somnath wrote:^^^RajeshA, akhand bharat is not a position -it has the same basis as (say) a country based on the Germanic civilization, or an Islamic caliphate all over again!
Germanic Civilization has been compensated by establishing an EU with Germany at the core. Islamic Caliphate is an ongoing project, and it's pursuit very much a part of perceivable reality. PRC has used arguments from the history of Chinese Civilization to justify its imperialism, and if I may say so, exerts its sovereignty and control over those areas. Indian Civilization has not found its ultimate satisfactory realization, and many people are dead against its very pursuit. They have been brainwashed to think in terms of Quarterly Earnings and servitude to short- and long-term interests of other civilizations, in this case that of Americans. Akhand Bharat is a justified position, though not realistic in the short time-span which is the focus of our present discussion.
somnath wrote:The Independence of India Act made no mention of Kashmir at all..And going strictly by the "principle" of Partition (Muslim majority areas to Pakistan, rest to India), well...As I mentioned in an earlier post, all that matters is that we "took" Kashmir, good or bad, legal or not, we did it, and thats what matters...We said to the rest of the world, including impotents like the UN, bugger off...
You do it again and again. You keep on repeating that India's control over J&K has its basis on our use of power and initiative, and try to undermine the legal and principled basis of J&K's accession to India. This is a Western agenda, and you do it without needing the rhetorical hat of the devil's advocate. You also fail to mention, that there was a set of rules for the accession of princely states to India or Pakistan, and J&K followed those, and we did it by the book.
somnath wrote:Now in our maximalist position, we can say that PoK is part of Kashmir, and acording to the accession agreement, the whole territory should be ours..But what matters is the reality on the ground, and that is the LoC...
The reality you talk about is shifting. As the internal strife engulfs Pakistan and as India grows, that reality will keep on shifting. Future is also a part of reality. It is better we arrive at a 'final resolution' when the reality has shifted sufficiently in our favor.
somnath wrote:What happens if there is a resolution along the LoC solution? Well to start with, Pakistan loses teh fig leaf of the Kashmir issue for all the jihadi outfits in Pakistan..It is then forced to take away troops from the Kashmir border towards the west, allowing us to improve our posture on the East..(Remember it was the minior diplomatic coup in the '90s by PVNR with China on the border talks that allowed us to withdraw troops from the Chinese border and deploy them on the Kashmir front) - now the reverse is required to preapre for the new great game in Asia!!
If Kashmir is only a fig-leaf for jihadis for Pakistan, do you think that the loss of a 'fig-leaf' would be sufficient to change the core existential doctrine behind the fig-leaf. No, it just means that a few commanders would look for a different fig-leaf, say, India's involvement in Baluchistan or somewhere else in their country ridden with internal strife. Fig-leaves grow a plenty.
Moving Pakistani troops to the west is a Western Agenda. somnath ji, if you do not hide this agenda better behind your eloquence and focus-shift, people here may really be convinced you are C. Raja Mohan.
It is not in India's interest that Pakistan moves its forces to its west. Those forces, which are giving the Pakistanis a bloody nose, are doing India a favor. Since India has decided not to wage any war against the Pakistanis, it is good to see, that some other people are less shy of taking on Pakistani forces. Those forces should expand and prosper. For that India should nail down most of the Pakistani Army on its eastern border. I feel comfortable with that.
Indian and American agendas will coincide when America decides to denuke Pakistan. Until then USA and India have divergent strategic interests in the region.
For the Chinese border, we will simply have to arrange for troops somewhere else and increase the defense outlay for that.
somnath wrote:Even with the whole of Kashmir, our access to Afghanistan would be a thin sliver of land, another chicken's neck if you will..ill suck up more resources in its protection...The alternative through the Chabahar port is much better and scalable....The Karakoram Highway is a decrepit piece of roadways - dont think it is of any useful use to the Pakis...And it is within very easy range of our fighters out of Leh...
That chicken neck need not remain a chicken neck over time. The elephant can one day ensure an elephant's neck. Besides access routes are not only over highways, but also aerial. We also need an aerial bridge into Central Asia. Chahbahar is also susceptible to the vagaries of global politics.
As of now, China need not ask any other country for the use of its aerial space if it wants to transport anything to Pakistan. The land route, the Karakoram Highway fulfills its limited use, but this can be easily improved on and expanded. The Chinese are good engineers. Secondly it allows for an energy corridor, going all the way to the Gulf. Why would we want to give the Chinese so much leeway?
If we want to check and contain China, we have to break its hold over our West. For that Pakistan needs to go down.
It is the American agenda to see quick results in AfPak. India OTOH can wait. There is no need to hurry with 'final resolutions' with Pakistan.
We are religious too, we are capable to do everything 
It is just that you and CRM seem to have an identical Weltanschauung and writing style!