:. Gaddafis Kashmir stand

84471k

MPA (400+ posts)
source:http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showkws...chive=&start_from=&ucat=8&var1news=value1news
Gaddafis Kashmir stand
Kashmir should be an independent state, were the words of Libyan President Colonel Gaddafi and his words has worked the same way and had the similar impact as was once done by Che, the Cuban insurgent leader. He shelved off both India as well as Pakistan by terming Kashmir as a buffer state between India and Pakistan.

His hundred minute speech in which he supported Kashmir to be independent state got surfeit of takers in Indian occupied Kashmir. Within no time Gaddafi become an icon of hope, a figure of respect and an overnight hero. In Kashmir he is no longer considered an angry Libyan President but a man of high standards who spoke up in front of Uncle Sam in favor of forgotten Kashmir. His photographs were sold a la Ches in Cuba once upon a time when Cuban revolution was at its peak. His comments were applauded by all the pro-freedom leaders.

United Jihad Council (UJC) leader, Syed Salahuddin praised President Gaddafis statement. He termed the Libyan leader as courageous and asked Muslim leadership across the globe to follow his line of action and garner international support in favor of Kashmir resolution.

In an another statement issued by the Huriyat (G), Syed Ali Shah Geelani greeted President Gaddafi on his daring speech in favor of Kashmir resolution on UN podium. He demanded similar action from other leaders of Islamic nations so that they can press India to grant people of Kashmir their birth right as has been promised to them by India as well as by the UN.

Likewise Huriyat (M) spokesman, Syed Saleem Geelani in a separate statement expressed similar feelings and welcomed Libyan Presidents brave remarks on Kashmir.

Another pro-freedom (women) leader and chief of Jammu Kashmir Mass Movement, Ms Farida Behanji thanked President Qaddafi for his courageous comments on Kashmir. She also stressed upon other Islamic nations to pursue the similar diplomatic motion in favor of Kashmirs ongoing struggle for independence.

In an exclusive article to The Kashmir Watch, (titled Kashmir: The Definitive Solution, dated 16 Nov, 2007) President Gaddafi praised both India as well as Pakistan and termed them sisterly neighbors and true siblings. He also believed the partition of the sub continent as a colonial conspiracy. In his article he has raised his figure towards the then British empire that used her policies of divide and rule to split the sub continent on sectarian and religious lines. Nevertheless, President Gaddafi spoke vehemently in favor of an independent Kashmir; he was all praise for India and Pakistan for their rich cultural oneness and brotherhood.

Gaddafis intentions were not appalling at all towards India or Pakistan. He didnt want to embarrass either India or Pakistan as has been reported by various vested interests. What he meant was to end up the long standing conflict which has put South Asian peace at the stake. He was rather optimistic of the pace of economic reconstruction and overall welfare of both the neighbors (born due to the British legacy of divide and rule) if the core issue of Kashmir be resolved sooner than later.

President Gaddafis statement regarding the fate of disputed Kashmir shouldnt be taken as an attack on Indian democracy or Pakistans role as a legitimate party but in the backdrop of an exclusive article to The Kashmir Watch, his statement should be taken as a welcome step, a step towards peace and harmony. According to President Gaddafi, mere mudslinging or change of nomenclature according to ones interests will not solve the issues, rather it would add more animosity to the two neighboring nations.

He argues that it is uncreative to say that the independence of Kashmir will destabilize India or the view that Kashmirs independence might disintegrate India and leave a precedent on other states, on the basis of religion, regional, ethnic or linguistic grounds. He has a sound footing to support his argument. His analysis that the alliance of other Indian states was determined by the will of the people at the time of partition of the Indian Sub continent with the consent of UN Security Council resolutions. But Kashmir never got a chance to speak or to decide her fate or future course since the inception of two nations.

Kashmir has an alibi to demand and detach herself from India. In President Gaddafis exclusive article to The Kashmir Watch he has raised many valid questions and few of the questions needs special attention. His queries that could have bogged anybodys mind are:

1. Why was the status of the two other states that were considered exceptional cases (Hyderabad and Jonaghad) settled while that of Kashmir was left unsettled?

