Kashmir: Fresh looks at “The unfinished business”

“I can’t understand why anyone said that the thing was signed in Jammu, because we never went to Jammu.”

[thing: (instrument of accession proclaming Kashmir’s conditional status)]

And what else? Sam Manekshaw, the first field marshal in the Indian army, recalls:

As usual Nehru talked about the United Nations, Russia, Africa, God almighty, everybody, until Sardar Patel lost his temper. He said, ‘Jawaharlal, do you want Kashmir, or do you want to give it away’. He (Nehru) said,’ Of course, I want Kashmir (emphasis in original). Then he (Patel) said ‘Please give your orders’. And before he could say anything Sardar Patel turned to me and said, ‘You have got your orders’.

This is how Indian leadership (read, the nationalist Patel) operated. And the hapless playboy king Hari Singh who had lost all legitimacy to govern the state that forced him to flee, decided on the fate of the state! As a careless albeit colorful international celebrity associated with the blackmail scandal in London, the pearls, diamonds and emeralds, Singh gave in to pressures amidst the New Delhi leaders. But the condition of a referendum has remained still unfulfiled–despite declarations by both the UN and Nehru (seems like they died together)!
{My friend Diptiman Tripathy from Moscow sent this link. }



  1. Hi Saswat,
    There were some preconditions laid out for the referendum. Unless and until those preconditions were (are) met, its pointless to talk about referendum.
    Dear Saswat, it was only because of our visionary leader aka Nationalist Patel, that we are able to call ourselves as Bhartiya/Indian. Had it been not for Sardar Patel, another imperialist would have enslaved, robbed us of our culture heritage and material wealth (what ever was leftover from British occupation) or worse there would have been some 500+ princely states, fighting among themselves to gain supremacy.

    And when you say Unfinished Business, look at the demography of Jammu and Kashmir, in 1947 and now.
    1947 – Muslims ~85%
    Hindus/Buddhist – Remaining 15%

    2005 – Muslims ~98%
    Hindus – Less than 1%

    Yes, predominantly Hindu Army of India has UNFINISHED BUSINESS of wiping out the remaining hindus.

    Thanx Saswat, for shedding a fresh light on the Kashmir issue.

  2. Hi Sanjay
    Thanks for the response.
    I always thought the nationalists believed India was some 10,000 year old civilization, not a 1947 phenomenon. Then how do you think Patel would have agreed to your claim that without him, people would have lost their rights to call themselves Bharatiya? As for calling themselves Indian, thanks are largely due to the British!
    The problem is in our not seeing how the homegrown capitalists are any different from the imperialists you apprehended would have taken over if not for Patel?
    In fact the Tatas, Birlas, Dalmiyas, Bajajs, Singhanias, Thappars etc etc were all given free looting ground by misguided leaders like Patel in the name of the game: well, we dont have white skins any more, so all ye brown business houses start the loot?

    My friend, lets see beyond the obvious. And we see that in no way the white imperialists are any worse than the brown imperialists. They are one and the same. Before independence these business houses made profits, but not quite as much as the British. After the WWII, they surely wanted to gain more and since we got Netajee Bose killed, we never had an INA government and people like Patel continued to make merry. Had Bose implemented his envisaged 10-year rule, today we would not have been worshipping an exact opposite: Patel.

    About Kashmir, yes Hindu Army is continuing to rule. Not just that, An Asian Age report had a headline also where the military forces killed a dog in a house search because the dog barked. They said, must be a Pakistani dog!
    Why the Hindu Pandits are fleeing? Because they have another place to go to. Whole India is welcoming them with open arms. Look at movied being made on them! Sheen and what other craps.
    And Kasmir continues to have special status where no Indian can own lands and none of the Indian laws apply to that state anyway. So its quite a misfortune, except when we made big bucks making our movies there once some years back.
    I dont know where you got that statistics of 85/15 and 98/1, but if its true, its tragic. When New Delhi does not think its their baby, why should the Hindus think its theirs anyway?

    Plus, gone are the days when they could make business out of Kashmir. So its way better to leave the state than to perish. That part of “terrorism” (wiping out the privilaged) is not done by Indian Army. Its done by locals in retaliation to the presence of Indian Army.

  3. Another interesting thing is this:
    Very ironic, indeed.

    When it comes to show off its multicultural display, Indian government is more than keen to say that it has the largest Muslim population in the world and all that crap (which is any way untrue considering that Indonesia has way more.)
    Secondly, some Indian politcal parties take pride in this status to glorify Hinduism (aah..see how tolerant we are! we co-exist with muslims). Of course this one is true. Some of our best neighbors have been Muslims too.

    But when it comes to Kashmir, why so much grunt about the majority Muslims? I would say we all should celebrate their presence to enrich the country by providing that very needed image that prevents the whole country to be counted as a rogue nation of communalists, casteists and hardcore capitalists.

