Main Presentation
KASHMIR AT CROSS ROADS
By Zafar Meraj
BACKGROUND:
Kashmir dispute, to say in nutshell, for me and many others,
is a problem, revolving round BROKEN PROMISES AND SHAKEN FAITH.
Promieses were are still being made to people
of Kashmir, both by India and Pakistan, two close but hostile
neighbours, contenders for what was once called paradise on earth
and presently a virtual hell. However, neither of the two ever
bothered to honour its promises that eventually led to a situation
in which the people at large lost all hope and faith.
It was in 1947, when partition of India took place and a new
country under the name of Pakistan appeared on the globe and with
that the tragedy and suffering of Kashmiri people started. Kashmir,
which is also called as Jammu and Kashmir state, comprising five
different regions, namely, Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan, Jammu, Poonch
and Kashmir, was at that time a princely state, not part of British
India, ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh, whose forefathers had *purchased*
the entire state along with its inhabitants for a price of 7.5
million rupees from Sikh rulers. Hari Singh, despite being an
autocratic ruler, favoured to maintain the distinct identity of
his state and was against the very idea of merging Jammu andKashmir,
either with Pakistan or India, as was provided under the partition
formula. In fact, after Pakistan came into existence, Singh entered
into a stand still agreement with Pakistan and handed over his
department of Post to that country, for managing its affairs.
This saw Pakistan flag flying over the headquarters of Kashmir’s
department of Post, on August, 14, 1947.
However, in the meantime, large number of tribal from across
the border, from Pakistan, invaded Kashmir, under the patronage
of Pakistan army, in a bid to grab the territory and annex it
with Pakistan. Though Kashmir happens to be a Muslim majority
state, the population did not like the tribal invasion and rose
against it. Tribal, who indulged in large scale loot, arson and
plunder, also met with strong resistance from local people and
even though Hari Singh’s army failed in meeting the tribal
challenge, the latter could not accomplish their, otherwise easy
task as they instead of marching ahead and capturing Srinagar
airport, to block any outside intervention, wasted at least three
days in border town of Baramulla, looting anything that they thought
was precious, including copper utensils and like.
Meanwhile Hari Singh, in the wake of tribal invasion, fled to
Jammu and from there sent a request to Indian government for helping
in pushing the invaders back. Lord Mountbaten, the then English
Governor General refused to entertain Singh’s request on
the ground that latter had first to accede to India. Singh, pushed
to the wall by tribal invasion, sought to sign the Instrument
of Accession but Jawahar Lal Nehru, then India’s Prime Minister
opposed this as a strong popular movement against Singh’s
rule was on in Kashmir, led by Shiekh Mohammad Abdullah, a very
popular Kashmiri leader. Nehru’s contention was that as Singh
did not represent wishes of Kashmiri people, his request for the
accession could not be accepted unless supported by the Shiekh.
Shiekh, who was very close to Nehru and having serious differences
with Jinnah, supported the accession idea, to ensure that tribal
were pushed back. But Nehru put a condition to Singh’s request
for Kashmir’s accession with India, that a referendum would
be held in Jammu and Kashmir, as soon as peace and normalcy returned
there, asking people to give verdict on their political future.
Thus the accession of Kashmir with India was made a temporary
affair, subject to the ratification or otherwise by the people
through a free and fair referendum.
Immediately after Singh signed the document of accession, Indian
troops landed in Kashmir launching a major offensive against the
tribal invaders and succeeded in pushing them back. Meantime India
moved United Nations, accusing Pakistan of indirect invasion and
sought an indictment for the latter. However, surprisingly, when
the Indian troops were about to clear Kashmir from the tribal,
Nehru suddenly accepted the cease-fire, resulting that a major
portion of the Kashmir was left in the hands of tribal, to be
later given under the control of Pakistan. Historians still are
not sure why Nehru did this but some suggest Shiekh’s hand
in motivating his close friend to accept the cease-fire offer.
The reason, Shiekh and Jinnah did not cordial relations, ever
and the former knew that in case Kashmir went to Pakistan, he
as a politician would have no role to play there and will be reduced
to an ordinary politician, not the ‘undisputed leader of
Kashmiris’ as he would like to be called. In addition, the
parts of Kashmir, that Indian troops were prevented from taking
back from tribal invaders, were those where Shiekh’s writ
did not run and instead people supported other leaders like Choudhry
Ghulam Abbas, who were opposed to Shiekh.
After the cease-fire, an emergency government was formed in Kashmir,
with ¨Shiekh being appointed as the chief administrator.
Hari Singh was forced to abdicate in favour of his minor son Karan
Singh, who was appointed as Regent. Nehru visited Kashmir many
a time, addressed public meetings at which he used to assure Kashmiris
that their right to decide the political future would be granted
to them and their decision alone will be respected and honoured.
