Index IntroductionFormation of PoKInternational Law and ConventionsThe Plight of Civilians and the Plight of RefugeesRole of Pakistan in Ensuring the Needs and Security of Civilians PoKIntroductionSeven decades of Indo-Pak relations have been delineated by bloodshed . The repercussions of the affairs in Kashmir have led to confrontation between the two nations. The dispute over Kashmir, for Pakistan, may be limited to their Islamic congruence. On the other hand, India's secular dogma could be carefully examined. Ergo, this world's only conflicting nuclear neighbors not only fight over territory but also over their ideologies. The Kashmir conflict is based on the rule of colonialism: both these nations profess the same dependence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay The formation of PoKJ&K has been a source of contention between India and Pakistan since 1947. At the time of independence, the then approximately 565 princely states were given the choice between India and Pakistan. The situation which added fuel to the fire of the partition confusion was the inconsistency of Maharaja Hari Singh when he had no option but to annex Kashmir to India through an instrument of accession. Since then this tool has been controversial and a bone of contention with some considering it legitimate and others a parody. The issue was internationalized by Jawaharlal Nehru by submitting it to the UN. Pt. Nehru, said that "once the soil of the State is cleared of invaders (from Pakistan) and normal conditions restored, its people will be free to decide their future by the democratic method of a plebiscite or a referendum which, in order to ensure complete impartiality, could take place under international auspices.” That referendum is anything but a speck. International law and conventions There is an argument that international law and United Nations conventions on Kashmir issue are not relevant because the resolution passed by the UN due to the post-partition conflict between India -Pakistan is now a dead letter due to the statute of limitations period of the UN in the Kashmir issue has lasted about 17 years. With the signing of the Simla Agreement in 1972, the United Nations was left out of the picture as both nations adopted a bilateral approach to the Kashmir entanglement. Although the United Nations has passed numerous resolutions, these are not self-enforcing and only the parties involved, with their consent, can apply them. After hearing from Indian and Pakistani representatives, the United Nations Security Council passed its first resolution (Resolution 38) on the Kashmir conflict on January 17, 1948, calling on India and Pakistan to show restraint and ease tensions. Three days later, on January 20, the Security Council passed another resolution (Resolution 39), creating the United Nations Commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) to investigate the dispute and mediate between the two countries. Having put aside the idea of ​​a plebiscite, Pakistan opposed it fearing that its outcome would undoubtedly be arranged by Sheikh Abdullah as he was close to then Prime Minister Nehru. Indians opposed this plebiscite plan as they were adamant that J&K had become part of the Indian Union. None of the resolutions passed by the UN proved fruitful because at times the Soviets vetoed in favor of India, at other times China favored Pakistan. As a result, the United Nations withdrewfrom the issue after Russia negotiated the Tashkent agreement. India was too adamant in refusing to pay heed to the UN resolutions and this proved to be one of the major factors in the failure of the UN resolutions. Although India first took the issue to the UN with the intention of proclaiming Pakistan as the aggressor in the 1947-48 war, on the contrary, the UN suggested a plebiscite and hence India walked away by all United Nations resolutions. Both nations have repeatedly violated the Simla Agreement which, it seems, eliminated international intervention by providing for bilateral solutions to the Kashmir issue. Firstly, the 1982 Siachin Glacier breach in which India sent its forces to the Siachin Glacier area and established a tough military post there. Pakistan also sent its troops in 1984. Since then, both nations have been sitting making it a violation. Next was the famous Kargil war planned by Pakistan. Furthermore, India violated the Simla Agreement when it set up a fence along the LoC. Even if it is not the spirit of the letter of Article 4(ii)[1] of the agreement, it undoubtedly violated the agreement. Therefore, currently, since there have been extensive violations of the agreement, it is time that new bilateral talks or both nations will begin to seriously adopt the UN resolutions. Although the United Nations resolutions are now a dead letter, such resolutions cannot, under any circumstances, be overtaken by events. The passage of time cannot nullify a persistent and unparalleled norm, that is, the right to self-determination. This concept of defining a resolution as a dead letter in case of non-implementation would, without a doubt, extinguish serious international agreements. As a result, the UN Charter will suffer a fate similar to that of the Kashmir resolutions. This right to self-determination is an unlimited right, by very definition. The fault lies not only with Pakistan, but