news details |
|
|
| He stood solidly for accession to India | | | Sant Kumar Sharma | 9/9/2009 12:33:00 AM |
| Jammu, September 8, 2009:
Sher-e-Kashmir Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah died today 27 years ago in Srinagar. In 1948, on February 5, he made a historical speech in the United Nations Security Council, in its meeting defending the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India.
Sheikh also made several other points about his relationship with Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Pakistan and the Muslim Conference in his speech. Some excerpts from that speech, reproduced hereunder verbatim, make it clear to us what Sher-i-Kashmir stood for.
… Today Pakistan has become the champion of our liberty. I know very well that in 1946, when I raised the cry of "Quit Kashmir," the leader of the Pakistan Government, who is the Governor-General now, Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah, opposed my Government, declaring that this movement was a movement of a few renegades and that Muslims as such had nothing to do with the movement.
The Muslim Conference, which has been talked about so much, opposed my movement and declared its loyalty to the Prince. The representative of Pakistan now says that Sheikh Abdullah, once the supporter of "Quit Kashmir," has joined hands with the Maharaja of Kashmir....side..... But the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and its people, kept calm....
Why was that so? It was because I and my organization never believed in the formula that Muslims and Hindus form separate nations. We do not believe in the two-nation theory, nor in communal hatred or communalism itself. We believed that religion had no place in politics. Therefore, when we launched our movement of "Quit Kashmir" it was not only Muslims who suffered, but our Hindu and Sikh comrades as well....
While the raiders came to our land, massacred thousands of people -- mostly Hindus and Sikhs, but Muslims too -- abducted thousands of girls, Hindu, Sikhs and Muslims alike, looted our property and almost reached the gates of our summer capital, Srinagar, the result was that the civil, military and police administration failed.
I was explaining how the dispute arose -- how Pakistan wanted to force this position of slavery upon us. Pakistan had no interest in our liberation or it would not have opposed our freedom movement.
Whether Kashmir has lawfully acceded to India -- complaints on that score have been brought before the Security Council on behalf of Pakistan -- is not the point at issue. If that were the point at issue then we should discuss that subject. We should prove before the Security Council that Kashmir and the people of Kashmir have lawfully and constitutionally acceded to the Dominion of India, and Pakistan has no right to question that accession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
