Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai

Washington, July 21 (KMS): Kashmir is internationally recognized as a disputed territory whose final status is yet to be determined by the people. Both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons and have fought three wars during the past half-century. This is a matter that urgently needs to be put on a road to find a just and viable solution.

The heart of the matter is that Kashmir is an occupied country. Its sovereignty and right to self-determination is being ignored. India insists that this state, which is nestled in the Himalayas between Pakistan and India, is an integral part of India and refuses to negotiate in any manner with the people of Kashmir or with Pakistan. The claim is rejected not only by the people of Kashmir but also by the international community. »

Read More... | Comment

India claims to have signed an instrument of accession with former Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir but its statement is controversial. The fact is that Maharaja of Kashmir sought Indian military support against the popular insurgency in Kashmir. Despite the use of military power by India to crush this popular revolt, the Kashmiri people didn’t surrender politically. It was certainly and clearly an illegal and forcible occupation of a sizable part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir by India, therefore, the people of Kashmir and Pakistan never accepted New Delhiā€™s false claim over Jammu and Kashmir. »

Read More... | Comment

Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai

Washington, February 18 (KMS): India and Pakistan have had more than 150 official rounds of talks in the last seven decades to discuss conflicts and differences between them. The by-product of every round of talk was an agreement to meet again to talk. In consequence, the peace process between India and Pakistan has always remained an illusion. Talks have always proved barren because both India and Pakistan have never defined the parameters of talks. The talks were never meant to be time bound with specific benchmarks that would define and characterise progress. What was the common goal of talks? What are the objectives? To settle differences? What are the differences? How will they be resolved? When? Should we identify steps to resolve differences? Who are the important actors involved in those differences? How are those differences being revealed? »

Read More... | Comment