Monday, September 20, 2010
History Behind Kashmir's Possesion
Resolution adopted at the meeting of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan on 5 January, 1949.
The question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite. According to the resolution, there shall be freedom of the Press, speech and assembly and freedom of travel in the State, including freedom of lawful entry and exit;
(c) All political prisoners are released;
(d) Minorities in all parts of the State are accorded adequate protection; and
(e) There is no victimization.
The reality of the 'accession' instrument
1. India over the years has considered Kashmir as its integral part and has legitimized its rule over the region by claiming that maharaja Hari Singh, the last dogra ruler of the state signed the instrument of accession, an alleged document which India itself defends with. Few months back a similar statement was given by the Ministry Of External Affairs saying that the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir which existed before 14th of august 1947 is an integral part of India by virtue of its accession with India, India over the years has used the alleged instrument of accession to its greatest advantage in the United Nations and similar other platforms and justified its occupation over a Muslim majority state. But the core question is whether any such document has ever been signed by the last ruler of Jammu and Kashmir? The sequence of series of events at the time of partition does not seem to suggest so. Had there been really any such document in possession of the Indian government, India would have surely used it on various international platforms to legitimize its rule over the state.
2. India long before achieving the independence had laid out its future plans for the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It was on these lines that the prime minister of Jammu and Kashmir, pandit R.C.KAK, who was thought to favour, if not accession to Pakistan but atleast an independent state of Jammu and Kashmir was removed from the office and replaced by a more pro-Indian prime minister, M.C.Mahajan. Kak being removed from his office a year later which again was very critical in shaping the future of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The removal of Prime Minister R.C.Kak further reinforced the Kashmir dispute.