International The Kashmir Powderkeg: India To Strip Contested Region Of Its Autonomy

[Arkain2K]

​

For 69 years, Kashmir is torn by deadly strife
By Aijaz Hussain | AP
July 24, 2016

​

SRINAGAR, India — When news spread that Indian troops had killed 22-year-old Burhan Wani, a charismatic commander of Indian-controlled Kashmir’s biggest rebel group on July 8, the public response was spontaneous and massive. Tens of thousands of angry youths poured out of their homes in towns and villages across the Himalayan region, hurling rocks and bricks and clashing with Indian troops.

A curfew and a communications blackout has failed to stop the protests. The violence has left 48 civilians dead as government forces fired live ammunition and pellets to try to quell the unrest. About 2,000 civilians and 1,500 police and soldiers have been injured in the clashes.

But Kashmir’s fury at Indian rule is not new. The stunning mountain region has known little other than conflict since 1947, when British rule of the subcontinent ended with the creation of India and Pakistan.

THE HISTORY

The Himalayan kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir was asked to become part of one of the two newly independent nations. But Maharaja Hari Singh, the unpopular Hindu ruler of the Muslim-majority region, wanted to stay independent.

A raid by tribesmen from northwestern Pakistan forced Singh to seek help from India, which offered military assistance on condition that the kingdom accede to India. The ruler accepted but insisted that Kashmir remain a largely autonomous state within the Indian union, with India managing its foreign affairs, defense, and telecommunications.

The Indian military entered the region soon after, and the tribal raid spiraled into the first of two wars between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. The war ended in 1948 with a U.N.-brokered ceasefire. Nonetheless, Kashmir became divided between the two young nations by a heavily militarized Line of Control, with the promise of U.N.-sponsored referendum in the future.

In Indian-controlled Kashmir, many saw the transition as the mere transfer of power from their Hindu king to Hindu-majority India. Kashmiri discontent against India started taking root as successive Indian governments breached the pact of Kashmir’s autonomy. Local governments were toppled one after another, and largely peaceful movements against Indian control curbed harshly.

Pakistan continued raising the Kashmir dispute in international forums, including in the U.N. India began calling the region its integral part, saying that Kashmir’s lawmakers had ratified the accession to New Delhi.

As the deadlock persisted, India and Pakistan went to war again in 1965, with little changing on the ground. Several rounds of talks followed, but the impasse continued.

In the mid-1980s, dissident political groups in Indian Kashmir united and contest elections for the state assembly. The Muslim United Front quickly emerged as a formidable force against Kashmir’s pro-India political elite. However, the front lost the 1987 election, widely believed to have been heavily rigged.

A strong public backlash followed. Some young MUF activists crossed over to Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, where the Pakistani military began arming and training Kashmiri nationalists.

By 1989, Kashmir was in the throes of a full-blown rebellion.

India poured in more troops into the already heavily militarized region. In response, thousands of Kashmiris streamed back from the Pakistani-controlled portion with guns and grenades. More than 68,000 people have been killed since then.

Though the militancy waned, popular sentiment for “azadi,” or freedom, has remained ingrained in the Kashmiri psyche. In the last decade, the region has made a transition from armed rebellion to unarmed uprisings as tens of thousands of civilians frequently take to the streets to protest Indian rule, often leading to clashes between rock-throwing residents and Indian troops. The protests are quelled by deadly force.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

In 2008, a government decision — later revoked — to transfer land to a Hindu shrine in Kashmir set off a summer of protests. The following year, the alleged rape and murder of two young women by government forces set off fresh violence.

In 2010, the trigger for protests was a police investigation into allegations that soldiers shot dead three civilians and then staged a fake gunbattle to make it appear the dead were militants and claim rewards for the killings.

In all three years, hundreds of thousands of young men and women took to the streets, hurling rocks and abuse at Indian forces. At least 200 people were killed and hundreds wounded as troops fired iknto the crowds, inciting further protests.

The crackdown appears to be pushing many educated young Kashmiris, who grew up politically radicalized amid decades of brutal conflict, toward armed rebel groups. Young Kashmiri boys began snatching weapons from Indian forces and training themselves deep inside Kashmir’s forests.

The number of militants has, however, remained minuscule, not crossing 200 in the last several years.

