4 ms·

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 separati

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.
        dang 7y ago
        Please do not post flamewar comments to HN, and especially not nationalistic flamewar. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - debuggerpk 7y ago
        Like you said, let's not overlook the facts. The fact is, India and Pakistan had visa on arrival up until 1974. The fact is, people from both sides of the border could still get naturalised citizens across the border up until early 70s. The fact is, both India and Pakistan did exactly the same things. Just look at the accession of Junagadh and Hyderabad estate into India. India got away with it because both the states were land locked and Pakistan couldn't help. If accession of Kashmir's raja is right, so was the declarations by nawab of junagadh and hyderabad. The fact is, the 1947 war ended with UN intervention which demanded plebiscite for kashmir. India had agreed, but so far failed to conduct that. Not only that, India doesn't even allow UN observers, while Pakistan do. I can throw in a lot of facts in here.
- 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).

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.
      - dang 7y ago
        Please do not post flamewar comments to HN, and especially not nationalistic flamewar. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - debuggerpk 7y ago
      Like you said, let's not overlook the facts. The fact is, India and Pakistan had visa on arrival up until 1974. The fact is, people from both sides of the border could still get naturalised citizens across the border up until early 70s. The fact is, both India and Pakistan did exactly the same things. Just look at the accession of Junagadh and Hyderabad estate into India. India got away with it because both the states were land locked and Pakistan couldn't help. If accession of Kashmir's raja is right, so was the declarations by nawab of junagadh and hyderabad. The fact is, the 1947 war ended with UN intervention which demanded plebiscite for kashmir. India had agreed, but so far failed to conduct that. Not only that, India doesn't even allow UN observers, while Pakistan do. I can throw in a lot of facts in here.
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).