Skip to comments.Meantime, back in India the Kashmir situation is deteriorating
Posted on 09/13/2010 1:41:11 PM PDT by swarthyguy
The Army is picking off Pakistani infiltrators left and right, because - as we have said many times - it has finally gotten its act together and is completely prepared. The infiltrators are not a problem now.
But the civil police have not been able to switch to non-lethal means to control protestors. Another four demonstrators were shot when they stoned a police chief's convoy.
Well, we feel bad for the people of Kashmir, but having made their bed they must now lie in it. India pulled out the Army, and most of the Border security Force, leaving local and Central Reserve police to handle law-and-order. It held free elections, with 60% of the population voting despite a boycott by separatist groups. If you don't consider sixty percent that fair, ask yourself what percentage of the US electorate votes. India keeps pumping money into Kashmir, 10 times per capita more than the rest of India gets.
If the Kashmiris cannot still pull together, and if they still want to dispute the division of spoils despite the clear electoral verdict, then we're very sorry to say this, but the Army is going to be back.
The Government has repeatedly offered talks, the separatists have countered with impossible demands, such as the involvement of the international community in negotiations. This is going to happen over India's dead body.
if the Kashmiris think they're being repressed right now, we can assure everyone its going be ten times worse if the Army is called back. Not least because the Army never wanted to be involved in IS in Kashmir to begin with, and was delighted when it was sent back to their bases. It is going to be in a very, very bad mood if they have to return. And if in the next few years India gets a right-of-center government, then the privileges the Kashmiris have since 1947 that are not given to other Indians are going to go into the trash bin.
The last time the army was involved in Internal Security in Kashmir, the number of Army and para-military troops deployed for pure IS was between 200-225,000. It was NOT 700,000 as some alleged for the very simple reason that if violence in Kashmir were to end tomorrow, half-a-million army and border troops will remain because they are for external defense against Pakistan and China.
India is undertaking a major build up of its paramilitary troops as well a sizeable Army buildup. Next time around you'll see 350,000 troops and police deployed for IS, a situation which is hardly going to cause the Kashmiris to rejoice and celebrate.
The Kashmirs have to learn - like all Indians are learning - that they live in a democracy and they get their chance to change their national and state government on a regular basis. If the losers don't like the results, they cannot resort to violence to get what they failed to get in a peaceful manner.
We have heard lots of criticism about unfree elections in Kashmir. Well, this last one was cleared by foreign observers as free. And we wonder how free any democratic election can be when you have hordes of terrorists and separatists running violently around.
Because the Indian Prime Minister is by temperament a kind and peaceful academic and goes on and on offering talks instead of the stick, the Sunni Kashmiris have gotten the idea they can push the Government of India around. To begin with, the claim of the Sunni Kashmiris to all Kashmir is illegitimate: there are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Shias with no desire to live in a Sunni run Kashmir. If anyone doubts this, please examine the experience of non-Sunnis in Pakistan, to say nothing of the West Pakistan treatment of the Bengalis, and Hindu Bengalis by the Muslim majority, as well as what's happening in every part of Pakistan today.
The hashish inspired dreams of Sunni Kashmiris for independence have no basis in reality. If India left tomorrow, by 12 noon, by 12 midnight "independent" Kashmir will have been seized by Pakistan. so why should India give up its own territory just to see it taken over by Pakistan?
And if the separatist Kashmiris really think they west is going to a FRY to keep them independent, then we're very sorry, but they are in a hopeless psychotic state. The first difference between between FRY and "independent" Kashmir is that FRY was white Europeans. The second difference between FRY and "independent" Kashmir is that FRY was a tiny country you could throw into any corner of India and the locals will not even notice. India is a country of 1.2-billion people. Third difference is - anyone notice that the west is just a teensy-weensy bit fatigued of taking on fights it cannot win? The west is really going to help keep separatist Kashmir independent so that another country falls to the Islamic fundamentalists?
Kashmiri separatists need to stop doing the Timothy Leary thing and smell the coffee or whatever. We all want our own country. But we cant have it so we get over it.