ANTI-INDIA GROUPS

The All Parties Hurriyat Conference is a conglomerate of social, religious and political groups formed in 1993. It advocates the U.N.-sponsored right to self-determination for Kashmir or tripartite talks between India, Pakistan and Kashmiri leadership to resolve the dispute.

The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, or JKLF, was one of the first armed rebel groups. It favors an independent, united Kashmir. Currently led by Mohammed Yasin Malik, the group gave up armed rebellion in 1994, soon after Indian authorities released Malik from jail after four years.

Hizbul Mujahideen is Kashmir’s largest and the only surviving indigenous armed rebel group. Formed in 1990, the group demands Kashmir’s merger with Pakistan. Its supreme commander Syed Salahuddin is based in Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. The group was led in Indian Kashmir by Burhan Wani until his death on July 8.

The Lashkar-e-Taiba is a Pakistani-based group fighting for Indian Kashmir’s merger with Pakistan. The United States lists it as a terrorist group. Its leader, Hafiz Saeed, is on a U.S. terrorist list with a $10 million bounty on his head. He’s also one of India’s most wanted. New Delhi blames the group for several deadly attacks in Indian cities, including the 2008 Mumbai attack that killed 166 people.

PRO-INDIA GROUPS

The Jammu Kashmir National Conference is a pro-India political group that has ruled Kashmir for the most part since 1947. Its most recent leaders, Farooq Abdullah, and his son, Omar Abdullah, the current opposition leader in the state assembly, are seen as the strongest proponents of India in Kashmir.

The Jammu Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party emerged in early 2000s as the strongest opponent to the NC, with pro-separatist leanings for electoral gains. It soon came to power in 2002. It currently rules Indian Kashmir in coalition with India’s ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/6900...-explains-69-years-kashmir-torn-deadly-strife

 

[Arkain2K]

Swaraj confirmed what we know: Sharif's Kashmir dream will be a dream
Sandipan Sharma
Jul 24, 2016

Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif.​

On 26 October, 1947, VP Menon was joined at his Delhi residence by the then British deputy High Commissioner for a drink. Menon, who had just returned from Srinagar, poured out a stiff drink, smiled and exulted: "We have Kashmir. The bas...d signed the Act of Accession. And now that we have got it, we will never let it go."

This incident, narrated by authors Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre in Freedom at Night should be enough to remind Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of the futility of his dream of seeing Kashmir become part of Pakistan some day. "Waiting for the day Kashmir becomes part of Pakistan," Sharif said while celebrating his party's victory in elections in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.

Menon, the brilliant ICS officer who helped Sardar Patel put hundreds of princely states in India's basket, had prophesied on that fateful October day that India will never let Kashmir go. Six decades of futile Pakistani efforts, including three wars, suggest Sharif's dream is inspired by a famous Indian TV serial starring Raguvir Yadav.

Sharif has a long list of people to blame for his unrequited love for the Vale. He can, for instance, blame Mohammad Ali Jinnah, who, in a fit of madness, decided to send tribals from the frontiers to invade Kashmir after the Maharaja denied his request for a vacation in the Valley. He can blame the atavistic Pathans, who, in spite of having the option of invading Srinagar without firing a shot, decided to loot Muzzafarabad and rape the nuns of Baramulla, giving Indian Army precious time to secure the airport at Srinagar. Sharif can blame Cyril Radcliffe too, who, decided to award Gurdaspur, a Muslim majority town to India, and thus the only road link to Kashmir. Or, Sharif can curse the turn of events that allowed Menon to return to Delhi on 26 October with the Instrument of Accession in his pocket.

But, Kashmir, Sharif should be convinced by now, would remain where Menon promised while pouring out a celebratory drink on the night Pakistan lost it forever.

Till Jinnah ordered the tribal invasion of Kashmir, misled perhaps by events that led to Junagadh's integration with India, there was a theoretical possibility of the Valley going to Pakistan. This was evident from the stance Patel had reportedly taken on the disputes that rose from the decision of Kashmir, Junagadh and Hyderabad to not accede to either of the two countries even after 15 August. Several scholars have suggested that Patel was willing to consider Pakistan's claim if it gave up Junagarh and Hyderabad.