At one of the public meetings, in the historic Lal Chowk (Red
Square), in the heart of capital Srinagar, Nehru gave his hand
in the hands of Shiekh when the latter recited a famous Persian
couplet, that goes as:
Man too shudam too man shudi - Man jan shudam too tun shudi
(I am you and your are me, If I an the soul, you happen to be
the body). This was to demonstrate Nehru’s love and affection
for the Kashmir and its people.
However, soon Nehru forgot all the promises he made to people
of Kashmir, in Kashmir, on the floor of the Indian parliament
and before the United Nations, with regard to their right to decide
their political future. He instead directly and indirectly patronised
and supported actions that were meant to crush the popular upsurge
in Kashmir and that helped his close friend, Shiekh to become
yet another autocrat and dictator, after having sought against
Hari Sinhg’s autocracy.
RIGHTS’ ABUSE
Many a people are worried, and genuinely so, over the grave abuse
of human rights in Kashmir, for the last over a decade, following
outbreak of a violent campaign against India’s rule. However
if I say that it is not just during last one decade or so, that
rights of Kashmiri masses are being abused. The process of rights’
abuse in Kashmir started, well, right from the day Shiekh Abdullah
took over the reins of power. Can one believe that Shiekh’s
cops used to be on look out of anyone who happened to oppose the
new ruler or dared to air the dissent. All such people, and there
were many, for many reasons, would be locked up in a police station
and hot irons would be used on their naked bellies. Another form
of torture was to force sizzling hot potatoes in one’s mouth.
Some of the Shiekh’s deputies, holding important positions,
would have blank warrants in their pockets, duly signed by the
concerned police authorities. Whenever they would found any of
their ‘enemy’ walking down the road, they would stop
their vehicle, take out the blank warrant, write down the ‘enemy’s’
name in it ands ask the escorting cops to arrest him. Many a time
these ‘leaders’ would get even those people arrested,
who failed to salute them when they used to be on ‘official
visits’. Complaints were made to the Shiekh and also to Nehru,
but none came to the rescue of the hapless Kashmiris. They suffered
and are continue to suffer, from 1947 till date. Only the form
of torture has changed not the policy. It is a bullet now instead
of hot iron or hot potato.
FRAUD OF ELECTIONS
In 1950, almost three years after the Shiekh Abdullah took over
as the Emergency Administrator, first ever general elections were
ordered in Kashmir. Karan Singh, the Regent, issued a proclamation
asking people to elect members for a Constituent Assembly, that
was to frame a constitution for the state and decide the nature
of the government that the state would have. objections from various
sides including that of Pakistan, as the elections for the constituent
assembly was not against the commitments made by India with regard
to the referendum as also in contravention of the UN Security
Council resolutions, India made it clear that purpose of the proposed
assembly was to frame rules for the self government and it would
not affect in any way the disputed nature of the state. Nehru
made it categorically clear, in one of his statements made on
the floor of Indian lower house, that even if Kashmir assembly
passed any resolution with regard to the political future of the
state, that would not affect the promise of referendum. However
these promises too proved to be hollow.
One interesting thing about the so called elections is that 1950
exercise set the trend of staging frauds in the name of elections,
to allow New Delhi to impose its agents on Kashmir people and
enact frauds in the name of democratic elections. How free and
fair was the 1950 election in Kashmir, can be clear from the fact
that of the 75 seats that were to be filled, nominees of the Shiekh
Abdullah’s National Conference were declared as having been
‘elected unopposed’. On remaining two seats, exercise
was nothing but a ‘friendly match’. It was not that
National Conference was so popular that none would dare to give
a fight to its nominees. The elections for the Praja Sabha, (Peoples
Assembly), that were held in 1946, under Hari Singh’s rule,
Muslim Conference had swept the polls, forcing Shiekh to call
a boycott of the assembly. But in 1950 elections to prove that
he was the only ‘popular’ leader, Shiekh resorted to
unprecedented rigging. Many people, some of them having a soft
corner for India, raised voice against this fraud that alienated
the people of Kashmir resulting in complete loss of faith in Indian
democracy, but all in vain. A noted Kashmiri political activist,
Balraj Puri from Jammu, who then was a student leader, led a delegation
to New Delhi to register protest against the fraud elections.
However he was categorically told by Nehru to go back as "we
can have the luxury of democracy in Kashmir at this stage".
However, soon, differences arose between New Delhi and the Shiekh,
with latter demanding greater powers for his state. A series of
parleys were held that culminated in the Delhi Agreement of 1952,
that gave Kashmir almost complete autonomy, with India to manage
only three subjects, defence, foreign affairs and communication
and remaining all the affairs of the state to be managed by the
local government. But, before this Agreement could be literally
implemented, Shiekh was dismissed as the Prime Minister and arrested
along few others on charges of conspiracy to make Kashmir an independent
state with the help of United States.
Shiekh was replaced by Bakhshi Ghulam Mohammad, one time confident
of the former and with that the process of Kashmir’s merger
with India started, though at slow pace. Bakhshi and subsequent
regimes, never had the mandate of the people and in fact these
worked as New Delhi’s agents, acting on the latter’s
pleasure.
In 1975, Shiekh was brought back to power after he renounced
his 22 year long struggle for plebiscite in Kashmir, on the plea
that he would now work for restoration of the autonomy to Jammu
and Kashmir. An accord between Indira Gandhi, then India’s
Prime Minister and the Shiekh took place which spoke about the
restoration of the autonomous status of Kashmir. But soon this
promise was broken by India with contempt, further alienating
the masses.
ARMED REBELLION
For all these years people of Kashmir tried all possible avenues,
knocked all the doors, to seek justice, demanding fulfillment
of the promises which the Indian government had made to them,
asking for the basic right to live as human beings and not the
second class citizens, worse than those of a British colony. However
all their demands were met with contempt and hatred, a rein of
terror was let loose to suppress them. And when people had exhausted
all the options, came the most infamous 1986 assembly elections.
This is the last time when we should make an effort to make our
presence felt, seemed to be the only slogan as for the first time
in Kashmir’s post 47 history, people actively and wholeheartedly
took part in the election process. But their dreams were again
shattered and this time very badly. To their shock and surprise,
once again the old drama of having fraud in the name of elections
was enacted, though more brazenly. And that was it. Shocked, humiliated
Kashmiris resorted to the extreme measures. They were virtually
pushed to the wall and seeing that all democratic options having
been closed for them, the youth took to the guns. I am not an
advocate of militancy and like majority of Kashmiris abhor violence.
We believe in non violence but when left with no alternative to
safeguard our interests, our self respect, if we resort to violent
measures, we are not to be faulted. And that is why I and many
like me do not think that ongoing armed conflict in Kashmir can
be branded as terrorism. I firmly believe that what started in
Kashmir in early 1990, was a rebellion by the people at large
against the state sponsored terrorism, that was unleashed in different
forms and in different fields by New Delhi and its agents imposed
on Kashmiris, by fraud and deceit.
Otherwise how does one justify the arrest of four Kashmiri youth,
working for an opposition candidate in Srinagar, who had dared
to challenge the might of Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference,
from inside the building where counting of votes was going on.
Not only were these boys arrested, in violation of all prescribed
laws and other norms, they were subjected to third degree torture
in the police lock up. To add salt to the injury, their parents
too were picked up by the police and given a thrashing for ‘not
asking your wards to mend their behaviour’. Police did not
stop there, it took into custody the opposition candidate too,
who at that time had established an unbeatable lead over the official
candidate. The results were declared and the official candidate
was declared as ‘elected’ even as he did not poll votes
enough to save his security deposit. What happened is now history.
The four boys, who were counting and polling agents of the opposition
candidate turned to be the four ‘area commanders’ of
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) that introduced the gun
in Kashmir way back in 1988. And the opposition candidate roughed
up by the police was none else than Mohammad Yususf Shah alias
Syed Salahudin, the chief of the premier Kashmir guerrilla group
Hizbul Mujahideen.
The manner in which New Delhi dealt with the popular upsurge
in Kashmir did not help in containing the situation and rather
it added fuel to the fire, further widening the gulf between New
Delhi and Kashmir. The policy makers in New Delhi thought that
by resorting to military tactics they would be able to suppress
the movement, but that soon proved to be incorrect. The approach
and thinking of the mandarin of North Block was and still is that
every Kashmiri Muslim was a "Pakistani" and an "enemy
agent" and deserved nothing but bullet. This approach was
put in practice in early 1990, with Gawkadal carnage in Srinagar,
when scores of Kashmiris, part of a peaceful procession, were
gunned down without any provocation, by the Indian troops. And
there seems to be no end to this policy and approach of New Delhi
that is evident from hundreds of such incidents, be that in Handwara
or Bijbehara, be that Haigam Sopore or Pathribal. In the name
of fighting gun wielding militants, innocent and unarmed civilians
are done to death with impunity, under the cover of special powers
that have been given to troops in Kashmir, making them totally
unaccountable.
SITUATION TODAY
It is not that the Kashmiri guerrillas who have been fighting
the Indian troops, are under the impression that gun alone can
help people in achieving the cherished goal of freedom. Right
from the day one, guerrilla leaders have been saying that they
were forced to take to gun only to make New Delhi admit the hard
reality of Kashmir being a dispute, that deserves urgent attention
and an amicable solution, in accordance with the aspirations of
the Kashmiri masses. All groups and almost all the political leaders
are in unison in saying that dialogue alone is the right answer
to the Kashmir problem. Everyone in Kashmir craves for peace,
but it can’t be achieved under the shadow of the gun. Peace
everybody wants, but with dignity and honour and that is where
New Delhi’s sincerity is lacking.
It was way back in 1995 that JKLF, a premier Kashmiri guerrilla
group announced a unilateral cease-fire and showed its keen desire
to open a dialogue. JKLF chairman Yasin Malik, soon after his
release from jail, made a public statement to this effect. But
what did he and his boys get from the other side, over five hundred
members of JKLF have been killed by Indian troops, so far, in
the name of being ‘active militants’.
In August last year, Hizbul Mujahideen, presently only strong
guerrilla group of Kashmir, called for a unilateral cease-fire
with the offer to hold dialogue with Indian government to find
some solution to Kashmir dispute. Hizb commander Majid Dar formed
a core group that was entrusted with the task of holding talks
with Indian representatives. But this cease-fire lasted only few
weeks as it was sabotaged by vested interests who are against
the very idea of peace in Kashmir. An impression was given that
Hizb has surrendered before India and Dar would now be following
the foot steps of Kukka Parrey, the renegade leader who along
his boys is now working for Indian agencies.
Then came Vajpayee’s Ramazan cease-fire which was welcomed
by everyone including the Huriyat Conference, a conglomeration
of some three dozen political and other Kashmir groups, that has
now emerged as the major political force, spearheading the ongoing
movement. But Vajpayee’s initiative was too sabotaged by
the hawks, both in Delhi and Kashmir. The assurance given to Huriyat
leaders that they would be invited by Vajpayee for talks and that
they would be granted permission to visit Pakistan, to persuade
Jehadi groups based in that country, to accept the cease-fire
and help creating an atmosphere for a peaceful dialogue, was not
fulfilled. Also the assurance that Delhi would appoint some credible
political personality to continue dialogue with Kashmiri groups
was not allowed to materalise. Vajpayee, who many people believe
was sincere in resolving Kashmir dispute, now seems to have been
held hostage by the hawks. This became evident from what happened
in Agra, during Indo-Pak summit when the two leaders could not
sign the joint declaration, even as the two had agreed to its
contents.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
What however causing grave concern to every right thinking Kashmiris
are the attempts being made by various agencies and other vested
interests to divide the state on communal and regional lines.
There have been talks going on about making the Ladakh region
a union territory, bringing it under the direct rule of New Delhi.
There are voices raised in Jammu for a separate statehood and
ironically the state unit of India’s Bhartiya Janata Party
(BJP), is leading the agitation started for the purpose. Though
BJP leadership had for sometime in the past stating that it was
against the division of Kashmir, party chief Jana Krishnamurthi,
talking to reporters in Jammu last month, justified the demand
on the ground that it reflected the urges of the people of that
region.
Some US based Kashmiri groups have too been working on similar
lines that would see Jammu and Kashmir state divided in various
parts, thus bringing an end to the rich ethos and traditions that
form the Kashmiriyat, most dear to the people. The division of
Kashmir serves the interests of many, including India and Pakistan,
except the Kashmiris as a whole as if allowed to happen, this
would be the end of their distinct identity of which everyone
is really proud of.
NEED OF THE HOUR
What is needed at this crucial
juncture all shades of Kashmir population join hands to defeat
these evil designs, be that communalising the situation or working
for division of Kashmir. What is also needed is that right thinking
people from India and Pakistan as also the civil society actors
across the globe help Kashmiris in this crucial hour as otherwise
coming days will see another bloodbath in the subcontinent which
could be worse than that of 1947 partition.
Let us be clear on one issue, Kashmir is not a territorial dispute
between India and Pakistan nor can it be termed as a bilateral
issue concerning the two neighbouring countries. Admittedly, the
two countries, being close to Kashmir, are and should feel concrned
aout Kashmir and therefore can discuss the situation prevailing
there. But this does not give the two countries any right to decide
about the fate of the troubled state. Kashmir was, is and shall
remain an issue concerning over 15 million people of the state
and it is the people of Kashmir alone who have the right to take
a decision with regard to their political future, to shape their
destiny. Let us give the people of Kashmir their basic human right,
to live as human beings, to decide what a life they should live
and how they should do it. Let none be allowed to infringe this
right of theirs.
August, 7, 2001, Montreal (Canada)
