Back to Article List
Nawaz Sharif victory: Return of hope for desperate Kashmiri leadership
by Hari Om on 25 May 2013 9 Comments

“Today (May 12) is an important day for people of Jammu & Kashmir as the elections were held in Pakistan and Mian Nawaz Sharif is emerging as victorious. I from this stage at Trikulbal Pattan (Kashmir) congratulate Mian Sahib on behalf of people of Jammu & Kashmir, my government and myself and hope that he would carry forward the process of restoring peace and friendship with India and work for resolving K-issue. I urge Sharif to move ahead once again on the important issue (of Kashmir) positively by picking up the threads from where they had been left (in 1999).” – National Conference working president and Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah

 

“Nawaz Sharif has been one of the architects of composite dialogue between the two neighbouring countries and his return to power has raised hopes of an earnest and sincere follow-up to the initial progress made on it. Lack of progress on Kashmir resolution had partly been attributed to instability in Pakistan but with the arrival in office of a new government to be led by a known votary for good relations could transform the situation and the two countries need to capitalize on it.” – Peoples Democratic Party patron Mufti Mohammad Sayeed

 

“The direct result of the Pakistan elections will be the country’s friendly relations with India. Our experience is that Nawaz Sharif wants settlement of issues (read Kashmir, Siachen and Indus waters) bilaterally through dialogue and discussions.”-- J&K Pradesh Congress Committee (JKPCC) president Saif-ud-Din Soz

 

“There is a huge responsibility on the heads of India and Pakistan to bring out the Kashmir issue from the cold-storage and work towards its permanent settlement.” -- CPI-M secretary MY Tarigami

 

“Now that Nawaz Sharif has won, we hope he won’t take Kashmiris for granted and instead give Kashmir a top priority vis-à-vis its resolution.” – Independent MLA ER Rasheed (Kashmir valley)

 

“Sharif has a very positive record on Kashmir and he would certainly engage with New Delhi for finding resolution of the Kashmir dispute.” – People’s Conference chairman separatist Sajjad Gani Lone

 

“Sharif should continue moral and diplomatic support to innocent Kashmiri people. Pakistan should use its influence to build pressure on India to implement UN resolutions on Kashmir which guarantees right to self determination for the people of Jammu & Kashmir.” – Tehrik-e-Hurriyat (TeH) chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani

 

“Nawaz Sharif is a visionary leader and has loads of knowledge. We met him in December last year and he assured us that if his party would be voted to power, he will work towards formulating a mechanism where Kashmiris will have a say in finding an amicable solution to the issue. We hope there will be a forward movement in that direction.” – All-Party Hurriyat Conference-M chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq 

 

“I hope the new government in Pakistan will not put the Kashmir issue on backburner and work for its resolution on a priority basis… Kashmiris are hopeful that Sharif will try institutionalizing negotiations with India. I hope he will ensure active involvement of people of Jammu & Kashmir (read Kashmiri leadership) as principle party in the process of negotiations and also will try to evolve a consensus on Kashmir between various political and religious parties of Pakistan… Sharif belongs to a Kashmiri family and because of the relation, people of Jammu & Kashmir have high expectations from him that he would keep the sacrifices, struggle, wishes and aspirations of people of Jammu & Kashmir in view and will work for the resolution of this vexed issue.” – Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front chairman Yasin Malik

 

“We congratulate Nawaz Sharif for his victory. He is a known figure and doesn’t need any introduction… No doubt there are many issues between India and Pakistan like Sir Creek, Siachen and water, but Kashmir has been the core issue. We want to convey to Sharif that Kashmiri resistance leaders haven’t closed doors of talks but time is witness that bilateralism has failed in the past. We hope Pakistan would plead the cause of Kashmiris keeping in view the UN resolutions on tri-partite talks.” – Democratic Freedom Party (DFP) chairman Shabir Ahmad Shah

 

“Under the leadership of Sharif, the new regime won’t let the people of Kashmir down and put in their best to resolve the vexed Kashmir issue. The fact remains that Pakistan is a basic party to the dispute. Given this, the country should work towards addressing the core issue of Kashmir.” – Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front-H chairman Javaid Ahmed

 

“The people of Kashmir have firm belief that under the leadership of Sharif, pressure would be built on India and international community towards settlement of Kashmir issue.” – Jammu & Kashmir Peoples League chairman Mukhtar Ahmad Waza

 

“Pakistan should invest its time to establish the disputed nature of Kashmir and then work towards its settlement as well. Without the resolution of this issue, peace can’t prevail in South Asia.” – Democratic Political Movement (DPM) chairman Firdous Ahmed Shah

 

The ridiculous and outrageous statements of “mainstream” and separatists leaders indicate several things. A brief reference to at least six would be in order. One, the victory of Nawaz Sharif and his Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) in the just-held elections to the Pakistan National Assembly after over thirteen years of General Pervez Musharraf’s and Pakistan People’s Party’s rule, has been taken by Kashmiri leaders of all hues to mean the return of hope. In other words, they have declared Kashmir to be on the threshold of a new era full of hope and promise for the future.

 

Two, all Kashmiri leaders, including the JKPCC president, do not consider Jammu & Kashmir an integral part of India. There is no fundamental difference among them as far as their attitude towards Pakistan, Kashmir and New Delhi is concerned.

 

Three, they are up in revolt against New Delhi as one man like the Palestinians are one against Israel. They consider Kashmir a communal issue and want a communal solution to the Kashmir issue which stood settled way back in October 1947 in terms of the constitutional law on the subject – law under which Pakistan also came into being and 560-odd princely state acceded to the Indian and Pakistani Dominions. They hate the presence of India and Indian institutions in Kashmir.

 

Four, they not only seek separation of the state from India on purely religious grounds but also speak for and on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as if they are an integral part of Pakistani establishment and its spokespersons.  

 

Five, there is not a single Kashmiri leader in the Jammu & Kashmir Legislature and outside who is prepared to accept the ground reality that this sensitive and strategic state consists of three disparate and distinct regions housing a highly diverse population. In other words, all the Kashmiri leaders, without any exception, including the JKPCC chief, wish to force down the throats of the unwilling people of Jammu and Ladakh their pernicious ideology. The state’s complete merger with India and abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution under which the solitary State of Jammu & Kashmir enjoys a very special status within the Union was, and continues to be, the motto and battle-cry of the people of Jammu and Ladakh, who inhabit over 88 per cent of the state’s land area and constitute almost half of the state’s population.

 

Six, the ruling coalition comprising the NC and the Congress and the main opposition party in the Legislative Assembly, besides the CPI-M MLA and Kashmir-based independent MLA, have violated the oath of office and shamelessly and brazenly jumped on to the bandwagon of Kashmiri separatists.

 

Who emboldened these seditionists to say what they said? The answer is simple and straight. The answer is the Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh-controlled UPA Government, which represents the Pakistani and Chinese interests in India more than Indian interests. Just look at what the so-called External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told reporters at Beijing on May 10 and you will endorse what I said. He inter alia stated: “I would love to live in Beijing… I didn’t raise the Chinese intrusion (into Depsang Bulge in eastern Ladakh) or seek a reason from them” (read Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi).

 

It is time for the nation to wake up and throw out the party of “termites” lock, stock and barrel.  

User Comments Post a Comment
Hari Om,who ever speaks the fact is a traitor in your eyes be it your own elected government elected my the majority of Indian votes.
Just read of the walls of Jammu and Kashmir,you will get the message loud and clear (in your case i highly doubt) that they want NOTHING doing with India any more,they want India OUT!
observer
May 25, 2013
Report Abuse
Arrey tumahare asli dushman xtian log he. Hindu aur muslim ek saath centuries tak rahe he. Age bhi rahege. Kashmiri pandit toh ab wapas ja rahe na..aur uspe aisi batein ho jaati he zameen ke masle par.
Sarfaraz.m
May 25, 2013
Report Abuse
Kashmir, the oldest dispute at the UN Agenda.
To my Indian friends the sooner you folks realize your obligations under the UN treaty better relations with Pakistan would blossom with no end.
Pakistanis are good people and want to be friends with India under right conditions.

The Kashmir dispute is the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world today. Pakistan considers Kashmir as its core political dispute with India. So does the international community, except India.
India's forcible occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 is the main cause of the dispute. India claims to have ‘signed' a controversial document, the Instrument of Accession, on 26 October 1947 with the Maharaja of Kashmir, in which the Maharaja obtained India's military help against popular insurgency. The people of Kashmir and Pakistan do not accept the Indian claim. There are doubts about the very existence of the Instrument of Accession. The United Nations also does not consider Indian claim as legally valid: it recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory. With the exception of India, the entire world community recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory. The fact is that all the principles on the basis of which the Indian subcontinent was partitioned by the British in 1947 justify Kashmir becoming a part of Pakistan: the State had majority Muslim population, and it not only enjoyed geographical proximity with Pakistan but also had essential economic linkages with the territories constituting Pakistan.
History of the dispute
The State of Jammu and Kashmir has historically remained independent, except in the anarchical conditions of the late 18th and first half of the 19th century, or when incorporated in the vast empires set up by the Mauryas (3 rd century BC), the Mughals (16th to 18th century) and the British (mid-19th to mid-20th century). All these empires included not only present-day India and Pakistan but some other countries of the region as well. Until 1846, Kashmir was part of the Sikh empire. In that year, the British defeated the Sikhs and sold Kashmir to Gulab Singh of Jammu for Rs. 7.5 million under the Treaty of Amritsar. Gulab Singh, the Mahraja, signed a separate treaty with the British which gave him the status of an independent princely ruler of Kashmir. Gulab Singh died in 1857 and was replaced by Rambir Singh (1857-1885). Two other Marajas, Partab Singh (1885-1925) and Hari Singh (1925-1949) ruled in succession.
Gulab Singh and his successors ruled Kashmir in a tyrannical and repressive way. The people of Kashmir, nearly 80 per cent of who were Muslims, rose against Maharaja Hari Singh's rule. He ruthlessly crushed a mass uprising in 1931. In 1932, Sheikh Abdullah formed Kashmir's first political party—the All Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference (renamed as National Conference in 1939). In 1934, the Maharaja gave way and allowed limited democracy in the form of a Legislative Assembly. However, unease with the Maharaja's rule continued. According to the instruments of partition of India, the rulers of princely states were given the choice to freely accede to either India or Pakistan, or to remain independent. They were, however, advised to accede to the contiguous dominion, taking into consideration the geographical and ethnic issues.
In Kashmir, however, the Maharaja hesitated. The principally Muslim population, having seen the early and covert arrival of Indian troops, rebelled and things got out of the Maharaja's hands. The people of Kashmir were demanding to join Pakistan. The Maharaja, fearing tribal warfare, eventually gave way to the Indian pressure and agreed to join India by, as India claims, ‘signing' the controversial Instrument of Accession on 26 October 1947. Kashmir was provisionally accepted into the Indian Union pending a free and impartial plebiscite. This was spelled out in a letter from the Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, to the Maharaja on 27 October 1947. In the letter, accepting the accession, Mountbatten made it clear that the State would only be incorporated into the Indian Union after a reference had been made to the people of Kashmir. Having accepted the principle of a plebiscite, India has since obstructed all attempts at holding a plebiscite.
In 1947, India and Pakistan went to war over Kashmir. During the war, it was India which first took the Kashmir dispute to the United Nations on 1 January 1948. The following year, on 1 January 1949, the UN helped enforce ceasefire between the two countries. The ceasefire line is called the Line of Control. It was an outcome of a mutual consent by India and Pakistan that the UN Security Council (UNSC) and UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) passed several resolutions in years following the 1947-48 war. The UNSC Resolution of 21 April 1948--one of the principal UN resolutions on Kashmir—stated that “both India and Pakistan desire that the question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite”. Subsequent UNSC Resolutions reiterated the same stand. UNCIP Resolutions of 3 August 1948 and 5 January 1949 reinforced UNSC resolutions.
KASHMIR ISSUE IN A NUTSHELL
The current agitation in Indian-Held Kashmir is rooted in the struggle of the people for the exercise of the right of self-determination. Peaceful processions chanting demands for freedom were fired upon by Indian Army and police. Thousands of men, women and children have been killed or wounded.
1. New Delhi's allegation of assistance to the Kashmiri people from the Pakistan side is unfounded. Objective reports in foreign media testify that the Kashmiri agitation is indigenous.
2. Pakistan upholds the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to self-determination in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. These resolutions of 1948 and 1949 provide for the holding of a free and impartial plebiscite for the determination of the future of the state by the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
3. The basic points about the UN resolution are that:
• The complaint relating to Kashmir was initiated by India in the Security Council;
• The Council explicitly and by implications, rejected India's claim that Kashmir is legally Indian territory;
• The resolutions established self-determination as the governing principal for the settlement of the Kashmir dispute. This is the world body's commitment to the people of Kashmir;
• The resolutions endorsed a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed and specified conditions.
1. The Security Council has rejected the Indian contention that the people of Kashmir have exercised their right of self-determination by participating in the "election" which India has from time to time organized in the Held Kashmir. The 0.2% turn out during the 1989 "elections" was the most recent clear repudiation of the Indian claim.
2. Pakistan continues to adhere to the UN resolutions. These are binding also on India.
3. The Simla Agreement of 2 July 1972, to which Pakistan also continues to adhere, did not alter the status of Jammu and Kashmir as a disputed territory:
· Para 6 of the Agreement lists “a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir" as one of the outstanding questions awaiting a settlement.
· Para 4 (ii) talks of a "Line of Control" as distinguished from an international border. Furthermore, it explicitly protects "the recognized position of either side." The recognized position of Pakistan is the one, which is recognized by the United Nations and the World Community in general.
Khan Sahib
May 27, 2013
Report Abuse
Much of the material supplied by Mr. Khan is erroneous. However, at this juncture there cannot be any dialogue with Pakistan over Kashmir. Both historically and after the Independence Act Kashmir is an integral part of India.

The only unfinished business is taking over Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK).

Pakistan is economically desperate. Navaz Sharif will be intent on that question. Then there is the internal taliban threat and so on.

Pakistan is in no position to help the separatists openly as many of the fellows in the above article are hoping. All that the ISI can do is to provide constant pin pricks but even that will not work with the changed situation in Afghanistan where their writ is no longer valid. Civil society in Pakistan will no longer tolerate the ISI and the Army's collusion with the Taliban, since the extremist forces are destroying their own well being.

All in all, Sharif cannot afford to alienate India. And with the demise of the Congress and most likely the coming to power of the NDA government a new Kashmir policy will be a firm one.

And with the international community tired of the fundamentalist attempt to establish a world Caliphate there will be no appeasement of these extremist elements.

Sharif understands this. He will proceed cautiously this time round.
Dr.Vijaya Rajiva
May 27, 2013
Report Abuse
@Sarfaraz.m,well said

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAKTM0IlhQo&feature=player_embedded#t=0s
Y
May 27, 2013
Report Abuse
....Also watch this :


http://youtu.be/vQq7PCath0g
observer
May 27, 2013
Report Abuse
Also know this

Having taken up the leadership of *powerless* Baqi Sthan, Mian nawaz sherif is loitering around with begging bowl to get power. And hold your breath, his first destination is Hindusthan. Mera bharath mahan. yeh ehlaan karta hai ki Sind, punjab, baluchistan, paktukwa (baqisthan mein) mein nata barqaraar hai.
krishnakumar
May 28, 2013
Report Abuse
KK,stop worrying about Pakistan,start worrying about "Rape sthan".
Naxals have already upped the ante so start scotch taping your mahan bharat as the it has started ripping at the seams!
observer
May 28, 2013
Report Abuse
@ Y, Good video & please tell me where this has happened (Gujarat!!!)? However, This is just one off incident that is not a true reflection of Muslims or Christians at large. In the 88 years of RSS journey, they couldn’t change the perception of at least 1% Muslim population. On the other hand, with relentless good work, NaMo could garner the >20% Muslims to his favor and for the first time, they too are celebrating Hindu festivals along with other Gujarati Hindus with open heart.

I am not trying to belittle RSS, but the way they discredited exemplary leaders like Vajpayee, LK Advani, NaMo etc. is creating discomfort, confusion and disharmony among loyal and honest party workers.
Mohan
May 28, 2013
Report Abuse