India's role in creating separatism No discussion of Kashmir can be fair unless we look back to India's boost to separatism. When India - um - "helped" Bangladesh become independent in 1971, it was the first time since World War 2 that a country was forcibly partitioned. We cannot count Israel's take over of Palestine because that was conquest. We're talking about A coming in and breaking up B into B and C, and then going home. The international community was so horrified it voted 104 to something (if we recall right), asking India to cease hostilities in Bangladesh and to please leave.
Pakistan's invasion of Kashmir using irregulars in 1947-48, 1965, and 1999 were not in the same category because the intent was annex part of India, not to break up India and go home.
The matter of the UN Plebiscite The Government of India - and its people - can be quite limp-wristed in their defense of India and Kashmir. We still see references to "India refused to abide by the UN resolution for a free referendum in Kashmir."
Fact 1: Yes, India did refuse.
Fact 2: India refused because Pakistan did not withdraw its troops from the "disputed" territory. The Indian Prime Minister agreed to a referendum provided Pakistan withdrew. This was an essential component of the ceasefire agreement and subsequently.
Fact 3: Pakistan says it did withdraw its troops; the ones left behind were members of the Azad (Free) Jammu and Kashmir Militia over which it had no control. Sure they were, just like the infiltrators of 1965 were just spontaneously awakened freedom fighters, and just like the elite Northern Light Infantry magically became "mujahids" about whom Pakistan had no knowledge...say, dijda see that line of pink elephants that just flew formation over the US Capitol? It's true, officer, it's really true, why are you loading your tranquilizer gun...if you didn't see the pink flying elephants you need to get your eyes examined...
Who started this whole darn thing? We believe that had Pakistan not twice tried the freedom fighter thing in Kashmir, India would not have gotten the idea of "helping" Pakistan Bangalis to free themselves. You may disagree, if you do, we'd be happy to publish your views.
September 9 2010
India acts decisively in Kashmir - not Editor almost passed out with shock when he learned from the Hindu that the Government had arrested the head of one of the three separatist parties in Kashmir.
Good thing we didn't pass out, or else we might not have read the second line. The gentleman will be held till the Eid festival, i.e., for a couple of days.
We are probably one more Mumbai terrorist attack away from hell erupting on the sub-continent.
I doubt hell will erupt since India is more concerned about its economy than anything else.
But, you are correct, whenever things get bad inside Pakistan, India takes a punch.
Just the way the Pakistanis and their military and ISI operate.
I feel so secure with the anti-American bastard in the White House./Sarcasism intended.
It isn't just the subcontinent that is going to explode.
Oh wait, I forgot....Obama will take care of all of this, between golf outings, parties, and vacations.
No tea party express can stop this unless Imam Obama is impeached. And impeached soon.
I sympathize with your position, Swarthyguy, because I have no earthly idea why any sentient human being would choose to live in Pakistan rather than India. But as you know most muslim voters boycotted the election. I don’t see how this ends without much more violence unless by a truly democratic process.
OK, CT, point taken.
However, India allows separatist parties to operate in Kashmir and run in elections.
In Pak, no elections at all in Kashmir, ever. And the Hindu and Buddhist minorities.....gone!
And anyway, no country is going to let a part of itself be detached. Now, if America and the West want to pull a Kosovo in Kashmir, meaning defacto annexation by Pakistan, then that may work.
But India is not letting the non Sunnis of Kashmir get oppressed by Pakistan.
And do Kashmiris think they will get more rights in Pakistan than what they have in India, this after India funds more projects for Kashmiris, per capita it gets more central government aid than virtually any other part of India.
An amusing and realistic presentation of the case. Not that the Pakistani Muslims are likely to listen to reason.
Makes no sense to me. You couldn't pay me to live in Pakistan.
Excellent article on the ground situation.
Thanks for posting!
Sometimes Orbat hits it for a sixer!
That’s one of those foreign, infidel values corrupting the purity of the Ummah.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.