The Supreme Court will have to take a bold stand for upholding the majesty of the Constitution.Mehbooba Mufti
Unfortunately nobody is talking about the Instrument of Accession.
It is because of Article-370 that the
disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir temporary acceded with India otherwise Jammu and Kashmir wasn't part of India. So if you want to remove Article-370 then Jammu and
Kashmir can't remain the part of India. And
another thing is that there is the UN Resolution for Kashmir dispute, in which
Jawahirlal Nehru has promised the people of J&K that you will be given the
opportunity to decide your future by the means of memorandum, that were the
terms and conditions on which Instrument of Accession was signed. So better for
India would be to either restore the constitution of Jammu and Kashmir 1954 or
let the Kashmiris decide their future by means of vote, whether they want same as before Independent Jammu and Kashmir or they want to merge with
India or Pak. Sheikh Gulzar
The abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in August 2019 provoked intense diplomatic response from the international community. For the most part, India received widespread support for its decision. At the same time, however, there have been criticisms of the restrictions imposed in the region on communication and civil liberties. China and Pakistan, in particular, reacted with hostility and attempted to open a new chapter on Kashmir at the United Nations Security Council. This paper explores how the global conversations on the issue of the erstwhile Kashmir have shifted. It argues that the decision to revoke Article 370 has caused a significant degree of international backlash for India, affecting the country’s narrative on the Valley.
