Kashmir Crisis Master Minded Hindutva Strategy to Stop Anti US Movement in India

Kashmir Crisis Master Minded Hindutva Strategy to Stop Anti US Movement in India


Troubled Galaxy Destroyed Dreams: Chapter 42

Palash Biswas

http://troubledgalaxydetroyeddreams.blogspot.com/

Hindutva Maha Rath was flagged off by the RSS Icon Lal Krishna Adwani from Indian Parliament on the day when the so called Left enforced the UPA super slave Government to go for Trust Vote. Indian communists tried their best to play the Anti Imperialist as well as Anti Fascist roles in the Reality Nuke Opera. Adwani subverted the debate in the Heightened Hindutva justifying the Hindu Zionist White Manusmriti Apartheid Galaxy re alliance! Poor communists had no home work to resist the Saffron Magic which captured this bleeding divided Sub continent once again after the destruction of Babri Mosque in Ayodhya!The crisis over the land grant to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board threatens to divide Jammu and Kashmir along communal lines.The Hindutva Fascist forces have fielded God Rama to justify the US interests!

What a drama follows! Indigenous communities were divided in more than six hundred castes and three percent Brahmins en cashed the crisis of British Imperialism to sustain its colonies after the World Wars and Global Recession! India was divided in nationalities, castes and communities. Anti imperialist aboriginal indigenous communities were never the parties in so called National Freedom Struggle which turned out to be the Freedom for Brahmins only! Dr Ambedkar was the supreme commander of the indigenous subaltern movement but he could not stop partition as he failed to resist Gandhi executing Pune Pact. Because the SC dominated indigenous movement could not deal with nationality question. Neither it could mobilise the OBC and ST against Brahminical Power Politics! Provided if the Aboriginal People from North West Frontier bordering Afghanistan and the modern Swat Valley, along with the tribals of Chittagong in Bangladesh, the nationalities in North East and central India, had it been so easy a cakewalk to partition India transferring power to Brahmins!

Kashmir Crisis is quite reminiscent of the Pre Partition circumstances in Bengal. The Tebhaga movement was in full bloom led by the communists. Hindu as well as Muslim peasants were fighting jointly against the Brahmin zamindars of United Bengal.Elite Brahmin Shyama Prasad Mukherjee was the leader of Hindu Mahasabha who was responsible to sabotage Krishak Praja Samiti leader Fazlul haq. Haq constituted the Haq Shyama Ministery to provided the launching pad for the Pakistani Nationality as Muslim League took over the Muslim psyche just because of the failure of Fazlul Haq. Then, Mukherjee and the elite ruling Brahmins of Bengal, hitherto being the voices of the British Masters since the War Of Plassy, jumped into the freedom struggle just after the beginning of First World War. The Ruling Class psyche has been well expressed in the so called classics of Tara Shankar Bandopadhyaya, rare human documentation of Hatred against the indigenous aboriginal communities in India.

Mukherjee declared whether India is divided or not, Bengal would be divided! Because the Brahmins were not ready to bear anymore the dominance of the untouchables and the converted lower class Hindus! This was a supreme strategy to provoke Muslim Nationality which convinced a secular man like Jinnah. Hindu Mahasabha launched an anti Muslim campaign to break Hindu Muslim peasants` Unity and defend the Brahmin Zamindars.The ultimate result was the partition of Bengal.

The Hindutva forces would not dare US interests in this divided bleeding subcontinent! This psyche never allows any space for Anti Imperialist Movement anywhere in this subcontinent. The best ploy to resist any Anti Imperialist movement in India happens to be the magic realism of Hindutva! Which has struck Kashmir well planned! It seems that any anti Imperialist movement led by the aboriginal indigenous majority eighty five percent population of India is almost Impossible.

The Brahmins never cared much for the integrity of India as the subaltern history of Partition of India proves well! The Brahmins never care to sustain Kashmir as an integral part of India this time!

This is the game!


Talks between an all-party delegation and the group leading the agitation demanding land for the shrine board failed in Jammu on Saturday. The Shri Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti, a combine of over 30 groups leading the agitation, said the talks were "inconclusive" and announced it would carry on with its campaign.

NDTV reports:

A new peace formula has been put forth to end the Amarnath deadlock. Whether the new proposal is accepted or not there's resentment at how Kashmiri Muslims were kept out of the talks on Saturday.

When it became clear that the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti would not accept Kashmiri leaders Mahbooba Mufti, Farooq Abdullah and Saifuddin Soz as part of the all-party delegation, members asked Home Minister Shivraj Patil to talk alone with the Samiti.

But Patil insisted that others remained. Eventually, only the Kashmiri Muslim leaders were excluded.

Finally former Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad also excused himself even though he's a Jammu leader. So it would not appear that just the Kashmir leaders were out.

Back in the Valley Mirwaiz Omer Farooq, chairman Hurriyat Conference has been put under house arrest. This after he decided to join the march to Muzaffarabad on Monday, the call for which has been given by Fruit Growers Association.

Meanwhile, the PDP has said it will participate in the march.

However, speaking to NDTV the home minister said his committee had succeeded in creating goodwill and understanding.

He denied that there was an economic blockade and appealed to the separatists not to try and take trucks via Muzaffarabad in Pakistan in a symbolic protest.
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060904


The land grant controversy has troubled the state for over five weeks now, with at least 15 people dying in violent protests and clashes. The controversy began when the state government allotted 40 hectare of forestland in north Kashmir to the shrine board in May—a step which angered Muslims—and then scrapped its decision on July 1, this time angering Hindus.


An all-party delegation led by Home Minister Shivraj Patil visited Jammu on Saturday to find a solution but both sides in the controversy refuse to budge from their positions.


Does the controversy threaten to pit Jammu and Kashmir against each other? CNN-IBN’s Editor-in-Chief Rajdeep Sardesai asked this on the Weekend Edition to Virender Raina, national spokesperson for Panun Kashmir, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, chairperson of All Parties Hurriyat Conference, and youth activist Aditya Raj Kaul.

Jammu vs Kashmir: Reign of peace
Rashid Ahmad, Hindustan Times
Domail (Baltal), August 10, 2008

From Domail (Baltal), at a place called Baltal, begins the shortcut to God. The Amarnath caves are just 16 km away from this piece of land the size of a football field — the Himalayas towering around it and the Sindh river gently gurgling past. Pilgrims begin the quickest climb to the shrine from here.

Shortcuts often come with dangers.

In the last six weeks, this piece of land 93 km from Srinagar has triggered one of the deepest communal divides in independent India in the Valley, with 10 people killed and more than 500 injured on the streets of Jammu and Srinagar.

On Saturday, the streets still burned, even as the Amarnath Yatra Sangharsh Samiti, the organisation demanding that the Baltal land be returned to a temple trust, climbed down a bit by agreeing to peace talks with Home Minister Shivraj Patil.

At Baltal’s Ground Zero, however, peace has never had to be talked out in the 30 years that pilgrims have been pitching tent here.

In an extension of a 160-year-old tradition of Hindu pilgrims being helped by Muslim workers on the older route to Amarnath from Pahalgam, around 300 Muslim labourers and seasonal workers escort people to the cave, carrying the old on their shoulders, providing mules to others, supplying water and helping with backpacks and other luggage.

