Islamabad, pti:
In what is seen as a significant shift in its stand, Pakistan on Monday said it never claimed Jammu and Kashmir to be its integral part and that the dispute is about the “aspirations” of Kashmiris.
“First of all Pakistan does not claim Kashmir. The Kashmir dispute is about the aspirations of Kashmiris,” foreign office spokesperson Tasleem Aslam told a media briefing here.
“Pakistan never claimed Kashmir to be its integral part. What we said is Kashmiris should be able to decide their future. We hope they would opt for Pakistan,” she said.
Her remarks drew angry reactions from presspersons who persistently asked on what basis Pakistan could say that it has never claimed Kashmir and what happened to slogans like Kashmir banega Pakistan (Kashmir will be part of Pakistan), to which she replied “it was essentially coined by Kashmiris and not by Pakistan”.
Kashmiris’ say
Clarifying that President Pervez Musharraf, in his interview to NDTV, has not stated that Pakistan would give up its stand on Kashmir unilaterally, Ms Aslam said as per UN Security Council resolutions “Pakistan and India are parties to this dispute and Kashmiris have essential say to decide their future”.
Ms Aslam denied there was any shift in Pakistan’s stand, saying even the country’s successive constitutions since independence never claimed Kashmir as a part of Pakistan. When a journalist referred to her remarks as a “new stand”, she shot back saying, “Which new situation? Do we say that Azad Jammu and Kashmir (as PoK is referred to officially) is part of Pakistan. AJK has its own president and prime minister.
If we have been claiming it as part of Pakistan, you would have had a chief minister there. You do not need any other proof that we have not made any territorial claims on Kashmir. We respect the wishes of Kashmiris,” she said.
“Please study Pakistan’s historical position from 1947 to this day,” Aslam said, adding that Pakistan had not wanted “any forced union and claim that territory.”
Final settlement
Asked about Musharraf’s proposals for demilitarisation, self-rule and joint management to resolve the Kashmir issue, she the President talked about a final settlement that was acceptable to all stake holders — Pakistan, India and the people of Kashmir.
“Once you have a settlement that is acceptable to all the parties, naturally that would be your new position. So where is the conflict?”
Same position
“We have not given up our position. Our legal position is the same. I said we never claimed Kashmir to be an integral part of Pakistan. We have always said we would respect the wishes of Kashmiris.”
About a “third option”, which sought independence for Kashmir, Ms Aslam said, “I cannot comment on that. I do not want to be prejudging the outcome of a settlement that may actually take place.”
Link
Wild Wild Web
Excellent move. Good to point out that what Indian and some ignorant commentators repeatedly make it look like a tug of war between Pak and India, is actually mainly a Kashmiri issue.Originally Posted by Endangered
Kashmiris decide.
It should be clear that who stands on a moral high ground and that India's presence there is occupation and it is yet to say something similar and so its position can be assumed to be to gobble up all of Kashmir even if Kashmiris are against it.
After losing at diplomacy and war it was bound to happen, about time they give their claim on Baluchistan too.
There has been no change in position. The older perceived position was just what India goes around telling people.
India historically had the better media. We've caught on!
Asim,
Then why the fuss about forcing political parties in PoK to swear accession of Indian Kashmir to Pakistan, before they are eligible for any official recognition?
Why was JKLF sidelined in the early 90s by the ISI in favour of Hizbul Mijahideen?
When you answer these questions clinically, you will see who stands on the moral high ground, and the hollow proclamations of the article.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
Nice article.
Since Pakistanis are such fair minded people, why don't they first withdraw from parts of Kashmir they have occupied?
Right so India which already wants to take over the rest of the Kashmir and already occupies whatever Kashmir it has and is against complying with the wishes of the Kashmiris would just capture all of Kashmir.Nice article.
Since Pakistanis are such fair minded people, why don't they first withdraw from parts of Kashmir they have occupied?
"‘Pakistan never claimed J&K as its integral part"
Who cares ?
We own 2/3rds of it....might as well take the remaining part and show those people what a real administration is all about when all they have seen in jihadi slaves dancing to the tunes of their Generals in Islamabad.
You expect him to answer a proper question instead of the usuall trolling eh Captain?Asim,
Then why the fuss about forcing political parties in PoK to swear accession of Indian Kashmir to Pakistan, before they are eligible for any official recognition?
Based on past precedent and present tactics, we have more reason to worry about Pak(or Pak based groups) to run over the territory and usurp Kashmir. So we are forced to compromise on the remaining 1/3 rd territory(PoK) that justly belongs to India and only India.
Thats true Pakistan never claimed JK..they just launch quixotic wars every 15 years to grab it.....
Pak won't run over Kashmir if Pak forces are at minimum levels and so are India's.
That already happened in 1947. Militias from Pak ran over the place, India was forced to send in the Army to flush them out. By then some damage was already done.
Oh yeah!
And India started Kargil...and '65 too. Right!
We were the ones who made the tribal cross the Durand line to capture the valley when the kind had not decided on anything.
And pray tell me how do you know what the Kashmiris want? You been there?
Why ofcourse!
Stupid of me. You must have been there..thats how you know everythng about the Kashmiris.
We got only 1/3 dear. The other 2/3rds the Chinese and the Pakistanis have."‘Pakistan never claimed J&K as its integral part"
Who cares ?
We own 2/3rds of it....might as well take the remaining part and show those people what a real administration is all about when all they have seen in jihadi slaves dancing to the tunes of their Generals in Islamabad.
No sir. Not quixotic.Thats true Pakistan never claimed JK..they just launch quixotic wars every 15 years to grab it.....
Quixotic means idealistic and impractical.
The wars are certainly not based on ideals, and going by Kargil, they certainly impracticle.
"To every man upon this earth, Death cometh soon or late;
And how can a man die better; Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his father; And the temples of his gods."
If I recall conrrectly from the book 'Slender was the thread' by Lt.Gen Lionel Sen(the brigade commander of the 161inf bgd, which is till date located in Uri, and was responsible for the fight the Indians gave those bloody chaps...supposedly tribals...my bare foot!)
"The tribals had come as far as Baramullaha in the valley and were only a few hours away from Srinagar. Fortunately(or rather unfortunately as you see it) the tribals were busy with ranskaing and looting and raping the town that gave Brigadier Singh(the head of the state forces) the time to collect 120 men and head for Baramullaha. There they blew the bridge that connected the two cities. This gave the Indian army a precious few days to collect in Srinagar. Lt. Col Ranjit Rai led his 1 Sikh to Patan."
I wanted to type much more, but as I am a lazy bum, I decided that this was enough!
"To every man upon this earth, Death cometh soon or late;
And how can a man die better; Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his father; And the temples of his gods."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: