news details |
|
|
| Jammu Kashmir history in new dynamics | | | Mahadeep Singh Jamwal | 8/27/2019 11:13:20 PM |
| The historical manuals from which individual now living drew their knowledge of early history of J&K state are to be annexed with new leaflets as reorganization of the J&K state into two territories, being the reason thereof. A political ideology disintegrating a state that never remained under British rule and thereby Ladakh region has been segregated politically as well as culturally from the state and other two regions of the state have been placed across each other in a union territory and this division can well be attributed as to the British philosophy of divide and rule. Whenever history of Jammu and Kashmir will be re-written, in reference to 'Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act 2019' it will carry with it that there were 116 MPs (39%) with criminal record, who too have voted to disintegrate the J&K state. This is a blow by the elected fraternity and more so in a democracy. Here we can visit the words of Lord Atcon, a philosopher and writer, "The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority". The people of all the three regions of J&K state have also been landed into psychological division. As it goes, a people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots. So whenever the history of Jammu and Kashmir will be re-written, it will have three names inscribed on the cover of the book 'Re-written history of Jammu and Kashmir' that of Maharaja Gulab Singh, Maharaja Hari Singh and Narinder Modi as trend setters in Jammu and Kashmir. The entire trio will be remembered for their different visions and their different roles. Maharaja Gulab Singh will be remembered as architect of Jammu Kashmir princely state with the fusion of princely state Jammu ruled by him, Kashmir purchased under the 'Treaty of Amritsar' from Britishers and Ladakh together with neighboring province of Baltistan was incorporated into the newly created state of Jammu & Kashmir. Just over a century later, this union was disturbed by the partition of India, as a result of which Baltistan became part of Pakistan, while Ladakh remained in India as part of the Jammu & Kashmir state. Maharaja Hari Singh will be remembered for acceding the state to Union of India, rejecting the option of even acceding to Pakistan, after India gets its freedom from British rule. Mr. Narinder Modi will be remembered for disintegrating and downgrading the state in 2019, after 173 years of its establishment without any plausible reasons thereof. Present dispensation has given us a situation to comment that yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but present is a conundrum.
If we have to permeate into the objectives of the trio that matured in creation and re-creation of the history of Jammu and Kashmir, we find that the purchase of Kashmir leading to integration of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh into princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was the part of the expansion policies of Maharaja Gulab Singh, who was at free will to implement his decisions by virtue of his kingship. The accession by Maharaja Hari Singh was to save the J&K from falling to the hands of vested interests of Pakistan. It was a decision compelled by the circumstances that prevailed immediately after partition of the British India; Maharaja asking for Indian army's help to save Kashmir was responded with a stipulation of acceding to India first before army could be sent to Kashmir. The disintegration by Modi is taken as to meet political aspirations' of BJP lust to have its party's absolute rule in J&K and to implement the election agenda. It deprived of any convincing reasons to re-organize the state but unfounded statements as to deal with the ongoing militancy in the region.
If we peep into the events after these three historic decisions, we find that immediately after integration, with the acquisition of Kashmir, its dependencies, including Gilgit and Indus valley to Chilas, also passed into the hands of Gulab Singh. In 1847, the chiefs of Rajouri, Bhimbar, Poonch, Jasrota, Mankote, Ramnagar, Basohli and Kishtwar were pensioned off. After accession and culmination of unresolved war of 1947-48, J&K lost the area now abbreviated as 'Pakistan occupied Kashmir' consisting of Muzzafarabad, Hattian Bala, Neelam Valley (Athmuqam), Mirpur, Bhimber, Kotli, Poonch (Rawalakot), Bagh, Haveli (Forward Kahuta), Sudhnati (Plandri) districts, and Gilgit-Baltistan, once part of Princely State of Jammu Kashmir and acceded to Union of India in 1947. Now after re-organization of the state, further the region of Ladakh including under occupation of China is going to be segregated from the map of the state as Union Territory and rest including both under occupation of Indian union as well as under Pakistan as another Union Territory.
Come what may, one thing that we find common in trio's decision is that; the will of the region's subjects found to be missing and the subjects have not been taken into confidence. The 1846 and 1947 decisions were not guarded secrets whereas 2019 decision was a well guarded secret and against the democratic norms of transparency and without hearing and involving the common subjects to be effected by the decision. The political representatives are voter's choice and they have to follow the party line, having no authority to spell out their independent views.
The bio-data of the trio takes us to the realization that Gulab Singh was serving in Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Darbar along with his father and brothers and was the choice of Maharaja Ranjit Singh to their installation as Raja of princely state Jammu and their journey from soldiers to rulers was through an agreement (to overcome the hostilities of Mian Dido towards Maharaja Ranjit Singh's rule). Ultimately this position carried him to the crown of princely state of Jammu and Kashmir that led to purchase of Kashmir and further the integration of regions of Jammu and Kashmir forming princely state. Maharaja Hari Singh was the natural hereditary choice, power and position passed to him through heritage and bloodline to rule the Princely state. Whereas Mr. Narinder Modi is a governmental head that is formed in democracy by the elected representatives as per provisions laid down in the Constitution of India. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
