Featured Post
Abdul Majid Zargar takes a leaf from history by pointing towards some unknown but startling facts about accession
IT is extremely important to reignite the accession debate in view of some recent articles appearing in various Newspapers notably the One authored by Hashim Qureshi (Greater Kashmir 29th September 2010). The fierce debate on the subject in the Legislative Assembly has also generated considerable heat and controversy necessitating a revisit.
Mr. Qureshi writes that besides the option of Joining Either India Or Pakistan, the Princely States were also extended the Option of remaining Independent. Advancement of this argument is prompted more to Counter Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s argument of “only two Options” than based on any legal or historical facts.
The fact of the matter is that India Independence Act did not contain any provision or clause which supports the ‘independence” or third option view. This is also confirmed from a labyrinth of correspondence between Governor General, Lord Mountbatten and heads of various princely States. Further confirmation is obtained from the fact that none of the nearly Six hundred princely States exercise this option simply because it did not exist at all.
Having said that, it does not mean that I agree with the proponents of “only two options” theory either. Kashmiris, who have virtually gone through hell and have suffered immensely during the last seven decades by becoming prisoners to the rival politics of their two nuclear armed neighbours should get all the conceivable options on earth and only “Sky Should be the limit” before they choose their future dispensation once for all. This is all the more important to prevent exposure of generation next to yet another mayhem and bloodbath.
Taking the debate further, it is necessary to state a word or two about the instrument of accession itself and the circumstances and background surrounding it. Let us first go to simple facts as apparently known or repeatedly told to us.
The State of J&K, ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh, was a Muslim Majority State ruled by a Hindu Maharaja. Pending final dispensation of the State’s future, the ruler had entered into a “Standstill agreement with Pakistan”. We are also told that Mahraja was dithering as to which country he would like to accede to. Meanwhile tribals supported by Pakistan Army enter into the State. Mahraja, unable to face the onslaught, solicited India’s for Military help. This help was not extended because of absence of any treaty between him and Government of India. A document of accession, was, therefore entered into between Maharaja and Government of India on 26th October 1947 and accepted on 27th October. This document gave India three rights namely defence, communication and External affairs. India landed its forces, here on 27th October 1947, we are told. Upon insistence of Lord Mountbatten, a clause was incorporated in the letter of acceptance that the final fate of the State would be decided by its people after normalcy is restored and the territory is cleared of Foreign forces.
Looking at the document in the context and background in which it was entered, it will not be unfair to call it an “ instrument of defence treaty “ rather than an instrument of accession. While the dominant or main purpose behind the document was to save Maharaja’s territory from foreign forces, the other two powers i.e communication and defence are supportive of the main purpose as no war can be won without having access to communication lines and foreign support. In that sense both form a part of overall logistic support needed to prosecute a war.
Morally and ethically, this document, surreptitiously entered and accepted within a period of less than 72 hours, by a person who did not possess any representative character and whose only claim to rule us was that his forefathers had paid a sum of 75 lac rupees (Nanakshahis) as purchase consideration, alone cannot seal the fate of a nation to a particular destiny.
That brings into focus another document called as “instrument of merger” .While it is conceded that our instrument of accession is more or less on the same lines as the one signed by other princely states, what is unique in our case is that our State did not sign the said merger instrument unlike other states which duly signed it. What CM Omar Abdullah stated in the legislative assembly is only an assertion of an obivious fact which does not merit the hue and cry it has raised inside and outside the legislative complex. Incidentally nobody from top to bottom is disputing the fact of non-signing. Their only grouse is why Omar Abdullah brought it in public domain. It is the manifestation of same old mind-set that in respect of Kashmir keep things under the carpet – far away from the knowledge of Kashmiris.
The facts, circumstances and background in which the accession was entered into need a little bit of further elaboration-When Indian Army pushed back the tribals and were within the reach of securing the whole territory of J&K, it dawned upon Indian authorities that in such an eventuality they had to leave Kashmir in terms of the instrument of accession (or defence treaty by whatever name you may call it). Hence a gimmick played here. They stopped the army from further advances and directed it to pull back to Uri. Even army authorities were taken aback at this direction and protested about it. But those poor fellows did not know the nitty- gritty of politics and legal nuances of the issue. The Indian authorities created a deliberate situation where it can be said that it’s army was not able to clear the whole of Maharaja’s territory giving it a reason to stay put and thwart the proposal of holding a plebiscite. To Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah the proposal was sold in a different package. He was made to believe that people of other side are not worth to become his subjects and in any case his writ does not run on them-Hence they should be left alone.
In this connection it may be useful to draw parallels from another incident occurring in our sub-continent. That is the request of Sri-Lankan Government to India for Military help to fight LTTE in 1987. India sent IPKF. When the matters started getting delayed a little bit, President Jayawardene of Sri Lanka saw to it that Indian Army leaves its shores even before accomplishing the military objective. He was a visionary and must have “Kashmir” in the back of his mind .
It must be stated here that when the Partition of sub-continent became inevitable, India had set her eyes on Kashmir. Nehru was so obsessed with this place that he once wept upon being told that Kashmir had a real , genuine and plausible option to Join Pakistan. Lord Mountbatten had to once admonish him for skipping important meetings regarding modalities of Partition of India and instead be busy with Kashmir politics. Our tallest leader Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah had already been conditioned on these lines. He was even made President of Indian State People’s Convention. He did not attend a single meeting of Corresponding Pakistan State People’s convention headed by Abdul Rab Nishtar. In that way the die was already cast for future of Kashmir.
When Draft Partition plan as prepared by Redcliff was ready, India found to it’s dismay no road link to Kashmir. The Gurdaspur-Pathankot corridor, being a Muslim Majority area , was awarded to PaKistan. It immediately launched a Covert operation to get the plan changed. As luck or ill luck would have it, the draft plan also did not find favour with a reputed landlord family of Pakistan which saw a major chunk of its estate (Jagir) losing on Ferozpur side. The said family also approached Redcliff begging for a change. Accordingly in deference to the wishes of both the parties, the draft plan was secretly revised which resulted in Gurdaspur-Pathankot belt going to India, much to It’s relief for getting a land route to State of J&K.
It also needs to be stated here that keeping the wavering nature of Maharaja Hari Singh in view, India had also kept ready a Plan “B” in it’s kitty. It had already obtained a Power of Attorney dated 23rd October 1947 through dubious and questionable means from Maharaja Hari Singh in favour of Dy. Prime Minister Mr. Ram Lal Batra which authorized later to enter into accession with India on behalf of Mahraja. (see inset) . Incidentally Batra is widely believed to be a mole planted by Indian authorties among the Maharaja’s inner circle. This is the most bizarre part of the plot as efforts were made to decide the fate of a whole nation through a power of Attorney. In that respect the move was no less ridiculous and inhuman than Amritsar sale deed of 1846.
Contrary to popular belief, Indian Army did not enter the State on 27th October 1947 but much earlier on 15th-16th October 1947. This purpose was achieved through a covert operation engineered by Sardar Patel and Baldev Singh Union Ministers of Home and Defence respectively at that time. For this purpose services of Patiala Force , a unit of Mahraja Patiala’s Army was requisitioned. A morale boosting visit of Maharaja of Patiala to Jammu on 4th November confirms this. It is these forces who along with the RSS fascists and other rightwing Hindu extremists carried a massacre of Jammu Muslims estimated to be around three to Four lac men, women and children. The planned objective of a demographic change in Jammu was achieved with the help of these forces in a short span of fifteen to twenty days. The Prime Minister of that time Mehr Chand Mahajan was hand in glove with such forces. Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah states in his Autobiography “Atish-i-Chinar” that at one point he thought to sue Mahajan for War crimes he committed or caused to be committed in Jammu. If any Muslim survived in Jammu, it was due to hilarious efforts of few secular and well meaning Hindus of Jammu .
The purpose of this article is not to generate any new controversy but to initiate an informed debate both within the freedom and mainstream camps with the sole purpose of finding a practical and lasting solution to the festering problem. Those crying hoarse that “Kashmir is an Atoot Ang” need to be informed of the facts in a civilized way. We need to produce light, not power.
(The author is a practicing Chartered Accountant. Feedback at amzargar1@indiatimes.com)
Mr. Qureshi writes that besides the option of Joining Either India Or Pakistan, the Princely States were also extended the Option of remaining Independent. Advancement of this argument is prompted more to Counter Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s argument of “only two Options” than based on any legal or historical facts.
The fact of the matter is that India Independence Act did not contain any provision or clause which supports the ‘independence” or third option view. This is also confirmed from a labyrinth of correspondence between Governor General, Lord Mountbatten and heads of various princely States. Further confirmation is obtained from the fact that none of the nearly Six hundred princely States exercise this option simply because it did not exist at all.
Having said that, it does not mean that I agree with the proponents of “only two options” theory either. Kashmiris, who have virtually gone through hell and have suffered immensely during the last seven decades by becoming prisoners to the rival politics of their two nuclear armed neighbours should get all the conceivable options on earth and only “Sky Should be the limit” before they choose their future dispensation once for all. This is all the more important to prevent exposure of generation next to yet another mayhem and bloodbath.
Taking the debate further, it is necessary to state a word or two about the instrument of accession itself and the circumstances and background surrounding it. Let us first go to simple facts as apparently known or repeatedly told to us.
The State of J&K, ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh, was a Muslim Majority State ruled by a Hindu Maharaja. Pending final dispensation of the State’s future, the ruler had entered into a “Standstill agreement with Pakistan”. We are also told that Mahraja was dithering as to which country he would like to accede to. Meanwhile tribals supported by Pakistan Army enter into the State. Mahraja, unable to face the onslaught, solicited India’s for Military help. This help was not extended because of absence of any treaty between him and Government of India. A document of accession, was, therefore entered into between Maharaja and Government of India on 26th October 1947 and accepted on 27th October. This document gave India three rights namely defence, communication and External affairs. India landed its forces, here on 27th October 1947, we are told. Upon insistence of Lord Mountbatten, a clause was incorporated in the letter of acceptance that the final fate of the State would be decided by its people after normalcy is restored and the territory is cleared of Foreign forces.
Looking at the document in the context and background in which it was entered, it will not be unfair to call it an “ instrument of defence treaty “ rather than an instrument of accession. While the dominant or main purpose behind the document was to save Maharaja’s territory from foreign forces, the other two powers i.e communication and defence are supportive of the main purpose as no war can be won without having access to communication lines and foreign support. In that sense both form a part of overall logistic support needed to prosecute a war.
Morally and ethically, this document, surreptitiously entered and accepted within a period of less than 72 hours, by a person who did not possess any representative character and whose only claim to rule us was that his forefathers had paid a sum of 75 lac rupees (Nanakshahis) as purchase consideration, alone cannot seal the fate of a nation to a particular destiny.
That brings into focus another document called as “instrument of merger” .While it is conceded that our instrument of accession is more or less on the same lines as the one signed by other princely states, what is unique in our case is that our State did not sign the said merger instrument unlike other states which duly signed it. What CM Omar Abdullah stated in the legislative assembly is only an assertion of an obivious fact which does not merit the hue and cry it has raised inside and outside the legislative complex. Incidentally nobody from top to bottom is disputing the fact of non-signing. Their only grouse is why Omar Abdullah brought it in public domain. It is the manifestation of same old mind-set that in respect of Kashmir keep things under the carpet – far away from the knowledge of Kashmiris.
The facts, circumstances and background in which the accession was entered into need a little bit of further elaboration-When Indian Army pushed back the tribals and were within the reach of securing the whole territory of J&K, it dawned upon Indian authorities that in such an eventuality they had to leave Kashmir in terms of the instrument of accession (or defence treaty by whatever name you may call it). Hence a gimmick played here. They stopped the army from further advances and directed it to pull back to Uri. Even army authorities were taken aback at this direction and protested about it. But those poor fellows did not know the nitty- gritty of politics and legal nuances of the issue. The Indian authorities created a deliberate situation where it can be said that it’s army was not able to clear the whole of Maharaja’s territory giving it a reason to stay put and thwart the proposal of holding a plebiscite. To Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah the proposal was sold in a different package. He was made to believe that people of other side are not worth to become his subjects and in any case his writ does not run on them-Hence they should be left alone.
