UNSC resolutions on POJK are toothless – India must act in the spirit of 22 Feb 1994 Resolution Iron is hot & PAK is weak - Time for NDA-II Government

The only dispute / differences that India has with Pakistan worth resolving is the vacation illegally occupied areas of Indian state of J&K in 1947/48 by Pakistan and all other socio- economic issues that are often listed in the parleys / agreements / meetings between two countries are in comparison only ancillaries of very very minor significances.

It has been over 70 years since 1st January 1948 when India had approached United Nations Organisation with a complaint (under Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations) against Pakistan (for having attacked the Indian territories in the State of J&K that acceded to India Dominion on 26th October 1947). And as far as UNSC resolutions were concerned they appeared just a drag on process like was even the UNSC Resolution 307 of 21 Dec 1971 that instead of asking Pakistan to vacate the territories of India including that in Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir in a routine manner occupied demanded that a durable cease-fire be observed until withdrawals could take place to respect the cease-fire line in Jammu and Kashmir contrary to Indian claims worth treating Pakistan as an aggressor.

India and Pakistan have fought three more wars after 1947/48 ( 4th April1965- 23 Sept 1965; 3 December to 16 December 1971; 26 May 1999 to 26 July 1999). Not only that as also disclosed in written reply to Q-32 in Lok Sabha on 12th Dec 2018 by GOI , under the so-called ‘Boundary Agreement’ signed between China and Pakistan on 2 March 1963, Pakistan has even illegally ceded 5,180 sq. kms of Indian territory in Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir to China. After 1965 war India had even returned captured Haji Peer to Pakistan. Not only that even after 1971 India has ceded some more area to Pakistan ( Chamb Niabat of Jammu District to Pakistan ).

In the written reply to LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 32 of Dr. Kirit Somaiya MP (a) whether the Government has asked Pakistan at diplomatic level to vacate all illegally occupied areas of Kashmir;(b) if so, the details thereof;(c) the details of the areas in Kashmir under illegal occupation of Pakistan till date;(d) whether Pakistan has reverted and taken initiative to vacate the illegally occupied areas of Kashmir; and (e) if so, the details thereof ? as was answered on 12.12.2018 Government of India had answered through THE MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS that < “India’s consistent and principled position, as also enunciated in the 1994 Parliament Resolution adopted unanimously, is that the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir has been, is, and shall be an integral part of India. Pakistan has been in illegal occupation of approximately 78,000 sq. km of Indian territory in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Under the so-called ‘Boundary Agreement’ signed between China and Pakistan on 2 March 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq. km of Indian territory in Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir to China. We have repeatedly and consistently called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation, most recently on 30 November 2018.Pakistan continues to be in illegal and forcible occupation of a part of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir.>.

It has been over 70 years since 1st January 1948 when India had approached United Nations Organisation with a complaint (under Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations , any Member may bring any situation whose continuance is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security to the attention of the Security Council) against Pakistan (for having attacked the Indian territories in the State of J&K that acceded to India Dominion on 26th October 1947) stating that situation then existed between India and Pakistan due to the aid which invaders, consisting of nationals of Pakistan and of tribesmen from the territory immediately adjoining Pakistan on the north-west, were then drawing from Pakistan for operations against Jammu and Kashmir, a State which had acceded to the Dominion of India and is part of India; and made a request that Pakistan be prevailed upon / the areas of Indian state of J&K illegally occupied ( by Pakistan/ invaders) be got vacated. It was also submitted that < “They (GOI) feel justified in requesting the Security Council to ask the Government of Pakistan : (1) To prevent Pakistan Government personnel, military and civil, from participating or assisting in the invasion of the Jammu and Kashmir State; (2) To call upon other Pakistani nationals to desist from taking any part in the fighting in the Jammu and Kashmir State; (3) To deny to the invaders : (a) access to any use of its territory for operations against Kashmir, (b) military and other supplies, (c) all other kinds of aid that might tend to prolong the present struggle.>. It was on 20 Jan 1948 that UNSC resolved ( 39) to assist in the peaceful resolution of the Kashmir Conflict by setting up a 3 member commission to suggest what course of action would be best to help further restoring peace in the region that was followed by UNSC resolution -47 of 21 April 1948 that asked for (i) Pakistan to use its "best endeavors" to secure the withdrawal of all tribesmen and Pakistani nationals, putting an end to the fighting in the state (ii) India was asked to "progressively reduce" its forces to the minimum level required for keeping law & order and principles that India should there after handle the administering law and order in consultation with the Commission by as far as possible using local personnel (ii) India to ensure that all the major political parties were invited to participate in the state government at the ministerial level and to appoint a Plebiscite Administrator nominated by the United Nations ; and it was after that resolution of 13th Aug 1948.