In his book, Patel, A Life, scholar Rajmohan Gandhi reports Patel's speech at the Bahauddin College in Junagadh, where the home minister said:

"If Hyderabad does not see the writing on the wall, it goes the way Junagadh has gone. Pakistan attempted to set off Kashmir against Junagadh. When we raised the question of settlement in a democratic way, they (Pakistan) at once told us that they would consider it if we applied that policy to Kashmir. Our reply was that we would agree to Kashmir if they agreed to Hyderabad."​

But, the moment Jinnah decided to send tribals under the leadership of Major Khurshid Anwar to invade Kashmir, and then dispatched his soldiers guised as Pathans to fight the Indian army, Pakistan lost the argument and the Valley. As Patel used to say, possession is 90 per cent of the law.

Pakistan failed to get anything out of the 1965 war it fought with India. In 1972, it signed the Simla accord and agreed to a status-quo and bilateral resolution of the dispute. Since then, nothing has changed that entitles Sharif to a walk through Srinagar's Nishat Bagh or drink from the founts of Chashm-e-Shahi.

Pakistan doesn't have the military might to split India. Its proxy war, as history proves, lacks the firepower to melt India's resolve. And there is no way India will surrender its rights over Kashmir, especially in a global scenario dominated by huge security concerns, Islamic terror and China's rising ambitions of China in the region.

Allowing a Muslim-majority territory on the northern border to become a hotbed of Chinese, Pakistani, Afghan and Islamic State interference would be a political disaster. The fate of Bangladesh and Pakistan, both home to terror, has forever ruled out the possibility of another Islamic country in the region. Though pro-Pakistan sloganeering and flag-waving is common in Kashmir, it is doubtful if Kashmiris actually want to become part of Pakistan, especially in its current avatar. In 2014, while on his first visit to the Valley, BBC's Owen Bennett Jones wrote: "If a foreign journalist asks you how many people in the Kashmir Valley support union with Pakistan, off the record you say 25% but on the record you adjust the number down to 10%."

It is true Kashmiris dream of azaadi, a future that was promised to them by Dogra ruler Hari Singh before Jinnah forced his hand. But their loyalty towards Pakistan is grossly exaggerated, more propaganda than reality.

For all practical purposes, a workable solution to the Kashmir problem will have to be worked out between the people of Kashmir and the Indian government. Pakistan would, of course, never agree to anything that shatters its dream of possessing Kashmir, and that would ensure longevity of the dispute.

Pakistan's unrealistic dream that is destined to remain unfulfilled, and thus remain a source of trouble, makes it imperative for India to win over Kashmiris through dialogue and peace initiatives. Though armchair hardliners in India argue that Kashmiris will never accept India's presence in the Valley, deride them as jihadis, they forget that for several years after Independence, Kashmir remained calm and quiet', even if the desire for azaadi simmered below the surface. Even the first decade of this millennium was comparatively quiet and calm, suggesting a return to normalcy.
In 1947, when Jinnah dispatched his tribals to Srinagar, he assumed their presence would trigger a revolt within Kashmir. Muslims of the Valley, he erroneously believed, would support the Pakistani invasion and drive out the Indian army.

India's challenge now is to ensure that its own follies in Kashmir do not alienate Kashmiris enough to inspire someone in Pakistan to embark on another misadventure. Only rank stupidity, rigidity, continued oppression, suppression of rights and over-reliance on guns by the Indian state has the potential to fulfil Sharif's dream. And negate Menon's prophesy.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/why-...-dream-is-inspired-by-mungerilal-2910852.html

 

[sangreporsangre]

 

[Arkain2K]

Consequences of Pakistani Terrorism
Raids signal that India won’t tolerate more attacks in Kashmir.
Sept. 29, 2016

India’s doctrine of “strategic restraint” toward Pakistan was tested again Wednesday, after the Indian Army responded to a Sept. 18 attack against an Indian base that killed 19 soldiers by conducting raids against terrorist facilities just inside Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Islamabad has addressed the incidents with its usual mix of bluster and denial, but if it means to prevent an escalation of violence it needs to shut down the terrorist groups it continues to support.

That should start with Jaish-e-Mohammad (Army of Mohammed) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Pure), two major jihadist groups that operate openly in Pakistan and are prime suspects in these attacks. Both groups are supported by its military despite being on United Nations lists of terrorist organizations. Last month the U.S. Defense Department blocked $300 million in reimbursements to Pakistan because of its continuing tolerance of the Haqqani Network that operates in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The Pakistani government insists it had nothing to do with the attack on Uri, as well as with a similar attack in Pathankot in January that killed another seven Indian soldiers. Pakistan’s military goes so far as to deny the raids took place and blamed India for an unprovoked artillery attack across the Line of Control that killed two Pakistani soldiers. Defense MinisterKhawaja Muhammad Asif even accused India of staging the Uri attack and repeated past threats to use tactical nuclear weapons.

But as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi noted in a speech on Sunday, so far this year the Indian Army has thwarted 17 attempts by terrorists to cross the border from Pakistan, killing 110 of them. These incursions often occur under the cover of Pakistani artillery fire. New Delhi also presented evidence Tuesday that the Uri attackers crossed the border from the Pakistani city of Muzaffarabad. Two guides who assisted the infiltrators have been detained.

Mr. Modi has consistently offered closer economic and diplomatic ties to Pakistan as long as it stops supporting terrorism. Pakistan’s democratic government has also long been threatened by the very jihadist groups it helped unleash, particularly the Taliban. And Pakistan increasingly risks becoming a pariah state. Even China, Pakistan’s “all-weather friend” as both countries put it, will have limited patience if Islamic extremism spreads into its Muslim-majority northwest.

Pakistan remains trapped by a national identity based on fomenting religious-based insurgencies in Kashmir. The country needs a new vision centered on improving the lives of its people, and there is no shortage of potentially willing hands, including Mr. Modi’s, to help it move in that direction. What’s needed is political courage in Islamabad, before the crisis in Kashmir escalates.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/consequences-of-pakistani-terrorism-1475189497

 

[Orgasmo]

Pakistan cannot give up its support for Islamic extremism, because its very birth was due to that particular brand of ideology. Sympathy for Islamic hardliners permeates through all sections of Pakistani society, including its political and military elites. In fact, it's the only thing holding Pakistan together. The three major ethnic groups in Pakistan (Punjabis, Balochis and Pashtuns) do not get along with each other. Asking Pakistan to drop its support for these groups is akin to asking a person to completely change his nature.

To compound the problem, the Pakistani military and its civilian government aren't exactly buddies either. There had been multiple military coup attempts since the founding of Pakistan in 1948. The more secular civilian government has very little control over its army, especially the intelligence branch.

Due to heavy influence of strict Islam in Pakistani society and the unstable security situation there, foreign investments have dried up along with tourists. As a result, Pakistan is increasingly dependent on Saudi Arabia for money. In exchange the Saudis have a near free reign to spread their branch of Wahbism through funding of mosque construction. The entire country is caught in a cycle of economic stagnation and growing insecurity due to extremist influence.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Arent the chinese involved in this somewhat? They fought a war with India over an area called Aksai Chin, which I believe is pretty much a part of Kashmir.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War_of_1962

 

[ShinkanPo]

So what will the Pakistanis do now?

 

[Arkain2K]

India-Pakistan ‘tinderbox’ to test Donald Trump’s foreign policy
By Siddhant Mohan - Special to The Washington Times - -
Sunday, November 20, 2016​

VARANASI, India — Aiina Shah lost her brother to the latest surge of violence to engulf Kashmir, the India-controlled province that is also claimed by Pakistan

He was blinded by pellets that the security police fired on demonstrators, she said. He died a few weeks later from wounds to the rest of his body.

“He did not want to go the hospital for treatment because the police were raiding hospitals to arrest [those injured],” said Ms. Shah, a 28-year-old student from Sopore in the Baramulla district of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. “Local doctors could not help [heal] his infection.”

Ms. Shah’s brother was one of more than 100 people, mostly protesters, killed in demonstrations that began in July after a popular young Kashmiri militant died in a gunbattle with police.

Since then, local shops have shut their doors, schools have closed and outbreaks of violence have risen steadily in protests and an escalating tit-for-tat spat between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. India and Pakistan have expelled each other’s diplomats in the past month.

The escalation may prove an unexpected early test for President-elect Donald Trump and his emerging foreign policy team. The issue was almost entirely overlooked during the presidential race, where the foreign policy debate focused heavily on Russia and the Middle East. Mr. Trump has established a personal rapport with the strongly pro-business Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but he also raised eyebrows across the region when he told an Indian newspaper last month that he would be honored to serve as a mediator if asked in the long-running Kashmir clash.

