4

India is in a strong position always and doesn't want any international intervention in the Kashmir issue. This can also be observed from India's reply given to Mr. Donald Trump's recent remark about PM Modi asking for help to resolve the Kashmir issue. The same can also be observed in India's response to China's recent offer to assist with issues in Kashmir.

Why is India so strongly opposed to international intervention in Kashmir? What is the strategic rationale behind this?

|improve this question
  • 2
    If they are already strong, why would they want to bring powerful actors into the situation? Countries like China might decide to favor Pakistan and then India could lose its strong position. – Rayce1950 Aug 7 at 6:53
  • You are aware of the territorial conflicts between India and China? And only an idiot would ask the Trump administration (with their intense focus on US interest above everything else) to become involved in anything. The UN is also not an option because China is a veto power. And nobody else would want to become involved. – Roland Aug 7 at 14:38
8

To invite international arbitration would be to recognize that this is in fact the international issue that it is. But to quote from Wikipedia, "India has officially stated that it believes... Kashmir to be an integral part of India". You can read that article for more elaboration, but this is the simple answer to the question posed here. Why should India invite the US to manage what India considers an internal affair, unless the US is willing to unequivocally take India's side?

|improve this answer
2

Because, Kashmir acceded to India and it clarifies that legally it is India's territory. Therefore, the Indian Kashmir Part does not need to be discussed. Only POK and COK is disputed territory because Pakistan and China occupies it illegally. (King Hari Singh Signed Instrument of accession when Pakistan backed militias attacked Kashmir.)

|improve this answer
  • I added a sources for the accession. I'm not entirely clear about the reasoning though, if it's so clear, wouldn't an outside court (e.g. the PCA) rule in India's favour? – JJ for Transparency and Monica Aug 12 at 12:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .