The last 63 years have been so painful for the once so called the paradise on earth-Kashmir. The people here are getting crushed now & then because of the self-centered policies of the two estranged neighbors of Asia: India & Pakistan. The dispute is currently the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world. The Indian troops-to-Kashmiri people ratio in the occupied Kashmir is the largest ever soldiers-to-civilians ratio in the world. There are approximately 600,000 Indian military forces including regular army, Para-military troops, border security force and police currently deployed in Kashmir. This has resulted in grave Human rights violation. According to Kashmir Dispatch estimates, the number of persons killed in Occupied Kashmir from January 1989 to August 2010 is 93,340.About 117,345 Civilians were arrested,105,861 structures destroyed, 22,728 women widowed,107,351 Children orphaned & 9,920 women raped/molested in the same period. The queries that frequently strike the mind of every common Kashmiri in general and particularly the wretched new generation of the valley, which has never witnessed peace in their native land, are that why are we being treated as slaves? Why don't they have the right to speak their miseries? And why the basic Human right of freedom is being snatched away from them? This has resulted in frequent uprisings in the valley for freedom and will continue till the Issue is settled amicably.
Kashmir has been hot & ideal subject matter for the writers to gain popularity and earn quick bucks particularly in the last twenty years. But the question, however, is how far the information provided by these authors is authentic & relevant. To understand the complexity of Kashmir dispute, we have to reconstitute and reorganize the coffer of history in order to scrutinize the facts, but being impartial and unbiased. Let's investigate specifically the reasons responsible for the loss of charm and glory of Kashmir and its transformation into a look-alike to hell.
Until 1846, Kashmir was part of the Sikh empire. In that year, under the Treaty of Amritsar between the East India Company and Raja Gulab Singh of Jammu, Kashmir Valley was sold for mere Rs.7.5 million to Raja Gulab Singh who added it to Jammu and Ladakh which were already under his rule. The Maharaja signed a separate treaty with the British which gave him the status of an independent princely ruler of Kashmir. Gulab Singh died in 1857 and was replaced by Rambir Singh (1857-1885). Two other Marajas, Partab Singh (1885-1925) and Hari Singh (1925-1949) ruled in succession. Gulab Singh and his successors ruled Kashmir in a tyrannical and repressive way. The people of Kashmir, nearly 80 per cent of whom were Muslims, rose against Maharaja Hari Singh's rule. He ruthlessly crushed a mass uprising in 1931. In 1932, Sheikh Abdullah formed Kashmir's first political party-the All Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference (renamed as National Conference in 1939). The Glancy Commission appointed by the Maharaja published a report in April 1932, confirming the existence of the grievances of the State's subjects and suggested recommendations providing for adequate representation of Muslims in the State's services; Maharaja accepted these recommendations but delayed implementation, leading to another agitation in 1934; Maharaja granted a Constitution providing a Legislative Assembly for the people, but the Assembly turned out to be powerless.
The debate concerning the future of Kashmir gained impetus particularly from the days of transfer of power and the partition of British India way back in 1947. On 15 August 1947, the Indian subcontinent became independent. Kashmir signed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan. Rulers of Princely States were encouraged to accede their States to either Dominion - India or Pakistan, taking into account factors such as geographical contiguity and the wishes of their people. The Maharaja of Kashmir delayed his decision in an effort to remain independent. In theory, rulers were allowed to accede their States to either Dominion, irrespective of the wishes of their people; but as a practical matter, they were encouraged to accede to the geographically contiguous Dominion, taking into account the wishes of their people and in cases where a dispute arose, it was decided to settle the question of accession by a plebiscite, a scheme proposed and accepted by India. Being a Muslim majority State and flanking to Pakistan, Kashmir was expected to accede to Pakistan. Since the Hindu Ruler acceded instead to India, a dispute arose in the case of Kashmir. In 1948, India imposed and won a plebiscite in the case of Junagadh, which had a Hindu majority ruled by a Muslim Ruler who acceded to Pakistan; However, in the case of Kashmir, the mirror image of Junagadh, India did not hold a plebiscite; Pakistan applied its own share of double standards by having divergent positions on Kashmir and Junagadh, insisting it get both.
