Kashmir: Deep rooted Conspiracy to balkanise Bharat–1

The reaction of Pakistan to Kashmir’s accession to Bharat wasvery violent. — Vinod Johri

As we are going to celebrate 77th Independence Day on 15th August 2024 with jubilation, we are also pained to commemorate Vibhajan Vibhishika Diwas on 14th August, just a day before, to reminisce the partition horrors, the hounded souls, victims and sufferings of the people displaced from newly formed Pakistan with undecided borders. The subject of the independence of Bharat, the partition more akin to mutilation and strangulation of Bharat in the Jammu and Kashmir, birth of Pakistan with British support, large scale massacre of Hindus displaced from Pakistan, illegal occupation of Kashmir through invasions of  Pak soldiers with kabayalies, the invaders and mutiny by muslim soldiers and officers in the army ranks of the Maharaja Hari Singh, the then ruler of Kashmir, the then PM Shri Jawahar Lal Nehru coerced to refer to United Nations, the consequences of which we are still facing, handing over Hindu majority areas like Mirpur to Pakistan after partition and so many others relating to partition are extremely complex but lost into narrative based history written post partition and by European historians. I have occasion to read Hindi, English and Marathi newspapers of independence era (1940-1959…still continuing…) preserved in microfilms and honestly find that Vibhajan Vibhishika, the horrors and conspiracies in United Nations have been brushed aside in the history books read by our four generations after independence. Plebiscite was yet another issue which haunted our country due to the UN misadventures on Kashmir as a result of massively change in the demography of the state, particularly in Pak occupied Kashmir and the conspiracies revolved around the plebiscite for very long time until it lost relevance. A section of British press, however, was sometimes more candid about the happenings within Britain on Kashmir issue but honestly unaware of ground reality and oblivion of glorious past history of Kashmir of centuries and was carried away by partisan interest and attitude of the then British rulers. 

It needs volumes to write on the subject but a subtle attempt has been in this article to unearth the sins of partition and strangulation of Kashmir and dig deep into the history on limited issue of pre-conceived bias against Bharat before the independence and balkanise us through illegal occupation of Kashmir by Pakistan. I came across a thesis of Shri R.L. Gupta on Indo-British relations 1947-1950 (Independence Day to Republicday) submitted in 1969, a part of which is referred here. The facts are supported and substantiated by chronology of events discussed here. Many of such events are also published in the newspapers of the corresponding period. I may be pardoned to use the name of our country as “India” at some places due to historical recording in the newspapers, journals and thesis. Otherwise, Bharat has been mentioned for our Mathrubhoomi. 

Genesis of the Problem

On 21 October1947, a tribal invasion of the state was mounted from across theNorth West Frontier Province (NWFP) and West Punjab (both inPakistan) and within a day the raiders reached Muzaffarabad. Thesituation deteriorated rapidly, and, in the words of M.C. Mahajan,the Prime Minister of Kashmir, became desperate: “We had decidedby the 25th evening to go to India if we could get a plane, orelse go to Pakistan for surrender.... Luckily, at this criticalmoment Mr. V.P. Menon arrived.” 

Under these compellingcircumstances, the Maharaja of Kashmir appealed to India formilitary help. But the Indian Government pointed out that theaccession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Indian Union was a pre-requisite tor such assistance. Thereupon, on 26 October 1947,the Maharaja of Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession and the State of Jammu and Kashmir, like any other princely state, becamea part of the Indian Union. But, while accepting the accession, the Government of India made it clear that the final arbiter of the destiny of the state would be thepeople of Kashmir themselves. Replying to the letter of the Maharaja, Lord Mountbatten, the Governor-General ofIndia, said:

“In the special circumstances mentioned by Your Highness, my government have decided to accept the accession of Kashmir State to the Dominion of India. Consistently with their policy that, in the case of any state where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the peopleof the state, it is my government’s wish that as soonas law and order have been restored in Kashmir and itssoil cleared of the invader, the question of the State’s accession should be settled by a reference to thepeople.”

The reaction of Pakistan to Kashmir’s accession to Bharat wasvery violent. She had always “considered Kashmir to be withinits hegemony”. Therefore, she contested the validity of theaccession and declared it to be based on fraud, violence andconspiracy. The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan said:

“……We do not recognise this accession. The accession of Kashmirto India is a fraud, perpetrated on the people of Kashmir by itscowardly Ruler with the aggressive help of the Indian Government….”

Bharat, on the other hand, charged the Government of Pakistanwith complicity in and abetment of, the invasion of Kashmir. As,both Bharat and Pakistan took diametrically opposite positions onthe circumstances which gave rise to the invasion and offer ofaccession, the attitude of the two Dominions became hardened and their relations were strained. Under these circumstances, Bharat preferred to go to the Security Council to seek justice in thisdispute. In a letter to the Chairman of the Security Council on1 January 1948, the Government of India stated:

“Such a situation now exists between India and Pakistanowing to the aid which invaders, consisting of nationalsof Pakistan and tribesmen from the territory immediatelyadjoining Pakistan on the north-west, are drawing fromPakistan for operations against Jammu and Kashmir. TheGovernment of India request the Security Council to callupon Pakistan to put an end immediately to the giving ofsuch an assistance which is an act of aggression againstIndia.”

The SecurityCouncil never came to grips with the main issue and drifted intodiscussions of irrelevant and less urgent issues. The basic issuethat an act of aggression has taken place in Kashmir got lost inpower politics. The Security Council not only brushed aside theIndian complaint, it also refused to name and denounce the aggressor.

As the problem of Kashmir could not be solved by the UnitedNations, the British Government took the initiative to solve theproblem. In a joint letter in September l949, Prime Minister Attlee(along with President Truman of the United States), appealed toIndia (and Pakistan) to accept arbitration’ in the dispute overKashmir. This suggestion was considered by the Indian government tobe unnecessary ‘intervention in Indian affairs and was accordinglyrejected.Sincethen, the Kashmir problem had defied all solutionsput forward by Britain or the United Nations or any other country.

In the next issue, we will discuss the British attitude on Kashmir and Indo-British relations, the attitude of Conservative party in Britain and British press reporting followed by issues of plebiscite and Radcliffe line dividing Bharat and Pakistan on northern borders with particular reference to Jammu and Kashmir.          

Share This