Christopher Snedden says the Azad Kashmir government and the Muslim Conference have accepted the deal because they wanted Azad Kashmir to join Pakistan, which they were expecting soon with the promised referendum. According to him, this relationship was similar to that of Pakistan with its other provinces.  (a) The link between MANAWAR and the south bank of the JHELUM River at URUSA (including India) is the fine that is now defined by the actual positions on which both parties agree. Where no agreement has been reached, the line should be as follows: the 830-kilometre-long ceasefire line defined in the agreement began at the southernest point of the Chenab River in Jammu. It took place in a rough arc to the north and then northeast to the coordinate of the NJ9842 maps, about 19 km north of the Shyok River.  The inhabitants of PoK and Gilgit Baltistan are now calling for the immediate abolition of the agreement with all the rights that citizens have in the letter and mind. E. In all the provisions that can be adopted under this agreement, troops remain at least 500 metres from the ceasefire line, unless the KTSHANGANGA River forms the line. Points identified as included for one party may be occupied by that party, but the other party`s troops remain at a distance of 500 meters.
H. Except in the form amended by paragraphs II-A to II-G, including above, the military arrangements between the two High Commands of the Ceasefire of January 1, 1949 remain in force. I. The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan will deploy observers where it deems necessary. “As we critically analyze the agreement, we learn that Pakistan has been held responsible for the management of the region and not for the development of the region,” said Jamil Maqsood, chairman of the UN People`s Party (UKPNP), in Brussels. There is not even a single point about Pakistan`s settlement of the region. You took control of a large area and declared 4000 square miles (Azad Kashmir) independent, while you let Pakistan take control of the 28,000 square miles without taking the approval of the legitimate local government. “We reject all aspects (of the agreement) in fact, the entire Karachi agreement. Today, the circumstances are completely different from those of the time when the agreement was signed and if the Pakistani government is really serious about solving the problems of these two regions (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan), it should both remove the councils of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan and merge them into one appropriate representation of the two regions. Maqsood said. According to Christopher Snedden, the agreement was very favourable to Pakistan and deprived Azad Kashmiris of considerable powers and responsibilities.  The agreement was apparently kept as a secret document until the 1990s. It has not been reported in the press articles of 1949, the memoirs of Sardar Ibrahim or other sources.
It was first revealed in the gilgit and Baltistan judgment (northern zone) by the Azad Kashmir High Court in the 1990s, which says the agreement “appears to have been executed on April 28, 1949.” Later, it was published in 2008 by Judge Syed Manzoor Hussain Gilani as Annex XVII of the Constitution of Azad Jammu – Kashmir.   B.