2. Why does the head of government of Kashmir carry the title of prime minister like the head of the government of India?

3. Why does Kashmir have its own flag and its own parliament?


He believes that Kashmir is distinct in many ways like its history is different than that of other states of the sub continent. Like other opportunists he hasnt termed India as a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu Country) primarily meant for Hindus but a country of greater religious, cultural and linguistic diversity capable of acknowledging all its people irrespective of caste, creed, color and religion. Likewise, he doesnt consider Kashmir as a Muslim state exclusively meant for Muslims of the valley but an amalgam of all faiths residing in the valley since ages. President Qaddafi doesnt seem to believe in British legacy of divide and rule or on the lines of religion as he contends that no state can say that it is a Hindu, Muslim, Christian or a Buddhist state because that could lead to further cleavages and splits within.

He doesnt appear anti Indian or anti Pakistani but he is looking at the issue from an observers prism. Truly Kashmir conflict is the core cause of hostility between two neighboring countries (India & Pakistan) since the dissection of the sub continent in 1947. The base of his argument is that in this globalised world, religion is not the adhering factor as has been portrayed by the proponents of peace and democracy but what carries weight in present times is the common interests that unites people in real terms. To harp on the mantra of religion is hogwash as religion has become a cliche which has been used by the West to fragment the sub continent.

But hats off to President Gaddafi! At least he has acknowledged Kashmirs vast water resources as its biggest asset. Otherwise think tanks on both the sides insist that Kashmir cant survive of its own. He dismisses the argument that Kashmir issue is the religious issue that has been used by nations to exploit vast natural resources of Kashmir for their own betterment.

He empathizes with the Kashmiris and recognises their genuine sacrifices made by them throughout the course of history. Kashmir must belong to all Kashmiris are the words which will resonate in the annuals of Kashmir history. These words will be remembered by all Kashmiris as golden words spoken by the grandson of a grand Libyan leader.

In his speech in the UN and in an exclusive article to the Kashmir Watch, what is so unique and distinct, what is so appealing to an eye is his in-depth and keen insight into the Kashmir issue. He took everybody by surprise by exhibiting a vast knowledge of Kashmir dispute, its history and the dangers it poses to the stability of South Asia.

But what worries Kashmiris is the negligence of Islamic leaders and failure of OIC as a centre stage to educate international community of the dangers of the long standing Kashmir dispute for the entire South Asia. Why only President Qaddafi raised his voice in favor of Kashmir and why not other Islamic leaders is a moot question. Why Islamic nations didnt launch any diplomatic initiatives in support of Kashmir cause till day?

By speaking audibly in favor of Kashmirs independence President Qaddafi has won the hearts of all Kashmiris. By doing so he opened a new chapter in the history of Kashmir. He seems more audible than the Kashmirs own leadership. By giving vent to his feelings, President Gaddafi has promoted other leaders to toe the same line. He has truly advanced the Kashmir cause by speaking the truth even before Uncle Sam.
 

Nepali Pandit

MPA (400+ posts)
84471k,
I think its bad luck for kashmiris as it is highly unlikely that it will ever become independent country.
1) Kashmir valley only is too small to become independent. pakistan is not going to give you its part of kashmir. Large part of kashmir has already been gifted to china by pakistan.
2) Places such as Laddakh and jammu, where there is sizeable hindu/ buddhist/ shikh population is unlikely(impossible) to ever agree to be a part of pakistan or even agree to become independent in muslim majority independent country.
3) Can you even comprehend any prime minister of India signing on documents giving up its territory?
4) In todays India having different religion or ethnicity is not enough to become independent.
5) Eventually Indian part of kashmir is going to get autonomy within Indian borders. This is not fair, but i am trying to be pragmatic here. Life is not fair.
6) New generation of educated kashmiris are slowly warming up to India. In future don't be surprised if in fair election kashmiris agree to autonomy rather than independence.
I know large number of kashmiris want independence. But can you tell me how are you going to realize it. What is your plan or vision regarding kashmir?
 

