| Author | Message | ||
Abhysg Side Hero Username: Abhysg Post Number: 3289 Registered: 08-2008 Posted From: 166.137.136.78 Rating: N/A |
Technically belongs to India. King signed treaty with India. But authenticity is questioned by pak. democracy a/c lo chooste part of it like Jammu to India and valley to pak. native pandits were driven away from their land. Most people want to go with Azad Kashmir which will under pak influence | ||
Stig Comedian Username: Stig Post Number: 1815 Registered: 01-2010 Posted From: 67.80.101.77 Rating: N/A |
Doodh Maange tho Kheer denge ... Kashmir maange tho cheed denge !!  ------- DC >>> (MI+RCB+CSK+DD+KKR+KPXI+RR) Only seven people have looked The Stig straight in the eyes. They are all dead now !! | ||
Ustad Side Hero Username: Ustad Post Number: 3376 Registered: 07-2008 Posted From: 173.184.246.34 Rating: |
The India-Pakistan joint statement at Sharm el-Sheikh mentioned Balochistan. India is now committed to discuss Balochistan with Pakistan. Let us now make a comparison between Balochistan and Kashmir. Both have been in turmoil due to militancy for decades. They are mountainous regions suited for guerrilla warfare. Pakistan calls Kashmir the core issue. But Kashmir is more a symptom than the disease. Balochistan is the largest province of Pakistan with 43 per cent of its land space and only four per cent of its population. It is the richest province of Pakistan in mineral resources with gas, oil, uranium, thorium and arguably the largest copper deposits in the world. It is also Pakistan’s most deprived province. All its people profess the same religion. Kashmir has negligible mineral resources. It enjoys greater autonomy than all the other states in India. It is the most pampered state in terms of the highest per capita Central aid. As against India’s national average of 26 per cent below the poverty line, Kashmir has only 3.7 per cent in this category. Kashmir is a multi-religious state where Kashmiri Muslims are in a minority with the remaining population comprising non-Muslims and non-Kashmiri Muslims. The British signed a treaty with the Khan of Kalat in 1876. This made Balochistan an allied state, virtually like Nepal. Kashmir was a Princely State, like several others in the country. Jinnah had been the attorney of the Khan. As per the agreement signed at Delhi on August 4, 1947 between Mountbatten, Jinnah and the Khan of Kalat, Balochistan was to revert to its 1876 status on Pakistan becoming independent. Accordingly, the Khan declared his independence in August 1947. In January 1948, on a visit to Karachi, the then capital of Pakistan, the Khan was made to sign an instrument of accession to Pakistan. This was rejected by the state Assembly at Quetta and by the tribal councils. A violent agitation was started by the Khan’s brother and this has continued with varying intensity for over six decades. The Kashmir story is different. The Maharaja of Kashmir had not been able to make up his mind about which dominion to join. Pakistan launched an invasion of tribal raiders led by officers of the Pakistan Army. By October 26, 1947, the invaders had captured Baramulla, subjecting it to pillage and rapine of the worst kind. They were now very near Srinagar. The Maharaja acceded to India. Sheikh Abdullah, the undisputed political leader of Kashmir, endorsed this. The Indian Army flew into Kashmir the following day, saved Srinagar and drove the enemy out of the Valley. Sheikh Abdullah became chief minister and later the Maharaja was made to abdicate. After the first Indo-Pak war, peace prevailed in the state for over 40 years. Democracy functioned and elections were held regularly. Having lost three wars to India, Pakistan crafted a strategy of a thousand cuts to bleed India. A low-intensity conflict — a vicious mix of insurgency, terrorism and proxy war — has been raging in Kashmir since 1989. Over 300,000 Kashmiri Pandits were forced to flee the Valley. Militancy in Kashmir is fuelled by religious fundamentalism. In the case of Balochistan, it is the assertion of a separate ethnic and political identity. The Pakistan Army has been conducting all-out offensive operations in Balochistan using air power and artillery. These area denying weapons cause indiscriminate and heavy casualties. There has not been a single instance in which the Indian Army has used such weapons in Kashmir. General Tikka Khan of Pakistan ruthlessly quelled the Baloch uprising in 1973. The Baloch people called him the “Butcher of Balochistan”. Gen. Musharraf ordered airstrikes to kill veteran Baloch leader Akbar Khan Bugti. On the other hand, in Kashmir, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the hardcore separatist leader in Kashmir, has never been treated harshly. He is allowed to meet Pakistani diplomats and leaders. In 2006 he was terminally ill with liver cancer. He wanted to go to the US for treatment but was denied a visa. All facilities were provided for his treatment in Mumbai. On a previous occasion, he was even flown to Mumbai in a state plane for treatment — complicated surgery that saved his life. Immediately on return to Srinagar, he ranted against India’s “illegal occupation” of Kashmir. Prompt action is taken in Kashmir against human rights violations. Army, paramilitary and police personnel found guilty have been dismissed and given prison sentences of up to 14 years. There is no information of such action being taken in Balochistan. Two specific instances are revealing. Major Rehman was accused of raping a mother and her daughter at Handwara, Kashmir. He had been going to the woman’s house when her husband was away. One night the 13-year-old daughter saw him with her mother. She raised a hue and cry, leading to the officer being apprehended. Immediate action was taken and the officer was arraigned before a court martial. There was no forensic or other evidence to substantiate rape. However, it was proved that he had gone to the woman’s house in the night while her husband was away. He was dismissed from service for conduct unbecoming of an officer. About the same time, a Pakistan Army major raped a lady doctor in a hospital at Quetta. No action whatsoever was taken against him. Violent disturbances broke out but these were quelled by the Pakistan Army. The lady doctor left Balochistan and went to Karachi, where her conservative father-in-law refused to accept her. Her husband was more understanding. They migrated to Canada. Gen. Musharraf, during his US tour, was asked about this case. He said the lady was raped, got money and got a visa to Canada. There was an uproar against this statement, both in international and Pakistani media. There is proof of Pakistan’s involvement in militancy in Kashmir, from thousands of Pakistanis apprehended there as also from documents and from international sources. Jihadis in Pakistan have openly declared war in Kashmir. A former ISI director, as a minister during Musharraf’s regime, admitted in Pakistan’s Parliament that the ISI had been organising cross-border terrorism in Kashmir. On the other hand, there is not a shred of evidence produced by Pakistan of any Indian involvement in Balochistan. India has no geographical access to Balochistan. She cannot do what Pakistan has been openly doing all these years in Kashmir. Had India wanted to pay back Pakistan in its own coin, she could have done so in the Gilgit Skardu region with which she has a common border. This region is legally Indian territory. For some time there has been widespread unrest there. Pakistan has raised the Balochistan bogey to put pressure on India to withdraw her consulates at Kandahar and Herat as a first step to hustling India out of Afghanistan. Pakistan, the epicentre of terrorism in the world, is suffering at the hands of a monster of its own creation. She accuses India of terrorist attacks in its country even when its own terrorist outfits have been claiming responsibility. All this is being done to provide a fig leaf of justification for its terrorist attacks against India. http://www.deccanchronicle.com/op-ed/balochistan-no-kashmir- 507 lieutenant-general S.K. Sinha  |
