Kashmir Problem From Ambedkarite

Perspective
Dr. K. Jamanadas,
Region and the People
The state of Jammu and Kashmir has Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist population,
mostly concentrated in valley, Jammu and Laddhak respectively. It is
strategically situated with Tibet to east, China in northeast, Afghanistan to north-
west, and Gilgit had become part of the State. Most of the traffic was by land
roads to the state and all the supplies were coming to state through the areas
now gone to Pakistan, and the travel to state from Indian side was nonexistent.
There was no communication by road from India to J & K till the declaration of
Radcliff Award.
Maharaja Hari Singh was the ruler and Ramchandra Kak was the Prime
Minister. Maj Gen Janak Singh replaced him before 15th August 1947. Later Mr.
Justice Meher Chand Mahajan replaced him. Hari Singh was considered to be a
castiest ruler. He was not only against the Muslims but also against the Pundits.
The Rajputs enjoyed 60 % seats in services, Muslims had no equal opportunity
in trade and industry, outsider Hindus were welcome and out of 25 'jagirs' only 2
were of Muslims. [EPW 21.12.1991 q/b Dahat]
There was one political party under popular leader Sheikh Abdullah, the
"National Conference", which was agitating for freedom and was more or less a
counterpart of Indian National Congress. Maharaja thought majority Muslims will
ruin his kingdom and Dogra Army could save that. Maharaja and Jinnah tried to
curb the party.
After plan of leaving India was announced on June 3rd, 1947, Lord Mountbatten
visited Kashmir and told Maharaja that British Government will not recognize J
& K as a dominion state and he should better join any dominion - India or
Pakistan - before 15th August 1947. But J & K Government announced its
decision to enter "Stand Still" Agreement with both India and Pakistan. Even
after signing the agreement, Pakistan cut of supplies of food, petrol and other
essentials to J & K, and put pressure on J & K to accede to Pakistan.
Pak Aggression
The new Prime Minister, on 15th October 47, complained to the British Prime
Minister that Pakistan broke Stand Still Agreement and stopped supplies and
stopped Railway service from Sialkot to Jammu, and requested him to advise
Pakistan to deal fairly with J & K and stop raids on the border. There was also
protest to Governor General Jinnah.
On 22nd October, all out invasion of J & K started, along Jehlam Valley road
through N. W. Frontier province, the raiders being tribesmen led by regular Pak
officers. All Muslim forces in Muzafarabad deserted and joined the aggressors
as advanced guard. Brig. Rajender Singh could gather about 150 soldiers to
fight against the raiders but he and all soldiers were killed. On 24th Oct. The
raiders captured the Mahura powerhouse, supplying electricity to Shrinagar.
Shrinagar was immersed in darkness. Raiders declared they would capture
Shrinagar by 26th October 47. How Kashmir was accessed
Government of J&K approached Government of India for military help on 24th
October. New Prime Minister Mahajan reached Delhi on 25th October. GOI did
nothing except sending V.P.Menon to Shrinagar. Both Mahajan and Menon
went to Shrinagar. Maharaja was sent to Jammu for safety, and both came to
aerodrome and in the morning reached Delhi.
Nehru was requested to send troops. Mahajan said, "Give army, take accession
and give whatever powers you want to the popular party, but the army must fly
to Shrinagar this evening, otherwise I will go and negotiate terms with Mr.
Jinnah, as the city must be saved". On this Nehru flew into rage and asked
Mahajan to go away. Sheikh Abdullah, who was over hearing the conversation,
sent a slip of paper to Nehru, which completely changed Nehru's attitude.
Sheikh Abdullah wanted power in his hands and Maharaja to be only a
constitutional head.
Accession agreed to
Indian Cabinet agreed to the accession and to send army. V.P.Menon and
Mahajan again went to Jammu. Menon flew back with Instrument of Accession
signed by the Maharaja. After a long discussion in Defence Committee, it was
decided to accept the Accession subject to proviso that "a plebiscite will be held
in the State when the law and order situation allowed."
Dr. Ambedkar advised to send Mahar battalion, and also explained that guerrilla
tactics to be applied.
