Kashmir: Too Early For The Next Round
By Nawaz Gul Qanungo
21 September, 2010
Kashmir Times
Before trying to imagine anything as a possible resolution for J&K, it is vital that Kashmir be placed in its correct Historical context. The least that any delegation from New Delhi could do is to take home one fact: that revisiting the territorial integrity of the so called state of J&K is not just vital but a historical necessity. Sadly, the current delegation is so late in its arrival that it’s too early for such a round of talks
Their fields, their crops, their streams
Even the peasants in the vale
They sold, they sold all, alas!
How cheap was the sale.
– A translation of Iqbal cited by Mridu Rai, 2004.
The process of the creation of the so called state of Jammu and Kashmir went underway, as is well known, in the middle of the nineteenth century. March 16, 1846, the Treaty of Amritsar goes thus:
“In consideration of the transfer made to him and his heirs by the provisions of the foregoing article... Gulab Singh will pay to the British Government the sum of seventy-five lakhs of rupees... fifty lakhs to be paid on or before the 1st October of the current year, A.D., 1846.”
The space here doesn’t allow any extensive historical discourse of what prompted this “transfer”. To cut the long story short, this transfer was a reward given by the British to Gulab Singh for betraying the Sikh empire left by Ranjit Singh after his death. During the rule of Ranjit Singh itself, Gulab Singh had made his way to be among his most trusted lieutenants. But still, the bigger question would be whether there was (and still remains after nearly two centuries) a justifiable basis to what was being done:
“The British Government transfers... forever... in independent possession to... Gulab Singh and the heirs male of his body all the hilly or mountainous country with its dependencies situated to the eastward of the River Indus and the westward of the River Ravi... being part of the territories ceded to the British Government by the Lahore State according to... the Treaty of Lahore, dated March 9, 1846...” Forever?
If this deed of sale wasn’t enough to trample the whole Kashmiri nation, the final article of the treaty was the masterstroke that took care of it. Here goes the treaty further:
“...Gulab Singh acknowledges the supremacy of the British Government... [Hence, he] will in token of such supremacy present annually to the British Government one horse, twelve shawl goats of approved breed (six male and six female) and three pairs of Cashmere shawls.”
Get that again:
One, a horse!
Then, one full dozen of shawl goats! Of approved breed. And that’s still not all: Six of them must be male, and the rest female!
And finally, three pairs of Cashmere shawls. Not just three! Pairs of them.
And all these, how? In the right measure. And when? Every year!
Was it a joke? No. History, of course, is full of such frauds and machinations, filled with swine characters. And this is the farce that lies at the heart of the creation of the so called state of Jammu and Kashmir. The problem is that this is also the farce that binds, even today, the remains of the concoction of this “state”. No wonder it’s a doomed one.
And, this sham of the state of J&K exists to this day – decades after the end of the Dogra rule – simply because there could be no better devastating an argument for Kashmir’s appropriation by India as a proponent of a “secular” nation state. The truth is that far from being an asset to be protected for the interest of its people, it remains the biggest obstruction in the way out of the planned, organised and strategized siege upon the valley of Kashmir. Searching for a future of its people in this inorganic concoction of incongruent territories would be merely a continuation of what has rightly been termed as a historical monstrosity.
The Indian position vis-a-vis Kashmir has not just remained that of it being an integral part of India but equally of it being an inviolable part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It not just served its argument for a secular nation state but also came handy for confusing – for public consumption back home – the just political demands of Kashmiris with the politics of those outside it but within the state of J&K. Hence, the secularism attributed to Kashmir is very conveniently held hostage on one hand to the Hindus of J&K outside Kashmir and on the other to the Muslims of India. And this is invariably followed by a specious argument of “Kashmiriyat” where the integration of Kashmir with India is not simply a political goal of the Indian state – the idea of India – but a natural demand of an imagined idea of Kashmir. The desired practical implications, claimed and invoked by India, of this “idea” seem to be believed by every Indian, but need not be shared – and it isn’t – by Kashmiris themselves.
The truth, however, is that J&K as a state never existed before that disgraceful deed of 1846, nor has ever on its own any scope for rightful existence. That a conquest or a sale deed could “forever” endow Kashmir to any external power could hardly be a justification. More so, Kashmir never accepted any. There is not a single natural way out of this half of Kashmir where you won’t end up sieved with bullets – such are the “borders” and “lines of control” that have been plotted without a soul in Kashmir being asked. But, the bigger question is whether there was, and remains after nearly two centuries, a justifiable basis to what was done in 1846.
The fact for the people of Kashmir is there neither was nor remains one. Geographically, politically, historical, economically, culturally, and practically: None. The answer to the Kashmir question lies in tearing apart whatever remains of the gruesome lie of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The Abdullahs, the Muftis, their likes and the rest know it holy well. But then, who shuns the path that leads to treasures? Who shoves a fortune away, even if soaked in blood?
During one of the many TV debates over the current turmoil, a member of the National Conference tried to start an argument that “in 1952, the then prime minister of Kashmir, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, and Jawaharlal Nehru had...” when the anchor dropped her head on the desk in frustration, and cried aloud: “But that is hissstoryyyyy!” Not that one expected the historical TV debate to achieve anything. But before trying to imagine anything as a possible resolution, it is vital also that Kashmir be placed in its correct Historical context. And the context necessitates that the territorial integrity, claimed by India and taken for granted by many, of the state of Jammu and Kashmir be revisited. Going into history may not be fashionable, or viable, in glossy TV debates but anything that ignores Kashmir in its true Historical context will only lead to another useless debate. But “all-party delegations” should know better, especially in the light of the statement by the Indian home minister that “several promises made to the people of J&K need to be acted act up on”. Unfortunately, if past were a pointer, there still isn’t much no hope in the present.
But the least that the current delegation – any delegation – from New Delhi could do was to take home one fact: that India’s position on the history and politics of the conflict is nothing but a piece of fiction in today’s Kashmir. Sadly, after taking more than a hundred innocent lives, maiming several more and devastating countless families in just the last three months, the delegation is so late in its arrival that it seems too early for such a round of talks.
But then, desperate situations need equally hard measures. Where is the dispute? In Kashmir. Who lost a hundred thousand lives? Kashmiris. From where have 350 thousand people been displaced? From Kashmir. Who have been orphaned? Hundreds of thousands Kashmiri children. Who have been taken away but not returned? Thousands of Kashmiris. Who live as half widows? Thousands of Kashmiri women. Whose lives have literally been obliterated since more than six decades now – and centuries before? Generations – and millions – of Kashmiri people. Who’s sufferings come anywhere close to these? Nobody’s. Add to this the partition of Kashmir eventually in 1948.
It is time the illegitimate baggage that a Dogra chieftain and the other crooks lobbed on the valley of Kashmir is thrown to dogs, so that the biggest obstruction in the way to a resolution of this painful conflict is removed. There is no other way in. And there is no other way out.
The writer was formerly based in New Delhi with Business Standard. Follow him at www.drqanungo.blogspot.com