Pakistan has long pushed for international intervention in the dispute, while India has refused to accept outside mediators. Mr. Trump in the interview called Kashmir a “very, very hot tinderbox.”

Pakistani officials said last week that thousands of villagers near the border in Kashmir fled a day after Indian shelling killed seven Pakistani soldiers. That was only the latest shooting across the Line of Control, which divides the Himalayan region claimed by both countries.

In the worst incident in September, 19 Indian soldiers were killed at their base in Kashmir. Indians said the attack was orchestrated by a militant group based in Pakistan with Pakistani help, a charge Islamabad denies. That attack was followed by an Indian strike on “militant bases” across the Pakistani border.

Now many believe this is the conflict that will push tensions in the region over the edge.

“A proxy war between these two nations [over Kashmir] is already happening,” said Sheikh Showkat Hussain, a political and international law professor at Kashmir Central University. “And incidents in last four months have tensed the relationship even more.”

He added that he expects violence to grow, especially with no resolution in sight: “[Nothing] can make us believe India or Pakistan are going to sit down together and talk on Kashmir issue.”

The violence is just the latest turmoil to strike the mountainous region on a border that has witnessed three wars between India and Pakistan. In between those conflicts, violence has been common throughout the Kashmir Valley in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir since India and Pakistan became independent states in 1947. Insurgents seeking to join Pakistan and achieve independence for the region rose up in an armed insurgency in the 1980s. India has suppressed those movements.

In recent years, however, separatists have gained support especially among disaffected Kashmiri youths. Unemployment, tensions between citizens and officials, heavy police militarization of civilian spaces and suspected human rights violations by the Indian army have pushed Kashmiri youths to take part in anti-India protests. This time, in Burhan Muzzaffar Wani, they found a leader.

The 22-year-old commander of the Hizbul Mujahedeen, an Islamic militant group, had become popular through social media and was one of the more charismatic separatists. It was his killing in a July 8 shootout with security forces that triggered the latest round of violence. In this region, the group is considered heroic.

Thousands attended Wani’s funeral, which became the biggest protest in recent years. Demonstrators poured into the streets and hurled stones. Police responded with pellets, and hundreds were hit in the eyes, local officials say.

In the subsequent months, protesters have defied curfews that have shut down streets and closed schools and businesses. Mobile phone, internet and television services have been intermittently cut off.

The curfews, violence and security measures have made life harder for residents.

“We haven’t opened our shop since July,” said Muzamil Waseem, a businessman from Baramulla district. “We were managing to live with whatever savings we had. Our employees aren’t able to come to work, but we do pay them. That’s how people are managing their lives here.”

“I stayed in Kashmir to manage my family business,” he said. “I thought it was an easy way of earning a living. But now I think my decision was wrong. We’re stuck between security forces and protesters. There is no way out now.”

Ghulam Hassan Pandit, 46, of the Kakpora Tal area, Wani’s hometown, said the situation is increasingly dire.

“Our area is badly hit,” he said. “We are running short of food supplies, our savings are dwindling and medical services lessening. People wish to move out, but they are now framed as terrorists, so they refrain.”

Hassan Beg, a businessman from Srinagar, conceded that Kashmir has always been a conflict zone but said the situation is getting worse.

“This time, things turned more violent and got much attention,” said Mr. Beg. “Many innocent lives were lost. But what hurts most is that our fellow countrymen now consider us as terrorists. They do not count us as Indians. TV channels were accusing us of destabilizing the nation, but they did not bother to see that we were crushed under army boots.

“My son doesn’t want to go New Delhi for his higher studies,” he said. “He fears that he’d be framed as terrorist and will be lynched.”

Kashmiris wonder when this latest round of hostility will end. But Raqib Hameed, a 23-year-old from Srinagar, said the shutdown of services and the violence in the streets have left youths isolated and on edge. He doubts the situation will calm anytime soon.

“If you consider that a young boy is stuck in his house with no internet, phone and television, with the tear gas, pellets and bullets outside, it must be easy for you to think of what young Kashmiri people would do in such scenario,” he said. “People are skeptical. No one has any idea what can happen at any given minute. We have lost trust of everyone but ourselves.”