There is little sense of the street rage and deep religious divide sweeping Jammu and Srinagar.

“I am here for more than a month, helping yatris,” said Ashiq Hussain (25), a resident of nearby Kangan. Hussain is an Arts graduate but could not get a government job. His three younger brothers, two sisters and widowed mother depend solely on him for livelihood.

“This is the time I earn for my family. We have no other means,” he said. Ashiq has earned around Rs 12,000 in a month.

The piece of land at the centre of the conflict has pre-fabricated structures, including latrines, bathrooms and shelter sheds.

The control over the conduct of the yatra, which rested with the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (which now looks only after religious matters), is now with the state tourism department.

On Saturday, about 200 yatris were ready to set out on the trek. Officials said 250 yatris had already left. Those who could afford were taking the helicopter service.

Abdul Gani Khan, another resident, said he had been associated with the annual pilgrimage for 15 years.

“We have never treated yatris like outsiders invading the Valley. They are like family,” said the 55-year-old.

Akhel Kumar, a 23-year-old Delhi student, agrees. “We have no problem here. When my friend Abhishek and I decided to leave for the yatra, friends and relatives advised against it,” he said. “We faced problems in Jammu. Agitators threw stones on our vehicle at Samba and Kuthua. We thought the worst might be waiting in the Valley. But we are surprised to see the hospitality and generosity of the people here.”

On the way from his home state Chattisgarh, driver Anil Kumar’s Scorpio was stopped at several places in Jammu by protesters who asked him to go back. “At Samba some people hurled stones at us,” said Kumar (35). “But it is all calm once I reached the piece of land over which battles are being fought.”

Om Prakash Karlekar (45), a pilgrim from Maharashtra, termed the rioting over the yatra as a “political stunt”.

“This is disgusting. We must not be swayed by what is being said and done,” he said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=3357c363-d249-4420-8137-abda757d3691&ParentID=056d4aa2-5870-4f29-b2ff-1ab4dd19bbd7&MatchID1=4737&TeamID1=8&TeamID2=6&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1194&MatchID2=4728&TeamID3=2&TeamID4=3&MatchType2=1&SeriesID2=1191&PrimaryID=4737&Headline=Jammu+versus+Kashmir%3a+Reign+of+peace



Swapan Dasgupta
Identity crisis
10 Aug 2008, 0148 hrs IST, SWAPAN DASGUPTA

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Columnists/Identity_crisis/articleshow/3346990.cms
There is a facet of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir that is both puzzling and revealing: why did it take the government so long to begin talking to the protestors in Jammu?

Consider the facts. On July 31, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh invited the leader of Opposition L K Advani and Arun Jaitley for a discussion on internal security. After an anodyne exchange on terrorism, the prime minister requested the BJP to use its good offices to ensure that the 'blockade' of the highway to the Kashmir Valley is lifted. He had information that the separatists would use the disruption to press for accessing the Muzaffarabad road and demanding transit through Pakistan. This would create fresh complications and add an international dimension to the problem.

The prime minister's fears were warranted since this is precisely what the Hurriyat Conference leaders have begun demanding. Yet, for a full week, until the all-party meeting on August 6, the government sat back and watched the agitation in Jammu escalate steadily. At the all-party meeting too, the government's limited objective was to secure a unanimous resolution asking for the Jammu agitation to be called off. It was only after the BJP flatly refused that the government grudgingly agreed to begin a dialogue with the Sangharsh Samity spearheading the agitation.

Democracy is by definition quite tiresome. It involves constant engagement with saints, dreamers, rogues and normal people. In Jammu and Kashmir, successive governments have kept the door open for dialogue with even those who have questioned the state's inclusion in the Indian Union and supped with the ISI. The prime minister even travelled to Srinagar for a Round Table Conference which included the Hurriyat Conference - it is a separate matter the separatists didn't attend. So, why did the government hesitate to talk to those who have been on the streets for over a month, defying curfew, braving hardships and marching with the Indian tricolour? If the separatists are "our people", are the citizens of Jammu non-citizens?

The government's insensitivity arose from a mindset that has influenced official thinking, shaped the million-dollar conflict-resolution industry and permeated into the editorial classes. It was centred on the assumption that the Kashmir Valley was all that mattered in Jammu and Kashmir; Jammu and Ladakh were the loose ends that could be conveniently papered over. No one gave a damn when Ladakh protested against the demographic transformation and the threat to its identity and Jammu's long-standing complaints of discriminatory treatment were brushed aside with sneering condescension. All that mattered was the so-called 'hurt Kashmiri psyche' and Kashmiri 'alienation'. These labels of victimhood also became the cover for the most heinous political crime of independent India: the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley. Today, this shameful expulsion has become such a footnote that Hurriyat leaders can brazenly proclaim their 'secular' credentials on TV talk shows, while the voices of Pandit protest are rubbished with the disdain reserved for Praveen Togadia.

The protests in Jammu are only partially about the 40 acres of land given to the Amarnath Yatra Shrine Board and then taken away after the PDP and the separatists raised the bogey of a demographic invasion and an assault on Kashmiri identity. Imagine the outcry if a Haj Terminal is peremptorily denotified on 'cultural' grounds?

Having had their feelings trampled upon for so long, the people of Jammu are demanding the right to live with self-respect and dignity in a state where only separatist blackmail seem to matter. The protests are an assertion of political empowerment and a plea to the rest of India to give nationalism a place in Jammu and Kashmir. Simultaneously, it is a fitting rebuff to the mindset that deems Omar Abdullah's eloquent insensitivity in the Lok Sabha an iconic assertion of cosmopolitan modernity.

Express News ServiceInvoking Bapu and Ram, Advani, Rajnath raise Jammu pitch
Suman K JhaPosted online: Sunday, August 10, 2008 at 0029 hrs
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/346842.html

New Delhi, August 9: Hours before talks between the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti and the all-party delegation from New Delhi fell through, BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate L K Advani and party president Rajnath Singh affirmed their resolve to support the agitation for restoration of the land to the Amarnath shrine board.

“Our demand is supported by every believer — whether Hindus or Muslims — in the country,” Advani claimed. A 150-member Rashtrawadi Muslim Manch (an RSS affiliate) went to Jammu and Kashmir in solidarity with the demand only this week...This is India’s struggle, our party supports the Sangharsh Samiti charter in its fullest,” he said at a function here today.

“Like Gandhiji told the people of India ‘Do or Die’ today, you should also get ready to make sacrifices and struggle,” said Advani at a Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha function, coinciding with the Quit India anniversary.

BJP president Rajnath Singh, in keeping with his positioning for the last few months, played a hardliner to the hilt. “The BJP, born in 1980, is in the prime of youth

today. The Ram Lalla of Advaniji’s rath yatra, too, has entered His youth. The party is fully behind the Jammu agitation,” said the BJP president, reiterating the party’s commitment to “introduce POTA when it came to power”.

Hitting out at the Congress for what he called its “flawed secularism”, Advani said: “Secularism means respect for all religions; this doesn’t mean that Hindus be shown disrespect. Congress and some other parties think they can benefit politically by promoting an anti-Hindu mindset. This is evident in the recent developments in Kashmir. A similar anti-Hindu mindset was also evident in the Congress-led UPA Government’s approach towards the Ram Sethu issue...”

