Kashmir: Article 370 Abrogation and Vilifying Nehru

Ram Puniyani :

As the Supreme Court has upheld the abrogation of Article 370, the RSS ideologues are celebrating it as a SC ratifying the decision of the Government, while leaders of Parties based in Kashmir are aghast with the decision. The same occasion was used by Amit Shah and company to vilify Nehru yet again. Using selective and distorted history their ideology has been propagating that had Sarder Patel handled the Kashmir issue, the problem would have been solved then and there only. Adding on to that Amit Shah stated that Nehru's decision to declare ceasefire was a Himalayan blunder and that his granting the special status to Kashmir has been the mistake which led to a series of problems.

Surely the accusation made by Mr. Shah has nothing to do with the reality of the events as they unfolded. The attempt to show that Nehru and Patel had differing opinions on Kashmir is a figment of imagination which abuses the facts of the history to its extreme. As such it was Nehru (and Sheikh Abdullah) due to whom Kashmir acceded to India. Maharaja Harisingh had refused to merge with India and was supported in this decision by Praja Parishad. Sardar Patel who was doing the integration of Princely states had enough on his plate. Rajmohan Gandhi in his book, 'Patel a Life' points out that what Patel had in mind about Kashmir was to strike a bargain, to have Hyderabad for India and to let Pakistan have Kashmir, Rajmohan Gandhi cites a speech Patel delivered at the Bahauddin College in Junagadh following the latter's merger with India. In it, he said, "We would agree to Kashmir if they agreed to Hyderabad."

The treaty of accession with India, was signed by Maharaja Harising after the marauding Pakistan army posing as Tribal (Kabayali) were close to Srinagar border. He approached India and India on the condition that Kashmir accedes to India, and sent the army. Harisingh was dreaming of Independent Kashmir as he was refusing to merge with India. Patel was content with Hyderabad merging with India. It was Sheikh Abdullah, who chose to come on the side of India. Here again his consideration was not religion but secularism and socialism. He was keen for land reforms which he saw as impossibility in Pakistan, with predominant leadership with feudal mindset. With many leaders of Indian talking socialism he felt it was possible in India. He also saw in India the hope for secularism as Gandhi and Nehru gave the message of secularism without any ifs and buts.

Mr. Shah and other RSS ideologues say that Nehru's decision of cease fire was faulty and was under the pressure of British commanders to whose opinion Nehru succumbed. This again is disproved by the facts of history. That time Lord Mountbatten was the Governor General of India. He first advised for a cease fire and took the matters to the United Nations. He was not alone. Indian leadership saw the consequences of extending the war, the casualties to the civilians and the lack of resources with the Indian army. As per 'Sardar Patel's Correspondence, 1945-50, published in 1974 by the Navjivan Publishing House, Ahmadabad', he expressed... on 4 June 1948, in a letter to Gopalswamy Ayyangar, that the 'military position is not too good, and I am afraid that our military resources are strained to the utmost'." So much for the false bravado being spoken by Amit Shah that had the ceasefire not been declared whole Kashmir would have been part of India! This is a totally concocted view which is not backed by historical facts.

As far as stating that taking the matters to the UN was a historical blunder, lets again listen to Sardar Patel, "As regards specific issues raised by Pakistan, as you have pointed out, the question of Kashmir is before the Security Council," (letter to Nehru dated 23 February 1950). And that, "Having invoked a forum to the settlement of disputes open to both India and Pakistan, as members of the United Nations Organization, nothing further need be done in the way of settlement of disputes than to leave matters to be adjusted through that forum." The letter is available in the tenth volume of Sardar Patel Correspondence. Surely it was UN which called Pakistan army invading Kashmir as an invasion and in its resolution asked Pakistan to vacate the aggression, while telling India to reduce the army to minimum as a condition for referendum. Pakistan backed by American support refused to withdraw its armies leading to stalemate as referendum, assessing the opinion of Kashmiri people, could not take place.

As far as blaming Nehru for Article 370, RSS combine deliberately forgets that Article 370 giving total autonomy to Kashmir Assembly except in the matters of External Affairs, Defense and Communication was finalized in the Constituent Assembly. This assembly also had representation of Sheikh Abdullah among others. Sardar Patel as Home minister was overseeing the drafting. "At the end of five months of negotiations, when the outline of what would come out to be Article 370 had been decided, NG Iyengar wrote a letter to Sardar Patel, which is again in the public domain for people to verify. "Will you please let Jawaharlal Ji know directly that all these provisions are agreeable to you... only after you agree will Nehru issue a letter to Sheikh Abdullah that you (he) can go ahead." This shows Patel's centrality to the provisions of Article 370.

The distortions in history are a major tool in the hands of communal forces. While they have been distorting medieval history in particular, lately they have intensified distorting the history of the freedom movement and the events related to Kashmir. In all these Nehru is criticized to the hilt, the attempt to create a binary between Patel and Nehru is undertaken through their vast propaganda machine. The aim in criticising Nehru is clear as Nehru stood rock solid against the communalism practiced by Hindu nationalists. What is needed most is the promotion of democratic norms in Kashmir and respecting the commitments which were given to them. Hiding behind vilifying Nehru is no solution to the vexed issue of our country.