| News Details |
| Why not support Mehbooba on Accession & Pakistan? | | Straight Talk | 
By K B Jandial
Mehbooba Mufti is perhaps the first Chief Minister of J&K to publically hail J&K accession with union of India and that too in Kashmir. She even justified this decision in the backdrop of unending bloodshed in Pakistan and other Muslim countries. By all means, it is a big political statement coming from the first woman CM, often linked with “soft separatism” in her earlier avatar. It can become a turning point in the State’s political narrative.
At her maiden public rally at Anantnag after becoming Chief Minister, Mehbooba Mufti said, “Sheikh Abdullah took the decision (No doubt, Sheikh was an ardent supporter of accession with India but decision was of Maharaja Hari Singh) to accede to a country, for preserving the unique identity of the State, where Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians live together in harmony”.
“India is a country where more Hindu pilgrims visit Ajmer Sharief shrine than Muslims and Muslim sculptors create idols for major Hindu temples,” Mehbooba aptly described India’s glorious secular traditions. Why only Ajmer Sharief, at every dargah Hindus devotees outnumber the Muslims.
She also sought to draw a comparison with “violence-ridden” Pakistan, created in 1947 for Muslims. “Look at our neighbouring Pakistan where people belonging to the same religion (Muslims) live. Terrorism has taken such menacing proportions that they have to resort to aerial bombardment (India never used this option despite all problems). Every day, 20 to 30 people are killed and many others hanged. We now realize how correct the decision to accede to India was.”
She also claimed that accession with India has benefited Kashmiris, who are not identified with the “violence-ridden Muslim countries”. We have Kashmiri doctors working in the US and London. They tell us that when they introduce themselves as Indians, they are not looked with suspicion,” she told the audience.
No political leader of Kashmir, much less the Chief Minister, had ever talked straight to the Muslim audience in Kashmir on such a sensitive issue. It needs a courage of conviction and intellectual and political insight about things taking place in the neighbourhood. This is sincere endeavour to puncture the thick smokescreen created around Kashmiris. Accession is one of the issues on which pro-Pak elements in Kashmir have been exploiting, supporting religion-based unity. Can religion be the basis for unity, harmony and cohesiveness of the State? Bloodshed in Pakistan and other Islamic nations seriously negate this contention. Had the religion been the basis of State’s harmony and prosperity, Islamic nations would not have been shedding blood of their own Muslim brethren endlessly.
Those who followed the dream of Jinnah, hoping Pakistan to be an icon of harmony and Muslim brotherhood, must be repenting their decision as sectarian violence and terrorism have ripped through the “pious” land on which 17 crore Muslims live. Pakistan has lesser number of Muslims than of India but more of them are victim of sectarian violence as compared to India. More than 4000 Pakistanis were killed in sectarian violence between 1987 to 2007 and “thousands” of Shia has been killed by Sunni extremists since 2008, according to the Human Rights Watch. Shia’s Imambarahs are often attacked that reinforced the view of increasing intolerance in Pakistan.
Pakistan is a breeding ground of terrorism which is now eating its own turf. Since 2003, about 60600 Muslims have been killed in Pakistan and still it doesn’t stop promoting terrorism as State policy. The killed included 21,122 civilians and 32,993 militants. More than 900 persons have been killed this year alone. Does Kashmir or for that matter entire India has so many people killed in communal incidents in a year?
While Pakistan shed crocodile tears on the killing of militants in Kashmir, it is mercilessly killing such militants at home in air strikes. Muslims are killing fellow Muslims and there is no guarantee of life in view of different unfettered terror groups operating there. Is this the “promised land” that excites Kashmiris? There is a need to revisit the history of Pakistan and coolly understands how Punjabis dominated -West Pakistan ill-treated their own Muslim brethren in East Pakistan, now known as Bangladesh. With this background, how can anyone trust Pakistan?
The fate of the ‘Arab Spring’ in Middle East should also open the eyes of Kashmiris. Is anyone better off as result of popular uprising that started five years ago and created over-optimistic expectations of a peaceful transition from authoritarianism to democracy?
These uprisings have led to civil wars and increased repression in all but one of the six countries where the ‘Arab Spring’ principally took place. Syria, Libya and Yemen are being torn apart by civil wars with no sign of ending. In Egypt and Bahrain, autocracy is far greater and civil liberties far less than they were prior to 2011. Only in Tunisia, which started off the surge towards radical change, people have greater rights than they had before.
The civil war in Syria has destabilised Iraq and led to resumption of the Sunni-Shia war. The armed opposition in Syria and Iraq is dominated by jihadis. Moreover, have created conditions for permanent violence. Remember, ‘Arab Spring’ has taken a toll of 1.80 lakhs of Muslims besides displacing over six million.
In J&K, the failed “armed uprising” provided another opportunity for the people to work over their decision.
J&K was a Muslim majority princely State with a Hindu monarch. On the lapse British paramountcy on August 15, 1947 Maharaja Hari Singh could not decide the issue of accession and in terms of the Indian Independence Act of 1947 the State became Independent and the ruler became its sovereign who had the sole authority to decide the future of the state.
Unlike India, Pakistan had executed Standstill agreement with the Maharaja but it brazenly violated it when on 22nd October, 1947 it engineered tribal invasion and illegally captured some parts of J&K. The invaders got stiff resistance from the people of Kashmir which indicate clearly that Kashmiris were not in favour of Pakistan.
Amidst marching columns of invaders, Maharaja acceded to India on 26th October, 1947 which was accepted only after Sheikh Abdullah endorsed it. While accepting the Instrument of Accession the Governor General Lord Mountbatten wrote in the covering letter to the Maharaja, “My Govt. desires that as soon as peace is restored in Kashmir and the State gets rid of the aggressors the issue of accession should be resolved after the people’s will is taken into consideration.”
Indian forces landed in Kashmir on 27th October, 1947 and pushed back Pak army supported invaders and recaptured substantial portion of territory but still a sizable territory remained under Pak occupation when UN cease-fire was enforced on 1st Jan., 1949.
In his opening address to the State’s Constituent Assembly, Sheikh Abdullah, most popular leader of the time, had listed three options for consideration- continued accession to India, accession to Pakistan & remaining Independent. He indicated advantages and disadvantages of each but his inkling was towards India even though he did not say so in clear words as he wanted the Assembly to decide with an open mind.
On remaining independent, Sheikh said, “it is not easy to protect sovereignty & independence of a small country” and referred to Pakistan‘s aggression and said that J&K “was independent from August 15 to October22, 1947 and the result was that our weakness was exploited by the neigbhour with whom we had a valid Standstill Agreement….. What is the guarantee that in future too we may not be the victim of a similar aggression?”
The Constituent Assembly representing the collective will of the people unanimously ratified the accession on 6th February, 1954 and met Mountbatten’s “desire”. The finality of accession and J&K being an “integral part” of the Union of India is unambiguously recorded in the first part of the preamble of the J&K Constitution. Its Section 3 also closed the issue of J&K’s relationship with India as it says, “The State of Jammu & Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India.” And its section 147 totally debars amendment of Section 3 and thus settled Jammu & Kashmir accession forever.
Separatists and their ideologues often talk about “enforcement of UN resolution for plebiscite in J&K”. Demand is more of rhetoric and devoid of substance. The UNSC resolution for plebiscite was passed under chapter VI of UN Charter which is non binding, having no mandatory enforceability. Just to refresh the memory, the then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan during his visit to India and Pakistan in March 2001 had made it clear that ”Kashmir resolutions are only advisory recommendations and comparing these with those on East Timor and Iraq are like comparing apples with oranges as the latter resolutions were passed under chapter VII which are enforceable”.
Then in 1965, Pakistan used military open to resolve the Kashmir issue but failed. This, in a way, made the UN resolutions null and void. And then the Shimla agreement between India and Pakistan after 1971 war superseded all previous resolutions and agreements including UN resolutions. Kashmir became bilateral issue. It is in this context Pakistan’s periodical talk of plebiscite in UN forum failed to get any response. On the contrary, it removed J&K from its list of disputed territories in November 2010.
Even for plebiscite, it is Pakistan which did not perform its part of obligation making UN Resolution redundant. Pakistan was not only to withdraw its own troops from occupied territory but also secure withdrawal of tribesmen and its nationals entered the State for the purpose of fighting. On notifying and conveying such withdrawal, India was to complete its obligation which include withdrawal of bulk of its forces but retain the minimum strength of its forces necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order.
Mehbooba’s matured and matter-of-fact observations on J&K’s accession and plight of Muslims in Pakistan and other Islamic countries evoked expected reaction from separatists. But NC’s veiled criticism is surprising. It was Sher-i-Kashmir who rejected other options and supported State’s accession with India. He returned to national mainstream after two decades of political wilderness as he realized that despite all complaints and anger, democratic and secular India was still the best nation to live for Muslims.
When Kashmiri youth are evincing keen interest and excelling year after year in country’s premier civil services (corporate sector also), it is high time to strive to break physiological barriers created through these willfully distorted facts, and reach out to the youth to give them the big picture of India. Having strong potential to make it to central bureaucracy one day and influence India’s decision making process, J&K youth have chosen the right way, ignoring motivated slur and calumny against them in social media.
(The writer is former Secretary Information, health, transport, CAPD departments and a member of Public Service Commission, feedback: [email protected])
(Disclaimer: The views, observations and opinions expressed in above write up of Scoop News are strictly author's own. Scoop News does not take any onus or liability for the veracity, accuracy, validity, completeness, suitability of any of information in the above given write up. The information, facts or figures appearing in the write up in no way manifest the position, standpoint or stance of Scoop News and the Scoop News does not assume any encumbrance or answerability of the same.)
Editor
Scoop News,(scoopnews.in)... |
| |
|
|
Share this Story |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|