news details |
|
|
| Indian Government Decision to close down UN Military Observers Camps situate at J&K Appreciable | | | A N Bhardwaj
Part-I
The decision of the Government of India to withdrawal the UN Military Observers set up in 1949 from the cease fire line, J&K State is encouraging as well as appreciable. They were deputed to supervise the cease fire line violations, but since then nothing sort of their any substantial performance was observed. The cross border violations often were committed by Pakistan, uprooted the boarding people and disturbed peace but those were never taken in to their notice. Apart from it, extending its winking support to Pak-supported banned terrorists to sneak in to the Indian state through rain of rapid fire helped by Pak-forces to foment terrorism for destabilizing the State administration and shatter harmony had never been taken in view by them. They were under legal obligation to take serious actions against violator. They never made public the dare devil violations committed by this or that country and Pak-conspiracy to get the terrorists sneaked into Indian J&K State for destruction and the killings to grab the State for the information of the international community. It is presumed they had their own tilt to perform their legal responsibilities. All the years they did not take any initiative to find out misadventure took either this or that country for violation of cease fire line and had been looking blood-spilling game like mute spectator which was strange. In the light of asking to standing white elephants at borders without discharging any responsibility to withdraw from their camps was justified. The step taken by Indian Government was retaliated by the Pak-Government as well as its parrot-like speaking stipendiary lobby working in the valley flew into rage with the irritating comments furiously. They told with ambiguous remarks to console their mind that despite its decision did not have any impact on its legal status of the dispute. The UN Security Council mandate would remain till the Kashmir issue was resolved.
The decision for winding up its camps, even then that was inconsequential in the context of the status of the state. It did not abolish the mandate given by the UN Security Council in 1951under Resolution No 91, asserted Pak- spokes-person Taslim Aslam, appeared in media, dated 12th July 2914. The Pak-parrot Gilani also uttered with the same tune of Pak Foreign spokesperson that "these types of actions can neither change the status of the State issue nor can be this long pending issue solved in this way." Further, he condemned with the remarks that Modi Government can increase the number of forces in the State to unleash so called more atrocities, but cannot change the reality of its disputing status, nor can it end its disputed nature which is recorded at international level. Further he said that UN Military Observers role was clear overtaken by Simla agreement. Hurriyat by retaliating expressed its determination that the prime and real party to the so called Kashmir dispute were Kashmiris neither were they any part of Simla agreement and nor they asked any view point about it, appeared in media, dated 10th July
2014. Mirwaiz headed Hurriyat religious party is not a political organization. His party is now working to implement the Pak-agenda in the valley having discarded his own religious preaching profession. He is a self-style Sultan who has ambition to establish his domain out of the Indian soovereignty with the help of Pakistan. He does not possess any representative character and his popularity is up to the turn of his house street even then he boasts to claim as representative of Kashmiri Muslims, which is amazing. His Hurriyat was nowhere and had no status to participate in two-nation meeting at Simla agreement. India Government was only responsible to look the interest of its nation. The invisible component of the nation had no right for any talk in Simla dialogue which was going on to develop the mutual diplomatic relations for restoring future peace, and after long dialogue, understanding was made under Simla agreement. There was no need to talk with any component of the nation, Indian Government was and is itself only competent to rule the country.
In the same vain the Chief Minister, J&K State, Omar Abdullah, opened his mind to follow the Pak-lobby Hurriyat lopsided stratagem under appeasing policy by violating the spirit of the State and the national Constitutions which speak the political status of the State, but he said that the State was a political issue, which should be solved in political way. His likewise uttering was an ambiguous. He should have further elaborated political solution under which he had wanted to solve the issue. The question is lying pending with him to explain the nation of India about the political solution for the State which he had in his mind.
Pak-ruling leaders and their parrot-like speaking lobby should change their mind- set in the light of ground realities. Was that horrific aggression of 1947 over the Indian State by killings thousands innocent people to snatch it by flexing their muscles and encroaching upon the some part of its territory lying to be surrendered justified. Was strategy to initiate four conventional wars to hit India in the greed to snatch the Indian State resulting in suffering heavy loss to the extent of lost one part of Pakistan for which it reduced its political status to the inferior level and humiliated internationally fruitful?
The rulers of India are bound to keep its sovereignty intact and are under legal obligation to take any decision to keep its national integrity inherited from their predecessors. In the light of their inherited responsibility in case they send the message to UN Military Observers deputed to supervise the cease-fire violations if happened at Line of Control to close their camps, they were justified, and that was their domestic affairs. We are at a loss to understand under which capacity, and legal ground, Pak-invader and its valley based parrot lobby dared to utter absurdly to establish their claim over the Indian State. Their resentment over the adventure of India to close down their mute supervising obligation s entrusted to them was remarked critically that "closing their camps cannot change its legal status, neither its disputed status and nor any change can be affected to the UN mandate". These all ridiculous arguments had no weight and were misleading as well as provoking. It had been better that before misleading and illusive assertion of being also the claimant of the State, they must have been done home-work first to know the fact of the events that the British India was partitioned during 1947, and the Rulers of the States of British India were empowered for sole authority to accede their States either this dominion or that. In that event All India Muslim League President M A Jinnah declared a verdict for the Muslims of the British Indian States to abide by the spirit of proclamation issued by the British Crown, and at the same time he advised to regard the decision of the Ruler of his State accession. Accordingly, these Rulers wholly and solely were supreme authority to decide the future of their subjects, as they were fully competent to take the decision to accede their States according to their own choice. The Ruler of Jammu & Kashmir State did not accede his State within the date of dead line and submitted a proposal to India and Pakistan for Stand-still agreement. With the result of that, Pak-Government accepted his proposal and signed for its acceptance, but India informed that it was being processed.
To be continued... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
