Will India and Pakistan sit down to negotiate?

Or will the Indian authorities be willing to sit down and negotiate?

Although it was only a condemnation resolution, the Security Council gave India and Pakistan only 48 hours, during which time the two sides must give a clear account of the negotiations.

To put it simply, it is whether there is sincerity to sit down and negotiate.

It is not a verbal promise, but a substantive action, that is, an immediate cessation of all military operations and no more unilateral disruption of the status quo on the battlefield.

As for the rest, it is up to the negotiations.

Obviously, there are no problems with Pakistan.

Following the adoption of the Security Council resolution, Pakistan announced the immediate cessation of all military operations and expressed its willingness to negotiate an armistice with India on the existing basis.

The key remains India.

Cessation of military operations?

To put it bluntly, to stop military operations at this time and negotiate with Pakistan is tantamount to acknowledging that India has suffered a crushing defeat on the battlefield.

Moreover, what do you get from negotiations?

Although the Pakistani authorities have repeatedly claimed that they are only fighting back in self-defence against India and have no intention of seizing Indian territory, Pakistan remains tough on the Kashmir issue, because Pakistan has never recognized Indian-controlled Kashmir.

To put it bluntly, Pakistan can withdraw its troops from Amritsar, but not from Indian-administered Kashmir.

For decades, Pakistan has identified Kashmir as a whole, and the India-Pakistan ceasefire line itself has no legal effect.

In other words, India, through negotiations, can at most get Pakistan to withdraw its troops from its homeland.

Kashmir?

Clearly, India must accept the fait accompli of losing Kashmir.

In fact, Pakistan has already taken action.

What action?

Expelled Indians from Indian-administered Kashmir, Hindu natives to be precise.

Since the capture of Srinagar, about 3 million Kashmiri residents have poured into Uttar Pradesh, India, almost exclusively Hindus.

In total, there are just over 10 million people in Indian-administered Kashmir!

Of these people, most of them are ***, and there are less than 4 million followers of Hinduism.

That is, Pakistan has expelled the vast majority of Hindu adherents.

In fact, this is the main reason why India has always refused to negotiate an armistice with Pakistan.

Why?

The expulsion of the inhabitants of Indian-administered Kashmir is itself a violation of international law and a humanitarian catastrophe, and it will certainly not be supported by the international community.

Only, who can prove that this is the work of the Pakistani authorities?

Yes, the departure of millions of locals from their homes must have something to do with the Pakistani army, which forced them to flee after the Pakistani army occupied Indian-administered Kashmir.

The problem is that Pakistan has not issued any eviction orders.

In official Pakistani parlance, this is a choice made by the locals themselves, and the Pakistani army has been working hard to maintain order on the ground.

The Pakistani army has no power to intervene and stop the choices made by the people spontaneously.

As for the humanitarian catastrophe, there are definitely, but not as severe as India says.

According to official information released by Pakistan, in the occupied areas, the Pakistani army is not only responsible for maintaining order, but also distributing food and other daily necessities to everyone, and trying to ensure that the roads are as clear as possible, without restricting people's personal freedom, and without restrictions on ethnicity and faith.

In addition, the Pakistani army has provided necessary assistance to the migrants.

In other words, if there is a humanitarian catastrophe, it is also India's problem, which is that India has not settled the refugees who have poured into Uttar Pradesh.

Is it only Kashmir that there are refugees?

You know, there are refugees in Bertankot and Amritsar, and there are millions of them.

Relatively speaking, the influx of refugees from Kashmir is not large at all.

In Bertankot, the Pakistani army has been helping the refugees as much as possible before evacuating, unconditionally helping many civilians injured in the war.

In Amritsar, the Pakistani army has provided all-round assistance.

Among other things, Pakistan has even used its own strategic reserves to carry out humanitarian relief and help refugees through the most difficult times.

Of course, in India's view, these are just rhetoric.

Why?

All of this is done by Pakistan to secure control over Kashmir and make the occupation of Kashmir a fait accompli.

Only, what should India do?

Unfortunately, India simply has no way to deal with it.

Retake Kashmir?

Obviously, militarily it simply won't work.

Negotiation?

As long as India is willing to sit down and negotiate, it must first accept a fait accompli, which is to negotiate with Pakistan in the current situation.

It can be seen that the best outcome that India can achieve is for Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Amritsar.

48 hours is not too much, so what should the Indian authorities do?

On the same day, large-scale demonstrations broke out in New Delhi, Mumbai and other places.

Not against Pakistan, but against the Indian authorities.

The Indian authorities have failed to fulfill their previous commitments, let alone their responsibility to safeguard the security and sovereignty of the country's territory, and have therefore lost their qualifications to govern.

The next day, 99 days after the war began, demonstrations in New Delhi turned into riots.

Although the Indian authorities have been preparing for a long time, the police force responsible for maintaining order, or more precisely suppressing the riots, has also been affected.

That night, the riots had spread throughout New Delhi.

Shortly after dark, the Prime Minister of India signed an order for four brigades deployed in the suburbs to enter the city to assist the security forces in quelling the riots.

Unfortunately, counterinsurgency operations quickly turned into armed conflicts.

By daybreak, the whole of New Delhi was in flames.

According to later statistics, at least tens of thousands of people were killed in the riots that spread across the Indian capital, and most of them were unarmed civilians.

In the afternoon of the same day, before the expiration of the Security Council's ultimatum, the Indian Prime Minister announced his acceptance of the Security Council's mediation.

Subsequently, the Indian Prime Minister signed an order for the frontline troops to cease all military operations.

At this point, the large-scale engagement phase of the Fourth Indo-Pakistani War came to an end.

Of course, it's not over yet.

Within hours of the Indian Prime Minister announcing his acceptance of armistice talks, at least 50,000 Indian officers and soldiers surrendered to Pakistani forces on the northern front.

Why?

These Indian officers and soldiers, especially senior officers, feared a post-war purge.

You know, in the history of India, there are too many cases of purge because of defeat.

If the situation in the rear gets out of hand, the politicians who started the war are likely to shift the blame to the soldiers who fought on the front lines and launch a purge campaign against senior military officers as a way to deflect popular anger, stabilize the situation at home, and retain their own power.

It's just that it hasn't gotten to that point yet.