Facts we need to know

THE ACCESSION DEBATE
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.