news details |
|
|
| Pak-abortive attempt for third party participation in Two-nation meeting over J&K State-II | | | A N Bharadwaj | 9/15/2015 10:31:33 PM |
|
India in very clear terms
informed to Pak-ruling
leadership to view the problems relating to the State on the basis of the principles under bilateral status as already decided by India and Pakistan under Simla agreement and Lahore Declaration. Pak-attempt to involve anti-national elements who are the paid members of its lobby working in the valley to implement its agenda with the use of religious weapon and who are no representative character and reputation among the people in two-nation meeting over the State in the status of to represent its one of the components as a nation, which cannot be acceptable in the light of political federal position of India. No superfluous entry in the meeting is possible; while India itself remains ready to attend all problems of its people. Once the citizen of the State opted the citizenship of India during the partition of British India, he cannot change its status, but he can migrate to other country as desired by him. It is very strange, while India's door is open for anyone to hear their problems, in that event the eagerness for intrusion in the two-nation meeting does not carry any weight. India committed internationally to resolve all issues whatever may be, bilaterally with Pakistan in peaceful manner, in the light of that there is no scope to involve any third party or mediator in the two-nation meeting over the State.
It is amazing that during the judicial proceedings of the case, keeping in view of Pak. non-co-operating and indifferent attitude to vacate the unwarranted occupied territory and evade to make congenial situation for plebiscite as agreed by Indian and Pakistan , the U N Security Council closed the chapter once for all, except asked Pakistan to keep the status quo in tact of the Indian State territory encroached upon by it during aggression, but it was unheard and avoided win kingly to comply with its directions to make a congenial situation for further process, but all was gone in vain. Thus the second part of the case is yet lying which is to be processed by it. After dismissing the case against Pakistan, India again showed its generosity to Pakistan and invited Pak. Prime Minister to Simla to discuss mutual problem which was concluded to decide all problems bilaterally in peaceful manner which would to be cropped up and bound themselves with an agreement. The second part of the case to surrender the grabbed territory is still lying pending. It is the story of the State Jammu & Kashmir based on ground realties.
The State issue is between India and Pakistan only which is to be decided by them mutually in peaceful manner, but any unwarranted interruption made by Maulvi Mirwaiz Omar Farooq of unconcerned gold-plated issue under the name and style that the State was a political issue and needed to be solved politically did not possess any weight. He is nowhere to utter about two nation meeting due to his status. He is an Indian citizen possessing the Islamic religious philosophy to preach its tenets to people against social evils and promote peace and harmony to enrich the composite culture. He is supposed to occupy his dignified seat to pick up thread where it was left by his predecessors to disseminate their peace message to the world. The tune raised by him as an Indian does not meet the national standard. He belongs one of the smallest invisible components of the nation, who is free to talk any time with India Government for the welfare of his followers, as such the State cannot be termed of political issue. He needs to study the history from pre-historic time to the present historical events and then justify his stand.
The Foreign Affairs Minister of India clearly reiterated Pakistan and other world statesmen including the U N O appeared in the media on 1st June 2015, that the policy of the Government of India guided by three known principles including talk without any third party intervention, the first to resolve all issues bilaterally through peaceful manner, the second to talk mutually only without any third party or any mediator and the third to talk in conducive environment free from terrorism for gainful results for the bilateral meeting. It was for Pakistan to decide whether to talk with its anti-national lobby members would be better or with India. Under Pak-double edged policy to initiate dialogue with India over the State in the inciting atmosphere of terrorism and violence by misusing religion would not bear any fruit. It was left for Pakistan to justify its usefulness and viability of its double-edged policy for restoring peace and developing diplomatic relations.
After every short interval Mirwaiz raised voice, one of the members of the Pak-lobby working in the valley to implement the Pak-agenda to resolve the State issue settled long ago, as they were a natural party in so called State dispute. Afterwards, he asserted that State was a political question and needed to be resolved politically. Then he uttered loudly that it was a legal issue and needed to be resolved legally. His twisting after thought confusing issue conceived in sick-mind had no weight in the light of central subject of the issue, which was a main tussle forged by Pakistan for its own political interest, under which the case had been contested. The voice of demand of a Pak-mouthpiece along with other sectarian secessionist, who dances on Pak-tune, does not carry any weight, which would bear no fruit. In fact that Pak-lobby follows a negative approach for the people of the State; therefore, it is termed as an irrelevant because of being human blood-spilling elements of the society and instigates all the times to the people for disharmony in the name of religion. Therefore, it would not be encouraging for Nirwaiz to raise any afterthought issue at this stage when the case is lying pending for considering under Simla agreement. After the accession of the State, no objection arises for any question, and no any offshoot remains which is to be viewed, but door is still open for Pakistan to satisfy itself according to its desire on the basis of the historical documents under Simla agreements. Mirwaiz may raise any issue with his National Government for his microscopic Kashmiri Muslim community of the nation, but Pakistan has no role to interfere in the political affairs of India.
At present, Mirwaiz does not possess any claim to represent himself for any community of the State on any ground because of he is not an elected representative of his state people. He should know that Gujjar community whose people are more than Kashmiri Muslims, Kashmiri Pandit community, victim of the aliens whose people are the indigenous of the valley has the first political right on parity basis, Boddh and Shia community of Ladakh who claim also to be the principal party of the State, besides the people of the Jammu region headed by B J P and other political ideological parties are also looking onward very eagerly to participate in two nation meeting, which is not possible. Two-nation meeting means peaceful discussion between aggressor and victim from where the issue was started to limit the sovereign rights of their nations on the basis of the merit and historical documents, where Mirwaiz cannot participate in that meeting as a component of the nation of great India. The self-claimed leader of the State masses Mirwaiz justified his proposed meeting which had to be held with Pak-advisor Sartaj Aziz after his back-out from the meeting on terrorism vide agenda as decided in Russia between two Prime Ministers, with an argument that India had created mistrust by opposing National Advisors meeting and revived missing memory of former Prime Minister Atal Behari Bajpai and other of that time who had facilitated to talk with them. The present national Government also facilitates to everyone to approach it, but he did not deem fit to approach the authorities,' therefore his assertion is all lie. The present National Government headed by Narinder Modi is following also the same liberal secular democratic policy which had been followed by his predecessors. Pakistan should reciprocate to develop neighbourly diplomatic relations and co-operation to restore peace.
It was not viable for him and other anti-national Pak-lobby members to participate in the meeting invited by the guest country diplomat without taken in to the confidence of host country diplomat ahead of official meeting to web strategy against the nation on the Land of India which was embarrassing. As per international law and norms, the guest country diplomat neither can move freely in the host country nor arrange meetings with undesirable elements of the country without taking in to the confidence of diplomat of the host country. There was a meeting on terrorism between two countries vide agenda, in that event there was no need for anyone to clamour to take part in the meeting, which was a joke. In case he is interested to resolve the so called State issue, he will have to go back to catch the thread from where the case was started i.e. the representation of Government of India submitted by it to the U N Security Council. It does not lie on any whim. In case he is sincere to resolve the State so called issue, he should dedicate himself to bring Pakistan to review its policy to settle the affairs on theground realities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