According to historians, the last Viceroy of British India, Sir Lord Mountbatten's rather friendly relationship with Jawaharlal Nehru and the latter's sympathetic attitude towards Sheikh Abdullah and strong affection to what after all was his ancestral home, Kashmir, was the root of all crisis. Around this emotional 'triangle' revolves the history of the Kashmir dispute. Nevertheless, many other famous personalities of the past too played their part, but these three men ultimately were to decide the future of Kashmir and its people. In 1946, majority of the Kashmir people wanted an independent state. The two major political parties at that time, National Conference headed by Sheikh M. Abdullah and the Muslim Conference, however, had kept other options open in case the dream of independent Kashmir was not realized. Sheikh's National Conference had opened its doors for Indian accession (Sheikh Abdullah's decision might have been triggered out of his indifference towards M.A. Jinnah), while Muslim Conference, owing to its links to the Muslim League in British India was ready with accession to Pakistan. One of the prominent writers of the contemporary world, Alastair Lamb writes, “It is to be regretted that during the crucial weeks prior to the Transfer of Power Sheikh Abdullah remained in prison and was unable either to keep in touch with the march of events or to make his own views widely clear".
Sheikh was basically 'worshipped' by the people of the valley. According to historians the key objectives behind Sheikh Abdullah's "Quit Kashmir in 1946" movement was the removal of Dogra rule and its replacement by an independent Kashmir but later on he had developed strong affection towards India or to be more specifically towards Jawaharlal Nehru, who was after all liable for his release from the Maharaja's prison. When Jawaharlal Nehru realized the extraordinary position of Sheikh Abdullah in the state, he for that reason used Sheikh's influence as a tool in his policy of Jammu and Kashmir. This was indeed the reason why Nehru urged the release of Sheikh Abdullah and the latter's radical change from his policy of Independent Kashmir. Nevertheless, If Sheikh Abdullah would not have been in prison at the time of the Transfer of Power, even then there would not have been any change in his stand over the accession to India, since he strongly disliked M.A. Jinnah and his Muslim League.
Anxious Indian leaders in Delhi used all the political policies to make Kashmir a part of India. The policy of India has always been to extricate the anti-India elements in the valley. Pandit Ram Kak, Maharaja's Prime Minister, was expelled in 1947 owing to his policy of non-Indian future for the state. Even the Indian loyalist Sheikh Abdullah was not spared. Sheikh was put behind bars for his constant demand for the 'promised' autonomy. Augmentation of Pro-Indian elements in the administration supplemented the interest of Maharaja Hari Singh to accede to India. However, before he could have realized his ambition, Indian leaders were quick enough to grab the opportunity of 'invading' Kashmir.
In spring 1947, internal upheaval began in the Poonch region against domineering taxation under the recently imposed direct rule by the Maharaja. Poonch was chiefly a Muslim area. Maharaja strengthened the Sikh and Hindu sects in the Muslim areas and ordered the Muslims to hand over arms with the police. In August, Maharaja's tyrannically fired upon demonstrations favoring Kashmir joining Pakistan. Innocent people got killed in that act. The people of Poonch along with their families crossed over to Pakistan and later returned with arms. In the last week of August, a condition of unrest and lopsided violence turned into an organized rebellion. The Poonch rebels declared an independent government of "Azad" Kashmir on 24 October. Barring National Conference other political parties including the Muslim Conference and the Chiefs of Gilgit region, advised the Maharaja against acceding to the Indian Union. While in prison, Sheikh Abdullah wrote a letter to a friend in Jammu, which is published in the Congress press, in favor of accession of Kashmir to India. On 22 October, he explained the apprehension of the Kashmiri Muslims in joining India, keeping in view the massacre of Muslims in Kapurthala and elsewhere in India. On 22 October, thousands of Pathan tribesmen from Pakistan recruited by the Poonch rebels invade Kashmir along with the Poonch rebels, allegedly exasperated by the atrocities against fellow Muslims in Poonch and Jammu. The tribesmen engage in looting and killing along the way. The tribesmen and the Poonch rebels were unofficially supported by various individuals and high ranking officials in Pakistan. India accuses Pakistan of violating the Standstill Agreement with Kashmir by disrupting the supply links and of engaging in aggression by sending in the tribesmen.
On 26 October 1947, the Maharaja of the State of Jammu and Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession (IOA, acceding the 75% majority Muslim region to the Indian Union following invasion by the tribesmen from Pakistan. According to the 1948 Indian White Paper, India accepted the accession, regarding it provisional until such time as the will of the people can be ascertained by a plebiscite since Kashmir was recognized as a disputed territory. It should be noted that the IOA itself does not specify any provisionality or conditionality of accession, while the White Paper specifies it undoubtedly, thus creating a conflict between strict legal interpretation and repeated official promise made to the people of Kashmir.