    Indeed, we always can love Kashmir for its Muslim population if we dont have any problem with Haryana for its Hindu population.

  4. Hi Saswat,
    There never was any problem of hating muslim population or grunt about the majority muslims. It about oneness, uniformity and adhering to the rules and policies as employed by the higher governing bodies. You can not let someone come and create confusion/chaos and disturbance within a family. Dear Friend Saswat, its the same case with Kashmir. Just as you wont allow someone to sneak into your house and fiddle with your possession, same is the case with Indian government.

    If muslims prosecute Hindus in Kashmir, Its in retaliation for the presence of Indian Army. Saswat, think of the havoc, if every one starts applying your logic of retaliation. What will take imperialist years and lots of money to achieve (formenting civil war), Dear Saswat your logic will achieve in no time. God save earth. Have you wondered why army is present in Kashmir?
    Saswat how can you be so completely devoid of feelings when you say Kashmiri pandits are fleeing because they have some other place in India to go? Go and ask them what it takes to get alienated from there own home land? How difficult it is to leave a trade and came to stree to start all over the quest for Roti, Kapda aur Makaan? I am sure no one wants to go through the ordeal unless and until you are forced to make a choice between life and death.

    Your example of headline from Asian Age shows the kind of journalism in which they are involved? I am deeply moved by the report, covering shooting of a dog by indian army, cause it barked at them and army suspected it to be a Pakistani dog. Wow, this is what i call sensational journalism. I am sure readership of Asian Age would have quadrupled because of such journalism and now we will see owners of Asian Age, joining the motley crowd of hard core capitalists of India.
    Press, they say is the fourth pillar of democracy and keeps a check on legislature. If this is the kind of check press is going to provide… Ahem!!!

    Coming to “bhartiyata”, yes indeed its very ancient, and certainly not a 1947 phenomenon. You doubt this, then please check history. As for your statement, “As for calling themselves Indian, thanks are largely due to the British!”, I completely agree with you as the britishers were the one who gave the name India to Bharat.

    Agreed Netaji could’nt come to power but you cant deny Sardar Patel his credit of unifying different beads into a necklace.

    Saswat, why is it that when it comes to India, people are always referred to as Hindus / Muslims, Upper caste, Lower Caste, dalits, harijan… Wont it suffice to refer to inhabitants of India as mere humans without further distinction based on caste, creed religion and colour.

    Your idea of India not being counted as a rouge nation of communalists, casteists and hardcore capitalists is indeed a funny one.
    I am eager to know the credentials of certifying authority.

  5. In the US of A, people are called African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Latino/a as well. And people are also called by their being Muslims, Christians, Secular etc too. Incidentally, I work in an office of diversity. So its nothing special to India. US has progressed only through people’s assertions to implement affirmative actions (just as our reservations policies). Of course its another matter, the minorities actually get benefits in US, whereas in India, the hindu supremacists like Goswami enact self immolation dramas.

    Its ironic that what I find extremely sad is one which you find really funny. And you look for credentials of certifying authority! Will Amnesty International do? or Human Rights Watch?

    You sure live in a rosy India, my friend. Calling Kashmir home of the Hindus! From Ranjit Singh to Hari Singh, all of the Hindus ruled over the state despite being a minority. British in fact after defeating the Sikhs sold the state at paltry amount to a playboy king’s family. These bunch of minorities went on looting the state to their content. And now after raping the state, when they are left with nothing, but peoples’ wrath, you expect the commoners in Kashmir to garland the class divide?

    Sorry, but to say that HIndus in India are getting prosecuted is like saying Whites in America are being discriminated against!
    These theories are abound by the white supremacists, the aryan brothers and brahmin casteists. Sad that history is forgotten so soon. At times, never even learned from.

  6. Saswat, the so called self immolation drama by hindu supremacist aka Goswami was a form of people’s assertions to prevent something which was, though good in spirit was lacking in action. The so called drama was not against the reservation policy but against the implementation policy.

    Reservation on the grounds of economic background is way more than acceptable.

    Wasnt there enough problems faced by india which (were)are largely due to divison of its peoples on the name of religion and language then to invite some more with further divison of society based on caste.

    And to talk about diversity in India, its all too embracing and not kick ass attitude. Remeber from history, India had christianity long before europe was christianised. It was India who accepted parsis and zorastrians with open arms when they were prosecuted in there home land.

    I too work in an office of diversity here is India, but thankfully every one here is reffered to as collegue without being pointed about his religious or ethnic identity. But sadly dear Saswat, you are too far away to realize this winds of changes.

