Role Of Un On Kashmir Issue.pptx

NAME: SUMAIRA SALEEM ROLL NO : LW-15-01 PRESENTATION NO : 1 PRESENTED TO: MA’AM SHELA ZAHOOR SUBJECT : INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS DEPARTMENT :LAW SHAHEED BENAZIR BHUTTO WOMEN UNIVERSITY PESHAWAR



Kashmir



What is Kashmir issue?



Introduction



History



How conflict started?



When was Kashmir issued in UN?



Role of un on Kashmir issue



Un resolutions



13 august 1948 resolution of united nation commission for India and Pakistan(UNCIP)



Dead lock in two stages of demilitarization



Karachi agreement 1949



Aspects of Kashmir issue



Shimla agreement



Article 370



When article 370 revoked?



Musharraf four points solution on Kashmir issue



Possible solution on Kashmir issue



Reasons for failure of united nations in solving the issue



Recommendation



conclusion

Kashmir is the northern most geographical region of the India. The word Kashmir is derived from word Sanskrit which means desiccated land. Kashmir is a region administered by India as a state from 1954, constituting the southern and southeastern portion of the large Kashmir region which has been the subject of a dispute between India, Pakistan and china since mid 20th century. The underlying region of this state were parts of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and northern territories, now known as Gilgit Baltistan , are administered by Pakistan.

Who owned Kashmir first? •In 1339, Shah Mir became the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir, inaugurating the Salatin-i-Kashmir or Shah Mir dynasty. Kashmir was part of the Mughal Empire from 1586 to 1751, and thereafter, until 1820, of the Afghan Durrani Empire. That year, the Sikhs, under Ranjit Singh, annexed Kashmir.

Kashmir is so famous? •Why is Kashmir so important to India, Pakistan, and China? The answer is the glaciers and fresh water they provide to the region and to India. The glacial waters that flow through Kashmir provide water and electricity to a billion people in India.

INTRODUCTION TO KASHMIR ISSUE The people of Kashmir are suffering the worst brutality and are going through a tough time. Once considered a paradise on earth the land of Kashmir has turned into a disputed territory and the land has been divided into two halves being controlled by Pakistan and India respectively. The struggle for the freedom of the people of Indian occupied Kashmir has seen hundred thousands of sacrifices. The annual casualty rate is extremely high.  Pashtun durani empire ruled Kashmir in 18th century.  Until 1819 it was ruled by Sikh ruler ranjith Singh.  In 1845-1846 Anglo Sikh war took place and Kashmir has to sign treaty of Lahore with east India company.  During independence Kashmir was princely state ruled By Hindu Maharaja called maharaja hari Singh. He thought

That he could make an independent state.  At present India covers about 47% of Jammu and Kashmir Pakistan covered 37% of it and rest are covered by china.

THE Kashmir dispute is the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world today . Pakistan considers Kashmir as its core political dispute with India. India’ s forcible occupation of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 is the main cause of the dispute India claims to have signed a controversial documents the instrument of accession on 26 October 1947 with maharaja of Kashmir. The united nation also does not consider Indian claim as legally valid. The people of Kashmir and Pakistan do not accept the Indian claim United Nation recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory.

CONTINUE: With the exception of India the entire world community recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory. The fact is that all the principles on the basis of which the Indian subcontinent was partitioned by the British in 1947 justified Kashmir becoming part of Pakistan. the state had majority Muslims it not only enjoyed geographical proximity with Pakistan but also had essential economic linkages with the territories constituting Pakistan.

1947: On 14&15 August, Pakistan and India became independent countries. The valley of Kashmir was rules by Maharaja Hari Singh Bahadur who had to choose the country he wanted to stay with either Pakistan or India. Kashmir was a Muslim majority state. Hari Singh initially delayed any decision in an attempt to remain independent. Being a Muslim majority State and contiguous to Pakistan, Kashmir was expected to join Pakistan but the suspicion arose that Hari Singh might join India without the consent of Kashmiris. The things started to worsen in August when Singh's forces killed the demonstrators who wanted Kashmir to join Pakistan. At that time Hari Singh appealed to India to send troops to the region. Although the Indian Prime Minister Nehru was ready to send troops but Lord Mountbatten advised the Maharaja Hari Singh to accede to India before India would send its troops. Considering the emergent situation on 26 October 1947 Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession to India, which also lead to wars between Pakistan and India. Kashmir problem start on 22 October 1947.

