DR. JAVID IQBAL
India was paying for the blunders inherent in the Nehruvian vision. This formed the crux of what the BJP leaders talked of in Jammu, as per the news reports [GK-24th December]. Contrary to BJP belief, a cursory look at the history of the sub continental affairs in mid 20th Century provides the proof that Nehruvian effort more than anything else resulted in J&K becoming a part of India. Taking a circuitous route, refuting that religious division alone could form the basis of division, once the decision had been taken to divide the sub continent; the clause of ‘other factors’ was introduced into the partition plan apparently for administrative convenience. ‘Other factors’ covered the water head, the irrigation facilities, and the run of the river. The fallout had three tehsils of Muslim majority Gurdaspur district, east of Ravi-Gurdaspur Khas, Batala [Muslim majority tehsils, as per 1941 census] and Pathankot with its railhead become a part of India. Based on religious division, Gurdaspur would have formed a part of Pakistan and India could never have had the corridor to J&K.
Mountbatten put his Viceregal position of impartiality at stake by announcing on 4th June 1947 “It is unlikely that Boundary Commission would throw whole of the (Gurdaspur) District into Muslim majority areas” [Quoted in: L.A. Sherwani ‘The Partition of India and Mountbatten, Karachi 1986-page: 125] Alistair Lamb points out significantly in [Birth of a Tragedy-Kashmir 1947-Roxford Books U.K-page: 32] that Mountbatten said it about a month before Radcliff set foot on Indian soil-that was on 8th July. Mountbatten had pre-judged, what Radcliff had to judge! Nehruvian influence on Mountbatten is an unmistakable take of the period; vice-versa is equally true. Add Edwina Mountbatten to that equation and you have the scales tilted to suit Nehruvian vision. Edwina’s fascination for the handsome Pundit of Kashmiri stock finds prominence in so many accounts, a look at their beaming photographs is equally suggestive of the relationship being much more than merely platonic. Nehru was working deftly behind the scenes, not beyond throwing sentimental tantrums in ensuring that Kashmir remains with India. And Nehru did not stop at that; he convinced the international power corridors that Kashmir’s security is allied to Indian security in geopolitical parlance. Nehru’s telegram to Clement Attlee-British Prime Minister on 25th October 1947, at the height of Kashmir conflict bears testimony to that:
Kashmir’s northern frontiers…run in common with those of three countries, Afghanistan, U.S.S.R. and China. Security of Kashmir, which must depend upon its internal tranquility and existence of stable government, is vital to the security of India.
[Allister Lamb-Birth of a Tragedy-Kashmir 1947-Roxford Books U.K-page: 88]
Nehru’s telegram straightaway raises a query-has Kashmir attained internal stability and is there even a semblance of a stable government, 63 years after the telegram quoted above, to provide the vitality akin to Nehruvian vision to the security of India?
Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru’s gaffes’ in the resolution passed in Jammu by BJP are listed as:
* refusal to settle some of the millions of refugees from Pakistan in various parts of the country including the state of Jammu & Kashmir.
* erroneously endorsing the demand for ascertaining the wishes of the people with regard to the accession of the state into India, not done in relation to any other state and internationalization of the issue particularly before the United Nations;
*without realizing the long term implications constitutionalize a separate status for Jammu & Kashmir while still mentioning that this separate status would only be transient and temporary, it was mentioned in the resolution
Refugees from Pakistan constituted a bilateral traffic. It has been called in sheer numbers, the greatest mass migration recorded in human history. The sub continental leaders failed their people by their myopic vision. It is a recorded fact that communal holocaust cast its dark shadow over the Jammu region. Much blood was spilled, as the forces that had done their blood spilling home work and carried it across the sub continent did not spare Jammu too. Kashmir escaped, a fact Mahatma Gandhi admitted, as he saw a ray of home emanating from Kashmir. The mature Kashmiri leadership, across the political spectrum in Kashmir deserves a salute for an act, which blood spillers need to take a lesson from! Settlement of refugees in J&K State would have suited the element, which wanted to make a minority of a majority.
Ascertaining the wishes of the people being erroneous is a take, any democratically minded person would be ashamed to own, save BJP. By its very take, it renders itself open to charge of being anything but democrat, providing ammunition to the likes of Digvijay Singh, who did not bat an eyelid before painting BJP with the same brush as Nazi brigade in Germany. He did not mince words in putting BJP’s hatred for Muslims on the same level as that of Nazis for Jews. Nazis used the democratic set-up to implement their fascist agenda. BJP would be hard put to prove Digvijay wrong in putting them at par with Nazis.
BJP need not blame Nehru, as he did what the Parivar forces wanted him to do, by raising the slogan of Ek Nishan, Ek Pradhan and Ek Vidhan? He put the person, the very force in jail, which he depended upon to deliver Kashmir to India by a fair referendum. And then put the referendum on such a hold, where the idea got planted that holding it might put up more questions than it would solve. Thus intentionally or unintentionally 1953 proved to be the anti thesis of democratic functioning in Kashmir. With Sheikh’s arrest, the predominant stream remained the one representing a sentiment; BJP seems to be at odds with. Force has failed to repress that sentiment, so too the rhetoric against it. Where as sanity, logic and reason demand to address that sentiment and accommodate it, the BJP effort is geared to dilute it and dissolve it in its ‘Rashtra’ sentiment that is un-accommodative of any take, save its own!
Referendum in other situations! BJP’s knowledge of history as such is abysmal and whatever they seem to comprehend of Indian history is tailored to suit the Sangh Parivar designs. What about referendum in NWFP? Well, it might be argued it constituted British India and was not an Indian state. However, it established a principle, as Congress having the support of Badshah Khan headed Khudai Khidmatgar’s [servers of Almighty God] made the loyalties of frontier province a matter of contention. And what about Junagadh, where the Nawab opted for Pakistan? Referendum settled the political status of Junagadh-an Indian state and not a part of British India. Constitutionalize a separate status for Jammu & Kashmir! Maharaja of J&K State asked for it, as he signed the accession document, as per the Indian records on 26th of October 1947 as the rebels aided by tribal forces entered Kashmir on 22nd October and Indian forces were ready to be airlifted to Srinagar. The person who got the document signed was V.P.Menon-Sardar Patel confidant and when he flew back to Delhi, Government of India that approved it included the powerful Sardar-India’s man of steel-a Sangh Parivar icon, eulogized and praised in Jammu resolution too, while roundly condemning Nehru. And history is a witness and the narrative [Heir Apparent] of Yuraj [not destined to be a Maharaj] Karan Singh substantiates the take that J&K’s Raj Gharana was under Sardar Patel’s spell. Nehru acted through Sardar in getting the desired done in J&K’s Raj Durbar, which included ousting of Prime Minister Ram Chand Kak who was not inclined to toe Nehru line. Mehr Chand Mahajan was planted instead to make Kashmir Durbar tread Delhi’s way.
In spite of their differences on national level, in Kashmir there is evidence to prove that Nehru and Sardar Patel worked in tandem. Mountbatten got added to the equation, may be out of international concern that sensitive northern sub continental frontier is better left in Indian care. The calculation however seemed to have missed the vital factor of how the overwhelming majority in state of Jammu and Kashmir view the take prevalent in international power corridors in that decisive era. It also throws up the question-was the Nehruvian vision-utopian or realistic? Meanwhile new equations have come to fore. There is much more to J&K scenario than the rabble rousing BJP seems to comprehend and much more at stake too. Unifying rather than divisive forces remain the need of the hour to put a troubled sub continent on the mend. SAARC has to tread the European Union and the ASEAN way and the J&K’s predominant view addressed and accommodated in it! Anything short of that would mean giving in to divisive forces.
(Feedback at iqbal.javid46@gmail.com)
(Courtesy : www.greaterkashmir.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment