Mailbag

Mail

Truths About Sheikh Abdullah-I

Sir,

Apropos S Teja Singh article (DE of 1.10.2000) and further to Prof. SN Wakhlu's letter (DE of 6.10.2000). The author's attempt to show his hero Sheikh Mohd Abdullah (SMA) in bright colour is understandable. It is common human failing to see no fault in ones hero. In the process, objectivity becomes a casualty. Destiny catapulted on obscure school teacher to unprecedented dizzy heights of power and influence aided by British intrigues, Pt Nehru's naivete and the mans' own guile and strategem. It is well said that power will intoxicate the best heart as wine the strongest head. After 1947, the USA took over the baton from Britain in pursuit of the grand Anglo-American design of retaining control over the strategic Kashmir-Gilgit area, even if indirectly, in league with their favoured puppet Pakistan. SMA was a ready tool.

In order to arrive at a fair assessment, one should also listen from the other horses' mouths.

Says R K Karanjia in Blitz of April 24, 1965, ''shocking documents condemn Abdullahs a British agent'' (Letters from SMA to Ahmediya Chief seeking financial aid from the British had come to light. His hobnobbing with USA' Loy Henderson and Adlai Stevenson for a Sultanate for himself became public knowledge''

Says Late Rafi Ahmad Kidwai in 'Tragedy of Kashmir' by H L Saxena. '' Mr Kidwai then explained that he had seen some of the letters which Sheikh Abdullah used to write to the Mirza of Qadian, and through him to the British officers, who wanted to get Maharaja Hari Singh removed from the Kashmir throne, seeking Financial support for himself and his group''.

Pt. Nehru in 'Tragedy of Kashmir' says, ''Pt Nehru could not at first believe what he had heard from Dr Katju and Mr Handoo, the Intelligence Chief and therefore went through the letters very carefully. But he was astounded and dumb founded as he found it so difficult to believe that SMA could be a traitorous person like that.''

These letters and SMA telling a lie by saying that Bakshi and Sadiq were reluctant to ratify the Delhi Agreement of July, 1952, exhausted Nehru's patience. He then told SMA, ''Sheikh Sahib, so far I have been dealing with you as Jawaharlal Nehru. Now I shall deal with you as the Prime Minister of India.'' Shortly after, the Sheikh was removed from power.

B N Malik in his book writes : ''Then suddenly, to our surprise, Pt. Nehru started talking bitterly against SMA's communalism .....For tactical reasons, the Sheikh converted the Muslim Conference into National Conference to give it a non-communal character.'

Dr Karan Singh in ''Heir apparent'' : ''One theory is that the disturbances (of 1931) and Sheikh's activities were in fact master-minded by the British because my birth had upset their 'doctrine of lopse' policy and also to teach my father a lesson for his speech at the Round Table Conference''.

Granted that the Treaty of Amritsar was in fact a sale Deed. Now, in any sale, there is a seller and a buyer. The British sold Kashmir and Kashmiris for Rs 75 lakhs because to them Rs 75 lakhs was more valuable. Is it not remarkable that SMA has not even once blamed the British for this gross inequity? All his ire and fire was directed against Gulab Singh and his descendants.

Sorry S Teja Singh, you have placed a question mark on your impartiallity.

Yours etc...
A S Jamwal
110, Exchange Road
Jammu.

Truths About Sheikh Abdullah-III

Sir,

The latest article of S. Teja Singh on Sheikh Abdullah published in the October 1, 2000 issue of your paper made an interesting reading. It at once struck one's mind as to why and what was the reason to project the valley's leader when he has passed into history. The only reason which could be was to rehabilitate him in the minds of Jammuites as also of other Indians of his lost credibility and to assuage their injured interests on account of his so called partial decisions and actions from which they are suffering irreparable loss which is continuing even now and shall go on in the future also. The writer has made references to certain persons with whom the Kashmir leader is said to have come into contact and who had purported to have recorded their remeniscences which the worthy writer desires the reader to believe without any corroboratory secondary evidence.

