First Weapon:

RESOLUTION 47 (1948) ON THE INDIA-PAKISTAN QUESTION SUBMITTED JOINTLY BY THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR BELGIUM, CANADA, CHINA, COLUMBIA, THE UNITED KINGDOM AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ADOPTED BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL AT ITS 286TH MEETING HELD ON 21 APRIL, 1948. (DOCUMENT NO. S/726, DATED THE 21ST APRIL, 1948).


A - RESTORATION OF PEACE AND ORDER

1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavors:
a. To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State;
b. To make known to all concerned that the measures indicated in this and the following paragraphs provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste, or party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, and that therefore they should co-operate in the maintenance of peace and order. 2. The Government of India should:
a. When it is established to the satisfaction of the Commission set up in accordance with the Council's Resolution 39 (1948) that the tribesmen are withdrawing and that arrangements for the cessation of the fighting have become effective, put into operation in consultation with the Commission a plan for withdrawing their own forces from Jammu and Kashmir and reducing them progressively to the minimum strength required for the support of the civil power in the maintenance of law and order;
b. Make known that the withdrawal is taking place in stages and announce the completion of each stage;

Pakistan has never obeyed this proposal, never vacated the occupied part of J&K, that is the reason the Plebiscite could not have taken place.

Second weapon:
There is a treaty between the Maharaja of J&K and Lord Mountbatten signed on 26th October, 1947, which is legally valid, according to the American representative to the UN in 1948, when the UN Resolution of Plediscite was taken place.
Legality of the accession has been accepted in the halls of the United Nations' Organisation by the Government of the United States of America herself. The United States of America's Permanent Representative in the United Nations' Organisation, Mr. Warren Austin, said, on 4 February 1948 to the Security Council, " The external Sovereignty of Kashmir is no longer under the control of the Maharajah----------- With the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India this foreign sovereignty went over to India and that is why India happens to be here (Security Council) as a petitioner."

If The West now refuses to accept that treaty, subsequent UN Resolutions, based on the petition of India on 30th October,1948 as the plaintiff, are also invalid, according to any legal system.

Third Weapon:

UN Resolutions are not about the right of self-determination of the Kashmiris, because there no third option for ‘the independence’, which most Muslim Kashmiris want, according to The West.
If they, Kashmiris, wanted to join Pakistan, they could have done so in 1946 when Jinnah had invited Sheikh Abdullah to join Pakistan, he had refused.

In January 29, 1994, the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKIF) leader, Amanullah Khan, speaking in Muzaffarabad, reminded Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto that Pakistan's persistent rejection of the third option of independence for Kashmir is "tantamount to denying the very right of self-determination" Pakistan has been harping about a right which, he asserted, cannot be limited, conditioned or circumscribed. But Pakistan's espousal of the right to self-determination has always been self-servingly conditional and circumscribed.

Fourth Weapon:

Pakistan not only invaded Kashmir against the will of the people of Kashmir, it has so far violated every aspects of the UN Resolutions, thus it cannot ask India to implement the UN resolution in only 45 percent of the original state of the Jammu and Kashmir.
Pakistan was guilty of the invasion of J&K, it did not abide by the UN Resolution and neither withdrew its troops and infiltrators. Instead, it built airfields in the occupied territory, and imposed a full civilian and military control while claiming the territory as Azad Kashmir.
For these violations the UN could not impose sanctions on Pakistan, as the Resolution was not under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
To win Chinese support, it gifted 4853 sq km of the Kashmiri territory in the Shaksgam Valley to China in 1963, thus disrupting the territorial integrity of the State of J&K. Pakistan by a Constitution Amendment incorporated a part of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK), that is, Northern Areas, in Pakistan, thereby changing the territorial status of J&K and violating the UN Resolutions. Pakistan is now occupying 35 percent of the state.
Pakistan has changed the demography of the occupied area POK by resettling large number of Punjabi ex- servicemen and Afghans from NWFP, thereby making plebiscite of erstwhile J&K irrelevant.
Pakistan launched three large scale operations on India in 1965, 1971 and the recent Kargil war in 1999 with an attempt to militarily change the territorial status of J&K.
Since 1988, Pakistan has sponsored cross border terrorism in J&K with an aim to change the territorial status of J&K unilaterally which is again violation of the UN Resolutions.
China is illegally occupying Aksai Chin area, which is 19 percent of the territory. It will be next to impossible for the UN to make China vacate the area. China is occupying 20 percent of the state.

