Finding Kashmir's Pain in London

You dont even have to move people. Just allow people to buy property there. There will be lot of speculative buying. That would heat up the real estate market tempting the locals
to sell, take the money and invest elsewhere. Pretty soon locals would be priced out of the market with NRI/and other rich indians money pouring in. That would make the locals rich
and less prone to violence. Hey i would not mind buying a couple of acres of lakefront property and hold it for a while for things to turn around.

Re: # 119
Arjun
I think in retrospect, that you are probably right about the Indian populace supporting the idea of non-Kashmiris owning land in Kashmir.

However considering the recent history of violence in the valley it will be a tad more difficult in practice, than getting rid of the special status that Kashmir has in the constitution.

Now whether the government (any government) will show the appetite necessary for this is open to question, which is what I think Kaal was referring to. Of course time will tell.

O tempora, O mores.....

#116 by swarrier on April 10, 2006 7:32am PT


it is highly unlikely that such a move will have popular support everywhere.


I beg to differ..For most people, it`s not the number one thing they consider when going to the polls..If the move is made, a majority of people will support it..


Why hasn`t article 370 been abrogated yet.?


Beats me..another in a long line of things that should be done...

Re: # 117
[Also, it is the height of ignorance to compare removal of 370 with a human right abuse.]

I don`t recall any such comparison.

Tiananmen square is not the same as Tibet. There is a vast difference. You want to compare Tiananmen square then compare it to the Naxalite movement in India. Nobody cried much over the loss of a lot of India`s young intelligentsia.

What desgregation are you talking about? Are you comparing Kashmiri Muslims to African Americans? Things aren`t that simple.

#116 by swarrier

In my view, there is nothing which promotes discrimination (of whatever kind) and feelings of exclusivity as much as a segregated lifestyle. Article 370 essentially segregated Kashmir from the rest of the country – this was in addition to the simple facts of geography which impose their own problems in Kashmir and elsewhere.

Desegregation appears to be the key. What worked in the US has just as much chance of working in India.

I am not saying that China is a good role model. But as far as the “international pariah” issue is concerned, when China conducted the Tienenman Square outrage they were no pariahs – and did not become one following the operation. Every country does what it considers its national interest. Therefore, foreign relations continue to stay their ongoing track. Also, it is the height of ignorance to compare removal of 370 with a human right abuse.

There are no supporters of 370 except in Kashmir and perhaps across the borders.

One also needs to get away from this psychology of any government agency protecting ones’s life, family, or abode. Most such agencies protect only their own turf.

Re: # 115

Arjun
India and Israel are democracies for the most part. They cannot do what China does without sacrficing that democratic principle. Despite that fact that the vast majority of Indians do not sympathise with militant Kashmiri Muslims, it is highly unlikely that such a move will have popular support everywhere. I thiink it would give rise to too many internal fissures. History has shown us this.
Cromwell tried to do it in Northern Ireland. It`s still causing problems. Why hasn`t article 370 been abrogated yet.?

China has done this to Tibet when it was an international pariah. It would find that far more difficult to do so now. It iis doing this amongst the Uighurs because nobody cares. It`s not in the public eye.

#110 by zeemax on April 10, 2006 1:00am PT


Besides, all these will have to be ultimately dismantled for any solutuion.


Why?

#113 by masanamuthu

[That`s why we have the army there. Well armed folks who can take care of the jihadis.. They`d remain for decades to come..]

LOL!

You don`t need to change the demography of the Kashmir Valley by resettling people from the rest of India.. Why do you want them to be provided as fodder for the Jihadis?.

That`s why we have the army there. Well armed folks who can take care of the jihadis.. They`d remain for decades to come..

Zeemax

Absolutely. On display here is nothing but pure bluff and bluster. Pitiful pretense at hollering and bellowing and matching others that has a zero chance of scaring even a child outside who is familiar with India.

#110 by zeemax

[Dharma, your line of argument re changing demography through resettlement is interesting, but wouldn`t it need Israeli settler style infrastructure within west-bank (and previously Gaza) which is constsntly under threat and just the movements of settlers to and fro have to be within armoured trucks?]

There is a difference here Zee. Jews are proportionately miniscule and try as it may, the Israeli govt. just can`t find enough Jews to resettle in the settlements. India has no such problems and given the right incentives, there would be more than the required number of folks willing to move into Kashmir, even outnumber the Kashmiris.

#108 by dharma

Dharma, your line of argument re changing demography through resettlement is interesting, but wouldn`t it need Israeli settler style infrastructure within west-bank (and previously Gaza) which is constsntly under threat and just the movements of settlers to and fro have to be within armoured trucks? Besides, all these will have to be ultimately dismantled for any solutuion.

#106 by kaalchakra
We are not playing the cards you have in mind because, given the nature of our society, we cannot play them, and could not have played them.

Kaal, are you saying India did not follow the line Dharma suggests due to internal weaknesses in its national psyche? Please elaborate because it is a kind of a riddle :-)

#107 by nasah on April 9, 2006 4:14pm PT


hopefully a secular democratic Kashmir on the Pakistan side


Here`s where I`d have posted the bridge cliche if I hadn`t knocked back a few...

Re: # 103
``We are not playing the cards you have in mind because, given the nature of our society, we cannot play them, and could not have played them.``
we could have played them, we can play them now as majority of indians including indian muslim dont sympathise with kashmiri muslims. Infact they see them as oppressors instead of being oppressed because they kicked out their minorities and shown us how minorities have to be treated by example. We can follow their example and noone cries foul. After all you get what you deserve.

the only solution that is going to be acceptable to all three parties to remoce perpetual confrontation -- TWO Kashmirs united by a feather soft to non existent LOC --

hopefully a secular democratic Kashmir on the Pakistan side in sync with the already democratic secular Kashmir on the Indian side......

.....what the negotiations will be about ? -- the extent of autonomy -- the degree of central control -- bilateral control or monolateral control -- joint finances or separate finances -- water distibution -- the extent of free travel between the two sides -- refugees going back to their ancestral homes --on both side of the LOC -- irrespective of their religion........

.....want total dimilitarization for ever -- don`t bring Islam into the Valley politics ever again(period).......

in short -- everything is possible -- EXCEPT the `Transfer of Territory` -- that is a non starter.....

it was a nonstarter 10 years ago -- it is today -- and it will be 10 years after --

transfer of territory -- this is what General Musharraf wants and NEEDS -- to legitimize his bloody crime against an elected civilian government of Pakistan --

India has done a lot for the General -- has given him reluctant legitimacy that he did not deserve as a renengade soldier

but MR. Manmohan Singh cannot wash the General`s soiled hands (actually bloody soiled hands) with the waters of the Dal Lake by bringing the Dal Lake to his door.......

on the other hand Mr. Musharraf can OWN a House boat with shikara -- spend his vacation washing his hand squeaky clean in Dal Lake....but he cannot OWN the Dal Lake......only the Kashmiris can.

Mr. Musharraf wants solution of Kashmir to buttress his legitimacy -- fine

he can have even that -- and he can even go down in the history of the subcontinent as the accidental messiah who brought Peace to a festering wounded bleeding place -- after 50 years of shameless bloody fratricide --

but only after shedding his impossible dream (actually an would-be nightmare for millions of Muslims and Hindus).....of a Transfer of Territory......

EXCEPT for that impossible demand............the Kashmiris can administer any day their two Kashmirs with 100% Kashmiriats -- to their heart content.... INCLUSIVELY....living happily ever after....and trading merrily with everybody else in India and Pakistan..

....and THAT is indeed a POSSIBLE dream...WAITING for 50 years to be realized......(looks like it may happen afterall -- because the General has disembarked from his high horse....of pretensions -- because he badly to continue for another 7 years after 2007)

dharma

Another way to look at the situation is that we are doing favors to no one. We are not playing the cards you have in mind because, given the nature of our society, we cannot play them, and could not have played them.

Dharma ji, dharma cannot be sustained when internal weaknesses are not recognized and are not, by appropriate means, removed.

---

Beej

Regretted that line the moment it was sent. Sorry, never again! Abstruse knowledge is not my forte :(