Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JumpCrisscross 404 days ago
> Why would a unilateral surrender of land be considered valid terms for peace?

Because you trade it for more than it's worth to you. America gave up the Philippines, for example. Every decolonisation effort could accurately be described as "a unilateral surrender of land."

> what land would Pakistan offer in exchange?

You'd probably need China to participate. Maybe Siachen or even areas of Sindh? It's a long shot. One of the elements would almost certainly be co-ordinated anti-terrorist policing. Maybe guaranteed by China.

> I'm inclined to consider India a safer nation for most muslim denominations

I am, too. But let's be honest, neither side is concerned with the wellbeing of anyone in Kashmir.
1 comments
ignoramous 404 days ago
> decolonisation effort

Kashmiris on the Indian side are citizens (unlike in "colonies"). AFSPA must be phased out but Kashmir isn't the only Indian state that's subject to it.

> neither side is concerned with the wellbeing of anyone in Kashmir

Yeah, the issue is too good to give up for (religion-based) politics and (military-industrial) businesses, on both sides of the border.

Reminds of me this Bollywood movie dialogue: https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/RJAJdYw3ctw

link
JumpCrisscross 404 days ago
> Kashmiris on the Indian side are citizens (unlike in "colonies")

Since when has that prevented any government from negotiating borders?

> the issue is too good to give up for (religion-based) politics and (military-industrial) businesses, on both sides of the border

Yup. I’d add that the citizens of both countries legitimately despise each other. Not genocidally, for the most part, but dismissively to each others’ humanity. So it’s not like you have to go full manufactured consent to develop jingoism.

link
ignoramous 403 days ago
> I'd add that the citizens of both countries legitimately despise each other

I've been to towns on both sides throughout the years and this isn't the case everywhere. Though, disagreements do run deep, as contrasting narratives are in fact mainstream talking points.

Hopefully, in my lifetime, the countries resolve their differences & cast aside the hateful fringe like they should.

> negotiating borders

That's a very different thing to "decolonisation".

> manufactured consent to develop jingoism

They have to. A widow survivor of the Pahalgam Attack called for peace and the jingoists lost their collective minds: https://x.com/RahulSeeker/status/1919771002013118540

India is 1.6bn people and even if 7% disagree, that's a 100mn people (and the number is far greater than 7%). Not everyone is a right-wing nationalist, though, the ruling parties and the now-compromised MSMs are.

link