Kashmir elections after 10 years

[aupmanyav]

Kashmir is having elections for its state legislature after 10 years. They are being held in three phases - September 18 and 25, and June 1st. Results will be declared on October 8.
The first phase in restive South Kashmir for 24 out of the 90 seats has been done. There was 61% voting, which I would consider very high and nearly equal to the general voting in other parts of India. They have already had elections for the Central Parliament and local bodies. There was no untoward incident. What party the people have voted for is immaterial. Whichever party or coalition wins, it will rule Kashmir for the next five years.

I mention this because the general impression outside India is that we are not treating Kashmir people fairly.

 

[bigfield]

I mention this because the general impression outside India is that we are not treating Kashmir people fairly.

Probably has something to do with denying Kashmiris the right to vote for ten years.

 

[laughing dog]

I mention this because the general impression outside India is that we are not treating Kashmir people fairly.

Probably has something to do with denying Kashmiris the right to vote for ten years.

And the unilateral revocation of its autonomous status under the Indian Constitution in 2019.

 

[aupmanyav]

Probably has something to do with denying Kashmiris the right to vote for ten years.

It was a period of terrorist activities. Elections held under terrorist guns could not have been fair. Now things are peaceful and Kashmiris have tasted the fruits of peace. That is why a large percentage of people have voted.

And the unilateral revocation of its autonomous status under the Indian Constitution in 2019.

The parliament gave them the right temporarily, the parliament took the right away. Everything within the constitution. The Supreme Court rejected the contention that the removal of article 370 was unconstitutional. We do not worry about anything else. Whatever the world has to say about it, they are welcome to say that. The Supreme Court asked for elections before the end of September 2024. We are doing that. By 8th October, Kashmir will have a freely and democratically elected legislature, which will rule it for the next five years. Indian Supreme Court can scrutinize even the orders of the President of India.
In the first phase election on Setember 18, there were 219 candidates for the 24 seats where polling was held.

"On 11 December 2023, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India unanimously upheld the Indian Government's decision to abrogate Article 370. The bench said that article 370 of the Constitution was a 'temporary provision' and the president had the power to revoke it. They also recommended that elections be held in Jammu and Kashmir before 30 September 2024."

Revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The problem in Kashmir now is that people of Pakistan-held Kashmir want to join Indian Kashmir. They had had enough of Pakistan.

 

[laughing dog]

Probably has something to do with denying Kashmiris the right to vote for ten years.

It was a period of terrorist activities. Elections held under terrorist guns could not have been fair. Now things are peaceful and Kashmiris have tasted the fruits of peace. That is why a large percentage of people have voted.

And the unilateral revocation of its autonomous status under the Indian Constitution in 2019.

The parliament gave them the right temporarily, the parliament took the right away. Everything within the constitution. The Supreme Court rejected the contention that the removal of article 370 was unconstitutional. We do not worry about anything else. Whatever the world has to say about it, they are welcome to say that. The Supreme Court asked for elections before the end of September 2024. We are doing that. By 8th October, Kashmir will have a freely and democratically elected legislature, which will rule it for the next five years. Indian Supreme Court can scrutinize even the orders of the President of India.
In the first phase election on Setember 18, there were 219 candidates for the 24 seats where polling was held.

"On 11 December 2023, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India unanimously upheld the Indian Government's decision to abrogate Article 370. The bench said that article 370 of the Constitution was a 'temporary provision' and the president had the power to revoke it. They also recommended that elections be held in Jammu and Kashmir before 30 September 2024."

Revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The problem in Kashmir now is that people of Pakistan-held Kashmir want to join Indian Kashmir. They had had enough of Pakistan.

You do realize nothing you wrote addresses my point about how the residents of Kashmir feel about their treatment or how the rest of the world views it.

 

[steve_bank]

All things considered with Ukraine ad Gaza who cares abo0ut petty disputes over an inconsequential area between Pakistan and India.

Are the elections monitored by international observers?

Will all factions accepts the results or will they start fighti9ng each other?

 

[aupmanyav]

You do realize nothing you wrote addresses my point about how the residents of Kashmir feel about their treatment or how the rest of the world views it.

Forget about the world. The world has its own interests and biases. The large percentage of people voting means the people accept it. Who would like to go to Pakistan now when 1 Indian rupee is equal to 3.33 Pakistani rupees? At one time, Pakistani rupee was stronger than Indian rupee.
Pakistan has never treated Kashmiris fairly. That is why a large number of Pakistani Kashmiris (from Mirpur) migrated to UK.

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently no country in that region has treated the Kashmiris fairly.

If world opinion doesn’t matter, one wonders what the point of the OP is.

 

[aupmanyav]

Are the elections monitored by international observers?
Will all factions accepts the results or will they start fighting each other?

There is no bar on Indian or foreign reporters, or those who want to witness Kashmir elections in Kashmir.
They should blame us only if the election is not free and fair.

Right to protest is vigorously protected by the Indian Supreme Court. But the protest has to be peaceful. If it is not, then law will take its own course. What do you mean by parties not accepting the result of the election? The party or coalition which wins will rule Kashmir. If some party is not satisfied with its own performance, then it is their problem. 'Why did not the people vote for them?' What will Trump or Kamala do if one is not elected as the President of USA? The result of a democratic election has to be accepted.

 

[bigfield]

That was a quick pivot from "the world thinks we've treated Kashmiris unfairly" to "we don't care what the world thinks".

 

[aupmanyav]

Apparently no country in that region has treated the Kashmiris fairly.
If world opinion doesn’t matter, one wonders what the point of the OP is.

We have.
The point of the OP is to present the fact that the current elections in Kashmir are free and fair.

 

[aupmanyav]

That was a quick pivot from "the world thinks we've treated Kashmiris unfairly" to "we don't care what the world thinks".

We are pained about that. They blame us for no reason. The topic is to repel that misconception.
Indian Army went to Kashmir at the request of Kashmiris to save them from Pakistani attack after they signed the letter of accession.
We will not allow secession of a part of Kashmir on the basis of religion.
If we are doing the correct thing, why should we care about what some people in the world may say?

 

[steve_bank]

The world?

Its been years since there has been any reporting on Kashmir. It is inconsequential compared to other issues.

Venezuela elections are important because it affects Central and South America.

I care about s as much about Kashmir as Aup cares about Ukraine. I hear NATO is causing trouble in Kashmir, right Aup?

 

[bigfield]

Apparently no country in that region has treated the Kashmiris fairly.
If world opinion doesn’t matter, one wonders what the point of the OP is.

We have.
The point of the OP is to present the fact that the current elections in Kashmir are free and fair.

This thread is sponsored by the Bharatiya Janata Party.

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently no country in that region has treated the Kashmiris fairly.
If world opinion doesn’t matter, one wonders what the point of the OP is.

We have.
The point of the OP is to present the fact that the current elections in Kashmir are free and fair.

That is your opinion. Unilaterally changing the status of the region is not an act of fairness in my opinion or of others around the world.

If it pains India to be perceived as acting unfairly, perhaps a solution lies in changing behavior.

 

[aupmanyav]

This thread is sponsored by the Bharatiya Janata Party.

No. But sure, yours sincerely is a supporter of Bharatiya Janata Party. Modi, Yogi, are wonderful.

 

[aupmanyav]

That is your opinion. Unilaterally changing the status of the region is not an act of fairness in my opinion or of others around the world.
If it pains India to be perceived as acting unfairly, perhaps a solution lies in changing behavior.

It concerned the Indian Constitution. No second party was involved. Constitution gave Kashmir special status (not autonomy). The special status was removed by the parliament with due process of law and authenticated by the Supreme Court. You are welcome to have your views about it.
India did not act unfairly. It removed a silly status which divided India and Kashmir.

All because Nehru was friends with Sheikh Abdullah. Nehru should have refused it. Sheikh would have capitulated. Sheikh had no other option, the Pakistani marauders had reached the vicinity of Srinagar airport. And then, Nehru took the matter to UN. Kashmir problem was Nehru's creation. General Kariappa wanted just two days to occupy the whole of Kashmir.

 

[laughing dog]

That is your opinion. Unilaterally changing the status of the region is not an act of fairness in my opinion or of others around the world.
If it pains India to be perceived as acting unfairly, perhaps a solution lies in changing behavior.

It concerned the Indian Constitution. No second party was involved. Constitution gave Kashmir special status (not autonomy). The special status was removed by the parliament with due process of law and authenticated by the Supreme Court. You are welcome to have your views about it.
India did not act unfairly. It removed a silly status which divided India and Kashmir.

You mistakenly conflate "working within the confines of the law" with fairness.

All because Nehru was friends with Sheikh Abdullah. Nehru should have refused it. Sheikh would have capitulated. Sheikh had no other option, the Pakistani marauders had reached the vicinity of Srinagar airport. And then, Nehru took the matter to UN. Kashmir problem was Nehru's creation. General Kariappa wanted just two days to occupy the whole of Kashmir.

Your opinion is duly noted. No one is regarded to accept it as valid or authoritative.

 

[aupmanyav]

You mistakenly conflate "working within the confines of the law" with fairness.

I am sorry, but in case of a democratic polity, we have to go by the word of Constitution and law. Fairness and unfairness are subjective assessments.

 

[laughing dog]

You mistakenly conflate "working within the confines of the law" with fairness.

I am sorry, but in case of a democratic polity, we have to go by the word of Constitution and law. Fairness and unfairness are subjective assessments.

Then your OP is just an opinion.