5 ms·

> Preventative measures are necessary for the kind of thing it can spark. To prevent what exactly? Political dissent? Why can't people in Kashmir right now ta

> Preventative measures are necessary for the kind of thing it can spark. To prevent what exactly? Political dissent? Why can't people in Kashmir right now talk to each other over phone? Why can't they call their loved ones outside the region? Why isn't anyone else allowed to contact them? Why are lawyers, professors and activists being jailed? Why are some people not being allowed to leave the country? Why can't Indian politicians visit the region without being detained and sent back? What exactly is all this preventing?

kobiguru 7y ago
Okay, let's say they lift the ban here is how things will transpire. First, Pakistan's ISPR would start a massive disinformation campaign aided by the separatist who lost all their influence with the present government but has a great following among the Kashmiri Youth. Then there would immense violence with many dead while the "leaders" and there loved ones stay in a five-star hotel in Delhi. To prevent a loss of life they had to do it. But it's slowly being downgraded and the curfew is absent in all but 4 districts of erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir Edit: I agree with you, that it is bad for people to have no communication channel.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
  C'mon, stop bringing Pakistan into this. India has mismanaged Kashmir so badly that the majority of the population wants to leave India -- and not to join Pakistan, mind you, but to be independent.
  - iamshs 7y ago
    Pakistan is a big part of problem here by supporting militants and terrorists. Material, money and training support. Let’s not absolve Pakistan here. They invaded independent Kashmir in 1947 and Kashmir had to let go its independence to get support from India against Pakistan’s war.
    - nashashmi 7y ago
      They never invaded. Locals rebelled against the ruler for being independent. And asked to become part Pakistan. Army came in upon request from locals.
      - iamshs 7y ago
        Nah, tribals were armed by Pakistan. Tribals from Pakhtun invaded Kashmir. Locals actually helped repel the tribal attacks. Let’s not overlook stated facts.
        debuggerpk 7y ago
        haha .. if you can see the irony in your comment. So a resourceless Pakistan miraculously recovered from the bloody partition in mere three months to not only plan an insurgency, but also had the resources to execute it. Go Pakistan then? right?
        iamshs 7y ago
        Go learn your own history, Pakistan has given their highest bravery awards to these tribal invaders. Resourceless doesn't mean bereft of guns. British Army resources were divided among India and Pakistan.
        debuggerpk 7y ago
        lol. Pakistan was meant to get 1/3rd, never go that.
        dang 7y ago
        You broke the site guidelines frequently and egregiously in this thread. We ban accounts that do that. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules while posting here, regardless of how wrong or bad you think other comments are? And please don't use HN for nationalistic flamewar.
  - ra7 7y ago
    Huh what? Are you even aware of the history? Being independent has been their goal from day 1; that's the reason for the conflict. It's not because India has "mismanaged" Kashmir.
    - nashashmi 7y ago
      Staying away from hindu extremist dictatorship has been their goal and why they never conformed.
      - ra7 7y ago
        There was Hindu extremist dictatorship in 1947 when the conflict started? They originally wanted a separate country because they felt they are ethnically and culturally different to Indians. It didn’t become a religion issue until the 80s.
  - kbad1000 7y ago
    If Pakistan is not part of problem then why is it so much agitated by internal affairs of India? Let's be clear here the call for 'Gajawa E Hind' (which means complete destruction of Kafirs in India and establishment of a Islamic rule) runs in most of the Pakistanis, though they can't do anything for this, the emotions are clear. On the other hand Pakistan is a military autocracy. Without enemity with India and a cause for fighting, their existence and dominance is threatened. For them the conflict is their oxygen.
  - sbmthakur 7y ago
    Ofcourse, why blame Pakistan? Pakistan has only invaded the region few times and has made several inflitration attempts. Nothing more.
- owaislone 7y ago
  Immense violence started in Kashmir back in 1989 when India pulled off something like this the last time. It started dying out by 1995-96 as India adopted a more democratic and less militaristic approach to Kashmir (Vajpayee's Kashmiriyat, Insaniyat, Jamburiyat) right until the current Government came in and started going back to the militaristic approach by quelling protests by brute-force. This move is not going to go well in Kashmir and the Government knows it. People are going to revolt and that is why the valley has been completely locked down. This is not about saving lives. If that was the case the forces wouldn't shoot protestors every years in Kashmir. This is about suppressing the voices of those who object. India had made a lot of progress democratically in Kashmir and had actually won over a lot of Kashmiris. A lot of them either supported or tolerated Indian rule as long as their daily lives went on peacefully. With this move, they've lost all popular support they had in the valley. All pro-Indian Kashmiris I know personally are feeling betrayed and regretting that they supporting Indian rule in Kashmir. Even elected pro-India politicians have been jailed and their voices suppressed. IMO this is going to result in people losing their belief in Indian democracy. Over the next few years, I expect number of militants in the Kashmir valley to grow rapidly. I think the valley will go back to where it was in early 90s. I hope it doesn't come to that but I don't see this playing out any other way unfortunately. Showing military might is not the solution.
  - tech_dreamer 7y ago
    This time things will be different. Any militant movement needs money to grow - traditionally money (made using selling drugs) came from ISI [3]. Pakistan narrowly avoided FATF sanctions [1] (now in grey list but can be moved to black list this October) Now Pakistan's economy is tanking [2] and it clearly knows military options are not workable. No foreign governments except for China support them. Only option left is disinformation campaign aided by leftist media. [1] https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/watchdog-pakistan-could-still-be-placed-blacklist https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/watchdog-pakistan-co.... [2] https://herald.dawn.com/news/1398616 https://herald.dawn.com/news/1398616 [3] https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b6fe2d2d.pdf https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b6fe2d2d.pdf
  - amalag 7y ago
    This is BS. Pakistani jihadis are not overcome with any kind words. The isolation of Kashmir was the problem and the government has taken the solution that the majority of the country agrees with. The only people complaining are English language media who Modi has never cared about.
- wtmt 7y ago
  On what basis do you imagine that any resistance or disinformation campaign by Pakistan and other interests would die down soon enough within days or weeks and make the central government allow bringing back Internet and mobile connectivity? It seems like it can never come back unless the concentration of armed forces increases manifold and punishments doled out as lessons for anything that looks like an infringement. To me it seems like the situation cannot go back to how it was a month ago for a long time (several months, at the minimum).
tech_dreamer 7y ago
Kashmir is a part of India and India is not an occupational force. Also India doesn't want another Syria/Afganistan/Pakistan/Sudan/Libya/Iraq happening next to it.
- owaislone 7y ago
  I'm sure people of Kashmir would shout this at the top of their lungs if the communication blockade was lifted.
  - tech_dreamer 7y ago
    I'm sure, people of Gilgit/Baltistan, Balochistan and Pashtonistan will have similar opinions. Also, please don't forget how thankful Bangladesis are.
- selimthegrim 7y ago
  I look forward to the no doubt imminent abrogation of the Articles 371 that deal with the other integral parts of India such as Mizoram, Manipur (how's that AFSPA going over there btw), Nagaland, etc because all integral parts of India should be treated the same, right? If Kashmir is atoot ang why are you treating it differently like it has cancer?
  - tech_dreamer 7y ago
    A democratically elected Indian government has exercised it's mandate to update a temporary constitutional provision (370 and 35A and NOT 371 as mentioned above - these were granted 70 years ago) I'm not sure why foreign governments and media are getting fixated over it. Any armed struggle or insurgency movement against India will be crushed regardless. Also no other state or union territory has/had provisions for having separate flag, flawed property ownership and citizenship rights (currently a women loose her right as kashmiri citizen if she marries an outsider)
    - unmole 7y ago
      After denying the people of J&K the chance to democratically elect a government, a constitutionally dubious Presidential order was used to fundamentally alter the state. As an Indian, I find it concerning that our media is not fixated on this and instead is toeing the government line.
ra7 7y ago
> What exactly is all this preventing? Simply put, it's preventing deaths. Kashmir is volatile and massive government decision like scrapping Article 370 is sure to create violent protests in the region. See Kashmir protests circa 2016 on how violent it can get.
Sathi 7y ago
My point of view is this: India has always been bad at communicating effectively, clearly and loudly. Just read that Pakistan is claiming that India will attack AJK etc. I do not know the internal plans of Indian Army etc but I strongly believe India is not going to do it. But Pakistan make up so much stuff, put up fake videos, get embarassed but still they do not stop talking negatively about India and everybody else. The crying baby gets a lot of attention though even if it is crying for silly or fake reasons. So, for the Indian government, it has to make more noise than the crying baby, but also presenting supporting facts. Now, the moment the controls in Kashmir are suddenly lifted, forget Pakistan, the opposition politicians and everyone whose wallet/influence is going to get lighter themselves will talk so much against the current government and create/add fuel to the negative sentiment in the Kashmiris. So, it is better to have controls to prevent violence. Better to not lose precious lives than otherwise. Having said that, as some one above pointed out above, it is also mandatory for the government to ensure the availability of necessities. It is easy to criticize, not that we should not. But any big action like this will have something not going according to plan. Not every thing to extreme detail can be planned perfectly. So, I do want and hope that the government gets to know the ground realities, ensure availability of the necessities and also, with proof, talk about it wherever it can.
sbmthakur 7y ago
> To prevent what exactly? Political dissent? Listen to statements from Kashmiri leaders like Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah. They've routinely threatened violence over any attempt to the abrogation of the article. What do you think they would've done after the abrogation was anounced? And unlike other states, political dissent in Kashmir is not anywhere close to peaceful. It includes stone pelting , murdering policemen and what not.