Who is responsible for Kashmir problem? •Five characters responsible for Kashmir Problem Scoop News Jammu Kashmir. The five characters responsible for J&K problem were Maharaja hari Singh, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, Lord Mountbatten, Sheikh Abdullah and Mohammad Ali Jinnah. But in every case the buck stops at Pt.

Who sold Kashmir to Gulab Singh?

•Under the terms of the Treaty of Amritsar that followed in March 1846, the British government sold Kashmir for a sum of 7.5 million Nanakshahee rupees to Gulab Singh, hereafter bestowed with the title of Maharaja.

Why was Kashmir not given to Pakistan?

•Under the partition plan provided by the Indian Independence Act, Kashmir was free to accede to India or Pakistan. The maharaja (local ruler), Hari Singh, chose India and a two-year war erupted in 1947. ... By that time, India and Pakistan had both declared themselves to be nuclear powers

Its role has been very limited in recent decades. The UN was most active in the Kashmir dispute in the very first month of India's and Pakistan’s existence, when two countries were at war. The UN security council passed resolutions calling for a cease fire a withdrawal of security forces and an internationally supervised plebiscite for Kashmir to decide whether they join India or Pakistan. The cease fire resolution was implemented but the other two were not, ever since, the UN has not done very much at all on Kashmir issue, other than at times urging the two sides to come to negotiating table. It made a particularly big pitch for this in 1998 after both countries stages nuclear weapons tests. The UN could play the role of a truly neutral mediator. This is a role that the us has sometimes sought to play but with little success-particularly because there is mistrust in its relationship with both Islamabad and new Delhi. There really no country that could be taken seriously as a credible mediator, given that few countries have deep trusted relationship with both India and Pakistan. The UK which has sought to maintain good ties with both capitals is one possible exception but its unlikely the Uk would be interested in this role given its own history in region.

• In 1947 India and Pakistan went to war over Kashmir during the war it was India which first took the Kashmir dispute to the united nation on 1 January 1948.

BY WHOM KASHMIR WAS SOLD? Kashmir was sold by British government to Gulab Singh for a sum of 75 million and after this on 26 october1947 Mahraja Hari Singh agrees to the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India.

• Despite many resolutions and debates the issue of Kashmir still stands the oldest unsolved dispute in UN. The UN involvement in the Kashmir issue lasted for almost 23 years. During these 23 years (1948-1971), the United Nations passed a number of resolutions, which were aimed at solving of the conflict.

(RESOLUTION 38) After hearing the representatives from both the countries the U.N adopted its first resolution on this issue on January 17,1948, urging India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and to ease the tension. Nine voted in favor of this resolution while two abstained from voting and none voted against it.

(RESOLUTION 39) This was the second resolution adopted on January 20,1948 by the United Nations on the issue of Kashmir. This resolution offered to assist in the peaceful solution of the Kashmir Conflict by setting up a committee of three members. The committee would write a joint letter advising the Council on what course of action would be best to help further peace in the region.

(RESOLUTION 47) It was passed on April 21,1948 led by the Britain and United States. after hearing arguments from both the countries the Council increased the size of the Commission established by United Nations Security Council Resolution 39 from three to five members and instructed the Commission to go to the subcontinent and help the governments of India and Pakistan to restore peace and order in the region and prepare for a referendum to decide the fate of Kashmir.

(RESOLUTION 51) The U.N Security Council passed another resolution on June 3, 1948, which reaffirmed the previous resolutions and asked the United Nations commissions for India and Pakistan(UNCIP) to proceed to the "disputed areas" to carry out its mission as stated under Resolution 47 of April 21, 1948 The resolution was adopted by eight votes.

(UNCIP Visit to Sub-Continent) The UNCIP reached the Indian sub-continent in July 1948 and after deliberations with Indian and Pakistani leadership, they produced a proposal in which they called for an immediate ceasefire and an agreement between India and Pakistan along with withdrawal of all Pakistani tribals and fighters and bulk of India's troops. But India and Pakistan both rejected the proposal.

(CEASE-FIRE PLAN) On December 11, 1948, the UNCIP laid out a new set of proposals that elaborated on the question of referendum in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. According to the proposals "The question of accession to India or Pakistan was to be decided by a free and impartial referendum, which was contingent upon having a cease-fire". Pakistan and India accepted the plan and allowed U.N to observe the cease-fire from January 1,1949.

(RESOLUTION 80) It was adopted on March 14,1950 after receiving the reports of the Commission for India and Pakistan, as well as a report from McNaughton. The Council appreciated India and Pakistan for their compliance with the ceasefire plan. The Council appointed a United Nations Representative to assist in the preparations and implementation of the demilitarization program, to advise the Governments of India and Pakistan but this plan also failed as India and Pakistan could not agree to the plan of demilitarization.

PROPOSALS OF SIR OWEN DIXON After Mc Naught n's proposals failed, the United Nations replaced the UNCIP by a single U.N representative Owen Dixon in 1950. Dixon came up with a new set of proposals, but India and Pakistan could not come to an agreement on his proposal.

(RESOLUTION 91) It was adopted on March 30,1951, the Sir Owen Dixon resigned and The Council expressed its gratitude to him for his great ability and appointed Mr Frank Graham to carry out the job as the representative of U.N and to find a way to proceed towards a peaceful solution.

(RESOLUTION 96) It was adopted on November 10, 1951, after receiving a report by Mr. Frank Graham and the Council instructed the UN representative to continue his efforts regarding the issue.

(RESOLUTION 98) Being adopted on December 23, 1952, the resolution urged the both the Governments to enter into immediate negotiations but the efforts of Mr. Graham returned no fruit as the dead lock remained between the two states.

(RESOLUTION 122) Adopted on January 24,1957, the resolution declared that the assembly proposed by the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference could not constitute a solution to the problem as defined in United Nations Security Council.

(RESOLUTION 123) It was adopted on January 24,1957, this resolution requested the President of the Security Council to examine with the Governments of India and Pakistan towards the settlement of the dispute and invited the Governments of India and Pakistan to co-operate with him in the performance of these functions.

(RESOLUTION 126) It was adopted by the Security Council at its 808th meeting on December 2, 1957 and Requested the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan to make any recommendations to the parties for further appropriate action and authorized the United Nations representatives to visit the sub-continent for these purposes.

13 august1948 resolution of united nations commission for India and Pakistan(UNCIP) Upon its return to New York, UNCIP issued three-part resolution suggesting the ‘material change’ in the situation due to the presence of Pakistani troops in J&K. The first part of the UNCIP resolution of August 13, 1948 urged both India and Pakistan ‘separately and simultaneously’ to issue a ceasefire order to apply to all forces under their control and forces in J&K at the earliest possible moment. The second part called for a truce noting that “the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.” It further stipulated that the Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting. The resolution further instructed that after “the Commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A2 hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistan forces are being withdrawn 76 State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission”.51 However, the disagreement between India and the UN commission led to a deadlock in the demilitarization process.

India has long built its case on the argument that Pakistan did not fulfil the preconditions for a plebiscite. It has maintained that the implementation of the UN resolutions required Pakistan to fulfil Parts (I) & (II) of the UNCIP resolution of 13 August, 1948, which “inter alia required Pakistan to withdraw its troops and to secure withdrawal of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals and India will withdraw bulk of its forces once the Commission confirms that the tribesmen and Pakistani nationals and Pakistani troops are being withdrawn.”52 In October 1967, Dr Frank P Graham, the UN mediator in Kashmir, submitted a 60-pages review of the UN mediatory report on the Kashmir situation.53 He stated that the United Nations Commission found that they were unable to achieve an agreement by India and Pakistan on the terms for the implementation of the truce agreement, as a precondition for a plebiscite. He stated that the Commission and their several successors were unable to achieve an agreement between India and Pakistan on the provisions of the two UNCIP resolutions for two stages in demilitarization, namely: (l) on the withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces in relation to the withdrawal of all the remainder of the Pakistan forces after Pakistan had begun withdrawals, as provided in the August 13, 1948 resolution and (2) on the final

disposal of the Indian and State armed forces and the final disposal of the “Azad Kashmir” forces as provided in the January 5, 1949 resolution. He noted that in the provisions of part II of the 13 August 1948 resolution, the requirement for the withdrawal of all the Pakistan forces was related to the required withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces in stages to be agreed upon by India and the UN Commission. As noted above, such an agreement was not reached with India by the UN Commission or by the several successor UN mediators. This failure of India and the UN Commission and the UN Representatives to reach such an agreement, provided in part II, became the reason for the Pakistan’s failure to withdraw all of its forces from Kashmir, which, in turn, was held by India to be a reason for not accepting proposals leading to a plebiscite.54 Graham pointed out in UN mediatory report “Pakistan, which had, as had India, made some withdrawals of its forces from Kashmir, would not withdraw all the remainder of its forces from Kashmir, which was provided for in A 1 of part II of the 13 August 1948 resolution, as long as India did not reach agreement with the UN Commission, or their successors, on related but not simultaneous withdrawals of “the bulk” of the Indian forces and “the stages” of the withdrawals of “the bulk” which stages of withdrawals by India in agreement with the Commission, were provided for in B 2 of part II of the 13 August 1948 resolution.” 55

The UNCIP invited the military representative of the Indian and Pakistani governments on July 2, 1949 to a military conference in Karachi, in order to establish the Cease Fire Line (CFL) in Jammu & Kashmir. The resulting agreement ‘between the Military Representative of India and Pakistan regarding the establishment of a ceasefire line in the State of Jammu and Kashmir was signed on July 27, 1949. Following the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan, subsequent Security Council resolution focused on the demilitarization United Nations Resolutions on Kashmir and their Relevance 79 of J&K as the key step to a plebiscite. However, its efforts did not gain any success.60 General AGL McNaughton, President of the Security Council, proposed a ‘progressive demilitarization’ programmed on 22 December 1949. As discussed above, there was a disagreement between India and the UN commission for the required withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces in stages which became the reason for the Pakistan’s failure to withdraw all of its forces from Kashmir. To break this deadlock, General McNaughton proposed to both countries the reduction of armed forced on either side of the CFL by withdrawal, disbandment, and disarmament.61 The aim was to reduce armed personnel in J&K to a minimum, suitable for the maintenance of law and order. The programmed was to include the withdrawal of those regular forces from both countries not required for purpose of security or law and order; and the disbanding and disarming of local forces on the Indian- and Pakistani controlled sides of the CFL, including the Pakistansupported ‘Azad (Free) Kashmir’ forces. Following this demilitarization, the Plebiscite Administrator was to proceed with the conduct of the plebiscite. McNaughton also proposed that Pakistan would assure India that no tribal incursion into Jammu and Kashmir would not take place.

Shimla agreement Article 370

Shimla agreement 1972: • Following the December, 1971 war between Pakistan and India, Pakistan lost its East part which resulted in the formation of the nascent Bangladesh. Consequently, nearly 90,000 of Pakistani troops were held as prisoners of war by India. In July 1972, Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his Indian counterpart Indira Gandhi signed an agreement in the Indian town of Shimla, in which both countries agreed to “put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations”. Following the accord, Pakistan and India also resolved to discuss the “final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir” issue and the two government also formalized the ceasefire line as the Line of Control (LOC). The 1972 Shimla Peace Accord, signed by leader of the two countries also resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.” After the Shimla Agreement India adopted a position that Shimla Agreement had supplanted the UN resolutions as a point of reference for resolving the Kashmir dispute. India also pointed out and still insists that the agreement calls upon both countries “to settle