Jabral Tariq

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Gadaffis audacious statement should be applauded by every Muslim living on this earth because it gives message to the India- the illegal occupier of Kashmir that it can not for ever suppress aspirations of Kashmiris to free their land from the barbaric, ruthless and cruel oppression. Kashmiris want to live as free people in dignity and honour and treated as vermin by India who is the most ruthless regime when it comes to treating its minorities and over 300 millions Hindu Untouchables.

Kashmiris are daily humiliated and killed by the merciless Indian army, and they live in worse conditions than those that the Jews lived in Nazi Germany.

Hat off to Colonel Gadaffi and I wish that President Zardari and his timid government would be bold enough and speak out for the rights of Kashmiris.
 

Nepali Pandit

MPA (400+ posts)
Do you have the answer to some of the question this Gentleman is asking?
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS9fnS_SNLc[/video]
 

NaveedAli

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
nepali pandit as umer abdullah said there is only two options either join india or join pakistan however u control only a part of kashmir and yet u include whole kashmir in ur map thats shamefull and double standards and sometimes pakistani map resembles the same unfortunately. my personal view is kashmir should be seperate state but in the end they will be closer to pakistan than india..
 

Star Gazer

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
I am wondering why is this the only statement from Gaddafi that was chosen.What has he to do with Kashmir and UN resolution? Kashmir is basically for the Kashmiri's to decide and they would do well to remember the help Pakistan has extended to them and what Quaid Azam said about it and what was the original promise of the people of Kashmir.
 

84471k

MPA (400+ posts)
shaheedchoudry said:
84471K

YOU ARE WASTING YOUR ENERGY IN THE WRONG FORUM. HERE WE BELIEVE KASHMIR SHOULD BE PART OF PAKISTAN.
u belive r not... it doesn't make any difference, the importent thing is, wt kashmiri ppl want.... & they want INDEPENDENT KASHMIR..
 

84471k

MPA (400+ posts)
Nepali Pandit said:
84471k,
I think its bad luck for kashmiris as it is highly unlikely that it will ever become independent country.
1) Kashmir valley only is too small to become independent. pakistan is not going to give you its part of kashmir. Large part of kashmir has already been gifted to china by pakistan.
2) Places such as Laddakh and jammu, where there is sizeable hindu/ buddhist/ shikh population is unlikely(impossible) to ever agree to be a part of pakistan or even agree to become independent in muslim majority independent country.
3) Can you even comprehend any prime minister of India signing on documents giving up its territory?
4) In todays India having different religion or ethnicity is not enough to become independent.
5) Eventually Indian part of kashmir is going to get autonomy within Indian borders. This is not fair, but i am trying to be pragmatic here. Life is not fair.
6) New generation of educated kashmiris are slowly warming up to India. In future don't be surprised if in fair election kashmiris agree to autonomy rather than independence.
I know large number of kashmiris want independence. But can you tell me how are you going to realize it. What is your plan or vision regarding kashmir?
thnx, as u mentioned, alarg number of kashmiries (about 80%) want independent kashmir.... thats true but the thing i want 2 clear is v want a secular independent kashmir & when v say secular it means v r dealing the problem on political basis not on religious basis.... v know any solution of kashmir on the religious basis with divide the nation as v ev 60% hindus in jammu & ladakh is a buddhist majority area... v r dealing the problem in a socio-economic & political way... as u said majority of kashmiri ppl want independent kashmir,, v believe in the power of ppl... when ppl don't want 2 live with u. there is no way to keep status quo...
v r dealing peacefuly with both countries 2 get our rights but its not the last option v ev smthing else 2 try ;) ... don't worry that would b the last option
 

84471k

MPA (400+ posts)
Nepali Pandit said:
Do you have the answer to some of the question this Gentleman is asking?
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS9fnS_SNLc[/video]
i couldn't find any questions in the video... 1st of all omar is not representing the kashmiri ppl he is representing the indian point of view.. thats fine, he is doing his job... like sardar qayyum is doing his in pakistani kashmir....mony makes u say anything... but i realy couldn't get his point wn he says v don't need to eliminate borders to let ppl meet... & he gives the example of england & france, thats stupid... england n france ev never been a part of each other while kashmir is an internationly recognised unity.... england n france don't ev divided families... & secondly LOC is not border its Cease-fire Line.... & the most importent thing is v dn't just want 2 travel, v want 2 live..... again i woul'd say, when ppl want independence there is no way for both india & pakistan to maintain status quo...
 

