Talk:Kashmir and plebiscite

Any references

1

Bibliography needed related to Motilal Nehru, Kamla Nehru, Jawaharal Nehru, with respect to them being Kashmiri and the connection to Kashmir— If Kashmir ever got to have a referendum, would he, Kamla and Indira, be a part of it? DTM (talk) 13:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

2

This article throws up queries related to–

• Jammu–Srinagar relations/Jammu–Kashmir relations (relations between Jammu and and Kashmir, between, not with third parties)
• New Delhi–Srinagar relations
• New Delhi–Jammu relations
• Pakistan–Kashmir relations
• Pakistan-Jammu relations
• Islamabad–Srinagar relations
• etc

This one 'Pakistan–Kashmir relations' already exists as a redirect. Considering this, New Delhi–Srinagar relations could point to Kashmir_conflict#Indian_view. However these relations are probably not significant/notable enough, just synonyms for the countries. DTM (talk) 07:45, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Tags

1. "No efforts were ever made to "conduct" a plebiscite" - Most of the UN mediation towards a ceasefire, appointing plebiscite administrator etc were for an eventual plebiscite. Nevertheless line changed.
2. "Unclear connection to the subject" with reference to the formation of a constituent assembly and constitution. A statement by India in the security council in 1951 - "So far as the Government of India is concerned, the Constituent Assembly is not intended to prejudice the issues before the Security Council, or come in its way". In other words everyone had to clear the air that this was not a substitute for a plebiscite.
3. Tag says "Unclear relation to the subject" with regard to In 1975 the Indira–Sheikh Accord was signed; Abdullah agreed to changing his stance on a referendum so long as he was allowed back into politics. and ...and the Kashmir Conspiracy Case involving Sheikh Abdullah took place. In the early 1950s, a group of Pakistani Army officers, as part of the Rawalpindi conspiracy, sought stronger policies on Kashmir.- neutrality disputed and relevance sought. - Domestic events like these are part of the plebiscite narrative if we consider how the narratives for self-determination and referendums etc interlink as well, which could find place here. However, removing.
4. "As recently as 2021, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, at elections rallies, spoke of giving Kashmiris to choose independence or a merger through a referendum following a United Nations plebiscite." - the aim of adding this was to outline how the plebiscite narrative is used in contemporary discourse. DTM (talk) 02:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

• • On the first point, please note that the UN Security Council Resolution 47 outlined a 3-step process, the last step of whihch was the plebiscite. All the "UN mediatory attempts" attempted to address the first two steps, i.e., the conditions necessary for plebiscite, and failed. This needs to be carefully explained. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

If the three sources you have added disagree with this (the last source is terrible), I would like to know where they disagree. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:33, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

I notice that you tried to circumvent the "primary source" tag for the UN resolution, by citing a copy of the resolution included in FRUS. This doesn't make sense. The resolution is resolution, no matter where it appears. You need to find a secondary source that summarises or analyses the resolution and reflect it accurately. We can't have cherry picking of quotes from official documents. This is a slippery slope! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

I see where the shortcomings are.

There is no intention of wp:cherrypicking or circumventing primary. I've written the history too concisely. Some events and important explanation are missing. As the tags point out there may be unnecessary events. I am relying on readers to click on the links too much. DTM (talk) 08:04, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

The aim of UN mediation was (1) peaceful settlement (2) peaceful settlement through a plebiscite. (2) is a subset of (1). (1) and (2) are different. The UN mediation was point (2). Hypothetically, say the vote of the plebiscite was 50:50. Then what would the UN do? (edit) Have you come across any reference that considers this outcome of 50:50? DTM (talk) 08:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a quote from Korbel that justifies the language "attempts were made to conduct a plbiscite"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Kautilya3; The text I have added reads- A number of UN mediated attempts, involving substantial effort, were made to conduct a plebiscite and sort out associated issues. As you have written above, a more accurate summarisation would be- all the efforts were towards "the conditions necessary for plebiscite", which failed. Accordingly the line should read... "A number of UN mediated attempts were made towards the conditions necessary for plebiscite, which failed" with some grammatical adjustments as needed. How would you reference this? Korbel (pg 114) is close however it deals with just the 21 April 1948 resolution "The main purpose of the resolution was to stop fighting and to establish conditions in the state which would allow the population to express freely..." Will it be necessary to point out that only this cardinal resolution is being talked about? This does not apply to ALL the resolutions related to the India-Pakistan question. DTM (talk) 03:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

That brings us to the question of the whole point of this page. All this is already treated in detail on the Kashmir conflict page. A WP:CFORK can be legitimate only if it treats the same subject with more detail that may be unfit in the main article. But I don't see the point of making an abridged version, which tries to say as little as possible.

The plebiscite idea died in 1954. The two Plebiscite Fronts that popped afterwards were not meant for deciding the accession to India/Pakistan. They were meant for asserting the so-called "right to self-determination", which was never granted to Kashmir by any authoritative body. (Granted that some people use "self-determination" without understanding what it means.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Words that are not synonyms

These words could be separate sections in themselves with respect to this topic-

• plebiscite
• referendum
• self-determination
• separatist
• independence
• consent

DTM (talk) 02:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)