CONTINUE: their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations.” Since the Shimla agreement, India has maintained that the Kashmir issue is bilateral one and must be solved without any third party/international mediation. India also insists that the UN resolutions has become irrelevant post the Shimla Agreement. It also argued that the establishment of the LOC has superseded the UN mandated cease fire line and that the UNMOGIP had no role to supervise the LOC. India has also refused to lodge any complaint of a ceasefire violation to UNMOGIP since the two countries concluded Shimla agreement. Pakistan, however, disagreed and maintains that the UNMOGIP can only be wound up with reference to the Security Council and not without its consent. Meanwhile, Pakistan still continues to lodge complaints of ceasefire violations to the UNMOGIP. Pakistan also says that the Shimla Agreement does not bind both countries to only bilaterally finding a solution and continues to raise the issue in various international fora including the United Nations. Pakistan points out that the agreement clearly stipulated that “the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries,” and refers to the Article One of the UN Charter which guarantees “Equal rights and selfdetermination of peoples.” Pakistan also points out that the agreement explicitly states “a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir” as one of the outstanding questions awaiting a settlement. Pakistan also insists that according to Article 103 of UN Charter, member States obligations under the Charter take precedence over obligations under a bilateral agreement. Pakistan also refers to articles 34 and 35 of the UN Charter which specifically empower the Security Council to investigate any dispute 85 independently or at the request of a member State.78 Pakistan says these provisions cannot be made subservient to any bilateral agreement. According to the agreement, pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side could unilaterally alter the situation. These developments also failed to contribute any progress for resolving the dispute. However, optimism was again seen after Pakistan’s President Musharraf’s proposed in 2003 an out of the box plan for the demilitarization of J&K, for resolving the Kashmir issue.

Particulars of Shimla agreement 1972 On July 2, 1972 both countries reached an agreement. Main clauses of Shimla Agreement are: Both countries would put an end to conflict and confrontation and would work for promotion of friendly relations and peace. They agreed to follow United Nations Charter to govern their relations and affirmed to respect each other’s national unity, political independence and territorial integrity. Both Governments agreed to avert hostile propaganda against each other. For the restoration of normal relations both the governments agreed to resume communications and promote travel facilities. Both agreed for cooperation in economic and cultural activities. Both agreed to respect the line of control between Jammu and Kashmir resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971. The withdrawal of forces of both countries would come into effect within the 30 days of agreement’s enforcement.

Pakistan ratified the Shimla Agreement was ratified on July 15, 1972 and India on August 3, same year therefore, it came into effect on August 4, 1972. Shimla Agreement secured withdrawals of forces from territories occupied by both sides during war except for Kashmir. In the coming two years all the POW’s had returned home as well.

INTRODUCTION: This article specifies that except for defense foreign affairs communications and ancillary matters (matters specified in the instrument of accession) the Indian parliament needs the state governments concurrence for applying all other law. Thus a state residents lived under a separate set of law, including those related to citizenship ownership of property and fundamental rights as compared to other Indians.

SILENT FEATURES:  Article 370 guarantees special status to Jammu and Kashmir.  Allows state assembly to make its own constitution.  Separate set of laws for state’s residents such as citizenship , ownership of property and fundamental rights.  Citizens of other state cannot purchase land or property In state.  Center cannot declare financial emergency under article 360 in state.

th 5

On august 2019 , the government of India revoked the special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir a state in India , located in the northern part of Indian subcontinent and part of larger region of Kashmir, which has been the subject of dispute between India , Pakistan and china since 1947.

Revocation of special status of Jammu and Kashmir: BEFORE • Special powered exercised by Jammu and Kashmir. • Dual citizenship • state in charge of policing • Article 360 ( financial emergency not applicable) • No reservations for minorities • Indians citizens from other state cannot buy land and property in jammu and Kashmir.

NOW • No special powers now • Single citizenship • Center supervise policing • Article 360 ( financial emergency applicable) • Minorities were eligible for reservations • People from other sate will now be able to purchase land or property in jammu and kashmir.

Musharraf four point solution on Kashmir issue: Musharraf’s “four-point solution” on Kashmir On December 17, 2003, President Musharraf offered an out of the box solution in a bid to resolve the Kashmir dispute.79 Although, he maintained throughout that the 1948 UN resolutions on Kashmir remained Pakistan’s principle position but insisted that both countries must move from their stated positions. President Musharraf proposed four stages that involved (i) softening of borders which meant that the borders will remain the same but people will be allowed to move freely, (ii) identifying zones in Kashmir which will be followed by phased withdrawal of troops, (iii) self-governance or autonomy but not independence (iv) and a mechanism allowing both Pakistan and India to jointly supervise the region.80 President Musharraf believed that India should pull out its forces from some of the cities of Jammu selectively. He had further suggested that the LOC should be made irrelevant and the routes should be reopened to encourage Journal of Strategic Affairs 86 people to people contact & for transit trade so that the Kashmir process should further speed up.