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/20/india-pakistan-tinderbox-to-test-donald-trumps-for/

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Pakistan cannot give up its support for Islamic extremism, because its very birth was due to that particular brand of ideology. Sympathy for Islamic hardliners permeates through all sections of Pakistani society, including its political and military elites. In fact, it's the only thing holding Pakistan together. The three major ethnic groups in Pakistan (Punjabis, Balochis and Pashtuns) do not get along with each other. Asking Pakistan to drop its support for these groups is akin to asking a person to completely change his nature.

To compound the problem, the Pakistani military and its civilian government aren't exactly buddies either. There had been multiple military coup attempts since the founding of Pakistan in 1948. The more secular civilian government has very little control over its army, especially the intelligence branch.

Due to heavy influence of strict Islam in Pakistani society and the unstable security situation there, foreign investments have dried up along with tourists. As a result, Pakistan is increasingly dependent on Saudi Arabia for money. In exchange the Saudis have a near free reign to spread their branch of Wahbism through funding of mosque construction. The entire country is caught in a cycle of economic stagnation and growing insecurity due to extremist influence.

It really sucks that they have nukes.

Honestly the world would be safer if only the US, Russia, China, Israel, France and UK held nukes.

 

[Undying Poster]

Due to heavy influence of strict Islam in Pakistani society and the unstable security situation there, foreign investments have dried up along with tourists. As a result, Pakistan is increasingly dependent on Saudi Arabia for money. In exchange the Saudis have a near free reign to spread their branch of Wahbism through funding of mosque construction. The entire country is caught in a cycle of economic stagnation and growing insecurity due to extremist influence.

Well said. I've read that the military is like 40% of their GDP or some crazy number like that. Why would anyone ever create a business in such a volatile environment? The best Pakistani's are in America and Canada.

 

[44nutman]

True Story about 8 years ago I was in a hipster pool hall and played this song and a dude said a couple table over was like who remade Diddy`s song. Took all the restraint I had to not shove a cue ball up his ass.

 

[Starck]

Not much of a powderkeg - Pakistan knows it would get its shit pushed in by India, won't start anything anytime soon.

 

[indo80]

This has been going on for 70 years and will for another 700. India cant give up kashmir due to it strategic importance, by giving it up they will open up a gate for China and pakistan to attack and take over northern India which cant be allowed. All of the actors know this.

 

[ShoelessRye]

India-Pakistan ‘tinderbox’ to test Donald Trump’s foreign policy
By Siddhant Mohan - Special to The Washington Times - -
Sunday, November 20, 2016​

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/20/india-pakistan-tinderbox-to-test-donald-trumps-for/

Well here's a first look at Trump's Foreign Policy attempt in the area - http://time.com/4587069/donald-trum...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I wonder how India is feeling right about now.

 

[Egelo]

India just needs to go for it, eventually it will come to war based on their massive arms procurement i believe they are prepping for that day. Might as well be on their terms and their advantage.

 

[Arkain2K]

Guns fall silent, but tensions high between India, Pakistan
Published November 28, 2016
Associated Press

Indian army soldiers patrol near the highly militarized Line of Control dividing Kashmir between India and Pakistan, in Pallanwal sector, about 75 kilometers (46.8 miles) from Jammu, India. ​

NEW DELHI – An uneasy calm has fallen over the de facto border between the Indian and Pakistani-controlled portions of Kashmir after months of deadly firing and signs that the two countries were engaged in a brinkmanship not seen for decades.


Though guns have gone silent for the past five days, analysts say the two nuclear-armed neighbors have displayed unprecedented aggression this year without pursuing any real lines of diplomacy. They've amped up the artillery they've used and targeted infrastructure instead of just military outposts. The corpses of soldiers killed in battle have been found mutilated.

"The level of retaliation was definitely more intense than what India has done in the past," said defense analyst C. Uday Bhaskar of the New Delhi-based think tank Society for Policy Studies.

"There is a danger of it spiraling out of control," Bhaskar said. "If both sides decide that neither side will blink, then the collateral damage will only increase."

That could also mean recalling diplomats, halting the buses ferrying people back and forth across the border, or stopping all trade. In 2015, bilateral trade amounted to just $2.6 billion — far below the $10.9 billion Indian government economists say is possible under normal relations.

India and Pakistan have long been foes, fighting two of their three wars over their rival claims to the Himalayan region of Kashmir. Countless rounds of peace talks have yielded scant results.

The two sides reached a cease-fire agreement in 2003 which held for the first few years, but has seen frequent violations since then. Meanwhile, India accuses Pakistan of arming and training Kashmiri rebels fighting to oust India from the Muslim-majority region. Pakistan denies the allegation, saying it offers the rebels only moral support, and accuses India of an illegal military occupation of the disputed mountain territory.

Tensions began building this year as Kashmiri civilians on the Indian-controlled side rose up in rebellion, demanding independence or a merger with Pakistan. Violent street protests and clashes with Indian forces left 90 civilians dead and thousands injured.

The situation escalated further in September after anti-India rebels launched an attack on an Indian army base in the western Kashmiri town of Uri, killing 19 soldiers.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi promised "a befitting reply to those who dare to attack India," and India retaliated by sending small groups of military commandos across the border for what it called "surgical strikes" on terror bases. India said a dozen suspected rebels were slain, which Pakistan denied.

Pakistan's outgoing military chief, Gen. Raheel Sharif, promised that "India will be taught a lesson."

The two sides then spent two months firing aggressively at each other. As days turned to weeks, villagers were evacuated from areas near the Line of Control, the de facto border that divides Kashmir into the separate territories administered by India and Pakistan.

Pakistan, along with some residents near the border, accused India of using the Uri attack to ramp up border hostilities in order to distract attention from the public protests within Indian-controlled Kashmir.

As the shelling intensified, schools near the frontier were shut down indefinitely. Farmers abandoned their crops to rot. Pakistani cinemas banned Bollywood films, while Indian filmmakers vowed to never hire Pakistani actors.

Last week, the body of one of three Indian soldiers killed by rebels was found mutilated, a month after another Indian soldier was found beheaded.

Indian military officers, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with military rules, acknowledged the tensions have escalated to the highest level since the cease-fire came into effect.

"Our reaction time is swift and severe. It's no more wait and watch, no more hold your fire to see what the higher bosses have to say," an army officer in Kashmir said.

Indian officials said Pakistan has violated the cease-fire agreement more than 300 times in the last two months by firing and shelling military positions and villages, killing at least 17 Indian soldiers and 12 civilians in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir.

Pakistan has countered with its own list of 44 casualties, including 11 civilians that it said were killed when a civilian bus came under fire.

There were anxious moments last week as Pakistan shelled the border district of Gurez, close to a hydropower project that India is building, forcing authorities to suspend work.

There had been signs when Modi took office in 2014 that he might seek to work with Pakistan toward normalizing relations. He invited his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif, to his inauguration in New Delhi. A year later when returning to India from a trip abroad, Modi dropped in on Sharif at his home in Lahore to give him greetings on his birthday.

The bonhomie was short lived.

An attack on an Indian air force base in January and the assault on the army base in Uri eight months later left the 2003 cease-fire agreement in tatters.

Meanwhile, both countries face domestic pressure to take a harder line. Modi's Hindu nationalist party, in campaigning for some state elections, has once again whipped up a jingoistic fervor against Pakistan.

In Pakistan, a new army chief was appointed over the weekend. But analysts in both India and Pakistan said they do not expect any major change in Islamabad's position, as the army chief would not want to be seen as selling out.

Given that Pakistan's military plays a "dominating role" in shaping the country's foreign policy, "I don't think there will be any change in our policy toward India," said Azeem Khalid, an international relations expert at COMSATS Institute of Information Technology in Islamabad.

At the border, military commanders from the two sides agreed to halt all firing, but there was no indication of how long the calm would last.

Analysts said the space was shrinking for diplomatic steps to resolve the countries' differences.

"Pakistan asked for a cease-fire primarily because we made life unlivable for them near the border," said G. Parthasarathy, a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan.

What is clear is India and Pakistan have once again hit a low in their testy relationship, analysts say.

"The relationship with Pakistan is at a nadir at the moment," said Gurmeet Kanwal, a retired army brigadier at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, a state-run think tank in New Delhi.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/1...but-tensions-high-between-india-pakistan.html

 

[Pwent]

the west should just step back and let them bang bro

otherwise they are just dragging it out and more people are going to die before the eventual fight that will happen no matter what

 

[NoGiRonin]

India > Pakistani shitheads.

 

[HeirApparent]

Ah fuck it: