news details |
|
|
| Mustafa Kamaal’s tirade against New Delhi misplaced, motivated | | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, July 16: Fourth Formulation: Mustafa Kamaal says that the "NC categorically rejected Jinnah's 2-nation theory and did never believe in Azadi or accession to Pakistan." He is absolutely wrong. Mustafa, who is required to go through Prem Shankar Jha's Rival Versions in History for updating his knowledge about the reasons behind the mind-boggling ceasefire, is distorting and suppressing facts in order to mislead and hoodwink the people of Kashmir. The facts are altogether different.
It needs to be noted that his father did send his emissaries in the persons of Ghulam Mohammad Sadiq and Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad to Lahore to negotiate the accession of J&K with Pakistan, but failed because Mohammad Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan rejected out-of-hand their demand that the state be given an autonomous status within Pakistan. Why did NC turn to India and thought of acceding it? According to an interview Sheikh Abdullah gave in November 1947 to the editor of The Statesman, Ian Stephens, on the lawns of the Srinagar's Nedou's Hotel, the Sheikh had told him that "if they (Pakistani invaders) had to attack, Stephens, why in Heaven's sake couldn't they go to Poonch to help the people there against the autocrat (Hari Singh)? Why must they rush towards Srinagar, looting and burning?" Ian Stephens explains it further, saying "As a Kashmiri with ancestral recollections of previous incursions up the same route, he had felt personally outraged."
Besides, "the Sheikh had", according to Ian Stephens, "the "mortal fear of elimination at the hands of Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan." Of the Sheikh, "Jinnah had "contemptuously observed": "Oh, that tall man who sings the Quran and exploits the people (Kashmiri Muslims)." Liaquat Ali Khan, on the other hand, dismissed the Sheikh, saying "This quisling - an agent of the Congress for many years, who struts about the stage bartering the life, honour and freedom of the people for the sake of personal profit and power." That the Sheikh wanted to achieve for J&K an independent status became further clear when he on October 27, 1947, declared in Srinagar in unambiguous terms that "We have picked up the Crown from dust. The question of joining India or Pakistan can wait. We have to complete our independence first."
One can cite here innumerable instances to prove that the Sheikh was never for the state's accession to India and that he turned towards Nehru only when rebuffed by Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan. It is not for nothing that the people accuse him of "hobnobbing with the United States of America in order to establish a Switzerland-type independent Kashmir."
Fifth Formulation: Mustafa says that "because of NC's history and sub-national aspiration, successive governments in New Delhi pursued the policy of weakening NC and they left no stone unturned in uprooting a party that fairly and genuinely represented the people of this state" and that "Government of India patronized, funded, protected and glamorized the Valley's militants and separatist leaders, accorded to them warm receptions and also organized their foreign tours with state facilitation under a sinister plan." His assertion that the NC believes in "sub-nationalism" contradicts himself when he also says that the NC did not believe in 2-nation theory and that it never stood for independence. You cannot have two nationalities in one country. The NC did believe, and still believes, in the three-nation theory - Indian nation, Pakistani nation and Kashmiri Muslim nation.
Those who talk of sub-nationalism actually talk of separation and sovereign country. His 'sub-nationalism" formulation, which is based on the political philosophy and ideology of the NC, also proves that the NC stands for an exclusivist dispensation in which the other social and religious groups have to be subservient to the NC and similar other outfits, which regard the Indian presence in Kashmir "illegal" and "unwanted." If New Delhi acted at times against the NC it acted when the situation in the state had gone out of control and when the fissiparous tendencies threatened the very unity and integrity of India. New Delhi acted because it had to act. Had the NC behaved properly and not upped its ante against India from time to time, New Delhi would not have acted against it. Mustafa Kamaal must see reason and acknowledge that his party has created serious troubles for India from time to time.
However, Mustafa Kamaal is right when he accuses New Delhi of "patronizing, funding, protecting and glamorizing the Valley's militants and separatist leaders." He is right when he says that New Delhi "accords to them warm receptions and also organizes their foreign tours with state facilitation under a sinister plan." He is right.
It is hoped that Mustafa Kamaal would see all these facts on the face and redesign his formulations. It is no use distorting and suppressing the hard historical facts. The people know what the NC was and what it is and what it stands for. Is it not a fact that the NC stands for quasi-independence? It does. Its greater autonomy demand does prove that the NC is not really committed to India. (Concluded)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