“It was essentially due to Shyama Prasad Mookerjee’s sacrifice that the Tricolour found the pride of place in the state (J&K),” Advani said. “Had he not made the supreme sacrifice, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed (and others like him) would not have become chief ministers there...The present crisis has revived the old issue of the state’s full integration with the rest of the country. Why should there be two systems (of governance) in one country?” he said.

“How can Kashmir’s identity be threatened by the erection of temporary structures on just 100 acres of land for provision of basic amenities, and that too for only two months in a year? And what is Kashmir’s identity? Isn’t Kashmir an integral part of India?” asked Advani.

J&K talks: No headway, curfew still on in Jammu
Zafar Iqbal
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Jammu)
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060828&ch=8/10/2008%208:47:00%20AM
Please be flexible so we can resolve this crisis," that was the message of the Home Minister Shivraj Patil to the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti which has been leading the protests in Jammu.
The Samiti has also called for a bandh in Jammu till August 14 and curfew has not been relaxed on Sunday.
A day-long deadlock over the J&K peace talks on Saturday was broken after Kashmiri leaders Mehbooba Mufti, Farooq Abdullah and Saifuddin Soz withdrew from the 18 member all-party delegation as per a condition set by the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti to attend the peace talks.
The Samiti accused these leaders of starting the whole Amarnath land row in the first place.
But the first round of talks didn't achieve much.
Leela Karan the Convenor of Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti speaking to NDTV on whether the J&K talks were inconclusive said that the discussions would continue as he wanted both sides to rethink their proposals. He also said that the agitation would continue.
Kashmiri leaders say they don't want to be an obstacle in the peace process but add that no resolution can be found without the involvement of the Kashmiris.
"The meeting will definitely take place. But if progress can be made, if we are out of the meeting, then we will not attend it," said Mehbooba Mufti, leader, PDP.
The Samiti wants revocation of the Amarnath land deal, a demand the government finds difficult to meet.
"They should be flexible in their stand and help us resolve the issue," said Shivraj Patel, the Home Minister.
Forcing the Kashmiri leaders out of the delegation is the first victory of the Amarnath Yatra Sangharsh Samiti, but how they achieve their real objective will also be determined by how powerfully they put their point of view and what the government decides at the end of the day.
J&K row harks back to S P Mukherjee days: Advani
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (New Delhi)
Comparing the present agitation in Jammu over the Amarnath issue to the protest launched by Jana Sangh ideologue Shyama Prasad Mukherjee 55 years ago for cancelling the "visa" system for those visiting Jammu and Kashmir, BJP leader L K Advani on Sunday said "we have turned a full circle".
"Shyama Prasad Mukherjee had promised the people during that agitation that he would either get the permit system abolished or sacrifice his life ... Today (after the Amarnath agitation) we seem to have turned a full circle," Advani said.
He was speaking at a function to release the special issue of a children's magazine dedicated to former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.
Criticising the forces opposed to allotment of land for Amarnath pilgrims, Advani said, "They say how can you give land to outsiders in Kashmir... Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and whoever raises questions about this issue will have to pay for it."
Advani praised Mukherjee for his agitation which led to the abolition of the permit system for those entering Jammu and Kashmir.
"Mukherjee died two years after forming the Bharatiya Jan Sangh under mysterious circumstances. This party had to undergo several tribulations to reach this stage," he said.
Gen Sinha castigates PDP, media
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Chandigarh)
Former J&K Governor Lt Gen (retd) S K Sinha on Sunday took on the PDP for its so-called anti-national role while blaming the media for "misleading and misinforming" the public on the sensitive Amarnath land row.
Alleging that Mufti Mohammed Sayeed was opposed to the length of the annual pilgrimage to the cave shrine, Sinha said the former Chief Minister and PDP patron placed prefabricated structures along the Baltal route and continuously resisted his work as chairman of Shri Amarnath Shrine Board.
In his 90-minute keynote address at a seminar on "Shri Amarnath Land Transfer -- Implications of Revocation" organised in Chandigarh by the Forum on Integrated National Security, Sinha blamed the media, too, for its irresponsible coverage of the issue.
"I can understand the Valley press being prejudiced and engaging in yellow journalism but the national media has been misleading public opinion on this issue which is a matter of great concern," he said.
Sinha said vested interests are trying to portray the decision of land transfer to SASB as one made by him "whereas the truth is that the state cabinet in May this year had unanimously approved of land being given to the Board."
Separatists are whipping up the sentiments of Kashmiri citizens against the transfer, he said, by projecting it as a step to facilitate permanent settlement of Hindus and one that could potentially change the demography of the Valley.
Sinha also blamed the Centre for going into an "overdrive" with its "appeasement policy and hurried revoking of the order."
Meanwhile, in New Delhi RJD chief Lalu Prasad blamed Sinha for the ugly turn to the Amarnath land transfer issue.
"Sinha is in the root of all this problem. He should not have been made the Governor," said Prasad, speaking on the sidelines of the first national executive meeting of the Youth RJD.
Echoing the LJP chief Ram Vilas Paswan's earlier comments, Prasad said that the Press Conference by Sinha's personal secretary in which it was said that the land was transferred triggered off the controversy.
Charging the BJP with communalising the issue, Prasad said that BJP is anxious for the Prime Ministership and party leader Lal Krishna Advani is raising the issue with this purpose alone.
"Once again Rama is suiting BJP. They are raising the issue to become the PM," said Prasad charging BJP with spreading "communal virus."
Arguing that local Muslims always cooperated in the pilgrimage, he said that there has been no obstruction to it.
Yaseen Malik ends fast on PM's request
Press Trust of India
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (Srinagar)
Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) Mohammad Yaseen Malik on Sunday ended his six-day-long fast unto death following a message from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh requesting him to end the fast.
Malik, who had refused to cooperate with doctors and even declined to take medicines orally, took a glass of juice from the mother of one of the youths, Asif Mehraj, who was killed in police action while protesting against the economic blockade of the Valley at Maisuma on Monday, in presence of the Divisional Commissioner and Kashmir police chief.
"I take the word of the Prime Minister seriously. I don't doubt the credentials of the Prime Minister who is a very good human being. I am hopeful that his words would be translated into practice," Malik said after breaking his fast.
Malik, who was admitted in Soura Medical Institute on Thursday after his condition deteriorated, ended his fast around 4.30 pm when Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, Masud Samoon and Inspector General of Police, Kashmir, S M Sahai visited him and read out the Prime Minister's message.
"We will monitor the situation for a month and take necessary action if the government promise is not kept," he said
Amarnath row: New J&K peace formula mooted
NDTV Correspondent
Sunday, August 10, 2008, (New Delhi)
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060899&ch=633539982682842500
There is a new peace proposal that could break the Amarnath deadlock.
Sources told NDTV that according to the proposal, all the controversial decisions that led to the flare up will be cancelled including the Cabinet decision transferring land to the Amarnath Shrine Board and also the decision revoking that order.
In their place the old high court order will continue to operate. This order asks the government to safeguard the Yatris' interests.
The big question, however is, will the Amarnath Sangharsh Samiti accept this formula? The BJP hopes it will, but it seems clear the Hurriyat won't agree to it.
Meanwhile in Delhi, the leader of the Opposition L K Advani has hit out at those who, what he says, are challenging the identity of Jammu and Kashmir.
"The issue is not about Amarnath. It's not about a shrine. They didn't have a problem when land was allotted to Vaishno Devi temple in Jammu. But they are opposing the transfer of land in Kashmir. Every Indian has right to every inch of land in India. Nobody can deny that right. And if some people try to resist, it is not a small thing. They are questioning the identity of J&K. They are challenging the Constitutional fact that J&K is an integral part of India. Therefore, we will oppose their move with all our might and we will win," said L K Advani, Leader of the Opposition.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/south_asia/2002/kashmir_flashpoint/default.stm

Page last updated at 16:56 GMT, Thursday, 7 August 2008 17:56 UK
S Asia rivals sign security deals
India and Pakistan sign two security co-operation accords during talks between their foreign ministers.