The Indian army entered the state on 27 October 1947. Pakistan argued that the accession is illegal & Maharaja has no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan is still in force. Jawaharlal Nehru played a rather controversial part in the Pathan invasion in 1947. The purpose of sending the forces to Kashmir, as Nehru himself declared in the telegram to British Prime Minister, Attlee on 25th October, was only to defend the advancing Pathan forces and not something designed to influence the state to accede to India. Although Nehru and Mountbatten had declared that the decision of accession must be decided according to the wishes of the people, but reasonably that was not to be the case. There is no evading the fact that the decision of accession to India was taken against the will and wishes of the majority of the population of the state. Kashmir was provisionally accepted into the Indian Union pending a free and impartial plebiscite. This was spelled out in a letter from the Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, to the Maharaja on 27 October 1947. In the letter, accepting the accession, Mountbatten made it clear that the State would only be incorporated into the Indian Union after a orientation had been made to the people of Kashmir. Having acknowledged the principle of a plebiscite, India has obstructed all attempts at holding a plebiscite.
On 5 January 1949, UNCIP (United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan) resolution states that the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be determined through a free and unbiased plebiscite. As per the 1948 and 1949 UNCIP resolutions, both countries established the principle that the withdrawal of Pakistani and Indian forces, as a basis for the formulation of a Truce agreement & it would be followed by a plebiscite. However, both countries failed to arrive at a Truce agreement due to differences in whether the Azad Kashmiri army is to be disbanded during the truce stage or the plebiscite stage. On 17 October, the Indian Constituent Assembly adopted Article 370 of the Constitution, ensuring a special status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir with Indian jurisdiction in Kashmir limited to the three areas as decided in the IOA, namely, defense, foreign affairs and communications only. In 1952 Jawaharlal Nehru in the Lok Sabha on August 7 said, "...Ultimately - I say this with all deference to this Parliament - the decision will be made in the hearts and minds of the men and women of Kashmir; neither in this Parliament, nor in the United Nations nor by anybody else".
On 30 October 1956, the state Constituent Assembly adopted a constitution for the state declaring it an integral part of the Indian Union. On 24 January 1957, UN passed another resolution stating that such actions would not constitute a final disposition of the State. India's Home Minister, Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant, during his visit to Srinagar, stated that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and there can be no question of a plebiscite. In 1962 India and China had a war on account of a border dispute in the Ladakh region. At the end of war, China occupied 37,555 sq. kms from Indian held Kashmir at Aksai-chin and Demochok in Ladakh. In December, 5180 sq. kms are conditionally taken over by China at Shaksgam in Northern Areas of Kashmir under Pakistan control. After the release of Sheikh Abdullah, the ailing Prime Minister Nehru sent him to Pakistan on 25 May, in an effort to resolve the Kashmir problem, taking into account the wishes of Kashmiris. Nehru passed away on 27 May and the talks got stranded. In Aug 1965, Pakistan undertook Operation Gibraltar and sent in a few thousand armed infiltrators across the cease-fire line. Incidents of violence increased in Kashmir valley. A full Indo-Pakistani war broke out. In January 1966, Tashkent Declaration was signed by both countries agreeing to revert to pre-1965 position, under Russian mediation. India and Pakistan signed yet another agreement, the Simla Agreement in July 1972, which had a clause that the final settlement of Kashmir will be decided bilaterally in the future and that both the sides shall respect the LOC. In November, 1974 Kashmir Accord was signed by G.Parthasarathy for Indira Gandhi and Mirza Afzal Beg for Sheikh Abdullah, who was out of power at that time. The Accord retained Kashmir's special status, but the state was termed as a 'constituent unit of the Union of India'. Opposition parties and Pakistan condemned the Accord. In 1987 Farooq Abdullah won the elections. The Muslim United Front (MUF) accused that the elections were rigged. The MUF candidate Mohammad Yousuf Shah got imprisoned who later became Syed Salahuddin, chief of militant outfit Hizb-ul-Mujahedin. His election aides (known as the HAJY group) - Abdul Hamid Shaikh, Ashfaq Majid Wani, Javed Ahmed Mir and Mohammed Yasin Malik - joined the JKLF. In 1989 Militancy increases with bomb blasts. Kashmiri Pandits Jia Lal Taploo and Neel Kanth Ganjoo were killed by militants for sentencing Maqbool Butt to death in 1984.
In the Indian Defence Review of July 1989, one of India's top defence specialists, K.Subrahmanyam, cited the existence of a secret Pakistani plan to start a Kashmiri uprising, code-named 'Operation Topac'. However, this plan later proved false and concocted by Indian analysts as a hypothetical exercise, a fact Subramanian later acknowledged. Indian politicians have always been effective at spreading rumors and taking benefit of it (at least in case of Kashmir). They very skillfully held Pakistan responsible for whatever was happening in Kashmir. Indian leaders and media have absolutely attested the exactness in Joseph Goebel's sayings, “frequently repeated lies have the potential of being acknowledged as the truth". Even the Governor-General, Mountbatten appeared to have acknowledged without question every rumor antagonistic to Pakistan.
On 20 January 1990, an anticipated 100 people got killed when a large crowd of unarmed protesters were fired upon by the Indian troops at the Gawakadal Bridge. With this episode, it becomes an insurgency of the entire population. Lassa Kaul, director of Srinagar Doordarshan was killed by the militants for pro-India media policy. In the end of February, an estimated 400,000 Kashmiris take to the streets of Srinagar, demanding a plebiscite. On March 1, an estimated one million took to the streets and more than 40 people got killed in police firing. Massive protest by unarmed civilians rocked the Srinagar streets. In the last decade of 20th Century an officially estimated 10,000 desperate Kashmiri youth cross-over to Pakistan for training and procurement of arms. Gradually the militant insurgency declined by the end of year 2001.
In 2009, there were violent protests particularly in Shopian town and in Kashmir at large against the alleged rape and murder of two women. The protesters accused the security personnel of raping and murdering Neelofar Jan (22) and Asiya Jan (17). They also accused the State government and the police of hiding the facts. These protests were followed by the strike call by the sovereigntist–secessionist leaders. The Demands for justice, self-determination and removal of the Indian forces started. As soon as the protests started police and Indian armed forces in order to halt the protests batten charged the protesters and fired repeated tear gas canisters. Hundreds of people were injured and one person died due to an injury caused by a tear smoke shell. From May 30 to July 13 there were approximately 897 civilian injuries due to police. Many pro-freedom leaders were put under house arrest or jailed. Amidst public outcry, the state government, on 3 June 2009, appointed a commission headed by Justice Muzaffar Ahmad Jan to investigate the case. The panel submitted a 400-page report to the government. Jan commission report was considered a mere eye wash as no conclusion was drawn out of it. The CBI investigation further added to the people’s anger which erupted in 2010 with a yet another Uprising against the atrocities on Kashmiris.
June 2010 Uprising commenced with the assassination of three youths in a fake encounter in Matsel, Bandipora by Indian Army. All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) called it ‘The Quit Jammu Kashmir Movement’. The call for this campaign, led by Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, was given for absolute demilitarization of Jammu and Kashmir. The Hurriyat accused Indian Forces of various human rights abuses including fake encounters, killings of dozens of innocent youth, sexual violence against women, destruction of property and exploitation of the region’s natural resources, and claimed that “oppression has reached the extreme’’. The movement by APHC was aimed to reiterate the call for the right to self-determination for the people of Jammu and Kashmir as was promised by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1947, the then Prime Minister of India, under the auspices of the United Nations. Subsequently, the movement resulted in the continued street protests. Stone pelting by protesters and police firing were the routine of each day. An estimated 111Kashmiris mostly youngsters got killed from June-October 2010 where as more than 2,000 civilians got injured. The grave human rights violation can be ascertained by the fact that 70 injured persons in Government dental college hospital had to undergo maxillofacial surgeries & whose one or other part of the face got paralyzed by bullets and teargas shells. There were also number of cases of paraplegia & quadriplegia whose limbs and arms got permanently paralyzed for life. According to one estimate about 80% of Kashmiris were suffering from disturbed circadian rhythm (biological clock) syndrome since June 11.Surprisingly only one security personnel got killed and that too due to the negligence of his own driver. Due to the deaths of several teenagers during the 2010 protests, the year 2010 has been marked by analysts as the year of teenage killing in Kashmir.
The uprising of 2010 has been distinct in that it was purely led by youngsters both on street and off-street on internet. Marketing and information technology experts estimate at least 40,000 Kashmir residents were on Facebook and most of them being e-protesters. The facebook page for ‘Bekaar Jamaath’ or the Idle Group, amassed about 12,000 members in three months before being hacked, removed, re-established and renamed as ‘aalaw-the call’ in august 2010. Video song of intense stone throwing by protesters, Stone in My Hand, became a hit with the demonstrators. Eid-ul-Fitr in Kashmir was altogether different from any other Eid celebrated in Kashmir. There were no festivities. Mood was somber and gloomy. Social sharing was modest. For the first time in my living memory, there were no toys being sold. No children with fancy dresses going to parks. For the first time ever, there were no crackers being burst. Kashmir looked united in grief.
Kashmir has been hot & ideal subject matter for the writers to gain popularity and earn quick bucks particularly in the last twenty years. But the question, however, is how far the information provided by these authors is authentic & relevant. To understand the complexity of Kashmir dispute, we have to reconstitute and reorganize the coffer of history in order to scrutinize the facts, but being impartial and unbiased. Let's investigate specifically the reasons responsible for the loss of charm and glory of Kashmir and its transformation into a look-alike to hell.
