news details |
|
|
| Regressive forces support, oppose the Maharaja simultaneously | | WP refugee issue, Bloody agitation threatened -- II | | Rustam
JAMMU, Jan 14: Bulk of Kashmiri leadership as well as the so-called civil society groups in Kashmir have consistently supported the State Subject Definition of 1927 and opposed those who stood for citizenship rights for the refugees from West Pakistan. The reasons behind their support for Maharaja Hari Singh during whose regime State Subject rules were framed and implemented are quite understandable and it is hardly necessary to catalogue here all of them. Suffice it to say that sectarian and essentially separatist Kashmiri leadership and the self-styled civil society groups in the Valley use and exploit these archaic rules to keep the state aloof from the mainstream politics, perpetuate their domination over the state polity and make the life of these hapless and persecuted refugees a veritable hell on earth. The Kashmiri leadership and the self-styled civil society groups in the Valley hail the Maharaja for what he did in 1927 and at the same time oppose tooth and nail the historic decision that he took on October 26, 1947 to link the fate of his state with India, saying the state should have become part of Pakistan. In fact, they have been consistently saying that since India was partitioned into India and Pakistan on the basis of two-nation theory in 1947, Jammu & Kashmir, which was a Muslim-majority state, should have become part of Pakistan. While accusing the Maharaja and the authorities of the time
in Delhi of conspiring against the people of Kashmir (read members of a particular community whose demands range from independence to merger with Pakistan to autonomy to self-rule), they conveniently ignore four stark realities.
One, Jammu & Kashmir was one of the 560-odd princely states, which were not part of the partition plan. It was British India which was to be partitioned and which was partitioned, with Muslim Pakistan becoming a sovereign and independent state on August 14, 1947. Two, the rulers of the princely states, as per the Indian Independence Act of 1947, alone had the right to take decision on the political future of their respective states. Using the power vested in him by the Independence Act, Maharaja Hari Singh, like other princely states, took the decision and linked the fate of his state with India. Three, the princely states had only two choices before them. They could join either Indian Dominion or Pakistan Dominion considering the contiguity factor. Four, the people of the princely states had no locus standi in the matter.
The fact of the matter is that the approach of the Kashmiri leadership and "civil society" groups in the Valley has all along been selective. They have been supporting those actions of the Maharaja which have been catering to their sectarian and separatist urges and they have been opposing other actions of the Maharaja which brought Jammu & Kashmir closer to India. Their selective approach should not surprise anyone either in Jammu province or in other parts of the country. They have been conducting themselves in the manner the protagonists of two-nation doctrine conducted in the pre-1947 era, with the British imperialists extending them all possible support. That's not the issue now. The real issue now is the irresponsible conduct of New Delhi. It is New Delhi whose irresponsible conduct has promoted the kind of politics the Kashmiri leadership, Kashmiri "civil society groups" and others in Kashmir have been indulging in ever since the state's accession to India. Had New Delhi conducted itself in the best interest of the nation and acted
like a genuine state acts, things in Jammu & Kashmir today would have been somewhat different. There would been no exodus of Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley and the refugees from West Pakistan would have become full-fledged Indian citizens decades ago.
It's unfortunate that the attitude of New Delhi remains the same even today, with the regressive forces in the Valley not only vitiating the state's political scene but also ruling the roost. The real culprit is, it appears, the so-called Indian National Congress. (Concluded)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
