KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Alınteri Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

Keşmir Çatışmasının Hukuki Değerlendirmesi: Rawls’un Adalet Teorisi ile Çözüme Yaklaşım

Legal Review of Kashmir Conflict: Approach to Resolution Through Rawls’ Theory of Justice

Muhammad Haris(Institute of Business Management)0000-0001-8621-6248
Farid Bin Masood(University of Karachi)0000-0001-7908-0602
Sayfa
1–12
Yayın Tarihi
2021-07-01
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Tartışmalar ve incelemeler bir yandan konuyu aydınlatmak ve diğer yandan yanlış anlamaları ortadan kaldırmak için tarafsız olacaktır.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:İngiliz İmparatorluğu’ndan bağımsızlıktan sonra Keşmir, Hindistan ve Pakistan arasındaki en büyük çatışma kaynağı oldu.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu makale, arka planı tartışırken, çatışmayla ilgili hukuki ve siyasi konulara ışık tutacaktır.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Tartışmalar ve incelemeler bir yandan konuyu aydınlatmak ve diğer yandan yanlış anlamaları ortadan kaldırmak için tarafsız olacaktır.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Keşmir · Hindistan · Pakistan

Özet

İngiliz İmparatorluğu’ndan bağımsızlıktan sonra Keşmir, Hindistan ve Pakistan arasındaki en büyük çatışma kaynağı oldu. Bölünmeden bu yana Keşmir çatışmasının belirleyici bir çözüme ulaşılmadan önce yıllarca devam edebileceği anlaşıldı. Bu sorun Pakistan ve Hindistan'ı üç büyük savaşa ve birkaç küçük ölçekli çatışmaya sürükledi (çözülmezse gelecekte daha fazla çatışmaya yol açabilir). Bu makale Keşmir'in kesinlikle göz ardı edilemeyecek iki yeni devlet arasında bir çatışma noktası olduğunu öne sürmeyi amaçlamaktadır; ancak, çatışmayı tetikleyen çeşitli yerel ve uluslararası faktörler de vardır. Bu makale, arka planı tartışırken, çatışmayla ilgili hukuki ve siyasi konulara ışık tutacaktır. Son bölümde, gelecekteki olası çözümler hakkında kısa bir tartışma yapılacaktır. Makalenin temel amacı Keşmir çatışması konusunu herhangi bir önyargı olmadan nesnel olarak gözden geçirmektir. Tartışmalar ve incelemeler bir yandan konuyu aydınlatmak ve diğer yandan yanlış anlamaları ortadan kaldırmak için tarafsız olacaktır.

Abstract

After Independence, Kashmir has been the greatest source of conflict between India and Pakistan. Since the partition, it was apprehended that the conflict of Kashmir may linger on for several years before a decisive solution is reached. This problem has lead Pakistan and India into three major wars and several small-scale conflicts (it may lead to further conflicts in the future if not resolved). This article seeks to propose that Kashmir was definitely a bone of contention between the two newly independent states that could not be overseen; however, there were other various factors of domestic and international nature that triggered the conflict. This article, while discussing the background, it analyses the legal claims of both parties and political issues regarding the conflict. In the last section, a brief discussion on the possible future solutions will be put forward. The basic aim of the article is to review the matter of Kashmir conflict objectively and in sheer isolation from any sort of bias. The arguments and reviews put forward will be impartial in order to illuminate the matter on the one hand and eradicate misconceptions on the other.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Haris, M., Masood, F. B. (2021). Keşmir Çatışmasının Hukuki Değerlendirmesi: Rawls’un Adalet Teorisi ile Çözüme Yaklaşım. Alınteri Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30913/alinterisosbil.826718

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (40)

