In Historical Title, Self-Determination and the Kashmir Question Fozia Nazir Lone offers a critical re-examination of the Kashmir question. Through an interdisciplinary approach and international law perspective, she analyses political practices and the substantive international law on the restoration of historical title and self-determination. The book analytically examines whether Kashmir was a State at any point in history; the effect of the 1947 occupation by India/Pakistan; the international law implications of the constitutional incorporation of this territory and the ongoing human rights violations; whether Kashmiris are entitled to restore their historical title through the exercise of self-determination; and whether the Kashmir question could be resolved with the formation of international strategic alliance to curb danger of spreading terrorism in Kashmir.

Nuclear powers India and Pakistan have several times fought over the Kashmir region. Most Kashmiris, on the other hand have been fighting for their right of self-determination as recognized by the UNO. In the past two decades, the region has been witness to a lot of violence which has also strained the relations between India and Pakistan. There have been several rounds of talks on Kashmir between governments of India and Pakistan. Sadly, there has not been any substantial positive outcome in resolving this dispute which has international ramifications. The Kashmir dispute has been analyzed several times in terms of its impact, economical or political, on India, Pakistan and also Kashmir. An analysis through a Kashmiri point-of-view as to what the Kashmiris want and how the two decade long conflict has affected their resolve for self-determination makes for an interesting research. The books thus investigates these issues and reports on the basis of data collected in five main districts of Kashmir. The book contains a discussion of the respondents' views and their feasibility in light of Kashmiris' aspirations and realpolitik of south Asia.

Sumantra Bose locates his study on Kashmir within a comparative perspective on problems of self-determination and democratic conflict resolution that enables him to take an engaged but non-partisan view. Both this approach and the reliance on ordinary citizens and grassroots activists rather than on establishment sources, permit him to break away from the nationalist rhetorics of both India and Pakistan. He makes a strong case for an open dialogue between the contending protagonists in the framework of the right for self-determination.

This book approaches contested secession and the more Western concept of consensual secession from a political theory perspective. In particular, it focuses on the Kashmir issue as a form of contested secession and examines whether the Kashmiri people have a ‘right’ to secede.

After 20 years of insurgency, Kashmir continues to be a major flashpoint and decisive factor in destabilising regional relations. Resolving the dispute over the state of Jammu and Kashmir is crucial to achieving peace and stability, without which the US Af-Pak strategy is unlikely to succeed. With international eyes focused on South Asia, understanding what is at stake in Kashmir has never been more important. For decades, the dispute over the valley of Kashmir, famed for its beauty and tranquility, has determined much of Pakistan's and India's foreign policy. With the state, located between two nuclear-armed nations, and India blaming Pakistani militants for the 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai, the potentially wider implications of the conflict are higher than ever on the international agenda.This fully updated edition of Kashmir in Conflict offers a highly readable, carefully documented account of the origins, development and implications of this contentious issue. Beginning with the early history of the independent kingdom of Kashmir, Victoria Schofield traces the origins of the modern state in the nineteenth century, including the controversial 'sale' by the British of predominantly Muslim Kashmir to a Hindu ruler. She examines the implications for the people when in 1947 the Maharaja chose secular, yet majority Hindu, India over Muslim Pakistan and shows why the neighbouring countries continue to argue over the status of Jammu and Kashmir which, according to recommendations... passed by the UN, was to be determined by the will of the people.