Until 1846, Kashmir was part of the Sikh empire. In that year, under the Treaty of Amritsar between the East India Company and Raja Gulab Singh of Jammu, Kashmir Valley was sold for mere Rs.7.5 million to Raja Gulab Singh who added it to Jammu and Ladakh which were already under his rule. The Maharaja signed a separate treaty with the British which gave him the status of an independent princely ruler of Kashmir. Gulab Singh died in 1857 and was replaced by Rambir Singh (1857-1885). Two other Marajas, Partab Singh (1885-1925) and Hari Singh (1925-1949) ruled in succession. Gulab Singh and his successors ruled Kashmir in a tyrannical and repressive way. The people of Kashmir, nearly 80 per cent of whom were Muslims, rose against Maharaja Hari Singh's rule. He ruthlessly crushed a mass uprising in 1931. In 1932, Sheikh Abdullah formed Kashmir's first political party-the All Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference (renamed as National Conference in 1939). The Glancy Commission appointed by the Maharaja published a report in April 1932, confirming the existence of the grievances of the State's subjects and suggested recommendations providing for adequate representation of Muslims in the State's services; Maharaja accepted these recommendations but delayed implementation, leading to another agitation in 1934; Maharaja granted a Constitution providing a Legislative Assembly for the people, but the Assembly turned out to be powerless.
The debate concerning the future of Kashmir gained impetus particularly from the days of transfer of power and the partition of British India way back in 1947. On 15 August 1947, the Indian subcontinent became independent. Kashmir signed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan. Rulers of Princely States were encouraged to accede their States to either Dominion - India or Pakistan, taking into account factors such as geographical contiguity and the wishes of their people. The Maharaja of Kashmir delayed his decision in an effort to remain independent. In theory, rulers were allowed to accede their States to either Dominion, irrespective of the wishes of their people; but as a practical matter, they were encouraged to accede to the geographically contiguous Dominion, taking into account the wishes of their people and in cases where a dispute arose, it was decided to settle the question of accession by a plebiscite, a scheme proposed and accepted by India. Being a Muslim majority State and flanking to Pakistan, Kashmir was expected to accede to Pakistan. Since the Hindu Ruler acceded instead to India, a dispute arose in the case of Kashmir. In 1948, India imposed and won a plebiscite in the case of Junagadh, which had a Hindu majority ruled by a Muslim Ruler who acceded to Pakistan; However, in the case of Kashmir, the mirror image of Junagadh, India did not hold a plebiscite; Pakistan applied its own share of double standards by having divergent positions on Kashmir and Junagadh, insisting it get both.
According to historians, the last Viceroy of British India, Sir Lord Mountbatten's rather friendly relationship with Jawaharlal Nehru and the latter's sympathetic attitude towards Sheikh Abdullah and strong affection to what after all was his ancestral home, Kashmir, was the root of all crisis. Around this emotional 'triangle' revolves the history of the Kashmir dispute. Nevertheless, many other famous personalities of the past too played their part, but these three men ultimately were to decide the future of Kashmir and its people. In 1946, majority of the Kashmir people wanted an independent state. The two major political parties at that time, National Conference headed by Sheikh M. Abdullah and the Muslim Conference, however, had kept other options open in case the dream of independent Kashmir was not realized. Sheikh's National Conference had opened its doors for Indian accession (Sheikh Abdullah's decision might have been triggered out of his indifference towards M.A. Jinnah), while Muslim Conference, owing to its links to the Muslim League in British India was ready with accession to Pakistan. One of the prominent writers of the contemporary world, Alastair Lamb writes, “It is to be regretted that during the crucial weeks prior to the Transfer of Power Sheikh Abdullah remained in prison and was unable either to keep in touch with the march of events or to make his own views widely clear".
Sheikh was basically 'worshipped' by the people of the valley. According to historians the key objectives behind Sheikh Abdullah's "Quit Kashmir in 1946" movement was the removal of Dogra rule and its replacement by an independent Kashmir but later on he had developed strong affection towards India or to be more specifically towards Jawaharlal Nehru, who was after all liable for his release from the Maharaja's prison. When Jawaharlal Nehru realized the extraordinary position of Sheikh Abdullah in the state, he for that reason used Sheikh's influence as a tool in his policy of Jammu and Kashmir. This was indeed the reason why Nehru urged the release of Sheikh Abdullah and the latter's radical change from his policy of Independent Kashmir. Nevertheless, If Sheikh Abdullah would not have been in prison at the time of the Transfer of Power, even then there would not have been any change in his stand over the accession to India, since he strongly disliked M.A. Jinnah and his Muslim League.