  1. Agreement between the Government of India and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on Bilateral Relations (Simla Agreement) | UN Peacemaker. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from https://peacemaker.un.org/indiapakistan-simlaagreement72
  2. Birdwood, Lord. (2005). Two Nations and Kashmir. Gulshan Publishers.
  3. Brecher, M. (1953). Kashmir: A Case Study in United Nations Mediation. Pacific Affairs, 26(3), 195–207. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2753284
  4. Burki, S. J. (1991). Pakistan: The Continuing Search For Nationhood--second Edition, Revised And Updated (2 edition). Westview Press.
  5. CADIndia. (n.d.). Retrieved April 2, 2020, from https://www.constitutionofindia.net/historical_constitutions/government_of_india_act_1935_2nd%20August%201935
  6. Castellino, J. (2000). International Law and Self-Determination: The Interplay of the Politics of Territorial Possession With Formulations of Post-Colonial National Identity. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
  7. Constitution of India (Full Text) | National Portal of India. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from https://www.india.gov.in/my-government/constitution-india/constitution-india-full-text
  8. Copland, I. (1993). Lord Mountbatten and the integration of the Indian states: A reappraisal. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 21(2), 385–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/03086539308582896
  9. Farrell, B. (2003). The Role of International Law in the Kashmir Conflict. Penn State International Law Review, 21(2), 293.
  10. Howley, J. (1991). Alive and Kicking: The Kashmir Dispute Forty Years Later. Penn State International Law Review, 9(1), 87–120.
  11. India warns of Kashmir war | World news | The Guardian. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/india.kashmir
  12. Indian Independence Act 1947. (n.d.). [Text]. Statute Law Database. Retrieved March 31, 2020, from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/10-11/30
  13. Khan, A. (2007). The Kashmir Dispute: A Plan for Regional Cooperation (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 987561). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=987561
  14. Korbel, J. (1949). The Kashmir Dispute and the United Nations. International Organization, 3(2), 278–287. JSTOR.
  15. Letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan addressed to the Secretary-General dated 15 January 1948 concerning the situation in Jammu and Kashmir. (1948). http://digitallibrary.un.org/record/469219
  16. Letter from the Representative of India addressed to the President of the Security Council dated 1 January 1948. (1948). http://digitallibrary.un.org/record/468605
  17. Makeig, D. C. (1987). War, No-War, and the India-Pakistan Negotiating Process. Pacific Affairs, 60(2), 271–294. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2758135
  18. Resolution 39 (1948) /. (1964). http://digitallibrary.un.org/record/111954
  19. Resolution 47 (1948) /. (1964). http://digitallibrary.un.org/record/111955
  20. Resolution-adopted-by-the-United-Nations-Commission-for-India-and-Pakistan-on-13-August-1948.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from http://mofa.gov.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Resolution-adopted-by-the-United-Nations-Commission-for-India-and-Pakistan-on-13-August-1948.pdf
  21. Roy, A. (1990). The High Politics of India’s Partition: The Revisionist Perspective - The High Politics of India’s Partition: The Revisionist Perspective. Modern Asian Studies, 24(2), 385–408. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00010362
  22. Talbot, I. (2000). India and Pakistan (1 edition). Bloomsbury USA.
  23. Tashkent Declaration | UN Peacemaker. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from https://peacemaker.un.org/india-pakistan-tashkent-declaration66
  24. Thomas, edited by] R. G. C. (1992a). Perspectives on Kashmir: The roots of conflict in South Asia. Westview Press. https://catalyst.library.jhu.edu/catalog/bib_1407322
  25. Thomas, edited by] R. G. C. (1992b). Perspectives on Kashmir: The roots of conflict in South Asia. Westview Press. https://catalyst.library.jhu.edu/catalog/bib_1407322
  26. UN Charter (full text). (2016, April 15). https://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/
  27. UN rejects Pakistan’s request to intervene—Times of India. (n.d.). Retrieved April 2, 2020, from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/UN-rejects-Pakistans-request-to-intervene/articleshow/15007562.cms
  28. UNITED NATIONS INDIA-PAKISTAN OBSERVATION MISSION (UNIPOM)—Background. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2020, from https://peacekeeping.un.org/mission/past/unipombackgr.html
  29. Castellino, J. (2000). International law and self-determination: the interplay of the politics of territorial possession with formulations of post-colonial national identity (Vol. 38). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
  30. Farrell, B. (2002). The Role of International Law in the Kashmir Conflict. Penn St. Int'l L. Rev., 21, 293.
  31. Hodson, H. V. (1986). The Great Divide: Britain-India-Pakistan. Oxford University Press, USA.
  32. Khan, A. (1993). The Kashmir Dispute: A Plan for Regional Cooperation. Colum. J. Transnat'l L., 31, 495.
  33. Lamb, A. (2002). Incomplete partition: The genesis of the Kashmir dispute, 1947-1948. Oxford University Press.
  34. MEA: Statements: Bilateral/Multilateral Documents. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2020, from https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl%2F5541%2FSimla+Agreement.
  35. Mustafa, Z. (1972). The Kashmir Dispute and the Simla Agreement. Pakistan Horizon, 25(3), 38-52.
  36. Potter, P. B. (1950). The Principal Legal and Political Problems Involved in the Kashmir Case. The American Journal of International Law, 44(2), 361. doi:10.2307/2193764
  37. Qadeer, Muhammad Abdul. 2017. “United Nations Resolutions on Kashmir and Their Relevance.”
  38. Roy, A. (1990). The High Politics of India's Partition: The Revisionist Perspective - The High Politics of India's Partition: The Revisionist Perspective. Modern Asian Studies, 24(2), 385-408. doi:10.1017/s0026749x00010362
  39. Hodson, H. V. (1986). The Great Divide: Britain-India-Pakistan. Oxford University Press, USA.
  40. MEA: Statements: Bilateral/Multilateral Documents. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2020, from https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl%2F5541%2FSimla+Agreement.