also partly with India. There is a rudimentary principle that denies the possibility of an agreement between the parties if this affects the rights of a third party. If that happened, that international agreement would be considered nothing more than a hoax. India and Pakistan are making a mockery of democratic norms with the Kashmir issue. The plight of civilians and the plight of refugees There is no such situation as China-Tibet or Israel-Palestine in the India-Pakistan rivalry over Kashmir. The only reason is that at the time of partition there was a provision regarding the transfer of civilians. The people were given an option. But the plight of civilians in the daily armed conflict between India and Pakistan requires attention. Furthermore, civilians of J&K neither wish to go to Pakistan nor stay in India. So, the issue of refugee relocation does not have much significance as in the China-Tibet case or the Israel-Palestine case. The time, in 1947, when people were forced to abandon their homes in what is now called Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) upon the attack of Pakistani forces on Jammu and Kashmir, made the blood run cold. Those who fled from regions such as Muzaffarabad, Poonch, Kotli, Bhimber and Mirpur are still unstable and have not been granted refugee status. Our Indian government has maintained the position that they are not qualified to be called refugees and are claiming their benefits as they moved away from PoK, which is, no doubt, a part of India. Ergo, lately, the Indian government has refused compensation to be provided to the residents of Mirpur, whose properties were inundated due to the construction of the damMangla. Currently, people from PoK living in Jammu and Kashmir without political status number around 1,200,000 and also are devoid of any assurance from Indian governments regarding their position in the Kashmir conflict. Both nations constantly argue over territorial issues. In all this, the authority paid zero attention to the opinion and state of Indian Muslims and also civilians of PoK. If countries are under the impression that, without understanding the plight of civilians, they would be able to find a solution to this long-standing dispute, then they are far from the mark. Over time, the state government of J&K has been by, by and for Kashmiris. Since the PoK refugees are not Kashmiris, they were not allowed to settle in the Valley as the state government never wanted them to do so. To their relief, the central government settled some refugees in the Jammu region, while others were forced to relocate to states like Punjab, Rajasthan and UP. Nix's authority showed rigor in the settlement of these refugees. The current programs implemented for the cause are merely baffling relief measures, a small ex-gratia grant with rehabilitation. Those refugees have not yet been compensated for their properties in PoK territory and to twist the knife, they are being told that providing compensation at this step will not be possible. putting India's position at the United Nations at stake. By raising this issue, the contention that comes to the porch is that PoK will be recovered and people will be sent back. Thinking with a practical approach, by no stretch of the imagination, our authorities have the necessary capacity to recover PoK. In all this chaos, refugees are disenfranchised and confused. Role of Pakistan in ensuring the needs and safety of PoK civilians After the October 2005 earthquake, the harsh reality of PoK exploded. The situation was bad then. The area witnesses Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and the rise of jihadist influence in the area has also been alarming. There is no political party working for the upliftment of the province, making the way for terrorists an easy path. People now suffer from unemployment problems and do not have access to other basic services. The attacks on Kashmiri Pandits in Nadimarg in 2003 were carried out by these groups. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in 2002: "We must ask Pakistan to put an end to terrorist activities conducted on its territory in India, in Kashmir." Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary, told the British Parliament in 2002: "A number of terrorist organizations have been at the forefront of violent activity in the region. Successive Pakistani governments have encouraged and funded terrorists to make inroads across the line control and engage in terrorism." Kashmiris are troubled by the growing number of foreign mercenaries in Kashmir and the growing domination of Islamabad. Pakistan has ignored the resentment of the people of this region against the growing Chinese presence in the area. China has also undertaken many development projects in PoK, trans-Karakoram stretch in 1963. There is even suspicion that the Sunni majority state of Pakistan together with China may exterminate the Shia minority in Gilgit Baltistan to silence all opposition to their policies. in the future[3]. Indiscriminate violence has marked the area since 1989, and from 1989 to 2001 over 34,000 civilians were killed. Kashmir is a beautiful place, with even more beautiful people. Seven decades and generations have passed through it. Perhaps it is time that India stuck to its parliamentary resolution of 1994 which stated as follows: Keep..