Jammu & Kashmir – Dilemma of Accession

Title: Jammu & Kashmir – Dilemma of Accession: A Historical Analysis and Lesson

Author: Radha Ranjan

Publisher: Voice of India, 2017 (First)

ISBN: 9789385485107

Pages: 140

 

The state of Jammu and Kashmir is now in a divided condition between the two hostile nations of India and Pakistan. Kashmir joined India in 1947 and remains an integral part of the multi-religious, multi-ethnic federation of India. Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir is solely based on religion. Since the state (taken as a whole) contains 70 per cent Muslims, Pakistan feels that it should join her, which is an Islamic state where the harsh Sharia law is being strictly enforced. They ignore the wishes of Kashmir’s 30 per cent non-Muslims who will be doomed to certain extinction in the theocratic state of Pakistan that aims for the conversion of its religious minorities as state policy. Keeping these things in mind, if we go back to 1947, we see a lot of events occurring in quick succession which sealed the destiny of Kashmir. This book is based on a written account by Ramchandra Kak, the prime minister of Kashmir during the turbulent times of Indian independence. Radha Ranjan is a political thinker and the author of many books that analyse politics from a rightist perspective. The book includes a foreword by Krishen Kak, the grandson of Ramchandra Kak and an afterword by Lila Bhan, the elder Kak’s daughter.

 

This book is based on the insider account of Ramchandra Kak, the prime minister of Hari Singh, ruler of Kashmir. He was in office from 30 Jun 1945 to 11 Aug 1947 and was unceremoniously shunted out of the top post with just four days remaining for Indian independence. The existence of the account written in 1956 was unknown for most of the time. In the year 2016, the author received a photocopy of the note by post. She was intrigued by the 22-page document whose original was kept in the India Office Library at London. She managed to obtain another copy from Kak’s family which was a re-typed version of the original narrative with corrections made by Kak on the margin. Later, a genuine copy was obtained from London that proved its authenticity.

 

The author provides the background for the intransigent attitude of Congress against the ruling house of Kashmir. In the 1938 Haripura session, Congress reiterated its objective of standing for the same political, social and economic freedom in the native states as in the case of British provinces. There were individual movements in various states for responsible government. Shaikh Abdullah was the leader of one of the Kashmir movements but Jawaharlal Nehru boosted his image considerably by declaring open support. Gandhi and Nehru took to disrespectful and antagonistic approach in their dealings with the Maharaja of Kashmir. Shaikh Abdullah embarked on a hostile campaign to Quit Kashmir in 1946 against the ruler. Mobs of thousands strong used to surround houses of respectable citizens who opposed Abdullah and terrorized the inmates throwing stones and shouting filthy abuses. The maharaja had no other option than to put him behind bars on sedition charges.

 

The book then goes on to explain in detail the relationship’s sudden plunge to a low level after Abdullah’s arrest. Nehru wanted to visit him in jail, but the state forbade his coming. Nehru arrived in Kashmir flouting prohibitory orders and Kak’s police arrested him too. Utmost respect was shown to him and all facilities were provided in the Dak Bungalow where he was housed in detention. New telephone lines were laid for Nehru’s use. When he wanted to get back urgently to Delhi for negotiations with the Cabinet Mission, J&K government made arrangements for his travel to Rawalpindi by road and then to Delhi on a special plane chartered by the maharaja. Congress was determined to interfere in the affairs of Kashmir which was quite unlike its attitude to other princely states. The party appointed a committee with Jairamdas Daulatram and Sri Prakasa as members to hold an enquiry with regard to Shaikh Abdullah’s agitation, arrest, trial and conviction. Obviously, the J&K government refused to accept the authority of this frivolous committee. Moreover, Hari Singh was totally influenced by a local seer, Swami Sant Dev. He also believed that after the departure of the British from India, he would through the potency of the Swami’s supernatural power, be able to extend his territory and rule over a much larger dominion.

 

Radha Ranjan makes a seething attack on Indian national leaders who maintained a casual or indifferent sentiment against Kashmir. She claims that Gandhi assumed a very tall moral stance which forced a situation on the political players where he couldn’t be publicly exposed or challenged as the Congress would’ve been rendered leaderless and rudderless without him. His three agitations – civil disobedience, Salt Satyagraha and Quit India were only tokenisms and sloganeering in response to Tilak’s return from Mandalay, execution of Bhagat Singh and the meteoric rise of Bose and his INA respectively. These protests often turned violent and ordinary people paid with their lives and liberty, but they did not take a toll of Gandhi. Patel, Rajaji, K M Munshi and Rajendra Prasad also kept silent on the Kashmir issue (p.80). V P Menon too gets a dressing down as he writes that ‘during August [1947], I had no time to think of Kashmir’.

 

As usual with most of the matters under his consideration, it was Nehru who messed things around in Kashmir. He was very friendly to Shaikh Abdullah and wanted the state to be entrusted to him. This was in spite of fierce opposition to Abdullah from Chaudhary Ghulam Abbas, who was more popular in Kashmir. The king was removed from power and Abdullah was put in charge of Kashmir in contrast to other states where the ruler king nominally continued as the head of government till the reorganization of states happened nearly a decade later. Here, Nehru misread Abdullah’s intentions. The author claims that he was aiming for an independent state whose continued existence was guaranteed by the Indian armed forces and whose solvency was secured by the Indian treasury. He planned nothing to give in return. Nehru gave Kashmir a special status which put it on a par with a virtually free state having its own constitution and flag. Abdullah clamoured for still more freebies until Nehru ran out of patience and arrested him in 1953. He remained in prison for 11 years.

 

Revocation of Kashmir’s special status in 2019 was a bold action with tremendous impact. This book was published before this event, but contains advice on the legal options through which the special status could be scrapped. Kak notices that the Instrument of Accession was the only binding document regarding Kashmir’s merger with India. Plebiscite, separate constituent assembly, separate state constitution and Article 370do not find any mention in this document. Indian parliament in one voice can reject all sops and concessions made to Shaikh Abdullah by Gandhi and Nehru (p.79). These words spelt out in 2017 were prophetic indeed in nature! The valley contains a population of which 95 per cent are Muslims. However, if the Jews could get back Israel after 2000 years of exile, why should it be considered extraordinary if India wanted to retain Kashmir which is already in its possession?

 

After reading the book, the readers are likely to get a little disappointed. Practically nothing new is divulged by the former prime minister than is already known to the public. Since the memoirs were written almost nine years after partition, the advantage of hindsight is also available to him to embellish the narrative. The book contains a lot of quotes from V P Menon’s ‘Integration of Indian States’ which is interleaved with Kak’s description. This is confusing to the ordinary readers. Kak’s family employs considerable patronage to the book in the form of a foreword and afterword.

 

The book is recommended.

Rating: 3 Star