news details |
|
|
| J&K - "Lamhon Ne Khta Ki - Sadion Ne Saja Pai" | | | Mahadeep Singh Jamwal | 6/28/2019 11:23:22 PM |
| When collective voices from Jammu region, irrespective of caste, creed, social, cultural or religious differences, emerge regarding discrimination with Jammu region by the dominant political class from Kashmir, we have to introspect whether purchase of Kashmir by Raja Gulab Singh in 1846, was a right decision? Now in view of emerging voices from different quarters to segregate Jammu region from Kashmir, we can confidently say: Yes the purchase of Kashmir was an un-thoughtful decision of then Raja of Jammu. It is regarded as diplomatic move by Britishers in weakening Sikh power and creating a friendly and subordinate power on the most important frontier of India. This agreement (Treaty of Amritsar) was exclusively between British Government in India and ruler of Jammu. The interests of people of Jammu as well as of Kashmir were never taken into consideration. The Kashmir was never in favor of emerging with Jammu and historical facts testify it. The Kashmir valley came under Gulab Singh with the ominous terms of the treaty of Amritsar signed between the British and Maharajah Gulab Singh of Jammu on 16 March 1846, but Sheikh Imam-ud-din, then Governor of Kashmir, opposed Gulab Singh's take-over and it was with the help of British troops, Maharaja Gulab Singh was able to get the actual possession in the state only in November 9, 1846.
For centuries, Jammu as independent princely state remained under Hindu rulers. In the first half of the 1st millennium, the Kashmir region became an important centre of Hinduism and later of Buddhism; later in the ninth The century, Shaivism arose, Islamization in Kashmir took place during 13th to 15th century and led to the eventual decline of the Shaivism in Kashmir. However, the achievements of the previous civilizations were not lost. The ideologically Kashmir always remain indifferent towards Jammu. To arrive at conclusion, why it is so, we have to scroll down the history of Kashmir rulers. It tells us that Kashmir's Hindus have been persecuted and killed by Muslim rulers through the ages. We find that Islamization in Kashmir took place during 13th to 15th century when Shaivism in Kashmir declined, which has arisen over Hinduism and Buddhism during ninth century. Historians suggest that Shah Mir arrived in Kashmir in 1313 along with his family, during the reign of Suhadeva (1301-1320), whose service he entered. In subsequent years, through his tact and ability Shah Mir rose to prominence and became one of the most important personalities of his time. Shah Mir worked to establish Islam in Kashmir, ultimately taking over the reins of Kashmir in 1339 and establishing the rule of Mir dynasty. Under the rule of Mir Hamdani and Sultan Sikandar, also known as Sikandar But-Shikan, the two of them made it a state policy to unleash their terrible reign of terror on Kashmiri Hindus with the sole objective of eradicating the Kashmiri Hindus from their ancestral lands. Their efforts included destruction of numerous old temples, prohibition of Hindu rites, rituals and festivals and even the wearing of clothes in the Hindu style. Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam and were massacred in case they refused to be converted. The persecution of Hindus was carried out through forceful conversions, massacres, demolitions and desecration of temples. The second encounter of Kashmiri Hindus with mass exodus was engineered during the period of 1506-1585 under the rule of the Chak dynasty. The Chaks were new converts to Shia Islam. They imposed a punitive tax (Jazia) specifically on Kashmiri Hindus to harass and subjugate them into conversion. This ethnic cleansing was systematically engineered to change the cultural and ethnic landscape of Kashmir and convert it into an Islamic state. The Muslim Monarchs ruled Kashmir for at least five centuries including 'The Mir dynasty', 'Chak Dynasty', 'Mughal Dynasty', and before falling to 'Sikh rulers' (just about 26 years) by 'Afghan Dynasty'. After the 'First Anglo-Sikh War' the Territory of Sikh Empire was reduced in favor of British through 'Treaty of Lahore' (a peace treaty) and by virtue of another treaty (Treaty of Amritsar) Raja of Jammu purchased all the hilly regions between River Beas and Indus, including Kashmir, from East India Company, thereby establishing Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. The princely state remained under Dogra rulers under the paramountcy (or tutelage) of the British Crown, about 100 years till 1947, when it became disputed territory now administered by three countries: India, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China.
Hindu rule also not remained a matter of pride and it was a silence period before the trouble towards disliking of Hindu community and Hindu ruler. Around same time, while British colonial power was failing in countering India's independence movement, it was also using the time tested and proven 'divide and rule' strategy in Kashmir. It supported and promoted Muslim insurgency against the Dogra rule in Jammu & Kashmir and then came July 13, 1931 - a black day in the history of Kashmiri Hindus. That day, Kashmiri Hindus were once again made targets and subjected to vicious attacks. Even though India's independence brought democracy and popular rule to Jammu & Kashmir, plight of Kashmiri Hindus didn't have any material change. Yes, they were not only subjected to day-to-day Islamists' torture but they were still subjected to targeted discrimination and ridicule at the hands of majority.
Finding all troubles for the Hindu community in the Muslim ruled Muslim dominated Kashmir and Hindu's migration and eradication was a clear indication that the purchase of such troubled region that too by a Hindu ruler was in no way a necessity, as it also failed to restore the status and honor of Hindu community in the Kashmir and ultimately total migration of this community from Valley. History is witness to the facts that annexation policies by the dint of force ever remained a priority for the rulers that may be Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs or Britishers and the purchase of Kashmir State by ruler of Princely State of Jammu was also a part of it. In my opinion it was the day one when fate of Jammuities was sealed by emerging with Kashmir state, the people thereof were never linguistically, culturally, or ideologically in consonance with the people of Jammu region. The present scenario if conceived in reality also speaks of same mindset of Kashmir politics, the difference is only of physical in nature whereas ideologically the Jammu region an eye sore for these politicians is treated by way of discrimination in all fields that may be development, education, medical facilities, allotment of funds, un-employment, compensation and but not and our Jammu based politicians having pseudo concern for Jammuities are felicitators to Kashmir mindset. This is the reason the voices are raised for a separate Jammu State as we find the future of Jammu generation in dark and if the situation will persist, they have to migrate from this region also. Had the Sikhs not defeated the Durranis, the Kashmir would never been a part of J&K and Jammu would had never been a part to be oppressed like today but the arms of clock never turn back, so it becomes the first and foremost realization of Jammuities to have a sincere leadership for them instead of the tested horses who had always bent before Kashmir leaders to carry them on their backs for a joyful ride of Jammu region and getting themselves accommodated at the cost of Jammu voters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