Fifth Weapon:

In March 2001 in Islamabad, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said:
"The UN resolutions that come under chapter seven of the charter were self-enforcing like those related to East Timor and Iraq. The second type of resolutions which do not fall in the purview of chapter seven needed co-operation of the concerned parties for their implementation.
"The UN resolutions on Kashmir do not fall in the category of chapter seven and hence required cooperation of the concerned parties for their implementation and in this case it is lacking,"

Pakistan and China will not cooperate by vacating their parts which is required to organize any plebiscite.
There cannot be a plebiscite in only 45 percent of the area which India has in Kashmir.

If you write to any Western newspapers you can mention these, as they donot write the facts.
If you need the full version of the (1) the Treaty between the Maharaja of J & K and Lord Mountbatten; and (2) UN Resolutions of Kanshmir, I can supply you.

Kashmir- Some facts we must be aware of

As an ally of America during the cold war, Pakistan has had more than a 50-year head start in presenting their point of view to West. While India has remained mostly silent, the Western media continues to talk about a referendum and the fact that India must adhere to UN resolutions. Here are some facts we need to be aware of to counter baseless allegations against India.



Kashmir’s accession to India

1. The accession of all princely states to either India or Pakistan was done under the under the Govt. of India Act, 1935 and the Partition of India Act, 1947, the princely states had only two options (join India or Pakistan) keeping in mind the geographic contiguity clause.

2. Kashmir was geographically contiguous to both India and Pakistan, (unlike Junagadh and Hyderabad (both with Muslim rulers and Muslim majority populations) which had no option but to join India under geographic contiguity clause). Maharaja Hari Singh was dithering on the Accession when Pakistan violated a signed Standstill Agreement and sent in Armed forces disguised as tribal raiders (razakars) to force the issue in its favor.

3. It was the Pakistani invasion that led the Maharaja to accede to India. His accession to India had nothing to do with the fact that he was a Hindu as is implied by the Western Press, Pakistan and radical Muslims. Maharaja Hari Singh’s decision to sign the Instrument of Accession in India's favor of India was supported by the ruling cabinet of National Conference under Sheikh Abdullah.

4. India is and remains a secular, democratic republic. India sought a ratification of the Instrument of Accession. The elected Kashmiri Constituent Assembly, headed by Sheikh Abdullah, ratified the Instrument of Accession in 1953/54. Later in 1957, the elected Kashmiri Constituent Assembly drafted the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, which unequivocally declares Jammu and Kashmir as an "integral part of India".

5. While the election process in India may not be perfect, it is no different in Kashmir.



The Plebiscite and UN resolutions

1. The very first and basic UNCIP Resolution S/1100 Para 75 of August 13, 1948 required Pakistan to withdraw the Pakistani Army and the Pakistani Tribals from Kashmir. Pakistan never did. It was Pakistan that violated this precondition, yet the Western Press and Pakistan keep holding India responsible for not holding a referendum (http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/uncip(s1100).htm)

2. Secondly, The UN resolutions on Kashmir are not binding as per Chapter 6. They are also time-barred by later events in history. (China occupying Aksai Chin, Pakistan ceding Shaksgam Valley to China in 1963, Pakistan attacking India in 1965 and the separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan in 1971)

3. 1972, Pakistan signed the Simla Agreement making Kashmir a bilateral issue. http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/shimla.htm

4. Since then, the UN has made it amply clear that the Kashmir issue must be resolved bilaterally.



Ethnic Cleansing of the Minorities of Kashmir

1. Time magazine reported that in the 1980s, Kashmir had 36% minorities. Where are they today? http://www.time.com/time/2002/kashmir/index.html

2. The minorities of Kashmir and many Muslim Kashmiris will always remain faithful to India. Terrorists for that very reason are targeting them. They are being systematically killed and driven away with the spread of fundamentalist Islam and terrorism from Pakistan.

3. In Pakistan occupied Kashmir, minorities are down from approximately 20% in 1947 to zero % today. China has occupied one third of Kashmir. In the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir; Leh and Ladhak is a Buddhist majority protected by the Indian Army: In Jammu, the Hindu Dogra majority is being driven away by Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism; Kashmir valley has a Muslim majority.



