Right, here we are. I said I'd get back to you on this. Here are the UN resolutions. Here is what happened. Here is why India has ignored binding resolutions. Starting with something of historical significance, going through the process 1 by 1. Long read, but will clarify things, so no Indian can cause mischief and twist words.
Kashmir was sold to the a man by the name of Gulab Singh in 1846, when the British defeated the Sikhs for Rs. 7.5 million under the Treaty of Amritsar to pay for their war debts (even though the majority population of Kashmir was Muslim). For another hundred years Kashmir remained in the hands of the Mahrajah's successors. In 1945 however, the British could not hold onto India and they decided to leave whilst reaching agreement under the "two nation theory" to generate a state of Pakistan for those who wanted it. This led to several states including those of modern day Pakistan, and modern day Bangladesh wanting to join the Pakistani Union. However, there remained a state which hesitated about which country to join. No doubt this was because the leader, a Sikh, did not represent the religious culture if you like of his subjects, the majority of who were Muslim. There followed a chain of events which can be summarized in the following letter to Viceeroy Mountbatter from Maharajah Hari Singh (ruler of Kashmir in 1947) :-
Letter from Maharaja Hari Singh to Lord Mountbatten on Pak invasion of J&K in 1947
My dear Lord Mountbatten,
I have to inform Your Excellency that a grave emergency has arisen in my State and request the immediate assistance of your Government. As Your Excellency is aware,the State of Jammu and Kashmir has not acceded to either the Dominion of India or Pakistan. Geographically my State is contiguous with both of them. Besides, my State has a common boundary with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and with China. In their external relations the Dominion of India and Pakistan cannot ignore this fact. I wanted to take time to decide to which Dominion I should accede or whether it is not in the best interests of both the Dominions and of my State to stand independent, of course with friendly and cordial relations with both. I accordingly approached the Dominions of India and Pakistan to enter into standstill agreement with my State. The Pakistan Government accepted this arrangement. The Dominion of India desired further discussion with representatives of my Government. I could not arrange this in view of the developments indicated below. ln fact the Pakistan Goernment under the standstill agreement is operating the post and telegraph system inside the State. Though we have got a standstill agreement with the Pakistan Government, the Govemment permitted a steady and increasing strangulation of supplies like food, salt and petrol to my State.
Afridis, soldiers in plain clothes, and desperadoes with modern weapons have been allowed to infiltrate into the State, at first in the Poonch area, then from Sialkot and finally in a mass in the area adjoining-Hazara district on the Ramkote side. The result has been that the limited number of troops at the disposal of the State had to be dispersed and thus had to face the enemy at several points simultaneously, so that it has become difficult to stop the wanton destruction of life and property and the looting of the Mahura power house, which supplies electric current to the whole of Srinagar and which has been burnt. The number of women who have been kidnapped and raped makes my heart bleed. The wild forces thus let loose on the State are marching on with the aim of capturing Srinagar, the summer capital of my government, as a first step to overrunning the whole State. The mass infiltration of tribesman drawn from distant areas of the North-West Frontier Province, coming regularly in motortrucks, using the Manwehra-Mazaffarabad road and fully armed with up-to-date weapons, cannot possibly be done without the knowledge of the Provincial Govemment of the North-West Frontier Province and the Government of Pakistan. Inspite of repeated appeals made by my Government no attempt has been made to check these raiders or to stop them from coming into my State. In fact, both radio and the Press of Pakistan have reported these occurences. The Pakistan radio even put out the story that a provisional government has been set up in Kashmir. The people of my State, both Muslims and non-Muslims, generally have taken no part at all.
With the conditbns obtaining at present in my State and the great emergency of the situation as it exists, I have no option but to ask for help from the Indian Dominion. Naturally they cannot send the help asked for by me without my State acceding to the Dominion of India. I have accordingly decided to do so, and I attach the instrument of accession for acceptance by your Government. The other alternative is to leave my state and people to free booters. On this basis no civilised government can exist or be maintained.
This alternative I will never allow to happen so long as I am the ruler of the State and I have life to defend my country. I may also inform your Excellency's Government that it is my intention at once to set up an interim government and to ask Sheikh Abdullah to carry the responsibilities in this emergency with my Prime Minister.
If my State is to be saved, immediate assistance must be available at Srinagar. Mr. V.P. Menon is fully aware of the gravity of the situation and will explain it to you, if further explanation is needed.
In haste and with kindest regards,
October 26, 1947
Response from Lord Mountbatten
My dear Maharaja Sahib,
Your Highness' letter dated 26 October 1947 has been delivered to me by Mr. V.P. Menon. In the circumstances mentioned by Your Highness, my Government have decided to accept the accession of Kashmir State to the Dominion of India. In consistence with their policy that in the case of any State where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State, it is my Government's wish that, as soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir and its soil cleared of the invader, the question of the State's accession should be settled by a reference to the people.
Meanwhile, in response to Your Highness' appeal for military aid, action has been taken today to send troops of the Indian Army to Kashmir, to help your own forces to defend your territory and to protect the lives, property, and honour of your people. My Government and I note with satisfaction that Your Highness has decided to invite Sheikh Abdullah to form an interim Government to work with your Prime Minister.
Mountbatten of Burma
October 27, 1947 http://www.kashmir.com/modules.php?n...=article&sid=5
The important points of Mountbatten's letters
The Kashmiri people must decide whether they want to join with India or Pakistan
The Kashmiri people would get the chance to vote as soon as law and order was restored
The history continues....
So, the Indian Army came into Kashmir to restore law and order and prevent the alleged incursions by Pathani tribesmen from the frontier province of what was to become Pakistan. So far it's clear. India restores law and order, holds, free and fair elections, Kashmiris choose their path either India or Pakistan and India leaves if the Kashmiris choose Pakistan. Let's ignore the issue of whether the Maharajah was right to ignore the wishes of his majority Muslim populous and invite the Indian Army in, since now the UN stepped in and international law became applicable.
At this time, Pakistani irregulars controlled about 35% of Kashmir and India the rest. The UN decided to establish the line of control between these areas. Then began years of debate and UN resolutions about this conflict. The main essence of these resolutions are these in my point of view :-
Resolution of the Security Council of March 30, 1951-->> Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949 and of the Security Council resolution of 14 March 1950 (see below), and have re-affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations (Binding agreement between India, Pakistan, and the UNSC
Resolution of the Security Council, 14 March1950 -->Considering that the resolution of the outstanding difficulties be based upon the substantial measure of agreement of fundamental principles already reached, and that steps should be taken forthwith for the demilitarization of the State and for the expeditious determination of its future in accordance with the freely expressed will of the inhabitants.
In addition, India is bound to the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) resolutions of 1948 and 1949. Both re-iterate that the will of the Kashmiri people will determine which side they join. These therefore are binding in nature. Even the Indian foreign minister, Krishna Menon, acknowledged this by describing these resolutions as being in the nature of an “international agreement”. The acceptance of their binding character by the Indian permanent representative to the UN during the 1957 Security Council debate on Kashmir further confirmed this. The fact that the UN acknowledged the binding nature of this agreement makes it an international law/standard. A violation of this international law is illegal. Now here is the crux of the matter :-
In 1951 with Article 370 (which has been temporary for the last 53 years) India incorporated Kashmir temporarily into their constitution, and then finally amended their fully incorporating Kashmir into the Indian constitution 4 years later (1957) without consuIing the people of Kashmir. This is clearly a violation of UN resolutions since plebscite must be held before Kashmir accedes to anyone.
This was agreed bilaterally with the UN as observed by the UN. Can there be any disagreement that it was illegal to steal Kashmir like this?
The binding nature of these UN resolutions (acknowledgement from India at a government level)
Finally some quotes from Indian officials on Kashmir exemplifying their commitment to plebiscite rather than forced accession as history has found them do :-
We adhere strictly to our pledge of plebiscite in Kashmir – a pledge made to the people because they believe in democratic government …… We don’t regard Kashmir as a commodity to be trafficked in
-Krishna Menon (Press statement in London, reported in the Statesman,
New Delhi, 2nd August, 1951)
The Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible
-Letter from Govt. of India to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, 11th September, 1951
I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has undertaken.
-Krishna Menon (Statement at UN Security Council, 24th January, 1957)
The resolutions of January 17, 1948 and the resolutions of the UNICP, the assurances given, these are all resolutions which carry a greater weight – that is because we have accepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or not.
-Krishna Menon, (Statement at UN Security Council, 20th February, 1957)
These documents (UNCIP reports) and declarations and the resolutions of the Security Council are decisions; they are resolutions, there has been some resolving of a question of one character or another, there has been a meeting of minds on this question where we have committed ourselves to it.
-Krishna Menon, (Statement at the Security Council, 9th October, 1957)
India believes that sovereignty rests in the people and should return to them.
-Krishna Menon, (The Statesman, Delhi, 19th January, 1962)