A questions still unanswered

By Daya Sagar

Let us have a look at the Instrument of Accession that Maharaja Hari Singh signed on 26th October 1947 and acceded to Dominion of India. Very vital questions that have been left unanswered so far need answer. These questions must agitate sound minds. I would be happy in case these questions agitate the reasoning minds for a better understanding and widely acceptable solution to the doubts and objections to the accession from some quarters from with in and outside India.

The instrument of accession was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh of J&K on 26th October 1947 and forwarded to Lord Mountbatten, the then Governor General of India, requesting for the acceptance of accession of the Princely State of J&K with Dominion of India. It was signed for acceptance on 27th of October 1947 by Governor General of India.

While going through the contents of the Instrument of Accession we need to have a close look at where the instrument says that " where as the Indian Independence Act ,1947, provides that as from the fifteenth day of August 1947 there shall be set up an Independent Dominion known as India, and that the Government of India Act 1935, shall with such omissions, additions, adoptations and modifications as the Governor General may by order specify be applicable to Dominion of India ; And where as the Government of India Act 1935, as so adopted by the Governor General provided that a Indian State may accede to Dominion by an Instrument of Accession executed by the rule there of………. …I accept the matters specified in the schedule hereto as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for this State………..The terms of this my instrument of Accession shall not be varied by any amendment of the Act or the Indian Independence Act, 1947, unless such amendment is accepted by me, an instrument supplementary to this instrument…………. I here by declare that I execute this Instrument on behalf of this State and that any reference in this Instrument to me or to Ruler of this State is to be construed as including a reference to my heirs and successors."

And while accepting the Instrument of Accession the then Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten had signed as " I do hereby accept this Instrument of Accession dated this 27th day of October, nineteen hundred and forty seven".

The vital point that can not be ignored is that the Instrument of Accession as signed by the Maharaja on 26th October 1947 was covered by letter even dated addressed to Mountbatten and the acceptance of the Instrument of Accession was also covered by a letter but dated 27th October as addressed to Maharaja of J&K by Governor General of India.

The Maharaja Had Explained:-

Maharaja Hari Singh did try to explain the reasons for his not signing any instrument of Accession before 15th August 1947 with India or Pakistan . Some of the important paragraphs from the letter dated 26th October 1947 are reproduced here and that do tell us the circumstances, thinking and conditions that prevailed in J&K at that time and surely the Maharaja of J&K was the only authority as per the Government India Act 1935 and Indian Independence Act 1947( as passed by the British Parliament ) to make any observation as well as decision regarding a Princely State of British Empire outside British India.

The covering letter from the Maharaja said ," I wanted to take time to decide to which dominion I should accede or whether it is not in the interests of both the Dominions and State to stand Independent, of course with friendly and cordial relations with both …………"The mass infiltration of tribesmen drawn from distant areas of the North- West Frontier Province, coming regularly in motor trucks, using the Mansehra — Muzaffarabad road and fully armed with up to date weapons, cannot possibly be done without the knowledge of the Provincial Government of North West Frontier Province and Government of Pakistan . Inspite of repeated appeals made my Government no attempt has been made to check the raiders or stop them from coming into my State. In fact , both the radio and the press of Pakistan have reported these occurrences. The Pakistan radio even put out the story that a Provincial Government has been set up in Kashmir"

"The people of my State, both Muslims and non-Muslims , generally have taken no part at all…….With the conditions obtaining at present in my State and great emergency of the situation as it exists, I have no option but to ask for help from the Indian Dominion. Naturally they cannot send help asked for by me without my State acceding to the Dominion of India. I have accordingly decided to do so and I attach the Instrument of Accession for acceptance by your Government"

The Lord Said:

As regards the letter of Lord Mountbatten addressed to Maharaja Hari Singh much is left there to answer. The core of the letter dated 27th October is being reproduced here for the information of those who may not have gone through it so seriously and for those who may like to participate in the discussion initiated by me.

"……….In the circumstances mentioned by your Highness, my Government have decided to accept the accession of Kashmir State to the Dominion of India .In consistence with their policy that in the case of any State where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State (does Government of India Act of 1935 permit it ??????????), it is my Governments wish that , as soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir and its soil cleared of the invaders , the question of the State’s accession should be settled by a reference to the people"………….." My Government and I note with satisfaction that your Highness has decided to invite Sheikh Abdullah to form an interim Government to work with your Prime Minister".

It is a Point Here:

A big question comes out of the letter written to The Maharaja by Mounbatten. The letter says in the first para that, "My Government have decided to accept the accession of Kashmir State to the Dominion of India in consistence with their policy that in case of any State where the issue of accession has been the subject dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State, it is my Government’s wish that, as soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir and it’s soil cleared of the invaders, the question of State’s accession should be settled by a reference to the people."

