On the twenty-sixth day of October 1947, while New Delhi government was ordering airlift of its troops to Srinagar Kashmir, then Hindu ruler of the then predominantly Muslim’ Jammu and Kashmir, declared his country would suddenly accede to India as an independent state under the Indian constitution. The agreement ratified between India and ‘Jammu and Kashmir’ was known as the Instrument of Accession, deemed provisional pending a plebiscite within Jammu and Kashmir to seal its eventual fate. The next day the Indians sent in troops and occupied Jammu and Kashmir appropriating it by brutal force. Hari Singh, the ruler at the time, took this opportunity to deny its Kashmiri inhabitants their birthright, of self determination, without formally seeking the overall democratic consent of the indigenous Kashmiri people, the reason why to this very day such a move is fiercely disputed. Jawaharlal Nehru Prime Minister of the India sent an urgent telegram to the British PM Clement Attlee “I should like to make it clear that question of aiding Kashmir in this emergency is not designed in any way to influence the state to accede to India. Our view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any disputed territory or state must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this view.”
For seven decades, the tension and acrimony in occupied Jammu and Kashmir has been growing and been a cause for serious alarm. Under what has been coined Hindutva, we have witnessed harrowing reports of systematic ethnic cleansing of indigenous Muslims, of cultural hegemony, human degradation and social disintegration, and authoritarian politics leading to democratic decline in order to remould the demography of the country. In response to their subjection, since 1947, even sooner, the people of occupied Jammu and Kashmir have shown tremendous resolve by virtue of preserving what is known as Kashmiriyat, century’s old recognition of indigenous Kashmiri culture and identity, their unique way of life in their own free and sovereign country. Their political will and ‘political and cultural’ identity has been core to the worldwide Kashmiri movement that demands the outright self determination of occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
Although, a flashpoint between Pakistan and India, Kashmir or Kashmiriyat will not prevail without the people of Kashmir playing the lead role under the circumstances they now encounter. This is why we believe in internationalising the dispute, to work on one platform, hence the proposed UNCK (United Nations Commission on Kashmir), and to harness and garner wider support from the international community under established international law. The international dimensions of the dispute is not something that Hari Singh valued or sought, the very reason why we have been left with this almost insoluble predicament, conundrum or quagmire. The Kashmiri people themselves never acceded to India, only Hari Singh did, this is what all Kashmiris claim, of every political persuasion. Dissecting the problem, Kashmiriyat is indigenous to Kashmir – Hindutva is not …this is fundamental to my argument and may answer some questions.
Few days later in October another telegraphic message to Liaqat Ali Khan in which Nehru perpetually reassured India’s commitment that “we shall withdraw our troops from Kashmir as soon as peace and order are restored, and leave the decision about the future of the state to the people of the state is not merely a pledge to your government but also to the people of Kashmir and to the world.”
It has also been stated that India’s military campaign in Kashmir were not designed in any way to influence the state’s accession to India. So many claims have been made by Nehru that Kashmiri people are ones who can decide the future of Kashmir but ultimately who being befooled by the accession treaty which was against the aspirations of people and they never have been given chance to decide their fate, perhaps which turned heaven into hell. That day on October 27, 1947 as it is evident from the historical documents of the Indian Govt recognised Kashmir a sovereign state, and Pakistan and India both had assured the United Nations, that their military presence on the Kashmir territory was conditional and temporary. Both sides had agreed in the UN to abide by the choice of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
During the last 70 years, whenever Kashmiri people demanded the withdrawal of troops or asked for the plebiscite. Indian authority’s used open repression to silence the Kashmir demands. New Delhi also imposed draconian tactics against the will of the Kashmiri people rigging elections and crowning a corrupt ruler to the state. They also used military might to suppress the kashmiris and killed people, imprisoned leaders, which prompted Kashmiri youth to join militancy ranks to fight for their birth right. Each time India initiates dialogue but not happened according to previous UN resolution on Kashmir, it disheartens people and undermines further the Indian grip on the occupied territory.Mr. Nehru when will your country fulfil the promise which you have unfulfilled?