UNSC could not do much, even the 1st clause of UNSC Resolution-47 21-04-1948 on the 1st Jan 1948 complaint of India against ‘Pakistan’ could not be got implemented by UNSC from Pakistan side . There was a formal cease fire on 1st Jan 1949 between the Indian and Pakistan Forces and then it was that The Karachi Agreement ( only for military purposes ) that formally called the Agreement Between Military Representatives of India and Pakistan Regarding the Establishment of a Cease-Fire Line in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, was signed on 27 July 1949.The areas occupied by Pakistan in 1947 remained with Pakistan.

Then it was TASHKENT DECLARATION SIGNED BY PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA Lal Bahadur Shastri AND PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN M.A KHAN, F. M. on 10th January 1966 at Tashkent (Uzbekistan ) after 1965 Indo Pak War ( April 1965 to 23 September 1965) . There was no direct reference to some thing like India asking Pakistan to vacate areas of J&K occupied in 1947/48 and Pakistan making commitment for vacating the occupied areas of the Indian sate of J&K except that clause -1 had some general reference to J&K. The clauses were general diplomatic verses and Clause –II just talked what had happened on 4rth August 1965 where it said < The Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan have agreed that all armed personnel of the two countries shall be withdrawn not later than 25 February, 1966 to the positions they held prior to 5 August, 1965, and both sides shall observe the cease-?re terms on the cease-?re line. ; Clause- said < The Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan have agreed to consider measures towards the restoration of economic and trade relations, communications, as well as cultural exchanges between India and Pakistan, and to take measures to implement the existing agreements between India and Pakistan > Clause-IV < The Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan have agreed that both sides will discourage any propaganda directed against the other country, and will encourage propaganda which promotes the development of friendly relations between the two countries. > and clause –VI < The Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan have agreed to consider measures towards the restoration of economic and trade relations, communications, as well as cultural exchanges between India and Pakistan, and to take measures to implement the existing agreements between India and Pakistan> Clause-IX < The Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan have agreed that the sides will continue meetings both at the highest and at other levels on matters of direct concern to both countries. Both sides have recognized the need to set up joint Indian-Pakistani bodies which will report to their Governments in order to decide what further steps should be taken. >

After TASHKENT DECLARATION SIGNED BY PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA Lal Bahadur Shastri AND PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN M.A KHAN, F. M. on 10th January 1966 followed The Shimla Agreement signed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and President Zul?kar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan on 2nd July 1972 which could be seen more than a peace treaty seeking to reverse the consequences of the 1971 war – 3 December 1971 to 16 December 1971 (i.e. to bring about withdrawals of troops and an exchange of PoWs) where it said (i). The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan resolved that the two countries put an end to the con?ict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the sub-continent, so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing talk of advancing the welfare of their peoples……….. That the basic issues and causes of con?ict which have bedeviled the relations between the two countries for the last 25 years shall be resolved by peaceful means; That they shall always respect each other’s national unity, territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality;….. (ii)…….(iii) ….(iv) In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the Governments agree that: Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border. In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-?re of December 17, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual di?erences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this Line. The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this Agreement and shall be completed within a period of 30 days thereof. (v) This Agreement will be subject to rati?cation by both countries in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with e?ect from the date on which the Instruments of Rati?cation are exchanged (vi) Both Governments agree that their respective Heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that, in the meanwhile, the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a ?nal settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.