It is worth noting here that the said letter is dated 27th October 1947 where as India’s complaint to Security Council was dated 1st January 1948 from the representative of India as addressed to President of Security Council. It is a point here that till 27th October1947 India had not gone to Security Council (UN) and on the onset itself Government of India did not accept the Instrument of Accession as signed (26th October1947) by Maharaja Hari Singh in full and laid down the condition of Reference to the People. Where as no such condition was laid down by the Maharaja in the Instrument of Accession, Maharaja’s covering letter of even date that was very elaborate on his intentions.

Then why this condition???? And what was the basis, remains a big unanswered QUESTION ????.

Was it the Brain

Child of Mountbatten:

Now comes the vital question which needs to be properly addressed. Indian Independence Act (1947), and Government of India Act(1935) authorised only the Princes of the Princely States of British Indian Empire to take decision regarding Accession and the then Prince of Jammu & Kashmir State had taken a decision to accede i.e. to Indian Dominion (India-Bharat) after thoughtful considerations and prolonged deliberations with his near and dears as well as advisors. When he had sent the Instrument of Accession to Government of India, did the Government of India had any logical reason or any social authority or any provision in law to not accept an offer for accession on the lines as was drafted for all the Princely States or to accept the same Conditionally????.

The other question that could be asked is that even if there was no provision and the Government of India still wanted to act as per her own wises, why did Government of India accept it Provisionally??? Why??.

Was it the brain child of Mountbatten???? Or was it from the mind of Pandit Nehru ???.

There are many who blame Pandit Nehru for taking the issue of violations of the Indian Borders on the boundaries of J&K State to United Nations on 1st Jan 1948 and making the affairs more questionable.

I would say that at that time Lord Mountbatten , Governor General of India was quite Independent Authority to take decision on such matters and by that time (26th October 1947) the issue had not yet seen the light of United Nations Security Council through Government of India or even through The Maharaja, the Prince of J&K who as per his letter dated 26th October have staying independent of two dominions as the one alternative in his wavering or considering mind.

What was the need, why did Mountbatten put this condition(reference to the people) in the covering letter while accepting the Instrument o Accession?????. More so he could have laid down this in some modified Instrument of Accession instead of covering it with a separate letter. What prevented him from doing so????.

Question bank:

There is much to look into for those who advocate secession, do not accept the accession done by Maharaja Hari Singh with the Union (Dominion)of India and are today clamouring for seeking a reference to the people under the said acceptance to the Instrument of Accession and also advocate the application of the United Nation Security Council resolutions.

Those who are totally for India and consider Accession to be full and final too must have a look to find answers to the likely motives that led the events this way.

Had the Government of India Act of 1935 and Indian Independence Act of 1947 given any summary right to the then GOI for not accepting the Accession as offered by the Indian Prince without assigning any reasons of ultimate value in the absence of any such condition (otherwise by the Maharaja of J&K State .And if the GOI did not have any right and the exclusiveness rested with the then ruling Princes of the Princely States of British Empire outside British India, then the Accession has surely been there and those asking for Right of Self Determination in the context of political and National Status of J&K will have to first call for practical secession of J&K from the Dominion of India since now the issue of Accession, if at all pending could be only on technical grounds as laid down in Government of India Act1935 and Indian Independence Act1947.

Helmsmen to Answer:

The question that is to be addressed by the Government of India and those who have remained at the helm of affairs is that why did Lord Mountbatten put a condition at the time of accepting the Instrument of Accession when Maharaja, the Prince, had acceded very clearly and unconditionally??????

This question needs to be explained and answered to all those who have so far taken themselves as total Indian. And in case they are carrying a misconception or were so far carrying a wrong understanding with them, they deserve to be provided enough of information to clear their wrong conceptions and only after that they could think of whether they have been so far with correct views and conceptions or not.

The people of Jammu and Kashmir State have all the reasons and rights to question even the people (common man) from other Indian States for not having questioned the then leaders at the helm of affairs for their having so badly handled the issues that today the people of J&K are under foreign stress, militant stress, depleted exchequers, and dangers of total social divides; and the love, affections and social harmony for which the people of J&K were noted example has been questioned by her own subjects.

Questions must be answered , other wise the confusions and misunderstandings will remain and their will be enough of material for the anti forces to misinform and exploit the innocent. And to add to this the social forces too will not better equipped to work among the common man for clearing the misunderstandings created over last 50 years on the ground.

Pakistan's Collapsing Afghan Policy

By K.N. Pandita

Pakistan's active and physical interference in Afghan affairs began with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. General Zia extracted the longest possible mileage from this event. Little did he foresee the Frankenstein monster he was creating.

Pakistan did not withdraw from Afghanistan with the withdrawal of the Soviets. Finding the Afghans in total disarray and the Islamic card having worked the miracle, Pakistan began thinking of "strategic depth" and " backyard space". The crux of its Afghan policy was essentially India-centric. Hitherto with Afghanistan not too friendly towards her, a sandwiched state had become her obsession.

The creation of Taliban was the brainchild of ISI that had received the blessings of CIA. Both nursed their respective interests. ISI and Pakistan military wanted to retain a complete hold on Afghan ruling structure and the CIA looked up for a short and less expensive outlet for the Central Asian gas and oil pipeline.

The 11 September strikes against the US changed the whole scenario in Afghanistan. Pakistan's travails began with the serious threat from Washington. "Either you are with us or with our enemy" was President Bush's watchword. The General decided to be with the US for he needed to throw off the yoke of "restoration of democracy" in his country and also wanted to ensure the perpetuation of his dictatorial rule. If the world's biggest democracy supported the world's most retrograde military dictatorship, what more did he need.

The US kept him in good humour. It gave him bagful of dollars. More dollars will come either through the US lackeys like Japan or through the US controlled international funding agencies. The petro-dollar booty is in wide circulation in the process. Her hopes about getting Kashmir have also been raised exceptionally.

The General thought that bombardment of Afghanistan was not going to dislodge the Taliban. Much less did he think the Northern Alliance would take big strides southward. Then happened what happened. The General squeaked asking Bush and Tony to ask the NA to stop short of Kabul; His worry was not that large-scale massacres in revenge would take place. He was nervous about the Pakistani regulars and generals fighting along with the Taliban. What would happen to them? How could they come out? And if they fell in the hands of the opposition, would it not bring humiliation to Pakistan that had so far been taking recourse to deniability?

The NA forces entered Kabul. The General realised that the Americans were cajoling him. What was worse, the NA forces captured the Pakistani regulars and their officers and have kept them as living evidence of Pakistan's interference in the affairs of Afghanistan.

Soon after that the UN Security Council passed a resolution in which, among other things, it demanded no interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan by outside forces. The General had to eat the humble pie.

Having been beaten hollow on the ground, the General began to look frantically towards the United Nations. His foreign minister began swearing that Pakistan had always stood by the UN resolutions and she would abide by it in future also. This was to endear herself to the international community.

He forgot that despite similar resolutions of the UN General Assembly in the past, Pakistani regulars were very much in Afghanistan fighting along with the Taliban against the Northern Alliance. What for were the Pakistani regulars in Afghanistan if Pakistan really stood by the UN resolutions?

Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, the Northern Alliance foreign minister had to make it clear to the Americans that his government would not accept a UN peacekeeping contingent if it included troops from Pakistan. The Taliban are defeated and non-existent and now there is not a single soul that speaks of Pakistan. She remains the most hated country among the neighbours of Afghanistan. Turkey, an important member of the OIC has recognized the Northern Alliance and has deputed its ambassador to Kabul. So have the United States and Great Britain. But Pakistan, the lone country in the world, has not yet seized to have formal diplomatic relations with the Taliban. And yet she is an ally of the coalition forces out to destroy Taliban.

Pakistan wants to make up for this humiliation. She has established links with the leadership in the four Afghan provinces bordering on Pakistan to her west. This has been given the name of Shura-e-Mashriqi or the Eastern Assembly. Pakistan plans to form a coalition of the four provinces led by Nangerhar. The representatives of the four provinces met with the Pakistani officials and the ISI in Peshawar only a couple of days back to chalk out the strategy for consolidating the rule of local warlords in these four provinces and then to tie up with the Taliban. Thus Pakistan is trying to bring under its direct influence as much of Afghan territory in the east as is possible.

In other words, Pakistan is now bent upon bringing about the fragmentation of Afghanistan in a practical manner. She wants four provinces to be under her direct influence and their close relations with Kandahar – based Taliban forces. It means that Pakistan concedes trifurcating of Afghanistan with Northern Afghanistan under the Alliance, Eastern Afghanistan under her own influence and the Southern Afghanistan in the control of the Taliban. The Nangerhar Governor has turned out the Taliban from that province and taken the control in his hands. He has told the retreating Taliban that he would come to them at proper time. The Mashriqi Shura is at the moment in close consultation with the ISI and Pakistani planners in Peshawar. Probably they are trying to rope in the pro-Pukhtun refugees from Afghanistan. Essentially ISI's present strategy is to ensure that no pro-Pukhtun revivalist forces raise their head. The Pukhtun never accepted the Durand Line. Pukhtun revival movement would mean a frontal attack on Pakistan.