Anxious Indian leaders in Delhi used all the political policies to make Kashmir a part of India. The policy of India has always been to extricate the anti-India elements in the valley. Pandit Ram Kak, Maharaja's Prime Minister, was expelled in 1947 owing to his policy of non-Indian future for the state. Even the Indian loyalist Sheikh Abdullah was not spared. Sheikh was put behind bars for his constant demand for the 'promised' autonomy. Augmentation of Pro-Indian elements in the administration supplemented the interest of Maharaja Hari Singh to accede to India. However, before he could have realized his ambition, Indian leaders were quick enough to grab the opportunity of 'invading' Kashmir.
In spring 1947, internal upheaval began in the Poonch region against domineering taxation under the recently imposed direct rule by the Maharaja. Poonch was chiefly a Muslim area. Maharaja strengthened the Sikh and Hindu sects in the Muslim areas and ordered the Muslims to hand over arms with the police. In August, Maharaja's tyrannically fired upon demonstrations favoring Kashmir joining Pakistan. Innocent people got killed in that act. The people of Poonch along with their families crossed over to Pakistan and later returned with arms. In the last week of August, a condition of unrest and lopsided violence turned into an organized rebellion. The Poonch rebels declared an independent government of "Azad" Kashmir on 24 October. Barring National Conference other political parties including the Muslim Conference and the Chiefs of Gilgit region, advised the Maharaja against acceding to the Indian Union. While in prison, Sheikh Abdullah wrote a letter to a friend in Jammu, which is published in the Congress press, in favor of accession of Kashmir to India. On 22 October, he explained the apprehension of the Kashmiri Muslims in joining India, keeping in view the massacre of Muslims in Kapurthala and elsewhere in India. On 22 October, thousands of Pathan tribesmen from Pakistan recruited by the Poonch rebels invade Kashmir along with the Poonch rebels, allegedly exasperated by the atrocities against fellow Muslims in Poonch and Jammu. The tribesmen engage in looting and killing along the way. The tribesmen and the Poonch rebels were unofficially supported by various individuals and high ranking officials in Pakistan. India accuses Pakistan of violating the Standstill Agreement with Kashmir by disrupting the supply links and of engaging in aggression by sending in the tribesmen.
On 26 October 1947, the Maharaja of the State of Jammu and Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession (IOA, acceding the 75% majority Muslim region to the Indian Union following invasion by the tribesmen from Pakistan. According to the 1948 Indian White Paper, India accepted the accession, regarding it provisional until such time as the will of the people can be ascertained by a plebiscite since Kashmir was recognized as a disputed territory. It should be noted that the IOA itself does not specify any provisionality or conditionality of accession, while the White Paper specifies it undoubtedly, thus creating a conflict between strict legal interpretation and repeated official promise made to the people of Kashmir.
The Indian army entered the state on 27 October 1947. Pakistan argued that the accession is illegal & Maharaja has no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan is still in force. Jawaharlal Nehru played a rather controversial part in the Pathan invasion in 1947. The purpose of sending the forces to Kashmir, as Nehru himself declared in the telegram to British Prime Minister, Attlee on 25th October, was only to defend the advancing Pathan forces and not something designed to influence the state to accede to India. Although Nehru and Mountbatten had declared that the decision of accession must be decided according to the wishes of the people, but reasonably that was not to be the case. There is no evading the fact that the decision of accession to India was taken against the will and wishes of the majority of the population of the state. Kashmir was provisionally accepted into the Indian Union pending a free and impartial plebiscite. This was spelled out in a letter from the Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, to the Maharaja on 27 October 1947. In the letter, accepting the accession, Mountbatten made it clear that the State would only be incorporated into the Indian Union after a orientation had been made to the people of Kashmir. Having acknowledged the principle of a plebiscite, India has obstructed all attempts at holding a plebiscite.
On 5 January 1949, UNCIP (United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan) resolution states that the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be determined through a free and unbiased plebiscite. As per the 1948 and 1949 UNCIP resolutions, both countries established the principle that the withdrawal of Pakistani and Indian forces, as a basis for the formulation of a Truce agreement & it would be followed by a plebiscite. However, both countries failed to arrive at a Truce agreement due to differences in whether the Azad Kashmiri army is to be disbanded during the truce stage or the plebiscite stage. On 17 October, the Indian Constituent Assembly adopted Article 370 of the Constitution, ensuring a special status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir with Indian jurisdiction in Kashmir limited to the three areas as decided in the IOA, namely, defense, foreign affairs and communications only. In 1952 Jawaharlal Nehru in the Lok Sabha on August 7 said, "...Ultimately - I say this with all deference to this Parliament - the decision will be made in the hearts and minds of the men and women of Kashmir; neither in this Parliament, nor in the United Nations nor by anybody else".
On 30 October 1956, the state Constituent Assembly adopted a constitution for the state declaring it an integral part of the Indian Union. On 24 January 1957, UN passed another resolution stating that such actions would not constitute a final disposition of the State. India's Home Minister, Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant, during his visit to Srinagar, stated that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and there can be no question of a plebiscite. In 1962 India and China had a war on account of a border dispute in the Ladakh region. At the end of war, China occupied 37,555 sq. kms from Indian held Kashmir at Aksai-chin and Demochok in Ladakh. In December, 5180 sq. kms are conditionally taken over by China at Shaksgam in Northern Areas of Kashmir under Pakistan control. After the release of Sheikh Abdullah, the ailing Prime Minister Nehru sent him to Pakistan on 25 May, in an effort to resolve the Kashmir problem, taking into account the wishes of Kashmiris. Nehru passed away on 27 May and the talks got stranded. In Aug 1965, Pakistan undertook Operation Gibraltar and sent in a few thousand armed infiltrators across the cease-fire line. Incidents of violence increased in Kashmir valley. A full Indo-Pakistani war broke out. In January 1966, Tashkent Declaration was signed by both countries agreeing to revert to pre-1965 position, under Russian mediation. India and Pakistan signed yet another agreement, the Simla Agreement in July 1972, which had a clause that the final settlement of Kashmir will be decided bilaterally in the future and that both the sides shall respect the LOC. In November, 1974 Kashmir Accord was signed by G.Parthasarathy for Indira Gandhi and Mirza Afzal Beg for Sheikh Abdullah, who was out of power at that time. The Accord retained Kashmir's special status, but the state was termed as a 'constituent unit of the Union of India'. Opposition parties and Pakistan condemned the Accord. In 1987 Farooq Abdullah won the elections. The Muslim United Front (MUF) accused that the elections were rigged. The MUF candidate Mohammad Yousuf Shah got imprisoned who later became Syed Salahuddin, chief of militant outfit Hizb-ul-Mujahedin. His election aides (known as the HAJY group) - Abdul Hamid Shaikh, Ashfaq Majid Wani, Javed Ahmed Mir and Mohammed Yasin Malik - joined the JKLF. In 1989 Militancy increases with bomb blasts. Kashmiri Pandits Jia Lal Taploo and Neel Kanth Ganjoo were killed by militants for sentencing Maqbool Butt to death in 1984.
In the Indian Defence Review of July 1989, one of India's top defence specialists, K.Subrahmanyam, cited the existence of a secret Pakistani plan to start a Kashmiri uprising, code-named 'Operation Topac'. However, this plan later proved false and concocted by Indian analysts as a hypothetical exercise, a fact Subramanian later acknowledged. Indian politicians have always been effective at spreading rumors and taking benefit of it (at least in case of Kashmir). They very skillfully held Pakistan responsible for whatever was happening in Kashmir. Indian leaders and media have absolutely attested the exactness in Joseph Goebel's sayings, “frequently repeated lies have the potential of being acknowledged as the truth". Even the Governor-General, Mountbatten appeared to have acknowledged without question every rumor antagonistic to Pakistan.
On 20 January 1990, an anticipated 100 people got killed when a large crowd of unarmed protesters were fired upon by the Indian troops at the Gawakadal Bridge. With this episode, it becomes an insurgency of the entire population. Lassa Kaul, director of Srinagar Doordarshan was killed by the militants for pro-India media policy. In the end of February, an estimated 400,000 Kashmiris take to the streets of Srinagar, demanding a plebiscite. On March 1, an estimated one million took to the streets and more than 40 people got killed in police firing. Massive protest by unarmed civilians rocked the Srinagar streets. In the last decade of 20th Century an officially estimated 10,000 desperate Kashmiri youth cross-over to Pakistan for training and procurement of arms. Gradually the militant insurgency declined by the end of year 2001.
In 2009, there were violent protests particularly in Shopian town and in Kashmir at large against the alleged rape and murder of two women. The protesters accused the security personnel of raping and murdering Neelofar Jan (22) and Asiya Jan (17). They also accused the State government and the police of hiding the facts. These protests were followed by the strike call by the sovereigntist–secessionist leaders. The Demands for justice, self-determination and removal of the Indian forces started. As soon as the protests started police and Indian armed forces in order to halt the protests batten charged the protesters and fired repeated tear gas canisters. Hundreds of people were injured and one person died due to an injury caused by a tear smoke shell. From May 30 to July 13 there were approximately 897 civilian injuries due to police. Many pro-freedom leaders were put under house arrest or jailed. Amidst public outcry, the state government, on 3 June 2009, appointed a commission headed by Justice Muzaffar Ahmad Jan to investigate the case. The panel submitted a 400-page report to the government. Jan commission report was considered a mere eye wash as no conclusion was drawn out of it. The CBI investigation further added to the people’s anger which erupted in 2010 with a yet another Uprising against the atrocities on Kashmiris.
