news details |
|
|
| Why was the accession of J&K delayed ? a viewpoint | | | Col J P Singh | 10/30/2011 12:01:27 AM |
| Princely state of Jammu & Kashmir ac
ceded to Indian Union on 26 October 1947; later than the stipulated date.Why Maharaja Hari Singh did not accede to India or Pakistan on or before 14 August 1947? This question has been agitating sane minds since partition. Another issue under debate is, if it was done before 14 August, what would have been its impact on the history and geography of newly formed dominions. History has the answer to all the questions, however difficult they may be, provided we pose the questions. If we do not, the realities are bound to fade in the recesses of the time and individual biases are bound to overshadow realities. Much has been written about these issues. Without any bias, I submit my view point. Let me first begin with the characteristics of the State. J&K was complex in terrain, climate, religions languages, ethnicity and culture. Some districts had 10-15 spoken languages and every 10-15 miles, culture and ethnicity changed. It was indeed a model of Unity in Diversity. While Indian leaders are still grappling with the challenges of unity in diversity; Muslim and Dogra rulers had ruled J&K with perfect harmony despite odds. If any thing went wrong in 1947, it was British mischief. In pursuance of their plan to divide and rule, they abetted insurrection in the state to exploit diversity. They found Maharaja Hari Singh and Sheikh Abdullah, both gullible. While engineering division of India they supposedly promised Kashmir to Jinnah. Lord Mountbatten visited Kashmir in June 1947 to discuss accession. Since Mountbatten's stand on accession of Princely States was known; ie, 'geographical contiguity and religion of majority of subjects and incase of doubt the views of their subjects'. Maharaja having been forewarned of Mountbatten's intent of advising him in favour of Pakistan, did not meet him formally. Meeting him would mean accepting his directions. Hence it became clear that he did not wish to accede to Pakistan.
The importance of accession lies in J&K being a Muslim majority state contiguous to Pakistan and becoming an absolute sovereign on 15 August 1947 like UK, Iran and Iraq. Any thing done by the ruler after 15 August 1947 as sovereign of an independent republic could not be questioned because British Paramountcy had ended. Under similar circumstances Travancore, Hyderabad and Junagarh decided to stay away from accession which is an equally interesting paradigm. In the case of J&K geographical contiguity and communal composition weighed heavily in favour of accession to Pakistan. Hence Maharaja's decision to delay accession either to remain independent or to accede to Indian Dominion later were the only options left, perhaps both prudent under the circumstances.
When the British announced plans of quitting India, the King of Princely State of Travancore Sh. Chithira Thirunal Varma, supported by his Dewan C P Ramaswami Iyer declared himself independent on 18 June 1947. Iyer is remembered for his ruthless suppression of communist led Punnapra - Valyar uprising in reaction to independent Travancore State after partition. Over one thousand protesters were killed in this uprising. An assassination attempt was made on Dewan Iyer, which he survived despite multiple stab wounds. During his prolonged treatment at Chennai, Sardar Patel initiated negotiations with Iyer. On recovery Iyer persuaded the King to merge with India. Finally the independent state of Travancore merged with India on 01 July 1949. The ruler was made the Raj Pramukh of the state. Similarly Nizam of Hyderabad expressed his wish to stay independent though made no declaration like ruler of Travancore. It was because of agitation by Congressmen and its ruthless suppression by Nizam which so worsened law and order that Sardar Patel ordered police action to annex the state in 1948, however, on the term and conditions of Nizam. Even Bhopal acceded / merged in 1949. Hence the intention of ruler of J&K to stay independent like Nizam, as generally perceived can't be refuted in the absence of evidence otherwise. If the reason for delay was to accede to India under favorable terms and conditions later, this fact also cannot be refuted. All we know and hear is that Prime Minister R C Kak was strongly in favour of independence even though this is mystic. Sudden removal of R C Kak is another mystery.
Politically, Hari Singh's rule witnessed lot of upheavals. He ruled the state during a turbulent period of history witnessing struggle for freedom from Imperial rule led by Mahatma Gandhi, Quit Kashmir Movement led by Sheikh Abdullah, World War I & II, partition of India and 1st ever Indo - Pak war which was fought on the soils of J& K. His troubles began after the money lenders started retaliating for his controls on their Shahukari. British doubted his loyalty towards the crown after his strong pro independence statement in the Round Table Conference in London in 1931. Consequently he faced British abetted Kashmiri insurrection. He opposed Jinnah's Muslim League for its communal agenda and two nation theory; hence faced his wrath. He was victim of Pt Nehru wrath because of latter's overbearing personality and sympathies with Sheikh Abdullah. He thus remained victim of triple blasphemy. During the partition of India he saw a brief phase of tragic communal riots in the State. His differences with Sheikh Sahib continued even after he appointed him Prime Minister which further infuriated Pt Nehru.
During the partition movement, the sub continent was engulfed in communal riots and blood shed. New nations faced large scale tragic trans- border migrations of unprecedented magnitude. Mahatma Gandhi paid a visit to the valley on 31 July 1947 during which Maharaja is believed to have discussed accession plan with him. Maharani Tara Devi and Yuvraj Karan Singh also met Mahatma Gandhi on 01 August. Fortunately the Hindus and Muslim of J&K demonstrated unwavering commitment to secularism, the foundation of which was laid on the strong pillars of impartial and just reign of Dogra rulers. Mahatma Gandhi saw a ray of hope emanating from Kashmir; the credit for which goes to secular and democratic credentials of Maharaja Hari Singh and Sheikh Abdullah. The truth lies in angry voices against the govt often emanating from the valley, whenever there is turbulence, saying that the Dogra rule was fair, just, impartial and far better than present regime.
Historically, it would have been a dark day for the state if the Hindus and Sikhs were to migrate as refugees as happened in Punjab and Bengal if the state accede to Pakistan before 14 August. Similarly; Muslims were to migrate from J&K if state acceded to India before 14 August. There being unprecedented communal strife on partition; one can imagine the blood shed that would have accompanied such migration. The tribal lords of Gilgit - Baltistan and the ruler of Ladakh would have declared themselves independent causing civil war in the state as had happened in Muzaffrabad just before partition. These areas would have possibly merged to their neighboring kingdoms. The geography of the state would have shifted alignments. Therefore idea of independence to prevent the turbulence was not an out of the tune option. If J&K had gone to Pakistan perhaps Kashmir would not have been contentious issue in bilateral ties as it is today. At the same time Pakistan would have got strategic depth and upper edge in her defense policy; having threatened Delhi from closer North. Conversely, Gilgit would have been with India giving us direct land route to Afghanistan which today inhibits our strategic partnership with Afghanistan. Conscious of the ugly prospects of quick accession to either of the two Dominions, ruler offered a 'Stand Still Agreement' to both. Pakistan accepted the agreement hoping to lure the ruler into her fold while India delayed acceptance on account of seeking clarifications. Offering stand still agreement to both the dominions is indicative of intention of remaining independent. Even Sheikh Abdullah was not averse to independence if the ruler handed over the state to him. Sheikh Abdullah later hobnobbed with Western powers and declared his intentions of becoming independent Both ironically paid the price for an idea called independence. Despite accepting stand still agreement, Pakistan continued preparing another contingency plan to annex Kashmir if Maharaja did not agree to accede otherwise; which she executed on 22 October. All the rail and land routes to J&K passed through Pakistan. There was no direct route linking Jammu to Delhi passing through Gurdaspur District which came to Indian side. River Ravi became the boundary line between India and J&K. Since there was no road or rail link to Jammu through Pathankot, this too hindered decision. After meeting Mahatma Gandhi, Maharaja issued orders for the construction of Bridge on Ravi and improvement in the road condition from Kathua to Jammu as well as laying a telegraph line between Jammu and Srinagar. These events support the Intention / justification for delay and is indicative of favoring India; which finally happened on 26 October 1947, even though under compulsion. All is well that ends well.
(The scribe is a columnist, social worker and political analyst; can be accessed at [email protected]) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