In early hours of 27th October, more than one hundred planes - civilian as well
as RIAF - carried the soldiers with requirements. Jinnah got furious and ordered
General Gracy, the acting C in C of Pak Army to send Pak troops. But the
General refused saying he required orders from Field Marshal Auchinleck, who
flew next day to Lahore and explained to Jinnah that in the event of war
breaking out, the British Officers in Pak Army would be withdrawn.
On 1st November 1947, Governor General Lord Mountbatten flew to Lahore,
and suggested to Jinnah that the plebiscite should be under UN, but Jinnah
pressed for it to be under joint control of Governor-Generals of both India and
Pak. On 4th November, Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liyakat Ali Khan announced
the accession to India to be a Fraud.
Military Operations
Military operations were under Major General Kalwant Singh. The Mahar
Battalions were employed as advised by Dr. Ambedkar. Their stay was for 18
months. Their work was highly appreciated. They stopped the aggression and
repealed the enemy with great valor. It was exclaimed that if they were allowed
to fight fully, there would have been no POK.
Heroism in Kashmir
The Times of India 26.10.52 praised the valor of Mahar battalion in the following
terms:
"In Kashmir War in December, 1947, a battalion of the Mahar Regiment earned
undying fame by its bravery and devotion to duty. The part, which this battalion
played in the battle of Jhangar, will be written in the golden letters in the history
of Indian Army.
"On December 24th, 1947, enemy numbering between four to six thousand
attacked our position near Jhangar, the attack being premeded by heavy mortar
and small arms fire. It looked as if nothing could stop the onslaught of the
tribesmen but the Mahars held their posts which matchless courage. In the
hundreds of tribesmen were moved own by the devastating fire of the Mahar
Machine gunners who when their ammunition was exhausted, fought the enemy
in a hand to hand battle.The bravery of this battalion was recognized by the
award of one Mahaveer Chakra and five Veer-Chakras to its men. Their
matchless courage and devotion to duty played a most important part in turning
the tide of the battle at a critical moment." On the departure of these brave
soldiers - without any break for 18 months, -- General Thimmaya, in his address
to them, praised their work in high esteem saying, they "on all occasions
behaved with highest sense of gallantry courage and endurance." And
observed, "the name of your battalion will resound through the hills and the
valleys for a long time to come"
United Nations
The case was taken to United Nations on the persuasion of Lord Mountbatten,
on 25th January 1948. This was against the advice given by Dr. Ambedkar to
Nehru. Ambedkar desired that the aggressors must be evicted by force, but
Nehru did not agree. Pakistan denied any hand in the aggression. India
maintained her position that legally Kashmir is part of India. Dr. Ambedkar had
warned that this problem will not be solved by the United Nations, but it will
become more complicated. Ultimately a Cease-Fire was ordered from 1st of
January 1949.
Ambedkar's solution to Kashmir Problem
Ambedkar talked on Kashmir problem on many occasions. On 10th October
1951, Ambedkar in a statement of Resignation from the Cabinet, showed his not
merely dissatisfaction "but actual anxiety and even worry" about the foreign
policy of India. He said that, every country in the world was our friend in 1947
and today, after four years, all our friends have deserted us, and there is no one
even to second our resolutions in the U.N.O.
Reminding words of Bismark that, 'Politics is the game of the possible', and of
Bernard Shaw that, 'good ideals are good but one must not forget that it is often
dangerous to be too good', he criticized that India's foreign policy is in complete
opposition to these words of wisdom uttered by two of the world's greatest men.
He termed it "dangerous" and explained, the great drain on our resources made
by our military expenditure, as out of Rs. 350 crores of revenue we raise
annually, we spend about Rs. 180 crores on the Army. It is a colossal
expenditure that has hardly any parallel. This colossal expenditure is the direct
result of our foreign policy.
He said that our quarrel with Pakistan is on two grounds, one is Kashmir and
the other is the condition of our people in East Bengal. We should be more
deeply concerned with East Bengal.
