What does Kashmir look like over the last 70+ years had India not given it any autonomy from the very beginning?

Status
Closed

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
What does Kashmir look like over the last 70+ years had India not given it any autonomy from the very beginning but instead treated it like any other part of India from the start? For instance, how many Hindus would have moved to Kashmir over the last 70+ years in such a scenario and how many Kashmiris would have moved to other parts of India during this time?

Also, would there be less of a terrorism/insurgency problem in Kashmir later on (such as after the late 1980s) if Kashmir would have been much more Hindu? Also, might this have made Indo-Pakistani relations better due to the creation of new facts on the ground (specifically new demographic facts) in Kashmir?

Any thoughts on all of this?
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,874
India
It would be difficult to judge what would have happened. But article 370 was one of the blunders of Indian history, while Jammu and Ladakh were kept hostage to Article 370, the Kashmir valley resisted full integration to India because of article 370.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
It would be difficult to judge what would have happened. But article 370 was one of the blunders of Indian history, while Jammu and Ladakh were kept hostage to Article 370, the Kashmir valley resisted full integration to India because of article 370.
How many Hindus do you think would have settled in Kashmir in a scenario without Article 370?
 
May 2011
515
UK
It makes more geographic and political sense for the whole of Kashmir to be part of Pakistan. India has no conceivable gain from trying to hold onto it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abaseen

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
It makes more geographic and political sense for the whole of Kashmir to be part of Pakistan. India has no conceivable gain from trying to hold onto it
Southern and eastern Kashmir have a lot of Hindus and Buddhists, respectively:



Also, does Kashmir have some natural resource of value in large amounts? For instance, water?
 
May 2011
515
UK
Southern and eastern Kashmir have a lot of Hindus and Buddhists, respectively:

Also, does Kashmir have some natural resource of value in large amounts? For instance, water?
India would gain a lot more than it would lose by giving up the region to Pakistan. In one stroke it would remove a troublesome a costly, potentially ungovernable region, it would improve relations between both countries, improve India's international standing and stop the incessant border conflicts. Pakistan would have a larger and legitimate border with china which is better for the flow of trade and therefore the economy of the region as a whole. The region would become peaceful therefore increase economic development to the benefit of everyone.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
India would gain a lot more than it would lose by giving up the region to Pakistan. In one stroke it would remove a troublesome a costly, potentially ungovernable region, it would improve relations between both countries, improve India's international standing and stop the incessant border conflicts. Pakistan would have a larger and legitimate border with china which is better for the flow of trade and therefore the economy of the region as a whole. The region would become peaceful therefore increase economic development to the benefit of everyone.
I think that a fairer solution might be for India to give up the Kashmir Valley while keeping the rest of Kashmir. That said, though, what value does the Kashmir Valley have for India?

Also, India could quite naturally wonder why exactly it should be expected to give up the Kashmir Valley when Pakistan is unwilling to give up its part of Kashmir and when China is unwilling to give up the Kashgar Valley.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
I know that Indians sometimes invoke the Kashmiri Pandits--as in, saying that they will never be able to return to their homes if Kashmir will ever become independent or join Pakistan. I suppose that this claim might be similar to what a Serbian might have argued in regards to Kosovo--as in, if Serbian rule will end there, then a lot of the Serbs there will get ethnically cleansed (as ultimately did end up happening).

I do agree with you that things would be easier for India if it either gave up the Kashmir Valley or, alternatively, flooded the Kashmir Valley with so many Hindus that its demographics would have significantly been altered. IHMO, if India insisted on keeping Kashmir, it should have avoided the whole Article 370 business from the very beginning and instead opened Kashmir far and wide to Hindu settlement. Of course, it would have also been nice had India expelled Pakistan from all of Kashmir in 1949 instead of asking the UN for a ceasefire and thus subsequently been able to hold a free and fair plebiscite in Kashmir in order to determine its future fate.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,900
SoCal
I think that a fairer solution might be for India to give up the Kashmir Valley while keeping the rest of Kashmir. That said, though, what value does the Kashmir Valley have for India?

Also, India could quite naturally wonder why exactly it should be expected to give up the Kashmir Valley when Pakistan is unwilling to give up its part of Kashmir and when China is unwilling to give up the Kashgar Valley.
 

kandal

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,782
USA
It makes more geographic and political sense for the whole of Kashmir to be part of Pakistan. India has no conceivable gain from trying to hold onto it
Scottish first minister has been asking UK Prime minister to have another referendum so Scotland can secede, now that she is sure she can win the referendum. Do you think UK is going to let her have it?

For India and Indians, Kashmir is lot more than any 'conceivable gain'. It is an integral part of India as its capital Delhi. The chances of India letting Kashmir go is absolutely zero. It will be a part of India, as long as there is an India as a nation. One has to destroy India first before Kashmir can secede.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajeev and Futurist
Status
Closed