OTHER TOP STORIES


Pakistan 'controls terror flow'

Families' mercy needed for 'spy'

Tears of joy as prisoners return

India 'will cut' Kashmir troops

Row over Kashmiri Pakistan visit

Kashmir leaders to visit Pakistan

Second Kashmir buses arrive safe


Kashmir voices
Personal perspectives from Indian-administered Kashmir
Kashmir options
Maps showing the options and pitfalls of possible solutions
Kashmir
Key questions about the conflict answered



DESPATCHES


Why Kashmir's bus matters

How will the new bus service affect the peace process?


Witnessing a piece of history

Where are Pakistan militants?

Mixed views over bus service

History of a troubled road

Hopes of divided families
BACKGROUND


Roots of the crisis

Victoria Schofield, author of Kashmir in Conflict, explains how the dispute began.


Who are the Kashmir militants?

South Asia's high nuclear stakes

Kashmir's forgotten plebiscite

Contentious Line of Control



PROFILES


Lashkar-e-Toiba

Pakistan-based group fighting against Indian control.


Profile: President Pervez Musharraf

Manmohan Singh

Country profile: India

Country profile: Pakistan



Military balance
How the armed forces of India and Pakistan compare
Timeline
A guide to the troubled relations between India and Pakistan

NEWS FOR YOUR REGION
BBCUrdu.com

BBCHindi.com


Kashmir conflict
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Kashmir dispute)
Jump to: navigation, search


The disputed areas of the region of Kashmir. India claims the entire erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir based on an instrument of accession signed in 1947. Pakistan claims all areas of the erstwhile state except for those claimed by China. China claims the Shaksam Valley and Aksai Chin.


Page 1, The Treaty of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir) to the Union of India signed on 26 October 1947, and accepted the following day which shows Maharaja Hari Singh's accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India


Page 2, Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir), with signatures of Maharaja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir, and Viscount Mountbatten of Burma, Governor-General of India.
The Kashmir conflict refers to the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan (and between India and the People's Republic of China) over Kashmir, the northwesternmost region of the Indian subcontinent.

India claims the entire erstwhile Dogra princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and presently administers approximately half the region including most of Jammu, Kashmir Valley, Ladakh and the Siachen Glacier. India's claim is contested by Pakistan which controls a third of Kashmir, mainly Azad Kashmir and the northern areas of Gilgit and Baltistan. The Kashmiri region under Chinese control is known as Aksai Chin. In addition, China also controls the Trans-Karakoram Tract, also known as the Shaksam Valley, that was ceded to it by Pakistan in 1963.

The official stated stance of India is that Kashmir is an "integral part" of India, while the official stated stance of Pakistan is that Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status can only be determined by the Kashmiri people.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir: in 1947, 1965, and 1999. India and China have clashed once, in 1962 over Aksai Chin as well as the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. India and Pakistan have also been involved in several skirmishes over Siachen Glacier. Since the 1990s, the Indian state of Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir has been hit by confrontation between Kashmiri separatists, including militants whom India alleges are supported by Pakistan, and the Indian Armed Forces, which has resulted in thousands of deaths[1].

Contents
[hide]
1 Partition, dispute and war
2 Timeline
2.1 Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
2.2 Sino-Indian War
2.3 1965 and 1971 wars
3 Rise of militancy
3.1 Cross-border troubles
3.2 Human rights abuse
4 Reasons behind the dispute
5 Indian view
6 Pakistani view
7 Water dispute
8 Map issues
9 Recent developments
9.1 Conflict in Kargil
9.2 Efforts to end the crisis
10 Recent events
11 See also
12 Further reading
13 References
14 External links



[edit] Partition, dispute and war


A map of the Kashmir region showing the boundaries of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir in red.


The Instrument of Accession of Kashmir to India was accepted by Viceroy Lord Mountbatten
In 1935, British rulers compelled the Dogra King of Jammu and Kashmir to lease parts of his kingdom, which were to make up the new Province of the North-West Frontier, for 60 years. This move was designed to strengthen the northern boundaries, especially from Russia.

In 1947, the British dominion of India came to an end with the creation of two new nations, India and Pakistan. Each of the 562 Indian princely states joined one of the two new nations: the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir had a predominantly Muslim population but a Hindu ruler, and was the largest of these autonomous states and bordered both modern countries. Its ruler was the Dogra King (or Maharaja) Hari Singh. Hari Singh preferred to remain independent and sought to avoid the stress placed on him by either India and Pakistan by playing each against the other.

In October 1947, Pakistani tribals from Dir entered Kashmir with the hope to liberate it from Dogra rule. The state forces were not able to withstand the invasion and the Maharaja signed The Instrument of Accession that was accepted by the Indian National Congress on October 27, 1947.


[edit] Timeline
The following is a timeline of the Kashmir conflict.

Spring, 1947: Protests against the Maharaja's taxation policies turn into a rebellion against Dogra rule in the district of Poonch. The revolt spreads to Mirpur and Muzaffarabad districts.[2][3]
August-October, 1947: Communal riots break out in the Jammu region of the state; an estimated 200,000 Muslims are killed and much of the remaining population flees to Pakistan.[2]
August 15, 1947: Independence and partition of British India into India and Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir does not decide which dominion to join.[4]
October 3, 1947: Pro-Pakistan chieftains from the districts of Poonch, Mirpur, and Muzaffarabad declare independence from Dogra rule, and announce the formation of a provisional "Azad" (free) Jammu and Kashmir government at Rawalpindi, Pakistan.[3]
October 17, 1947: Patiala state forces enter Jammu & Kashmir to aid the Maharaja in his campaign against the separatists.[5]
October 22, 1947: Pashtuns from Pakistan's North West Frontier Province, backed by Pakistani army, invade Kashmir. Maharaja of Kashmir asks India for help.[6]
1947/1948: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 commences. Indian troops enter Srinagar.
1965: Pakistan launches Operation Gibralter which leads to Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.
December 6, 1971: Indo-Pakistani War of 1971; Secession of East Bangla
1972: Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan agree to respect the cease-fire as Line of Control.
April 13, 1984: The Indian Army takes Siachen Glacier region of Kashmir.
May, 1987: As a result of an agreement between Rajiv Gandhi and Farooq Abdullah, elections for the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly are blatantly fixed in favor of the National Conference, resulting in widespread unrest in the state.[7][8][9]
1989: Armed militancy begins in Kashmir.
February 5, 1990: First Solidarity day is observed throughout Pakistan and Azad Kashmir for the alleged massacres by Indian armed forces.[10]
May 1999: Intrusion of Pakistan-backed militants into Indian-Kashmir. Kargil War commences.
March 20, 2000: Murder of 35 Sikhs by the Islamic Fundamentalist militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba called the Chittisinghpura massacre.
July 14-16, 2001: General Pervez Musharraf and Atal Behari Vajpayee meet for peace talks.
October 2001: Jammu and Kashmir state assembly in Srinagar attacked.
December 2001: Attack on Indian parliament in New Delhi by Kashmiri militants resulting in 2001-2002 India-Pakistan standoff.
May 2, 2003: India and Pakistan restore diplomatic ties.
July 11, 2003: Delhi-Lahore bus service resumes
November 2003: Indo-Pakistan cease-fire is declared.[11]
September 24, 2004: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Musharraf meet in New York during UN General Assembly.
July, 2006 : Second round of Indo-Pakistani peace talks.

[edit] Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947
The irregular Pakistani tribals made rapid advances into Kashmir (Baramulla sector) after the rumours that the Maharaja was going to decide for the union with India. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir asked the Government of India to intervene. However, the Government of India pointed out that India and Pakistan had signed an agreement of non-intervention (maintenance of the status quo) in Jammu and Kashmir; and although tribal fighters from Pakistan had entered Jammu and Kashmir, there was, until then, no iron-clad legal evidence to unequivocally prove that the Government of Pakistan was officially involved. It would have been illegal for India to unilaterally intervene (in an open, official capacity) unless Jammu and Kashmir officially joined the Union of India, at which point it would be possible to send in its forces and occupy the remaining parts.

The Maharaja desperately needed the Indian military's help when the Pathan tribal invaders reached the outskirts of Srinagar. Before their arrival into Srinagar, India argues that Maharaja Hari Singh completed negotiations for acceding Jammu and Kashmir to India in exchange for receiving military aid. The agreement which ceded Jammu and Kashmir to India was signed by the Maharaja and Lord Mountbatten.[2]

The resulting war over Kashmir, the First Kashmir War, lasted until 1948, when India moved the issue to the UN Security Council. The UN previously had passed resolutions setting up for the monitoring of the conflict in Kashmir. The committee it set up was called the United Nations Committee for India and Pakistan. Following the set up of the UNCIP the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on April 21, 1948. The resolution imposed that an immediate cease-fire take place and said that Pakistan should withdraw all presence and had no say in Jammu and Kashmir politics. It stated that India should retain a minimum military presence and stated "that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations". The cease fire took place December 31, 1948.

At that time, the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite but Pakistan did not withdraw it's troops from Kashmir thus violating the condition for holding the plebiscite. Over the next several years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region, per the recommendations of General Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarization of the region - every one of which was accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.[12]


[edit] Sino-Indian War
Main article: Sino-Indian War
In 1962, troops from the People's Republic of China and India clashed in territory claimed by both. China won a swift victory in the war, resulting in the Chinese administration of the region called Aksai Chin, which continues to date. In addition to these lands, another smaller area, the Trans-Karakoram, was demarcated as the line of control between China and Pakistan, although parts on the Chinese side are claimed by India to be parts of Kashmir. The line that separates India from China in this region is known as the Line of Actual Control. [3]


[edit] 1965 and 1971 wars
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1965
Main article: Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
In 1965 and 1971, heavy fighting again broke out between India and Pakistan. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 resulted in the defeat of Pakistan and Pakistan Military's surrender in East Pakistan (Bangladesh). The Simla Agreement was signed in 1972 between India and Pakistan. By this treaty, both countries agreed to settle all issues by peaceful means and mutual discussions in the framework of the UN Charter.


[edit] Rise of militancy
Main article: Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
In 1989, a widespread armed insurgency started in Kashmir, which continues to this day. India contends that this was largely started by the large number of Afghan mujahideen who entered the Kashmir valley following the end of the Soviet-Afghan War, though Pakistan and Kashmiri nationalists argue that Afghan mujahideen did not leave Afghanistan in large numbers until 1992, three years after the insurgency began.[13] Yasin Malik, a leader of one faction of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front,along with Ashfaq Majid Wani and Bitta Karate, was one of the Kashmiris to organize militancy in Kashmir. However since 1995, Malik has renounced the use of violence and calls for strictly peaceful methods to resolve the dispute.He developed differences with one of the senior leader farooq papa for shunning the demand for independent Kashmir and trying to cut a deal with Indian Prime Minister resulting in spilt in which Bitta Karete Salim nanaji and other senior comrades joined Farooq papa.(see Praveen Swami; PMO in secret talks with secessionists.[4] [5] [14]

Pakistan claims these insurgents are Jammu and Kashmir citizens, and they are rising up against the Indian Army in an independence movement. It also says the Indian Army is committing serious human rights violations to the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. It denies that it is giving armed help to the insurgents. India claims these insurgents are Islamic terrorist groups from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Afghanistan, fighting to make Jammu and Kashmir part of Pakistan. It believes Pakistan is giving armed help to the terrorists, and training them in Pakistan. It also says the terrorists have been killing many citizens in Kashmir, and committing human rights violations, while denying that its own armed forces are responsible for the human rights abuses.

The Pakistani government calls these insurgents, "Kashmiri freedom fighters", and claims that it gives only moral and diplomatic support to these insurgents, though India [15] believes they are Pakistan-supported terrorists from Pakistan Administered Kashmir.


[edit] Cross-border troubles
The border and the Line of Control separating Indian and Pakistani Kashmir passes through some exceptionally difficult terrain. The world's highest battleground, the Siachen Glacier is a part of this difficult-to-man boundary. Even with 200,000 military personnel, [6] India maintains that it is infeasible to place enough men to guard all sections of the border throughout the various seasons of the year. Pakistan has indirectly acquiesced its role in failing to prevent "cross border terrorism" when it agreed to curb such activities [7] after intense pressure from the Bush administration in mid 2002.[8]

The Government of Pakistan has repeatedly claimed that by constructing a fence along the line of control, India is violating the Shimla Accord. However, India claims the construction of the fence has helped decrease armed infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir.

In 2002 Pakistani President and Army Chief General Pervez Musharraf promised to check infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir.


[edit] Human rights abuse
Claims of human rights abuses have been made concerning on both the Indian Armed Forces and the armed militants operating in Jammu and Kashmir. [9]. A 2005 study conducted by Médecins Sans Frontières found that Kashmiri women are among the worst sufferers of sexual violence in the world, with 11.6% of respondents reporting that they had been victims of sexual abuse.[16] Some surveys have found that in the Kashmir region itself (where the bulk of separatist and Indian military activity is concentrated), popular perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups. According to the MORI survey of 2002, in Kashmir only 2% of respondents believed that the militant groups were guilty of widespread human rights abuses, while 64% believed that Indian troops were guilty of the same. This trend was reversed however in other parts of the state.[17]


[edit] Reasons behind the dispute
Ever since the Partition of India in 1947, both India and Pakistan have staked their claim to Kashmir. These claims are centred on historical incidents and on religious affiliations of the Kashmiri people. The whole Kashmir issue has caused longstanding enmity between post-Colonial India and newly created Muslim Pakistan. It arose as a direct consequence of the partition and independence of the Indian subcontinent in August 1947. The state of Jammu and Kashmir, which lies strategically in the Northwest of the subcontinent, bordering China and the former Soviet Union, was a princely state ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh. In geographical terms, the Maharaja could have joined either of the two new Dominions. Although urged by the Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, to determine the future of his state before the transfer of power took place, Hari Singh demurred.

Kashmir remains bitterly divided on the ground; two-thirds of it (known as the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir) compromising Jammu, the Valley of Kashmir and the sparsely populated Buddhist area of Ladakh are controlled by India; one-third is administered by Pakistan. This area includes a narrow strip of land (Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas) compromising the Gilgit Agency, and Baltistan and the former kingdoms of Hunza and Nagar. Attempts to resolve the 'core issue' through political discussion were unsuccessful. In September 1965 war broke out again between Islamabad and Delhi. The United Nations called for a yet another cease-fire and peace was restored once again following the Tashkent Declaration in 1966, by which both nations returned to their original positions along the demarcated line. After the 1971 war and the creation of independent Bangladesh under the terms of the 1972 Simla Agreement, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan agreed that neither side would seek to alter the cease-fire line in Kashmir, which was renamed as the Line of Control, "unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations".

Numerous violations of the Line of Control including the infamous incursions by insurgents and Pakistani armed forces at Kargil which led to the Kargil war as well as sporadic clashes on the Siachen Glacier where both countries maintain forces at altitudes rising to 20,000 ft, add to concern for the stability of the hostile region.


[edit] Indian view
The Indian claim to Kashmir centers on the agreement between the Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Lord Mountbatten according to which the erstwhile Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir became an integral part of the Union of India through the Instrument of Accession. It also focuses on India's claim of secular society, an ideology that is not meant to factor religion into governance of major policy and thus considers it irrelevant in a boundary dispute. Another argument by India is that, in India, minorities are very well integrated, with some members of the minority communities holding positions of power and influence in India. Even though more than 80% of India's population practices Hinduism, a former President of India, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, is a Muslim while Sonia Gandhi, the parliamentary leader of the ruling Congress Party, is a Roman Catholic. The current prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, is a Sikh and leader of opposition, Lal Krishna Advani, is a Hindu.

In short, India holds that,

For the UN Resolution mandating a plebiscite to be valid, Pakistan should first vacate its part of Kashmir.
The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Maharaja's instrument of Accession to India and had adopted a constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of the state with the Indian Union. India claims that this body was a representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri people at the time.
India does not accept the Two Nation Theory that forms the basis of Pakistan.
India asserts that Kashmir being a religiously diverse region with a large number of Hindus and Buddhists, the region under a non secular Islamic Nation Pakistan is against the secular credentials of Kashmir. India points at the religious cleansing of the minorities in Pakistan after the independence.
The state of Jammu and Kashmir was made autonomous by the Article 370 of the Constitution of India, though this autonomy has since been reduced
India also points to an opinion poll held in Jammu and Kashmir that most of the Muslims living in the Kashmir valley do not want Kashmir to be a part of Pakistan.[18]
India alleges that most of the terrorists operating in Kashmir are themselves from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and that Pakistan has been involved in state sponsored terrorism.[19]
India states that despite Pakistan being named as an "Islamic Republic", India accuses Pakistan of being responsible for one of the worst genocide of Muslims when it allegedly killed millions of its own countrymen in East Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities.
India also points to articles and US reports[20] which suggest that the terrorists are funded mostly by Pakistan as well as through criminal means like from the illegal sale of arms and narcotics as well as through circulating counterfeit currency in India.

[edit] Pakistani view
Pakistan's claims to the disputed region are based on the rejection of Indian claims to Kashmir, namely the Instrument of Accession. Pakistan insists that the Maharaja was not a popular leader, and was regarded as a tyrant by most Kashmiris. Pakistan also accuses India of hypocrisy, as it refused to recognize the accession of Junagadh to Pakistan and Hyderabad's independence, on the grounds that those two states had Hindu majorities (in fact, India occupied and forcibly integrated those two territories). Furthermore, as he had fled Kashmir due to Pakistani invasion, Pakistan asserts that the Maharaja held no authority in determining Kashmir's future. Additionally, Pakistan argues that even if the Maharaja had any authority in determining the plight of Kashmir, he signed the Instrument of Accession under duress, thus invalidating the legitimacy of his actions.

Pakistan also claims that Indian forces were in Kashmir before the Instrument of Accession was signed with India, thus, Indian troops were in Kashmir in violation of the Standstill Agreement, which was designed to maintain the status quo in Kashmir (although India was not signatory to the Agreement, signed between Pakistan and the Hindu ruler of Jammu and Kashmir). [21][22].

From 1990 to 1999 some organizations report that Indian Armed Forces, its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent militias have been responsible for the deaths 4,501 of Kashmiri civilians. Also from 1990 to 1999, there have are records of 4,242 women between the ages of 7-70 that have been raped.[23][24]. Similar allegations were also made by some human rights organizations.[25]

In short, Pakistan holds that

The popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrates that the Kashmiri people no longer wish to remain within India. Pakistan suggests that this means that either Kashmir wants to be with Pakistan or independent.
Indian counterinsurgency tactics merit international monitoring of the Kashmir conflict, and the Indian Army has carried out human rights violations - including torture, rape and extrajudicial killings - against the Kashmiri people.
According to the two-nation theory by which Pakistan was formed, Kashmir should have been with Pakistan, because it has a Muslim majority. The "K" in Pakistan stands for Kashmir.
India has shown disregard to the resolutions of the UN (by not holding a plebiscite).
The Kashmiri people have now been forced by the circumstances to rise against the alleged repression of the Indian army and uphold their right of self-determination through militancy. Pakistan claims to give the Kashmiri insurgents moral, ethical and military support (see 1999 Kargil Conflict).

[edit] Water dispute
Another reason behind the dispute over Kashmir is water. Kashmir is the origin point for many rivers and tributaries of the Indus River basin. They include Jhelum and Chenab which primarily flow into Pakistan while other branches - the Ravi, Beas and the Sutlej irrigate northern India. Pakistan has been apprehensive that in a dire need India under whose portion of Kashmir lies the origins and passage of the said rivers, would use its strategic advantage and withhold the flow and thus choke the agrarian economy of Pakistan. The Boundary Award of 1947 meant that the headworks of the chief irrigation systems of Pakistan were left located in Indian Territory. The Indus Waters Treaty signed in 1960 resolved most of these disputes over the sharing of water, calling for mutual cooperation in this regard. This treaty faced issues raised by Pakistan over the illegal construction of dams on the Indian side which limit water to the Pakistani side.


