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
21,977
SoCal
It's unfortunate that they have to/would think of adopting this policy in the 21st century but I would expect Modi to support settler-colonialism.
Well, if Israel still has a settler colonialism policy in the 21st century, Indians might wonder why not them as well.

What do you think would happen to the ethnic Kashmiri Muslims on the Indian side, would they be sent to Pakistan?
Highly unlikely. They could move to Pakistan if they chose to, but it's highly unlikely that India would actually try to force them out. I don't see even Modi going full-on Myanmar on the Kashmiris.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,977
SoCal
TBH, India should allow for dual citizenship for Kashmiris--as should Pakistan. I don't think that it's actually going to happen anytime soon, but if it ever does, Pakistan could be happy that any Kashmiri who wants to be a Pakistani citizen would actually be able to do so even if they won't actually want to move to Pakistan.
 
Aug 2019
276
United States
It does look like (according to Wikipedia) the Dogri language is very similar to the Punjabi language:



That said, though, it's still interesting that Jammu and Azad Kashmir are painted in different colors on this map.

BTW, Pakistan should give its part of Kashmir representation in its parliament like India already has.
Yes because the Kashmiri language and ethnicity is mostly confined to the valley, parts of jammu and some bordering districts in north azad Kashmir but the rest of the region is pahari/dogri.

Pakistan can not give Azad Kashmir representation in the parliament because they're entitle autonomy, they have their own assembly, Prime Minister and President. It's the same reason why Puerto Rico is a US territory but doesn't have any representation in congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,977
SoCal
Yes because the Kashmiri language and ethnicity is mostly confined to the valley, parts of jammu and some bordering districts in north azad Kashmir but the rest of the region is pahari/dogri.
Interesting. Please let me do some more research on this and then get back to you. :)

Pakistan can not give Azad Kashmir representation in the parliament because they're entitle autonomy, they have their own assembly, Prime Minister and President. It's the same reason why Puerto Rico is a US territory but doesn't have any representation in congress.
One could have a separate parliament and still have representation in a national parliament. For instance, South Tyrol has such an arrangement in place:

Landtag of South Tyrol - Wikipedia

As for Puerto Rico and all of the other US territories, I would certainly like to see them get admitted into the Union as full US states. :)
 
Aug 2019
276
United States
Well, if Israel still has a settler colonialism policy in the 21st century, Indians might wonder why not them as well.



Highly unlikely. They could move to Pakistan if they chose to, but it's highly unlikely that India would actually try to force them out. I don't see even Modi going full-on Myanmar on the Kashmiris.
Well Israel is universally condemned, they're not the best example for a democracy. I wouldn't put it past Modi go full Myanmmar on Kashmiris, he's the RSS guy and has done worse things (Gujarat, beef ban etc) so displacing an indigenous community is not a big deal for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist
Aug 2019
276
United States
Interesting. Please let me do some more research on this and then get back to you. :)



One could have a separate parliament and still have representation in a national parliament. For instance, South Tyrol has such an arrangement in place:

Landtag of South Tyrol - Wikipedia

As for Puerto Rico and all of the other US territories, I would certainly like to see them get admitted into the Union as full US states. :)
I think Pakistan should grant them seats in parliament but I'm not sure if some UN resolutions oppose that. I'm all for Puerto Rico joining America if that's what they want, most likely we'll give them a referendum to let them decide and not pull some Article 370-like stunt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,977
SoCal
Well Israel is universally condemned, they're not the best example for a democracy.
So far, they've been able to avoid serious international repercussions for their occupation, though. It helps that Israel has friends among right-wingers in various countries worldwide (the US, Europe, India, et cetera) who see Israel's ethnocentrism, ethnonationalism, and Islamophobia as something to emulate. :(

I wouldn't put it past Modi go full Myanmmar on Kashmiris, he's the RSS guy and has done worse things (Gujarat, beef ban etc) so displacing an indigenous community is not a big deal for him.
Yeah, unfortunately I wouldn't completely rule it out either. :( That said, though, such a move on Modi's part might very well trigger a new insurgency in Kashmir--which Modi probably doesn't want. I don't think that Modi is going to try expelling Kashmiris in huge numbers if Kashmiris are going to avoid causing any trouble for India and are going to "know their place." If there is going to be a new Kashmiri insurgency, though, then maybe Modi might attempt to engage in more drastic measures. :(
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,977
SoCal
I think Pakistan should grant them seats in parliament but I'm not sure if some UN resolutions oppose that.
I don't think that UN Resolutions forbid it. Else, India would be violating these UN Resolutions by giving Kashmir seats in its own parliament.

I'm all for Puerto Rico joining America if that's what they want, most likely we'll give them a referendum to let them decide and not pull some Article 370-like stunt.
Yeah, Puerto Rico had several referendums on this and all of them appear to have come up short either in regards to total support or in regards to turnout. :( The US is highly unlikely to force Puerto Rico into the Union by force, though.

As for Article 370, I still maintain that if India wanted to permanently keep Kashmir, it was probably best not to have Article 370 in the first place.
 
Aug 2019
276
United States
I don't think that UN Resolutions forbid it. Else, India would be violating these UN Resolutions by giving Kashmir seats in its own parliament.



Yeah, Puerto Rico had several referendums on this and all of them appear to have come up short either in regards to total support or in regards to turnout. :( The US is highly unlikely to force Puerto Rico into the Union by force, though.

As for Article 370, I still maintain that if India wanted to permanently keep Kashmir, it was probably best not to have Article 370 in the first place.
I'm not sure about the technicalities of the resolution. Yeah I don't think America will force Puerto Rico to join the union.

I don't know, India might keep the land by repelling the law but they have lost the people - even the few native supporters they had are now gone. Btw Kashmir wasn't the only state that had the "special status". Himachal Pradesh, Nagaland and few other states also have Article 370 (or something similar) and they have not been repelled. In fact Nagaland threatened that if Modi tried to scrap it hell would break lose.
Nagaland apprehensive after repeal of Article 370 | India News - Times of India

Won't relax Himachal Pradesh land law: BJP President Satpal Satti
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,977
SoCal
I'm not sure about the technicalities of the resolution.
Yeah, it's worth researching into. In any case, though, since Kashmir isn't actually going to get its independence anytime soon, I don't think that the UN would mind it if Pakistan gave Kashmir representation in its parliament.

Yeah I don't think America will force Puerto Rico to join the union.
Agreed.

I don't know, India might keep the land by repelling the law but they have lost the people - even the few native supporters they had are now gone.
I think that the logic might have been that most Muslim Kashmiris are a lost cause in any case and that thus the best thing for India to do is to try flooding Kashmir with Hindus. I mean, it's not an entirely invalid calculation considering that even if Kashmiri Muslims had a lot of autonomy, they would probably still prefer independence (or joining Pakistan, but that's probably less likely).

Btw Kashmir wasn't the only state that had the "special status". Himachal Pradesh, Nagaland and few other states also have Article 370 (or something similar) and they have not been repelled. In fact Nagaland threatened that if Modi tried to scrap it hell would break lose.
Nagaland apprehensive after repeal of Article 370 | India News - Times of India

Won't relax Himachal Pradesh land law: BJP President Satpal Satti
Interesting. I wonder why Kashmir got the biggest priority here. Could it be because Kashmiri separatism actually has a great power sponsor (in the form of Pakistan) while those other regions don't have any great power sponsors?

The northeastern part of India (near the Chinese border, containing Tawang) might also be a good area for India to engage in settler colonialism in if it can actually do this successfully. After all, this might decrease the risk of future Chinese revanchism.
 
Status
Closed