    When you talk about Amnesty International or HRW do cite a single country who comes good on all the parameters of these organizations to be called as truly Humane civilization. I am not trying to tell you to enjoy the rape, but attributing all the bad things to India, is tad too much. Others too have there past and present in darker shades.

    History is forgotten too soon, which history are you talking about

  7. The problem is you dont see how race and economy intersect. I dont wanna start a lecture here about how they do. Because more than textbooks, you need to experience what it means to be brahmin and being poor and what it means to be lower caste and being poor. at least you can pretend to be a lower caste and feel how it feels like not being only poor but being despised as untouchable. And on the other hand being poor and brahmin and drawing all the sympathies and benefitting from the old boys network of the temple pandas and gram panchayats.

    i agree all countries have their shades of bad. but what you dont get is this: we steer clear of our own families and start preaching others of what is hinduism. i exactly know how women are treated in india. save that cock and bull story for hippie americans who will go to ashrams to get laid.

    the history i am talking about is the history of exploitation of indian peoples by indian royals (both moghuls and hindus–btw, moghuls are not the same as muslims of republic of india –as you compared elsewhere) and with help from foreigners.

    to begin with the original foreign invaders of india are the aryans who looted the indigenous people well enough. and today they are suddenly taking pride in india and what nots!!!

    history is that one which we dont teach–not one of golden age of indian culture but one of oppression that aryans and the europeans caused and then the homegrown capitalists with their partner foreign hands.

  8. Saswat Pattanayak

    Just a final note on this whole debate on who constitutes minority. Minorities are not just different in different places, but also they are in different capacities. For example, in India there are economic minorities who are the elites, but the religious minorities are paupers. What we have to understand is how are we dealing with the elite minorities and the poor majorities.

    As Sahir Ludhianvi had criticised Taj Mahal as an emporer’s fancy, we have to understand that all the good things we see may actually have a saga of exploitation. And by uncovering that, we can better appreciate this minority-majority dichotomy in the cycle of socialization, oppression, and liberation.

    Marcos, the revolutionary leader of the Latin movement had this to say when he was being attacked as being a Gay:

    Marcos responded by writing a poem:
    “Yes, Marcos is gay. Marcos is gay in San Francisco Black in South Africa an Asian in Europe, a Chicano in San Ysidro, an anarchist in Spain, a Palestinian in Israel, a Mayan Indian in the streets of San Cristobal, a Jew in Germany, a Gypsy in Poland, a Mohawk in Quebec, a pacifist in Bosnia, a single woman on the Metro at 10pm a peasant without land, a gang member in the slums, an unemployed worker, an unhappy student and, of course, a Zapatista in the mountains.
    “Marcos is all the exploited, marginalised, oppressed minorities resisting and saying `Enough’. He is every minority who is now beginning to speak and every majority that must shut up and listen. He is every untolerated group searching for a way to speak. Everything that makes power and the good consciences of those in power uncomfortable – this is Marcos.”
    [From Social Justice E-Zine #27.]

    All the oppressed minorities must get united to form the vast majority that will take the elite minorities to task. That is the task of the revolution!

  9. You talk about oneness, uniformity and rules……….in which world you are Mr. Sanjay. Kashmir,Jab kabhie hamara tha hi nahin to aaj khone ka kya gham hain. It was on presure or complsion, treaty was signed with India. What patel did was ruthless approach. About the Army presense in kashmir, if one is so sure that its part of india. Why army deployed in huge number. Why government is behaving indiferently, fact is that people too fedup with the indian system. Let them decide about their own future.
    If one is so sure that its a part of india, why force!
    It is not that only hindu being affected, it is muslim people too.

  10. Military has opened up to the media only recently. Kargil operation was the first televised war, which brought the conflict to peoples homes. It showed the war zone to the world and changed people’s perception on the pattern of conflict in high altitude areas. It reduced the gap between the military and the civilians and connected people with the lives of soldiers, who carry out their duties even at the peril of their lives. It is in their prompt response at the borders that our countrymen can remain comfortable at their homes. It was a bonding established and a national fervour built which brought about unity in diversity. The up front reportage altered the world opinion in our favour and justified the conflict, making Pakistan the bad guy. All this happened only because the media by India was handled with an aim, a vision and the public, in many ways participated in the conflict. The negatives, to balance out, have also been true, with at times some media personnel being given preferential treatment by the military and the same media men, when rubbished on an occasion have been nasty in the reporting about the military. Such practices are reasonably common, despite the users in the game being quite aware, and such practices are bound to take place in a democratic system, yet it is important to analyse the reasons for the reporters adopting a sudden change in their outlook. It must be appreciated, after all, they are also individuals and bound to err and swing one way or the other to gauge the mood swing of the readers.

  11. I would like to buy kashmir sapphire anybody interested please contact me at ceymat@netzero.com
    Los Angeles

What are your thoughts?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.