[edit] Map issues
As with other disputed territories, each government issues maps depicting their claims in Kashmir as part of their territory, regardless of actual control. It is illegal in India to exclude all or part of Kashmir in a map. It is also illegal in Pakistan not to include the state of Jammu and Kashmir as disputed territory, as permitted by the U.N. Non-participants often use the Line of Control and the Line of Actual Control as the depicted boundaries, as is done in the CIA World Factbook, and the region is often marked out in hashmarks, although the Indian government strictly opposes such practices. When Microsoft released a map in Windows 95 and MapPoint 2002, a controversy was raised because it did not show all of Kashmir as part of India as per Indian claim. However, all the neutral and Pakistani companies claim to follow UN's map and over 90% of all maps containing the territory of Kashmir show it as disputed territory.[10]

Sources from:

UN: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. Dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control of Jammu and Kashmir agreed upon by the Republic of India and the Government of Pakistan since 1972. Both the parties have not yet agreed upon the final status of the region and nothing significant has been implemented since the peace process began in 2004.

Islamabad: The Government of Pakistan maintains un-provisionally and unconditionally stating that the formal "Accession of Jammu and Kashmir" to Pakistan or even to the Republic of India remains to be decided by UN plebiscite.It accepts UN's map of the territory.[citation needed]

New Delhi: The Government of India states that "the external artificial boundaries of India, especially concerning the Kashmir region under its jurisdiction created by a foreign body are neither correct nor authenticated".[citation needed]


[edit] Recent developments
India continues to assert their sovereignty or rights over the entire region of Kashmir, while Pakistan maintains that it is a disputed territory. Pakistan argues that the status quo cannot be considered as a solution. Pakistan insists on a UN sponsored plebiscite . Unofficially, the Pakistani leadership has indicated that they would be willing to accept alternatives such as a demilitarized Kashmir, if sovereignty of Azad Kashmir was to be extended over the Kashmir valley, or the ‘Chenab’ formula, by which India would retain parts of Kashmir on its side of the Chenab river, and Pakistan the other side - effectively re-partioning Kashmir on communal lines. The problem however is that the Population of Pakistan Administered portion of Kashmir is both ethnically and linguistically and culturally different from that in Kashmir Valley India. The Azad Kashmir population being on the most part ethnic Punjabis. Therefore a Partition on the Chenab formula is opposed by most Kashmiri politicians from all spectrums, though some, such as Sajjad Lone, have in recent months suggested that non-Muslim part of Jammu and Kashmir be separated from Kashmir and handed to India. Some political analysts say that the Pakistan terrorist state policy shift and mellowing down of its aggressive stance may have to do with its total failure in the Kargil War and the subsequent 9/11 attacks that put pressure on Pakistan to alter its terrorist position.[26] Further many neutral parties to the dispute have noted that UN resolution on Kashmir is no longer relevant.[27] Even the European Union has viewed that the plebiscite is not in Kashmiris' interest.[28] The report also notes, that the UN-laid down conditions for such a plebiscite have not been, and can no longer be, met by Pakistan.[29] Even the Hurriyat Conference observed in 2003, that "Plebiscite no longer an option"[30] Besides the popular factions that support either parties, there is a third faction which supports independence and withdrawal of both India and Pakistan. These have been the respective stands of the parties for long, and there have been no significant change over the years. As a result, all efforts to solve the conflict have been futile so far.

The Freedom in the World 2006 report categorized the Indian-administered Kashmir as "partly free", and Pakistan-administered Kashmir as well as the country of Pakistan "not free". [11] India claims that contrary to popular belief, a large proportion of the Jammu and Kashmir populace wish to remain with India. In a 2002 survey by MORI in the Indian administered areas around 61% of the respondents said they felt they would be better off politically and economically as an Indian citizen, with only 6% preferring Pakistan instead. [31] However, it is important to note that the same MORI survey found that within the Kashmir Valley, only 9% of respondents said they felt they would be better off as Indian citizens, with 13% preferring Pakistan, and the remaining 78% showing no enthusiasm for either nation.[32][33] According to a 2007 poll conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies in New Delhi, 87% of respondents in the Kashmir Valley prefer independence over union with India or Pakistan.[34]


[edit] Conflict in Kargil
Main article: Kargil War


Location of conflict.
In mid-1999 insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir infiltrated into Jammu and Kashmir. During the winter season, Indian forces regularly move down to lower altitudes as severe climatic conditions makes it almost impossible for them to guard the high peaks near the Line of Control. The insurgents took advantage of this and occupied vacant mountain peaks of the Kargil range overlooking the highway in Indian Kashmir, connecting Srinagar and Leh. By blocking the highway, they wanted to cut-off the only link between the Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a high-scale conflict between the Indian Army and the Pakistan Army.

At the same time, fears of the Kargil War turning into a nuclear war, provoked the then-US President Bill Clinton to pressure Pakistan to retreat. Faced with mounting losses of personnel and posts, Pakistan Army withdrew the remaining troops from the area ending the conflict. India reclaimed control of the peaks which they now patrol and monitor all year long.


[edit] Efforts to end the crisis
The 9/11 attacks on the US resulted in the US government wanting to restrain militancy in the world, including Pakistan. Due to Indian persuasion on US Congress Members, the US urged Islamabad to cease infiltrations, which continue to this day, by Islamist militants into Indian-administered Kashmir. In December 2001, a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament linked to Pakistan resulted in war threats, massive deployment and international fears of nuclear war in the subcontinent.

After intensive diplomatic efforts by other countries, India and Pakistan began to withdraw troops from the international border June 10, 2002, and negotiations began again.[citation needed] Effective November 26, 2003, India and Pakistan have agreed to maintain a ceasefire along the undisputed International Border, the disputed Line of Control, and the Siachen glacier. This is the first such "total ceasefire" declared by both nuclear powers in nearly 15 years. In February 2004, Pakistan further increased pressure on Pakistanis fighting in Indian-administered Kashmir to adhere to the ceasefire. The nuclear-armed neighbours also launched several other mutual confidence building measures. Restarting the bus service between the Indian- and Pakistani- administered Kashmir has helped defuse the tensions between the countries. Both India and Pakistan have also decided to cooperate on economic fronts.

On Dec. 5, 2006, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf told an Indian TV channel that Pakistan would give up its claim on Kashmir if India accepted some of his peace proposals, including a phased withdrawal of troops, self-governance for locals, no changes in the borders of Kashmir, and a joint supervision mechanism involving India, Pakistan and Kashmir, the BBC reported[12]. Musharraf also stated that he was ready to give up the United Nation resolutions regarding Kashmir [13].


[edit] Recent events
The 2005 Kashmir earthquake, which killed over 80,000 people, led to India and Pakistan finalizing negotiations for the opening of a road for disaster relief through Kashmir.