Even about Kashmir, the issue on which we are fighting, who is in the right and
who is in the wrong. The real issue to my mind, he said, is not who is in the right
but what is right and he observed: "... my view has always been that the right
solution is to partition Kashmir. Give the Hindu and Buddhist part to India and
the Muslim part to Pakistan as we did in the case of India. We are really not
concerned with the Muslim part of Kashmir. It is a matter between the Muslims
of Kashmir and Pakistan. They may decide the issue, as they like. Or if you like,
divide it into three parts; the Cease-fire zone, the Valley and the Jammu-
Laddhak Region and have a plebiscite only in the Valley. What I am afraid of is
that in the proposed plebiscite, which is to be an overall plebiscite, the Hindus
and Buddhists of Kashmir are likely to be dragged into Pakistan against their
wishes and we may have to face the same problems as we are facing today in
East Bengal." Ambedkar's views were praised by most of the national as well as
international newspapers including the Manchester Guardian.
Tunnel to Kashmir
When the "Nehru Tunnel" was being contemplated, Ambedkar had opposed the
very idea. He said:
"... I find that Prime Minister had launched upon a project of digging a tunnel
connecting Kashmir to India, Sir, I think it is one of the most dangerous thing
that Prime Minister could do. That might happen that the Prime Minister, in
digging the tunnel, thinks that he alone would be able to use it. He does not
realize that a conqueror who comes to the other side and captures Kashmir, can
come away straight to Pathankot and probably come into the Prime Minister's
House. I do not know". He reminded that England was reluctant for Anglo-
French Tunnel for fear of European Aggression in the event of occupation of
France by enemy forces. He observed that someday, if China, Pakistan or
Russia could occupy Kashmir and then this tunnel will bring the enemy in our
courtyard. [Khaimode, vol.11, p.100]
In this respect, we should give a thought to present day declaration by Atal
Bihari Bajpayi of providing a Railway Link from Jammu to Kashmir.
Article 370 in the Indian Constitution
It seems Ambedkar was against Article 370 in the Constitution, which gives a
special Status to the State of J&K, and it was put against his wishes. Balraj
Madhok reportedly said, Dr. Ambedkar had clearly told Sk. Abdullah: "You wish
India should protect your borders, she should build roads in your area, she
should supply you food grains, and Kashmir should get equal status as India.
But Government of India should have only limited powers and Indian people
should have no rights in Kashmir. To give consent to this proposal, would be a
treacherous thing against the interests of India and I, as the Law Minister of
India, will never do it." Then Sk. Abdullah went to Nehru, who directed him to
Gopal Swami Ayyangar, who approached Sardar Patel asking him to do some
thing as it was a matter of prestige of Nehru, who has promised Sk. Abdullah
accordingly. Patel got it passed when Nehru was on foreign tour. On the day
this article came up for discussion, Dr. Ambedkar did not reply to questions on it
though he did participate on other articles. All arguments were done by Krishna
Swami Ayyangar. [Dahat:1997: 82]
Recent Discussion
During recent times, it was Ms, Tavleen Singh who in an article in Sunday
Express of 20 April 2003, made a daring suggestion of third party international
intervention by America in Kashmir dispute. She was correct in saying that India
has already asked American help to tame down Pakistan and that we must
realize to start with, that the problem can not be solved domestically.
Now supposing with some good fortune, wisdom prevails on all sides and such
talks do take place, what the Indian side hopes best to bargain for? What is not
only just and reasonable but also possible under the circumstances for the
Indian side?
The answer to this has been given long time back by Dr. Ambedkar, who had
said, as mentioned previously, that, the Hindu area of Jammu and Buddhist
area of Laddhak be separated from the Muslim area of the Valley. These non-
Muslim area should be the part of India and the valley be given independent
status with every right to them to do what they want.
RSS realizes bifurcation is good
It is now after so many years that RSS has come to realize the sagacity of this
formula and asked for bifurcation of J & K on such lines within Indian frame
work, but the pride and prejudice will not allow them to implement even that.
Rule by force, how long?
From Pakistan point of view, no matter which group of people rule over
Kashmir, it is going to be a Muslim rule. What more does Pak want? Unlike
Hindus with thousands of castes and groups, Muslim society is comparatively
more monolithic. If the individuals do not matter, how does it matter to Pak,
whether Kashmiri people feel more comfortable in India or not?
From Indian point of view, Indian spending in Kashmir directly and indirectly has
been so great that lot of developmental works could have been possible in rest
of India with that money. Now, further, it is contemplated to spend on Railways
in Kashmir from the resources from rest of India, as if it is going to be with you
till the sun and moon last. The British could not rule India by the force of sword
for long, will India or for that matter Pakistan rule Kashmir for long against their
wishes? If the answer is negative, then why is the conflict?
Resources in Kashmir
After all, what are the resources available in Kashmir? Are they worth fighting
for-for both India and Pakistan? It is not oil rich Iraq. Let us forget about border
security, a point well discussed by Ambedkar in "Thoughts on Pakistan".
Security of a country does not depend upon physical boundaries, these days.
Otherwise, America would not have been able to attack Afghanistan or Iraq.
If the resources of Kashmir would have been plentiful, would the British have
sold it to Gulabsingh Dogra, who not only surrendered himself but made
Deelipsingh, the last heir of Ranjitsingh to surrender on 29th March 1849. As a
reward of this, the British sold him the province of Jammu and Kashmir for
250,000 pounds sterling, and returned the treasury of Suchetsingh. Thus the
Punjab got slavery and the Dogras got the province of Jammu and Kashmir.
A lost case for India
The Hindus, as a matter of fact, lost Kashmir forever in thirteenth century, when
a boy of tender age, Ratanju, of no fixed religion or nationality was refused entry
to Hinduism, and was converted by a Muslim fakir Bulbulshah to Islam. His son
Shahamir usurped the throne. Kashmir, a Buddhist and Hindu country till then,
became Muslim very soon. It is said, those pundits, who refused to become
Muslims, were put in gunny bags and drowned in river Jehlam by Ratanju and
Shahamir. The place in Shrinagar where they were drowned, is famous even
now by the name of 'watta mazaar'. [Santram, Sarita Mukta vol. 8, p.162.]
Chenab formula
Muzamil Jaleel in Indian Express of 28 June 2003, wrote of Chenab
Compromise. Though the official stance of both India and Pakistan says they
want full control of Kashmir, they both are - may be under pressure from
America - likely to come to accept the idea of compromise. India would be
happy if LOC becomes International boundary, which has been strongly refuted
by Pak. Now and again India talks of POK, knowing well that there are no
takers.
What does Pak want to settle for - apart from full control of J & K - nobody
knows. But Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan Prime Minister of POK, last month, had
called upon both Delhi and Islamabad to consider River Chenab as the Border -
ostensibly a Pak motivation. Australian Diplomat Sir Owen Dixon had expressed
similar idea in 1950.Even in mid sixties, the Britain and US were urging both
India and Pakistan for partition. In Pakistan media there seems to be support to
Hayat proposal. Also the Kashmiri separatist leadership seems to favour the
idea.
Will the caste ridden India accept it? Those who were talking of "Akhand
Bharat", had to accept the Partition of India, as predicted by Ambedkar. But
India and Pakistan both had to suffer a lot during the process with loss of life,
property and human suffering, as the safeguards as advocated by Ambedkar
were not followed.
Now the talks are likely to start on the problem. Partition along the river Chenab,
which runs north of Jammu is one of the proposals for long time. But the
partition involves human angle and all those precautions advocated by
Ambedkar during partition of India and Pakistan will have to be taken, if the
human tragedy has to be averted.


Print this Page
Published on: July 1, 2003
Send e-mail to dalits@ambedkar.org with questions or comments about this web site.
No Copyright: Dalit E-Forum

DISCLAIMER :
www.ambedkar.org does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information/content of news items/articles
mentioned therein. The views expressed therein are not those of the owners of the web site and any errors / omissions in the same are of the
respective creators/ copyright holders. Any issues regarding errors in the content may be taken up with them directly.