Continue: India initially under the Vajpayee government agreed that Kashmir was disputed territory. The India-Pakistan Joint Statement of 6th January, 2004 clearly stated that the Kashmir problem was to be settled ‘to the satisfaction of both sides’. In return Pakistan, pledged to prevent crossborder infiltration and terrorism by undertaking that it would ‘not permit any territory under Pakistan’s control to be used to support terrorism in any manner.82 However, under the succeeding government of Prime Minister, Man Mohan Singh, India announced to reduce the number of soldiers in its only muslims majority state in November 2004 83 but maintained that J&K was an integral part of India and that it would not accept any redrawing of borders in the region.84 Prime Minister Singh, however, suggested that borders can be made “irrelevant” or just “mere lines on the map”. The response caused disappointment in Pakistan where its leadership was hoping that both sides could move beyond their stated positions in order to resolve the dispute.85 However, backchannel diplomacy during President Musharraf’s era helped Pakistan and India to reach a framework for a political settlement on Kashmir.86 The development suggested that Pakistan is prepared for bold moves if Delhi is willing to reciprocate. However, the Indian response to President Musharraf’s proposals remained limited with some temporary improvements on the LoC.87The efforts again failed to achieve any considerable progress. Scholars believe that an important reason of this stalemate was probably the powerful establishment in India which does not wanted any change in the status quo.

THE STATUS QUO Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 60 years. Currently a boundary – the Line of Control – divides the region in two, with one part administered by India and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalize this status quo and make it the accepted international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both want greater control over the region. KASHMIR JOINS PAKISTAN Pakistan has consistently favored this as the best solution to the dispute. In view of the state’s majority Muslim population, it believes that it would vote to become part of Pakistan. However a single plebiscite held in a region which comprises peoples that are culturally, religiously and ethnically diverse, would create disaffected minorities. The Hindus of Jammu, and the Buddhists of Ladakh have never shown any desire to join Pakistan and would protest at the outcome.

KASHMIR JOINS INDIA Such a solution would be unlikely to bring stability to the region as the Muslim inhabitants of Pakistani-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including the Northern Areas, have never shown any desire to become part of India. INDEPENDENT KASHMIR The difficulty of adopting this as a potential solution is that it requires India and Pakistan to give up territory, which they are not willing to do. Any plebiscite or referendum likely to result in a majority vote for independence would therefore probably be opposed by both India and Pakistan. It would also be rejected by the inhabitants of the state who are content with their status as part of the countries to which they already owe allegiance. INDEPENDENT KASHMIR VALLEY An independent Kashmir Valley has been considered by some as the best solution because it would address the grievances of those who have been fighting against the Indian Government since the insurgency began in 1989. But critics say that, without external assistance, the region would not be economically viable. THE CHENAB FORMULA This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan’s borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.

Reasons for Failure of UN .

• I think the main obstacle in UN's way to work efficiently is that its controlled mainly by US . Now , before tagging me anti- America (which most of the people do after reading such sentence),I would like you to listen to me a little. E.g. US plays a major portion for its expenses . It can't stand and live without US assistance which makes it a lot dependent on US . So when anything , any decision goes against the interest of US, it vetoes that decision . As an example , I think the Palestine issue is enough for us to get this point. Might is right . To relate this saying to the UN , you know every

decision will be accepted if it has some force on its back . In International affairs that force is present in the form of military . Now the UN does not have any army of its own so it cannot implement its decision and its decision are left to the free will of the advanced , developed and powerful nations.

• As far as UN's failure is concerned, if we see that behind the UN the super power USA has an effective impact in order to make any decision. If we see in past all things were firstly decided and then the things are mentioned in UN for international documentation. It would not be false to say that US is the power which is running the UN because the most of financial assistance are provided by US. Besides, before UN the US was also had super authority over the world. But, after getting source of UN the USA has become more power full. As far as UN's working goal is concerned, no doubt that UN has been working effectively in certain sphere, such as in Health sector, financial assistance, and other social programming's are the best works which have been done by UN. But, the main and major issue is peace that is the main motto of UN's organization. As a matter of fact, it can be seen that the UN has not been doing any affective work in order to make the world peaceful owing to hurdle of US veto power. It would not be false to say that the US has been protecting her self interest by doing veto. So, with the sum up it can be said that the US is the hurdle on the of UN.

