Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (85105)	3/23/2003 2:14:21 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 281500

<I wonder how well this solution would work in countries that are more polarized and where the violence is more imminent, e.g., Kashmir.> 3 ways this works out in practice: 1)It works when the majority understands the necessary limits on their ability to impose their culture on the minority. 2)If they don't, then there is frequently a nationalist revolt by the minority, an exchange of populations, and the minority becomes a majority in a new small nation. 3)The other solution, is for some external power to impose, by force, a solution. But this, which is essentially Imperialism, is ever-less-viable as a solution. In Kashmir, there is no entity who could play "honest broker". Both India and Pakistan are steadily drifting toward Fundamentalisms. The inevitable ugly logic of the situation, if that Hindu Fundamentalist India will face a perpetual guerrilla war in Kashmir, until they expel the Muslim population and colonize the territory with Hindus. Or are defeated and withdraw. The same choice that Israel faces in the Occupied Territories.