The Separatist Movement

1. If there is indeed a freedom struggle, it is an internal matter for the Indians ... of a State that legally acceded to India and now wishes to break away due to a separatist movement.

2. Where does the question Pakistan come in unless they themselves are after Kashmir? The Pakistani call for a referendum and loose talk about Kashmiri ‘self-determination” has worked well in deceiving the West as well as the illiterate Kashmiri. It has been a wonderful ploy to foment trouble in India.

3. Azad Kashmir as Pakistanis like to call it, is not Azad (free). It is occupied by non Kashmiri Pakistanis. It is minority free. Azad which means “free” is a word used to brainwash the poor and illiterate Kashmiris into believing that they are free. The fact is that they are not. Azad is a word used to imply to the ethnic Kashmiris that they MAY have freedom and independence if they so desire. That is not true if you read the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) Constitution, which clearly spells out the accession of POK to Pakistan. The illiterate Kashmiris and Jihadis seem to trust Pakistan’s motives about granting Kashmir independence.

4. The constitution of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) clearly shows that the Pakistanis aren’t really interested in self-determination (independence if they so desire) for the Kashmiris.

5. The Pakistan Occupied Kashmiri (POK) constitution states: “ No person or political party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the State’s accession to Pakistan".

Under Section 5(2) (vii) of the POK Legislative Assembly Election Ordinance 1970, a person would be disqualified for propagating any opinion or action in any manner prejudicial to the ideology of Pakistan, the ideology of State’s accession to Pakistan or the sovereignty and integrity of Pakistan. The same caveat applies to anyone who "defames or brings into ridicule the judiciary of AJK of Pakistan or the Armed Forces of Pakistan".

While guaranteeing freedom of speech,
Article 9 of the POK Constitution, imposes "reasonable restrictions in the interests of the security of AJK and friendly relations with Pakistan". The oath of office for the President, PM, Minister, Speaker, MLA or MLC of POK clearly includes the following clause: "That I will remain loyal to the country and the cause of accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan".

6. Because Kashmir had a Muslim majority, and Pakistan has had designs on "freeing" Kashmiri Muslims from "Hindu" rule, Pakistan has succeeded in using the problems in Kashmir, to suit its own expansionist ambitions.

7. In a poor and diverse country like India there are problems everywhere with too little to go around. Every community seems to think their problems are worse than the others in India. But at the end of the day they realize that being with India is in their own interests. India has had several separatist movements like Khalistan, they have all died a natural death.

8. In 1947 India was partitioned once. No Indian, will permit further vivisection of the country by redrawing India’s borders on the basis of religion once again. It could jeopardize the destiny of 120 million Indian Muslims for the sake of only 4 million Kashmiri Muslims, not all of whom desire secession.

9. Kashmir is important to India’s democracy, integrity, sovereignty and secular beliefs. India despite all its problems remains a self-correcting democracy committed to secular beliefs. It has been commendable in battling with separatist movements all over the country; a country made up of people from different ethnicities and all major world religions. If Kashmir’s separatist movement were allowed to succeed, the West would be responsible for the disintegration of India, the world’s largest democracy.



In my opinion, given all of the above reasons the question of a plebiscite does not arise.



Why India should not allow third party intervention

Can the US be trusted with its pro Israel stance which they are likely to balance off with a pro-Islamic stance in Kashmir to secure their oil and security interests? If India was "quick" to "mobilize" then the US can be accused of being quick to bomb Afghanistan, not to forget Iraq. And if the Americans consider this to be their "business" why don’t they start with de-nuking their terrorist ally Pakistan?



And lastly on Pakistan ... How can Pakistanis talk about self-determination of Kashmiris when they have been ruled by military dictators for most of their "independence”?

Why don’t they send in their Army into China to "free" the Muslims there?

While they talk of "oppression" in Kashmir, why don’t they provide equal rights to their minorities and women?

Why were they silent about human rights abuses in Afghanistan when they point fingers at India?

Why are Pakistanis talking about a referendum after signing the Simla Agreement?

And finally...What are Indian criminals like Dawood Ibrahim doing in Pakistan? What is Maulana Masood Azar who was responsible for the Indian Airlines Hijackings doing roaming free in Pakistan? ....Why are they leading a life of luxury under ISI protection?