India-Pakistan relations, they must talk to resolve all outstanding disputes. India was defeated in the war. https://youtu.be/8Fb7kU6hf2s
Abbas Butt analyses the JK dispute and Iran Israel war. People must have the final say on the future of JK. Trump has played an important role.
Who has won Israel or Iran? Who has given the US and Israel the right to attack other countries? https://youtu.be/WQCP4LkuNSQ
Referendum in JK. Iran has emerged as a big power. There could be a clash between India and Pakistan.
Trump’s lunch for Asim Munir and the Nobel Peace Prize. Who is the biggest liar, Trump or Imran Khan? https://youtu.be/YE2LRzk9GQE
Can Trump help resolve the Kashmir dispute & the Palestine dispute? Who wanted India and Israel to get a setback?
There will be no nuclear war. There will be a peace agreement. Roles of China and Russia. Israel has lost.
General Asim Munir is playing his cards sensibly. Pakistan must not side with America. Ukraine and Israel’s war. https://youtu.be/AOrKh4eQPDs
Comprehensive Analysis - The Pakistani Delegation’s Visit to Brussels and the Confused Narrative on Jammu and Kashmir
By Jamil Maqsood, New Age Islam
17 June 2025
1. Context and Significance of the Visit
The recent visit by a Pakistani state delegation led by Mr. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari to Brussels, and his remarks at the Brussels Press Club, took place against the backdrop of a diminishing international focus on the Jammu & Kashmir conflict. This visit was presumably aimed at reinvigorating Pakistan’s traditional position on the issue — namely, framing it as an “unfinished agenda of partition” and invoking the UN Security Council resolutions of 1948–49.
However, the message conveyed was incoherent and contradictory, exposing the fundamental weaknesses and selective moral framing of Pakistan’s Kashmir policy. Rather than presenting a modern, inclusive, and rights-based vision, the delegation fell back on outdated rhetoric, omitting Pakistan’s own failures in Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) — regions that remain politically disenfranchised and under military-influenced governance.
2. Bilawal’s Dual Message: Strategic Ambiguity or Policy Confusion?
Mr. Bilawal’s remarks presented a dual narrative. He claimed that Jammu and Kashmir is an “unfinished agenda of the partition of the Indian subcontinent,” while simultaneously advocating for the “self-determination” of Kashmiris. This attempt to appeal to international legal sentiment through the language of self-determination, without addressing Pakistan’s historical and ongoing violations, revealed deep contradictions.
Two key flaws are evident:
• Historical Oversimplification: Referring to Jammu and Kashmir as a pending matter of partition overlooks the instrument of accession, the multiple wars initiated or fueled by Pakistan, and the strategic use of proxy warfare that has turned Kashmir into a battleground rather than a zone of peace.
• Selective Interpretation of UN Resolutions: The UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) Truce Agreement of 13 August 1948 clearly placed the obligation of withdrawal on Pakistan as a precondition for any plebiscite. Pakistan never fulfilled this primary condition, thus invalidating its persistent demand for a plebiscite under that framework.
3. Jamil Maqsood’s Critique: A Pro-Peace, Pro-Justice, Pro-Reunification Perspective
Jamil Maqsood, President of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United Kashmir People’s National Party (UKPNP), has sharply criticized Pakistan’s contradictory and opportunistic posture on the Kashmir issue. His analysis underscores several undeniable facts:
• Non-Compliance with the UNCIP Truce Agreement: Instead of demilitarizing AJK and GB, Pakistan entrenched military and bureaucratic control, established puppet administrations, and stifled democratic development. These actions are in clear breach of the UNCIP framework that Pakistan cites to justify its position.
• Denial of Political and Constitutional Rights: AJK and GB remain constitutionally marginalized and and constitutionally discriminated in their own territory. These regions have no genuine autonomy, and their governance is tightly controlled by Islamabad via the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and the Pakistani military establishment. True self-determination is denied to these regions while being advocated externally for Indian-administered Kashmir — a glaring double standard.
• Misrepresentation of UN Resolutions: Pakistan’s selective reading of international resolutions — particularly by omitting its own primary obligations of military withdrawal and non-interference — exposes its strategy of exploiting international law rather than adhering to it.