It was only after nearly three decades that Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee went by bus (via Wagah border) to Lahore on invitation to meet Pakistan Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif on 20th Feb 1999 and signed & issued on 21st February 1999 The Lahore Declaration ( known as Lahore Declaration The Prime Ministers of the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan) and got issued - Joint Statement – the Memorandum of Understanding(by Indian Foreign Secretary, Mr. K. Raghunath, and the Pakistan Foreign Secretary, Mr. Shamshad Ahmad) in their presence reiterating the determination of both countries to implementing the Shimla Agreement 2nd July 1972 in letter and spirit; recalling their ( Foreign Secretaries agreement of 23rd September, 1998 New York) that an environment of peace and security is in the supreme national interest of both sides and that the resolution of all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, is essential for this purpose so shall intensify their e?orts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir; shall refrain from intervention and interference in each other's internal a?airs; shall intensify their composite and integrated dialogue process for an early and positive outcome of the agreed bilateral agenda . But that was followed by Kargil war May 1999.

As per records in the public domain it will not be wrong to say that the ‘Heads’ of India & Pakistan never met for pointed and exclusive ( final) settlement of Jammu & Kashmir till there was the Indo – Pak Kargil war - 3rd May through 26 May 1999 to 26 July 1999 - as aftermath of which Indian PM Atal Behari Vajpai & Pakistan President Gen Musharraf did go for a Summit at Agra 14-16 June 2001 ( India) but at the end of two exhausting days there too they had to leave with not even a document in their hand to study and annotate for their readers and “Principals” (Heads – Indian Prime Minister & Pakistan President ) did not meet the press to say what they had discussed, even there were no leaks or peeks of any kind. So whether there were any talks about India asking Pakistan to vacate occupied areas still could not be said.

And what has happened after 2001 as regards 22 Feb 1994 Parliament Resolution where in it has been demanded ( from Pakistan) that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression surely has many unanswered questions about the duty performed by Government of India to get the operative part of the resolution (“Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression”) executed is still a question many Indians surely would be asking since that part of the resolution (Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression ) vacate has so far, in a way, remained unsaid & un executed at the level of GOI. And as far as UNSC resolutions were concerned they appeared just a drag on process contrary to Indian claims worth treating Pakistan as an aggressor like it was also the spirit under lying the UNSC Resolution 307 of 21 Dec 1971 that instead of asking Pakistan to vacate the territories occupied of India including that of/ in Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir in a routine manner even after 23 years of Indian complaint just demanded that a durable cease-fire be observed until withdrawals could take place to respect the cease-fire line in Jammu and Kashmir.

If we go by the report of Dileep Padgaonkar lead 3 – member interlocutors team (appointed on 13-10-2010 after All-Party Parliamentary Delegation’s visit to Jammu and Kashmir from September 20-22, 2010 and the Home Minister’s announcement of September 25, 2010 ) as submitted to Government of India in Oct 2011 some negotiations were on between Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh and Pakistan President Gen. Musharraf. Similarly the indicators as regards the contents of negotiations in process as mentioned in Dileep Padgaonkar report/ and some other claims / reports have surely been of the type that would surely violate Article- 1 of COI , Section-3 of J&K Constitution and ofcourse also 22nd Feb 1994 Parliament Resolution. Interlocutors Report says at Page: 10 : The key objective is, as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has expressed, make the LoC irrelevant. It should become a symbol of Concord and Cooperation. Point: 38 :: “The most important contribution of this phase was to coordinate initiatives to end the armed conflict. Thus, the veteran separatist leader of the People’s Conference, Abdul Ghani Lone, went to Pakistan administered Jammu and Kashmir to ask the armed groups to enter a peace process. The 2002- 2005 Coalition government in Jammu and Kashmir, headed by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, launched a “healing touch policy”. And for the first time the Pakistani government acknowledged that “Pakistani soil” was being used to launch terrorist attacks against India ::” At Point 42 to 44 page 24 to 25 the interlocutor report opined “ : Perhaps the most important achievement of Phase II was the opening of back channel talks between Indian and Pakistani envoys. The two sides narrowed divergences and focused on convergence to the point that they came close to a framework agreement for resolution, comprising self governance, phased demilitarization on both sides of the LOC and, over time, joint development institutions. For the first time, the Pakistani government began to recognize elected political representatives in Jammu and Kashmir, changing a long-held position that the APHCs and armed groups were the sole representatives of the people. At the same time, there were several rounds of New Delhi-APHC (M) and inter-Kashmiri dialogue, and five Working Groups to propose ways to resolve the conflict were set up by Prime Minister Singh. …. …. Four out of five of the Working Groups dealt with internal issues, and one dealt with cross-LOC relations. In other words, the internal and external tracks would have dovetailed if the framework agreement between India and Pakistan had ensued as envisaged. “President Musharraf pledged to prevent cross-border terrorist attacks, and the India-Pakistan Joint Anti-Terrorism Mechanism was set up. …” 44. Unfortunately, the explosion of violence within Pakistan led President Musharraf to request in 2007 that the talks be put on a back burner, and the elections soon after brought a Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) headed coalition to power that was internally preoccupied.” On page : 39 -40 the report said “ However, even when they do not contest the legitimacy of the Accession, the separatist elements insist that it was provisional in nature. It had to be ratified by reference to the will of the people. According to this school of thought, the leadership at the Centre, spearheaded by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, had time and again accepted this crucial condition. Indeed, the Government of India was party to the resolutions of the UN Security Council that called for determining the will of the people of the State to arrive at a permanent political settlement of the issue. The sound arguments advanced to rebut this argument fall on deaf ears. Pakistan’s refusal to vacate the portion of the princely State rendered the resolutions obsolete as indeed UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan himself acknowledged in 2004. Moreover, the report of the European Parliament in 2007, authored by Baroness Emma Nicholson, interpreted the ‘four-point formula’ that had emerged from the Manmohan Singh-Pervez Musharraf talks as providing self-determination for the former princely State…..

Interlocutor’s report 2011 says at page-40 that National Conference wants to revert to the original Article under which the State ceded to the Centre powers related to Defence, External Affairs, Communications and certain ancillary subjects and more specifically to the Delhi Agreement of 1952. The People’s Democratic Party wants to build on it by retaining certain features introduced in the pristine Article after 1953 and adding to it a ‘Greater Kashmir’ dimension de facto if not de jure. Sajjad Lone’s “Achievable Nationhood” goes several steps further as regards both the internal and the external dimensions of the Kashmir issue.”

The observations, if any , of the Government ( UPA-II till 2014 and NDA-II after that ) on the report OF THE GROUP OF INTERLOCUTORS headed by Dileep Padgaonkar , particularly where some references of negotiations like Musharraf 4 Point formulae / joint control at the highest levels of the governments , are made have not been made public till date and in the absence of that many have been getting opportunity for using the report even to strengthen the separatist proposals. GOI should have immediately / thereafter acted upon references /reports in either direction and still there is time to do so.

Even Dr. Farooq Abdullah has in the Parliament of India shown his annoyance for there being very very rare occasions when references have been made to the status of the actions taken by the Government as regards the status report of the policies framed/ actions taken by the State for executing the resolve of the Parliament as has been made in the 22nd Feb 1994 Parliament resolution. Any how it has been on 12th December 2018 that there was a Starred Question 32 a asked by Mr. KIRIT SOMAIYA MP for reply as regards the actions taken by Government of India for getting vacated the POJK from Pakistan . As far as my information is concerned Mr. Kirit could be the first 'person' to have asked government of India (pointedly) whether GOI has asked Pakistan to vacate the areas of Indian state of J&K (“Whether the Government has asked Pakistan at diplomatic level to vacate all illegally occupied areas of Kashmir?”).

No doubt the Minister for External Affairs did say that India have on 30th November 2018 also called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation but the Government of India did not pointedly elaborate where and at what level India has asked Pakistan on 30th November 2018 to vacate the areas of Indian State of J&K occupied in 1947/48 by Pakistan.

More so as regards the 22nd February 1994 Parliament resolution that had in a way in the style of some thing like facts & reasons reiterated that the State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means ( of course otherwise also required in terms of Art-1 of Constitution of India and Section-3 of Jammu & Kashmir Constitution ) , it had been demanded ( from Pakistan) that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression. So, Government of India had to get the operative part of the resolution (“Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression”) executed and that part of the resolution has so far remained unsaid & un executed at the level of GOI. I do not find any where even after 22nd Feb 1994 where GOI at any level (PM or FM level) have pointedly asked Pakistan with force to vacate occupied areas.

On 12 December 2018 that GOI was pointedly asked to reply on the floor of Lok Sabha by Dr. Kirit Somaiya MP (a) whether the Government has asked Pakistan at diplomatic level to vacate all illegally occupied areas of Kashmir;(b) if so, the details thereof but the reply as could be read from the contents the reply given by GOI has not been that speaking as was demanded.

In my opinion the reply given has not been that focused. Mr. Kirit should have further asked for some clarifications like :

1.Is the area of 5180 sq km handed over by Pakistan to China included in the figure of 78000 (app) sq km ?

2. No doubt Parliament had reiterated (declared) on 22 Feb 1994 : "The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means" and had demanded that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression. But as far as getting the areas vacated from Pakistan the Government had to get the Parliament resolution executed. I do not find any where , there after , where GOI at any level ( PM or Ext Affairs/ FM level) have asked Pakistan to vacate occupied areas. Any how in the reply External Affairs has said GOI have called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation even recently on 30 November 2018. Mr. Kirit should have sought the details / reference of the 30th Nov 2018 communication from Ext AF M since although Smt Sushma Swaraj ji has said <:“We have repeatedly and consistently called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation, most recently on November 30, 2018,”> But the reply had been without elaborating on where the issue was raised with Pakistan ? Ofcourse Pakistan still even after 72 years continues to be in “illegal and forcible occupation” of a part of Jammu and Kashmir ?

It has been over 70 years since 1st January 1948 when India had approached United Nations Organisation with a complaint (under Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations) against Pakistan (for having attacked the Indian territories in the State of J&K that acceded to India Dominion on 26th October 1947). And as far as UNSC resolutions were concerned they appeared just a drag on process like was even the UNSC Resolution 307 of 21 Dec 1971 that instead of asking Pakistan to vacate the territories of India including that in Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir in a routine manner occupied demanded that a durable cease-fire be observed until withdrawals could take place to respect the cease-fire line in Jammu and Kashmir contrary to Indian claims worth treating Pakistan as an aggressor.

India and Pakistan have fought three more wars after 1947/48 ( 4th April1965- 23 Sept 1965; 3 December to 16 December 1971; 26 May 1999 to 26 July 1999). Not only that as also disclosed in written reply to Q-32 in Lok Sabha on 12th Dec 2018 by GOI , under the so-called ‘Boundary Agreement’ signed between China and Pakistan on 2 March 1963, Pakistan has even illegally ceded 5,180 sq. kms of Indian territory in Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir to China. After 1965 war India had even returned captured Haji Peer to Pakistan. Not only that even after 1971 India has ceded some more area to Pakistan ( Chamb Niabat of Jammu District to Pakistan ).

In the written reply to LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 32 of Dr. Kirit Somaiya MP (a) whether the Government has asked Pakistan at diplomatic level to vacate all illegally occupied areas of Kashmir;(b) if so, the details thereof;(c) the details of the areas in Kashmir under illegal occupation of Pakistan till date;(d) whether Pakistan has reverted and taken initiative to vacate the illegally occupied areas of Kashmir; and (e) if so, the details thereof ? as was answered on 12.12.2018 Government of India had answered through THE MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS that < “India’s consistent and principled position, as also enunciated in the 1994 Parliament Resolution adopted unanimously, is that the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir has been, is, and shall be an integral part of India. Pakistan has been in illegal occupation of approximately 78,000 sq. km of Indian territory in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Under the so-called ‘Boundary Agreement’ signed between China and Pakistan on 2 March 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq. km of Indian territory in Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir to China. We have repeatedly and consistently called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation, most recently on 30 November 2018.Pakistan continues to be in illegal and forcible occupation of a part of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir.>.

No doubt the Minister for External Affairs did say that India have on 30th November 2018 also called upon Pakistan to immediately vacate all areas under its illegal occupation but the Government of India did not pointedly elaborate where and at what level India has asked Pakistan on 30th November 2018 to vacate the areas of Indian State of J&K occupied in 1947/48 by Pakistan.

More so as regards the 22nd February 1994 Parliament resolution that had in a way in the style of some thing like facts & reasons reiterated that the State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means ( of course otherwise also required in terms of Art-1 of Constitution of India and Section-3 of Jammu & Kashmir Constitution ) , it had been demanded ( from Pakistan) that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression. So, Government of India had to get the operative part of the resolution (“Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression”) executed and that part of the resolution has so far remained unsaid & un executed at the level of GOI. I do not find any where even after 22nd Feb 1994 where GOI at any level (PM or FM level) have pointedly asked Pakistan with force to vacate occupied areas. And now it has been also on 12 December 2018 that GOI was pointedly asked to reply on the floor of Lok Sabha by Dr. Kirit Somaiya MP (a) whether the Government has asked Pakistan at diplomatic level to vacate all illegally occupied areas of Kashmir;(b) if so, the details thereof but the reply as could be read from the contents the reply given by GOI has not been that speaking as was demanded.

Dr. Farooq Abdullah , 3 times J&K Chief Minister , has dragged his self into controversies that have sounded even ‘anti national to many’ when he has during his public addresses & media interviews at occasions since 2016 like he said in November 2017 suggesting that in his opinion the only possible solution as regards the areas of Indian State of J&K that have been occupied illegitimately by Pakistan would be converting the LOC into Indian borders arguing that otherwise he does not see any end to the 7 decades old turmoil/ unrest in which people of J&K are living. And reaction had come On 16th November 2017 from Union Minister Hansraj Ahir who said on the sidelines of function in Delhi that Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir is a part of India, due to the mistakes of the previous governments it has been with Pakistan and If we try to get “PoK” ( POJK) back, no one can stop us because it is our right. But he did not clarify why has not Government of India tried to get back ‘POK’ ( POJK) that could prove DR. Farooq Abdullah wrong who has been suggesting that for peace & stability in J&K possible solution could converting LOC into a regular international border ?

Dr. Farooq Abdullah has at occasions also made reference of suggestions that transpired between him and the then Indian PM in 1999 ( recently 02-12-2017 with Aak Tak : < ?????? ??? ???????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? .. ??? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ..?? ??????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ( ???? ???) ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ... ??????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??????? .. ?? ????? ?? .. ????? ?? ????????? ?? ??? ????? ?????????? ...... ??? ??? ????? .. ?? ?? ????? ???? .. ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????????? ??? .... ??? ????????????? ??? ...?? ????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ????? .. ?? ??? ?? … , ?? ??? ?? ?? .. ??? ??? ?? ???? .. ??? ?? ??? ??? .... ????? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ... ?? ?? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?????? … ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ????.. ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ??????.. ????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? > < dekhiye agar imandari se meri baat maante aap, agar Vajpayee ji jeet gaye hote - oos election mein jo us ke vaad aeya (2004 mein aaeya),mujhe umeed hai ke bo jaroor is mamle ko behtari ki or le jatae . ……. Vajpayee ji ne mujhae khud bulaeya ,jab lahore gye (20-21 Feb 1999), mujhe nahin le gyae , kyon ke pakistan ke liye Farooq Abdullah ……. mein ha .. mil jaega … aap to mante nahi…. aap to samjhte hain ki mein Pakistani hoon … mein attankbadi hoon.. bo samjhte hain ki meri chamdi uttar deinge .. je haal hai , bus mein jab gye, magar mujh se poocha … mein ja raha hoon, meine kaha mubarak hai jaeyae aur kuch kar ke aeeyae, jab gye to meine poocha kya kiya aap ne, kha meine vaat ki ke tum bo hissa rakh lo hum jhe rakh leinge aur line ko theek karein ge … jahaan aap hamare andar hain bapis chale jaeeye, jahaan hum andar hai bapis chale jayein ge aur dono vatan theek se rahein ge > ) But even if some solution of the type is considered by the Government of the day still unless the Parliament is involved no any territory of indian state of J&K can be given to some other country and that should not be done.

Right through 1989 till 14 February 2019 militant attack on the CRPF convoy near Pulwama ( J&K) where in more than 40 Indian jawans were martyred it has been the considered opinion of Government of India that Pakistan has been and is acting against Indian interests by diplomatically and materially supporting the militant & separatists for inflicting material as well as ideologically damages in the Indian state of J&K including conduct of atrocities also on the people of J&K living in the areas occupied by Pakistan since 1947/48.

After the 14th February 2019 attack on CRPF convoy the emotions in India have run very high and even the Government has initiated a surgical strike involving Indian Airforce destroying huge militant installations / camps across LOC in Balakot Pakistan. Indian people and all the parties in opposition too have put their weight behind Government of India for any course that the government may deem fit for action against Pakistan/ militants and as regards the areas of Indian state of J&K as occupied by Pakistan by aggressions.

Going by the claims / indicators that have come from the government now after Pulwama attack Pakistan Government has been more pushed to the wall by the policies of the present government as well as by the response / support that India has received from international community except China ( who have its own compulsions). The assessments and information that is being shared in media with the reference of government of India sources / or as claimed to be assessed by GOI about the political/economic/military status of Pakistan is that the Pakistan economy is shattered, Pakistan is no way equipped to bear the burnt of attack if India ventures into this day ( not even for 3 to 4 days ) and the ‘democratic’ Imran Khan Government is a puppet of Pak. Two years back (16th November 2017 ) Union Minister Hansraj Ahir had said on the sidelines of function in Delhi that Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir is a part of India and if we try to get PoK back, no one can stop us because it is our right. In case Mr. Ahir is to be believed, one would surely ask then why India is not getting ‘indian’ lands vacated by Pakistan?

So, going by all that and claims of government functionaries it appears to be the appropriate time for Government of India to : (i) Issue a final call on Pakistan to immediately withdraw her forces/ people from the areas of Indian state of J&K that have been illegally occupied after 1947/48 otherwise no option will be left with India than to get vacation by any other possible means including militarily (ii) Inform UN Security Council that it has been now more than 7 decades since India requested UNSC to prevail upon Pakistan to vacate the illegally occupied areas of Indian state of J&K but still no result has come and hence India is asking Pakistan to withdraw her forces since India can not afford to wait for more time as the POJK areas are being also used by some forces under the patronage of Pakistan to disturb peace / stability including indian state of J&K through militant / terrorist/ separatist activities (iii) Use open force in case Pakistan does not respond favorably in the given immediate time frame.