kobiguru 7y ago

Okay, let's say they lift the ban here is how things will transpire. First, Pakistan's ISPR would start a massive disinformation campaign aided by the separatist who lost all their influence with the present government but has a great following among the Kashmiri Youth. Then there would immense violence with many dead while the "leaders" and there loved ones stay in a five-star hotel in Delhi. To prevent a loss of life they had to do it. But it's slowly being downgraded and the curfew is absent in all but 4 districts of erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir Edit: I agree with you, that it is bad for people to have no communication channel.

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
C'mon, stop bringing Pakistan into this. India has mismanaged Kashmir so badly that the majority of the population wants to leave India -- and not to join Pakistan, mind you, but to be independent.
- iamshs 7y ago
  Pakistan is a big part of problem here by supporting militants and terrorists. Material, money and training support. Let’s not absolve Pakistan here. They invaded independent Kashmir in 1947 and Kashmir had to let go its independence to get support from India against Pakistan’s war.
  - nashashmi 7y ago
    They never invaded. Locals rebelled against the ruler for being independent. And asked to become part Pakistan. Army came in upon request from locals.
    - iamshs 7y ago
      Nah, tribals were armed by Pakistan. Tribals from Pakhtun invaded Kashmir. Locals actually helped repel the tribal attacks. Let’s not overlook stated facts.
      - debuggerpk 7y ago
        haha .. if you can see the irony in your comment. So a resourceless Pakistan miraculously recovered from the bloody partition in mere three months to not only plan an insurgency, but also had the resources to execute it. Go Pakistan then? right?
        iamshs 7y ago
        Go learn your own history, Pakistan has given their highest bravery awards to these tribal invaders. Resourceless doesn't mean bereft of guns. British Army resources were divided among India and Pakistan.
        debuggerpk 7y ago
        lol. Pakistan was meant to get 1/3rd, never go that.
        dang 7y ago
        You broke the site guidelines frequently and egregiously in this thread. We ban accounts that do that. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules while posting here, regardless of how wrong or bad you think other comments are? And please don't use HN for nationalistic flamewar.
- ra7 7y ago
  Huh what? Are you even aware of the history? Being independent has been their goal from day 1; that's the reason for the conflict. It's not because India has "mismanaged" Kashmir.
  - nashashmi 7y ago
    Staying away from hindu extremist dictatorship has been their goal and why they never conformed.
    - ra7 7y ago
      There was Hindu extremist dictatorship in 1947 when the conflict started? They originally wanted a separate country because they felt they are ethnically and culturally different to Indians. It didn’t become a religion issue until the 80s.
- kbad1000 7y ago
  If Pakistan is not part of problem then why is it so much agitated by internal affairs of India? Let's be clear here the call for 'Gajawa E Hind' (which means complete destruction of Kafirs in India and establishment of a Islamic rule) runs in most of the Pakistanis, though they can't do anything for this, the emotions are clear. On the other hand Pakistan is a military autocracy. Without enemity with India and a cause for fighting, their existence and dominance is threatened. For them the conflict is their oxygen.
- sbmthakur 7y ago
  Ofcourse, why blame Pakistan? Pakistan has only invaded the region few times and has made several inflitration attempts. Nothing more.
owaislone 7y ago
Immense violence started in Kashmir back in 1989 when India pulled off something like this the last time. It started dying out by 1995-96 as India adopted a more democratic and less militaristic approach to Kashmir (Vajpayee's Kashmiriyat, Insaniyat, Jamburiyat) right until the current Government came in and started going back to the militaristic approach by quelling protests by brute-force. This move is not going to go well in Kashmir and the Government knows it. People are going to revolt and that is why the valley has been completely locked down. This is not about saving lives. If that was the case the forces wouldn't shoot protestors every years in Kashmir. This is about suppressing the voices of those who object. India had made a lot of progress democratically in Kashmir and had actually won over a lot of Kashmiris. A lot of them either supported or tolerated Indian rule as long as their daily lives went on peacefully. With this move, they've lost all popular support they had in the valley. All pro-Indian Kashmiris I know personally are feeling betrayed and regretting that they supporting Indian rule in Kashmir. Even elected pro-India politicians have been jailed and their voices suppressed. IMO this is going to result in people losing their belief in Indian democracy. Over the next few years, I expect number of militants in the Kashmir valley to grow rapidly. I think the valley will go back to where it was in early 90s. I hope it doesn't come to that but I don't see this playing out any other way unfortunately. Showing military might is not the solution.
- tech_dreamer 7y ago
  This time things will be different. Any militant movement needs money to grow - traditionally money (made using selling drugs) came from ISI [3]. Pakistan narrowly avoided FATF sanctions [1] (now in grey list but can be moved to black list this October) Now Pakistan's economy is tanking [2] and it clearly knows military options are not workable. No foreign governments except for China support them. Only option left is disinformation campaign aided by leftist media. [1] https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/watchdog-pakistan-could-still-be-placed-blacklist https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/watchdog-pakistan-co.... [2] https://herald.dawn.com/news/1398616 https://herald.dawn.com/news/1398616 [3] https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b6fe2d2d.pdf https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b6fe2d2d.pdf
- amalag 7y ago
  This is BS. Pakistani jihadis are not overcome with any kind words. The isolation of Kashmir was the problem and the government has taken the solution that the majority of the country agrees with. The only people complaining are English language media who Modi has never cared about.
wtmt 7y ago
On what basis do you imagine that any resistance or disinformation campaign by Pakistan and other interests would die down soon enough within days or weeks and make the central government allow bringing back Internet and mobile connectivity? It seems like it can never come back unless the concentration of armed forces increases manifold and punishments doled out as lessons for anything that looks like an infringement. To me it seems like the situation cannot go back to how it was a month ago for a long time (several months, at the minimum).

tech_dreamer 7y ago

Kashmir is a part of India and India is not an occupational force. Also India doesn't want another Syria/Afganistan/Pakistan/Sudan/Libya/Iraq happening next to it.

owaislone 7y ago
I'm sure people of Kashmir would shout this at the top of their lungs if the communication blockade was lifted.
- tech_dreamer 7y ago
  I'm sure, people of Gilgit/Baltistan, Balochistan and Pashtonistan will have similar opinions. Also, please don't forget how thankful Bangladesis are.
selimthegrim 7y ago
I look forward to the no doubt imminent abrogation of the Articles 371 that deal with the other integral parts of India such as Mizoram, Manipur (how's that AFSPA going over there btw), Nagaland, etc because all integral parts of India should be treated the same, right? If Kashmir is atoot ang why are you treating it differently like it has cancer?
- tech_dreamer 7y ago
  A democratically elected Indian government has exercised it's mandate to update a temporary constitutional provision (370 and 35A and NOT 371 as mentioned above - these were granted 70 years ago) I'm not sure why foreign governments and media are getting fixated over it. Any armed struggle or insurgency movement against India will be crushed regardless. Also no other state or union territory has/had provisions for having separate flag, flawed property ownership and citizenship rights (currently a women loose her right as kashmiri citizen if she marries an outsider)
  - unmole 7y ago
    After denying the people of J&K the chance to democratically elect a government, a constitutionally dubious Presidential order was used to fundamentally alter the state. As an Indian, I find it concerning that our media is not fixated on this and instead is toeing the government line.

ra7 7y ago

> What exactly is all this preventing? Simply put, it's preventing deaths. Kashmir is volatile and massive government decision like scrapping Article 370 is sure to create violent protests in the region. See Kashmir protests circa 2016 on how violent it can get.

Sathi 7y ago

My point of view is this: India has always been bad at communicating effectively, clearly and loudly. Just read that Pakistan is claiming that India will attack AJK etc. I do not know the internal plans of Indian Army etc but I strongly believe India is not going to do it. But Pakistan make up so much stuff, put up fake videos, get embarassed but still they do not stop talking negatively about India and everybody else. The crying baby gets a lot of attention though even if it is crying for silly or fake reasons. So, for the Indian government, it has to make more noise than the crying baby, but also presenting supporting facts. Now, the moment the controls in Kashmir are suddenly lifted, forget Pakistan, the opposition politicians and everyone whose wallet/influence is going to get lighter themselves will talk so much against the current government and create/add fuel to the negative sentiment in the Kashmiris. So, it is better to have controls to prevent violence. Better to not lose precious lives than otherwise. Having said that, as some one above pointed out above, it is also mandatory for the government to ensure the availability of necessities. It is easy to criticize, not that we should not. But any big action like this will have something not going according to plan. Not every thing to extreme detail can be planned perfectly. So, I do want and hope that the government gets to know the ground realities, ensure availability of the necessities and also, with proof, talk about it wherever it can.

sbmthakur 7y ago

> To prevent what exactly? Political dissent? Listen to statements from Kashmiri leaders like Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah. They've routinely threatened violence over any attempt to the abrogation of the article. What do you think they would've done after the abrogation was anounced? And unlike other states, political dissent in Kashmir is not anywhere close to peaceful. It includes stone pelting , murdering policemen and what not.