In the week of March 10, 2008, 17 people were wounded when a blast hit the region's only highway overpass located near the Civil Secretariat -- Indian-controlled Kashmir's seat of government -- and the region's high court. A gun battle between security forces and militants fighting against Indian rule left five people dead and two others injured March 23, 2008. The battle began when security forces raided a house on the outskirts of the capital city of Srinagar. The Indian Army has been carrying out search-and-cordon operations against militants in Indian-administered Kashmir since the current armed violence broke out here in 1989. While the authorities here say 43,000 persons have been killed in the violence, various rights groups and non-governmental organizations have put the figure at twice that number. [14]


[edit] See also
List of topics on the land and the people of Jammu and Kashmir
History of Jammu and Kashmir
Timeline of the Kashmir conflict
Kashmiriyat - a socio-cultural ethos of religious harmony and Kashmiri consciousness.
Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir) to the Country / Dominion of India
Indo-Pakistani Wars
Trans-Karakoram Tract
Aksai Chin
Kargil War or the Indo-Pakistani War of 1999
LOC Kargil, a 2003 Bollywood war film based on "Kargil War"
Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
Indian Kashmir barrier

[edit] Further reading
Drew, Federic. 1877. “The Northern Barrier of India: a popular account of the Jammoo and Kashmir Territories with Illustrations.&;#8221; 1st edition: Edward Stanford, London. Reprint: Light & Life Publishers, Jammu. 1971.
Dr. Ijaz Hussain, 1998, Kashmir Dispute: An International Law Perspective, National Institute of Pakistan Studies
Alastair Lamb, Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1846-1990 (Hertingfordbury, Herts: Roxford Books, 1991)
Kashmir Study Group, 1947-1997, the Kashmir dispute at fifty : charting paths to peace (New York, 1997)
Jaspreet Singh, Seventeen Tomatoes -- an unprecedented look inside the world of an army camp in Kashmir (Vehicule Press; Montreal, Canada, 2004)
Navnita Behera, State, identity and violence : Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh (New Delhi: Manohar, 2000)
Sumit Ganguly, The Crisis in Kashmir (Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press; Cambridge : Cambridge U.P., 1997)
Sumantra Bose, The challenge in Kashmir : democracy, self-determination and a just peace (New Delhi: Sage, 1997)
Robert Johnson, 'A Region in Turmoil' (London and New York, Reaktion, 2005)
Hans Köchler, The Kashmir Problem between Law and Realpolitik. Reflections on a Negotiated Settlement. Keynote speech delivered at the "Global Discourse on Kashmir 2008." European Parliament, Brussels, 1 April 2008.
Prem Shankar Jha, Kashmir, 1947: rival versions of history (New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 1996)
Manoj Joshi, The Lost Rebellion (New Delhi: Penguin India, 1999)
Alexander Evans, Why Peace Won't Come to Kashmir, Current History (Vol 100, No 645) April 2001 p170-175.
Younghusband, Francis and Molyneux, E. 1917. Kashmir. A. & C. Black, London.
Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in Conflict I.B. Tauris, London.
Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in the Crossfire, I.B. Tauris, London.
Muhammad Ayub, An Army; Its Role & Rule (A History of the Pakistan Army from Independence to Kargil 1947-1999). Rosedog Books,Pittsburgh,pennsylvnia USA.2005.ISBN 0-8059-9594-3

[edit] References
The references used in this article may be clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking.

^ A Good Voice Silenced: Kashmir's Loss Is Also Mine
^ a b Schofield, Victoria. 2003. Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War. I.B.Tauris. Pages 41-43
^ a b Bose, Sumantra. 2005. Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace. Harvard University Press. Pages 32-33.
^ BBC NEWS | India Pakistan | Timeline
^ Wirsing, Robert. 1994. India, Pakistan, and the Kashmir Dispute: On Regional Conflict and Its Resolution. Macmillian. Pages 50-51.
^ Stein, Burton. 1998. A History of India. Oxford University Press. 432 pages. ISBN 0195654463. Page 368.
^ Akbar, MJ. Exerting Moral Force. "Time Magazine," September 30, 2002.
^ Ganguly, Sumit. Explaining the Kashmir Insurgency: Political Mobilization and Institutional Decay. "International Security," vol. 21, no. 2.
^ Behind the Kashmir Conflict. "Human Rights Watch," 1999.
^ http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080206/j&k.htm#7 Kashmir Solidarity Day in Pak now a subdued ritual
^ India and Pakistan cease-fire holds in Kashmir
^ India Grabs It. Time Magazine, February 4, 1957.
^ Timeline of the conflict - BBC
^ "Interview: "I have never been on Pakistan's 'favoured guests' list"", Newsline (2005-01-01). Retrieved on 2006-07-27.
^ FBI has images of terror camp in Pak
^ Wailing Woes
^ Kashmiris Reject War In Favour Of Democratic Means
^ Exerting Moral Force - TIME
^ US panel raps Pakistan cross-border terrorism
^ [1] US Embassy
^ BBC NEWS | South Asia | Kashmir: The origins of the dispute
^ Ministry of Foreign Affairs
^ Cry and Anguish for Freedom in Kashmir (by Anver Suliman) - Media Monitors Network
^ Conflict Rape Victims: Abandoned And Forgotten By Syed Junaid Hashmi
^ Human Rights Watch World Report 2001: India: Human Rights Developments
^ Pakistan’s Kashmir Policy after the Bush Visit to South Asia Strategic Insights Volume V, Issue 4 (April 2006) by Peter R. Lavoy
^ Kickstart Kashmir - Times of India.
^ EU: Plebiscite not in Kashmiris’ interest - November 30, 2006, Pak Observer
^ REPORT on Kashmir: present situation and future prospects Committee on Foreign Affairs Rapporteur: Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne
^ [http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/bline/2003/07/01/stories/2003070102280400.htm Jul 01, 2003, The Hindu
^ Ipsos MORI - Kashmiris Reject War In Favour Of Democratic Means
^ Truth Behind the MORI Poll on Kashmir
^ Full Text of the MORI Survey on Kashmir
^ 87 pct in Kashmir Valley Want Independence
Jammu Kashmir / Azad kashmir

[edit] External links
The Future of Kashmir, ACDIS Swords and Ploughshares 16:1 (winter 2007-8), Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security (ACDIS) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front
Bookmarks and Coverage on Kashmir Conflict
Kashmir Watch: In-depth coverage on Kashmir conflict
Legal Documents related to Kashmir including treaties
Centre for Contemporary Conflict on Kargil War
BBC articles on Kashmir
Kashmir Conflict
Recent Kashmir developments
The Political Economy of the Kashmir Conflict U.S. Institute of Peace Report, June 2004
The Jammu and Kashmir issue
A peep into Kashmir History
The Kashmir dispute-cause or symptom?
LoC-Line of Control situation in Kashmir
Jammu & Kashmir-The Basic Facts
Introduction of the Kashmir dispute
An outline of the history of Kashmir
Images of Muzaffarabad (Capital City of Pakistani controlled Kashmir)
Images of Pakistan controlled Kashmir
News Coverage of Kashmir
Jammu & Kashmir on The Indian Analyst News, Analysis, and Opinion
Accession Document.
Conflict in Kashmir: Selected Internet Resources by the Library, University of California, Berkeley, USA; University of California at Berkeley Library Bibliographies and Web-Bibliographies list
Timeline since April 2003
A peep into Kashmir History and timeline
Conflict in Kashmir: Selected Internet Resources by the Library, University of California, Berkeley, USA; University of California at Berkeley Library Bibliographies and Web-Bibliographies list
Kashmir resolution of the European Parliament, 24 May 2007
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front