84471k

MPA (400+ posts)
NaveedAli said:
nepali pandit as umer abdullah said there is only two options either join india or join pakistan however u control only a part of kashmir and yet u include whole kashmir in ur map thats shamefull and double standards and sometimes pakistani map resembles the same unfortunately. my personal view is kashmir should be seperate state but in the end they will be closer to pakistan than india..
thnx for ur support 4 independent kashmir
 

freekashmir

Voter (50+ posts)
Nepali Pandit said:
Do you have the answer to some of the question this Gentleman is asking?
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS9fnS_SNLc[/video]
About Six decades long history of Kashmir Issue is evident that the problem cannot be solved permanently unless the solution is acceptable to India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir including both its Pakistani and Indian controlled parts. (Kashmir wherever mentioned in this article means Jammu in Kashmir State as it stood on August 14, 1947)

Over a dozen solutions of the Issue including the two publicly accepted by both India and Pakistan (S. Nos. 1 and 4 below) have so far been suggested by different quarters but could not be implemented for different reasons. Following were the important ones of these proposed solutions:-

1.

UN supervised plebiscite per UNCIP resolutions to determine the future of Kashmir
2.

The Dixon Plan
3.

Division of Kashmir on religious lines
4.

Final settlement of Jammu Kashmir through Indo-Pak bilateral negotiations
5.

Complete independence of the whole State
6.

Joint control of India and Pakistan
7.

U.N. Trusteeship
8.

Converting LoC into permanent Indo-Pak border
9.

Self-rule
10.

Demilitarization

None of these proposals could be implemented as one or the other party opposed it openly or created hurdles in the way of its implementation. Let me elaborate a bit

1. The UNCIP (UN Commission for India, Pakistan) resolutions of 1948 and 1949 agreed to and signed by both India and Pakistan provided for unilateral withdrawal of all Pakistani forces from the State before the proposed plebiscite and before India would even start withdrawal of her forces which Pakistan later refused to do arguing that India would immediately occupy the areas vacated by Pakistan. This created a deadlock which could not be resolved even by subsequent UN suggestion that Pakistan be allowed to keep a small force in Kashmir as India did not agree to its proposed strength. After 1957 India started claiming of entire Jammu Kashmir to be her integral part and refused to allow the promised plebiscite to be held. As such, the UNCIP resolutions remained unimplemented. Today Kashmiri nationalists also refuse to accept UNCIP resolutions as the final resolution does not accept Kashmiris right to opt for independence of their motherland.

2. Sir Owen Dixon, the UN representative appointed in early fifties, after realizing that the UNCIP resolutions could not be implemented, evolved a formula of his own suggesting that the territories of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan should go to Pakistan, the non-Muslim majority areas of Jammu and Ladakh to India and the rest (Kashmir Valley and Muslim majority areas of Jammu and Ladakh) be either given full independence or opportuned to choose from independence, accession to Pakistan and accession to India. This formula was rejected by both India and Pakistan for different reasons though, hence could not be implemented.

3. Division of Kashmir on religious lines, known also as Chinab Formula, was first suggested by Pakistan during 1962-63 talks sponsored by the United States and UK but India rejected the suggestion outright.

4. India and Pakistan through their agreements of 1972, 1999 and 2004 AD agreed to reach a final settlement of Jammu Kashmir through bilateral talks but have not succeeded so far mainly because these agreements were closely followed by some aggressive actions from them (occupation of Siachin by India violating Simla Agreement of 1972 and occupation of Kargil areas by Pakistan after Lahore Declaration of 1999) which strained their relations. Almost no progress has been made so far towards implementation of Kashmir specific provisions of the Joint Indo-Pak Statement of January 2004.