So far knowledge is concerned, the UN is a failed entity owing to the following factors. 1. It is financially vulnerable. It has to rely on the contributions of member countries. USA, being its major financial arm, exploit her serve its own interests. 2. Divergence of interests between great powers paralyses her i.e. it has been badly failed in sorting out recent Syrian crisis where the question comes of " Clash of interests" between Russia and anti Russian block. 3. It lacks the executive machinery to implement its decisions. its decisions has remained unimplemented. Big countries often tends to avoid her decisions. Its various treaties such as on human rights, environment etc. has been ridiculed and restrained by powerful countries. 4. Owing to its flawed charter, which was designed to serve the interests of big countries, it has been hailed as a failed entity. Quite often its decisions, owing to its biases beau racy, are delayed and designed to serve the interests of powerful countries. UNO is just rubber stamp of veto powers and specially USA.. well, there are number of issues in which Uno is badly failed but the main inefficiency lies in fulfillment of its prime objective... its prime objective is to bring peace in all over world but a number of issues in history and present burning peace issues shows that Uno is failed entity. Palestine issue, Kashmir issue, Afghanistan war etc. are main evidences.

Jammu and kashmir 2019 population; Year

Projected Population

2016

13,884,866

1.39 Crore

2017

14,153,483

1.42 Crore

2018

14,421,819

1.44 Crore

2019

14,689,775

1.47 Crore

The most significant issue which became the reason for the non-implementation of the UNSC resolutions was identified in the 1967 UN mediatory report which stipulates that the requirement for the withdrawal of all the Pakistani forces was related to the required withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces in stages to be agreed upon by India and the UN Commission. While no such agreement was reached with India by the UN Commission, as provided in part II of the UNSC Resolution of August 13, 1948, Pakistan also denied to withdraw all of its forces from Kashmir. The Indian leaders will continue to deny any sort of concessions and would like to maintain status quo on this issue. India would rather aim to convert the LOC into the accepted international border. Moreover, India has favors a bilateral approach in dealing this issue. Third party involvement or international mediation remain major irritant to India. However, from the Pakistani perspective, bilateral talks would yield no results as New Delhi would not compromise in any meaningful way with Islamabad. It would talk but not negotiate. Moreover, India’s aspirations to play a major role on the international stage has increased which demands a permanent seat at the Security Council. However, the unresolved Kashmir issue would remain an obstacle to the recognition it seeks. UN has declared that any unilateral declaration by India or Pakistan on the permanent status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir cannot nullify the position of the United Nations, therefore the relevance of UN resolutions will continue to exist until the two parties mutually decides any other solution. It is feared that another conflict between the two countries over Kashmir could Journal of Strategic Affairs 88 escalate into a nuclear war. In case where the situation might seems to escalate, UN Chapter 7 can also be invoked to take “Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression.”

RECOMMENDATIONS: • I SUGGEST THAT INDIA AND PAKISTAN SPLIT THE TERRRITORY . • THE SECOND SOLUTION IS THAT TO ALLOW KASHMIRIS TO LIVE PEACEFULLY • KASHMIRIS WANT INDEPENDENCE FROM BOTH PAK AND INDIA • I SUGGEST THAT KASHMIR ISSUE NEEDS PEACEFUL RESOLUTION IN ACCORDENCE WITH UN SECURITY COUNCIL TO ENSURE GLOBAL AND REGIONAL PEACE AND STABILITY.

• History………………………….www.pakun.org.kashmir • DEFINATION OF UNITED NATION ,PURPOSE AND SCOPE….https:///www.dictionary.com.browse , https;//www.un.orgcontent,history • Kashmir issued in UN……… www.pakun.org.kashmir • When Kashmir sold………….www.mapsofindia.com,on • • • •

Role of UN…………. https://www.Jstor.org/stabel41394458 resolution on Kashmir issue………..academia.edu Shimla agreement………….https://mea.gov.in>in focus-article , en.m.Wikipedia.org Article 370…………..en.m.wikipedia.org