June 2010 Uprising commenced with the assassination of three youths in a fake encounter in Matsel, Bandipora by Indian Army. All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) called it ‘The Quit Jammu Kashmir Movement’. The call for this campaign, led by Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, was given for absolute demilitarization of Jammu and Kashmir. The Hurriyat accused Indian Forces of various human rights abuses including fake encounters, killings of dozens of innocent youth, sexual violence against women, destruction of property and exploitation of the region’s natural resources, and claimed that “oppression has reached the extreme’’. The movement by APHC was aimed to reiterate the call for the right to self-determination for the people of Jammu and Kashmir as was promised by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1947, the then Prime Minister of India, under the auspices of the United Nations. Subsequently, the movement resulted in the continued street protests. Stone pelting by protesters and police firing were the routine of each day. An estimated 111Kashmiris mostly youngsters got killed from June-October 2010 where as more than 2,000 civilians got injured. The grave human rights violation can be ascertained by the fact that 70 injured persons in Government dental college hospital had to undergo maxillofacial surgeries & whose one or other part of the face got paralyzed by bullets and teargas shells. There were also number of cases of paraplegia & quadriplegia whose limbs and arms got permanently paralyzed for life. According to one estimate about 80% of Kashmiris were suffering from disturbed circadian rhythm (biological clock) syndrome since June 11.Surprisingly only one security personnel got killed and that too due to the negligence of his own driver. Due to the deaths of several teenagers during the 2010 protests, the year 2010 has been marked by analysts as the year of teenage killing in Kashmir.
The uprising of 2010 has been distinct in that it was purely led by youngsters both on street and off-street on internet. Marketing and information technology experts estimate at least 40,000 Kashmir residents were on Facebook and most of them being e-protesters. The facebook page for ‘Bekaar Jamaath’ or the Idle Group, amassed about 12,000 members in three months before being hacked, removed, re-established and renamed as ‘aalaw-the call’ in august 2010. Video song of intense stone throwing by protesters, Stone in My Hand, became a hit with the demonstrators. Eid-ul-Fitr in Kashmir was altogether different from any other Eid celebrated in Kashmir. There were no festivities. Mood was somber and gloomy. Social sharing was modest. For the first time in my living memory, there were no toys being sold. No children with fancy dresses going to parks. For the first time ever, there were no crackers being burst. Kashmir looked united in grief.
In conclusion, the problem of Kashmir would only be resolved through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite. But holding of Plebiscite with only two options (union with either Indian or Pakistan) is not now acceptable to the bulk of Kashmiris. They want an independent status for the entire state. Steps like starting a bus service from Srinagar to Muzaffarabad, laying down railway lines, or giving hefty economic packages in no way would solve the problem of Kashmir. Both India and Pakistan should make U.N Resolutions the basis of solving the problem. U.N. resolution, after all, was responsible to ultimately solve the international disputes in South Africa and Angola. India and Pakistan must keep the interest of Kashmiri people paramount and take serious and unwavering initiative in order to make things better for the common mass of Kashmir and settle the Kashmir issue once and for all. Fortunately the stir in the political circles at both regional and International level are favoring for the reconsideration of Kashmir dispute. The United States President Barak Obama recently stated that the dispute should be resolved bilaterally between Pakistan and India amicably. At the same period, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization enlisted Jammu and Kashmir as ‘’Independent entity’’. FAO representative in India Gavin Wall exclaimed the country grouping is based on FAO's Global Administrative Unit Layers (GAUL) and according to which controversial boundaries cannot be ignored. Furthermore, The Chief Minister of J&K Omar Abdullah on 6th October in State Assembly for the first time uttered that Kashmir is an outstanding issue and cannot be addressed through development, employment or good governance only. He added that our accession (to the Union of India) was based on the special status given to us, and not merger. Keeping in view the above facts it seems that the dispute could be resolved in near future if handled carefully with an impartial attitude. Let us pray for the day when the peace in the vale returns back and we could proudly call Kashmir as ‘the paradise of Earth’ to the future generations.
copyright: http://leyakat.blogspot.com
copyright: http://leyakat.blogspot.com
