Notion of ‘Azadi’ and ‘Kashmiriyat’

Much is being written about the current state of affairs in Kashmir. The ‘Azadi’ of Kashmir and independence to ‘Kashmiriyat’, is being spoken of. But what Azadi are they dreaming about? And which Kashmiriyat are they talking of?

Have Hindus no share of that Kashmiriyat, on the basis of which separatists are demanding an ‘independent’ state for themselves? Which Kashmiriyat are they talking about—is it 500 or 5,000 years old? That was the time when everyone in Kashmir was a Hindu. The separatists in the valley today, tend to forget, and are even motivated to forget, the fact that they are descendants of Hindu ancestors.

In Kashmir, like in the rest of the country, Hindus and Muslims have the same ancestors, share the same history, the same culture, and the same land. Therefore, nationalism is also the same. If that be so, then, how can ancestors change with change in religion and mode of worship? Can it be construed that wherever Muslims are in majority they will have their separate nationalism and get delinked from India?  I assume it to be so. This is the bitter truth about history and it has to be accepted. The history of the world is replete with events illustrating that whenever Muslims are in majority, fundamentalism has raised its head—giving birth to separatist ideas.

The Rise and Reign of Shiekh

With the objective of perpetuating their rule on the vast Indian subcontinent, the British made two things the foundation of all their political activities. First was the ‘divide and rule’ diplomacy and secondly, the arrangement of able agents and even stooges for implementing this appropriately in the political setup.

The rulers of Indian states too, played their role in strengthening the British political base. These Rajas and Maharajas neither dared nor thought it proper to oppose the foreign power because they were busy with entertainment of all sorts. The freedom struggle of 1857 was a revolt at a time when the British were yet to gain a strong foothold. Therefore, the British gave importance to the individual egos of these rulers and never tried to interfere in their world of pleasure. This is precisely why the foreign rulers had nothing to fear from them and kept on using them as the base for stability.

But something interesting occurred at the Chamber of Princes’ round table conference of 1931 in London. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir, in his capacity as Chairman, talked about ‘Indian independence’. Such talk, that too from the head of the Chamber of Princes, was undoubtedly a challenge for the British Crown. Those were the days when the pace of the freedom movement and partition of India were getting faster.

Kashmir was a Muslim majority state and the Maharaja, by talking about India’s ‘complete independence’, had struck at the caste-based politics announced by the British. Getting angry and alert, following the unhelpful attitude of the Maharaja, Viceroy Lord Mountbatten started looking for a suitable British agent in Kashmir to field against the Maharaja.

Islamic Fanaticism—Not Economic Backwardness

It’s almost a month since Jammu began, what seems to be, an insuppressible agitation against the Governor and the pro-partisan and Muslim-appeasing politicians on their refusal to re-allot the land to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB) for providing facilities to Hindu pilgrims visiting Amaranth. The depth of resentment is evident looking at an incident which occurred on July 22, when Kuldeep Raj Dogra, in his mid-30s, while participating in a hunger strike at Jammu’s Parade ground, consumed poison, stood up, read a passionate, self-written patriotic poem, faltered, and then… fell dead. Since then the situation has gone haywire, well beyond the control of the administration. But what made the people of Jammu, mostly peace-loving, to turn so aggressive? Is there a logical explanation for this?

Constitutionally Recognized Separatism

By U. Mahesh Prabhu

During the time of India’s partition, in the year 1947, all the states of the subcontinent were given the rights, under the Indian Independence Act, to accede either to India or Pakistan. Displaying his grand statesmanship the then Indian Union Home Minister, Sardar Patel, succeeded in merging 565 princely states with the Indian Union. As a result of obstinacy and rigidity of Hyderabad and Junagarh, Sardar Patel merged them by employing military means.

But the issue of Jammu & Kashmir was retained by Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru. His national outlook and his capacity to take decision were eclipsed by his affection for Sheikh Abdullah and his animosity with Maharaja Hari Singh and his ingrained Kashmiriyat. This personal ego, of Nehru, is the reason because of which India is loosing, though unconsciously, the state of Kashmir, today.

Jenab Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah was the Prime Minister, and not the Chief Minister of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The state was governed by its own constitution and not by the Constitution of India. The National Conference flag was the state flag and NOT the tricolour. The Indians needed a ‘permit’ for visiting Jammu and Kashmir. There were several other such separatist concessions and customs which Nehru offered, as his gift, in connection with the delight on Sheikh becoming the ‘sultan of the state’. And yet, Sheikh was not pleased.

There was one special reason behind this dissatisfaction of Sheikh Abdullah despite having the blessings from the Prime Minister of India, support of the UN Security Council and Pakistan. He had ‘fears’ that Hindus of India may come and settle in the state. He had fears that Kashmiri Muslims may be swept by the national mainstream. He had fears that Kashmir may be recognized on the basis of its ancient culture, Kashmir may be amalgamated like other states in India, after Nehru. Such fear would spoil his sleep.

Thus, in order to realize his dream of total independence for Kashmir, it was necessary to keep Jammu and Kashmir away from India permanently. He needed an instrument through which he could protect the seed; he himself had sown, of separatism in Kashmir. He again took Nehru for a ride and brought him under the clutches of his schemes. By incorporating Article 370 in the Constitution of India, Nehru offered him that instrument.