There is a reference by the said writer to assert such expression of utterances of the Kashmir leader 'From the Horse's Mouth' and tremendous effort has been made for the common man of Jammu to believe the veneer of so called expression as the inner conviction for sincerity of the Kashmir leader in the merger of the State of J&K with the Indian Union & his faith in the Indian constitution. However, all the efforts of the writer of the said article had been demolished by Prof. Sh Somnath Wakhlu in his letter to the editor which is appropriately timed as published in your paper of 6th October, 2000 which was like a crippling blow to the image which this Kashmir leader has tried to create in the minds but he failed to have impact upon them as he did precious nothing for their welfare, and this first unelected i.e nominated & self assumed P M of Kashmir (in 1947) due to his not so sympathetic approach to various problems of the people of the area failed to gain the affection and respect of larger sections of the populace of Dogras which was also so in the case of the unelected i.e. nominated & self assumed first P.M of India (in 1947) who was the mentor of the Kashmir leader and also of their alleged mutual innate hostility and aversion towards Maharaja Hari Singh the then ruler of Jammu & Kashmir and on his account against Jammuites, which culminated in the ouster of Maharaja, an incident which had no parallel in any of the 500 or so princely states which were integrated with Indian Union, not even in Hyderabad Deccan which had waged war against the Union. In other words, Prof Somnath Wakhlu in his letter has given a fitting reply to the contents in the article 'Truths about Sheikh Abdullah...' and the dubious contentions recorded therein and its writer had failed, inspite of all out but futile efforts, to habilitate the credibility of the Kashmir leader which has been so disproved & exposed by Prof. Wakhlu. The credibility and patriotism of Kashmir leader was amply disproved beyond a shadow of doubt on his being arrested and deposed in 1953 on his alleged complicity and intention to distance Kashmir (J&K) from the Indian Union and his bosom desire to get the State declared independent.

I may also further add here that the article of 1.10.2000 loses its value in the face of discrimination with Jammu people in all walks of life including technical and professional and education fields, besides Govt employment, development fields and various other spheres of activities. Thus Jammu has all along been and is being kept under the jackboot of the elite group of the valley Moreover Jammuites had been given lesser representation in the State in proportion to their population and so to say is an effort to stifle their democratic rights adding to the plethora of their various problems.

Yours etc...
M M Chandan
Gandhinagar, Jammu.

Withdrawal of Teachers posts

Sir,

The recent decision by Dr Farooq Abdullah to withdrew the posts of teachers from SSRB is an extremely arbitrary step, which is highly condemnable. What an irony it is that a trained post graduate person who spends nearly twenty five years of his life to become eligible for teacher's post cannot think of a regular Government job, but instead appointed on contractual basis for Rs 1500/- only. Isn't this a cruel joke with all of them.

Since the next assembly elections are drawing closer, this step is nothing but a cheap political gimmick to appease the vote bank of the ruling party legislators. They, in turn, will flout all norms and rules to get their favourites selected and thus earn political mileage. No doubt, nepotism will be promoted. It is nothing but killing of aspirations of hundreds of educated and deserving youth to get regular government jobs.

Rehbar-e-Taleem should be a temporary measure to run defunct schools which cannot be made functional for the time being due to unavoidable reasons. But finally merit, and not the availability of local candidates has to be the main consideration in filling up of these posts on regular basis. If not satisfied with the working pace of SSRB, the CM should have dissolved the Board itself and frame it afresh with new members.

In stead, he withdrew the posts itself and plans to refer them to private people who cannot be held accountable for their acts of omission and commission.

Dr Farooq Abdullah should reverse this decision at once and restore these vacancies to SSRB or command ever increasing alienation of public in general and unemployed youth is particular from N.C.

Yours etc...
Bhushan Singh Katoch
144, Moti Bazar, Jammu.