilized by the growing number of foreign mercenaries in Kashmir and the growing dominance of Islamabad. Pakistan has ignored the resentment of the people of this region against the growing Chinese presence in the region. China even undertook many development projects in PoK and the trans-Karakoram territory in 1963. There is even suspicion that the Sunni-majority state of Pakistan, alongside China, could exterminate the Shia minority of Gilgit Baltistan in order to to silence any opposition to their policies. in the future[3]. Indiscriminate violence has marked the region since 1989 and more than 34,000 civilians were killed between 1989 and 2001. Kashmir is a beautiful place, with even more beautiful people. Seven decades and generations have passed through it. It is perhaps..

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch