news details |
|
|
| Diluting Kashmir Issue Not Possible-III | | | A N Bharadwaj | 10/12/2010 10:30:43 PM |
| Aggressor Pakistan has no locus standi over the State of Jammu & Kashmir. It wishes to encroach upon it either his or that way. It pleads that it is a Muslim majority State; therefore it has bonafide right over it. Some times it argues that under two nation theories it is a principal guardian of the State. It is its self-styled argument and assertion which cannot be exercised on other. In fact the campaign for two nation theories was first initiated by All India Muslim League which was its political demand to divide India for its identity. The patriotism of Hindus who challenged the British Empire under the flag of Mughal Ruler Emperor Bahadur Shah, Delhi as they had brought up and nursed under the composite culture and the fanatic Muslims always intrigued against it and shattered the joint adventure to develop the nationalism in the battle of secularism verses communalism, but Indian Muslim League headed by M A Jinnah was adamant for its separate identity under two nation theory. It was acknowledged by Suhrawardi, the then Pak- Prime Minister in his speech made in Pak-National Assembly wherein he said that it were we who had demanded partition on the basis of two nation theory, but India never accepted it. In this regard, the then Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed on 8th October 2001 that the problem of Kashmir could not be solved on the basis of a two nation theory. As it was an example of the secular traditions of India. The Indian nationalism never accepted to their fanatic demand. It have been remained the significant example and reference of composite culture in which Maqbool Sherwani had been killed by Pak-raiders with his last voice for Hindu-Muslim unity while he had been cruelly nailing till death. It was his sacrifice which will be remembered till the sun would remain shine. It was the victory of composite culture. In other occasion it asserts that due to the religious affinity it has natural right over the State. It was argued by Sir Feroz Khan noon in the U N Security Council during pleading the Kashmir case on the representation submitted by India, but his lame argument was rejected on very moment by the world body with the plea that the partition what ever was that has been delineated clearly, was the final decision for the two Dominions and that cannot be altered. He, after failure in pleading, made a misguided trick to mislead the Security Council on his whimsical self-styled argument on the pretext of majority community and contiguous areas that this Muslim majority territory should go to Pakistan , as interpreted by him by referring the British Crown Statement dated 3rd June 1947, but that fell flat on their ears with remarks that India had never accepted the two nation theory, there he failed miserably to confuse and remained helpless also to convince the Security Council. Those Muslim leaders, who manipulated political intrigues to divide British India for Muslim home-land, had a hope to infect further Indian States with the dose of communal-poison and destroy communal harmony. Pak-sole aim has been remained against the solidarity of India.
It is very strange that it is a question of country, its boundary and nation which is fixed either on hereditary or war. It cannot be altered. It is not a ordinary matter which could be changed, or surrendered or divided when ever Government of the country feels necessary. No proposal at the cost of sovereignty of the nation will be taken in view. The accession of the State is irrevocable, legal, constitutional, and unalterable. Pakistan committed an aggression and occupied some part of the State territory illegally with might that will have to be surrendered. Pakistan is morally and legally bound to surrender it in peaceful manner. India will never compromise at the cost of its sovereignty. Pakistan may go to the maximum extend to bleed India, but it will never cow down on Pak- terms and conditions to share with its sovereignty. It is not possible in the present circumstances for Pakistan and its terror outfits to establish its hegemony in the sub-continent. In the medieval period, the tyrannical Mughal rule despite use of its sword, it could not have established its extreme lopsided oppressed ruling proclamations; because Hindus and Muslims- both had been remained the foundation of social fabric of Indian nation and developed a unique composite culture at the cost of their two faiths which manifestation was emerged in the form of Sofism that represented the cultural synthesis of Indo-Islam unity that developed communal harmony and brotherhood. But when politics under the influence of religion is played to gain ruling power, in that event it loses the essence and sweetness of cultural unity and develops bitterness, hostility and enmity for establishing supremacy among the people. This is what has happened with Pakistan and its lobbies working in the valley. It is stumbling block in the communal harmony. Therefore it is utmost necessary for the welfare of the nation to depart religion from the politics.
In South Asia, there will be no peace till Pak-stops its aggressive designs to incite Kashmiri Muslims by using the weapon of religion against India and interferes in Kashmir affairs. Pakistan cannot claim as a guardian of Kashmiri Muslims, and is not a representative of Islam. It only represents terrorism, and its own house is a hub of terror training centre.. There people of every component of the nation are struggling and massacring each other under the influence of their faith to establish their supremacy to rule the country. There chaos, lawlessness and instability prevail all the time and the country is with out the nation. That frenzy is generated among the Kashmiri Muslims on the pretext for out dated plebiscite that is a dead issue now. The European Union said on this very issue in its report wherein it expressed meaningless and disfavoured for conducting any proposal of plebiscite or right for self-determination in the State, expressing it as meaningless. It further expressed that Pakistan had altered the status quo, ignored the essence of UN resolutions at all for the withdrawal of its forces from the occupied territory of the Indian State, made the demographic change which changes were the major hurdle in the process of plebiscite. it cannot restore the status quo which was the first condition for plebiscite; as such the question of plebiscite does not arise to repeat it time and again. The report further advised to solve all issues confronted to them under Simla and Lahore agreements bilaterally as decided mutually.
Its report remarked that the republic of India was the world largest secular democracy and had evolved democratic structures at all levels, on the other the Islamic republic of Pakistan lacked full implementation of democracy in PoK and yet to start the progress of democracy in Gilgit Agency. The both countries were of nuclear powers while India’s nuclear doctrine rested on the principle of No First Use, while Pakistan did not. However, on the whole the US was not in favour and rejected Pak-plan for plebiscite or right for self-determination in accordance with the UN resolution on Kashmir. It favoured and advised to seek Kashmir issue bilaterally under Simla and Lahore agreements as these two parties reached to an agreement to treat this as a bilateral issue; therefore they should decide on their own accord mutually and should go ahead accordingly. In the light of this, no third party can interfere in this issue.
India approached the UNO as a sovereign country whose territory had been encroached upon through an act of the most immoral kind of warfare. The complaint which India made was that to take the prompt action to stop further bloodshed and vacate the Indian State territory. Although the UN resolutions were accepted by India but it first and foremost recognized stipulated in its resolutions that Pak-forces had no business to be in Kashmir and should be with drawn at all, which was agreed by Pakistan to withdraw and vacate the soil of Indian State. Apart from it, no plebiscite can decide this issue will be fair or free if the people are asked to vote on the basis of Islam, so Pakistan converted the political issue of Kashmir into a purely a religious issue, so in the incited religious atmosphere, the object of plebiscite will not be achieved. India never committed to process plebiscite in that nature of inciting atmosphere. There requires peace and free from incited atmosphere for plebiscite with out any iota of any religion. Thus Pakistan exerted its whole energy to convert the political issue of Kashmir in to a pure religious issue and misleaded the people in the name of Islam for its political purpose. India had never committed a plebiscite in the atmosphere of that inciting nature where the people were excited in communal frenzy.
Apart from it, India never committed any demilitarization and holding of plebiscite in Kashmir, which propaganda was baseless. However India accepted the UN resolutions on Kashmir on the basis of certain clear assurance that the responsibility for the security of Kashmir rests with the Government of India, the sovereignty of Jammu & Kashmir over the entire territory of the State shall not be brought in to question, there shall be no recognition of the so called Azad Kashmir Government at any time and the territory of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan shall not be consolidated. After accession India was bound for the protection of Kashmir and it could and would maintain as many troops as it needed in Kashmir to maintain the security of the State, and no out side authority had any right to interfere in measures that the Government of India or the Government of Kashmir may take to determine the will of Kashmiris or to demand that any non-Indian authority can or need supervise such steps.
It is well known to the world, especially Pakistan that being the secular policy of the Indian Government, religion is not the basic factor or engages any attention to decide any issue for the nation on this basis, as such Kashmir problem cannot be taken on the merit of two nation theory and cannot be repeated blunder for further partition, as the J&K State is an important example and an unique reference of the secular traditions of the composite culture in the world which cannot be allowed to harm and damage at any cost besides what Pakistan has right over the Indian State when it committed an bloodily horrific aggression and occupied its territory with might which is yet to be surrendered and now raises head to dare for interference in Kashmir political affairs unwarrantedly, so it has no right over it morally, and legally as well as constitutionally and be ready to surrender the occupied territory in peaceful manner.
On the whole the world powers, especially the US were not in favour and rejected Pak-plan for plebiscite or right for self determination, and two nation theory. It favoured and advised to settle all issues bilaterally and ruled out any possibility for mediator and third party participation in the meeting of two nations. The Government of India may come forward with extreme determination to abolish the temporary clause 370- of the Constitution of India to remove the communal considerations in order to develop the sense of security and over all development of the State. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