4. Pakistan’s Non-Compliance with UN Human Rights Reports (2018 & 2019)
Pakistan’s disregard for international norms and recommendations is further illustrated by its complete non-compliance with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ reports on Kashmir:
• June 2018 Report: The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) released a landmark report highlighting grave human rights abuses on both sides of the Line of Control. While India rejected the report entirely, Pakistan welcomed it selectively, ignoring the serious concerns raised about Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit- Baltiatan (GB) — including restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly, and political activity, and the absence of independent judiciary and press.
• July 2019 Follow-up Report: The updated OHCHR report reiterated concerns over Pakistan’s systematic denial of civil and political rights in AJK and GB, and urged the country to:
o Amend laws that curtail freedom of expression.
o Ensure independent functioning of judiciary and local governance.
o Dismantle militant groups operating in the territory.
o Provide 4G internet to the residents of both peripheries.
Pakistan has failed to act on any of these recommendations, further solidifying the perception that its commitment to international norms is rhetorical at best.
5. Complicity with Extremist Organizations and Export of Jihadist Rhetoric
Pakistan’s behaviour on the ground adds to global concerns:
• Tolerance of Proscribed Organizations: Despite being signatory to several international counterterrorism conventions, Pakistan continues to harbour and enable proscribed outfits in Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK), and Gilgit- Baltiatan (GB), under Pakistani control. These groups operate openly, influence politics, intimidate civil society, and fuel sectarian and religious violence.
• Prime Minister of Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK, Advocates Jihad: In a deeply troubling development, the so-called Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir recently made public statements promoting jihad, and reportedly invited Hamas-affiliated individuals to Rawalakot, clearly aimed at linking the Kashmir conflict to international jihadist movements. These actions are not only irresponsible and dangerous, but also in violation of UN Security Council resolutions and international law.
6. International Implications and Eroding Credibility
Pakistan’s approach is backfiring at the diplomatic level:
• International Fatigue with Double Standards: The EU and other democratic governments increasingly view Pakistan’s Kashmir narrative with scepticism, recognizing its inconsistencies and reliance on non-state actors. There is growing preference for indigenous, rights-based, peaceful solutions, such as those advocated by groups like UKPNP.
• Delegitimisation of Pakistan’s Advocacy: By refusing to grant constitutional rights to AJK and GB, by silencing dissent, and by backing extremist elements, Pakistan erodes its own moral standing and undermines its ability to engage meaningfully with global human rights platforms.
7. Conclusion: The Need for an Honest Reappraisal
The Brussels visit was a squandered opportunity for Pakistan to present a modern, constructive narrative on Kashmir. Instead, it reinforced a message of strategic confusion, selective morality, and outright disregard for international obligations.
If Pakistan genuinely seeks a just and peaceful resolution to the Jammu & Kashmir conflict, it must:
• Implement the recommendations of the UNHCHR reports of 2018 and 2019.
• Respect the European Parliament Resolution of 24 May 2007, which urged democratic rights, civil freedoms, and the cessation of extremist operations in AJK and GB.
• Demilitarize Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan and grant them full constitutional rights.
• End patronage of extremist groups, including Hamas-affiliated and other banned organizations.
• Allow free, open, and peaceful political activity, including the expression of pro-reunification and indigenous self-determination movements.
• Embrace an inclusive, rights-based resolution framework, grounded in international law and the genuine will of all peoples of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.
Only such an approach can restore Pakistan’s credibility and help usher in a peaceful and just future for all Kashmiris.
-----
Jamil Maqsood is President of Foreign Affairs Committee. United Kashmir People’s National Party (UKPNP)
The next target is Pakistan. Israel is not invincible. Where is the Muslim Umma? Role of China & Russia https://youtu.be/gC089t3kYCk
Usman Kayani analyses the worsening situation where Iran is targeted by imperial powers. Regime change will create uncontrollable chaos.
China is not a party to the JK dispute. I can’t say all Indians & Pakistanis are extremists.
The JK dispute was created because of the Pakistani attack. Create more space for peace. https://youtu.be/R8VbLGIZ274