5. Complete independence of the whole State, though accepted by both India and Pakistan during early stages, was later opposed by both. Both created their own pets and puppets in Kashmiri leadership and used them to create hurdles in the way of movement for independence. Both silenced the voice for independence that arose occasionally, using carrot and stick recipe and going to the extent of helping each other in doing so

6.&7. The proposals of UN Trusteeship and Joint Control were rejected by India or Pakistan.

8. Converting the Line-of-Control (LoC) in Kashmir into permanent India-Pakistan border has now become the most favorite solution of the Issue for effective and interested sections of international community and also for Indians whereas Pakistan may also agree to it with some re-adjustments in LoC. But bulk of Kashmiris specially the nationalists will never accept it. India and Pakistan may well succeed in silencing Kashmiri nationalists temporarily, using their pet politicians and puppet governments in their controlled parts of Kashmir. But that silence will surely be the proverbial lull before the storm and a momentous independence movement will surely emerge therefrom sooner than later.

9&10. Self-rule for and demilitarization of both India and Pakistan controlled parts of Kashmir was proposed by President Musharraf of Pakistan in 2005 but India took no notice of them. But Pak President announced that he was ready to withdraw Pakistans claim on Kashmir, if India responded positively and representatives of both countries are busy having secret parleys. Nothing can however be said about the ultimate outcome of these parleys.

The aforementioned proposed solutions could not be implemented due to opposition to them by one or the other party to the issue arguing, rightly or wrongly, that they were detrimental to their national interests. None-the-less there surely does exist a way to solve the Issue without hurting the national egos or harming the legitimate interests of India, Pakistan or Kashmir

The solution of Kashmir problem that does not hurt the national egos or harm the legitimate interests of any of the three parties hence cannot reasonably be rejected by any of them, is that it should be peaceful, equitable, honourable and democratic

The only solution that fully meets this criterion is to re-unite the divided Jammu Kashmir State in several peaceful phases after simultaneous withdrawal from there of all Indian and Pakistani armed and civilian personnel and make it temporarily though, a fully independent State with a democratic, federal and secular system of government and having compulsory friendly relations with all its neighbours, with India and Pakistan in particular, who should undertake not to violate the borders or interfere in the internal affairs of Kashmir and the latter should pledge not to let its territory to be used against any of her neighbours. 15 years after independence, there be a free and fair referendum under international auspices in which Kashmiris will determine whether Kashmir should perpetuate its independence, become part of India or Pakistan or adopt any other course and that fair and democratic verdict of Kashmiri people be accepted by all concerned i.e. India, Pakistan, all Kashmiris and international community, as final settlement of the Issue and implemented

This is the only way Kashmir imbroglio can be solved (1) without hurting the national ego of India or Pakistan or giving either of them a sense of defeat as neither of them will be required to hand over to the other the part of Kashmir under her control, (2) without harming the legitimate interests of either of them as Kashmir will be having compulsory friendly relations with both of them, (3) without causing bloodshed, mass-migration or communal disturbances and (4) on the basis of unfettered and freely expressed whishes and aspirations of Kashmiri people. What is all the more important, it will rid Kashmiris of their six decades long agony and ensure a peaceful, honourable and prosperous future for all the three i.e. India, Pakistan and Kashmir. In other words this will be a win-win-win solution for all the three parties to the issue, the only possible and practicable one to be so beneficial to all concerned. All that India and Pakistan will have to do to have these most precious gains is to part with the Kashmir territories now under their respective control and give them to their real owners, the people of Kashmir

Although there are a few minor ifs and buts in the way of implementation of this solution, a bit of selflessness, reasonability and far-sightedness on the part of India, Pakistan and Kashmiri leadership can easily remove these hurdles thereby heralding the dawn of an unimaginably bright future for their present and coming generations. Only the most stupid and unpatriotic among Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris can refuse to accept such a collossal gain at such a small price.