In this connection it may be useful to draw parallels from another incident occurring in our sub-continent. That is the request of Sri-Lankan Government to India for Military help to fight LTTE in 1987. India sent IPKF. When the matters started getting delayed a little bit, President Jayawardene of Sri Lanka saw to it that Indian Army leaves its shores even before accomplishing the military objective. He was a visionary and must have “Kashmir” in the back of his mind .
It must be stated here that when the Partition of sub-continent became inevitable, India had set her eyes on Kashmir. Nehru was so obsessed with this place that he once wept upon being told that Kashmir had a real , genuine and plausible option to Join Pakistan. Lord Mountbatten had to once admonish him for skipping important meetings regarding modalities of Partition of India and instead be busy with Kashmir politics. Our tallest leader Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah had already been conditioned on these lines. He was even made President of Indian State People’s Convention. He did not attend a single meeting of Corresponding Pakistan State People’s convention headed by Abdul Rab Nishtar. In that way the die was already cast for future of Kashmir.
When Draft Partition plan as prepared by Redcliff was ready, India found to it’s dismay no road link to Kashmir. The Gurdaspur-Pathankot corridor, being a Muslim Majority area , was awarded to PaKistan. It immediately launched a Covert operation to get the plan changed. As luck or ill luck would have it, the draft plan also did not find favour with a reputed landlord family of Pakistan which saw a major chunk of its estate (Jagir) losing on Ferozpur side. The said family also approached Redcliff begging for a change. Accordingly in deference to the wishes of both the parties, the draft plan was secretly revised which resulted in Gurdaspur-Pathankot belt going to India, much to It’s relief for getting a land route to State of J&K.
It also needs to be stated here that keeping the wavering nature of Maharaja Hari Singh in view, India had also kept ready a Plan “B” in it’s kitty. It had already obtained a Power of Attorney dated 23rd October 1947 through dubious and questionable means from Maharaja Hari Singh in favour of Dy. Prime Minister Mr. Ram Lal Batra which authorized later to enter into accession with India on behalf of Mahraja. (see inset) . Incidentally Batra is widely believed to be a mole planted by Indian authorties among the Maharaja’s inner circle. This is the most bizarre part of the plot as efforts were made to decide the fate of a whole nation through a power of Attorney. In that respect the move was no less ridiculous and inhuman than Amritsar sale deed of 1846.
Contrary to popular belief, Indian Army did not enter the State on 27th October 1947 but much earlier on 15th-16th October 1947. This purpose was achieved through a covert operation engineered by Sardar Patel and Baldev Singh Union Ministers of Home and Defence respectively at that time. For this purpose services of Patiala Force , a unit of Mahraja Patiala’s Army was requisitioned. A morale boosting visit of Maharaja of Patiala to Jammu on 4th November confirms this. It is these forces who along with the RSS fascists and other rightwing Hindu extremists carried a massacre of Jammu Muslims estimated to be around three to Four lac men, women and children. The planned objective of a demographic change in Jammu was achieved with the help of these forces in a short span of fifteen to twenty days. The Prime Minister of that time Mehr Chand Mahajan was hand in glove with such forces. Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah states in his Autobiography “Atish-i-Chinar” that at one point he thought to sue Mahajan for War crimes he committed or caused to be committed in Jammu. If any Muslim survived in Jammu, it was due to hilarious efforts of few secular and well meaning Hindus of Jammu .
The purpose of this article is not to generate any new controversy but to initiate an informed debate both within the freedom and mainstream camps with the sole purpose of finding a practical and lasting solution to the festering problem. Those crying hoarse that “Kashmir is an Atoot Ang” need to be informed of the facts in a civilized way. We need to produce light, not power.
(The author is a practicing Chartered Accountant. Feedback at amzargar1@indiatimes.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment